Answers about the T
In this post, Alex, a transplant to Maryland from the Wild West, responds to Michael’s recent posting “Questions about the T” and shares some personal responses to the questions raised about trans life and dating.
Does “trans” have a destination, or is it a life-long journey?
It depends on the person (actually, any answer “depends on the person”, so just assume that caveat is there), but most people reach a point where their outward gender presentation isn’t visibly in flux anymore. Some people transition and consider themselves no longer trans when they are done. For me personally, “trans” is a statement of my history as much as a current state of existence. I suppose I am still technically “in transition”, as I am still experiencing some puberty-type effects from testosterone, and have surgery scheduled for later this year. However, I don’t really think of myself as “in transition”, since I live and pass full-time as a man.
Do same-sex-attracted trans folk start off as gay people and, while changing their gender identity, maintain their gay identity and change who they’re attracted to?
Most trans people seem to continue to be attracted to the sex they were attracted to before transition (and so go from straight to gay, or vice versa). Second most common seems to be identifying as “bi” (physical sex can seem kind of trivial after transitioning, you know?). Some people, however, do change what sex they are attracted to, and this usually seems to happen with hormone therapy. I fall into the first (and second) category(s). I’ve always been mostly attracted to guys (and butch girls, butch girls are cute)
What about socializing? What community do trans-folk want to belong to? Do trans-men feel comfortable in straight “meat-markets” looking for potential sexual partners? (Does anyone, really?) Or do they find more success and understanding at lesbian venues? Wouldn’t a trans-man dating a lesbian present identity issues for both parties involved?
Alright, this is a big mess. I’m going to halve it by only talking about trans-men, since that’s the group I’m more familiar with, and even then I’m only going to be scratching the surface.
There’s no easy “rule” for whether any given transman participates in the larger LGBT community. Part of it depends on the importance they place on stealth and passing. Hanging out with other gender outlaws increases the probability of someone noticing your “tells”, and you run a risk of being mistaken for a butch lesbian. However, since trans issues are so much less well known than LGB issues, lots of trans people identified as some sort of queer before figuring out that being trans was an option.
There are many transmen who identified as lesbians before transitioning, and for some of them, that connection to the lesbian community remains very important to them. There are plenty of transman/lesbian couples, with varying degrees of success – there certainly can be identity issues, and relationships have ended because of them. Transmen who never identified as lesbians are unlikely to enter lesbian communities after transitioning to find dates.
Dating is often a huge issue for trans people, because the chances of rejection and the penalties for rejection are so high. Beyond that, many of us missed gender-appropriate socialization. For me, while I prefer the company of queers, the gay club scene makes me very uncomfortable (of course, besides being trans, I’m also a big geek, which doesn’t help at all). The emphasis on sex makes me feel like I would be disqualified from participating. Al wrote a great 3-parter (Post 1, Post 2, Post 3) for TNG about trying to date as a gay transguy. One reason why I really like reading TNG is that you can hear other gay men expressing dissatisfaction with the gay “dating” (rofl) scene, which gives me some hope.
“Some people transistion and consider themselves no longer trans when they are done”
Forgive me, but I don’t understand this statement… is this like people are only gay or straight when they are having sex?
If someone is biologically female, but identifies as male (or anything other than woman), aren’t they always trans?
As you may have read in some of my previous comments, “biological sex” is a fuzzy concept. You could make valid arguments for defining it by chromosomes, gonads, sex hormone production, reproductive capacity or some combination of the above.
It follows, then, that people who have transitioned could validly consider themselves to have attained the biological sex with which they identify, and are therefore no longer trans.
Because “biological sex” can be open to interpretation, people will sometimes use “natal sex” (which has all the fuzziness of “biological sex” but at least specifies a when), or “sex assigned at birth”. This last is most precise, I think, since it specifies a when and suggests that the quality is not an objective truth, but it is hideously awkward to fit into sentences so I don’t use it as much as I might otherwise.
(anderov = Alex the author, since that was never explicitly stated.)
So if i’m following your explanation no one can actually define anything related to sex or gender – the criteria for both is fuzzy/disputed and so everything is dependent upon individual perception.
Which is fine by me, but I would hope that that goes both ways.
Specifically, if a “trans man” can identify as a man (because they meet their own criteria for that gender identification), i can still identify that same individual as a woman because they meet my criteria for that gender.
