Ying posed the following scenario/question: "Recently, I heard a lesbian woman comment about a trans woman (who
happens to be a lesbian). She said the transwoman was not "really" a
lesbian like she was. It was upsetting to me. No one can define another
person's identity, right? It seemed so petty, too. What skin is it off
her nose anyway? What are your thoughts on people not accepting a
trans person's sexual orientation as being valid?"
Something to consider is going into this is that even though many of the LGB portion of our acronym are supportive and allies, that makes them no less cisgender. Just like any non-LGB person, they're acting from a position of cis privilege, and don't understand the implications of their actions, because, frankly, they don't have to think about it much. We pop up once in a while, in a single circumstance here or there, and that's generally the extent of it. And while they're our allies for political purposes, I've come to find in my experience that LGB people are often woefully ignorant of the issues of the transgender community they support. Which is no surprise, really: We're a vastly smaller group, a minority within our lgbt minority, so appropriately less time is spent on issues relating to us. (Just a shout-out to the LGBTU student group at The University of Akron, as they break this trend and give trans issues a much larger chunk of the spotlight than we deserve by population, because they've recognized the importance of these topics. Well done on them)
So what does this mean for the lesbian in question? Well, she's invalidating our trans lesbian's identity, plain and simple. By saying she's not 'really' a lesbian, she's implying an awful lot, and none of it is good. First and foremost, let's go ahead and define "Lesbian": a lesbian is a woman* who is attracted exclusively to other women*. Pretty simple definition, right? Well the two key elements are "Woman" and "Attracted exclusively to other women". By saying she's 'not really a lesbian' she has to be excluding our trans lesbian from one of the two criteria: and since, presumably, the trans lesbian has been with, or is currently with another woman, and has shown no interest in men, we can assume that 'Attracted to other women' is true. This means the only remaining conflict is in fact, our trans lesbian's womanhood. There's no other way around it.
Nobody else can define you but you. Labels are tools that you apply to yourself, and are not end all be all, but if the trans lesbian identified as trans lesbian, then she's a trans lesbian. It's not particularly up for debate.
As far as her actions, not petty so much as it's cissexist. It's a person, in their seat of privileged power, defining someone of a marginalized minority, which of course they feel free to do, because we're clearly not better informed of our own identities than they are. And yes, people may point out that "We're all LGBT here, I'm not discriminating" but the fact is, even though you're a part of the marginalized "L G or B" subgroup, transpeople are a step even lower on the ladder. And the trait that makes marginalized is one that you do not share with us. We are trans, you are cis. You have cis privilege.
The metaphorical 'skin off her nose' is she'd have to think about trans women more critically, and actually admit that they deserve their right to womanhood as well as the right to their own autonomy - particularly regarding their identity. This is admitting that she can no longer pick and choose how to define a trans woman as she sees fit. This is a problem because for most LGB people, they're completely fine with trans people, up to the point where it becomes a matter of sexual orientation (I.E. Something they define themselves with and take very seriously), and more specifically, their sexual orientation. It's not petty, no, it's lazy.
Just a thought exercise, for any LGB folk reading this. If a Trans* person, compatible with your sexuality(I.E. Trans man if you're gay, trans woman if you're lesbian) wanted to date you, would you say yes? I'm guessing most of you knee-jerked and said 'no'. Examine why, ask yourself why, and realize that there's a good chance you're invalidating their identity of trans people implicitly by saying so. Even if you help them politically in debates, stand up for them from bullies, it's telling of what you *really* think if it hits close to home and you say "ew, no". Chew on that for a bit, maybe you'll come to some realizations.
And before the inevitable genital argument arises, is that really what you look for in a partner? Is it really the genitals? I've never ever heard someone say "that's a mighty sexy penis you've got there" Or "My what a lovely vagina you have" It's ludicrous. To imply that it's completely irrelevant would be untrue, but to claim that you're utterly unwilling because of this fact is... well, depressing. What if, for instance, a gay cis male came to date a gay cis male, and the latter was found to have been victim of a botched circumcision. Would you instantly dump him because he doesn't have the coveted penis? It's not to say sex is unimportant, but there's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm going to go ahead and go out on a limb, because I think this is a general issue that plagues the thought processes of people who are trans, as well as people who don't understand trans lesbians, by clarifying once again the basic concept: Sexual Orientation and Gender are INDEPENDENT from each other. People have this fallback expectation that it's a definitive aspect of a woman that she be attracted to men. People further have a definitive aspect of a man that they are attracted to women. (This is heterosexual privilege but go with me here) Basically, since people believe these binaries are the 'normal' baseline, they expect someone who's 'just trans' to be following said baseline. I.E. if you want to be woman, a part of it MUST be that you're attracted to men. (This is also because people falsely try to rationalize why a guy would want a gender change and instantly assume it's sexually motivated). This is what leads people to say such ignorant things as "Well, if you're into guys, can't you just be gay instead?" or this gem: "If you like women, what's the big deal? You're a guy just like anyone else!"
