Socialize

FacebookTwitterRSS

What Next?

Last night I wrote a friend a rant that was full of expletives and frustration. Most of my disgruntlement was from the Wednesday’s passage in the House of Representatives of the sexual orientation only Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

It was a historic day for gays and lesbians (if only symbolically), but it was a setback for the GLBT movement as a whole. It will now be much harder to pass a gender inclusive bill, now that one has passed with sexual orientation only.

Another worrisome aspect of this vote has been the reaction from some parts of the transgender community. Since passage of ENDA, I’ve heard various transgender people call for the protesting of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). I have to wonder, is that really the wisest move? What does that accomplish? How does that move transgender people closer to inclusion in the 2009 bill?

I don’t like the duplicitous nature of the HRC over the past two months. Dealing with them on any level feels like a Charlie Brown nightmare. But an honest assessment of the facts shows that HRC is the largest GLBT political machine there is. Do we create or elevate another organization to that level in a years time? I don’t think that could be done in ten years time, much less one. The HRC owns the keys to access our politicians. How do we fight for an inclusive ENDA in 2009 and fight the HRC at the same time?

Wednesday did have it’s bright spots. When was the last time you saw ANY US Representative stand up on the floor of the House and talk about transgender people in a positive light? When was the last time any politician stood up for us, and voted against legislation that didn’t include us? Never. In that light, the debate over ENDA was positive and historic. A big thanks needs to go out to Rep. Yvette Clarke (D-N.Y.), Rush Holt (D-N.J.), Michael Michaud (D-Maine), Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.), Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.) and and Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) for standing strong with us.

I’m not sure what needs to be done next. But I do know that kicking sand on HRC isn’t going to move us any closer to an ENDA with gender identity inclusion. Almost everyone I’ve talked to in the GLB movement wants gender identity included in the 2009 ENDA. Initially, It seems like the most rational thing to do is to support the folks of United ENDA. Strengthening the groups within United ENDA by having more transgender participation and dollars would seem like a safe bet, and a good start.

No related content found.

avatarTransadvocate contributor: Marti Abernathey  (1924 Posts)

Marti Abernathey is Transadvocate.com's blog editor. She's also a podcaster, activist, and radiologic technologist in Madison, Wisconsin. She's been a part of various internet radio ventures such as TSR Live!, The T-Party, and The Radical Trannies, to name a few. As an advocate she's previously been involved with the Indiana Transgender Rights Advocacy Alliance, Rock Indiana Campaign for Equality, and the National Transgender Advocacy Coalition. She's taken vital roles as a grass roots community organizer in The Indianapolis Tax Day Protest (2003), The Indy Pride HRC Protest (2004), Transgender Day of Remembrance (2004), Indiana's Witch Hunt (2005), and the Rally At The Statehouse (the largest ever GLBT protest in Indiana - 3/2005). She was a delegate from Indiana to the Democratic National Convention and a member of Barack Obama's LGBT Steering and Policy Committee.


← Older Comments
  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com/ Lisa Harney

    Hmm, no, that’s not the entirety of what I want, and I’ve talked about other stuff elsewhere, such as an equivalent of the Gender Recognition Act, which would allow people to change their sex on ID and birth certificates without surgery at all, as well as getting rid of the “no match” social security notices that out trans people that are a violation of privacy.

    There’s also the whole “getting employment is not as easy as it should be” thing, plus the high rate of violence against trans people thing, plus lots of other things.

    I mentioned trying to make it easier to get surgery because Susan was saying that she wanted activism aimed at those who’ve already had surgery, but didn’t seem much concerned with getting that surgery (beyond, I guess, scrimping, saving, and living like a fucking pauper), which could only really happen if insurance were to actually cover it – but that doesn’t help those who don’t have jobs, and I’d rather see universal health care because health care issues are so much bigger than who gets to have a flat chest or a neovagina.

  • Dalmax

    Stuck in the middle of this debate

    I know I am coming into this conversation late, but I would like to add my 2 cents worth here. On a variety of topics that have been posted.

    Leigh and Susan are, in part, elitists. I think that anytime you try and establish a heirarchy you risk creating a new caste system which only further divides an already fractures group of people with barely a common agenda anymore.

    HOWEVER……….

    They are right on target about the decline of a structured path for transitioning, and the availability of the ‘instant gratification’ school of transition. It is the very people who greenlight themselves thru the process and THEN come to the realization that there are some ‘residual’ issues to address that create this line of controvery, not Leigh and Susan. By the very nature of their latent emotional instability they (further) illustrate why the HBSoC were drawn up in the first place.

    AS A (PRESENTLY) NON-OP…………

  • Dalmax

    Stuck in the middle of this debate

    I know I am coming into this conversation late, but I would like to add my 2 cents worth here. On a variety of topics that have been posted.

    Leigh and Susan are, in part, elitists. I think that anytime you try and establish a heirarchy you risk creating a new caste system which only further divides an already fractures group of people with barely a common agenda anymore.

    HOWEVER……….

    They are right on target about the decline of a structured path for transitioning, and the availability of the ‘instant gratification’ school of transition. It is the very people who greenlight themselves thru the process and THEN come to the realization that there are some ‘residual’ issues to address that create this line of controvery, not Leigh and Susan. By the very nature of their latent emotional instability they (further) illustrate why the HBSoC were drawn up in the first place.

    AS A (PRESENTLY) NON-OP…………

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com/ Val

    > It is the very people who greenlight themselves thru the process and THEN come to the realization that there are some ‘residual’ issues to address that create this line of controvery

    Certainly. But all this demonstrates is that, as information becomes more available, and more people are less comfortable with what is sometimes perceived as a somewhat patriarchal attitude embedded in the SOC, it’s more important than ever that people seeking transition *take responsibility* for their goals and actions. The more people there are, the more mistakes will be made, not by the system necessarily but by those people. But the proper response to that is not to pull the wagons into a circle and start tossing rocks at the supposed outliers.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com Val

    > It is the very people who greenlight themselves thru the process and THEN come to the realization that there are some ‘residual’ issues to address that create this line of controvery

    Certainly. But all this demonstrates is that, as information becomes more available, and more people are less comfortable with what is sometimes perceived as a somewhat patriarchal attitude embedded in the SOC, it’s more important than ever that people seeking transition *take responsibility* for their goals and actions. The more people there are, the more mistakes will be made, not by the system necessarily but by those people. But the proper response to that is not to pull the wagons into a circle and start tossing rocks at the supposed outliers.

  • Dalmax

    To continue………..