That’s not what I said at all. You can define biological sex, certainly; you should just be cognizant that there will be weaknesses in that definition when it’s put under a microscope, and that other definitions may be equally valid, or, situationally, more valid. The concept of “species” is similarly fuzzy, but people still use it.
Gender is also open to interpretation, but unlike sex, gender has an essential component that is wholly intangible (i.e. what’s in one’s head). You can’t really identify a trans-man as a woman, because you can’t see inside his head and prove the validity of your definition. (Or at least, you cannot do so and maintain any pretense of respectfulness. If you’ve decided to be a jerk, obviously, nothing can really stop you.)
Where are you getting that gender is essentially defined by what is in an individual’s head?
I’ve never heard/read that definition of gender – not ever.
Anon – how do you define gender?
It’s simply a fact that in addition to your sex (i.e. male/female) your gender (i.e. masculine/feminine) is also biologically determined.
There is one biological phenotype for male, one for female. However, there is a range of masculinity and femininity that is hormonally and chemically determined. It is impossible for a biological female to naturally produce levels of testosterone that make her reticent, impatient and ready to fuck all the time like a male.
Anon #2 where do you get the “fact” that gender is biological?
To me, that is like saying it is just a fact that little boys like to play sports and little girls like to play with dolls. That is socialization, not biology. If gender expression is merely a reflection of socialization, I don’t see how that is biological.
I may be wrong, because I’m definitely no expert in gender and/or queer studies, but from what I do know – isn’t SEX biological, and GENDER social?
i would agree that gender is social, that was exactly my point in disputing that gender is essentially defined in the head of an individual.
Anderov you can say that i’m a jerk as much as you want – ‘jerk’ also is socially defined. I can say i’m not a jerk, i just disagree with your definitions of gender. Just like you can identify yourself as a man and i can identify you as a woman. Both are equally valid by our own set of criteria, no?
Stephanie, if gender is only caused by socialization, then how does one explain the transgendered children in the article I wrote about earlier:
http://www.thenewgay.net/2008/10/transgendered-children.html
The article follows a little boy who wants to play with dolls and dress up as princesses despite all of the social forces encouraging him not to.
Isn’t it possible that both sex and gender are biological, but that the biological roots of physical sex (chromosomes) can be disconnected from the biological roots of gender (whatever they may be)?
I’m not agreeing with anon#2 at all. Perhaps it IS possible for a biological female (sexed) to be biologically masculine (gendered).
I know plenty of females who are “reticent, impatient and ready to fuck all the time like a male” and many males who are none of those things.
That being said, I don’t believe that gender is in the eye of the beholder. Instead, it can be chosen by the “self” and manifested in how one displays oneself to society at large. If society refuses to recognize the displayed gender of an individual, then that’s a different issue.
re: Stephanie
Biological differences between males and females in brain chemistry, brain structure and development, and hormones produce differences in behavior that are naturally distinct. This is not a value judgment, it’s biology. One behavior is not better than the other. To disregard biological fact elides the core issue.
Yes, society exaggerates and controls gender expression but one cannot fault legitimate biological difference for that abuse. It is the distortion of biology by which society constructs a taxonomy of difference and privilege that is what creates gender hierarchy.
Any male will tell you there are certain things about being male that he cannot change, regardless of his expression of masculinity.
Take it from Pat Califia, a FTM writing in the June 2000 Queer Issue of The Village Voice:
“My hips are smaller, my muscle mass is growing, and every day it seems like there’s more hair on my face and body. My voice is deeper, and my sex drive has given me newfound empathy with the guys who solicit hookers for blow jobs.”
Link: http://www.villagevoice.com/2000-06-20/news/family-values/2
I don’t think anyone would argue with Califia that what she feels is “natural”…so why do we argue with biological males and females that their gender, what they feel and how they behave, is a construct? It is not “gender” itself but the choices we make within it’s range of expression that are exaggerations or constructs.
I don’t think that it can be emphasized enough that gender and gender expression are two different things.
Gender (man/woman) has biological criteria (i.e. is based on sex).
Gender expression (masculinity/femininity) does not.
Clarification:
It is my position that biological sex (i.e. male/female) and gender (i.e. masculine/feminine) are both biologically determined. Only gender can be exaggerated, distorted and manipulated beyond it’s reasonable phenotypic expression.
