The essential conflict between transitioners and non-transitioners

I've written before that I believe most transgender people share the same basic feelings: gender dysphoria, transgender desire and gender fog. Whether you are transsexual, transvestite, drag queen, drag king, butch lesbian, genderqueer, non-binary or something else, you almost certainly experience one of those feelings, and probably all three. Whatever neurological claims you may have read about essential differences between one group and another, the fact remains that almost none of the trans people you will meet have been found to have a "female brain," neurologically. People cross those subcategory boundaries all the time, and the only evidence currently accepted for membership is personal declaration.

We are the same, and yet we can be divided into two subgroups that are very different, with an essential conflict of interest between us that is impossible to erase. This difference is not based on biology or neurology, it is based on a simple difference of goals. Trans people who transition - who take a goal of becoming or being seen as a different gender - are often at odds with trans people whose goals do not include transitioning.

There are multiple conflicts between transitioners and non-transitioners, but the most common, the most salient, conflict is over destiny. Transitioners tend to believe that it is their destiny to transition, and to interpret facts as evidence for that destiny. Non-transitioners may believe that it is our destiny not to transition, or we may be agnostic on that issue.

For example, one time I was out with a friend, presenting as a woman. My friend remarked to me, "You're not very feminine, are you?" At first I was hurt, but then I saw he had a point, and I thought to myself, "Actually, I'm getting tired of being a woman, and I'll be glad when I can take this bra off and use my regular voice. Good thing I didn't transition!" In contrast, Lal Zimman interviewed trans men who reported feeling devastated by the idea that they were failing as men. They couldn't say, "good thing I didn't transition," because they did. Instead, they said things like, "I must just be a feminine man."

And you know what? I completely understand the value of the destiny argument. Transition is hard. I've known transitioners for whom it was pretty obvious to everyone that they were on the right path, but still they encountered some very daunting challenges. There are many people who are politically and philosophically opposed to transition, and who will fight you on it, possibly including parents, employers and medical professionals. It's hard to go through that constantly wondering if you're doing the right thing.

The psychologist Dan Gilbert talks about an experiment where people who felt that they were stuck with a possession (an artistic print) decided that they liked it better than people who thought they could exchange it. When we're stuck with something - and it's something we can live with - we make peace with it. When we can change it at any time, the grass is always greener. Marriage works in similar ways. If you're committed to a person it helps to believe that you're destined for them, and if you're committed to transitioning it's helpful to believe that you're destined to transition.

The conflict comes in when people start making universal destiny arguments, like the idea that "trans women are women," not just when presenting as women, but essentially, eternally, from birth through death, whether we transition or not. Transition then is portrayed as not a change of gender, but as revealing the "real you," or your "authentic self." That implies that someone like me who chooses not to transition is hiding the real me, or denying my authentic self. And that is true for people who stay in the closet, but it's not true for the rest of us.

If we are not denying our authentic selves, but we are still not transitioning, many conclude, we must not have that essence of womanhood (or manhood) that makes transition such a necessity. And that leads to bizarre twists of logic, where someone can be a "man who likes to wear dresses" one day, and be seen as essentially and forever male, and the next day declare a transition and be seen as essentially and forever female.

This essentialist view of non-transitioners leads people to declare that we are not truly trans, and therefore not part of LGBT. It leads them to deny the very real feelings of gender dysphoria, transgender desire and gender fog that we continue to feel, and to deny us any need for support or services. It leads them to speak on behalf of all transgender people, setting priorities and making declarations about terminology without any regard to our very real needs.

Transgender essentialism also leads people to marginalize and ignore non-transitioners. Because the choice not to transition results in people tending to become less passable over time, non-transitioners are caricatured as embarrassing, and negative characteristics that are found across the transgender spectrum are pushed into caricatures of cross-dressers and drag queens as big clumsy insensitive objectifying men in short skirts, and of transmasculine genderqueer people as childish "transtrenders" who claim gender variance only to attract attention.

Detransitioners are usually kicked right out of the transgender club. The fact that they weren't happy with their transition leads many people (including many detransitioners themselves) to declare that they were "never really trans" in the first place. But of course the feelings of dysphoria and desire and fog don't vanish, and the detransitioners are left to cope with them with very little support.

In short, the essentialist way of thinking about trans issues is a big problem for non-transitioners and detransitioners. I used to think that it was just confined to a particular subgroup, and I had friends, many of them non-transitioning trans people, who were skeptical of it. But then a funny thing happened. Many of these friends transitioned, and as each one began to commit to building new lives in a new gender they and their families started repeating essentialist claims. Each time I heard one of these claims I objected, but the result was that over time they began to think of me as a combative stickler. This pattern is repeated in most of my interactions with transitioners.

I used to take some of this personally, but now I realize that the transitioners are just protecting their interests. They don't seem to be capable of realizing how much their actions threaten my interests (this kind of egotism is a hallmark of gender fog), and thus they tend to dismiss my complaints as cranky contrarianism.

