I was wondering if anyone here has tried to change their voice. I came across this in a book I was reading which is not on the subject of transitioning but it came up that there was a trans woman who was giving lessons in how to make your voice more feminine or masculine.
[RD] Ask a trans person II: 2 trans 2 sexual
- Thread starter schlaufuchs
- Start date
Broken_Erika
I Are Be Custom User Titale.
Learning how to sing apparently makes it easier.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Yep, it's all about learning to naturally hit certain notes without forcing your voice.
(I've done it, and my voice without perhaps being stereotypically feminine is now at least toward the androgynous end of feminine voice. When I don't unconsciously slip back - it's a lot easier to learn a new pitch than to forget the one you've used for decades! - or get a sore throat, anyway).
(I've done it, and my voice without perhaps being stereotypically feminine is now at least toward the androgynous end of feminine voice. When I don't unconsciously slip back - it's a lot easier to learn a new pitch than to forget the one you've used for decades! - or get a sore throat, anyway).
Cloud_Strife
Deity
It's a very long and arduous journey
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,372
Do hormones affect that directly? And are there other options (surgery, etc)? Or is it just down to individual training?
Cloud_Strife
Deity
Only for trans men, testosterone lowers your voice, hence why puberty blockers are desired for kids
Although im going to take a wild guess here and assume you're against puberty blockers
Last edited:
I did a couple voice lessons, a while back (before I got comfortable being obviously trans). The exercises started out with blowing bubbles in water, and... just bleh. I'll get back to it someday, when the option of being less obviously trans generally starts coalescing as an achievable option.
Cloud_Strife
Deity
I find it hard to believe proponents of blocking puberty blockers aren't acting from a position of malice and power when they decide that trans people should be forced through a puberty that is both permanent but also life long and causes countless years of misery and all for what?
Because they're personally uncomfortable with our care, not theirs, but our own bodies. These people are no different from anti choice zealots
Because they're personally uncomfortable with our care, not theirs, but our own bodies. These people are no different from anti choice zealots
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
I changed my voice. I didn't do any formal training with a professional but I did apply the general principles of voice training (i.e. I moved the point of resonance further up in the mouth). It's by no shakes great, but my voice was already on the femme-y end of masc-passing before transition so it didn't take a lot of work to get the resonance into a range where I pass well enough in most circumstances. I suspect having a Californian accent also really helps with this. Of course it's not just about resonance: cadence, prosody, word choice and conversational style also really affect how well you are read as femme or masc, and those are also things you work on with a voice coach. Additionally, as with all things in this area, the overlap on individual aspects of gender is massive, and when we read someone's gender, we read it holistically. Having a stereotypically femme voice can help you pass, but on the other hand you can have a husky voice which in one context (i.e. with a certain style, appearance, name, etc.) is read as male and in another is read is female.
As noted, trans people who are on t don't generally have to do training for their vocal register, as the t affects their vocal folds and gives them a deeper voice (in precisely the same way that it did for us trans femmes who experienced t-puberty as teenagers). In this way, you can think of voice training as sort of unlearning the habits and behaviors that were impressed on you when you experienced your natal puberty, and since trans femmes who get the benefit of puberty blockers don't experience this learning, they don't have anything to unlearn. The voice you are developing is not a new voice, nor a "fake" voice, but rather finding the voice you would have had if you hadn't experienced that first puberty.
Generally speaking voice training is a) expensive, b) not covered by a lot of insurance schemes, and c) seen as less pressing in the array of transition treatments. As trans people we have limited amounts of money, and that money typically is only enough to be put into one thing at a time. If you have $500, is it better to put that into 10 voice lessons, 1 laser session, 5 electro sessions, some clothing, or to stash it away for bigger procedures like FFS (20-50k), bottom surgery (10k-30), or hair transplants (3k-15k)? Frequently something like face dysphoria, or dysphoria from a beard shadow, or hips or genitals or what have you are the more immediate and distressing sources of dysphoria and you're going to focus on financing those things first. Voice training is also a long process, which requires a lot of diligent practice of exercises that seem silly and pointless, and part of the practice entails recording yourself and listening back, which can be agonizing if your voice is a major source of dysphoria for you.