@Angry Anon: Whoa – No one is trying to bust a nut on yr Boyz Club. Why do you have such a problem with other people calling themselves men? Are you the pope hiding behind a laptop?
@Michael – You kind of make it sound like playing with dolls and wearing princess clothes is biologically a woman thing to do. Perhaps you can be born more feminine or masculine, but not as a socially defined woman or man. Am I not a woman because I don’t like princess clothes? Am I a man because I played with Tonka trucks, hellz to the no! I am a masculine woman.
@Anon #2,
Uh, did you call Patrick Califia “she”? I’m pretty sure that’s not right, dude.
“Biological differences between males and females in brain chemistry, brain structure and development, and hormones produce differences in behavior that are naturally distinct.”
Yet the line is fuzzy and porous. Do you know about sex-reversed XX males and XY females? Apparently it happens because the gene for gonad development crossed over during meiosis. So someone can be chromosomally one gender but gonadally another.
I’m surprised by how much resistance there is to gender ambiguity in the so-called queer community. I would think a group of people who have been persecuted their whole lives because of inappropriate gender expression (i.e., being attracted to the “wrong” sex) might be more open-minded.
“Yet the line is fuzzy and porous. Do you know about sex-reversed XX males and XY females?
It is misleading and disingenuous to imply sex reversal is relatively common, and extrapolate it’s occurrence to the trans population at large.
Sex reversed chromosomes occur in approximately 1 of every 20,000 births. I do not call that “fuzzy and porous”, I think that is clearly distinct…and extremely rare.
In those cases physicians can treat the biological condition with the consent and input of the patient (or legal guardian/s) to alter gender expression. It is the individual’s biology that is in question not the integrity and coherence of that individual’s psyche. Only society can alter the full integration of that person’s psyche via acceptance or repudiation.
I am not, as you say, resistant to gender ambiguity. I am resistant to compulsory gender hierarchies of any type, enforced by anyone or any group, whether is the hegemonic medical establishment, The Gays, or the trans population.
Ambiguity with regard to gender expression is definitely NOT the issue. I think we all should be working to support freedom of gender expression. This is exactly why I the “trans” issue is so problematic.
Instead of saying that anyone can express themselves in any way that they want at any time (with regard to gender), trans folks are advocating that there is such a thing as “alignment” with one’s physical gender and one’s mental gender identity. This is a million steps backwards for those of us who have been advocating for years that your physical body should be in no way a consideration in how you should or shouldn’t behave or that your behavior/identity should be in any way restricted by your gender OR your sex.
While some trans folks may also be exhibiting behaviors that are not in accordance with gender gender stereotypes (and I know that many are), the fact is that the notion of “trans” itself(at least the alignment aspect) works against this point.
oh, jeesh, sorry about all the typos. clearly i need more coffee. ;)
re: Steven
“Yet the line is fuzzy and porous. Do you know about sex-reversed XX males and XY females? Apparently it happens because the gene for gonad development crossed over during meiosis. So someone can be chromosomally one gender but gonadally another.”
If, as I gather from your statement above, you are arguing a biological basis for gender then we are in agreement: there is a biological determinant for gender regardless of it’s expression. Again, I am talking only about biological bases not cultural or societal cartoonish exaggerations of gender.
re: anonymous
The value of your content far exceeds its presentation. Typos not a problem dude.
Anon #2, what gender hierarchies am I enforcing? I’m expressing what’s true for me and you’re telling me that’s invalid. As Samba very accurately put it in one of his comments, trans folks tend to be very libertarian – none of us is telling you how to be yourself. We are asking that you respect the fact that maybe, we might have some insights into own existences that you might not be privy to.
(And did you try to make the “natural” argument? Really? It’s a dumb argument against same-sex marriage, it’s a dumb argument against the right to end one’s life with dignity, and it’s a dumb argument here. My secondary sexual characteristics aren’t natural, so you get to discount my identity? Man, children born of fertility treatment shouldn’t even get to vote.)
Michael, I think that concluding gender is absolutely biological because there are 4 year old transgender kids is a bit of a stretch – there’s a lot of socialisation that happens in 4 years. I think there’s a big difference between “biologically determined” and “biologically predisposed“; if you and I were born in a different time/place/culture, there’s a very good chance neither of us would identify as gay men.
