(and a couple of other gender-ambiguity threads, for those who like 'em) posted by soyjoy at 10:48 AM on March 7, 2005
Surprisingly sane policy on the part of the school officials. posted by kenko at 10:51 AM on March 7, 2005
Excellent. I also like how the article refers to the female child as him. posted by sciurus at 10:52 AM on March 7, 2005
No kidding, kenko. Would that this guy could be in charge of all the schools in the nation. posted by dlugoczaj at 10:57 AM on March 7, 2005
I used to question the notion of transgender--especially people who go to such drastic lengths as surgery--but now that I've seen an acquaintance go through the FTM transition, I feel differently. I think he's incredibly brave to stand up and change his identity in such a public way, especially since he seems to be an otherwise shy person.
But what I wonder about in this case is if the child got to choose how to represent him/herself in public, or if the parents chose for him. I can't help but wish there were a way for people to identify as "biologically male with female feelings" rather than having to assign themselves to one hard category or another. In a way, the concept of "transgender" essentializes gender roles, which I thought we were trying to get past? posted by insideout at 10:58 AM on March 7, 2005
And I think any reassignment surgery/hormone treatment should be definitely delayed until the child can give full, independent consent. posted by insideout at 11:01 AM on March 7, 2005
I think this post is insensitive in its wording and general attitude. Can we not do Jerry Springer here, and instead realize there are real people involved here, who are in very hard personal situations? Anyone who has read anything on gender identity should know that a big chunk of it is biological and not be suprised it shows up in a two year old.
As for the school, they have been doing this in Sweden for awhile now. Finally it is happening here too. posted by Shusha at 11:01 AM on March 7, 2005
Both threads about transgendered teens have been about female-to-male trannies. Are we more tolerant of that than of boys who want to be girls? As a society, I mean.
I'm honestly curious. posted by jonmc at 11:02 AM on March 7, 2005
While the post's brevity might indicate Jerry Springer-esque sentiments (although I don't think it does), certainly the conversation so far has been far above Springer. I'm cautiously optimistic.
johnmc, I think that's a good question. I know only one transgendered person, and he's FTM. I'd be interested in hearing people's thoughts on this. posted by goatdog at 11:06 AM on March 7, 2005
OK, this is just to prove my point. "Trannies"? Sometimes I feel that I landed on Fark instead of Metafilter... posted by Shusha at 11:07 AM on March 7, 2005
OK, this is just to prove my point. "Trannies"?
It's shorthand, not a slur. I had already used "transgendered" once in that sentence, I was trying to avoid linguistic clunkiness is all, not start a fight. posted by jonmc at 11:09 AM on March 7, 2005
When I was a kid, I always thought it would be cooler to be a Girl. They got better clothes, etc. As I grew up, I found more and more things which made me wish I was a girl.
Then eventually I realized that all of those things really only applied to attractive girls. At my weight being a guy is a much better deal.
You know, I have to wonder just how much of a concept of "gender" a 2 year old really even has. I wonder if transgender issues are really just a "grass is greener" situation.
Plus, I can't imagine why a kid would want to be a boy, if they were a girl. I mean, what benefit is there of being a boy if you're a little kid, girls get nicer clothes!
Oh well, who knows I'm not a psychologist so I really have no idea. posted by delmoi at 11:12 AM on March 7, 2005
Cheers to his parents and the administrators of that school. It can't be easy feeling like your body is the wrong gender.. hopefully this kid will be spared those psychological problems that all-too-often accompany being transgendered.
insideout, I'll agree that anything surgical and permanent should wait until he is older. By the time he hits puberty, he'll probably know for sure. And before then, none of the secondary characteristics have really started to form yet, so dressing like a boy until then shouldn't be a problem. posted by cmyk at 11:13 AM on March 7, 2005
It's amazing that both the school and his parents are treating this with the seriousness it deserves. However, I agree any decisions for hormones and/or surgery should wait until the kid is mature and of legal age.
Not snarking, jonmc, but for me "tolerant" is the wrong word. Anything consenting adults want to do is fine by me. Who am I to judge? posted by deborah at 11:16 AM on March 7, 2005
Jonmc - I am sorry, it's a slur. Just so you know.
Delmoi - you don't understand how much concept of a gender two year old has because you are not transsexual. If you read on the subject, you also get a much clear picture of gender differences you would never suspect existed in everyone's head. posted by Shusha at 11:16 AM on March 7, 2005
Can we not do Jerry Springer here, and instead realize there are real people involved here, who are in very hard personal situations?
Shusha, if you were familiar with soyjoy's posting record or his personality here you'd be aware that he's posting this to call attention to a potential sign of progress, quite surprising in America during these times of right-wing fundamentalist fervor and bans on gay marriage and general homophobia. I can gurantee he had no intentions of this being in any way Springer-esque... posted by Shane at 11:22 AM on March 7, 2005
Jonmc - I am sorry, it's a slur. Just so you know.
I'll avoid using it in this conversation, but i don't recall handing you a Linguistic Police Badge. A word is only a slur if it's used as one. And if you truly believe it is too loaded an expression then perhaps we need a less formal, shorter word for "transgendered" that dosen't offend.
Not snarking, jonmc, but for me "tolerant" is the wrong word.
More semantics. I was making an observation that we seemed to accept the idea of a girl wanting to be a boy a lot better than the reverse. And that goes beyond stuff like transgenderism; there's a lot less eye-rolling at "masculine," women than at "feminine," men. This may be due to the fact that being traditionally masculine is an easier way to get through life, perhaps, but I don't think that explains all of it. posted by jonmc at 11:23 AM on March 7, 2005
Wow, that's pretty cool. Good for everyone involved.
Except shusha. Good lord. Sorry, I don't buy the "it's OK to say trannie if you are one, not OK if you're not" party line. And theories on gender identity are far from widely agreed upon.
delmoi writes," Plus, I can't imagine why a kid would want to be a boy, if they were a girl. I mean, what benefit is there of being a boy if you're a little kid, girls get nicer clothes! "
Well, there's that whole institutionalized sexism thing... posted by mkultra at 11:24 AM on March 7, 2005
Are we more tolerant of that than of boys who want to be girls?
Speaking as a girl who used to be a boy: yes. I'm sure there are FtMs who'll disagree, but -- especially in the early stages -- it's safer, quieter, and just plain easier to be a girl in a shirt and tie than a boy in a dress.
Interesting that I had to reach for "shirt and tie" to find a typcially masculine form of dress not normally worn by women... posted by ArmyOfKittens at 11:25 AM on March 7, 2005
Shusha -- why don't you educate us on the subject instead of just telling us to go read? Stridency like yours ("you can't understand unless you are one") is what makes me suspicious of the broad claims some transsexual advocates make. I mean, it's a huge step to take huge doses of hormones or have hugely invasive surgery on your sex organs that possibly ruins their function...if as a society we're going to talk about how to best deal with this, we need more than "you just don't understand cuz you're not us." I really do worry about situations where people are getting gender reassignment surgery who later change their mind, and so we need to develop solid ethical standards on how to decide when to do it. That takes discussion. posted by insideout at 11:26 AM on March 7, 2005
As a parent, I can only imagine that the parents came to this point only after much research, anguish, soul searching, etc. I'm sure it's not something they've taken lightly. I'm glad to hear that one big hurdle--public schools--seems to be at least somewhat better than worst-case scenario. It's so unfortunate that we all have come to expect only the worst from schools. posted by tippiedog at 11:26 AM on March 7, 2005
Interesting point, AoK. I'd go the next step and say it's perfectly OK for a girl to be a "tomboy", but there's no male equivalent that isn't an out-and-out insult. posted by mkultra at 11:28 AM on March 7, 2005
You know, I have to wonder just how much of a concept of "gender" a 2 year old really even has. I wonder if transgender issues are really just a "grass is greener" situation.
If you were a boy who had to live as a girl, why *wouldn't* you think that the grass is greener on the other side? It is, for you, at least! You would be more comfortable living as the gender you really are.
This is an example of the subtle assumptions that people make with regard to gender. Basically, you are the gender of your birth sex. If you switch, then it's to the "opposite" gender. The "other side". When the grass on the other side should have been yours, you think about it differently.
The idea that you desire something, that you want to be someone you are not, is the fundamental misunderstanding of what transgendered people go through. It's all just to have the freedom to be yourself, not the freedom to be someone else. posted by adzuki at 11:30 AM on March 7, 2005
I'd go the next step and say it's perfectly OK for a girl to be a "tomboy", but there's no male equivalent that isn't an out-and-out insult.