It is not cranky contrarianism. It is the one essential difference between trans people who transition and those who don't: transitioners have an interest in justifying transition, and non-transitioners often have an interest in justifying not transitioning. It is not biology, it is simple psychology.

Can we still be friends? Yes, despite this difference, we have many of the same feelings, and many of the same needs. We face many of the same dangers, and we inhabit many of the same spaces. I have friends who have transitioned or are transitioning, and I respect their choices about what path to follow. (That is all I can do; I cannot accept that they have no choice. I think this is clear.)

There is room for us to form alliances of common interest, and alliances of the hearth. But there will always come a Yalta, a time when that essential conflict of interests will manifest itself, when the alliances will break down. Some people - Righteous Ones - will be able to put things in perspective and sacrifice their own interests for someone with a greater need.

It will not always be obvious whose need is greater, and we may take actions that are at odds with each other's interests. But what is absolutely critical is to acknowledge and respect them. If a transitioner tells me that something I do or say affects her interests, I may keep doing it, but I will try to accept that the conflict exists and respect her interests. I ask the same from transitioners. If we all do that, there's a chance we may be able to stay friends and keep the door open to future alliances.

Why HRC, GLAAD and TLC’s advocacy hurts the transgender community

Today I got an email from the Human Rights Campaign saying, "Tell ABC: Your new comedy is no laughing matter." It's about this new television show called "Work It." HRC says,

As part of their winter line-up, ABC is releasing a new comedy called "Work It," featuring two men who dress as women in order to get jobs. The problem is that the premise reinforces false, hurtful stereotypes about transgender people. This kind of programming only mocks those who don't adhere to society's gender norms. Tell ABC's president to can "Work It" now.

The link in HRC's email goes to a petition asking ABC "not to air a show that reinforces negative and damaging stereotypes about transgender people." On their website, HRC says that their president Joe Solomonese "contacted ABC Entertainment Group President Paul Lee today to request a meeting to discuss the very real challenges transgender Americans face in the work place – with the goal of ensuring “Work It” can be a light-hearted comedy that doesn’t belittle or mock these obstacles; or reinforce negative and potentially damaging stereotypes."

With a little googling, I found a trailer for the new series, and articles at The Wrap and the Hollywood Reporter. These both said that not only HRC, but the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination were up in arms about the new show.

On GLAAD's website, I found a blog post attempting to explain "Why ABC's New Sitcom Work It Hurts the Transgender Community." That blog post linked to a Huffington Post article by Mark Daniel Snyder of the Transgender Law Center saying, "We owe it to our constituents to speak out anywhere we see an injustice, no matter how big or how small."

I don't particularly feel that this show is harmful to transgender people. I'll explain my reaction in more detail later, but for now I want to focus on the advocacy messages.

Note that in the HRC website and email, and the statements in the media, we do not hear from a single trans person. HRC president Joe Solomonese is not transgender, and I'm pretty sure that neither is GLAAD Acting President Mike Thompson or Matt Kane, their Associate Director of Entertainment Media. The transgender Huffington Post bloggers who've discussed this issue, Emerson Whitney and Mark Daniel Snyder, are both female-to-male, as is Transgender Law Center Executive Director Masen Davis, quoted in the Advocate.

It took a lot of digging to find any public statements by male-to-female transgender people, and there was a negative one by Kelli Busey and one withholding judgment by Jillian Page. The only expert on transgender workplace diversity I know of, Jillian Weiss, has produced a single tweet, "@kellibusey I like your guest post on care2."

What I find a lot more disturbing than yet another crappy sitcom is reading pronouncements by a bunch of gay men and FTMs about what MTF transgender people feel and think and want, at best referencing yet another problematic convenience-sample survey, without a single MTF voice to be heard. Do Joe Solomonese and Matt Kane and Mark Daniel Snyder know any MTFs? Emerson Whitney at least quoted Kelli Busey; why couldn't Mike Thompson or Mason Davis?

I'll tell you what hurts the transgender community. It's the pretense that we are united by anything other than the hatred we get from outside. It's the idea that we all care about the same things, feel the same way, react the same way. It's the constant stream of shoddy convenience-sample survey reports that allow some gay guy who read The Celluloid Closet or some FTM who read Marjorie Garber to set themselves up as authorities about What Hurts the Community. It's the idea that this is a problem ABC can solve by meeting with Joe Solomonese instead of, say, an actual transgender person, maybe even an actor or producer.

I'm thinking of starting a petition.

The closet corrodes your soul

Cross-posted from my personal trans blog.

I’ve talked before about the value of being out of the closet – the global political value. But being out can be valuable in a more direct, immediate way. It can save us from the closet.

When I first started cross-dressing, I knew that it was not acceptable. I had heard so many people making fun of transvestites that I didn’t think that anyone would value or support me if I told them I was one. For over a year I did my cross-dressing in secrecy and isolation.

One day my mother came into my room and said, “This closet is a mess! I’ve given you so many chances to clean it up. Now I’m going to do it.”