If you want to hear what the end product sounds like, I would recommend checking out Abigail Thorn on youtube. Her voice control is really quite incredible (and her theater background no doubt helped with that).
Estrogen does not affect it. Testosterone does affect it for trans masc people (and this difference in hormone exposure is where the difference in gendered voices comes from in the first place). There is a voice feminization surgery. It's a procedure performed on the vocal folds which makes it easier to naturally fall at a higher pitch, and harder to fall into lower ranges. Generally speaking this procedure is considered unnecessary and voice training is sufficient to get you to a place where you're read as femme.
Ordnael
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2021
- Messages
- 212
Do you think a prepubescent child should be allowed to take drugs to facilitate transition?
Do you think minor should be allowed with going on gender reassignment surgery?
Do you think parents have a say on allowing such life, physical changing treatments?
Do you think minor should be allowed with going on gender reassignment surgery?
Do you think parents have a say on allowing such life, physical changing treatments?
Cloud_Strife
Deity
You understand what puberty blockers are for, right
Where is this happening? Nevermind that cis children can already undergo gender affirming surgery for a variety of reasons that aren't involved with transitioning
Not all forms of medical transitioning is irreversible.
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
They should have precisely the same amount of say they have under reasonable existing legal frameworks for any other medically warranted course of treatment.
Which is, in most - reasonable - places, a lot less than "parents have final say until age of majority", with laws usually giving minors increased control of their own body prior to adulthood, and likewise limiting what reason parents can actually cite to reject treatment.
Which is, in most - reasonable - places, a lot less than "parents have final say until age of majority", with laws usually giving minors increased control of their own body prior to adulthood, and likewise limiting what reason parents can actually cite to reject treatment.
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
Prior to puberty a child would not take drugs to transition. Currently the recommended treatment is to affirm the identity, and encourage social transition and gender exploration. Subsequently, puberty blockers are prescribed at puberty onset if the child has been consistent, insistent, and persistent in their gender identity. But by definition that wouldn’t be “pre-pubescent” but rather at the onset of pubescence.
If the question is whether I approve of the use of puberty blockers in transition, my answer is broadly yes. I think avoiding the trauma of experiencing wrong puberty is generally a good thing. However in my perfect world I would prefer puberty blockers instead be used only in the case of children who are explicitly unsure a) of their identity or b) of their overall transition goals. (Do note: these are not necessarily the same thing)
In my estimation, the use of blockers is a compromise measure to assuage the feelings of cis people who still devalue us and our identities. Given what data we have regarding the persistence of trans identification from youth to adulthood, blockers seem to me unnecessary, exposing the child not only to the potential medical side effects of taking them over a long period of time, but also the social harm of watching your peers experience puberty and the social, physical, emotional, and mental development that entails, while you are stuck waiting for the sensibilities of cis people to be sufficiently salved before finally being permitted to move forward in your life as everyone else already has.
I would much rather the primary course of treatment be to get the child on cross-sex hormones at puberty onset, with blockers for post-puberty onset children who are unsure or are pending evaluation (an evaluation measured in months rather than the years it is currently).
Yes, though, perhaps with a higher threshold for approval or a longer evaluation period than exists for adults. I don’t see the harm in allowing a Kim Petras - someone who first presented as trans at the age of 2 or 3, who has been living as a girl for the entire period since then, has been on hormones for multiple years, and has never wavered in her identity through that period - to receive GCS at 16 or 17 rather than being made to wait till 18.
I think they should have a say, but I don’t think they should have the only say. Generally we as a society acknowledge morally (even if not always so well legally or institutionally) that children do have rights, and that parents are not allowed to engage in behavior that is substantially harmful to their child - that they ought not physically torture their child, or intentionally deprive them of food or shelter, or sexually abuse them, for instance.
If a child was diabetic, and the parent has the ability or means to provide the child with insulin and denies them access to that life saving drug on moral or religious grounds, should the parent be allowed to do so? Should they be held accountable when their child dies as a result? If the child files claim or a family member does so on their behalf, to be rehoused with someone who will be able to get them the life saving care they need, how should the law treat such a matter? Does the child not have a right to preserve their own life? Does the parent not have a moral or legal obligation to ensure the well-being of their child?