    As A (Presently) Non-op I would love to have surgery but, due to other more compelling issues, it is currently totally out of the question. It hasn’t, however, stopped me from developing a fairly full and well-rounded life that isn’t centered, or dependent, on the trans-community. I have been full-time for almost 12 years, have been under a doctor’s care the entire time and was pretty much jettisoned by my therapist as not having enough relevant issues of ANY sort to keep coming back.

    STILL………..

    I am offended that so many think they can just jump in, find a ‘friendly’ therapist who will nudge them along and then just assume that whatever they elect to do is fine with the rest of the human race.

    I need to say that there are many people who think that transition is a matter of buying a few skirts, some makeup and 5″ heels and parading around. So many are all form and no substance; forgetting the huge impact of re-socialization and the effects your conduct has on people around you.

    SO while I don’t enjoy the line drawn by Leigh and/or Susan, I understand why they might feel the way they do. To a lesser degree, *I* object to the people who come merrily down the lane shouting their transness and presuming that if they say it is so, it is, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

    Let’s not completely ignore the logic behind the HBSoC. They aren’t rules, but they are some pretty logical guidelines that eliminate alot of the self-destructive, self-delusional conduct that vilifies so many of us in the eyes of the majority of the inhabitants of the planet.

  • Dalmax

    To continue………..

    As A (Presently) Non-op I would love to have surgery but, due to other more compelling issues, it is currently totally out of the question. It hasn’t, however, stopped me from developing a fairly full and well-rounded life that isn’t centered, or dependent, on the trans-community. I have been full-time for almost 12 years, have been under a doctor’s care the entire time and was pretty much jettisoned by my therapist as not having enough relevant issues of ANY sort to keep coming back.

    STILL………..

    I am offended that so many think they can just jump in, find a ‘friendly’ therapist who will nudge them along and then just assume that whatever they elect to do is fine with the rest of the human race.

    I need to say that there are many people who think that transition is a matter of buying a few skirts, some makeup and 5″ heels and parading around. So many are all form and no substance; forgetting the huge impact of re-socialization and the effects your conduct has on people around you.

    SO while I don’t enjoy the line drawn by Leigh and/or Susan, I understand why they might feel the way they do. To a lesser degree, *I* object to the people who come merrily down the lane shouting their transness and presuming that if they say it is so, it is, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

    Let’s not completely ignore the logic behind the HBSoC. They aren’t rules, but they are some pretty logical guidelines that eliminate alot of the self-destructive, self-delusional conduct that vilifies so many of us in the eyes of the majority of the inhabitants of the planet.

  • Dalmax

    To continue………..

    As A (Presently) Non-op I would love to have surgery but, due to other more compelling issues, it is currently totally out of the question. It hasn’t, however, stopped me from developing a fairly full and well-rounded life that isn’t centered, or dependent, on the trans-community. I have been full-time for almost 12 years, have been under a doctor’s care the entire time and was pretty much jettisoned by my therapist as not having enough relevant issues of ANY sort to keep coming back.

    STILL………..

    I am offended that so many think they can just jump in, find a ‘friendly’ therapist who will nudge them along and then just assume that whatever they elect to do is fine with the rest of the human race.

    I need to say that there are many people who think that transition is a matter of buying a few skirts, some makeup and 5″ heels and parading around. So many are all form and no substance; forgetting the huge impact of re-socialization and the effects your conduct has on people around you.

    SO while I don’t enjoy the line drawn by Leigh and/or Susan, I understand why they might feel the way they do. To a lesser degree, *I* object to the people who come merrily down the lane shouting their transness and presuming that if they say it is so, it is, regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

    Let’s not completely ignore the logic behind the HBSoC. They aren’t rules, but they are some pretty logical guidelines that eliminate alot of the self-destructive, self-delusional conduct that vilifies so many of us in the eyes of the majority of the inhabitants of the planet.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com/ Val

    You do realize, of course, that according to transsexual fundamentalism, you are “just” a fulltime crossdresser?

    Your “offense” at those you generalize carries no more inherent authority that does a fundamentalist’s perception of your own choices.

    Who are these shameless wannabes? Where are the parades of fake trannies, trotting “merrily down the lane shouting their transness,” and what evidence do you rely on to make such distinctions?

    And where on earth does anyone get the idea that, as a percentage, we are any more overrun than we ever were, with “self-destructive, self-delusional conduct?” As if transwomen in the seventies and eighties (ah, those halcyon days, the survivors of which love to sit around and grumble about “kids these days”) were any less prone to outright batshit nuttiness? And as if most of the transwomen in view these days quite frankly have their shit pretty much together and get along in the world quite nicely, thank you very much, regardless of their identity politics?

    (Hey, didn’t Renee Richards go through “the program”?)

    This whole pointless argument is almost exactly like the interminable “gay marriage” debate… stop worrying about how anyone else’s behavior or experience clutters up your own, and concentrate on living your life as best you can.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com/ Val

    You do realize, of course, that according to transsexual fundamentalism, you are “just” a fulltime crossdresser?

    Your “offense” at those you generalize carries no more inherent authority that does a fundamentalist’s perception of your own choices.

    Who are these shameless wannabes? Where are the parades of fake trannies, trotting “merrily down the lane shouting their transness,” and what evidence do you rely on to make such distinctions?

    And where on earth does anyone get the idea that, as a percentage, we are any more overrun than we ever were, with “self-destructive, self-delusional conduct?” As if transwomen in the seventies and eighties (ah, those halcyon days, the survivors of which love to sit around and grumble about “kids these days”) were any less prone to outright batshit nuttiness? And as if most of the transwomen in view these days quite frankly have their shit pretty much together and get along in the world quite nicely, thank you very much, regardless of their identity politics?

    (Hey, didn’t Renee Richards go through “the program”?)

    This whole pointless argument is almost exactly like the interminable “gay marriage” debate… stop worrying about how anyone else’s behavior or experience clutters up your own, and concentrate on living your life as best you can.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com/ Val

    Syntax error. This paragraph should read:

    And as if most of the transwomen in view these days didn’t quite frankly have their shit pretty much together and get along in the world quite nicely, thank you very much, regardless of their identity politics?

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com Val

    Syntax error. This paragraph should read:

    And as if most of the transwomen in view these days didn’t quite frankly have their shit pretty much together and get along in the world quite nicely, thank you very much, regardless of their identity politics?

  • Dalmax

    Sorry, Val, you are taking this MUCH too personally.

    MY point, and it is a lucid and valid one, is that even in the heyday of the adherence to the HBSoC there were many who crashed and burned because they thought they could fool the system. The current advocacy of circumventing the SoC almost guarantee that the failure rate will double.