I said, “Okay, Mom, but just don’t open the top drawer.”

“What’s in the top drawer?”

“Just don’t look in it.”

“Angus, what’s in the top drawer?”

After a few more rounds of this, I told her. Her response was not as bad as it could have been (the horror stories we’ve heard about teenagers being rejected by their parents, thrown out of the house, beaten, or even killed), but it was not encouraging. I won’t go into too much detail, since she apologized for it many years ago, but she was ashamed of me, and worried that I might be gay. She insisted that I go to therapy, which was probably a good idea, but I didn’t even mention cross-dressing to the first therapist. The second one was helpful in various ways, but not with regards to this issue.

I avoided talking to my mom about cross-dressing after that, until I came out in general. That meant that I was pretty much alone in the closet for another fourteen years. And that time was hell. I don’t know which was worse, the feeling of shame when I cross-dressed, or the feeling of relief when I purged. Every time the topic came up in general conversations with anyone other than my mother I had to remain silent, afraid that I would be ostracized if anyone found out. The chronic fear of being found out was a source of discomfort throughout my teen and college years.

Since I’ve come out, I know that there is a group of people that I can rely on, who have shown me that they support me no matter what I’m wearing. I don’t need to feel ashamed around them. Even if I don’t feel comfortable telling absolutely everyone, it’s still liberating to know that there are many people who don’t judge me for my gender expression.

Unfortunately, it took a long time for me to feel comfortable coming out. I had to tell one person at a time, until I knew that there were enough people who supported me. This is why one of my goals is to encourage widespread, open, vocal support of non-conforming gender expression, so that the teenagers of tomorrow can live outside the closet.

A simple thing you can do for trans people (whether you're trans too, or not) is to say something supportive every time the topic comes up. You can do this for gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, cyclists, or any disenfranchised group. You might want to have a handy phrase or two ready ahead of time. And if you can’t think of anything supportive to say, educate yourself!

Dear Pop Culture: Leave TransFolk Alone!

Ok, so am I the only one who really would prefer it if pop culture would leave transfolks alone? I'm not saying I don't want our folks in media, quite the opposite, I want our faces, our stories, our experiences out there; I want visibility for our people. That said, there is a difference between visibility (which I define as socialized educational promotion of our community and cause) and simple exploitation or just plain annoying stereotyping.

Pop Culture often will poke fun at or provide cameos for community leaders or performers that it respects. And if this were what was happening for transfolks, to for example have Kate Bornstein on TV, that'd be awesome. But that isn't what happens. I am so sick of non-trans media outlets feeling that they have the right to represent us when they don't have a clue about what they are doing. This isn't just a trans issue, is a problem for all groups outside the privileged minority, but I'm trans so I'm gonna talk about trans stuff. The reason why transfolks (and queers) are included in media is because we are considered weird and fascinating. We're an interesting hook. Many people take it as a compliment when, to repeat previous sentiments, Pop Culture throws us a bone with a "its better than nothing" mentality. Me, I would rather be ignored than have to deal with mainstream adaptations of my people based on what outsiders think we are.

This week, The Simpsons, an old school favorite of mine (until it stopped being funny around season 20, but I still love the old episodes) has finally got on the culture-crash band wagon and making jokes about trans folk. I have to admit that unlike last years' Family Guy disaster, the Simpsons trans cameo was far from monstrous, but it wasn't anything to cheer about.

via The Bilerico Project

(Note: You think its a coincidence that that one women looks like Winne from the Kinsy Sicks?) I have to admit as an activist I thought the little rally was cute, but I am left feeling confused, wondering about the intent. To me, I see a cute little community rally portrayed, with queers and other 'queer' groups - but I'm a radical queer and see this as my community. To others - the creators included perhaps - I'm sure that they saw one 'freak' community(transfolks) and then wanted to continue to highlight how weird and strange queers are by adding other "weird" things like the Furries and the "1900s style gays". Were they trying to make fun of Furry communities too? Possibly the Simpsons' intent was to humanize these communities, but it isn't clear to me. Why include Furries (who aren't expressly 'gay' by the way) but not Leather? And I can't help but laugh at the episode's androcentric gay community with 1 lesbian (Selma). I definitely recognized our community in this in the stereotype promoted here: that all transfolk are trying to pass inside a cultural mirror of gender conformity. And maybe its because this is a real life problem for us that I was irked to see it used by non-trans people to crack a joke for a primarily non-trans audience. Yeah, we have a hard time, thanks for laughing at our troubles - and what's worse, not even knowing or caring how it affects us.