These dismiss the fact that it's not their sexual attraction that bothers them, it's their gender, their body, their social role, etc. You aren't a 'more legit' trans woman if you're into guys, you're a straight trans woman (this argument is commonly framed "Trannier than thou"). Likewise, people shouldn't come to expect that being a transwoman comes with the baggage that you must like men. Likewise likewise, people should absolutely NOT be using a transgender lesbian's sexual orientation as some sort of 'proof' that she must be a guy. This is equating "wants to screw women" with "is a man". It reinforces the notion that being male is screw women ( and actually is homophobic - as any gay man will tell you, they are very much men, and are very much into other men).
A corollary of this is gender presentation. In my own case, for instance, I don't dress super fem - I wear a v-neck t-shirt and pants most days. That doesn't make me any less of a woman, and it would be just as wrong to imply that I'm not a woman because of my manner of dress. (Passing while wearing less feminine clothes is a whole other story, but the principle is still relevant).
Something to consider as a litmus test in this sort of situation is to ask yourself: If the person were cisgender, would I be scrutinizing X aspect of their person so harshly? In the case of the original scenario, were the trans lesbian a cis lesbian, her sexuality would have never been called into question. It's discriminating against a trans person because they're trans. This applies to anything. Telling a trans person "Well why don't you wear makeup? real women wear makeup" is silly, because if she were cisgender, you'd never suggest that she were not a real woman (though you might politely express that she'd look better with it).
That doesn't mean you shouldn't help your trans friend with some social norms they may not be accustomed to, but please try to not come of as patronizing or cissexist (I.E. I'm a real girl, here let me teach you). Many of us who're just beginning hormones are experiencing a second puberty - and much like the first, it comes with awkwardness, confusion, and learning what's expected of you. Understanding that they ARE women, just, in terms of social constructs, inexperienced women, is key. (In that way, its more like teaching your 13 year old cousin than a 'guy becoming a girl')
Basically at the end of the day, cisgender people are conveniently overlooking sexual orientation as being fluid for the sake of using it as proof that they don't have to consider someone's gender identity. It's heteronormative, and just as insulting to homosexuals as it despicable that it's being weaponized against transgender people.
The only alternative to the above is if she mentally created a third category for trans women, but that's incorrect. Trans women are women who are trans. They're not a third category.
Quote of the day: "Searching for the answer's a lonely quest, but the act is liable to bring out your best" Bad Religion, Someone to Believe
-Lyn
(As always, if you have any questions you would like me to address, please put them in the comments section. It is a seriously big help to me, and you get your question examined by me!)
@ Orangeban: Your question has been answered by someone else already, and I don't much feel I have anything I could add to the discussion. You can find a link to their article in the comments section of the "How to be a Trans Ally" post.
A blog for answering questions, and sharing ideas pertaining to all things transgender.
Friday, May 11, 2012
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
How to be a Trans Ally
A friend of mine on Facebook asked: How can I be a good trans ally?
The answer to this one isn't nearly as complex as people really make it out to be, it comes from two key components: Respect for trans persons, both the ones you personally know, as well as ones you've not met, and an open-minded desire to learn with the understanding that no, you probably don't know everything about being trans, and that many assumption you've probably already made are wrong.
The first part seems like it would be common sense, but it often isn't. You need to respect the person and their identity. Don't use their old pronouns or name. This one is basic, if they ask to be referred to as 'Crissy', call them Chrissy. These practices should extend beyond just interacting with the person directly; it says a lot about how little you respect their decision if, as soon as they're out of earshot, you start calling them by their old name. If you talk with a mutual friend, and Chrissy comes up, she should be Chrissy, not Christopher, She, not He. Even if she's not there, it's still a matter of respecting her. In fact, a show of good faith as well as a personal reminder, switch to their new name in your phone. It shows that you respect their change, even when nobody else would see it.
Don't disrespect OTHER trans people, besides the ones you know personally. This should be fairly intuitive, if you want to be considered a trans ally, you have to be an ally to all trans people. If you aren't, your broadcasting some really negative things about yourself. For one, "It's only okay that you're trans because you're you" in other words, you're acting self important, and accepting them/treating them nice as a favor to them. It's not a favor, it's baseline respect for any trans person, period. Alternatively, in the case of "Well, but, you don't LOOK trans, you, you know, look good! not like those others" you're basically saying it's only okay that they're trans because they pass for cisgender; implying if they didn't look cisgender, you wouldn't support them. Further, there really aren't a whole lot of trans people per area. If you're speaking of someone else locally, there's a fairly good chance we know the person you're talking about, and don't appreciate you looking down on them. So, respect all trans people, easy.