There have been (and are) many cultures with third genders. Who’s to say that, had Brandon been born in one, he would not have identified as that alternate role instead of as a girl? We probably are born with some degree of masculine and feminine inclinations, but how we synthesise them into our conception of self is going to be heavily influenced by culture.
Good point, Anderov. I didn’t mean to say that gender was 100% biological, but trying to chip away at the argument that it was 100% cultural.
I for one am really enjoying this dialog. I appreciate everyone’s attempts to stay level-headed.
re: Anderov
Anon #2, what gender hierarchies am I enforcing? I’m expressing what’s true for me and you’re telling me that’s invalid.
What is “true” for you is a gender stereotype: body and behavior must match. I suggest you read the Anonymous comment above regarding “alignment”.
And did you try to make the “natural” argument? Really? It’s a dumb argument against same-sex marriage, it’s a dumb argument against the right to end one’s life with dignity, and it’s a dumb argument here.
You cannot argue challenges to cultural conventions and societal norms (like gay marriage and euthanasia) are “natural” any more than you can argue capitalist democracy and team sports are natural. The equation of cultural phenomena and naturally occurring biological organisms is a false comparison.
re: Michael
I for one am really enjoying this dialog. I appreciate everyone’s attempts to stay level-headed.
I can do without having my comments called “dumb arguments” by Anderov. That does not strike me as “level-headed”. I wish you understood that.
Re: Anon #2
I, too, can do without being called a ‘jerk’ by Anderov. I do not consider that at all “level-headed”
Actually, that kind of response to my comments/thoughts is exactly why i comment anonymously here (as i mentioned in the Hostile post earlier in the week).
Anon, it is not true for me that body and gender must match. I personally, like mine better that way. I could have continued living as a masculine female, but the way I live now is closer to who I think I am.
And it may be “stereotypical”, but being so does not imply motivation. It is a stereotype that men are more competitive and like sports more than women. If a boy decides he needs to play football to be a Real Man, that’s conforming to a stereotype. But if he just honestly likes football, is that not a valid reason to play? Must he refuse to do something he enjoys to defy the stereotype?
I also have an issue with Michael’s statement, although in my case it’s wondering how you spouting off your narrow-minded, poorly reasoned bigotry somehow constitutes a “dialogue”.
Whoa, Anderov, you are way out of line calling people narrow-minded and bigoted just because they disagree with you.
Seriously, you do not have a monopoly on opinions/thoughts/arguments about gender. Please check your aggression.
…it is not true for me that body and gender must match.
While this may not be true for you personally you are arguing it is true for the trans population in general. I am discussing the trans population in general, not you as an individual. The inference that I am attacking you personally is without basis.
And it may be “stereotypical”, but being so does not imply motivation.
Motivation does not happen in a vacuum. Your (sub)conscious motivation betrays the desire to adapt and conform. If we lived in a culture where genders were not assigned and confined to particular bodies I doubt there’d be a need for people to transition from one body to another at all.
…wondering how you spouting off your narrow-minded, poorly reasoned bigotry somehow constitutes a “dialogue”.
Why do you attack people who do not agree with you? That is not, as Michael would say, very “level headed”.
Your dismissal of conflicting opinion betrays your own bias and inability to discuss this issue objectively. It is similar to discussing human evolution with an evangelical christian who has already decided what s/he believes.
I am not calling people names for the sake of calling people names. I am saying that based on the comments made throughout this and the other trans related posts, I believe these various anonymous commenters to be narrow-minded. Am I not allowed to hold that opinion? Or just not allowed to express it?
It’s not because people disagree with me, it’s the conclusions they are making. If you want to debate with me whether people are born gay or not, fine, I’ll discuss that, and we may have to agree to disagree. But if you want to say that people are not born gay, and therefore it’s a disease and we should all be sent to reparative therapy to be cured, well… then I’m going to think you’re a bigot. If you want to discuss how people come to identify as the gender they do, or how biological factors influence gender and gender expression, great. But if you’re going to tell me that it’s impossible for me to be a man because I’m just reinforcing gender stereotypes, well…
It’s not impossible for you to be a man because you are (or are not) reinforcing gender stereotypes. It’s impossible for you to be a man because you do not meet the socially defined criteria for that gender (which is, at least for now, based in biology).
Anon #2: (didn’t see your comment before I hit “post”)
“While this may not be true for you personally you are arguing it is true for the trans population in general.”