I definitely do not think that non-trans or non queer people can not or should not be a part of the trans movement. What I do think is that when it comes to representation, best leave it to the community OR at the very least educate yourself before doing something stupid or offensive. But Pop Culture doesn't do that. It just throws us in because we are interesting or funny or fascinating, and that's fucking bullshit. Am I reading too much into this mostly harmless clip? Honestly, part of me thinks I am, but the rest of me is saying that every little bit helps, or hurts. And if we don't play watchdog for ourselves, who else is going to do it? It is not impossible for the media to get it right, for example the trans character on Degrassi (Canadian show, go figure) is widely recognized to be a good adaptation. So clearly the issue here is lack of trying. Pop Culture doesn't care about actually representing, they just want to exploit. Surprise, surprise. The continual usage of the trans community as an community clown or freak act plays into our dehumanization, not the other way around.

xposted: MidwestGenderQueer.com

One of these things is not like the others

I can definitely understand why L.A. School Superintendent Ramon Cortines was upset that students were carrying pictures of O.J. Simpson at a Black History Month parade. The man is widely believed to be a brutal murderer, and is currently in prison for robbery and kidnapping. I can also understand why Mayor Villaraigosa was upset that the children were wearing pictures of Dennis Rodman, who was recently in rehab for alcohol addiction and has been convicted of spousal abuse. However good they were as athletes, they are not good role models like the other choices, who included President Obama and Dr. King.

Like Calpernia Addams, I'm very disturbed, however, by the fact that Cortines, Villaraigosa and NAACP branch president Leon Jenkins seem to be just as upset that the students were looking up to RuPaul Charles. A school district spokesperson implied that the administration believes RuPaul, like Simpson and Rodman, is not "appropriate for Black History Month." Jenkins is quoted as saying, "These are not the people we want our young people to emulate or believe these people represent the best of the African-American community."

I honestly haven't seen too many other Black drag queens, but RuPaul is one of the best I know of any ethnic group. More importantly, aside from his talent, he has a reputation for being professional, hardworking and an all-around decent human being. I've never heard about him being involved in any instances of drug abuse or violence. Children of any race could do a lot worse than to emulate him. In that regard, he's a much better role model than Michael Jackson, who died of a drug overdose and was accused of pedophilia.

RuPaul has been something of a role model for me, too, over the years. He can look glamorous in a dress, but is comfortable being seen in men's clothes. He doesn't sweat the pronouns. His presentation is wild, sexy and provocative without being clownish or degrading. And for a guy who's pushing fifty, he still looks damn good, even without the airbrushing.

It remains to be seen whether this was a deliberate racist joke on the part of three white teachers, or a fumbled attempt to appeal to things that impress kids. But I know that if I were a kid at that school grappling with transvestite or homosexual feelings, and I heard people like Leon Jenkins lumping RuPaul in with O.J. and Dennis Rodman, I'd be pretty crushed. No wonder the suicide rate is so high.

I would like to see Cortines, Villaraigosa and Jenkins retract their condemnations of RuPaul. I hope that TBLG leaders will let them know that this kind of homophobia and transphobia is not okay. I hope that some national Black and Hispanic leaders will also come out in support of RuPaul, and of cross-dressers everywhere. We can be good role models.

Update: the World of Wonder blog has more on RuPaul and the homophobic Ramon Cortines. I should also point out that Rodman has done drag too, much more clownishly than RuPaul.

'Bobbi with a I' and I

I'd run across "Bobbi with an I" by country singer Phil Vassar a few months ago and was intrigued. The song tells the story of the singer's friend Bobby, a former "linebacker, a quarterback sacker," who drives a tow truck and bench presses 335—and who shows up one night at the local bar "in his pink party dress." Jaws drop, but over time nobody gives it a second thought, it's "just Bobbi with an I."

Given that country music isn't known as a bastion of social progressivism it was a pleasant surprise, with a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor (one reason Bobbi gets respect is because "he's been known to knock a few teeth out if you ask him for a beauty tip") that doesn't make Bobbi the butt of a joke. It seemed like Vassar either knew someone who crossdressed, or at least had run across crossdressers hanging out at a bar somewhere.

Vassar just released a music video for the song and it's got some, ah, interesting differences.



The video adds a prequel where Bobby is invited out by his friends, but demurs because he's broke. But his eyes light up when his friend mentions "it's Ladies Night, free drinks for the girls!" Did someone say: free drinks? Cue the music. Bobbi enters the bar, a cigar-chomping burly "man in a dress" (in fact he's wearing sunglasses to conceal the fact that he's not wearing any make-up). And in interviews and his "behind-the-scenes" video, Vassar says: “Bobbi is actually a guy I knew—this outrageous guy who showed up at a club one night dressed as a girl. It was just a funny way to pick up chicks.” In other words—it's all just good fun, it's a one-time thing, and Bobbi doesn't really want to be seen as a woman.

I'll take Vassar at his word, he seems like a decent guy—but also a guy who comes across as savvy enough to know how far he can push things with his fans. Not that that might be a reason the video is at odds with the actual lyrics. (And don't think too hard about how Bobbi, who's flat broke, manages on short notice to get decked out in a cocktail dress, high heels, earings, platinum wig, fashionable women's sunglasses and a black sequin purse, or why he's got seemingly hairless legs.)