Well, drag queens have become part of the cultural landscape, but they're not transgendered so much as they are outrageous performers.
And the meaning of "masculine appearance" is rather fluid, cultural speaking. It wasn't too long ago that shoulder legnth hair and earrings would be enough get a guy branded as "gay," or a "sissy," but these days you'll see macho badass types sporting both or either. posted by jonmc at 11:33 AM on March 7, 2005
hey...my alma mater!
i'm thrilled that the school is accommodating the kid so well, tho a little worried for him. The school is really big (K-8) and I certainly remember being intimidated by the older kids. Lotsa fights.
Still, what a great lesson for the rest of the kids. posted by es_de_bah at 11:33 AM on March 7, 2005
Still, what a great lesson for the rest of the kids.
posted by es_de_bah at 11:33 AM PST on March 7 [!]
Yeah...but I worry about the burden placed on this one kid in the course of educating the rest. That's always seemed to me an odd goal of school "mainstreaming" in general--that the different kid should be in charge of educating the others. I guess it's unavoidable, but still unfair. posted by insideout at 11:37 AM on March 7, 2005
I wanted to say exactly what mkultra said, but he beat me to it. posted by Specklet at 11:37 AM on March 7, 2005
drag queens have become part of the cultural landscape, but they're not transgendered so much as they are outrageous performers.
Was that...ah....was that a little snark there, jonmc?
Well, darling, I think you're outrageous, too. posted by Baby_Balrog at 11:39 AM on March 7, 2005
Well, darling, I think you're outrageous, too.
*snaps finger*
You could never afford me, darling.
*blows kisses, lifts skirt to show garters*
Nah, no snark, just acknowledging the difference between transsexuals, transvestites, and those who are merely too fabulous for one gender. posted by jonmc at 11:44 AM on March 7, 2005
Ironically, when I was about this kid's age, you know who was mayor of the town where I went to school? That's right, Jerry Springer!
(Thanks for the backup, Shane, my hero! I was just trying to keep it pithy. I regret not putting "- 4th grader" in [small] tags, though, because it kind of looks like I'm saying "and it's a freakin' fourth grader, fer cryin' out loud!" when I was really only trying for a style of attribution.)
Anyway, back on topic, not that ArmyOfKittens needs my additional vote, but yeah, jonmc, I think we (society) are more comfortable with female-to-male because it's an "upwardly mobile" paradigm. Obviously Male is The Thing To Be, so why wouldn't females want to switch? But for a male to go the other way is threatening, because it suggests that maybe, after all, Male isn't the state we'd all choose if we were free to. posted by soyjoy at 11:46 AM on March 7, 2005
Interestingly, and as a side note, when I was a boy people were nice enough to me if I spoke to them; when I was an in-betweenie people were either neutral or actively hostile towards me; and now I'm a woman people fall over themselves to be nice to me. This has made me terribly cynical.
I think soyjoy's right, although I don't think it's necessarily conscious. I lost all my (straight) male friends pretty much automatically, and the feeling I got from some of them was that they couldn't believe I might want (or need) to go from being the taker to being the taken. posted by ArmyOfKittens at 11:52 AM on March 7, 2005
'For the kids who aren't close to him, it was Phyllis and now it's Phillip," said Littlefield, using other names for examples. 'And it's OK. They want to know what's for lunch."
Yay kids! (I hope it's pizza day.) posted by Guy Smiley at 11:55 AM on March 7, 2005
The first thing this post made me think of is a terrible 80s movie called Just One of the Guys where this girl is convinced that she lost a journalism contest because she is a hot girl so she starts going to a new school pretending to be a boy.
Anyway, this hits a little close to home because I recently found out that my 5 year old cousin is turning into a super brat who likes to dress up in girl's clothing (his favorite Christmas present last year was a princess costume from my aunt). When they say no to him, he throws tantrums, and my aunt is becoming a spineless mother who refuses to discipline him, thus putting a strain on her marriage to my uncle.
But in regards to the cross-dressing part of it all, what do you do? Part of me says "Hey, let the kid do his thing, if that's what he enjoys." The other part of me, knowing the conservative backwoods Pennsylvania hellhole community they live in, thinks maybe they should find a way to redirect his creativity so he won't get his ass kicked on a daily basis when he's 13.
While it may not be a gender identity issue yet, I think that someone needs to muster up the balls to sit down and have a chat about this. before it becomes one. posted by aGreatNotion at 12:02 PM on March 7, 2005
side note on the clothes issue:
a small but growing number of guys around my campus are wearing long skirts in the summer. granted, they're dirty hippy types, and they all have beards to set off any perceived femininity, but it's a small step in the right direction...they sure look comfy... posted by es_de_bah at 12:03 PM on March 7, 2005
Fantastic. Finally, a good school story. posted by agregoli at 12:07 PM on March 7, 2005
This made me very happy: "If students bring home questions that parents cannot answer, he said, they should call the school to speak to a staff member familiar with gender identity issues."
That's one thoughtful school administrator. People say the schools are worse than ever. People like this man give me hope.
When the article mentions a "medical" aspect to this, are they simply including the term to indicate that psychological issues are, of course, medical issues -- or are they talking about some physical or hormonal issues? Do children with gender dysphoria often or usually have physical characteristics that are unusual for their genetic sex? posted by Cassford at 12:07 PM on March 7, 2005
When the article mentions a "medical" aspect to this, are they simply including the term to indicate that psychological issues are, of course, medical issues -- or are they talking about some physical or hormonal issues? Do children with gender dysphoria often or usually have physical characteristics that are unusual for their genetic sex?
There may be physiological differences in the brain, and physical differences in structure, but research is ongoing (google "BSTc" and "Zhou"). There are usually not outwardly phsyical manifestations.
However, researchers don't know when gender identity forms, but I think all respected ones think that no later than gradeschool. posted by adzuki at 12:10 PM on March 7, 2005
Oh yeah, kudos to the superintendent for handling this the way he's handling it. It's nice to see an administrator who cares about more than keeping his or her job. posted by aGreatNotion at 12:11 PM on March 7, 2005
Well, there's that whole institutionalized sexism thing...
What does a 2 year old know about institutionalized sexism? posted by delmoi at 12:12 PM on March 7, 2005
ArmyofKittens: Is it possible that people changed their interaction style with you after the switch because you exude more happiness now that you are in the body you belong in? Or are you sure that it is something about the difference between how men and women are treated by default? posted by Cassford at 12:16 PM on March 7, 2005
[off-topic]And here I thought that "tranny" was an abbreviation of "transmission"...[/off-topic] posted by Slothrup at 12:17 PM on March 7, 2005
a small but growing number of guys around my campus are wearing long skirts in the summer.
That probably has more to do with the breeze between their legs than any gender identity thing. Or perhaps they're merely wannabe Scotsmen.
What does a 2 year old know about institutionalized sexism?
Well, even at that age, you're starting to get the message that "boys act this way, girls act that way..." posted by jonmc at 12:19 PM on March 7, 2005
What does a 2 year old know about institutionalized sexism?
It knows that for some reason it never gets the right toys. posted by sonofsamiam at 12:23 PM on March 7, 2005
Well, even at that age, you're starting to get the message that "boys act this way, girls act that way..."
And if not at 2, you certainly get it by 5. posted by soyjoy at 12:24 PM on March 7, 2005
On the other hand, I remember that back around 4th grade, at recess, most of the girls would go off an play jump rope or something, and the boys would go off and play kickball. But there were always a few girls who would play with us guys and we really didn't think much of it. Maybe it's cause we all knew eachother, maybe it was a cultural byproduct of being a kid in the "Free To Be You And Me," 70's.
And anyway, judging what makes a "man" by superficial details is kind of stupid. It's how you carry yourself, and how you treat others that defines manhood. I live my life in a fairly traditional male style, but I've met "sissyboys" who are more man than a truckload of would-be tough guys by that measure. posted by jonmc at 12:30 PM on March 7, 2005
Cassford: about 50/50, I'd say. I'm happier and nicer to people, but they also approach me a hell of a lot more. When I'm just standing/sitting there (waiting for a tram or a train, say) I still get approached more for questions or conversation than I ever did before.
It's difficult to say why. Men and women both seem to be more intimidated by men, and more inclined to be nice to a woman without prior contact. I'm shy, so I rarely initiate contact myself, and I've simply noticed a huge increase in the number of daily interactions.