Don't intentionally out them as trans. This is important for a few reasons. For one, the fact that they're trans is not a particularly relevant detail for most social interaction. Drawing attention to it does nothing but cause hassle for someone who's trans. People get curious, uninformed people may give her or him a hard time (OH, so you're REALLY a DUDE? Sorry guy, I didn't know!), she may have people become dismissive of her experiences or gender. Even in the best case, if the present party is accepting of trans people, there's STILL issues present because most cisgender people are still very ignorant and misinformed about trans people. This is clear even in LGBT communities. If the trans person volunteers their status, that's another matter, but revealing that part of themselves is a deeply personal choice that should be left to them.
In an argument, NEVER use their trans status against them. For one, it's going to make you look like a petty bigot. If you get into a big fight with your trans friend, don't resort to using their old name/pronouns as 'punishment'. It speaks more about you than it does about them: That your acceptance of their trans status comes on a string. That you're subtly reminding them who's in charge here, flexing your cisgender privilege and waving it in our face. You're expressing that you have power to define their gender. Basically, it makes you look like a cissexist, bigoted ass. And it doesn't even accomplish winning an argument, because insulting them is an Ad Hominem logical fallacy. So, just don't do it.
Now, on the topic of mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I've even personally made mistakes. The key is to try your hardest to NOT make those mistakes, and to correct yourself immediately when you do. Though it's especially important when you're out and about with them in public. Trans people often face discrimination, violence, hatred, and other unpleasantness from the uninformed general public. They rely on their friends and allies to help validate their identity to others. People who look at your trans friend may not immediately be able to discern one gender or the other (many of us look androgynous), hearing your use of proper pronouns, name, etc is a social cue that helps other people to refer to your friend as they wish to be.
Then there's the darker truth to this. If a person's trans status is revealed in the wrong situation, or to the wrong person, your trans friend may face insults, derision, mistreatment, discrimination, abuse, or in extreme cases, violence, or even death. By using their preferred pronouns and name, you're shielding them from the view of these hurtful people.
Now onto open-mindedness. You may, yourself think you're open minded, you're accepting of trans, etc. But then someone tells you what you said was offensive, and you're taken aback. That wasn't your intent at all! You don't see what's wrong with calling them your "Tranny friend", you meant it in a good way, after all!
The key here is: You are not trans. You do not have the experiences of gender dysphoria, hormonal changes in your body from a medically induced second puberty. You've never been discriminated against because you're perceived as the opposite gender. You've never had to contemplate suicide over your gender, as some odd 41% of trans identified people have. You've never been slurred because of your gender presentation. You've never been expected to foot the bill for medically necessary treatments because your insurance company considers them 'cosmetic'. You're able to take your gender for granted, we cannot.
Because you are not trans, you cannot tell them what is or isn't offensive. If you offended them, take it as a learning opportunity. Turn your mistake into better understanding of your friend. Even if you think you're the most supportive ally on the planet, odds are you're still deeply ignorant to aspects of trans life. Have you ever had to worry whether or not you'd have access to a restroom before? We do. You, in all likelihood, are not as educated on trans issues as your trans friend is. You should differ to them, and trust what they say, because they will likely know better than you. Put your ego and arrogance aside, realize you don't know as much as you think, and you'll find you might learn something.
All of this comes with a caveat: we are not all alike. Not all trans folk are offended by the same things. Not all trans people are bothered by the same words. I could go on, but the gist of it is, we're all different. The only way you can know for sure what to do in a given circumstance is to ask them yourself.
For example: I'm out. Everyone directly relevant to me knows I'm trans, I live fulltime. However, I've not yet explained my circumstances to my neighbors. It's just simply never came up, and I've never gone out of my way to tell them, because our interactions are infrequent, and frankly, they don't NEED to know. This is just one minor example, but it does highlight that you should ask your trans friend if you're unsure.
So there you have it. My short list on how to be an ally.
Quote of the day: "Mistakes are another opportunity to refine" Bad Religion, Prove it
-Lyn
P.S. I really appreciate when people leave me questions in the comments. I use them as prompts for my posts here, and so far there's been almost no participation. So if you can think of a question you want me to address, post it in the comments section and I'll try to get to it soon as I can. It helps me, and you get your question addressed. It's a win - win!
The answer to this one isn't nearly as complex as people really make it out to be, it comes from two key components: Respect for trans persons, both the ones you personally know, as well as ones you've not met, and an open-minded desire to learn with the understanding that no, you probably don't know everything about being trans, and that many assumption you've probably already made are wrong.
The first part seems like it would be common sense, but it often isn't. You need to respect the person and their identity. Don't use their old pronouns or name. This one is basic, if they ask to be referred to as 'Crissy', call them Chrissy. These practices should extend beyond just interacting with the person directly; it says a lot about how little you respect their decision if, as soon as they're out of earshot, you start calling them by their old name. If you talk with a mutual friend, and Chrissy comes up, she should be Chrissy, not Christopher, She, not He. Even if she's not there, it's still a matter of respecting her. In fact, a show of good faith as well as a personal reminder, switch to their new name in your phone. It shows that you respect their change, even when nobody else would see it.