But even if the video undercuts the lyrics, Bobbi's having a great time, his friends are having a great time, in fact everyone's having a great time except an eye-rolling old man, who's presented as a curmudgeonly killjoy. The "big-boned girl with a platinum curl" is the life of the party. As Vassar sings: "That's how it is, nobody gives a second thought these days."

Would I have preferred that the video stayed true to its roots and cast someone like Victoria "Porkchop" Parker as Bobbi? Hell ya. But if the "lite" version ends up making life a little easier for some trans person in some shitkicker bar somewhere, I'm not gonna complain too much.

* Before anyone kvetches, yes I know Porkchop is a gay man who's a professional female impersonator. But she's burly enough as a guy to be a convincing Bobby and femme enough to be a Bobbi who would've left viewers stunned and amazed.

Kilts and Cross-Dressing and Utah (oh my!)

Originally I was going to make my first post to the TGB a bit more of a commentary on GenderQueer identities: and then this came up and I had to share it with everyone…

Utah School Forces Student to Change out of Kilt

Basically, a student was forced to change out of a kilt because he was mistaken for a “cross-dresser.”

Riddle me this: if I, as a female bodied, GenderQueer, masculine person was to wear a kilt (which happens frequently, I might add) to this school, what would happen? Would I be a cross-dresser, now that the principle is aware that a kilt is traditionally masculine? This is yet another example of the problems associated with having such a strict gender binary. We get these kinds of knee jerk reactions to any article of clothing that steps outside what society sees as normative.

On another note – I realize this is Utah, and, by default, a little conservative (not all residents, of course). That being said, I still find it amazing that “cross-dressing” is so openly criminalized in public situations.


...and for a comparative study in gender. James Bond (Sean Connery) in a kilt.

Thanks everyone!

Drafts from the DSM-V workgroup are out and they're continuing to pathologize trans people

When the infamous Ray Blanchard was appointed to the work group revising the American Psychiatric Association's "Manual for Diagnosis of Mental Disorders" -- the standard reference book used by psychiatrists in North America, there was widespread worry that he'd used the opportunity to push his pathologizing and discredited theories about trans people all being sexual fetishists.

What a surprise... Blanchard reportedly has done exactly that the recently presented "Provisional Report by the DSM-V Workgroup on Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders" according to the GID reform advocates, who are calling on trans people and their allies to voice their concern about the direction the work group is heading.

I don't have a copy of the report itself, but a related presentation Blanchard made at the same conference seems to support the reported account.

Blanchard proposes keeping the current disagnostic criteria for "transvestic fetishism" -- only now it's a "transvestic disorder," which by definition, according to Blanchard, can only occur among hetero men. (Apparently gay crossdressers and women who crossdress don't exist in his world.) Blanchard would also add two subcategories -- "transvestic disorder with fetishism" and "transvestic disorder with autogynephilia" -- based on "unpublished research, which I conducted specifically for the Paraphilias Subworkgroup." [emphasis mine]

Blanchard's research claims that:

The results showed that transvestic patients who acknowledged autogynephilia had higher odds of reporting past or current desires for sex reassignment than transvestic patients who denied autogynephilia. The opposite result was found for fetishism, that is, transvestites who reported fetishism were less likely to report a desire for sex reassignment. It is noteworthy that these predictors were independent to a large extent.

But either way under his proposal by definition people with this "disorder" are always sexual fetishists, i.e. you're either "sexually aroused by fabrics, materials, or garments" or "sexually aroused by the thought or image of self as female."

Hmmm... I guess it's too much to ask that proposed diagnostic criteria, one that affects a huge number of people's lives, be based on research that's withstood peer review...

Mayor Comes Out as Trans, is Re-Elected in Oregon

Stu Rasmussen was the Mayor of Silverton, Oregon (population 7,414) from 1988 to 1992. He was transgender, but in the closet. In 1994 he came out and started cross-dressing in public. In 2000 he got breast implants, but he continues to identify as male and hasn't modified his voice.

On November 4 Rasmussen won a third term, beating the incumbent by thirteen points to become the first known openly transgendered Mayor in the US. Thanks to Metafilter for the link.

James "Cora" Birk on Transition and Regret

I would like to thank Helen for inviting me to post here. I'm sure she's aware that some people might not like what I have to say, but I'll try to play nice, and I hope we can disagree respectfully. Here's a post that I just put up at my own Trans Blog, but since it fits in with some recent posts here, I'm cross-posting it.

In the light of the recent news that sportswriter Mark Penner has detransitioned, I went back and looked at an earlier post on regret on my personal blog. I noticed that I had linked to Cora Birk's writings on her partial transition and subsequent de-transition, but that they have since been removed from the site.

However, Birk's columns are still available via the Internet Archive, and since the last one, especially, is particularly well-written, I would like to share some excerpts:

It is still (and always has been) true that I want to be female. However, somewhere along the way, I appear to have convinced myself that this desire was much more than a simple, harmless wish — that it was a yearning, that if I didn’t get what I wanted I couldn’t possibly go on. I’m not exactly sure when this happened, though I do suspect an intense psychological imprinting experience sometime in 1998.