    Identity politics? WTF?

    Most trans people DON’T have their shit together, as evidenced by their own identity duality. They don’t identify as alt.lifestyle or queer and take great pains to distance themselves from the GLBT community. Yet, let the HRC dump us at the 11th hour (and who didn’t see THAT coming???) and all of a sudden everyone is all about trans/queer rights, our need to unify and how we need to be a community.

    Hah friggin’ HAH!

    You can namby pamby BS all you want. The reality is that the trans community has never been less cohesive, more fractured and directionless than it is now. So if you are going to defend a group of people pathologically intent on not defending themselves, at least come up with a more compelling argument.

    And while I’m at it, let me just say that MY status as a non-op is a tragedy and a travesty. If I COULD have surgery; if any reputable doctor would actually perform it; I would mortgage my soul to have it done. But while I CAN’T have it done at the moment, I still manage to have a (truly and honestly) full and fulfilling life that most people just gloat about in cyberspace because they don’t have one in real time. It isn’t about sex, it’s about adjusting, resocializing and getting with it.

  • Dalmax

    Sorry, Val, you are taking this MUCH too personally.

    MY point, and it is a lucid and valid one, is that even in the heyday of the adherence to the HBSoC there were many who crashed and burned because they thought they could fool the system. The current advocacy of circumventing the SoC almost guarantee that the failure rate will double.

    Identity politics? WTF?

    Most trans people DON’T have their shit together, as evidenced by their own identity duality. They don’t identify as alt.lifestyle or queer and take great pains to distance themselves from the GLBT community. Yet, let the HRC dump us at the 11th hour (and who didn’t see THAT coming???) and all of a sudden everyone is all about trans/queer rights, our need to unify and how we need to be a community.

    Hah friggin’ HAH!

    You can namby pamby BS all you want. The reality is that the trans community has never been less cohesive, more fractured and directionless than it is now. So if you are going to defend a group of people pathologically intent on not defending themselves, at least come up with a more compelling argument.

    And while I’m at it, let me just say that MY status as a non-op is a tragedy and a travesty. If I COULD have surgery; if any reputable doctor would actually perform it; I would mortgage my soul to have it done. But while I CAN’T have it done at the moment, I still manage to have a (truly and honestly) full and fulfilling life that most people just gloat about in cyberspace because they don’t have one in real time. It isn’t about sex, it’s about adjusting, resocializing and getting with it.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com/ Val

    Your point certainly was lucid and valid. I hope that the strength of my retort was not taken to suggest otherwise.

    A couple of points:

    I’m not convinced that a lot of the people who didn’t “fool the system” didn’t crash and burn anyway. Conversely, it seems to me that the vast increase in available information has allowed more people to not crash and burn, whether they assent to the strictures of the system or not, because they are given a much more comprehensive view of realistic expectations.

    Further, while most trans people I know have a lot of residual damage as a result of trying to discover themselves in an increasingly hostile society, the fact is also that they function about as well as everyone else, by essential criteria. To me, “having one’s shit together” means being “not maladaptive.” And contrary to the offensive generalizations made by some (not necessarily you), there really isn’t a zombie horde of “trannie freaks” lumbering about the country.

    Also, I disagree about the relative cohesion of the trans community. The internecine conflicts I see now have been around for years, and there really wasn’t any “community” at all not that long ago. (Especially not among the fundamentalists, if you believe their story, since according to them, the only true goal is assimilation and disappearance.) It seems to me that we’re evolving.

    Finally, I’m sure that your own case with respect to surgery is exactly what you say… and that you are exactly who you say. I was simply pointing out a pecking order – one which I believe is fraudulent, and best dispensed with altogether.

  • Pingback: With Apologies to Radical Feminists : TransAdvocate

  • Marti Abernathey

    I’ve never said that we should join hands with HRC. I’m just pointing out a glaring reality that the “protest HRC” folks seem to be missing.

    As far as Mara goes, that’s a very good question. The blame for this goes far and wide.

  • http://sabrinastar.transadvocate.com sabrina star

    It’s not just Mara Keisling, there’s also Donna Rose, who may not have used the word “liar,” but who resigned from the board of HRC in frustration over this. She knew what HRC was going to do long before they actually did it by signing that letter.

    So, whether or not it’s constructive to burn bridges with HRC, the last thing we can do is trust them. I agree with Marti that we should focus on a positive relationship with United ENDA, with Rep. Baldwin and the others who stood by us.

  • Polar Bear

    Val, it isn’t just Solmonese’ lie at Southern
    Comfort. HRC has a long and undistinguished
    record of lying and subverting T political lobbying and initiatives, going back as far
    as 1995. Why anyone ever thought they’d be
    trustworthy is beyond me. I haven’t trusted them since 1997, and never will. History repeated itself the past few weeks, but few know it.

    Yes, HRC must be protested. Yes, the emphasis
    must be on working with those who have PROVEN
    themselves to be our friends – and there are many of those. We have to work in other ways. I know of AA/T activists who are outraged by NAACP’s joining
    of the HRC letter, and who are going to be
    working on that organization’s disgusting stance on ENDA, and on the dearth of support for T inclusion from CBC offices. That is an example.

    Basically, we must work in a scattered way,
    with T people working on different, varied
    groups, coalescing in overcoming this debacle.

    There is also a need for another T organization on Capitol Hill, one that has never had any connections with HRC. That would be NTAC.

    PB

  • Marti Abernathey

    I’d love to do it without them. Can you point out how? I’m no fan of HRC, but I think there are political realities that you have to look at, before moving forward.

    What is the end game?

  • http://gorgonqueen@wordpress.com Val

    I seem to be having a devil of a time with the comment system today. Let’s try this again:

    > Can you point out how?

    I cannot. I simply remain unconvinced, and was also unclear on your own position, given that earlier article.

    The one thing we know for sure is that HRC will be disingenuous at best, if not outright dishonest. Assurances, commitments, apparent enlightenments… all seem null and void in the light of expediency. We know without question that they will not lobby on our behalf, and even will lobby against out interests if need be. So while protesting may not be useful, working with them appears to be a waste of capital.

    Now what? I don’t know. But I’m not sure that acceding to HRC’s own sense of being the only meaningful player on the board will yield anything useful.

    Maybe the people who have been sneering at us at Americablog are right. Maybe it really is going to take another decade for us to get together whatever it is that’s finally going to function in our own interests.

  • Polar Bear

    NGLTF, for one.

    HRC must be hurt – we will have to cost them
    donations. They have a huge mortgage and a lot of salaries to pay. Any drop in revenues would get them to the table.

