Special Status, and Cisgendered Privilege

The book “Transpeople” by Christopher A. Shelly, published by the University of Toronto Press, has been a facinating read. I've been going through the book both sequentially page by page, and also flipping to random sections that fit my current fancy.

One of my friends, Ellie, considers herself a radical feminist. What she has noticed very poignantly in radical feminist circles is a kind of militant transphobia towards transgendered people and gender-non-conformists. The self-proclaimed “women-born-women” (or “womyn-born-womyn” as they attempt to get rid of the patriarchal and admittedly sexist language of including “men/man” in “women/woman”) attempt to discredit and delegitimize both transgendered women and transgendered men as “not women/actually men.”

I have, of course, mentioned the most infamous of the “feminist” transphobes, Janice Raymond. She wrote the book “The Transsexual Empire,” where she described transgendered women as “Male-to-Constructed-Females” and “transgendered men,” claiming that they were no better than “rapists” who wanted to use male privilege to “invade the female space.” We are, apparently, “spies for the patriarchy.” (My words.)

It strikes me as particularly odd. Even though MtF women have experienced male privilege, upon transitioning almost all of that privilege is deemed forfeit. With transgendered presenation being so extremely public, from hair, to the voice, to the clothes, to the given name and pronouns, to the particular locations of body fat and muscle on a trans persons' body, if one does not “pass” then how do radical cultural feminists expect FtM men and MtF women to retain any sort of “male privilege” without being victims of male schadenfreude? Do transphobic radical cultural feminists truly believe that MtF women who are full time and non-passing really move in and out of male circles at will without any repercussions to their reputation, status or social network? Moreover, do they deny that transpeople face the same gender-determined violence based on their perceived gender role, and are the victims of gender-based discrimination and hate crimes that women are?

With these powerful and direct words, I digress into my sociological theory.

Growing up as a very “gender queer” child who simply “could not” be a girl but did not see “him”self as a boy, I noticed the special status applied to boys and girls at an early age. I saw it quickly like a club, as opposed to anything that had any sort of responsibilities or oppression associated with it. Boys were for sports and being all manly, girls were for being pretty. This is a simplistic view, but as someone who didn't value competitive sports or being pretty, I quickly saw how these two “differences” were then played off each other in the social scene. Both girls and boys at such a young age became quickly infatuated with the patriarchal gender binary, as it quickly became a simple and easy mould to identify with.

Feminism, as far as my understanding goes, wished to equalize men and women and erase the borders between them. Thus, it also found a solid footing in the queer movement. But with the rise of individualism in the last thirty years, starting especially in the late-70's/early-80's, there was a change. Simultaneous group-identification and individualist drive took hold of society.

I will not attempt to paint all cultural feminists with the same brush, but this is my interpretation. Transphobic radical cultural feminists, from what I've read, have adopted this “special status” but in a very specific way. Mainly, they have begun embracing biological determinism and the sex/gender dichotomy as a source of strength. “Men are rapists” is a kind of sexism which feminism used to decry. How is “men are rapists” functionally different than “women are emotional/underdeveloped men”? Both are biologically determined stereotypes and generalizations aimed at extracting some kind of power or privilege over the “bad” gender. Much like how there were “proper women” and “improper women/unwomen” when the second wave first hit, so too have they created a “proper woman” and “improper woman/man” - a transgendered woman, despite her extremely transgressive behaviour and inherently queer nature, is placed on the same level as women who adopt patriarchy and men (who all apparently “rapists”).

This same biological determinism is what is currently used to oppress women even to this day and elevate the status of men. Yet radical cultural feminists see no cognitive dissonance on adopting this biological determinism and applying it to transgendered women, transgendered men, queer identified men and women, and so on.

This special status as “real women” empowers them to oppress other gender minorities. Suddenly, they are the privileged ones, and those who do not conform to the biologically deterministic philosophy of gender are unaccepted outcasts of “the movement.” Much like how women who wore pants in the 50's and 60's were seen as “unwomanly,” so too are transgendered women who weren't “born women,” a natural roll of the dice that ended up not in their favour, marginalized and ostracized from female spaces, independent of their sexual anatomy, sexual orientation, personalities, intentions, or “true nature.” This demonization of men, and, by “association,” transgendered women only seeks to perpetuate the stereotype of “feminists are all lesbian man-haters.”