[...]

I embraced transsexuality, I think, because I was extremely uncomfortable with the other terminology I was hearing. If I was merely a crossdresser of one kind or another, I was nothing more than a largely misunderstood pervert with an extensive makeup collection. But if I was transsexual... then I was validated. I could be helped. I could go on hormones and one day have sex reassignment, all under the protection of politically correct GLBT activists who would see my condition as something to be proud of. I could hold my head high in parades, and everyone around me would put aside their native discomfort with the situation and use all the right pronouns.

My take on this is that the decision about whether or not to transition would be a lot easier if we didn't have to deal with rigid categories and arguments based on destiny. In recent, very thoughtful posts and comments here, Helen, Julie and Marlena all allude to the question of whether Penner is "really a transsexual." To their great credit, they refuse to consider it, but their use still implies that they believe it's a valid question, and that people who are "really" transsexuals should transition.

Let me put this out there: if we assume that there are "true transsexuals" and "false transsexuals" out there, isn't it possible that there are "true transsexuals" who would turn out to be happier in their birth genders, and "false transsexuals" who would manage to be quite content after transition?

Sometimes it's the little things...

Someone once aptly described privilege as the luxury not to have to think about things. Like the way most men are blissfully unaware of the safety concerns that are reflexive for most women venturing out at night. In a far more minor way, I had a reminder last Friday about how being gender variant means not being able to take things for granted.

It was insanely hot for May here in the Bay Area, with record-breaking heat near 100 degrees. So it would've been nice to wear sandals to work because they would've been cooler than shoes and socks. One nice thing about working for a tech company is that the dress code is extremely casual and although a guy in sandals is a bit casual even in that environment, a lot of people were wearing shorts or sundresses that they wouldn't normally have worn because it was so damn hot.

There was just one issue: I've got painted toenails.

Unlike a lot crossdressers who "underdress" I don't wear nail polish because of the feminine symbolism, I wear because I like how it looks. To paraphrase (our patron saint) Eddie Izzard, it's not women's nail polish, it's my nail polish. I guess in that regard I'm just a metrosexual gone too far.

Now most of the company knows I perform as a drag queen, and a smaller number number know that my presenting myself as a woman is more than just for stage, it's also to express a part of myself that society deems "feminine." So it wasn't likely that my co-workers would freak out. Besides, my toes were an almost-sort-of-manly shade of bronze, and outside of work I've got no problem with walking around in sandals and shorts exposing my shaved legs and painted toenails.

But still...

There's always the not knowing how people will react, and if nothing else, I had a lot to do that day and just didn't feel like dealing with the conversations that might result. So I put on my shoes and went to work. It's trivial in the scheme of things I know. But it's another one of those subtle remainders about how I've forfeited my "straight" card now that I'm embraced being a gender variant guy.

School peers crossdress to back trans student

Those darn kids... They make me want to cry (in a good way).

It wasn't a spur-of-the-moment decision that drove Brewster High School student Michael Loscalzo to go to school dressed as a girl.

"Years of taking judgment made me decide to stick up for myself," said Loscalzo, 17. "All my life, people either said I was weird or that I was gay."

The Brewster High School sophomore recently revealed his secret about his desire to become a woman by going to class wearing makeup and feminine attire. His choice has reverberated through the halls.

Loscalzo said school officials warned him Friday that he could be suspended if he continued to cross-dress, a claim that administrators denied yesterday.

In a show of support, several students have organized an "Equality Protest" this week, by showing up to school dressed in garments of the opposite sex.

Yesterday, about a dozen teens gathered at a local deli with boys wearing skirts, wigs and dresses and girls donning caps, cargo pants and T-shirts. They said about 60 students cross-dressed yesterday, though school officials said the number was far less.

"We want Mike to feel more comfortable in his surroundings," said senior Shannon Dodd, 18, one of the organizers. "We're letting the student body know that it's OK to dress this way."...

Goddess Worship

The Times of India ran an interesting story about a crossdressing religious tradition:

They are about to take part in the Kottankulangara Sridevi temple festival. The ancient temple in Chavara, Kerala, has a unique tradition. On the last two days of the festival, regular men, common office-going professionals, dress up as women for the chamayavilakku (chamaya is make-up, vilakku is lamp). Bedecked with flowers, lamps in hand, they wait patiently till the wee hours of dawn for the goddess to bless them.

It's also become a gathering for "feminine men," or Kothis - which the article identifies as homosexuals and transvestites.

(Thanks to Veronica for the link.)

NYC: Crossdressing Erotica Reading

Thursday night, 11/29, there's going to be a crossdressing event at the LGBT Center in NYC. Rachel Kramer Bussel’s Crossdressing: Erotic Stories book is the reason for the gathering. I’ll be reading, as will Miss Vera, amongst others.

* Where: LGBT Center, West 13th Street, NYwww.gaycenter.org
* When: Thurday 11/29, 7PM

Do come! It should be a fun night!