Don't disrespect OTHER trans people, besides the ones you know personally. This should be fairly intuitive, if you want to be considered a trans ally, you have to be an ally to all trans people. If you aren't, your broadcasting some really negative things about yourself. For one, "It's only okay that you're trans because you're you" in other words, you're acting self important, and accepting them/treating them nice as a favor to them. It's not a favor, it's baseline respect for any trans person, period. Alternatively, in the case of "Well, but, you don't LOOK trans, you, you know, look good! not like those others" you're basically saying it's only okay that they're trans because they pass for cisgender; implying if they didn't look cisgender, you wouldn't support them. Further, there really aren't a whole lot of trans people per area. If you're speaking of someone else locally, there's a fairly good chance we know the person you're talking about, and don't appreciate you looking down on them. So, respect all trans people, easy.
Don't intentionally out them as trans. This is important for a few reasons. For one, the fact that they're trans is not a particularly relevant detail for most social interaction. Drawing attention to it does nothing but cause hassle for someone who's trans. People get curious, uninformed people may give her or him a hard time (OH, so you're REALLY a DUDE? Sorry guy, I didn't know!), she may have people become dismissive of her experiences or gender. Even in the best case, if the present party is accepting of trans people, there's STILL issues present because most cisgender people are still very ignorant and misinformed about trans people. This is clear even in LGBT communities. If the trans person volunteers their status, that's another matter, but revealing that part of themselves is a deeply personal choice that should be left to them.
In an argument, NEVER use their trans status against them. For one, it's going to make you look like a petty bigot. If you get into a big fight with your trans friend, don't resort to using their old name/pronouns as 'punishment'. It speaks more about you than it does about them: That your acceptance of their trans status comes on a string. That you're subtly reminding them who's in charge here, flexing your cisgender privilege and waving it in our face. You're expressing that you have power to define their gender. Basically, it makes you look like a cissexist, bigoted ass. And it doesn't even accomplish winning an argument, because insulting them is an Ad Hominem logical fallacy. So, just don't do it.
Now, on the topic of mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes. I've even personally made mistakes. The key is to try your hardest to NOT make those mistakes, and to correct yourself immediately when you do. Though it's especially important when you're out and about with them in public. Trans people often face discrimination, violence, hatred, and other unpleasantness from the uninformed general public. They rely on their friends and allies to help validate their identity to others. People who look at your trans friend may not immediately be able to discern one gender or the other (many of us look androgynous), hearing your use of proper pronouns, name, etc is a social cue that helps other people to refer to your friend as they wish to be.
Then there's the darker truth to this. If a person's trans status is revealed in the wrong situation, or to the wrong person, your trans friend may face insults, derision, mistreatment, discrimination, abuse, or in extreme cases, violence, or even death. By using their preferred pronouns and name, you're shielding them from the view of these hurtful people.
Now onto open-mindedness. You may, yourself think you're open minded, you're accepting of trans, etc. But then someone tells you what you said was offensive, and you're taken aback. That wasn't your intent at all! You don't see what's wrong with calling them your "Tranny friend", you meant it in a good way, after all!
The key here is: You are not trans. You do not have the experiences of gender dysphoria, hormonal changes in your body from a medically induced second puberty. You've never been discriminated against because you're perceived as the opposite gender. You've never had to contemplate suicide over your gender, as some odd 41% of trans identified people have. You've never been slurred because of your gender presentation. You've never been expected to foot the bill for medically necessary treatments because your insurance company considers them 'cosmetic'. You're able to take your gender for granted, we cannot.
Because you are not trans, you cannot tell them what is or isn't offensive. If you offended them, take it as a learning opportunity. Turn your mistake into better understanding of your friend. Even if you think you're the most supportive ally on the planet, odds are you're still deeply ignorant to aspects of trans life. Have you ever had to worry whether or not you'd have access to a restroom before? We do. You, in all likelihood, are not as educated on trans issues as your trans friend is. You should differ to them, and trust what they say, because they will likely know better than you. Put your ego and arrogance aside, realize you don't know as much as you think, and you'll find you might learn something.
All of this comes with a caveat: we are not all alike. Not all trans folk are offended by the same things. Not all trans people are bothered by the same words. I could go on, but the gist of it is, we're all different. The only way you can know for sure what to do in a given circumstance is to ask them yourself.
For example: I'm out. Everyone directly relevant to me knows I'm trans, I live fulltime. However, I've not yet explained my circumstances to my neighbors. It's just simply never came up, and I've never gone out of my way to tell them, because our interactions are infrequent, and frankly, they don't NEED to know. This is just one minor example, but it does highlight that you should ask your trans friend if you're unsure.
So there you have it. My short list on how to be an ally.
Quote of the day: "Mistakes are another opportunity to refine" Bad Religion, Prove it
-Lyn
P.S. I really appreciate when people leave me questions in the comments. I use them as prompts for my posts here, and so far there's been almost no participation. So if you can think of a question you want me to address, post it in the comments section and I'll try to get to it soon as I can. It helps me, and you get your question addressed. It's a win - win!