    Of course, once at the table, better hook them up to a polygraph machine. They lied
    at SCC. That fact must never be forgotten.

  • Dyssonance

    Because it will feel good.

    I’m one single gal. By myself, my voice will be little more than a gnat to a 30 million dollar a year organization on the other side of the country.

    But ya ever had a gnat buzzin around you that you can’t swat?

    And I’m not alone in this.

    But, lastly, They can’t ruin me anymore than simply being who I am already has. They can’t take my family — that’s gone. They can’t take my job – I don’t have one.

    And they can never ruin my spirit.

    So I have nothing to lose save my life, and as bad as they are, I don’t think there are any HRC assassination squads out there…

  • Kathy

    So Susan – you consider anyone who dates a person with a history of transsexualism worthy of your disdain and abnormal?

    Bit of a catch 22 you’re setting up for yourself.

  • Susan

    “…crimp…(my) bubble…?” Naaaah…doesn’t affect it at all. It does further illustrate and confirm that one can call themselves a turnip if they want to…and even believe it. One’s ability to differentiate between male and female is acquired quite early in life. It’s very easy to tell the difference between “real” transsexuals and wannabes…turnips too, for that matter.

    “Not so long ago…” people like me didn’t have to contend with people like you. Life was much better then; there were fewer men masquerading as vegtables.

    Whatever will you (I) do? Whatever I want to, sweetpea. One thing I won’t have to do is learn the correct usage of the word epistemology and its forms.

  • Val

    > It does further illustrate and confirm that one can call themselves a turnip if they want to…and even believe it.

    Or even a woman.

    What authorizes your claim?

  • Susan

    I don’t believe I’ve made a claim . I did make a general comment and voiced an opinion…one I stand by. But, as you are so damn offended and attempt to slam me on a personal level with nothing more pseudointellectual verbiage used incorrectly, where do you fit in? Just so you don’t misunderstand, I really don’t care what you self-define as.

    Why you or anyone else would care one way or the other about my take on your precious “community” is beyond me anyhow. You and those like you are in the majority for sure. The trans blogs are not going to all of a sudden promote standing up for those issues unique to transsexuals, much less those of us who are post op. They are not going to abandon their crossdressing “brothers and sisters” and recognize the transgender umbrella for the homosexual construct it is. Certainly they are not about to disasociate themselves from the homosexual movement and will no doubt continue to support the GLB in their ultimate quest, same-sex marriage. They will continue to support the concept of a gender spectrum, the legitimacy of a non-op, and nondiscrimination for all who present an alternate gender expression. Sadly, they will also sit dumbfounded, incapable of understanding why one doesn’t want to share a bathroom with someone of the opposite sex, or go to work everyday in the presence of crossdressers.

    It’s your ballgame, Val. I’ve told you I’m bowing out of the debate. So what’s your issue specifically? You, and those like you, have control and it’s most obvious to me no one is likely to sway that position. After all, the blogosphere is chocked full of editorials that agree completely with you and those who hold your opinion…there is not one that holds to mine.

    So what’s your point? Is it that I don’t agree with you nor agree generally with the party line? If that’s the case then too bad cause you are absolutely right. I don’t.

  • http://gorgonqueen@wordpress.com Val

    > I don’t believe I’ve made a claim.

    Oh, I thought you were asserting your Essential Rutabaganess.

    Well, OK then.

    Peace, Susan. Spare the world your bottomless, pointless spite. “Embittered Old Tranny” may have been a great vaudeville act, but it never played in Atlantic City, and every bilious little nugget you cough up just sinks you even deeper into irrelevance. You have no audience. You’re no one’s bogeyman. You’re just a joke we tell ourselves during coffee breaks.

    Curl up with a good book. Have some tea. Get a cat.

    And have a nice day.

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    So Susan, you want there to be rights …. but only for people like yourself?

  • Susan

    “You’re just a joke we tell ourselves during coffee breaks.”

    I don’t doubt that at all. I guess the difference between you and me is I don’t sit around with other trannies on my coffee break talking about wierd blog posts nor do I need special legislation and rights to cut it in the mainstream.

  • http://transadvocate.com/sabrinastar sabrina star

    Passing privilege… must be nice.

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    > HBS gals really annoy me, though. They are isolationist.

    Try moderating an email list with two vocal ones. Who also love to use “women born transsexual” … ignoring how anyone against the MWMF policy might object. :(

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    That reminds me … I have yet to meet an HBS gal who was not loudly ‘stealth’. A bit of an oxymoron really.

  • Dyssonance

    If they weren’t so exclusive, I’d give a rats behind about them — but they are intenitonally denying themselves, and carrying forward into their lives issues that are deeply frustrating and highly sexist.

    Secod wave feminism, for ya.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Susan’s a bit more explicit here:

    The interesting part is that the trans blogs and activists rather than advocate for the rights of post ops and those issues that uniquely affect us, instead rally around the homosexual movement thus putting rights that post ops already have at risk by some how associating same-sex marriage (between homosexuals) with heterosexual marriage involving a post op. Instead of championing a position that clearly defines, if not EXPLAINS, a postop in terms of their legal post operative gender, they march behind a GLB movement that has turned post op MtoF and FtoM into defacto gay men and women, respectively.

    So yeah, she’s upset that trans activists aren’t focusing on issues that primarily benefit trans people who have had surgery. She doesn’t care to acknowledge economic limitations, legal limitations, or health limitations on the ability to get surgery. For example, Thailand is cheaper than the US – but not nearly as cheap as it was a few years ago. Also, at least one state will not allow you to change the sex on your birth certificate if you get SRS outside of the United States.

    She’s only up to date far enough to see that modern trans activism isn’t all about her. That and she doesn’t even consider herself trans since she’s had surgery, so her complaints are kind of meaningless.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Do they have a field day trying to deny personhood to and imposing third/no gender on trans people who haven’t had surgery?

    The whole HBS thing is . . . well, it’s interesting that the only trans people who are allowed in the club have had surgery, and everyone has to agree with the party line.

    Plus, yeah. “WBT” is just inane. “WBW” isn’t a gender identity at all. “Woman” is. “born-Woman” is just, uhm…originally it meant your mother was a woman.

    Anyway, it’s great to get transphobia from trans people who think their genitals are a wellspring of magical authority.

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    The really hilarious thing about the local two: how much in a glass house they are. While ranting about “true” TSs and such they conveniently forget to mention something. That one of the two is, by her own words, a “peri-op” (in other words, she opted for an orchi for now).