Travolta & Turnblad, Topsy-Turvy

John Travolta’s turn as Edna Turnblad in the film of Hairspray has provided the occasion for more than a little awkwardness in the press recently.

The part, which was of course orignally written for, and embodied by Divine in the oriignal John Waters film, has also been played by Harvey Fierstein, who won a Tony for his version of Edna on Broadway.

“Fox News’ story on this turn of events, back in March of 2006, was entitled TRAVOLTA TO TURN TRANSVESTITE FOR ‘HAIRSPRAY.” The fact that the term ‘transvestite’ is now considered a perjorative (at least in this country) apparently had not reached the editors there. (Generally ‘cross dresser’ is considered a bit less incendiary, but then, it also depends who you ask.)

There have also been more than a few raised feathers given the fact that Scientology has an allegedly anti-gay bias, thus making Travolta a curious choice for this most iconic gay role. The controvery was addressed in a piece in the July 15, 2007 Sunday New York Times. The Times piece, by Jesse Green, is actually very good, and focuses largely upon Travolta’s process as he prepared for the role.

Still, one thing that got my attention in the Sunday NYT piece was Travolta’s repeated line about how “he didn’t want to play Edna as a drag queen; he wanted to play her as a woman.”

This line of course, in countless variations, is exactly the line spoken by thousands and thousands of MTF transsexuals, who, as they come out, want to be seen as women, not as transsexuals.

I said as much my own self when I came out. I wanted people to know that the woman they saw before them was an authentic soul. I still want that.

But I’ll also admit that lots of transsexual women make a big deal of coming out as women, and not as TS, because they look down on cross-dressers, and people doing drag, as individuals somehow not as exhalted as their own selves. It’s a prejudice I hear all the time– including from a number of very visible trans-women in the public eye right now– that they are all for fighting for their own civil rights as gender variant individuals, but at the same time, drag queens, cross dressers and other fellow travelers make them uncomfortable. The division between transsexuals and cross-dressers, sometimes, echoes the old division between transpeople as a whole and the gay and lesbian movement. That is to say, everyone is afraid that these other characters, these “lesser beings” will somehow “make them look bad.”

And so here comes John Travolta, playing one of the most iconic gay drag characters in film history– and what does he want? He wants to be seen as a woman, not as a drag queen. Cause, like, if you’re a “drag queen,” oh that is so very bad, but if you’re a WOMAN, well hey. You’re Good Old Mister Normal.

This subversion of drag strikes me as so nutty I can hardly write about it: it’s like the entire point of drag is to subvert, to make us challenge our ideas bout gender. Plus, have some fun. So instead, here’s Travolta NOT DOING DRAG, but being an ACTUAL WOMAN because its– “ACTING!”

I don’t consider my own life as a woman an act of drag; but it is an act of transgression, I suppose. And sometimes I do think of Ru Paul, who said, “We’re all born naked; everything else is drag.”

Travolta not doing a drag part as drag means he’s doing it as An Actual Woman which means you can Be an Actual Woman and Still be a Man as long as it’s Acting and Not Be Gay.

No wonder Fox news got all confused with its headline. And they’re usually so cutting edge on GLBT issues.

Transforming Community Anthology

I'm up at my usual ungodly hour having just finished a piece for an upcoming anthology called TransForming Community: Stories from Merging Trans and Queer Communities which will come out on Suspect Thoughts Press next year and is being edited by Michelle Tea and Julia Serano.

It comes out of a spoken word series Michelle Tea started a while back; Julia Serano recently reported on her experience at one.

My piece is on queer heterosexuals, specifically crossdressers/transvestites and their female partners, and how we do or don't fit into queer community, or straight community, or trans community, depending.

It's also about how to tie your shoes.

When I have a final edit, I'll put an excerpt of it up here.

Intersections of Trans and Lesbian Lit Panel

My wife (Diane Anderson-Minshall) and I just returned from Atlanta where we attended the Golden Crown Literary Society conference. While there, Diane moderated and I sat on a panel about the intersections of trans and lesbian literature. It was interesting to see how lesbian authors deal with trans characters. JD Glass, author of Punk and Zen, introduced a trans character in that book and will be delving into trans issues more in her next book. In Burning Dreams drag king Susan "Smitty” Smith, has a trans character who teaches a bio guy how to be a man.

Although Radcylffe successfully introduced a crossdressing character into her work over a decade ago, lesbian penned trans and genderqueer characters tend to be trans masculine. As our panelist Monica Helms (founder of the Transgender American Veterans Association) pointed out, there are few MTF or trans women characters in lesbian works, though, clearly, trans lesbians--like her—are among the readers.

Still there seems new openness in lesbian literature—by readers and publishers—to address trans issues (at least on the FTM side of the spectrum). When we were first signed to do a series with Bold Strokes, I was originally surprised that I was not asked to assume a pen name. Would lesbian readers pick up a book that was written by man—even if he was trans? I wondered.