Monday, May 7, 2012
Trans vulnerability
A friend on my facebook asked me: Are trans women more vulnerable than trans men because of gender bias against women?
There are a great many reasons why transgender women tend to be more vulnerable than transgender men. Please note: this isn't an attempt to invalidate the experiences or challenges transgender men face, nor is it an attempt to make their problems seem less important. I understand full well that there are many challenges we all face, this is my perspective on how, in most circumstances, trans women are particularly vulnerable.
The first and most obvious in my mind relates to passing as cisgender. Trans men get far, far more benefit out of their hormone therapy than trans women get from theirs. By the time most trans women get their hormone therapy, testosterone has already ravaged their bodies, leaving them tall, broad, and with a deep voice. Trans men, once they begin hormones, experience their voice changing naturally, they develop facial hair (whereas trans women hormone treatments do not remove it).
This leads to trans men blending in better than trans women. This in and of itself is a layer of protection from violence - if people can't perceive you're different, then you're simply not different.
The reasons that trans women are more vulnerable is not just limited to available treatments. To begin, there's the age-old idea that men are superior to women. This is just a general thing, coming from the sexist, patriarchal roots of our culture. The man was the bread winner, the man voted, the man took care of business. Ergo, being male sets you by default on a 'higher' position. This is reflected in many places in society, from hiring practices, lower wages, 'glass ceilings', and so on, being a woman is just traditionally considered 'a step down'.
It's even a part of how our children are raised: If a girl acts 'boyish' it's perceived as a good thing. She's competitive! She's good at sports! She's a tomboy! It's celebrated, parents enroll her in softball, soccer, track, whatever she wants.
The male equivalent? The only word I've heard for an effeminate guy is "sissy", and it's almost always in a negative context. Even "effeminate guy" rings of someone who's "not a real man". Young boys who more identify with stereotypically feminine things are actively discouraged; how many male flute players do you see? Male cheerleaders? For a guy to express feminine traits, it's just unacceptable.
So to begin with, transgender women are already viewed negatively, for giving up their position of assumed power. "Why would any guy willingly become... less?" is the question many people find themselves instinctively wondering. (Of course the question isn't why would a guy want to be a girl, it's why would a girl want a girl's body instead of a guy's body). This creates an air of suspicion, which combined with the misconception that we're male; trying to act/look like women (instead of being women in our own right) we're immediately branded as perverts. Either we're really gay men looking to improve our odds by giving us more people to screw, or we want our body to be female so our bodies could be our own personal playthings. Both of these are incorrect, but the idea that we're merely perverts, sexual deviants, in some people's minds, justifies acting out against us (or at least makes it more okay). Again, this is opposed to the (also incorrect) perception that trans men just 'understood men were better' and decided to upgrade their status. Trans women are just perverts, but trans men are just trying to get ahead.
Then you have the stereotypical relationship dynamic. Women are the prey, men the predators. Women put themselves on display, men come and ask the women out. (Yes, I know there are exceptions, but this is in general). This by definition puts a trans woman at more of a risk. Assuming she passes as a cisgender woman, people will assume she's a cisgender woman. This leads to the problems when people find out their assumptions were incorrect. With the aforementioned idea that we're just men in women's clothing, most males immediately react like they're being tricked into a gay relationship (which, by the way, doesn't even make sense: the things he was attracted to were her feminine traits; you know, things a straight guy should be attracted to). This leads to rejection, and tragically often, violence.
There's two core issues here: One, the assumption that everyone is cisgender (and that we, as transgender, should voluntarily out ourselves as different), and, two, the limited scope of masculine expression.
I could go over the first point, but it's handled in much greater detail here: (http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed/2012/03/20/the-ethical-imperative-of-disclosure-or-how-to-believe-your-victim-owes-you-an-opportunity-for-abuse/)
As for the second point, this is a far, far more pervasive problem in our society. The scope of activities, modes of dress, emotions that are socially acceptable to show, and so on, are drastically limited for men as compared to women. Men nowadays are not allowed to cry, they're only allowed to show anger, they must otherwise be an emotionless stoic. Men, "Real Men(tm)" want to do women, and don't care about petty things like 'feelings'. Real men like titties, beer, sports. And the final thing, "Real Men" never, ever look at another guy sexually. (This of course being an extension of the fact that women are lesser: Women want to date men, ergo if a man wants to date a man, he's being womanly, and therefore less) None of this reflects my view on what makes a man a man, but this is what's typically understood.
Also, if you doubt the above, consider the following: Women can wear skirts, dresses, pants, suits, pretty much whatever they want to. They can have their hair long or short. They can be bisexual, bi curious, etc.
Now how about a guy? Even if he's bisexual (I.E. attracted to both women and men) if he's ever dated a guy, even once, he's forever gay. It doesn't matter that he's dated three girls before, or two girls after. The fact that he has one male x male relationship on his record deems him irrevocably gay. If a guy wears a skirt, it's considered comical at best. If a guy has long hair, he shoots his chances of having a serious career in the foot.