    So, by their own definitions, she must be less of a TS than me since I happened to have SRS? :)

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    My Big Sister describes them this way: a mix of male socialization and a new drug (estrogen).

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    Oh, I have no problem with including them, the problem is often they do not want to be included. To be included in trans legislation would mean saying they are trans (and actually consorting with other trans people at some level) so they stay in their la-la lands and complain.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Yes, exactly. I wouldn’t argue for excluding any trans people, no matter how much internalized transphobia they carry.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Whoops. :)

    It all bothers me. We catch enough shit from cis people that we shouldn’t have to also catch it from other trans people. Especially trans people who make it clear that the only needs that should matter are the needs they define.

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    Actually, I am a Wiccan and have made a costume or two that were vulcans. What they have to do with anything in your rant is beyond me. Come to think of it, most things in that paragraph were ‘err, what do they have to do with anything?’ rather than actually making any sort of point.

    Anyone can take parts of sentences (which most of your examples are) and present them out of context. The nice thing about blogging is that people can read them in their full contest and make up their own minds.

  • http://gorgonqueen@wordpress.com Val

    > You have to love the shout-down/walk-over approach this crew generally has when it comes to discussing an issue.

    This from the person whose very response to me was to tell me to “be quiet.”

    Poor Susan.

    You get the “debate” you merit, snookums. If you ever have anything to offer other than refried malice, then perhaps someone will choose to take you seriously.

    Until then, you’re just passing gas.

  • Dyssonance

    So I insulted you by calling you isolationist?

    I insulted you by saying ya annoy me?

    I somehow managed to “shout down”, on a written forum without using caps, you?

    Susan, you’ve wigged, I think.

    I haven’t once told you to shut up. You’ve said it, however. I haven’t shouted you down.

    I expressed my opinion. Reasonably.

    You are right, though, I won’t debate the issue with you.

    I won’t, because I’ve never met an HBS’er who is inclusive.

    That’s a disagreement of principle, and that’s why its fine by me if you don’t want to get involved yourself.

    I’ll still be working on causes that you can benefit from.

    And that’s all that matters to me.

    Not the internal politics of nomenclature or separatist existence.

    Stealth is no longer an option, Susan. I envy you the ability to get it.

    I’m passable, I’m het, and 15 years ago I could have gone stealth too.

    Time’s change.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Susan, as long as you continue to act as if the only trans people who matter are those who have had surgery, you’re not going to get any respect. Your reality – the time when you transitioned, the life you lived before and after, even now – is not the reality that trans people today have to live with.

    As long as you make it clear that you view “non-ops” with contempt and that you want to establish a trans hierarchy placing yourself at the top, you’re not going to get a nice reaction. You’re like a bull in a china shop, dragging around decades old conceptions through our modern realities.

    We can’t afford to place trans people who’ve had surgery first. There’s too many obstacles for trans people in general and trans people who haven’t had surgery specifically.

    Yes, yay, you could get surgery while working for minimum wage at a Reed Erickson-funded gender clinic. That doesn’t happen anymore.

  • Dyssonance

    Precisely.

    Those from without who would see us cast out, untouchable, share their irrationality with those within who would see us divided.

    its still irrational.

  • Susan

    My self esteem is in no way dependent upon the respect I am given from blog posters. All. if not most, of those who post here have very similar takes on the socio/political issues in question. Though I admire and respect their committment to that position, I disagree with it. If that makes me a pariah, then so be it. I know it is novel, but it would be refreshing if different position could be debated based upon those same positions and not simply responded to with irrational insults. Then again, I can give as good as I’m given so albeit.

    When you refer to “We…” in your placing post ops first sentence above, that is quite indicative of the argument…argument defined as a differece in positions. I don’t believe that post-ops should be placed “first”, just as I don’t think the GLB should be placed first when it comes to the basic rights everyone on the planet should enjoy. No where have I ever said that. And, if I have ever even vaguely implied that then I was misunderstood and didn’t express myself clearly. My position is one of difference, not of priority. With that said, I don’t buy into a “We…”; clearly most do.

    If others want to place all who fall under the transgender umbrella, as well as the GLB, flag in the “We…”, i.e., the same category with the same issues, then more power to them; I don’t hold to that. The issues a post op has are simply not the same as that of a crossdresser hooked on a fetish…at least to me. Do I think that post ops should be “first” when it comes to addressing whatever those issues are defined as?…NO, I don’t. Do I think whatever the issues are that a crossdresser has are any less important than mine?…NO, I don’t. Do I think that the issues the GLB face are illegitimate?…NO, I don’t. But I do think they are different. And, I do think they should be addressed separately.

    If that makes me egocentric and self-centered to others then again, that’s fine with me.

  • Dyssonance

    1 – why would it make you a pariah to merely hold a differing POV?

    2 – How are the issues a post op faces different from a crossdresser?

    3 – How are the issues a pre-op or non-op deals with different from a Post op?

    4 – How are the issues of a post op gay person different from a non trans gay person?

    5 – Which is more important in terms of humanity — the similarites or the differences?

    I await your answers, susan.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    “We” as in “trans women and men.” As in all of us. We can’t afford to do things like:

    The interesting part is that the trans blogs and activists rather than advocate for the rights of post ops and those issues that uniquely affect us, instead rally around the homosexual movement thus putting rights that post ops already have at risk by some how associating same-sex marriage (between homosexuals) with heterosexual marriage involving a post op. Instead of championing a position that clearly defines, if not EXPLAINS, a postop in terms of their legal post operative gender, they march behind a GLB movement that has turned post op MtoF and FtoM into defacto gay men and women, respectively.

    Which, by the way, seems to be a clear message that you want to place your interests (as a trans woman who’s had surgery) above those of other trans people (who have not had surgery).

    If that’s not what you meant, then what did you mean? When you say that anyone can fly to Thailand and get surgery for a few thousand dollars, do you really believe it’s still that easy? Do you think that trans people can just magic up several thousand dollars to pay for electrolysis, hormones, new wardrobes, rent, transportation, food, and surgery? What you say indicates you’re focused on a model where everyone can just rush off and buy a new vagina, but this isn’t the reality we live in.

    Do you also think that transphobia and homophobia are in no way related to one another? That trans people and GLB people (ignoring intersections) have no oppression in common, or from a similar source?

  • Susan

    1 – Why would it make you a pariah to merely hold a differing POV?

    Simply because my position doesn’t agree with the overwhelming majority of those who post here. With regard to the reponses that either referenced me or my position, I stated that it “…doesn’t take a mentat to quickly see there is no attempt at debate; the overwhelming focus is simply insult.” From the replies to that statement, it appears I underestimated.

