Talk:Transsexual

Kindly remember to put new topics at the end of the page, not the top.

---

More on above

Same link removed from this entry numerous times already. Site in question contains content lifted without permission from at least two other sites:

• Electrologists on the 'Net Who Treat Men, compiled by Rodney Brandon
• TG-friendly Therapists, compiled by Dr. Rebecca Allison

The site has been spammed under multiple listings on Wikipedia. Many speculate the site owner is responsible for repeated attempts to reinsert the link here and elsewhere. The owner has had an unsatisfactory experience with plastic surgeon Douglas Ousterhout and has been publicizing this dissatisfaction in any venue available. Since the link appears under the Ousterhout entry and is not considered a primary trans web resource or a neutral point of view, it should not be listed under the general heading.

note:

• original comment was removed by 68.185.69.177 on 8 March and replaced that day.
• comment removed by 68.185.69.177 again on 9 March and replaced that day.

Jokestress 15:40, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

TAKE A LOOK AT TRINITY'S SITE AND COMPARE WHAT THIS USER IS SAYING TO WHAT IS ON THE TRINITY SITE AND YOU SEE THAT Jokestress IS MAKING FALSE CLAIMS.

Jokestress Makes the claim that info has been lifted from * Electrologists on the 'Net Who Treat Men, compiled by Rodney Brandon

Compare the the link at **Trinity Site is question You will find the site uses frames, which would require you to dirctly right click on top of the Electrolysis and Laser link, then left click on open in a new link to see where it's linked to. Jokestress tries to use peoples lack of knowing how web pages work to make it seem like that site is stealing something when it's not doing any such thing.

Click on the link to the Electrolysis & Laser Treatments

Electrolysis and Laser **Electrolysis & Laser Treatments Area in question Notice the site links directly to Electrologists on the 'Net Who Treat Men, compiled by Rodney Brandon www.hairremovalpros.com being the site Jokestress claims is being lifted without permission. The site in questoin is linked to the same site Jokestress is claiming to be lifted by the Trinity site and this is the first example of slander by Jokestress

Now look at the other site Jokestress claims has had info lifted from it. TG-friendly Therapists, compiled by Dr. Rebecca Allison and compare the the links at **Trinity Site is question There are no TG-friendly Therapists listed on the site at all. Another example of slander by Jokestress

Slader after slander after slander.

I moved the above response by 68.185.69.177 below the earlier comment by me. Frames or not, the issue at hand was whether the site link should appear under this entry. Since several other Wikipedians had removed the link previously, I was following suit. Finally, the removal of comments on a talk page is considered vandalism. This is a place for discussion of conflicts, not for removing comments with which one disagrees. Jokestress 04:48, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Jokestress you lied about the site and the owner time and time again. I would not be surprised that people who removed the site are past patients of Douglas Ousterhout. I think you would want to up date you statement since accused **Trinity Site is question lifting items and it has not done what you claim. The site is linked on some of the major TG sites om the web by the owners of the site. So there are bound to be people who link it here and other places. If a site is linked on one major site on the web, it will bound to get links other places by the people who read the site and like it.

OK, let's take another look at more Trinity content lifted from another site as an example. Electrologists and Laser in CA is lifted almost verbatim from California Electrolysis Page on Karyn's Transsexual Refuge. Bottom line is that the Trinity site has padded out some areas to make it seem like a general resource site, but its primary goal is to complain about a surgeon Trinity does not like. Jokestress 15:11, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As a semi-objective bystander here, I want to state that Jokestress's website is one of the most comprehensive and genuinely useful ones out there on the Web. She takes definite stances on some things, and is a very successful client of Ousterhout, but she errs on the side of cautious scrutiny and caveat emptor in all cases. She is extremely NPOV about everything she states on her website, and I am sure her edits here are, as well. I don't have caches of the website(s) in question, so I can't swear to the absolute accuracy of her points here, but I would bet a lot of money that she is in the right here. (Is this an appropriate place to make this point? I'm still kinda new to Wikipedia.) Jiawen 04:09, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As another bystander here I would like to revive the this about the Trinity site that was unjustly put down by Andrea JamesJokestress's www.tsroadmap.com