So, our culture has a very, very rigid definition of what a real man is. How does this relate to dangers trans women face?
It's this core fear that we might be turning them gay / they're gay for liking us / people will think he's gay etc. that exposes us to this violence. The fact that we exist is a threat to his masculinity, and in our culture, for how tough guys are supposed to be, our image of masculinity is remarkably fragile. He doesn't want to be viewed as less manly, and by even being seen with us, he's risking that.
By the nature of straight males in our society, and the expectations placed on them, by being objects of their desire (in a society where bisexual-leaning men are likely to repress the homoerotic half) we threaten them. We make them confront the possibility that they might not be 100% straight. We make them wonder about things that society says they ought not wonder about.
Now, the reason that a gay trans man wouldn't face the same trouble is simply that, by the nature of a gay male coming to terms with their preferences, they're not bound by the fragile, limited male expression discussed above. Their identity being challenged by a transgender partner isn't as threatening or damaging to a gay male as a straight male, because the straight male faces no longer being 'normal'.
So there you have it. To sum it up, trans women are in fact more vulnerable than trans men.
As always, if anyone has any questions they want me to answer, please leave them in the comments section. Seriously, I don't have a ton of readers right now so if you post it I'll probably get to it within a few days.
-Lyn
There are a great many reasons why transgender women tend to be more vulnerable than transgender men. Please note: this isn't an attempt to invalidate the experiences or challenges transgender men face, nor is it an attempt to make their problems seem less important. I understand full well that there are many challenges we all face, this is my perspective on how, in most circumstances, trans women are particularly vulnerable.
The first and most obvious in my mind relates to passing as cisgender. Trans men get far, far more benefit out of their hormone therapy than trans women get from theirs. By the time most trans women get their hormone therapy, testosterone has already ravaged their bodies, leaving them tall, broad, and with a deep voice. Trans men, once they begin hormones, experience their voice changing naturally, they develop facial hair (whereas trans women hormone treatments do not remove it).
This leads to trans men blending in better than trans women. This in and of itself is a layer of protection from violence - if people can't perceive you're different, then you're simply not different.
The reasons that trans women are more vulnerable is not just limited to available treatments. To begin, there's the age-old idea that men are superior to women. This is just a general thing, coming from the sexist, patriarchal roots of our culture. The man was the bread winner, the man voted, the man took care of business. Ergo, being male sets you by default on a 'higher' position. This is reflected in many places in society, from hiring practices, lower wages, 'glass ceilings', and so on, being a woman is just traditionally considered 'a step down'.
It's even a part of how our children are raised: If a girl acts 'boyish' it's perceived as a good thing. She's competitive! She's good at sports! She's a tomboy! It's celebrated, parents enroll her in softball, soccer, track, whatever she wants.
The male equivalent? The only word I've heard for an effeminate guy is "sissy", and it's almost always in a negative context. Even "effeminate guy" rings of someone who's "not a real man". Young boys who more identify with stereotypically feminine things are actively discouraged; how many male flute players do you see? Male cheerleaders? For a guy to express feminine traits, it's just unacceptable.
So to begin with, transgender women are already viewed negatively, for giving up their position of assumed power. "Why would any guy willingly become... less?" is the question many people find themselves instinctively wondering. (Of course the question isn't why would a guy want to be a girl, it's why would a girl want a girl's body instead of a guy's body). This creates an air of suspicion, which combined with the misconception that we're male; trying to act/look like women (instead of being women in our own right) we're immediately branded as perverts. Either we're really gay men looking to improve our odds by giving us more people to screw, or we want our body to be female so our bodies could be our own personal playthings. Both of these are incorrect, but the idea that we're merely perverts, sexual deviants, in some people's minds, justifies acting out against us (or at least makes it more okay). Again, this is opposed to the (also incorrect) perception that trans men just 'understood men were better' and decided to upgrade their status. Trans women are just perverts, but trans men are just trying to get ahead.
Then you have the stereotypical relationship dynamic. Women are the prey, men the predators. Women put themselves on display, men come and ask the women out. (Yes, I know there are exceptions, but this is in general). This by definition puts a trans woman at more of a risk. Assuming she passes as a cisgender woman, people will assume she's a cisgender woman. This leads to the problems when people find out their assumptions were incorrect. With the aforementioned idea that we're just men in women's clothing, most males immediately react like they're being tricked into a gay relationship (which, by the way, doesn't even make sense: the things he was attracted to were her feminine traits; you know, things a straight guy should be attracted to). This leads to rejection, and tragically often, violence.
There's two core issues here: One, the assumption that everyone is cisgender (and that we, as transgender, should voluntarily out ourselves as different), and, two, the limited scope of masculine expression.
