"Intersex and trans demands"

[flexibeast]

A post recently came through to the transgendernews group which contained proposed lists of "Intersex and trans demands".

Reading over the proposed list of "trans demands", i agreed with many, if not most, of the demands listed. i particularly appreciated:

• "Understand the privilege of feeling at home in your body, using a public bathroom, knowing which M/F box to check, having people assume your gender identity and them being right, etc."

Indeed. i really don't like going into 'male' bathrooms, because it feels like i'm betraying myself; but i feel that i have no other choice, since i basically look 'male' at the moment.


• "Don't think that FtM are dealing with some kind of internalized sexism."

i can see parallels between this and the claims by some people that bisexuals are simply people who haven't dealt with their internalised homophobia. :-/


• "Don't label our gender or sexual identity for us. Recognize the difference between the two!"

Yes, yes, yes! Most people assume that trans is a sexual orientation, not a gender identity (not surprisingly, because they're probably not exposed to much - indeed, any! - information to the contrary). It's frustrating when surveys and such ask me to specify whether i'm bisexual or whether i'm trans.


• "Don't think of our experiences and identities as monolithic."

One of the things i always make sure to say to people when i'm talking about my experience of being trans is that we're a very diverse lot. i've gotten the impression, when i tell people that i have both a penis and breasts, that they're imagining a beautiful 'she-male' from a porno. So i then talk about how 'she-male' seems to be a porn industry term, since i've never seen it used outside of porn, and how i look more male than female.

However, there were a few demands i wasn't sure about:

• "Don't just name yourself a 'trans ally' one day."

It's not clear to me what this means: is it saying "Don't just say that you're a trans ally; prove that you are by your actions"?


• "Even if you think fucking with gender is hot, don't talk about it in an objectifying way."

Again, it's not clear to me what this means; is it a parallel to the demand in intersex list which says "Don't fetishize our bodies"? If so, i worry about the possible implications for sexual expression: don't most of us (i.e. both trans and non-trans people) have 'fetishes' that involve us being attracted to particular types of people? For example, couldn't we refer to being attracted to women with long hair, or to clean-shaven men, as 'fetishes', in that it involves getting turned on by specific physical characteristics? If so, aren't we then saying that we trans people don't want other people to be turned on by our physical characteristics? For me, this demand raises quite a number of complex issues.


• "Recognize how class and race fit into these equations."

Woah. That's a big ask; there are people whose entire careers are based on studying how race and class intereact with gender and sexuality. Perhaps it could be better phrased as "Recognise that race and class influence these equations"?


• "Don't think of a transgender identity as 'political.'"

Unfortunately, being transgendered is political; otherwise, trans people wouldn't face as many difficulties as they do. But perhaps the intention here was to say "Don't think of a transgender identity as a political statement". If so, that's problematic too, because there are people who identify as transgender who have taken on that identity as a political statement (just as there are women who become lesbians for political reasons).

Overall, however, i think the list is a very good start. :-)

Comments

[merrywitch.livejournal.com]

I've always thought of list like this one as silly, frankly. For instance, what privilege is there in using the toilet or ticking the female box, if that is who I am and who I am accepted socially and legally to be? It isn't an affect of privilege then, it is a simple statement of fact.

I know sexual identity and sexual orientation are often being confused in people's minds; even some of my closest friends were confused when I ended up lesbian - one asked why I didn't just stay pretending to be male? She missed the point as do many others; female is what I am, lesbian talks about who I happen to be attracted to. Had I stayed "male" I would still have an internal knowledge of self as female and still be attracted to other women; I would be lesbian anyway. Surgery just makes being a lesbian more fun~!

These rules are so very American and reflect a culture and, importantly, a societal attitude to the transsexed, that we in this country seem not to share. My rules, were I to draw them up, would be very, very simple and go something like this:-

* Not everybody is allocated to the correct sex when they are born. For some, the incongruity between mind and body sees them wrongly forced to conform to a sex and a gender stereotype they can never identify with. A person's knowledge of self as being of a particular sex should be the paramount determinent of sex.

* All people have the right to be treated with courtesy, dignity, fairness and equality no matter their race, culture, religion or the sex that they affirm.

* Any person who affirms a sex at variance with the sex they were allocated at birth, and makes that affirmation of sex irrevocable through whatever surgical and hormonal treatments are available at the time, must be legally, ethically and socially considered for all purposes to be of the sex they affirm.

* The affirmation of a sex at variance with the sex allocated shortly after birth has nothing to do with sexual preference, gender role, political statement or deviant behaviour. It is purely concerned with a knowledge of self as belonging to a particular sex, whether or not the external genitalia of the body reflects that self knowledge.

If those simple rules were enshrined at law, all of us so affected would be entitled to medical treatment for our condition, full recognition of selves as the men and women we are, and the full support and protection of the law.

Blessings always ............ Merry

Hmm . . . .