Andrea James Jokestress is was not NPOV when it comes to the subject of Trinity Rose or her sitewww.facialfeminizationsurgery.net The number one reason being that Andrea James Jokestress has been taking large contributions from Dr. Douglas Ousterhout for the past ten years in the name of the events Andrea James Jokestress has been presenting. Dr. Douglas Ousterhout been presented at the top of the guest list at the events she has organized because of the contributions to the event. Kind of hard to be NPOV about ike Trinity or her sitewww.facialfeminizationsurgery.net when you are accepting large amounts of money from Dr. Douglas Ousterhout. It would also be difficult to be NPOV Andrea James Jokestress's www.tsroadmap.com website promotes Dr. Douglas Ousterhout and you are selling videos promoting Dr. Douglas Ousterhout surgeries.

Another note I woud ike to touch on is when Andrea James Jokestress was trying to keep this Trinity’s off links section, Trinity’s site and Andrea’s were in direct competition in content and scope.

I think we should talk about this matter a great deal and get some facts out including some letters that have been made pubic about Dr. Mark Zukowski and Dr. Douglas Ousterhout fighting about Trinity case. The facts of the contents of the Dr. Douglas Ousterhout's letter to Dr. Mark Zukowski is to force him to get Dr. Anne Lawrence to remove Trinity's link from her website www.annelawrence.com/twr/index.html by way of treats. And for anyone that does not know this Andrea James Jokestress and Dr. Anne Lawrence have also been debating on number of subjects for many years now through the use of their websites and other media.

I think on the next response to this I will also provide get the link for the Dr. Douglas Ousterhout letter to Dr. Mark Zukowski.

There is a great dea of history when it comes to the matter of the Trinity Rose site and her ordeal with Dr. Douglas Ousterhout that people just don't know 23 Apr 2008

Image

Is there any specific reason the image at the top of the page isn't in the infobox? Raymond1922 (talk) 03:53, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

I'll take the silence as a "no". I've moved it to the infobox; feel free to revert if there was a good reason for it not to be there. Raymond1922 (talk) 22:55, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Reverted with an explanation. If you want a long discussion about this, I'm not interested. Just know that such an edit is unlikely to stand whether it's me reverting you or someone else reverting you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 10:57, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Should File:TransgenreatParis2005.JPG be included in the article?

File:TransgenreatParis2005.JPG is currently the first image the article displays, but there've been some back-and-forth attempts to remove (and readd) it lately. So, let's discuss. I don't have a firm opinion on whether it should stay or go. It is perhaps a bit odd to illustrate an article on a global topic with a picture of one individual person. OTOH, the image has, in some ways, become associated with the article (it semi-famously inspired Chelsea Manning's twitter handle). Should it stay where it is? Be moved further down? Be replaced by some other image? -sche (talk) 03:11, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I don't have a firm opinion either, other than some image should occupy that spot. However, I don't find it odd at all to illustrate an article with a single image or person illustrative of that topic. Dress is illustrated by one dress. Folklore is illustrated by one painting at the top. Ditto Aircraft pilot, Soldier, Nurse, Kathoey, Drag queen, Transvestite, and so on. Mathglot (talk) 10:06, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Clearly the subject of the photograph self identifies as trans, so in that sense we will be hard pressed to find a better image. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 10:22, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Noting that it was an IP range, this one and this one, removing and edit warring over the image. Reasons given are in the IP's edit summaries. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 11:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I agree with IdreamofJeanie I think it is a positive picture of a trans person (personally i would want a photo of a trans man too but my edit was once rejected). ~ BOD ~ ^TALK 14:46, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Anti-trans genetic screeners are having a field day with this photo! I squirm when I see the photo because of how Renée Richards was mistreated in the 1970s. The photo is unwittingly broadcasting a terrible message.--2601:C4:C080:81C:10A:8C39:401B:160B (talk) 19:23, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

So you are saying that the trans woman in the image does not meet passing standards, and you'd prefer we use an image of a trans women who passes? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:55, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

And/or you take issue with the XY written on her hand? Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes. My issue is the XY written on her hand. That's kind of like a woman holding up a sign that she has no uterus or a man holding up a sign that he's got no facial hair.--73.137.178.251 (talk) 23:04, 7 January 2019 (UTC)