I am not arguing that it is necessarily true for the trans population in general. It’s true for those for whom it is true, and it is not true for those for whom it is not. People certainly come down on both sides, and neither is more or less valid. I don’t like making statements for trans people as a whole because there is so much diversity. The only underlying thing I would feel confidant saying is that all trans people would ask that you respect their identities, and respect that what they say is true for themselves is, in fact, true for them and that they are not also insisting that it is true for anyone else.
The evolution/creation thing is an odd choice… Yes, I am biased, and I have decided what I believe. No evangelical is going to convince me that their magical sky fairy trumps science. (Short of God reaching down and bitch-slapping me. Then I might believe.) Could an evangelical convince you, or have you also made up your mind?
re: Anderov
Nothing I have written in this post as anon #2 (my only screen name) is objectionable, offensive or deserving of your dismissive responses. To reject me based on every other anonymous commenter is the same as me generalizing about you based on erroneous impressions.
It is not an issue of being “born gay” but of a biological basis for all sexual orientation. For a quick answer just ask any straight person if they were born straight.
…if you’re going to tell me that it’s impossible for me to be a man because I’m just reinforcing gender stereotypes, well…
Again, the discussion here is not about you personally but about biological determinants of gender. Sure you can be a “man” but you were not born biologically male. Not all biological males reinforce gender stereotype. That reasoning is very reductive.
Anon#2
My apologies if I have confused you with however many other anonymous posters expressing that trans people are liars/insane and what they say about themselves shouldn’t be respected.
However, having re-read all of your comments on this post, I am having difficult reconstructing what your underlying point is. Could you (re)state it for me?
(re some other anon: Society’s definitions blow. Most of our society currently defines marriage as “between one man and one woman”)
The evolution/creation thing is an odd choice… Yes, I am biased, and I have decided what I believe…Could an evangelical convince you, or have you also made up your mind?
The evolution/creation debate is a question of deep personal conviction and belief vs. established biological fact. A person who understands the facts of evolution cannot have a rational discussion with someone who has already decided what they believe based on limited information. I would not challenge a christian’s beliefs but, by the same token, I would expect them to respect the facts of evolution…and not try to proselytize and evangelize me into the fold.
Andeov,
Agreed, sometimes society’s definitions do ‘blow’ (as in your example), but language is social nonetheless.
Do you propose abandoning all definitions as a solution to the fact that things don’t always mean what we want them to?
Anon#2
And the evangelicals would take your insistence that they recognise the “facts”* of evolution as trying to try to “proselytize and evangelize” them into the fold. Both sides see the other as inflexible, immune to logic (and possibly evil). There is no creation/evolution “debate” because the creationists are wrong.
*the quotes are to express the evangelical opinion, if that wasn’t clear.
re the other anon: I do not propose “abandoning all definitions”. I’m saying that since we’re talking about a population for whom a particular word in every-day usage of the language is inadequate, we should accept a more appropriate (re)definition of that word when we’re having discussions about that population. It’s jargon.
So because a trans person thinks that “man” means one thing (i.e. is defined within one’s own head) and I think “man” means another (i.e. is based up on biological criteria), when talking to/about a trans person I should abandon my beliefs in order to truly respect theirs?
Why not the other way around?
Anonymous above me: there is no reason your beliefs shouldn’t be respected. But keep in mind: your beliefs don’t leave you a target for physical violence, they don’t restrict your legal rights when it comes to employment and they don’t leave you misunderstood and persecuted by much of greater society. Anderov’s frequently do.
Why do you care if someone chooses to define their own gender? You chose to define your own sexuality. Homosexuality isn’t a choice, but the expression of it is.
Why does this issue seem to make so many gay so apoplectic? Someone chose to live as a gender other than the one they were born with. Why is this insulting to people? Why is it so contentious?
One final question (which assumes you are a gay man. If you’re not, you should still see some value in it:) You are walking down the street and see a gorgeous man with thick dark hair, broad shoulders, donned in a suit and tie. He is your dream guy. You stare at him for as long as he remains in your sightline and tell all your friends about him when you get home.
How does it change your perception of him at that moment if he does or did have a vagina?
This gets us awfully close to the problematic arguments about what it is to be a “real” man (or, at least this week, a “real american” ;)).
Someone is a man because they are a man (male), no behavior, surgery, sexual attraction or affinity for “girly” things will ever change that. This is what I (and others within (some) gay and feminist communities) have been asserting for years. To say that gender is mutable “because you (any individual) say so” undoes years of progress.