It could be age as well, of course. I'm 25 now, and I haven't been male for five years. I know I don't approach teenage boys unless I absolutely have to... posted by ArmyOfKittens at 12:30 PM on March 7, 2005
I can't help but wish there were a way for people to identify as "biologically male with female feelings" rather than having to assign themselves to one hard category or another.
Ah! That's where queer theory comes to the rescue. The general idea (with a whole lot of other theory and political context accompanying) is that you can identify as anything you damn well please, and change that identification whenever you feel it necessary. A fair number of transfolk never transition with hormones and surgery, but choose to live with the body type they were born with and the social gender they choose to perform. Those people identify as male, female, transgender, transman, transwoman, however they feel best represent them. The category of genderqueer is where you really get a chance to subvert the binary. Genderqueer is neither male nor female, nor is it the absence of gender--it is a gender unto itself, defined by the individual who professes it. Genderqueers, and some transpeople, often use gender neutral pronouns (ze/hir and ze/zir are the most common) to avoid locating themselves as male or female.
And Shusha, I've heard "tranny" used by trans and genderqueer friends o'mine as both a term of affection and a casual abbreviation, and I feel comfortable using the term with some of them. It's a contextual thing. I don't think jonmc was in the wrong to use it here.
A note on biological connections: A awful lot of transfolk and gender activists argue that it's misleading and beside the point to debate whether gender identity has genetic or biological roots. Additionally, saying that a transman, say, is "biologically female" is offensive to some people because it implies that a person's gender/sex is really determined by what kind of genitals ze has. If you want to talk about the fact that when a man was born, the doctors put "female" on his birth certificate and his parents decoracted the nursery with pink, you would say he was female-assigned. posted by hippugeek at 12:33 PM on March 7, 2005
What sonofsamiam said. The infant-to-youth toy market is perhaps one of the most sexist institutions out there. posted by DrJohnEvans at 12:38 PM on March 7, 2005
"biologically male with female feelings"
But what are female feelings? being able to publicly cry? show affection? wear pink clothing?
I'm quite comfortable doing the first two, and I'm quite happy being a guy.
what kind of genitals ze has.
I appreciate the aim of this pronoun, but "ze" just sounds excessively Tuetonic to me, and know I'm hearing your entire post in the voice of Colonel Klink. posted by jonmc at 12:39 PM on March 7, 2005
hippugeek writes,"Additionally, saying that a transman, say, is 'biologically female' is offensive to some people because it implies that a person's gender/sex is really determined by what kind of genitals ze has."
This doesn't make sense to me- we have a very well-defined biological definition of gender: the XY chromosome pair. Someone born as a male can have all the surgery s/he wants, but that Y is gonna stick with him/her forever. posted by mkultra at 12:44 PM on March 7, 2005
It wasn't too long ago that shoulder legnth hair and earrings would be enough get a guy branded as "gay," or a "sissy,"
That's just recently in The US culture. Look back at pirates as examples where it was not. posted by thomcatspike at 12:45 PM on March 7, 2005
What does a 2 year old know about institutionalized sexism?
Well, there's plenty in family life to tell a kid about gender roles. Control of the household is made pretty clear by statements like "you wait until your father comes home!" Mommy can drive, but Daddy drives when both of them are in the car. Brothers get Tonka trucks and rough play, sisters get Barbies and kitchen playsets and are told to "play nice". Lots of indicators.
we have a very well-defined biological definition of gender: the XY chromosome pair
Actually, that's an indicator of your biological sex, not your gender. posted by heatherann at 12:47 PM on March 7, 2005
That's just recently in The US culture. Look back at pirates as examples where it was not.
that's what I mean by "fluid," thom. Yarr. posted by jonmc at 12:48 PM on March 7, 2005
Anyone who's seen the groundbreaking 80s documentary Sleepaway Camp knows the quite literal horrors that can face transgender children. We've come a long way since then! posted by gurple at 12:48 PM on March 7, 2005
Additionally, saying that a transman, say, is "biologically female" is offensive to some people because it implies that a person's gender/sex is really determined by what kind of genitals ze has.
I'm with mkultra. I'm puzzled as to why the simple fact that they have certain parts would be offensive to anyone. I'd think that in certain situations (like medical ones) it would be important to know what pieces and parts the person in question was born with, and 'biological' seems to be the obvious way to express that.
Can you explain this further? posted by anastasiav at 12:54 PM on March 7, 2005
I have always found gender issues/identity to be very interesting. Awhile back I stood in court as a reference for a person undergoing a name (to a more gender neutral name) change because she was undergoing a M to F gender change. Something interesting she said was whenever she took her car to be serviced she dressed male because there was a vastly different professional reaction to men as opposed to women.
I just got through reading a bunch of John Varley (SciFi) short stories, many of which occur when gender change is common place, and a person would undergo multiple changes easily over a lifespan. There is a certain part of me that wishes this was possible now. A concept that came out of those stories was to think of people as "male" or "female" but a male human or female human. The new focus being on the human part with gender being but an adjective.
As far as nature/nurture is concerned most current thought is each places about a 50/50 role, but the interconnections between the two are mind bogglingly complex.
a small side note, at times I want to scream at the narrow nitpicking that some progressives exhibit towards others. referring to almost tjack by Shusha. posted by edgeways at 12:58 PM on March 7, 2005
related links: Berdaches are those in Native American culture who are two-spirited -- who are believed to have both a female spirit and a male spirit in the same body. Hijras are those of the third gender in South Asian culture. They are considered neither male nor female, and have their own caste. (more here)
Also, Wikipedia has this to say on the sex/gender terminology: "Many people, including many social scientists, use sex to refer to the biological division into male and female; gender to refer to the gender role assigned to an individual on the basis of their apparent sex and/or other contingent factors; gender identity to refer to an individual's subjective feeling of having a particular sex or gender; and gender perception to refer to what others perceive to be the sex or gender of an individual."
I'm currently taking a course on Sex and Gender, and we've been instructed to use male/female to refer to a person's sex, and masculine/feminine to refer to their gender. Just because someone is born with a penis does not necessarily imply that they have a masculine gender; that's what hippugeek is on about. posted by heatherann at 1:01 PM on March 7, 2005
when I was an in-betweenie people were either neutral or actively hostile towards me
What hippugeek said, because really, she said everything that I was thinking and was much clearer than my thoughts.
I have a number of trans-friends and have been actively and passively learning about trans-issues for years now. I'm amazed to find parents so accepting because I know that for my own friends, theirs have been anywhere from snarky to outright hostile about their change in gender status. I'm quite happy to be reading something positive about trans-children!
For anyone who wants to read more about transgenderism, I really recommend the works of Leslie Feinberg and Kate Bornstein. I was lucky enough to hear them both speak and to meet them (albeit briefly) at my crazy hippie college. They're excellent writers and explain a lot about the history of transgenderism and also how we create gender much better than I ever could.
(Leslie Feinberg is the creator of the gender neutral pronouns "ze" and "hir" and while I still think that they sound kind of strange, they're quite useful in describing individuals who don't identify as male or female and much more respectful than using the wrong gendered pronoun.)
On preview : "biologically" female is offensive to TG folk because they don't believe that biology is the be all and end all of gender development and to say that someone is "biologically" female implies that this trumps their true identity if that identity is "male" or "other." Saying "assigned" female is more correct as it indicates that this is someone with female genitalia, but it doesn't imply anything beyond that nor does it trump that person's gender identity. posted by grapefruitmoon at 1:03 PM on March 7, 2005
Also, to expand on what heatherann was saying : sex can be male, female, or other. (XY, XX, XXY, XYY... lots of people have chromosomal anomalies which don't necessarily show up at birth) - as for gender, there is a whole spectrum of identities ranging from "masculine" to "feminine" and beyond. A good example of a non-polar gender identity would be of (transvestite comedian) Eddie Izzard's "male lesbian" - a man who feels more comfortable dressed as a woman, but is not gay and does not identify as being a woman. posted by grapefruitmoon at 1:07 PM on March 7, 2005
Rather young children do perceive gender roles. I recall that through most of our let's-pretend phase one of my friends always took a boy identity because boys are the ones who get to actually *do* stuff. (Being from a less culturaly restrictive family, I just made myself a girl-who-does-stuff.) It took her until college for her to finally realize that she didn't want to be a *boy*, she wanted to be not treated like a second-class citizen. (Off topic somewhat, it took *me* nearely that long to figure out that so many of my friends did the lets-pretend-i'm-blonde bit -- because they were, erm, nonwhite. Being white myself, I didn't perceive the difference in treatment.) posted by Karmakaze at 1:19 PM on March 7, 2005
Saying "assigned" female is more correct as it indicates that this is someone with female genitalia, but it doesn't imply anything beyond that nor does it trump that person's gender identity.
