#pro cherid

[transidorg]

A Bold Coin, (Cherid)

This coin was written by the original coiner of transid (aka 6120975), (not me). And the OG coiner claims this is more in line with their original intentions of what transid’s meaning was intended to be. Cherid Coin “Cherid: short for cherished identity is a term for those who are switching to a differing identity than how they are societally perceived. It is for those who genuinely identify as such. These individuals may or may not have dysphoria. To be cherid the identity must meet the following criteria: 1. Can be transitioned to 2. Effects how one is societally perceived 3. Is not based in a desire to harm oneself or others 4. Must be approved by the cherid committee” (Yuki's proposed coin amendments for easier interpretation) (added at end) "Criteria 1-3 shall be interrupted through a scientific lens. We evaluate (and reevaluate) terms based on how the scientific consensus seems to see 1-3." also, this should be changed "1. Can be transitioned to towards" When a cherid committee forms, we will draft up a constitutions, and vote on my amendments. 6120975 is an advisor (can be asked questions) who left me (Yuki) in charge of forming a cherid committee. Terms that are decided by committee are not cherid are still transid. No one in the current community is being excluded from transid.org. I am making this post because I the founder of transid.org identify as cherid. I see the irony there! I'll talk about how this will affect transid.org and then have go into length of my opinions so people don't put words in my mouth.

How does this effect transid.org?  We will NOT destroy or exclude any part of the community that has called our website home. There seems to be a need for this coining though. Some notice that many have left the community (who disagree with controversial terms) not having something to call themselves. I follow the original transid coiner, in IDing as cherid. But we will give a platform to differing ideologies. We silence no one! May we coexisist?! We are NOT burning the controversial books of the wiki. We are NOT excluding transid, radqueer or cherid from transid.org! However, with so much controversy in the terms under the transid umbrella, and no other word, in my opinion we exclude ‘normies’ like me. I hope those in this community understand the search for terms the feel representative of our identities. I should also note that the transid.org mod team has plenty of transid/radqueer types along with cherid representation namely me (Yuki). This post reflects Yuki's views, the founder of transid.org. I hope you tolerate my or anyone cherid’s who may have such a difference of opinion. Without tolerance of differences the mainstream lgbtq and neurodivergent would have never flourished compared to the past. We truly all are entitled to our opinions. I hope tolerance is widespread and mutual. Many transid people even see problems with anyone online making a new term. The transid community does distance itself from some terms (replaceids) mostly for suspected trolls. But is in full support of transharmful. My opinions on transharmful I’m not against transharmful people, glad to see you all found an online community who you can relate to. You (of course) are all are still welcome to be a part of transid. Transharmful people finding community seem to helped relieve some shame of having intrusive thoughts. But choosing to make such a thought a part of your core of who you are could prevent you from healing from the trauma by cementing such thoughts. I encourage you all to get help with such thoughts. I believe with letting such thoughts pass could allow getting better. I encourage you all to cherish the euphoric happiest parts of you as the core parts of you identity. I think making the clearly uplifting things part of us are a positive contribution to our well being. Why should I encourage making negative thoughts more permanent. I understand people will disagree here. I'm not going to force anyone to change their opinion. I ask for tolerance of differing views of transharmful on transid.org. It is possible to disagree respectfully, and tolerance does not mean you are forced to be besties! Trans suffice usage suggestion Here is a 6120975 suggestion about the trans suffix. A transman is a man. It is that simple, at least if you ask an actual queer. But with some more recent transid terms, trans also means is not. Like when people don’t genuinely identify as a term they ‘hoard’. Can we as a community come up with an alternative suffice people can use in those cases? I think keeping trans meaning someone is, is good. We should reward all the grandparents who now connect trans with someone's real identity. I think we should make an alternate suffix besides "trans" people can choose to use (opt in) who don’t choose to identify as something.

[transidorg]

Cherid recoin

I stand behind the general concept of cheird. But one thing has become very clear. No one wanted a committee. It is very unpopular. To be honest I want to spend my time working on the website not being a part of some committee. Better to risk, cherid evolve in an unintended way that make a term that serves no one. I can understand the anxiety of not being in control of the umbrella you identify with. I have no problem removing the committee part. I stand behind the coin minus the commitee! I took the liberty of adding my previously proposed edits to the coin. This coin does not reflect the views of all transid.org moderators. Cherid recoin

“Cherid: short for cherished identity is a term for those who are switching to a differing identity than how they are societally perceived. It is for those who genuinely identify as such. These individuals may or may not have dysphoria.

To be cherid the identity must meet the following criteria:

1. Can be transitioned toward

2. Effects how one is societally perceived

3. Is not based in a desire to harm oneself or others

Criteria 1-3 shall be interrupted through a scientific lens. We evaluate, as a community, (and reevaluate) terms based on how the scientific consensus seems to see 1-3”