“So because a trans person thinks that “man” means one thing (i.e. is defined within one’s own head) and I think “man” means another (i.e. is based up on biological criteria), when talking to/about a trans person I should abandon my beliefs in order to truly respect theirs?”
So because a gay couple thinks their “married”, and I think they’re not, why should I abandon my beliefs? Why shouldn’t they respect my belief that they are an abomination before the eyes of God?
Most recent anon:
What progress is undone by allowing that gender is self-defined?
I don’t see the distinction between you telling me I must be a woman because I have a vagina and someone else telling me I can’t be a Real Woman because I’m too butch/have a job/don’t submit to men/whatever. How is changing who gets to tell me who I really am progress?
your beliefs don’t leave you a target for physical violence, they don’t restrict your legal rights when it comes to employment and they don’t leave you misunderstood and persecuted by much of greater society.”
Zack, I really have to disagree with you there…
Actually, I have issue with the “trans movement”* because it very much threatens me in all of these ways.
As a woman who does not meet stereotypical or gendered “norms” with relation to my gender expression I am often challenged with regard to my gender – by men, women AND trans folks.
Because I do not “look” like a woman, people often identify me not only as a man (which is bad enough), but as trans, something i find extremely offensive – because it means that not only do they know i’m a woman, but they figure that I must be *trying* to be perceived as a man.
The idea that women could be “masculine” without being “men” is greatly threatened by the “trans movement”*.
*I realize that this is making a generalization about the community as a whole, but I DO acknowledge that your mileage may vary with regard to individuals who identify as trans…
gender : an individual’s self-conception as being male or female, as distinguished from actual biological sex. encyclopedia brittanica bitches.
re masculine female anon:
To the extent that there is A Trans Movement (which is kind of like saying The Homosexual Agenda, since we’re all obviously hive-minds), it has not my experience that it says “masculine people must be men, feminine people must be women”. If anything, perhaps that is “Old Trans”, as opposed to “New Trans”… heh.
For what it’s worth, I have no issue with your stated identity, I don’t think it threatens The Trans Movement (lol), and it is unfortunate you have experienced discrimination based on it. Every community has it’s morons. (On a strictly personal note, I would be very sad if there were no masculine women.)
As for other people mis-identifying you, while that is unfortunate… is there a way to prevent that? It has happened to me (and, I’m sure, most trans people) more times than I can count, and seems particularly prone to happen in LGBT spaces where people are more used to seeing masculine women. But given that there may not be any clues, to even a well-meaning and educated observer, to distinguish a pre-T transguy from a butch woman… I mean, if it’s an honest mistake, and they graciously accept the correction, no harm, no foul?
Anonymous who gets challenged by people with respect to her gender,
I’m really sorry that’s happening to you. Nobody should have that happen.
One of the important things I have learned from my involvement in the trans community is to *not* make assumptions about anyone’s gender based on their appearance or presentation. It sounds like individual trans people have also given you trouble, but know that that sort of behavior is not acceptable in the trans community at large.
I also think that when people incorrectly assume that you’re trans, that assumption is based on some level of ignorance about the trans community. You know that trans men can be femme, trans women can be butch, and that gender expression and being trans are two totally different things. But lots of people don’t realize that, and unfortunately, they apply their sterotypical notions of what trans people are like to label you as trans.
Is this the fault of the trans community? I don’t think so. I think it’s mostly due to lack of education about the difference between gender and gender expression and ignorant people making bad assumptions based upon their limited understanding of the issues.
I’m FTM and completely support you as a woman who doens’t meet stereotypical gendered norms, and if I overheard anyone making inappropriate assumptions about you, I’d give them a piece of my mind!
I don’t have an issue with being mis-identified, but to state that my gender is only defined by what I say it is seems to me to be a weaker point than because it is how my gender is defined.
I am not a woman because I say I am a woman, I am a woman because my sex is female. This is what makes me a woman. It’s not just how i identify myself or how i feel. The fact that I am a woman is based upon more than just my word.
Feelings/behaviors have been deemed masculine because they were perceived as “specific to men” for ages. However as more and more women exhibit them (or are recognized as having exhibited them all along), that feeling itself becomes de-gendered. This, to me, is the goal. Gender is not based on behaviors or feelings. If women calls herself a man because she “feels like” a man, it works against this goal.