Eh? But isn't the isn't the point generally made that the gender identity of these folks is somewhat biologically "assigned", too, just like their naughty bits?
How in the world does one create language for these concepts? Language that's neither judgmental nor laughably ambiguous nor bogged down with baggage ("tranny")? I haven't seen a term in this thread yet that isn't at least one of those three. posted by gurple at 1:21 PM on March 7, 2005
gurple : The point is that gender idenitity goes beyond what's biologically assigned and a lot of people find it direspectful to imply otherwise. Yes, biology plays a part in gender identity, but it's not the be all and end all. Socialization plays a large part as well - how you were raised, what gender your parents perceived you to be, that sort of thing. To say that some one is "socialized female" is to say that person was brought up with the world treating hir as female. "Assigned" female means that this person also has female genitalia and probably XX chromosomes.
I don't see what's so "laughably ambiguous" about this. To me "biologically male" is fairly ambiguous because what do you mean by that? Does this person have male hormones? An FTM may be taking testosterone and thus has male hormones, is this person "biologically male?" What exactly do you mean by "biologically?" To me "assigned male" is much more precise - it means that the gender assigned to this person at birth is male. Nothing ambiguous there. posted by grapefruitmoon at 1:34 PM on March 7, 2005
I just got through reading a bunch of John Varley (SciFi) short stories, many of which occur when gender change is common place, and a person would undergo multiple changes easily over a lifespan.
I haven't read John Varley, but I'm pretty confident that this will, in fact, come to pass. Whether we work to "subvert the binary" or not, the binary (and I mean for both M/F and het/homo) is too rigid and arbitrary for the people we are and, dare I say, the people we will be. Doubtless it was so for a lot of the people we were, which is why we're now finding out about all the historical exceptions, both social and biological, to what was always officially a binary system.
Uncanny valley problem?
FFF, that's a good point, and it probably seems that way to the people who have the problem. But there's an important distinction: The uncanny valley, as I understand it, is between two concepts that are truly opposite: real and unreal. Male and female gender are only "opposite" in a very loose sense, and on a real level there's already plenty of fill in that valley (hermaphrodites, for instance, if you want to limit it strictly to sex). And in terms of, say, drag queens, there can be a particular appeal in a persona that dances right on the border between the two. posted by soyjoy at 1:40 PM on March 7, 2005
grapefruit: sorry, on review my "laughably ambiguous" sounds like a bit of a troll, but that wasn't my intention. "assigned female" struck me as funny because it seemed that, in an attempt to the apparently-offensive "biologically female", a term had been created that managed to convey virtually no information to the uninitiate.
That is, say "assigned female" to the average person on the street and you'll have to spend 10 minutes explaining yourself. Then again, that might not be such a bad thing because, as I expressed earlier, these are inherently difficult concepts to build language around, and because discussion is good.
To me "assigned male" is much more precise - it means that the gender assigned to this person at birth is male. Nothing ambiguous there.
Really? It seems to me that this post is full of ways in which the word "gender" is demonstrated to be ambiguous. What exactly is assigned? I'm assuming you're talking about external genitalia, but the term itself doesn't attempt to convey that to me. posted by gurple at 1:50 PM on March 7, 2005
heatherann writes"Wikipedia has this to say on the sex/gender terminology..."
Wikipedia also has a very large contingent of trans-gendered contributors; accepting any Wikipedia article as correct or unbiased is a stretch, but especially so when it's on a contentious subject close to the contributor's heart.
Citing Wikipedia can be useful, but referring to it as an authority on anything other than the ideological biases of its contributors (laughably called "editors" by Wikipedia ) is an unjustified leap of faith. posted by orthogonality at 1:52 PM on March 7, 2005
As Raphael Carter puts it, "You may ask after a transgendered person's genital appearance in exactly the same situations where you might ask the length of a man's penis — that is, if you will excuse M. Manners' language, not bloody often."
In other words, asking if someone's biologically male or female might not be offensive per se — to tell the truth, I'm not sure what "offensive" means anymore — but it sure is intrusive. posted by nebulawindphone at 1:56 PM on March 7, 2005
A co-worker of mine underwent reassignment surgery, going from male to female. People would detour through her area to gawk at her, until her cubicle was moved to a sort of dead end/cul de sac to put an end to this.
There was a meeting of everyone in her area, where my employer brought in a psychologist to discuss the issues. Like the some of the people quoted in the story, the biggest question was "Which bathroom?"
This person has unbelievable courage, since we are a pretty provincial and conservative workforce. posted by fixedgear at 1:57 PM on March 7, 2005
A number of commenters have mentioned having (sometimes several) trans-gendered friends. At what point in getting to know trans people do they reveal they are trans?
For the trans commenting here, when do you let new acquaintances know? posted by orthogonality at 1:58 PM on March 7, 2005
Delmoi - you don't understand how much concept of a gender two year old has because you are not transsexual. If you read on the subject, you also get a much clear picture of gender differences you would never suspect existed in everyone's head.
Isn't it at least possible that they exist to greater and lesser degrees in different people's heads? If I were male, I really don't think I'd care, at least not enough to have surgery. I think being male would be pretty cool. I'm fine being female, but I don't feel like it's utterly central to my personality, in a way that would make me feel "wrong" if I'd been born with a different set of chromosomes. Maybe some people have a deeper sense of internal gender than others? (FWIW, I've never been particularly interested in "traditionally" girly things, never played with dolls, don't usually wear make-up, and during my adolescence the only "pink" I liked was pink floyd.)
Anyway, glad that this is being handled intelligently; just hope that the recognition of cross gender-identity being a legitimate problem does not translate into an assumption that everyone must have a strong gender identity. I think some of us are a little bit androgynous on the inside. posted by mdn at 2:09 PM on March 7, 2005
I'm wondering how one pronounces "hir" so as not to sound like one is saying "her". posted by goatdog at 2:09 PM on March 7, 2005
Citing Wikipedia can be useful, but referring to it as an authority on anything other than the ideological biases of its contributors (laughably called "editors" by Wikipedia ) is an unjustified leap of faith.
Oh, bull hockey. Every Wikipedia entry I've read that's about an area in which I can call myself an expert has always struck me as accurate and mostly unbiased. Wikipedia has earned the faith people put into it.
And its entry on the matter strikes me a pretty lucid and unbiased. posted by eustacescrubb at 2:10 PM on March 7, 2005
At what point in getting to know trans people do they reveal they are trans?
This nettles me a bit, because it seems to me that your question insinuates that a trans-gendered person must, at some point, reveal this particular piece of their history.
I liken it to my marriage status: divorced. It's like asking me "At what point in getting to know someone do you tell them you are divorced?"
Sure, I may tell them (if it comes up in conversation) that I was once married, but it's not something I feel they have to know about me in order to "get to know me". posted by Specklet at 2:14 PM on March 7, 2005
If we got over our obsession with gender, it might solve a lot of problems for a lot of people. If we weren't so stuck on rigidly defined binary male/female gender roles wouldn't that pretty much make issues re: sexual identity moot? And sexism? And we wouldn't have to shame kinds for wanting the wrong kind of toys or wearing the wrong colour. And maybe it would reduce the pressure to become a mom or like certain activities or whatever.
It strikes me as very weird that we put up these 'immoveable' boundaries and tolerate (even encourage) segregation based on this arbitrary thing. Why do we continue to have segregation re: gender when we don't tolerate segregation re: race?
I don't forsee this as an attainable goal in my lifetime, but long term, maybe it's ultimately the answer for queerfolk.
I'm trying to raise my child in an environment that recognizes that gender and sexuality are fluid. But the outside pressures are enormous. The first question everyone asked when my kid was born: "Boy or girl?" And gifts? pink clothes with frills on them, kitchen sets, dolls. Based on that, anybody wanna guess what my kid's private parts consist of? I try and balance that by filling my home also with denim, trucks, bugs, tools, whatever seems to appeal to her. Yet I'd probably have a harder time (but still make the effort) if my child had been born with a penis instead of a vagina. It bothers me that I'm still that .. close-minded.*
*See, even our language itself makes adrongyny nearly impossible. I TRIED to remove gender-specific language from that last paragraph, but it isn't long before it sounds ridiculous.