Not all men are rapists. Transgendered women are NOT men and receive no male privilege. They live in an oppressive cis-privileged society. Much like how there is the dichotomy between the rights and status of men and women, there is the dichotomy of rights and status between cisgendered and transgendered people. Those who cannot see this aren't just simply “not looking hard enough,” they haven't even opened their eyes.

One

On April 15th, 2008, I came out to my ex-partner and essentially destroyed that relationship. Over the last year I have gone from being afraid I "looked too gay" to giving speeches on transgendered issues to classes as a transgendered woman.

I'd be lying if I said I was even half way there. But things are going well.

A big thanks to my new friends and my family. I couldn't have gotten this far without you.

Repetition and Narrative

I'm sorry for the tardiness on posts to this blog. Life happened and I was forced to prioritize other stuff. But this semester is over, so I think things will be easier from here on out.

I've recently started reading a book. It is “Transpeople” by Christopher A. Shelly. You can pick it up at your local Indigo for about $25. It is written by a cisgendered man, but he constantly strives to attempt to let the transgendered people he interviews write the narrative.

Too often, the narrative of transgendered people is destroyed in favour of the cisgendered perspective. For instance, the movie “Girl Inside” (which I admit have not seen, but have talked with many people about) was marketed as a documentary about a Male-to-Female transsexual “becoming a girl.” The surgery was the #1 thing hyped throughout the documentary. The self-discovery, the years of therapy, the oppression placed on her by society, her immediate surroundings, her friends and family, and the years of social networking apparently go unmentioned. Oh no, being a transgendered woman is all about the surgery. After all, how can you be a girl if you have a penis?

This kind of cis-washing happens in Psychology quite often. Gender Identity Disorder was written and is enforced by cisgendered people. It is no longer about the story of the transgendered person, their perspectives or their trauma, but how the cisgendered psychologists view their “condition” and “disorder” and how they can be “cured” (either through reparative therapy or transitioning to their desired gender).

It is for these reasons that transgendered people constantly have to perfect their narratives. I myself have to perfect my narratives to present a sense of validity, a sense of exception, a sense of “normality”, and most importantly, I have to project comfort to others.

I begin by saying I am my own person, and I “see myself as a girl.” Then I have to give a timeline, to show how long I have been “living” with this “condition” - which was the age of nine or ten. Then, I have to establish that I passed as your “average guy” quite well, had girlfriends, a goatee, and so on, to show that, yes, I tried to be a “normal male.” I then have to describe the kind of trauma I experienced conforming to that gender role. And so on, and so on.

Do you see a pattern here? I am forced to prove myself, to validate myself for their benefit. I cannot simply be a woman, I must validate my identity through whatever means necessary. I must teach them about transgendered issues every single time. I cannot divulge any sense of personality, only “objective” truth, backed up by the opinions of cisgendered psychologists under the medical model.

Thus my entire history, my entire way of being, becomes “properly” framed for the benefit of my cisgendered acquaintances. Without certain conditions being met, I may not, in fact, be “legitimately transgendered”, and my entire personality may be a facade. According to them, at least. That becomes internalized quite quickly by most transgendered people. It becomes a social imperative to show the cisgendered oppressors that yes, I am normal, I have a valid condition according to the medical community, I am disabled or different or special and to be taken seriously I must show this. I cannot simply be or exist or live; I must, through my very existence, be a socio-political entity, the token tranny whose “trans identity” precedes her.

I am not saying that being politically active, or a transgendered representative, or an activist, or any of those things is “wrong.” I am not advocating passing and being accepted carte blanche is the only way of being, totally acceptable, or perpetrating oppression. But the method in which almost every transgendered person organizes their history, is so very specific to the assumptions raised by cisgendered people. I myself would really enjoy being allowed to speak in front of people using this method. But a part of me resents the fact that I have to have such a structured organization of my entire identity to simply be taken seriously or as a legitimate person.

And that's not even to say if they'll see me as a woman, a man, or an “other” (transgendered person who is neither). That depends on how well you do or do not “pass” as the desired gender, and whether or not people can read you.

