What happened before hormone treatment and surgery were available?

I cannot write openly on this forum about men who dressed as women though.

The Institut für Sexualwissenschaft provided gender reassignment surgery in the 30's, before it was destroyed by the Nazi's. Synthetic Estrogen was made in the 40's ish, but not sure when it would have been first used as a cross sex hormone. So these treatments, while relatively new, are not as new as most people would have you believe. Just because something wasn't openly talked about, doesn't mean it didn't exist.

Lots of women dressed as men in order to escape poverty, a life of child rearing and to fulfil their educational aspirations. Single women living together was not considered strange. There were many institutions throughout Europe, well known, that took single women in under the guise of religion. Some of these women are now seen as trans. Shameful redesigning of history, with no substance to it whatsoever and only a 21st century gloss on it.

It's a strange question. It's a bit like asking what people did before laser eye surgery... they wore glasses, or before glasses...they lived with visual impairment. Same goes for any illness, just because it didn't have a name or a cure doesn't mean it didn't exist.
I don't know if surgery or hormones is a cure, only people that have been through it can answer that.

Interesting question posted about the case of the Scottish lord 1935 and there are many other examples in history of trans people who lived there whole lives and were only. Found to be trans on there death there are many interesting stories around them if you look for them.

What happened? Most people got a grip and got on with their lives instead of having tantrums. I was there.

I suppose you could say interfering with normal sex development has a long history. Eunuchs in harems and sold as slaves for higher price, boy sopranos as well as girls and FGM etc. But none of these were elective.

Things like breast binders have, sadly, been around for a very long time

I would guess it would be harder to "pass" where everyone knows you and your family, and you have very little privacy (families of ten living in a two up, two down type thing). Presumably a move away to somewhere completely new would be in order

I think many lesbians would disagree with your view that being straight is a norm but being a lesbian isn't

I don’t think that’s what was meant. Being a lesbian is normal, it is ‘a norm’ in the sense that it’s normal. It is not ‘the norm’ in the sense that it’s not the majority sexual orientation. ‘The norm’ usually means the most common state.

A norm and the norm mean different things. To say something is not the norm has no value judgement. It’s not the norm to be a genius, amazing at chess or incredibly beautiful, but none of those things are ‘abnormal’ or wrong.

It is fascinating what a placebo effect that surgery has on people. I mean it's not actually "treating" a condition any more than bleeding or leeching ever was.

It is abusive however, that women and girls are also used unwillingly, as a placebo to treat the condition..

"What happened before hormone treatment and surgery were available?"

Hormone treatment and surgery weren't available to me as a child or as a young adult. I was constantly unhappy and given that being trans is not about clothes, dressing in feminine clothes had very little effect.

However, eventually, I got to transition, and now I am happier than I ever knew a person could be. Which is a good thing, yes?

So hooray for medical science which has made it possible for trans people to achieve relief from their gender dysphoria, and hooray for all the other medical advances that have allowed people to live with medical conditions happily rather than suffering the way they did before the treatment was available.

Ah if only there was a word for heterosexual being considered "the norm". Heteronormative, perhaps...?

I think many lesbians would disagree with your view that being straight is a norm but being a lesbian isn't

Don't twist my words, Snappity. I didn't say "being straight is a norm but being a lesbian isn't". I said "gender norm". Perhaps I could have phrased it better as "gender stereotype".

Stereotypes for women include (amongst many other things):
Wearing makeup, wearing high heels, liking shopping for clothes, being attracted to men, disliking football, and so on.

Not conforming to any of those things makes you gender non conforming to some degree. But a lesbian is no more abnormal than a woman who likes football or who never wears makeup.

What happens to the body if hormone treatment is stopped? Does it revert back to biological type?

Sadly it does not, as many female detransitioners have found. When women take testosterone, their voice breaks - stopping the testosterone will not reverse this, and they are left with a permanently male sounding voice. The facial hair growth and male pattern baldness may also be permanent.

East European female athletes who took testosterone in the 70s and 80s (often they didn't know what they were taking and thought they were 'vitamins') had permanent changes to their bodies, and at least one (Andreas Krieger, formerly Heidi), decided to become a transman because of the irreversible results of taking testosterone.

It hadn't occurred to me that some people may consider being compared to a legal third gender as offensive - but you're right, who's to know what any individual person may consider beyond the pale... 😬

Oh, unless it's someone being offended by the phrase "beyond the pale" of course - then it's up to the individual and not policed as a rule.

This is true. All lesbians are gender non conforming. A woman who conformed to gender norms would be attracted to men and therefore not a lesbian.

I think many lesbians would disagree with your view that being straight is a norm but being a lesbian isn't

Damnthat
the phrase 'gender non conforming lesbian' is a tautology
This is true. All lesbians are gender non conforming. A woman who conformed to gender norms would be attracted to men and therefore not a lesbian.

Gender Identity and sexuality are two completely different things.
And gender non conformity is different again. Being gender non conforming does not mean that you have a 'gender identity'.

I was listening to a podcast about this woman today. The whole story is fascinating.

www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/he-was-a-she-but-a-killer-20120218-1tfpu.html

My personal opinion is that although there have always been people like the hijra etc, there is in evidence now a completely new category of men for whom this is nothing to do with feeling like a woman (whatever that means) but purely of control of women: the control of individual women (like a spouse or colleagues); and the control of women in general (by occupying their spaces and defining what can and can't be said). I think the pleasure some derive from controlling and abusing women is so seductive that they begin to desire experiencing it for themselves. I think that is why so many are into BDSM. I am not saying that they are all conscious of their actions, just that those thoughts are in their psyche somewhere.

And some just seem to jump on the bandwagon for a laugh, it seems.

Well, looking at for eg Hijra now, I'd suppose that they were castrated - at least in some societies

Norther
Sorry, just realised the phrase 'gender non conforming lesbian' is a tautology
No need to apologise ... you were right first time. Gender Identity and sexuality are two completely different things.

Sorry, just realised the phrase 'gender non conforming lesbian' is a tautology!

Before hormone and surgical transition was available some people were transvestites.