I could go over the first point, but it's handled in much greater detail here: (http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed/2012/03/20/the-ethical-imperative-of-disclosure-or-how-to-believe-your-victim-owes-you-an-opportunity-for-abuse/)
As for the second point, this is a far, far more pervasive problem in our society. The scope of activities, modes of dress, emotions that are socially acceptable to show, and so on, are drastically limited for men as compared to women. Men nowadays are not allowed to cry, they're only allowed to show anger, they must otherwise be an emotionless stoic. Men, "Real Men(tm)" want to do women, and don't care about petty things like 'feelings'. Real men like titties, beer, sports. And the final thing, "Real Men" never, ever look at another guy sexually. (This of course being an extension of the fact that women are lesser: Women want to date men, ergo if a man wants to date a man, he's being womanly, and therefore less) None of this reflects my view on what makes a man a man, but this is what's typically understood.
Also, if you doubt the above, consider the following: Women can wear skirts, dresses, pants, suits, pretty much whatever they want to. They can have their hair long or short. They can be bisexual, bi curious, etc.
Now how about a guy? Even if he's bisexual (I.E. attracted to both women and men) if he's ever dated a guy, even once, he's forever gay. It doesn't matter that he's dated three girls before, or two girls after. The fact that he has one male x male relationship on his record deems him irrevocably gay. If a guy wears a skirt, it's considered comical at best. If a guy has long hair, he shoots his chances of having a serious career in the foot.
So, our culture has a very, very rigid definition of what a real man is. How does this relate to dangers trans women face?
It's this core fear that we might be turning them gay / they're gay for liking us / people will think he's gay etc. that exposes us to this violence. The fact that we exist is a threat to his masculinity, and in our culture, for how tough guys are supposed to be, our image of masculinity is remarkably fragile. He doesn't want to be viewed as less manly, and by even being seen with us, he's risking that.
By the nature of straight males in our society, and the expectations placed on them, by being objects of their desire (in a society where bisexual-leaning men are likely to repress the homoerotic half) we threaten them. We make them confront the possibility that they might not be 100% straight. We make them wonder about things that society says they ought not wonder about.
Now, the reason that a gay trans man wouldn't face the same trouble is simply that, by the nature of a gay male coming to terms with their preferences, they're not bound by the fragile, limited male expression discussed above. Their identity being challenged by a transgender partner isn't as threatening or damaging to a gay male as a straight male, because the straight male faces no longer being 'normal'.
So there you have it. To sum it up, trans women are in fact more vulnerable than trans men.
As always, if anyone has any questions they want me to answer, please leave them in the comments section. Seriously, I don't have a ton of readers right now so if you post it I'll probably get to it within a few days.
-Lyn
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Trans* portrayal in the media
Orangeban asked: It seems to be that there has been a recent upsurge in the amount of
trans* people being portrayed in the media, particularly TV. Do you
think this is the case? And what are your general thoughts about the
portrayal of trans* people in the media?
This is an undeniable truth I've personally seen just from watching television myself, I remember watching the episode of E.R. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XygnX8DqHj4) where there was a young transgender girl who's father and mother divorced. The father supported his transgender daughter, while the mother did not. When the father died in a car accident, she was made to live with her mother, who forcefully made her live as a boy.
I've also seen the episode of Law and Order: SVU (Episode title: Fallacy) where a transgender suspect ends up convicted, put into the male prison system, who is subsequently raped and murdered.
Then there's an episode of What Would You Do? Where the setup involved a young trans girl coming out to her mother, to her disrespect and derision. The situation is sometimes ignored by nearby people, sometimes someone stands up for the young transgirl.
Although I didn't personally watch it, you also have Chaz Bono being allowed to compete on Dancing with the Stars.
And, of course, you have the transphobic side of visibility, in the Libra tampon commercial (which is equally insulting to trans women as cis women - Because, you know, womanhood is exclusively defined by periods, and nothing else, right?) and the Paddy Power Advertisements; as well as that failed ABC comedy "Work it".
It's safe to say, that our visibility in media is growing. This list was made just off the top of my head, I'm sure there's many others. In a general sense, there's some good, and some bad with the way we're portrayed in media, even ignoring the transphobic parts.
Lets start with the good: Most people tend to be curious about transgender people, and in many ways these examples I've listed have done a great job showing real issues we face to the public at large. From the division it causes in families, to the very real danger we face in prisons, these facets of our life are often completely glossed over by people. Making people more aware of the dangers we face can only help improve public sympathy for us, and all in all is a positive.
Now onto the negative. I've yet to hear a story or sitcom or any other form of media with a trans person who's just *there*. What I mean is, they're used as a plot device to drive interest intrigue, appearing for one episode centering on their trans status, then that's it, they're gone. There is no depiction, that I'm aware of, at least, where the trans person is just a member of the cast. This lack of representation simply reinforces cis-normativity, and more importantly, the "this doesn't happen to me" mentality. The reason? Nobody is forced to live with, and accept the person on a regular basis. They show up as an a thought-provoking anomaly, their transition (not the person themselves) gets the spotlight, then they cease to be relevant. The closest to this was the Chaz Bono thing, but that became a media circus because of his trans status.