[flexibeast.livejournal.com]

*looks thoughtful*

Interesting points. i have a couple of questions and a comments:

* How do we handle situations, such as the one i myself am in, where people are not socially or legally recognised as their preferred sex and/or gender?

* i was interested to read you describe the list as "very American"; what do you feel is 'American' about it?

* Regarding your suggested rules - i think they're great, although i have concerns about the rule "Any person who affirms a sex at variance with the sex they were allocated at birth, and makes that affirmation of sex irrevocable through whatever surgical and hormonal treatments are available at the time, must be legally, ethically and socially considered for all purposes to be of the sex they affirm." What about people who can't or won't affirm their sex in that way?

Re: Hmm . . . .

[merrywitch.livejournal.com]

Hi again,

Before I go on, can I point out that my comments refer only to those like me; intersexed women, especially women who were surgically altered at birth and forced to become transsexed in the eyes of society to reclaim their true sex. I can't discuss the FtM experience intelligently, having never experienced it.

Simply, the American system seems to be a far more confrontational, "us vs Them" sort of affair. The intersex movement here in Australia has achieved its gains through a process of education and consultation. In America it seems more geared to challenge and fighting for rights.

How we gain acceptance in our affirmed gender is to affirm it, unambiguously and without exception. Australia as a society will generally show tolerance and courtesy to anyone so long as they are making a reasonable effort to conform to the mores that we all share. Given that we exist within a dichotomy of sex, a person who expresses a desire for androgeny or "third sex" status is placing themselves outside the accepted dichotomious structure and can expect to be treated negatively. Whether or not this is wrong is immaterial; it IS, and that must be accepted. Perhaps it will change with time and education, but until it does those pioneers who are breaking new ground must expect a degree of social resistance to change.

You asked the question; what of those who can't or won't affirm. Those who CAN'T for medical reasons need to be given sensitive and decent consideration and I believe generally will be, as any condition serious enough to prevent SAS will also be immediately apparent in every other aspect of a person's life and the reason for the person not seeking surgery is both obvious and seen as reasonable.

Those who WON'T affirm their sex and retain the ability to pick, choose and change will always be looked upon with distrust - if a person feels strongly enough that they are of a sex which is not reflected by their body that they are willing to risk everything to change, that is one thing, and their courage and sincerity generally sees them gain acceptance. A person wanting the rights and status of a woman but expressing an unwillingness to commit themselves fully to the only treatment seen to alleviate the condition of transsexuality is viewed entirely differently. I tend to agree with this view as well - I do not believe a truly transsexed person would not wish to do everything in their power to remove the wrongness from themselves, ergo anyone not so desiring is not truly transsexed and is not deserving of any recognition of sex other than that displayed by their body.

I know that some folk will see these views as a little extreme, but I have to say it like I see it.

Blessings always ........ Merry

Re: Hmm . . . .

[naked-wrat.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry but I cannot accept that those people who do not fit the dichotomy, or challenge the dichotomy, are deserving of negative treatment. Yes it IS a fact of life at this given time in our society but to say that these people that do not affirm their sex in either dichotomous category are deserving of negative treatment is quite another thing. No-one is deserving of negative treatment for being who they are when they are not harming anyone. The stupidity of this whole situation is that the dichotomy doesn't fucking work. Sexuality, sex, gender, life is more complicated than two freaking boxes. I cannot and will not accept that this is how things are and that we all should like it or lump it.

Re: Hmm . . . .

[merrywitch.livejournal.com]

And I respect your view totally. My problem here is that I deal with Politicians and the Medical and Legal professions on almost a daily basis and have to discuss this issue with them in terms of the current legal standing in this country. Under the Re: Kevin decision the High Court of Australia has finally acknowledged those like me to be of the sex we affirm provided that irreversible steps (ie: surgery) have taken place. Without that irreversibility - which is a legal myth in any case, but the myth we must follow - no such affirmation can be made.

I don't propose that any person ever receive discriminatory or negative treatment, only that the law as it stands is the one determinent we must follow. The law here says you are either male or female. If you affirm a sex other than your gonadal sex then, so long as you have met the irreversibility criteria of re:Kevin you will be accepted as the sex you affirm. If not, you will be accepted as the sex which appears on your Birth Certificate. There is no legal provision for a third sex and I do not believe there ever will be, so if a person is defined as transsexual under the terms of the DSM IV or the ICD-10 it is accepted that they will seek surgery as part of the amelioration of their condition. If they are not wishing surgery then they do not fall under the classification of transsexual in either case. They aren't my rules, but they are the rules we exist under.

You may not like binary views on gender. I may not like them either, but our dislike does not make them go away. I respect all people who seek to change the status quo but in my current position I am forced to work within the system as it stands, for the benefit of all Intersexed people. To do otherwise would mean our Orhganisation would be dismissed as yet another fringe group not needing to be listened to. I believe I can affect far more change from within the system than from without.

Blessings ........... Merry