Plus it's challenging for myself because I identify myself strongly with my life-experience as a woman. And at this point I do believe that male people and female people have different experiences, but most of it is socially constructed. Anyone born XY will not experience my hormonal cycles, the monthly bleeding, giving birth - but then there are many born XX that also do not experience these things. That doesn't reduce their personhood, and it's a small (albeit significant to me) part of my personhood.
I know there's not a lot of clarity in these mumblings of mine, but can anyone understand what I'm driving at?
To those of you that are transgendered, and to other concerned parents, what can we do to reduce the indoctrination of our kids? How can we create a more positive inclusive environment for our children (and everyone else's) no matter their gender / sexual identity? posted by raedyn at 2:14 PM on March 7, 2005
While in college, i worked at a vegetarian restaurant staffed mostly with the hippy/punks you'd expect. Several of my co-workers were assigned females that were considering a "FTM" transition(both apparently went through with it.)
After interacting with them on a daily basis for a year or so, i could understand that they identified themselves other than "female", because i too identified them as other than "female."
Regarding queer culture - i lived in a quasi-anarchist community in Asheville, a southern queer culture stronghold. Rather than having different "identifiers"(i.e. transgender, assigned female, etc.) people just used queer as a catch-all. It simplified the issue, and prevented some uncertainties in how to address a specific person.
In my college town, a queer that was/is undergoing a MTF transition decide to run for an elected office...one of the most inspirational and brave people i have ever met. posted by schyler523 at 2:15 PM on March 7, 2005
grapefruitmoon: To me "assigned male" is much more precise - it means that the gender assigned to this person at birth is male. Nothing ambiguous there.
But to me "assigned male" implies a choice was made of two equally apparent choices IE: someone who at birth had both sets of equipment. Otherwise one would just say male or female and leave off the adjective.
On preview what gurple said.
The people who are affected by this because they either are transgendered or are interested in some other way have a jargon that Mr Average hasn't. Not that this is anything unusual as almost every discipline and area of interest does. What is different is, for example, technical people rarely get _offended_ when some mispronounces SQL or calls Windows Office. Anytime there is a sub group that feels oppressed or discriminated against by a word things tend to get blown out of proportion. Even on relatively civil MeFi. One only has to think back to the "Drama Queen" incident for proof.
PS: I love how MeFi's spell check suggests Mafia for MeFi. posted by Mitheral at 2:16 PM on March 7, 2005
At what point in getting to know trans people do they reveal they are trans?
One FTM friend of mine often doesn't seem to have mentioned his past to people, and sometimes when I meet newer friends and they ask when we met, he starts looking a little nervous that I might mention that his gender was different when we met. He is 100% guy now, though. I was kind of sad when he began transitioning, because he was a hot dyke, but she's just gone. I can hardly remember what he was like as a female, so it doesn't occur to me to mention!
Other trannies I know are more upfront about it, but I think it depends on a few factors: do they identify with the trans-community in a big way, or would they rather just get married and live a normal life with their new sex? How well do they 'pass'? And how open are they in general about personal details? posted by mdn at 2:18 PM on March 7, 2005
ArmyofKittens and adzuki -- thanks for the answers.
grapefruitmoon, when you speak of the variations of sex chromosomal aneuploidies, I think you are making it a bit more complicated than it is. The appearance of a Y chromosome makes that person's genetic sex male.
XO = Turner Syndrome (female, sterile, distinctive phenotype)
XXY = Kleinfelter Syndrome (male, sterile, some feminization)
XXX = metafemale (variable effects, often minor)
XYY = tall male, many show no other effects.
Gender identification is complicated enough without making it completely inscrutable.
P.S. -- yes, that's metafemale posted by Cassford at 2:23 PM on March 7, 2005
Specklet writes"This nettles me a bit, because it seems to me that your question insinuates that a trans-gendered person must, at some point, reveal this particular piece of their history."
Well, commenters had mentioned having trans friends, and I was assuming that they knew because those friends had revealed it, and not because they'd secretly taken their friends' blood and had it tested for the presence of Y chromosomes. posted by orthogonality at 2:37 PM on March 7, 2005
"Most parents who called, however, simply wanted to know which bathroom the child uses, according to Littlefield, who said he told them the youngster uses a separate bathroom, and people say, 'Oh, wow, that's cool.""
At what point in getting to know trans people do they reveal they are trans?
The two transguys I know well, I met when they were still presenting themselves as female, so I've always known. Other than that, if someone is ambiguous-looking and I want to be sure to use the right pronoun, I'll just ask. I haven't known anyone to be bothered, because I always present it in a "I want to call you what you want to be called and treat you how you prefer to be treated" manner, while simultaneously not making it a big deal.
More generally, while I am entirely for people being masculine, feminine, or genderqueer as it suits them, I have to admit I won't be signing up for gender swapping anytime soon. Like mdn, I am not the girliest of girls (heels and makeup baffle me, frankly), but I do like being a girl. posted by dame at 2:40 PM on March 7, 2005
Thanks for your additions, grapefruitmoon--I'm usually the learner of this stuff rather than the explainer.
I'll try to clarify a little more.
(ran away for a bit and on preview, I'm comically behind. Hope this is still relevant)
The idea is that it is possible to entirely divorce chromosomal sex and the appearence and function of external and internal genitals from the way people enact their genders in public.
In my experience, there are two major ways this plays out.
In one, chromosomes and genitalia constitute sex, while behavior and self-idenditification constitute gender. The one has no bearing on the other. People who ascribe to this would be unlikely to object to being called biologically male or biologically female.
In the second, physical characteristics are still tied to gender, but do not determine it. Instead, an individual determines whether hir external features are male or female--this has more to do with how people relate to their bodies. Thus, a transwoman might refer to her clit (which most of us would see as a penis), and a transman might refer to his chest (which most of us would see as breasts), because that's how they think of their bodies. Or not. It's entirely individualized, and in radical queer circles there is a very strong feeling against making assumptions and generalizing and for self-definition.
anastasiav, you're right that it's hard to fit healthcare into that framework. There's actually a whole field of activism trying to make medical care more trans-friendly. A transman who has a uterus would go to a gynecologist; a transwoman with a prostate would go to a urologist. If they were lucky, they'd each be able to find doctors who could provide appropriate medical care and be respectful of their genders. posted by hippugeek at 2:47 PM on March 7, 2005
in an attempt to the apparently-offensive "biologically female", a term had been created that managed to convey virtually no information to the uninitiate.
Welcome to the Thunderdome trannyweb. I feel sorry for TS kids coming onto the net these days: if they're lucky, in their half-blind search for a bit of information to validate the horrible wrong feelings writhing inside, they'll find the pink pages; if they're unlucky they'll find a bunch of terrifying trans college kids doing their best to overcomplicate things in an attempt to sound like the 1970s feminists who hate them.
If I were explaining my past to someone I met on the street I'd say I was "born male". Nice and simple and politics-free.
How can we create a more positive inclusive environment for our children (and everyone else's) no matter their gender / sexual identity?
Unless you can control the world, then you can't. No matter how open and friendly you are with your kid, and no matter how much you let them choose their own toys and don't automatically shadow-box with the child just because he'll be swinging testes around some day, that kid is going to go out into the world and see almost everything put into two huge flashing sex boxes. You can always try to get hold of fairly gender-neutral material to show your sprog at home, like Spongebob or something, but that kid's also going to see Minnie and Mickey Mouse, and For Him adverts, and pictures of cars with sexy ladies on them. A trans kid will learn very quickly that the feelings inside them are dirty and wrong and should be kept very secret. That's not to say there isn't stuff out there that is passively or even occasionally actively trans-positive, but there's very little of it and it's usually not available to kids.
I know it probably doesn't seem that stark to most people, but I'm afraid I have to say that, for the most part, if you haven't been there (or if you haven't specifically looked for it), you won't know what it's like. A developing boy, searching for something that says, "It's okay: you can be a girl if you need to be," will find the world telling them very sternly to stay as they are, and to get a nice pretty wife sometime too.
I'm wondering how one pronounces "hir" so as not to sound like one is saying "her".
That's why I don't use genderfree pronouns. I mean "he", "she", "zie"? Why the voiced consonant? Are they trying to make our sentences fall flat on their faces? I've been waiting for someone to come up with a set that fits cleanly into the language without all the grace of an elephant on roller-skates.
For the trans commenting here, when do you let new acquaintances know?