At the GCLS panel, Radcylffe (aka Bold Strokes Books Publisher Len Barot) admitted that even 5 years ago I might have been asked by publishers to hide my gender behind a pseudonym, but fortunately, times are changing. Diane jokes that now I’ve become like some kind of exotic fruit or I’m the zebra in the room. I wasn’t the only guy at the GCLS conference—there was one non trans guy who pens lesbian fiction—but I definitely stood out in the crowd.

The sound of one CD not transitioning...

A few days ago, a crossdresser posted to the Betty boards about how she was two years into her goal of a career in stand-up comedy -- as a comedian who crossdresses on stage. Part of her post was a reflection on how being out to audiences and fellow comedians had freed a part of her soul that had been trapped for years, as well as how she felt that we don't give the straight community enough credit sometimes. It ought to been a joyous occasion -- seeing someone achieving peace and self-acceptance with herself.

And yet it left, at best, a bittersweet taste in my mouth.

Why? There was a distinct dearth of kudos from the board's many transition-tracked people (whether pre-, post- or pondering). A reminder again about how so often crossdressers and their experiences don't seem to rate in the trans communities.

From the public shunning. For example Susan Stanton's statement* that she was trying to make herself available to the press because "For most people, a transgender person is not something you see every day. It's important for them to see that I'm not a freak, I'm not a pervert, I'm not a crossdresser. I'm just me." Et tu Susan? Now in fairness I realize what Stanton was probably trying to say: this is who I am, it's not an act. But dammit, the sort of thing hurts -- like a salt-encrusted cutlass to the guts -- when said by someone who's having CNN follow her around for a year to help educate the public about trans issues. (In my own public outreach appearances I've started saying crossdressers are both the dark matter and the Rodney Dangerfields of the trans communities. But no, I'm not bitter...)

To the little stuff, like the lack to response to the comedian's post. Write about how you've started hormones, or you're telling your boss you're transitioning or you're headed off to the Thailand for surgery and (at least in the MTF world) and you'll be met by a multitude of responses, from outright cheerleading -- "You go girl!" -- to congratulations that things are going well, to at least a cautious: "I hope this bring the peace of mind you're seeking." Many of those comments come from those of us not on the transition track. Because supportive comments like those aren't hard to do and often mean a lot to the recipient. And at least in my world being part of community means one ought to give as well as receive. Granted the post wasn't as obvious a "support situation" compared to the many sturm-und-angst posts I've seen from folks in transition, some of whom post on almost a daily basis. But it's one of the things that makes it hard for us non-transitioning folks: there's no public validation when one decides to accept being "just a crossdresser."

I suppose that's in part because there can be comparatively few milestones. Sure for those of us who go out in public, there's the terror and exhilaration of stepping out the house for the first time -- like I did a little over two years ago. Likewise, for those who do so, the act of coming out for the first time -- like I did a year ago. (And in fairness, posts about these sorts of things do get supportive responses.) But truly meanful milestones are often passed without notice. It wasn't until I recently also started performing as a drag queen and told co-workers about an upcoming performance that I realized I'd embraced being a crossdresser as part of who I am, and that I'm comfortable with others knowing about that part of me. (OK, maybe not everyone -- for me it's still a "don't advertise, don't deny" situation -- but the key thing for me is that if everyone did know, I could live with it.)

But you realize this only in retrospect and there's no clear before-and-after that way there often is with transition-track milestones. There's nothing to say you've "arrived." As Helen once said, it's the sound of the other shoe not dropping. (Which is one of the sources of anxiety for partners. All they've got is one's word that you're happy where you are on the trans spectrum.)

Which is why I was thrilled when Helen talked about how Reid's new book tried to reframe "transition" to express the moment when someone trans stops taking gender for granted and starts to deal with their gender variance, in one way or another. Because Reid rightly points out that changing one's gender presentation and/or surgery aren't the sole kinds of "transitions" that one can have in life. It was because I had such high hopes that I was quite disappointed when I read Reid’s book and found it was still very much about the context of those considering physical transformations (even if some of those folks decided they don’t need that). Don’t get me wrong, I think "Transition and Beyond" is an excellent and much-needed book, and there’s much that crossdressers like myself can extrapolate to help them in their efforts to come to terms with and even embrace their crossdressing. In fairness to Reid, the vast majority of his clients are trans people considering social and/or surgical transitions - folks like me just aren't that likely to seek out a gender therapist -- so it's hard for him to talk to our situations. Which is a shame, because there's so many crossdressers who could use help getting to self-acceptance and so little literature for therapists that's focused on our situations.

Such as how to mark - and celebrate - our own "transitions." As Margaret Cho said, where's my parade? Maybe we need to throw ourselves a "coming out" party, much like the (at least mythical) "singlehood celebrations" thrown by happy singletons. After all, most crossdressers would love a chance to wear an elegant party dress.

* Update: I'm now told that reportedly Stanton was misquoted (although there's no word on what she actually said). But regardless of what Stanton did/didn't say, I've heard too many other trans folks publicly throw crossdressers under the proverbial train.