    2 – How are the issues a post op faces different from a crossdresser?

    By definition, MtoF post ops are females; crossdressing is a fetish. Whatever the issues are of crossdressers, they have nothing in common with those of post ops.

    3 – How are the issues a pre-op or non-op deals with different from a Post op?

    There are many. Once pre-ops have transitioned and undergone GRS, their issues are obviously the same as post-ops. Those non-ops who have by choice opted not to have GRS are crossdressers, with whatever those issues might be.

    4 – How are the issues of a post op gay person different from a non trans gay person?

    I don’t know; I am neither.

    5 – Which is more important in terms of humanity — the similarites or the differences?

    As an answer to that as a general question, that would depend upon the differences. As I assume you refer to the questions two and three, I don’t see any similarities.

    It seems that many if not most of those who post in here somehow see gender as this broad spectrum. I don’t. I think the notion of a “third gender” and some form of a gender spectrum is BS. I was preop once and I’m not going to be bothered with those I’m sure will come back with the argument of “Well, Susan, so you HAD to have surgery before you thought of yourself as female?” But to answer that…NO, I didn’t. I HAD to have surgery first and most importantly because innately I knew I WAS female and couldn’t stand the sight of my genitals, much less handle a male status, further realizing that aside from my own internal feelings, neither socially nor legally would I ever be recognized as female without GRS.

    Everyone does what they must do…and approaches whatever that is the way they decide is best. I don’t fault anyone for whatever that tact may be. When I transitioned it was paramount that my former social interaction be mirrored after transition. I lived in ALL of the world before I transitioned and it was very important to me to be able to live in all of the world after. Then, and now, I had no desire to define my existence, as I think so many do, by the fact that I was born transsexual. I find it sad that so many seem to do that and never fully integrate into the mainstream, instead choosing to live forever identifying with the “transgender” lifestyle. That is their choice; it’s their life, and if they are happy, I am tickled pink.

    Now, I started this thread way back when by saying I really don’t care one way or the other…and I don’t. So, again, I am bowing out of this debate.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Then, and now, I had no desire to define my existence, as I think so many do, by the fact that I was born transsexual. I find it sad that so many seem to do that and never fully integrate into the mainstream, instead choosing to live forever identifying with the “transgender” lifestyle. That is their choice; it’s their life, and if they are happy, I am tickled pink.

    Ignoring the Christian Right language of “transgender lifestyle,” the reason that trans people are coming out of the closet is for survival and visibility. When trans people integrated fully and disappeared into society, it left room for others to speak for us – those like Janice Raymond, Mary Daly, etc – and to do so with the luxury of not caring about what we had to say about ourselves.

    You may find it sad that so many never fully integrate into the mainstream, but if we did integrate, who would advocate for our rights?

    That is their choice; it’s their life, and if they are happy, I am tickled pink.

    That’s very magnanimous of you.

  • Dyssonance

    1 – You also dismissed outright me — doing the same thing that you accused the others of doing.

    2 – How can you know they have nothing in common with MtF — wouldn’t being female be part of it?

    You didn’t even *try* to understand them. Gratned, I’m not exactly the most buddy buddy with CD’s/TV’s, but at least I don’t dismiss them as having nothing in common with me — espeically when its obvious they have far more of what makes us different in common.

    3 – So a person who, for reasons of physical incapability cannot have surgery is dismissed as a crossdresser — which is buying wholehertedly into the same phobic BS that you will be accused of.

    As for us being women, have you attended the Michigan womyn’s festival recently? I hope not — you’d be a liar if did.

    You forget that our public gender is determined by how others percieve us, regardless of how we percieve ourselves. We can choose to accept that (which you appear to be advocating) or deny it.

    And your entire argument utterly ignores the entire consideration of passability, which, to me, is jsut down right rude and inconsiderate.

    Lastly, you didn’t even answer the question. You stepped around it to make a point that was basically it doesn’t matter to you — if they don’t have the surgery, they aren’t your type of person and therefore have none of the problems you do.

    I disagree. They have all the problems you do. And more.

    4 – You say, point blank, that you don’t know, yet you have the gall to say that they have differnt issues from each others? If you don’t know, how can you say that? That’s hypocrisy.

    5 – Depends ont eh differneces, you7 say.

    I say it doesn’t matter. I also say it isn’t a general question, but a specific and exacitng one.

    This is another example iof why people with your general politics bother me. Its either apathy, or NMP, or more of the same, constant harping on “them” versus “us”.

    we are all the same. we are human.

    After that, we are individuals. Everything else should be irrelevant.

    What you are doing is *exactly* the same was has been done to confine women inthe past to rigid gender roles. To deny racial equality.

    It is the very *root* of sexism and racism.

    It is *keeping the Us us and the Them them*.

    And sorry susan, but I find that outlook to be, well, against every principle I believe in.

    Becuase its what’s made my life as a woman a hell of a lot harder than it ever needed to be.

    And is the same for you.

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    > I find it sad that so many seem to do that and never fully integrate into the mainstream, instead choosing to live forever identifying with the “transgender” lifestyle.

    Maybe because we are, oh, grateful, to those who gave us a helping hand when we were starting out …. and have realized the best way to repay that is to help the next group. Pretty hard to do that if they can not find you.

  • http://www.eriktrips.com ErikTrips

    a mix of male socialization and a new drug (estrogen).

    haha. it’s funny you should say that, because on the ftm side of things we have to deal with the lesbian penchant for processing–on testosterone! =80

    I’m a gay ftm and I spend a fair portion of my time in ftm forums trying to explain how it is that “T” became associated with “LG(B)” in the first place (parentheses for the B’s as they get their own share of abuse from hardcore separatist LG’s), and why it is that in the US particularly, mainstream culture sees us all as genderqueer and that that is the whole problem they have with us to begin with.

    I never thought I’d see the day when we were tearing each other to pieces on a national stage. In fact I never thought I’d see the day when we were tearing each other to pieces–but that’s how They work, you know: divide and conquer.

    They win. We lose.

  • Felix

    I’d just like to back Rebecca up in what she says here. She is The “Every Woman” of whom Chaka Khan sings; she is the frangrant and modest flower of transfm; never does liquor or strong language pass her refined lips. Rebecca Nay is way superior to any other transwoman podcasting today, especially that deviant Marti Abernathey who keeps catching me in Yahoo and is probably a lesbian. I sincerely hope that when Rebecca has Susan on her show that she will invite me to participate as the second guest and provide a suitable earpiece so this person can hear me because, according to her, I don’t exist.:-D

  • Susan

    “If that’s not what you meant, then what did you mean?”

