Discussion on Transgenderism

It wasn't quite like that. I was aware but couldn't admit it to myself until I saw and talked with similar others. Considering where I was (a small city in Ohio) there wasn't a whole lot of support out there. While I may have had the intellectual tools to examine the situation I didn't have the emotional and supportive resources until then. The Transgender group on AOL allowed me to develop the courage to face who I was and to do something about it.

yeah.. i completely agree.. the transgendered panel was great! brian and amelia really helped me to understand what
transgenderism is... i guess i always associated transgenderism with sexual orientation.. but this is not the case.. in actuality.. it's
about one's self identification.. to a specific gender. it has nothing to do with one's sexual orientation.. i really felt brian's anger at
being labeled a lesbian.. because this meant identifying with the female gender.. which to him is not the case. that was really
enlightening for me. thank you! but just to pose a question.. i guess that's why this is a discussion board.. since gender is socially
constructed.. are transgendered people people who have not accepted being socialized.. so in a sense are we all
transgendered?

Okay, I'm not sure I understand your debate but let me try to clarify some concepts.

First of all, the term "transgender" was first coined to refer to people or acts that transcend the dominant understanding of what "a man" should do and what "a woman" should do. It is a descriptor for breaking gender boundaries. For examples, "a woman" who wears pants instead of a dress and "a man" who wears a dress and make-up. Note this is culturally specific norms and cannot be applied cross-culturally nor transhistorically when you think of deviants and norms for men and women.

Note that I use quotes to refer to men and women. This is in line with Monique Wittig's argument that the category "woman" is a myth. Some of us are born out with apparent vaginas and some with apparent penises. We are categorized as "boy" or "girl" accordingly to the dominant understanding that boys have penises and girls have vaginas. To save time, I won't go into issues of hermaphrodites or the intersexed (see Fausto-Sterling). Back to our story: having our "sex" being determined at birth, we are then socialized to carry out corresponding gender roles. When we do not conform, we get sanctioned. For example, "sissy
boys" get beaten up in school and young women who assert their sexual desire are put down and dismissed as whores, sluts. After being "properly" socialized, no one ever needs to see our genitalia to determine our "sex." They could just observe our gender performance to determine our "sex". In fact, it has become so common-sense that our gender performance and our assigned sex are conflated into either the notion of "man" or "woman". Given we live in a society that value the sciences such as biology, one's "sex" becomes a natural explanation of what one's gender should be. Those that do not fit into this mold are considered deviants. They puzzle us when we can't determine their gender/sex.

The people above can be seen as transgender because they undermine our gender ideology of what a person with a penis should do and what a person with a vagina should do. Hence, an independent woman who do not act timid or supportive but
is assertive is considered "a bitch" or complementarily as "someone with balls." Notice how essentialist this type of thinking is: One's sex determines one's gender roles and one's sexual desire. It is all natural and inherent within the organism.

Feminists challenged this "Natural Order" argument by pointing out that gender is a social construct. That is, our gender roles are shaped by a specific culture and political economy. It is NOT NATURAL and definitely not cross-cultural that all men and women act as the ones in the contemporary US society act. In fact, some societies do not conceptualize human population as
made of men and women. They may have more categories of people such as the Hijrah in India or the 2-spirited people in some Native American nations.

So, what is this contemporary transgender stories of Bryan and Emilia? Since I know Bryan, I will use his story as an example to demonstrate my points. Bryan sees himself as innately a man just born in the wrong body. He identifies as transgender or more specifically transsexual (actually going thru hormonal surgical alterations) because he goes against the dominant view about sex, gender and "sexual orientation." Yet, at the same time, he conforms to traditional gender expectations of a man in his everyday living. If he could, he would like to fit in and be seen and treated as man for the rest of his life. This means his partner must see and validate him as a man and must not see herself as a lesbian. Once he completely transitions over, he would leave the transgender/transsexual identity behind him and pass as a man. Well, that is his wish for now.

A different route that a transgender or transsexual may take is to become politically radical and "gender fuck" society. That is, they will not conform to everyday expectations of gender roles by acting as a man or as a woman. They may display both manly and womanly attributes in one body to challenge people's assumptions about sex/gender.