My narrative has become so structured that sometimes it makes me feel depressed. All I've ever wanted to be was a cute girl who hugged people was just taken for granted as a cute girl. Why must I politicize myself to be taken seriously as a woman? Why is it that a few more millimetres of hand girth, or an extra centimetre of jaw size, or a couple of inches on height, or a few hertz lower in voice pitch should force me to have to structure my identity in such a way that it almost becomes alien to me?

It isn't as though I'm talking directly to the reactionary psychologists or social right wing. I am also talking to the LGB community, the social left-wing who is tolerant but uninformed, and anyone who is accepting but has no real grasp on transgendered issues. Cisgendered people cannot fathom having such a basic personality trait such as gender “go wrong”, and thus pick up the popular perceptions or stereotypes of this particular class of people. This again forces the methodology – that transgendered people must structure themselves for everyone, regardless of social leaning.

And so, if you meet a transgendered person who is very structured and organized in regards to their identity, or a transsexual who wishes to never, ever be read by another person as being biologically male or female so they wont have to explain themselves or deal with people accusing them of being “liars”, perhaps now you will understand why.

LGB vs T

(Keyword for today: cisgender – a persons physical body and mental identity matching up, “not transgendered”)

A lot of rhetoric gets thrown around by the left-wing liberals of this continent (being North America) about the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender” movement. (There are of course other letters to this particular alphabet, such as Intersexed (insultingly and classically called “hermaphrodites”), Genderqueer (those who identify as neither gender, or both), 2-Spirit (a differing Native American description of what we call “transgender”), Queer (not conforming to social expectations of man/woman), and so on. But on the whole, every piece of literature out there has to deal with “LGBT Communities,” “LGBT Rights,” “LGBT Pride,” and so on, yet nobody really stops to think, “what does gender have to do with sexuality?” (Similarly, what does Intersexuality have to do with sexual orientation as well?)

It's a common misconception from everyone across the political spectrum to assume that “transgender” is somehow a form of sexual deviancy. After all, many transsexual individuals move towards getting Sex Reassignment Surgery, so obviously transgender/transsexualism is a form of sexuality. I mean hell, “sexual” is right there in the word “transsexual.”

But it is a completely false assumption to label transgendered people as sexually deviant. I myself am a transgendered woman, yet I do not hate my reproductive system and see myself as a lesbian woman.

Gender vs Sexuality

A woman can love a man, another woman, both, or all genders. (straight, lesbian, bisexual, pansexual) A man can love another man, a woman, both, or all genders. (again: straight, gay, bisexual, pansexual). How is it different when it concerns a transgendered woman or a transgendered man? Can a transgendered man or woman not see themselves as gay/lesbian, bisexual, or pansexual?

From a use of simple logic you can see how identity differs from sexual orientation. The presentation of a cisgendered gay man vs. a cisgendered straight man does not differ all that much. The presentation of a cisgendered gay man vs. a transgendered straight woman (assuming both are “men”, which is entirely incorrect) is completely different; because the transgendered woman sees herself as a woman. Because she is a woman. So how does she fit into the sexual orientation “community” when she is straight and loves men? What does her identity (transgender) have to do with lesbian, gay, or bisexual?

The “Community” and “Allies”

It is important to remember that the reason why transgendered people got themselves added to LGB was because they were (and are) seen as allies. Transgendered people were seen as sexual deviants, as were lesbians, gays and bisexuals, and so with similar forms of oppression from the psychiatric and social mainstream it became an easy match.

But what I've personally seen through my experience moving through “LGBT” spaces is that while LGB have essentially had an “easier” time overcoming oppression through a solidified human rights movement, transgendered people still remain ghettoized within that “community”, seen and not heard.

A transman I know reels at the mention of the “C-word,” as he calls it. He sees it as a copout of recognizing the differences within a particular minority group for the sake of solidarity, and I personally agree.

Some gay men see transgendered women as confused gay men, independent of their actual sexual orientation. Many lesbian women, one of the more famous ones being Janice Raymond, see transgendered women as “men” who are attempting to “invade the female space”, like “rapists.” More uncommonly, transgendered men are seen as “gender traitors.”