    I meant what I said, Lisa: That the issues of post-ops (and implied: pre ops) should be addressed separately from the issues of the GLB and crossdressers.

    “When you say that anyone can fly to Thailand and get surgery for a few thousand dollars, do you really believe it’s still that easy? Do you think that trans people can just magic up several thousand dollars…”

    What is it about plain english you have difficulty with? I did not say that, nor even vaguely imply it. What I DID say was: “Anyone with a few thousand dollars and a plane ticket to Thailand can change their anatomical gender. The sidestepping of the SOC is so common its mere existance is a sham.” And it’s true…and if you have the exposure to the issues you blog on that you say you do, you KNOW it’s true. So, for YOUR benefit alone, IF one HAS a few thousand dollars and IF they HAVE a plain ticket to Thailand, then it’s not difficult to side step the SOC and obtain the surgery. It is quite clear what I said. As for thinking someone can “magic” up the money to transition?…of course not. I have been through it. I know how difficult it is to balance the financial equations of transitioning and GRS. I also know that if someone wants to take that route bad enough, most can find a way to get it done. Thousands do it every year.

    Again, this is just argument for the sake of argument. Taking what I said out of context just to prevail in a discussion is irrational, if not just plain juvenile…and I’m NOT going to let it pass, Lisa. I’m going to call you on it everytime…EVERY time.

  • Susan

    “1 – You also dismissed outright me — doing the same thing that you accused the others of doing.”

    I have lost track of the posts, but if I have dismissed you or your post outright, and I have no reason to not believe you when you say I have, then I was wrong and I apologize.

    “2 – How can you know they have nothing in common with MtF — wouldn’t being female be part of it?”

    I don’t see crossdressers as female, so no.

    “You didn’t even *try* to understand them.”

    No, I didn’t and don’t. I also don’t try to understand what makes BDSM tick either…or any other fetish.

    “Gratned, I’m not exactly the most buddy buddy with CD’s/TV’s, but at least I don’t dismiss them as having nothing in common with me — espeically when its obvious they have far more of what makes us different in common.”

    I don’t dismiss them and I almost agree with you when you say they have far more of what makes us different in common. I don’t think we have anything in commmon.

    “3 – So a person who, for reasons of physical incapability cannot have surgery is dismissed as a crossdresser — which is buying wholehertedly into the same phobic BS that you will be accused of.”

    I didn’t address those who for reasons of “physical incapability” are dismissed as a crossdresser. What I DID say was (caps mine): “Those non-ops who have BY CHOICE opted not to have GRS are crossdressers.

    “As for us being women, have you attended the Michigan womyn’s festival recently? I hope not — you’d be a liar if did.”

    No, I haven’t…and I don’t lie. I’m aware of the issues regarding that festival, however, and think their policy with not allowing post ops stink. This is an example that refers to the “uniquely different” issues of post ops.

    “You forget that our public gender is determined by how others percieve us, regardless of how we percieve ourselves. We can choose to accept that (which you appear to be advocating) or deny it.”

    Yes, I do choose to accept it. That is human nature and it won’t change regardless of what is done.

    “And your entire argument utterly ignores the entire consideration of passability, which, to me, is jsut down right rude and inconsiderate.”

    So now I am rude and inconsiderate because there is an issue I didn’t address? That’s more than a little wierd. You are holding me accountable for something I didn’t even express myself on? ROFL Geez…can’t you throw me a bone here?

    “Lastly, you didn’t even answer the question. You stepped around it to make a point that was basically it doesn’t matter to you — if they don’t have the surgery, they aren’t your type of person and therefore have none of the problems you do.”

    I was answering your question, not trying to make any point. However, you’re comment relative to “not my type of person” could not be further from the truth. As you said of yourself, “I’m not exactly the most buddy buddy with CD’s/TV’s…” that also applies to me. I have no problems with crossdressers nor anyone under the transgender or GLB umbrellas, nor with the rights they feel entitled to…none whatsoever. I don’t support each and everyone of those rights, but no one supports what EVERY one else desires. I have friends who fall into the entire GLBT spectrum. I don’t think that the issues/rights of ANY group, GLBT or otherwise are more important than ANY other group, or that one set of rights should be addressed “first” over such perceived importance. I am not alone in that thinking…all one has to do is look at the uproar over the ENDA issue and the fact that the HRC put the GLB first over the T rather than to support inclusion. I THINK THAT THE ISSUES SHOULD BE ADDRESSED SEPARATELY.

    “I disagree. They have all the problems you do. And more.”

    Honestly, I don’t have any problems, or at least haven’t to date and there is only one issue that I would like to see addressed and that is important to me. I would like to see Federal legislation that would recognize and legalize across the board, in every state, in every instance, the gender status of a post operative TS…a gender recognition act, if you will. If and when that is ever done, then post ops would then be entitled, by law, to ALL of the rights afforded any other female (or male)in the United States. The Littleton case, the Michigan music festival, and other such issues would soon disappear, if not immediately and overnight. The issues involving the change of birth certificates that many experience would be a thing of the past…and so on. That Federal recognition will never come to pass if not addressed separately.

    “4 – You say, point blank, that you don’t know, yet you have the gall to say that they have differnt issues from each others? If you don’t know, how can you say that? That’s hypocrisy.”

    And just HOW is it hypocrisy Again, you are holding me accountable for something I have never addressed and know nothing about. Your question was:

    “4 – How are the issues of a post op gay person different from a non trans gay person?”

    I DON’T know how they are different. I have never addressed nor posted on what the issues of a post op gay person may have when compared to what those of a non trans gay person’s may be. Please cut and paste where I did so.

    “5 – Depends ont eh differneces, you7 say.”

    Yes, I think so. With regard to humanity, people do not advocate for the things everyone agrees on but of the things that other people feel differently about.

    “I say it doesn’t matter. I also say it isn’t a general question, but a specific and exacitng one.”

    Well, the question was: “5 – Which is more important in terms of humanity — the similarites or the differences?” That seems pretty general to me. But actually, I disagree that it doesn’t matter. Differences that humanity may have can run the gamut from a simple disagreement in which two people walk away as friends, to world wars in which millions are killed. How similarities and differences affect or are important to humanity depends on what, and to what degree, there are differences I think.

    “This is another example iof why people with your general politics bother me. Its either apathy, or NMP, or more of the same, constant harping on “them” versus “us”.”