I only give two extreme examples here. There are more diverse stories than these two so don't stereotype.

Lastly, here are how the transgender/transsexual communities are defining these buzz words. Please note that these meanings change in time and place:

Transgender: umbrella term for anyone who challenges dominant view of sex/gender system.

Transsexual: will go thru hormonal and surgical procedures to change their "sex" Bryan and Emilia are here.

Transgender: will not go thru the transition but still identifies as opposite of the sex they were assigned.

Cross-dresser: A person who dresses the attire of the opposite sex. They may not identify as gay nor as transgender/transsexual. Could just be a person who enjoys dressing up of the opposite sex. Transvestite is another term for this
group of people.

Drag Queen: Female or male impersonator and performer.

Hope that helps

I have a problem believing that gender is entirely socially constructed. If gender is purely constructed by society, then wouldn't
Amelia and Brian's identities be that of "normal" gendered people? It doesn't seem to me that their status as transgendered
people has anything to do with their existance in society, for everything in society is telling them not to identify as the sex that
they prefer. Thus, they must be biologically transgender.
Although, gender is created by society. The specific categories of "male" and "female" do not exist naturally, as we are ordered
into such groups on the basis of a few biological features such as chromosomes or sex organs. Because these organs do not
necessarily constitute our behaviors we are told by society the approprite way to act, according to our so-called sex. In my
opinion, to say that we are all transgender beings would be an accurate description, based on this observation.
I know that this argument isn't complete. If someone would like to add anything to it, or to reform it, I would greatly appreciate
it.

okay.. what i was trying to say.. is that since gender is socially constructed.. and i think that you agreed with me.. that's why we
are in a sense transgendered.. (i think you also agreed with me there too.. ) i just wanted to make a point that society has
created the category of being "transgendered" and how it is viewed as being a "minority" group. but if you really think about it...
since gender is socially constructed.. to be transgendered would be normal.... anyhow.. so the really frustrating question would
be why is it that "transgendered" people are viewed by a large segment of society as deviante?

The only problem that I have with the social construction theory is that if society had its way there would be no transgendered
people. Our society has it's own narrow view on gender, that is, people are either born girls or boys. As soon as we are
declared one or the other, we are placed in the either the pink or blue cribs, which we never should leave, according to society.
And so I would argue that it is impossible for transgendered people to be entirely a creation of society, but insted a group of
people that society's strict gendering of people just can't account for.
Transgendered people are seen as deviants by society, and that deviancy can be reinforced by either the essentialist or
constructionist point of view.

Society: If people are born transgendered, then they are a mistake- they are some sort of mutation that is in need of correcting...
they need help to become normal.

Society: If people are constructed by me to be transgendered, then they must be rebelling against me, because I consider that
type of person to be a deviant, and most members of me treat them as such, so there is no way I could have created such a
being. If they are rebelling against me, and by becoming transgendered they are liberating themselves from my confines, then
they are reacting against me, not created by me. In that case they are rebelling and trying to mess up the order of things and
must be contained.

...something like that... that's just a guess. I don't really know what society would say.

I agree with you to a degree. I am in an Evolution of Human Sexual Behavior class right before this M167 class and what we
are finding out is, sexual orientation aside, that biology does determine behavoir, to a degree. That is among all mammals and
other aminmals, testosterone leads to increased violent and dominant behavior and estrogen vice versa. For example, when one
injects female rats with testosterone, they try to mount males and when males are injected with estrogen, they perform
lordosis--a certain receptive pose that normally only females do that indicates they are ready to be mounted. In fact, what is
more bizzare is that in some song-birds, males sing several different types of songs and females singe none or one. The males
will sing these songs after puberty, even if they have been raised in isolation. What is more interesting is that females will sing the
male songs after they have been injected with testosterone.

The point is that I feel that biology--essentialism--does determine certain aspects of human behavior. It is not surprising that
(until very recently) in 99% of all cultures, men are the only sex who participate in an organized military, as well as dominate
females in the economic and political spheres of life. There is *some* genetic programming for male-male competition and
dominance. Of course, as human being we have shown our ability to break free the confines of nature, and just because
biological drives/essential tendencies exist, does not morally justify acting on them.