there were some misunderstandings from the previous post. First I want to say some people might think “can transition toward” means someone, anyone in that community can transition towards their goals. Someone who isn’t transitioning or doesn’t want to is still cherid. I also want to say that I’m no expert on transharmful. I am not transharmful myself or a medical health professional. In the previous post I made a claim that there is a better way to heal from intrusive thoughts. I made a claim that I could not back up. If you are a part of the transharmful community please write an ask with your experiences. Such as how transharmful effects you. And things that are misunderstood about the community. And what the term means to you. I will read all of them but don’t promise to reply to all of them, and talk to some mental health professionals I know. I will present transharmful to these professionals, and include some of the asks. I will do my best to come in with an open mind. And listen to both sides. I’m not going to make anyone do anything differently. If transharmful gave you a way to cope with intrusive thoughts that seems helpful. I could be wrong but there might be a more effective way to heal from intrusive thoughts. I will present what they see as the DO and don’ts of coping with such thoughts, if they suggest transharmful or another method of coping you will hear it. And I’ll come to my own personal conclusion based on this. If you wish to boycott the transid.org website or discord. That is your own decision. The data on the wiki is pretty open not locked in. If you wish to make your own site it takes a lot of determination and some funds. Great luck to you! I'm not going to hold your hand but I'd be willing to answer some technical questions. Also note there is the term FLEUR I was not familiar with for those of you who are looking for something existing similar to transid. That cherid coin version you saw in the previous post seems to have been coined on 8/18/2025. But was kept private for a while. We expected some amount of backlash. The people who do not like the addition of certain controversial transid terms typically leave transid. We did not expect the people who stuck around to be very in favor of this. I think it is wrong to scare such people off how might be searching for cherid or FLEUR. And I aim to advocate tolerance from all both sides.

[transidorg]

I have a question. Not about transharmful (I could say a lot about whether or not I consider it a good term, long story short I see both your perspective and your critics perspectives) but about the other part of that rule in the cherid coining. That identities must also not be based in a desire to harm yourself.

I assume this is meant to be a way to exclude transharmed identities? Which… I mean… okay, if that’s what you want to do. I would argue that that’s hard to do completely (as transharmed grew out of transtrauma which grew out of transabled identities like transPTSD).

My problem is that depending how you interpret “desire to hurt yourself” (or how antis interpret it) could become a big issue. For example, is desiring an amputation having a desire to hurt yourself? Because this is the claim levied against basically all transabled identities. That it’s just sh. Hell, transphobes will call any medical transition of any kind self harm. With “transgenderism” being called the new equivalent of cutting.

My fear is that adding that specification basically means that in the wrong hands or viewed through the wrong eyes, a lot more than transharm identities could be excluded. And it makes me uncomfortable to just think of that in a definition. I know what you’re trying to do. But to some people, safely blinding yourself or having an amputation is self-harm (since what you’re doing is damaging your body). To some people, tulpamancy/willomancy is self-harm (since you’re encouraging dissociation, a negative coping mechanism). To some people… you get the idea. I don’t agree with either of these, but I wanted you to know they are viewpoints out there.

I would not want to be in a community where that was a specification unless I knew exactly and specifically how “hurting yourself” was going to be defined.

I will attempt to define "hurting yourself" as you have asked me to. I would like it to be a fair and factual metric. I have read that transgender transition and surgery has very very low regret rate less. Trans surgery is less than 1%. As long as you look at real studies that aren't fabricated by TERFS. It seems all regret types are defiantly under 3%. I geniunely hope that the following does not seem transmedicalist! I'm not one. I support people in cherid who choose not to transition. They are cherid. But I think the least biased method I can think of, to numerically assign regret rates is to transitions. I think we should accept everyone by default who fits the other definitions of cherid. And wait for more evidence to rule something out for harm. I think if in future research there a mountain of evidence shows, more than 50% regret a surgery or transition... I think that in that case surgery or transition for that identity would be harmful... If more people regret something than are satisfied with I conclude that causes more harm than good generally. (this is a ethically utilitarian. I choose this ethical frame work because it is simple to follow). I think if someone is very determined to get a high regret rate surgery or similar, we should still be kind to these people. But some people trying to talk them out of it seems warranted. There are a few other caveats to consider, can we rule out the regret coming from how society treats those people (such as rejection)? The regret must from how the person might feel about their surgery in isolation for it to be harmful. I think this only shows a transition of high regret could be harmful, I don't think this is enough evidence to show the identity itself is harms. Let's say the cherid as a concept does not promote transitions that the majority genuinely regret. We can keep identity separate from high regret rate transitions and try and be more inclusive of any identity (that meets the other criteria). I would expect: transspecies, transage, transrace, and transabled all to have much lower regret rates. But I don't have proof. I cannot to yet come to any strongly supported conclusions. Many biased people see woman as less than or disabled as less than. They are seeing the world through a lens where someone is more than someone else. A transwoman's ideal body is often similar to a ciswoman's, I legitimately hope we allow transabled people to get surgery to become disabled, and monitor the regret rates. My guess is they would be happier than way. Not everything in life is about less or more as some people assume. I think what body are you comfortable in is most important. And my guess being the the body you identify with will make people happier even if it is 'disadvantages you' in some way. With transplural I don't expect it to be harmful. I think we should be supportive of anything like that by default. I support transplural. When people's transitions are studied, we could look at regret rates in the future.

I think less than 50% of less regretting is a logical place to draw the line. And doesn't hold everything to the same high standards as the success of transgender surgery. I don't think it should have to be such a positive way to transition as transgender surgery is. But over 50 times more can regret is as people who get trans surgery in my book. So support everyone unless included by the other criteria unless there is ever strong harm evidence in the future that transition causes harm then don't encourage that transition method, unless a better one comes in the more distant future that people don't regret so much. Anon, please let me know if this seems like a fair unbiased way to assess harm. Or you have concerns or suggestions still.