    I have no clue where you are coming from or what your point is here…sorry. Certainly not everyone feels obliged to have the same passion for, or join in on every issue, nor should they be; people become involved on the issues that are important to them. I don’t see this debate as a “them vs. us”…I don’t see a competition at all for I don’t agree their are similarities. I support addressing the issues separately.

    “What you are doing is *exactly* the same was has been done to confine women inthe past to rigid gender roles. To deny racial equality – It is the very *root* of sexism and racism – It is *keeping the Us us and the Them them*.”

    That’s absolutely absurd.

  • http://kara_h.livejournal.com/ Kara Harkins

    > Qualifications first: 22 years M2F Post op, married (to a guy)

    err, how do either of those count as “qualifications”?

    BTW, do you even realize the internet is how a lot of us realized we were not CDs but realized we are TSs? Oh, and before you shake your high horse at me: yes, I can play the post-op card back at you. :)

  • Leigh

    hmmmm .. this board doesn’t post properly

    Perhaps I should have said “Background”. If for instance I was posting a comment on a university blog about a construct of law, stating my “qualifications” to speak on the matter such as “Professor with 20 years at harvard law school” might enable the reader to have some idea of the level of understanding of the issue to which I speak. Instead you merely assumed I was bragging with your “High Horse” reference.

    >>BTW, do you even realize the internet is how a lot of us realized we were not CDs but realized we are TSs?<<

    Yes I do, and as the old saying goes, “Many of those messerscmitts were actually fokkers” .. one can convince oneself of anything.

    Congratulations on your GRS *S*

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    This is why:

    I find it sad that so many seem to do that and never fully integrate into the mainstream, instead choosing to live forever identifying with the “transgender” lifestyle. That is their choice; it’s their life, and if they are happy, I am tickled pink.

    You offer your pity, but say you’re accepting. Do you want a cookie?

    The reason I pointed out the resemblance to the religious right’s labeling of gay/lesbian/bisexuality as lifestyles is because, well, what the heck is a transgender lifestyle? It’s a meaningless phrase, like gay agenda.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    I meant what I said, Lisa: That the issues of post-ops (and implied: pre ops) should be addressed separately from the issues of the GLB and crossdressers.

    If you truly meant that, you picked a bad way to say it. You shouldn’t assume that the inclusion of those who haven’t had surgery is assumed when you explicitly include those who’ve had surgery.

    Also, quite a few issues overlap quite strongly with GLB issues, to the point of inseparability.

    I also know that if someone wants to take that route bad enough, most can find a way to get it done.

    This is naive. You’re implying that those who can’t find a way to get it done are somehow at fault, not the fact that they’re unable to get work, or the possibility that after they do get work, they’re fired after the IRS outs them. You are basically saying that if you want it bad enough, you can magic up the means to get the money. That’s just not true, not for everyone, and probably not for most.

    Again, this is just argument for the sake of argument. Taking what I said out of context just to prevail in a discussion is irrational, if not just plain juvenile…and I’m NOT going to let it pass, Lisa. I’m going to call you on it everytime…EVERY time.

    You know, it is just possible that I strongly disagree with much of what you say. It’s not juvenile. It’s not irrational. Yes, I am more concerned with the trans people who are murdered every year than I am with rights for those women who’ve had vaginoplasty. I am more concerned with making surgery more accessibly through insurance, and making insurance more accessible. The trials and tribulations of post-surgical life are pretty much the last issues I’m concerned with when it comes to trans issues.

  • http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com Lisa Harney

    Hmm, no, that’s not the entirety of what I want, and I’ve talked about other stuff elsewhere, such as an equivalent of the Gender Recognition Act, which would allow people to change their sex on ID and birth certificates without surgery at all, as well as getting rid of the “no match” social security notices that out trans people that are a violation of privacy.

    There’s also the whole “getting employment is not as easy as it should be” thing, plus the high rate of violence against trans people thing, plus lots of other things.

    I mentioned trying to make it easier to get surgery because Susan was saying that she wanted activism aimed at those who’ve already had surgery, but didn’t seem much concerned with getting that surgery (beyond, I guess, scrimping, saving, and living like a fucking pauper), which could only really happen if insurance were to actually cover it – but that doesn’t help those who don’t have jobs, and I’d rather see universal health care because health care issues are so much bigger than who gets to have a flat chest or a neovagina.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com Val

    You do realize, of course, that according to transsexual fundamentalism, you are “just” a fulltime crossdresser?

    Your “offense” at those you generalize carries no more inherent authority that does a fundamentalist’s perception of your own choices.

    Who are these shameless wannabes? Where are the parades of fake trannies, trotting “merrily down the lane shouting their transness,” and what evidence do you rely on to make such distinctions?

    And where on earth does anyone get the idea that, as a percentage, we are any more overrun than we ever were, with “self-destructive, self-delusional conduct?” As if transwomen in the seventies and eighties (ah, those halcyon days, the survivors of which love to sit around and grumble about “kids these days”) were any less prone to outright batshit nuttiness? And as if most of the transwomen in view these days quite frankly have their shit pretty much together and get along in the world quite nicely, thank you very much, regardless of their identity politics?

    (Hey, didn’t Renee Richards go through “the program”?)

    This whole pointless argument is almost exactly like the interminable “gay marriage” debate… stop worrying about how anyone else’s behavior or experience clutters up your own, and concentrate on living your life as best you can.

  • http://gorgonqueen.wordpress.com Val

    Your point certainly was lucid and valid. I hope that the strength of my retort was not taken to suggest otherwise.

    A couple of points:

    I’m not convinced that a lot of the people who didn’t “fool the system” didn’t crash and burn anyway. Conversely, it seems to me that the vast increase in available information has allowed more people to not crash and burn, whether they assent to the strictures of the system or not, because they are given a much more comprehensive view of realistic expectations.

    Further, while most trans people I know have a lot of residual damage as a result of trying to discover themselves in an increasingly hostile society, the fact is also that they function about as well as everyone else, by essential criteria. To me, “having one’s shit together” means being “not maladaptive.” And contrary to the offensive generalizations made by some (not necessarily you), there really isn’t a zombie horde of “trannie freaks” lumbering about the country.

    Also, I disagree about the relative cohesion of the trans community. The internecine conflicts I see now have been around for years, and there really wasn’t any “community” at all not that long ago. (Especially not among the fundamentalists, if you believe their story, since according to them, the only true goal is assimilation and disappearance.) It seems to me that we’re evolving.

    Finally, I’m sure that your own case with respect to surgery is exactly what you say… and that you are exactly who you say. I was simply pointing out a pecking order – one which I believe is fraudulent, and best dispensed with altogether.

← Older Comments