So, is it helpful that we're being portrayed in media more? In short, yes. We're fast becoming visible, people are aware of us. However, we still have a way to go. We've yet to make the breakthrough to just being there, being 'normal'. Once we have a positive role model who's just there, who's trans status isn't used for petty jokes, and who is just a member of the cast with few issues, then we'll have made some serious progress.
-Lyn
Quote of the day: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Gandhi
(Also, there's apparently going to be another What Would You Do? scenario where a transgender waitress encounters an old acquaintance from a year ago, who causes hell for her. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2012/05/patrons-defend-transgender-waitress-at-n-j-diner/ )
If you have any questions you'd like to see me address, please leave them in the comments section.
This is an undeniable truth I've personally seen just from watching television myself, I remember watching the episode of E.R. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XygnX8DqHj4) where there was a young transgender girl who's father and mother divorced. The father supported his transgender daughter, while the mother did not. When the father died in a car accident, she was made to live with her mother, who forcefully made her live as a boy.
I've also seen the episode of Law and Order: SVU (Episode title: Fallacy) where a transgender suspect ends up convicted, put into the male prison system, who is subsequently raped and murdered.
Then there's an episode of What Would You Do? Where the setup involved a young trans girl coming out to her mother, to her disrespect and derision. The situation is sometimes ignored by nearby people, sometimes someone stands up for the young transgirl.
Although I didn't personally watch it, you also have Chaz Bono being allowed to compete on Dancing with the Stars.
And, of course, you have the transphobic side of visibility, in the Libra tampon commercial (which is equally insulting to trans women as cis women - Because, you know, womanhood is exclusively defined by periods, and nothing else, right?) and the Paddy Power Advertisements; as well as that failed ABC comedy "Work it".
It's safe to say, that our visibility in media is growing. This list was made just off the top of my head, I'm sure there's many others. In a general sense, there's some good, and some bad with the way we're portrayed in media, even ignoring the transphobic parts.
Lets start with the good: Most people tend to be curious about transgender people, and in many ways these examples I've listed have done a great job showing real issues we face to the public at large. From the division it causes in families, to the very real danger we face in prisons, these facets of our life are often completely glossed over by people. Making people more aware of the dangers we face can only help improve public sympathy for us, and all in all is a positive.
Now onto the negative. I've yet to hear a story or sitcom or any other form of media with a trans person who's just *there*. What I mean is, they're used as a plot device to drive interest intrigue, appearing for one episode centering on their trans status, then that's it, they're gone. There is no depiction, that I'm aware of, at least, where the trans person is just a member of the cast. This lack of representation simply reinforces cis-normativity, and more importantly, the "this doesn't happen to me" mentality. The reason? Nobody is forced to live with, and accept the person on a regular basis. They show up as an a thought-provoking anomaly, their transition (not the person themselves) gets the spotlight, then they cease to be relevant. The closest to this was the Chaz Bono thing, but that became a media circus because of his trans status.
So, is it helpful that we're being portrayed in media more? In short, yes. We're fast becoming visible, people are aware of us. However, we still have a way to go. We've yet to make the breakthrough to just being there, being 'normal'. Once we have a positive role model who's just there, who's trans status isn't used for petty jokes, and who is just a member of the cast with few issues, then we'll have made some serious progress.
-Lyn
Quote of the day: "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Gandhi
(Also, there's apparently going to be another What Would You Do? scenario where a transgender waitress encounters an old acquaintance from a year ago, who causes hell for her. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2012/05/patrons-defend-transgender-waitress-at-n-j-diner/ )
If you have any questions you'd like to see me address, please leave them in the comments section.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Introductions!
Hey, everyone! This is going to be a short introductory post, just putting my name out there and a little about what I do.
I'm a transgender woman, finishing my last requirement for my Bachelor's degree in English. I've been on hormones for about two years, 'out' for about a year, and living full-time for about 6 months.
I constantly find myself discussing transgender issues with those I hang around with at college, some for, some against. In either case, we've had great talks, and it's motivated me to start a blog, both to give me a platform to talk about whatever trans-related issues come up, and to, if people take interest in my blog, perhaps answer questions people have.
So, that's pretty much it for now. If anyone has any questions to kick-start this blog, leave em' in the comments section.
-Lyn
I'm a transgender woman, finishing my last requirement for my Bachelor's degree in English. I've been on hormones for about two years, 'out' for about a year, and living full-time for about 6 months.
I constantly find myself discussing transgender issues with those I hang around with at college, some for, some against. In either case, we've had great talks, and it's motivated me to start a blog, both to give me a platform to talk about whatever trans-related issues come up, and to, if people take interest in my blog, perhaps answer questions people have.
So, that's pretty much it for now. If anyone has any questions to kick-start this blog, leave em' in the comments section.
-Lyn
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)