In the real world? Never. If they find out then I don't lie about it, but people don't tend to find out. If I'm in all-queer company, then I feel more comfortable about my past and may discuss it or make jokes about it, but if there're people who'll be grossed out or just really interested then I keep quiet: outside of Metafilter, I'm not the answering-questions sort of tranny. Hell, the only reason I'm talking about it here is that my username is one I've abandoned everywhere else after the scary people got a little too interested in me. posted by ArmyOfKittens at 2:48 PM on March 7, 2005
I found Cassford last post so interesting I'm expanding it with this other link which explains
Sex determination in humans
1) The presence or absence of the Y chromosome determines sex
2) A gene on the Y chromosome called the SRY gene codes for the testis-determining factor
(a) It controls the production of maleness
(b) Works by inducing development of the medulla of the gonadal primordial, pairs of ridges on the embryonic kidneys
(c) XY individuals who lack the part of the Y chromosomes with this gene are females
(d) XX individuals who carry a tiny piece of the Y chromosome with this gene on an X chromosome are male (though sterile)
Among the anomalies it correlates XYY potentially to..delinquency ? What the hell ??
But there's also Polyfemales with a lot of XXXX and Trysomy. Truly a lot of potential sexes out there. posted by elpapacito at 2:56 PM on March 7, 2005
But to me "assigned male" implies a choice was made of two equally apparent choices IE: someone who at birth had both sets of equipment. Otherwise one would just say male or female and leave off the adjective.
I don't see that choice - it simply means that whoever was in charge of deciding for the infant looked at it and chose. If you saw male genitals, you'd likely assign the child as male, but that doesn't mean that they are solely male. posted by agregoli at 2:56 PM on March 7, 2005
Wait, so, pretend for a second that I'm just Regular Old Joe Red State and I don't have any exposure whatsoever to all the subtle nuances of gender/sex/sexual orientation nomenclature and I don't have any transgendered friends and haven't done any in-depth reading on the subject (save for this fascinating thread).
Now, my question is this:
For a Male to Female transsexual (for example), would the male, to begin with, be regarded as gay? I mean, that is to say, is there any sort of large number of men who undergo surgery to become females who are then sexually interested in females? And, if so, after the surgery, would they be considered "lesbians?" Or if they're involved with men, are the men "gay?"
I mean, I guess this is where the whole binary view of sexuality sort of falls apart, isn't it? But with all the different possibilities on the table (Assigned Male who Identifies as Female who is attracted to Men, Assigned Female who Identifies as Male who is attracted to Men, etc. ) it makes it a little overwhelming to the unindoctrinated.
I guess I just mean to say that this isn't going to be a subject that can ever been simply reduced for mass consumption, you know? People are loathe to read as it is (Grisham doesn't count), so I can't imagine many people taking the time to read long treatises or essays on the topic, and with our patience-less culture, I can't imagine people are interested in 15 minute explanations.
Up until recently I had no idea this world even really existed. I mean, I understood that some men became women and vice versa, but I certainly didn't understand (and still don't) the deeper gender/sexual implications. I'm not saying that all of this progressive gender stuff will always be niche, but I can't imagine it (it being the whole philosophical aspect) finding mainstream acceptance anytime soon.
schyler523 - I had a friend who also lived in a quasi-anarchist community in, I think, Asheville. Though it might've been Raleigh. posted by StopMakingSense at 3:14 PM on March 7, 2005
I'm wondering how one pronounces "hir" so as not to sound like one is saying "her".
"Heer." It still comes out like "her" sometimes if you're talking fast, which is why some people prefer "zir." But then "ze" sounds like "she" if you don't pay attention, so... imperfect.
In terms of trans friends coming out: It differs, but it's never been a big deal--no one has ever "come out" to me formally. I have several formerly-male friends who have started identifying as genderqueer over the last couple years. They all were into gender activism beforehand and transitioned fairly gradually, so it was no big shock. There are also a couple people who have been their current gender as long as I've known them, so I was introduced to them that way, and either realized right away that they were trans or had it dawn on me slowly. I'm at a college with a very visible queer and trans community, though, so I imagine it does vary in parts of the world with small communities and with individuals who have transitioned with hormones and/or surgery.
What is different is, for example, technical people rarely get _offended_ when some mispronounces SQL or calls Windows Office.
I see your point about inaccessible jargon, but to say that the words someone uses for computer applications are as important and personal to a techie as the words someone uses for a transperson's body are to that transperson is simply absurd. posted by hippugeek at 3:15 PM on March 7, 2005
A transman who has a uterus would go to a gynecologist; a transwoman with a prostate would go to a urologist.
Not to be too nitpicky (because the comment about health care is a valid one), but a transman will never have a uterus and a transwoman will never have a prostate. (Not yet, anyway; medical advancement may make that possible at a later date.) posted by Specklet at 3:15 PM on March 7, 2005
The infant-to-youth toy market is perhaps one of the most sexist institutions out there.
Riiiiight, we all live in one big social engineering experiment, right? ***rolls eyes***
In my experience of kids (as a father/uncle) and having been a kid myself, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. Some girls are into boys toys, some boys are into girls toys, but generally you can see tendencies and preferences of what kids are into that can be distinguished by gender (i.e. boys tend to like certain things, girls other things). And why should this be wrong? It's as OK for tendencies to occur (based on gender) as it is for individuals to like what they happen to like. Are they brainwashed into liking blue or pink? Some people would love to believe this to be true, but sorry - a lot of tendencies and likings are simply natural. posted by FieldingGoodney at 3:21 PM on March 7, 2005
This is such a refreshing thread. I know a couple of fabulous transgendered people, but not well enough that I feel I can/should ask questions like 'is trannie an affectionate or a derogatory term?'
I am curious when sexual identity forms. Even small toddlers show an awareness of gender, and many gay children want to reassign their sex, but there seems to be a core difference. I really wanted to be a girl, tried to dress like a girl and only played with girls until I began to like boys, like them a lot, sometime around grade four or five. This child's clarity is so different from what I went through.
My guess is that these parents are saving their son years of anguish and therapy. posted by gesamtkunstwerk at 3:22 PM on March 7, 2005
stopmakingsense: I guess I just mean to say that this isn't going to be a subject that can ever been simply reduced for mass consumption, you know?
I guess not. After all people for centuries believed the planet was flat and if you said to them "look, not only is the planet not flat, but it's orbiting around the sun and the moon is a satellite" they would probably have burned you alive !
Oh wait, they almost did with Galileo Galilei ! They guy just went to so much against the Scriptures the Church wasn't simply ready to accept such an Enlightement.
So I guess it will take some time but I have hope everybody can understand ; what I'd rather see disappear or at worst be challenged is hatemongering, jingoism, sexisms and other form of forced bi-polarizations whose only purpose seems to give all the possible blames (and even the impossible ones) to "the other" side..whatever is "the other" or "the different" posted by elpapacito at 3:28 PM on March 7, 2005
That's why I don't use genderfree pronouns. I mean "he", "she", "zie"? Why the voiced consonant?
It's okay to pronounce "ze" with a very soft z sound, which lets your tongue get around it quite nicely. (I've occasionally heard its etymology described as deriving from an attempt to pronounce "s/he" as a single word. I think I even heard Riki Anne Wilchins say that once, which doesn't make sense given her politics so maybe I'm making the whole thing up.)
Specklet: Not to be too nitpicky[...]but a transman will never have a uterus and a transwoman will never have a prostate.
Are you sure you don't have your terms reversed? posted by nobody at 3:32 PM on March 7, 2005
a transman will never have a uterus and a transwoman will never have a prostate.
You're got it backwards, Specklet: a transman is ftm, a transwoman is mtf. posted by hippugeek at 3:34 PM on March 7, 2005
The infant-to-youth toy market is perhaps one of the most sexist institutions out there.
Riiiiight, we all live in one big social engineering experiment, right? ***rolls eyes***
Riiiight, babies definitely have a preference whether their clothing is pink or blue depending on their gender. ***rolls eyes*** posted by agregoli at 3:34 PM on March 7, 2005
Er, yeah. Oops. Reverse terms, comment stands. posted by Specklet at 3:36 PM on March 7, 2005
Though you can also be a "man with a history of transsexuality" who now id's as male and has a prostate but is also trans in some fashion...so it's complicated. In general, though, people will go to the doctor who can best treat their parts. posted by hippugeek at 3:38 PM on March 7, 2005
Riiiiight, we all live in one big social engineering experiment, right? ***rolls eyes***
Are you actually incapable of envisioning the concept of "institutional bias"? posted by sonofsamiam at 3:40 PM on March 7, 2005
nobody: I'm less than keen on the "soft z" form of "ze" because there aren't that many words in common use that start similarly; it stands out like a sore thumb. I'd genuinely love to see a set of pronouns that fit nicely into the language (either as part of a he/she/??? logical sound progession or as a whole new set of sounds -- but not "ey" and "eir" and their deformed friends, or I may be forced to die horribly) but I've yet to see one. Every set so far seems designed either to assimilate so closely that they can't be distinguished from the old ones, or to stand out so much that everyone will have to be aware that one is an enlightened individual and one does not consider another's gender to be worth commenting on.
