IQ Test

The Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association Standards of Care (HBIGDSASOC); do they help? Do they serve the purpose for which they were intended? I don't think that they do so completely. To the extent that they should be considered guidelines, they function rather well. To the extent that they function as absolute criteria for determining the outcome of a transsexual's life, they are too much. For some folks I'm sure they function exactly as intended: they help weed out people who are not truly transsexual but instead are more than likely psychopathic. But I have a problem with the HBIGDASOC: I think that to entirely too many people they are seen as a series of hoops that are imposed from the outside for transsexuals to jump through and that they aren't really necessary any more in most cases.

I know that originally the HBIGDASOC were put in place as a well-meaning methodology to deal with a new phenomenon - or a phenomenon that was new to the field of medicine, anyway. And that they were imposed by non-transgendered individuals with the ostensible reasoning that transsexuals were either too close to the issue or too "sick" to be able to impartially and accurately deal with the other transgendered people. I also know that the SOC have been modified several times over the years to reflect changing times and that transgendered individuals now serve on the various boards and committees of the HBIGDA, Inc. But without getting really personal, I found myself wondering how many of the transgendered folks now associated with the HBIGDA, Inc. are in essence products of the SOC. Those same people are now involved in updating the SOC. What percentage of those transsexuals is impartial enough to maybe admit that the very thing that allowed them to transition might no longer be needed? What percentage is impartial enough to remove the very hoops that they themselves had to jump through in order to become the persons that they are today? What percentage of all those involved in the project, transgendered or not, is impartial enough to admit that their mission might not be necessary any more? Maybe a lot, but if that is the case, I would expect to see the removal from the SOC phrases like, "under no circumstances should .".

I think that today the HBIGDASOC have become simply an IQ test to be passed by those willing to take it. If one is smart enough to discover and undergo the process dictated by the SOC, one is probably smart enough to do a little research, figure out how to deal with the system and the people involved and to subsequently complete the process. And it shouldn't be forgotten that some of the most psychotic individuals are often also some of the most intelligent. For those who are not willing to undergo the process of jumping through the hoops dictated by the SOC, the standards then simply become another evolutionary pressure forcing those people to find alternative methods of achieving the same results. With the pervasiveness of information today, it is simply too easy to get the "right" answers and provide them when needed. Or to simply find resources to accomplish the desired results without regard to the SOC at all. I know of several individuals who fit into all those categories and the ones who have bypassed the SOC are indistinguishable from SOC "graduates". The very fact that someone can simply bypass the SOC, change their gender and still be a rational and functional contributing member of society should say a great deal about the usefulness and applicability of the SOC today.

As guidelines to follow, the HBIGDASOC are very good, but I believe that they should be only guidelines and should not be treated as absolutes. Humans bypass and disobey and ignore absolute laws all the time. We've been doing it since the Garden of Eden through the Ten Commandments, right down to today when we speed a little or fudge on our income taxes. We're still around, doing things our own way and taking control of our own lives.