Last edited:
Doesn't this argument mirror part of the abortion debate?
On a different note, I wanted to ask you if the womens' sports issue was an area where trans rights should be pressed, or conceded. I have my own ideas, but I am conflicted and frankly, I'd like input/guidance from actual stakeholders. I have a daughter, however, she is not "losing her spot/position/scholarship/etc." as a result of trans rights so my instinct is that even if I was opposed to trans women in womens' sports, which I am not, I'm not even theoretically in position to complain, based on any personal stake in the matter. Furthermore, I regard opposition to trans womens' participation in sports by people who, like me, have no personal stake, as essentially unwarranted malice.
Do you share my skepticism of separate categories for trans women in sports? Or is that something that has traction in the trans women community?
Cloud_Strife
Deity
It's all about obliquely denying trans trans woman both their womanhood and autonomy, but also excluding cis and intersex women (who often are people of color) who fail to adhere to the "standards" set by these strict bio-essentialist rules
So basically treating us like lepers and excluding us from even non-ranked sports
It seems to me that this is the core/primary reason. In fact you will often hear people openly stating as much. You will also hear, on the other hand, many more folks citing "fairness" and "integrity of the sport" as their reason.
So putting aside the many people who are just using the "fairness" and similar arguments as a mask for their malice towards trans women, is there any belief in the trans community that there is a significant portion of people who have genuine concerns about "fairness"?
For my part, I'm finding it difficult to separate the "fairness/integrity" arguments from a basic rejection of trans identity. If trans women are women, how can they be denied participation in womens sports? I guess as you've mentioned already, you have to use "strict bio-essentialist rules", which I guess boils down to testosterone tests in most cases.
The "non-ranked" point raises a topic I've been thinking alot about. I always wonder, when I hear folks railing about trans women in womens sports...how much of the womens sport in question they actually consume. That goes back to my position regarding actual stakeholders. Take the WNBA for example... "How much WNBA do you actually watch?" If you didn't care about womens NCAA swimming until you heard about trans women participating, then opposition to trans women participating just seems like more malice, that has nothing to do with the sport itself.
If the underlying reason womens sports are less consumed than mens sports has partly to do with the relative level of competition/performance and that is the current/popular justification for the separation between the two, then isn't there some inherent tension between the "fairness" argument and the reality of the relative level of competition? In other words, if the reason we continue to have womens sports is to essentially perpetuate a less competitive (in absolute terms) level of the sport... don't we then have to admit that other considerations, besides absolute competitiveness/performance should play a role in who is allowed to participate?
Last edited:
Ordnael
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2021
- Messages
- 212
Do you think these drugs are safe for a child. Is denying the natural biological changes the body undergoes the safest course for transitioning?
I am not aware of gender affirming surgery, could you give me an example, please?
Could you give an example of such treatments? Are those forms of reversible medical transition treatments safe enough for children? Is there any possibility of long lasting adverse side effects.
How do you affirm this identity, and encourage social transition and gender exploration? How can you be certain a child is truly committed to transitioning and not just going over a phase, or acting up?
What if the treatments are harmful and irreversible? Should parents still be accountable for allowing harm?
Synobun
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2006
- Messages
- 24,423
I am not trans but am part of the demographic puberty blockers were originally designed for. They were originally made for cis children experiencing precocious puberty, i.e., puberty that is onset far before it's appropriate. There are significant health risks from entering puberty too early, so puberty blockers are prescribed to halt the process until a more appropriate time. Puberty blockers are considered safe compared to the alternative, both for cis and trans children. They have been in use for over fifty years. Stopping their use resumes the body's development of sex characteristics.
Pretty sure Ordnael wanted a list of gender-affirming surgeries for cis kids.
Things like:
circumcision
breast reduction for cis boys with gynacomastia
breast augmentation or reduction for cis girls
testicular implants for boys with missing testes
This article has a lot of discussion about it:
Things like:
circumcision
breast reduction for cis boys with gynacomastia
breast augmentation or reduction for cis girls
testicular implants for boys with missing testes
This article has a lot of discussion about it:
Similar threads
- Poll