Are these popular opinions? I would disagree and say they are fringe at best. But they still represent a very vocal voice of the LGB “community.”

In another bout of opinion, one thing that strikes me hard is a telling sign of the “community” being apathetic towards transgendered people is what happened when homosexuality was delisted in the Diagnostics and Statistics Manual, the “big book of psychology.” It was delisted, and transsexuality added in its place as “gender identity disorder.” Yet nobody fought back against that. Transgendered people have now gone through years of reparative therapy at the hands of Dr. Kenneth Zucker and Dr. Ray Blanchard, who believe that transgendered people can be “cured” of their transgendered tendencies. They also see male-to-female transsexuals as homosexual men, independent of things like... if they were lesbian transsexuals. Or happy after transitioning. Challenging gender roles is strictly verboten.

T vs T

Within the “transgender “community””, there is, of course, infighting. What constitutes “a transgendered person”? Are those people who are not diagnosed with “Gender Identity Disorder” under the medical model “legitimate”? Are transgendered people not on Hormone Replacement Therapy (HRT) “really” transgendered or just “hardcore” cross dressers? How do we reconcile seeing gender as a social construct while conforming to the opposite genders habits in an attempt to fit in with a cisgendered, “biologically determined” society?

Some go back even further and claim that those who do not undergo Sex Reassignment Surgery are somehow less legitimate in their identities than those who do. Some claim that they are a “type 6: true transsexual” and wave it like a flag. Some see themselves as the other gender, yet present androgynously, bringing the ire of people who conform to the gender stereotypes down upon them.

Solidarity within the T minority is almost non-existent except as the institution level in many places, which is usually under the medical model.

In my opinion, the reason I see for this is that we, as transgendered people, are culturally oppressed at every turn. We thus have to construct a brick-wall identity. When some transgendered people perceive a “challenge” to their identity as trans by someone else, they take it personally. It quickly escalates to mortal combat at each side gets more and more personal. It's a defensive mechanism, from a society that constantly assaults their identity with one-word insults like “fake”, “shemale”, “tranny”, and so on. Thus a constant validation of identity becomes nigh-necessary for any type of emotional survival. And so, trans turns on trans.

Separatists, or “Radical Transgenderism”

Transphobia differs from homophobia in a lot of ways, mostly that it is more pervasive and tied to emotion. Sexual orientation, as former Prime Minister Trudeau put it, exists in the bedroom.

Gender identity exists in the public realm. The clothes, the mannerisms, the name, the designation on your identification, the pronoun on your mail, the pronouns. It exists when someone greets you as “Sir” as a transgirl or “Ma'am” as a transguy. It exists when you're picked out of a crowd because you're a slightly shorter, more effeminate guy, or a taller girl with broad shoulders and a deeper voice. It exists when someone says “you're REALLY a man” or “you're REALLY a woman”, claims that your identity is fake, and so on.

My own view of the situation is that there needs to be solidarity in the transgendered minority insofar as transgendered rights and representation in the wider culture goes – but this cannot be done while we exist attached and defenceless to the sexual orientation minority. There are of course extreme differences regarding different forms of oppression within the transgendered minority, such as race, class, ableism, religion, heterosexism (beyond transphobia) in general, and so on.

Perpetrating the LGBT misnomer does nothing but harm transgendered people, by sexualizing their identities much to the glee of the reactionary medical community and social right wing; allowing them to say we're “like homosexuals, but worse.”

Identities need to be separated from sexuality. T needs to be separated from LGB. Transgendered, transsexual, intersexed, genderqueer, two-spirit and androgynous (TTIG2SA) individuals from all walks of life need to rise up to form their own “community”, and say “we are our own persons, and we are not defined by our sexuality.”

Some may disagree and say that it would “split” the community and force allies away from us. I say it is crucial to our survival as a distinct class of people who face different forms of oppression and barriers. With a homogenized (no pun intended) voice with the sexual orientation minority, our message and purpose is lost. We need a distinct voice if we are to be recognized as a distinct class of people, independent of any other minority.

LGBP for sexual orientation minorities.

TTIG2SA for gender identity minorities.