I don’t think that trans people are dictating that masculine people must be men, but I do believe that saying that gender can be changed by the snap of a finger or the turn of a phrase is problematic and quite scary to me.
Samba, I appreciate your words/thoughts. I learn a lot from discussions in which you are involved.
It’s probably my own fault for being unclear in my statement about women being “masculine” (which is why i put it in quotes)… but just to clarify what i meant:
I have an issue with being called a masculine female. I am a female who exhibits “masculine” behaviors/appearance, but by definition any action/appearance of mine is feminine because I, a female, am doing it(object/agent thing). In my opinion, women are always feminine no matter how they behave/appear.
The longer we label particular behaviors/appearances as masculine/feminine without actually attaching them to who is actually doing them at the time, the more we perpetuate gendered myths/stereotypes. It’s totally feminine to have a goatee – i’m a female and i have one. So how can it not be? ;)
Anon (and I appreciate the clarification on why “masculine” was in quotes):
I completely appreciate (and agree with) your points about re-gendering/un-gendering behaviours. However, I don’t think that a female identifying as a man undermines that general thrust. Of all the various feelings, behaviours and actions that are supposed to be “specific to males”, why is “being a man” crossed off the list of “things a female can be”? How is being a female man not fundamentally subversive to the “men/males are [this thing]; women/females are [this other thing]” dichotomy?
I do not disagree/dispute that you are a woman because you are female, or that by definition anything a woman does is/can be feminine. However, I don’t think that I invalidate your beliefs or your identity by saying that I am not a woman, just because I am female, or that all females must be “feminine”. Defining my gender independent of my physical sex may be a “weaker point”, but I don’t have any other option.
I haven’t had time to read through every comment, so apologies if this is redundant -
Do most trans, FTM, for example, consider themselves a MAN or a MALE?
I don’t get why so many people get so angry about this, as if it’s some zero-sum game where you can’t have your gender if someone else has it, too.
So, my big question: Why do the haters even give a fuck?
re: Stephanie
Why do the haters even give a fuck?
Nice. Very “level headed” as Michael would say.
Stephanie-
It depends on who I’m talking to… If I’m talking casually, either to someone who knows me or to someone who I would not expect to appreciate the distinction, I will be lax and use “man”/”male”/”guy”/FtM (which has “male” as part of it, obviously)/whatever interchangeably. However, I do not consider myself to be biologically male (though I don’t think I’m wholly “female” either).
I think, based on my experiences, that this could be extrapolated to most transguys, at least. (But I could be wrong, and it’s not like there’s any formal trans polling organisation.)
anderov, thanks for the answer, as well as the post.
anon – i’m just eloquent like that.
I guess Michael won’t admonish you because you both agree. The bias on this blog is clear.
I wish I could be so politically correct, I mean eloquent, and develop a dysfunctional co-dependence with only politically correct friends but reality and maturity got in the way.
“Wouldn’t a trans-man dating a lesbian present identity issues for both parties involved?”
This is a really good question, one that my partner and I are still trying to figure out. When we first started dating, he told me that I didn’t have to give up my identity so that he could have his. I guess if we can accept identity as something that is more fluid than static, it helps lessen any sort of “identity crisis” presented when a transguy and a lesbian get involved.
Leave your response!
What is TNG?
Find TNG Online
Subscribe to TNG Emails
Follow Rohan at SXSW
More...
- Top 10 Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being…Top 10 Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being Gay
[No Comments]
- Ke$ha ParodyKe$ha Parody
[One Comment]
- Glee+Easter Eggs=AwesomeGlee+Easter Eggs=Awesome
[No Comments]
- Urban Legends!Urban Legends!
[No Comments]
- Shh! Glenn can hear you.Shh! Glenn can hear you.
[No Comments]
- DC Trans Coalition: Today! DCTC…DC Trans Coalition: Today! DCTC testifying before the DC Council about the DC jails
[No Comments]
- Ask me!Ask me!
[No Comments]
- That’s Gay! Awards ShowsThat’s Gay! Awards Shows
[No Comments]
- Granny DJ Rocks ParisGranny DJ Rocks Paris
[No Comments]
- It’d be great if the sponge…It’d be great if the sponge cleaned itself..
[No Comments]
More in Chatterbox...Recent Coments
Most Viewed
Most Commented