I tried to make up my own once, but they were crap.
(This is the best trans thread Metafilter's had. Everyone is awesome!) posted by ArmyOfKittens at 3:45 PM on March 7, 2005
...who now id's as male and has a prostate but is also trans in some fashion...
I stand corrected! posted by Specklet at 3:52 PM on March 7, 2005
stopmakingsense : You're right, the sexuality "binary" does break down when you're talking about transgendered folk, but if you think about it, the gay-straight binary doesn't work to begin with. There are millions of people who are not trans in anyway who don't identify as "straight" or "gay" - "bisexual" is the most common variant, but those who don't want to limit gender to either/or often prefer the label "pansexual" (I personally can't wrap my head around that one, it still sounds to me like you prefer having sex with pots).
Of my trans friends, one is pansexual (and not very discriminating. I would say "having a pulse" is more important to him than the other person's gender), and one is a lesbian.
That is, she is MTF and prefers dating women. Many transfolk are gay/lesbian, which places them in an interesting place in the queer community. Is a lesbian who dates an MTF still a lesbian if her partner still has a penis? Official answer is yes, gender identity is more important within the queer community than assigned sex. If you're a lesbian who dates MTF women, you're still gay as the day is long.
Cassford : I don't think that I'm making this any more complicated than it is. It's hugely complicated. I studied gender development in college and there is much more to it, both pyschologically and biologically than most people think of at first. On surface, it's easy to limit biological discussion to XY/XX chromosomes, but in fact, intersex individuals play an important part in gender studies and intersex variations happen more often than one would think. For someone to discover that they have a chromosomal or hormonal anomaly in their late twenties and that this makes their previously incongruent gender identity suddenly "make sense" is not unheard of. True , it's not common, but frankly, neither is transgenderism, which is the topic of discussion.
I guess I've just studied this too long to limit my thoughts to a surface discussion. posted by grapefruitmoon at 3:54 PM on March 7, 2005
XXX = metafemale (variable effects, often minor)
XYY = tall male, many show no other effects.
As a minor linguistic aside, while I was learning about gender assignment in a psychology class years ago, the contrast between "metafemale" (XXX) and "supermale" (XYY) really stuck in my mind. Why 'meta-' vs 'super-'?
'SuperFilter' does sound more masculine to my ear than 'MetaFilter'. In a vaguely-Engrish teenage computer geek sort of way. posted by DaShiv at 3:54 PM on March 7, 2005
AoK, thanks very much for your explanation and perspective. I'm acquainted with only one transgendered person (that I know of). I was introduced to her a few years ago by a mutual friend, and after we worked together on a couple of projects, I suddenly realized from some innocuous information she shared about her home state that we had first met the previous summer at a dinner party with that mutual friend. At that dinner, she was still dressing and presenting herself in public as male.
My first impulse was to blurt out "Oh, right -- that's where I know you from!" because I felt genuinely bad that I had been treating her as someone I had just met instead of as an old acquaintance. (Well, that turned out not to be an issue because it took her a few moments to remember that she had met me before, too.) I was a completely sincere but graceless dork about it, too, as I apologized for not making the connection, then apologized for making an issue of her transition. But she's very smart and eminently sensible and she did a good job of gently telling me there was no need to beat myself up over it. posted by maudlin at 3:55 PM on March 7, 2005
(and not very discriminating. I would say "having a pulse" is more important to him than the other person's gender)
At last, something we can ALL agree on!
Apologies to the necrophilists in the crowd.... :) posted by gurple at 4:11 PM on March 7, 2005
FieldingGoodney, you're not the first person I've heard claim that preference for pink or blue is genetically encoded. Are you serious? Can you argue, in good faith, that there is something inherent about pink that makes it biologically a "girl color?" What could possibly be the biological advantage to that? And why doesn't it cross cultural boundaries?
I'm amazed that I've heard multiple people use this as an example of nature over nurture, when it seems to be an obvious counterexample. posted by LittleMissCranky at 4:22 PM on March 7, 2005
For a Male to Female transsexual (for example), would the male, to begin with, be regarded as gay?
We're talking about the difference between sexuality & gender here. For instance, the person in this story is pre-sexual, and could turn out to be gay, straight, or anything in between upon the onset of puberty. So, to answer your question, no. A "woman trapped in a man's body" who is attracted to men is attracted to the opposite gender, and therefore heterosexual. Gender is about who we are, and sexuality/sexual orientation is about who we are attracted to.
I mean, that is to say, is there any sort of large number of men who undergo surgery to become females who are then sexually interested in females?
I certainly wouldn't call it a large number, but it happens. I know one person who went Male-to-female, while remaining married to her (female) wife. So her gender is female now, but her sexuality could be said to be bisexual, as her sexual preference is not primarily determined by her partner's gender. The same can be said of her wife. this is, BTW, the only legally-married same-sex couple I know.
I imagine it's as common for a transgendered person to be attracted to the "same" sex as in the general population; that is, somewhere around the same frequency as left-handedness.
On preview: much of what grapefruitmoon says too. posted by obloquy at 4:35 PM on March 7, 2005
Late joiner here... Just wanted to point out something about Cassford's post. Saying that the presence of a Y chromosome makes someone male is, well, oversimplifying things. There are a whole lot of chromosomal possibilities -- why do they have to ultimately be reduced to a binary pair? That's like saying "There are millions of colors in the spectrum, but the only colors that really matter are red, blue and yellow."
Furthermore, it's very rare that people actually know their own chromosomes. How many people on this thread actually know what chromosomes they have? I certainly don't know what mine are. Do you? If chromosomes are the final arbiter of who is male and who is female (and there are only these two possibilties), then, for example, we had better start requiring people to take chromosome tests before they go into bathrooms. Lots of people get married without ever having their chromosomes actually checked.
It's simplifying things too much to say that chromosomes are the only thing that matters in determining sex. Reality just isn't that simple.
Also, for any in the audience, I'm an MTF TS. Feel free to ask any (respectful) questions. I may, of course, refuse to answer... :) posted by jiawen at 4:41 PM on March 7, 2005
FieldingGoodney, you're not the first person I've heard claim that preference for pink or blue is genetically encoded. Are you serious? Can you argue, in good faith, that there is something inherent about pink that makes it biologically a "girl color?" What could possibly be the biological advantage to that? And why doesn't it cross cultural boundaries?
LMC, my blue/pink observation was arbitrary - it was meant to be flippant, but it's a bad example for this discussion. However, what about toys? Sports? Careers? Here's an interesting article on careers and how gender influences the choices we make. Excerpt:-
Harvard President Larry Summers had had the temerity to suggest that the continuing preponderance of men in scientific fields, despite decades of vigorous gender equity initiatives in schools and universities, may reflect something other than sexism. It might reflect the fact, Summers hypothesized, that the male population has a higher percentage of mathematical geniuses (and mathematical dolts) than the female population, in which mathematical reasoning skills may be more evenly distributed.
If you take a pool of 100 boys and girls (50/50), and WITHOUT co-ercing them one way or the other, you will spot tendencies/preferences based on gender. I'm not saying they will all robotically adhere to some gender blue-print of behaviour - simply that there will be groupings of behaviour based on gender. And as I asked before, what on earth should be wrong with that? I think people are confusing gender-based tendencies with some evil conspiracy. Not everything comes down to sexism. To suggest our behaviour isn't in any way influenced by nature is to say that even our sexual preferences are somehow 100% dictated by our upbringing.
Are you actually incapable of envisioning the concept of "institutional bias"?
sonofsamiam, what manifests itself as "institutional bias" in terms of a young child and his or her day-to-day life? What do you mean by institutional? Day-care centres? Schools? And "bias"? This suggests the institutions have a preference to one gender over the other. How does that manifest itself? posted by FieldingGoodney at 5:06 PM on March 7, 2005
Lots of great comments on this long thread. For more about how sex works biologically and the cultural implications of that (and vice versa), see the amazing book
She discusses chromosomes, hormones, genitals, and politics in a really insightful way that recognizes the importance of the ambiguities. posted by mai at 5:11 PM on March 7, 2005
My ex was TG. Specifically, female-to-male. I can't tell you how much I wish she could have gone to a school where this kind of tolerance was possible. It would have been better than winning the lottery. posted by Clay201 at 5:18 PM on March 7, 2005
>People are loathe to read as it is (Grisham doesn't count), so I can't imagine many people taking the time to read long treatises or essays on the topic
Except that Middlesex was on the best seller list for a long time, so someone's reading about it. posted by occhiblu at 5:34 PM on March 7, 2005
If you take a pool of 100 boys and girls (50/50), and WITHOUT co-ercing them one way or the other, you will spot tendencies/preferences based on gender.
The problem with that is that it's 100% impossible to test. Unless you're going to remove children from society at birth and raise them in a hermetically sealed environment for all of their formative years, you are not going to be able to separate biological preferences from societal pressure.
Linking to that article is not cutting any ice as far as your reasoned opposition to nurtured-based gender, by the way. The fact that you seem to think of that particular article as an expository piece rather than a polemic would strongly suggest to me that you're much more interested in clinging to an idea that makes you comfortable than you are in finding any real truth. posted by LittleMissCranky at 5:43 PM on March 7, 2005
1,100 kids in a grammar school? That's appalling. It's like a factory. posted by Eideteker at 6:05 PM on March 7, 2005
For a Male to Female transsexual (for example), would the male, to begin with, be regarded as gay?
There is a school of thought that places sexuality as very fluid, suggesting that pansexualism is perhaps the norm - but that certain people find certain traits attractive, some of which belong to only one gender. It suggests that sexuality often has nothing to do with gender and that saying "this girl likes a boy" is entirely a social construct.
I'm away from my own computer and can't slap down the handful links about the above theory that I have bookmarked. Damn. posted by honeydew at 6:12 PM on March 7, 2005
In response to your question, StopMakingSense, I don't think one can necessarily assume transfolk are inherently more or less "gay" than those whose gender identity aligns neatly with their equiptment. As obloquy has said, this is a difference of sexuality and gender. The fact that as a society we see these as inextricably is linked is part of why transfolk align with the queer community on the whole. Loving someone of the "same" gender is seen as stepping outside of the traditional gender roles, something transfolk have to grapple with daily.
Personally, I feel that gender and sexual orientation are connected, but separate parts of selfhood. In high school, I had a very dear transgendered friend who identified as a heterosexual male. The fact that he was born into a body with ovaries doesn't necessarily make him a lesbian if he dated women, because he felt he related to them as a man. Similarly, my dating a male in no way confines me to being heterosexual simply because I identify (physically/mentally) as female. And there are plenty of other varieties: a FTM who is attracted to men for example. Such an individual may or may not identify as gay, what we might want to classify them as is sort of irrelevant.
How would you classify yourself, in such terms as to clearly distinguish yourself from any other individual, much less with regards to simply your gender and sexuality? I'm of the mind that pure heterosexuality is just as rare as pure homosexuality, and that most people exist at some point along a spectrum that is fluid and changing in time and with whom we interact. posted by nelleish at 6:13 PM on March 7, 2005
Linking to that article is not cutting any ice as far as your reasoned opposition to nurtured-based gender, by the way.
LMC, I am not actually opposing the idea that our environment has an influence in shaping our tendencies and preferences to things (objects/people/careers/sports etc) - I'm simply saying that nature is far more of an influence (in my opinion). As I say, this idea isn't comfortable with many people because often difference is associated with inequality - it's far more desirable to think we are all blank slates* (therefore "equal") and so rather than alter the person, we just need to alter society.
By the way, the article I linked to actually had some facts in there - it wasn't 100% opinion - such as the fact that gender equity initiatives are failing because people's choices aren't reflecting a 50/50 split across genders. I wouldn't call this "inequal" - I would call it simply a difference of tendency, based on gender. Yet again I ask, what is wrong with that? Surely as individuals we are free to choose, and if our choice happens to be similar in grouping to the gender we belong to (or not!), who cares? Why does that matter? To me, it's simply an observation, and not a rule to live by.
Neil Gaiman's Sandman comic cleverly touched on the issue. An MTF was treated with great respect but was unable to perform a ritual to the moon (it's a fantasy comic); another character explained that the gods only care about chromosomes. posted by NickDouglas at 7:16 PM on March 7, 2005
Agh, sorry -- the moon is traditionally a tool for feminine magic. That's why gender mattered for a moon ritual. Also, the storyline involved gender issues at many levels, and this character was one aspect of the theme. posted by NickDouglas at 7:17 PM on March 7, 2005
FieldingGoodney, you do realize that you're just resurrecting the same argument MeFi's had at least four times - every time the Summers debacle and its fallout have come up? A fair number of people agree with you, and think that most societal discrimination has been ameliorated, and that current differences in gender ratios in math and science are the result of gender-related differences in intellect. These people hold up various studies claiming men have better spacial intelligence, women have better verbal intelligence, etc. On the other hand, a fair number of people disagree, and believe that while institutional discrimination is certainly less rampant than it used to be, notions of "what women are able to do" still shape the choices of students and employers, and are still imprinted into the minds of children [not through statements but through actions, through the way boys and girls are treated differently as kids and through the ways adults behave differently.] These people in general think that due to the amount of influence societal mores have on people, it's still near-impossible to fairly measure innate differences between men and women. They tend to bring up studies such as those that demonstrate that identical papers are considered "better" if the author's name is male, or studies which show that girls' spacial intelligence improves markedly when they are taught to play sports. These people do not rule out the possibility of innate gender differences, but they think that it's still too hard to separate nature from nurture.
Unfortunately, neither Pinker nor the rather fact-thin article you linked to truly settle the matter; the fact is, one can argue either side of the discussion and back up one's argument with scads of peer-reviewed research. Since we cannot take 100 boys and girls and - this is the key - raise them in some isolated lab, away from the influence of society, it's pretty damn hard to make a case for current male-female statistical differences being primarily nature. The studies that prove the existance of discrimination and bias, however, do tend to throw some doubt on the impartiality and accuracy of studies that claim to measure intellectual differences that result from gender.
As for societal bias - again, check out some of the links in the Summers threads. I need to get back to work, or I'd find them myself... several linked by Ethereal Bligh and josh were, I think, the most useful. Several studies very clearly indicate outright [although probably subconscious] discrimination against women attempting to publish papers or apply for jobs/tenure/etc. in scientific fields. This bias [yes, actual institutional bias] doesn't spring out of nowhere; from the moment of birth, children are assigned a gender role. By the time they get to school, they've already had years of exposure to notions of what boys and girls ought to be interested in or act like. There are studies that show that boys are given more classroom attention, are called on more frequently, are encouraged to go into math or science while girls are told that they should learn to write well and be "well-rounded." And so on; I suspect I can rehash the Summers threads at length and it won't make much of a difference.
On a completely anecdotal [but slightly more on-topic] note: a MtF transexual I know commented that she thought that discrimination against women was exaggerated... until she started going out in public as a woman. posted by ubersturm at 7:42 PM on March 7, 2005
Nova did a show on intersexuality a few year back. Their website has an excerpt from Sexing the Body by Fausto-Sterling, if you're looking to read something online, and also has quite a few stories from transsexuals in the share your stories section. posted by carmen at 7:43 PM on March 7, 2005
I have yet to read all the replies here (shame on me!) but I've already written E-mailed the superintendent a glowing missive of support and praise. I suggest everyone else do the same. Flood his in-box with love! He can print them all out and dump them on the heads of people who think this kid needs to wear a skirt just because he doesn't have a penis. posted by Faint of Butt at 7:51 PM on March 7, 2005
Wow, what a lucky kid to have such great parents and be in a school that is that accomodating. If only all kids could be surrounded by that much love and compassion. That's beautiful and wonderful and gives me hope about the humans after all. posted by dejah420 at 8:24 PM on March 7, 2005
For a Male to Female transsexual (for example), would the male, to begin with, be regarded as gay? I mean, that is to say, is there any sort of large number of men who undergo surgery to become females who are then sexually interested in females? And, if so, after the surgery, would they be considered "lesbians?" Or if they're involved with men, are the men "gay?&quo
Subscribe
(and a couple of other gender-ambiguity threads, for those who like 'em)
posted by soyjoy at 10:48 AM on March 7, 2005