This argument goes hand in hand with your "how can transgenderism be socially contructed when society as a ultra-powerful
force is directed a producing sex-coded traditional gender roles?" There is a biological bias towards heterosexulaity and
towards traditional male-female roles that has to do with reproduction and parental investment.

However, within this larger context, the most important questions of human behavior are not adequately answered by
essentialism/biology. The article that we read that medicine has "created" transgenderism was a powerful criticism. The relatively
large number of unhappy post-op transexuals is very troublesome for social contruction, I think.

I am not sure how a biological male could, for instance, have an identity socially constructed as a female identified lesbian, yet
these people do exist. In fact, I am not even sure if a majority of transexuals have a heterosexual orientation for their gender
identity. I agree that society has institutionalized and encourages traditional male-female roles and that because of those
institutions, and others, those who identify today as transgendered have their identities molded and shaped by these same unique
institutions. Being transgendered today means something different than 50 years ago and certainly than 500 years ago and it is
different in the U.S. compared to Brazil.

I think that there is a three stage process whereby we are born a certain sex with a preponderance for a certian sexual
orientation and that our development through adulthood produces an identity that is the product of the interaction of biology and
society mediated by uniquely powerful human cognition. The lack of attention that social constructions pay to biology is
troubling and I think a drawback of their theory. Society does assist in constructing an identity but it does not work with a tabula
rasa (blank slate), else as you said, we would all be pratically identical.

Emilia and Brian certianly broke down steriotypes that I had about the subjective experience of Trans people. However, I am
not sure that they helped construct a more compelling argument as to the reasons of why Trans people exist and did not really
help the essentialist/constructionist debate that rages in my head.....

My two cents.

--Justin

hi eric... gee.. i feel like we're the only ones in this conversation.. oh well. anyhow.. you said the it is "impossible for
transgendered people to be entirely a creation of society." i simply have to disagree. why? because gender is socially
constructed.. there's a definite difference between sex and gender. gender is something that society has created to tell us what is
appropriate behavior for men and womyn... which i think is wrong! so therefore... gender is completely socially constructed.
(this dosen't have anything to do with the social constructionist theory.. in the sense that gender is a socially constructed
category. i think social constructionist are more interesting in the implications of what it means to be placed in a category... not
whether the category is "natural") since gender is completely constructed.. the category of being transgendered is again socially
constructed. so what i'm suggesting is that we are all "naturally" what society today would call "transgendered." so i guess what
i'm implying is that by labeling trangendered people in our society today as deviant is a way to make people strictly adhere to
the gender "norms." which is bad!! i think that makes sense.. but let me know what you think.bye.

Sophia, I think you may have misunderstood my point. What I'm trying to say is that if gender is socially created, how is it
possible for transgendered people to be created. Granted, there is a category(and word) "transgendered," but I don't think that
constitutes the creation of a group of people that fit into such a category. What I was trying to say in my last entry was that
society creates people to be either a man or a woman. Society wants to place these concrete labels on people, and trains them
from birth to be either a man or a woman, but never to cross over the line, as transgendered people do. So what I'm saying is
that society is entirely against the creation of transgendered people, evidenced by the manner in which they are treated in
society. How many transgendered polititions do you know? They are not exactly encouraged. And so just because there is a
word that attempts to label thier identity, doesn't mean that they have been trained by society to fit into that label. People still
create thier own identities, regardless of the restrictions placed on them by society, and transgendered people are no exception.
Does this make any sense. It is pretty late. Perhaps this discourse is meant to be continued later.

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Amelia and Brian naturally posted by sophia on March 03, 1999 at 10:45:17:

I'm a little confused on the issue of transgenderism. Okay, here's my thought: many people in society become enraged at the
thought of transsexuals. Why? Because they are not adhering to the gender "norms." But who created those norms? Society.
Can we turn the argument around on the accusers and say that they are responsible for creating a group of people whom they
object to. I might be mistaken, but I remember Amelia and Brian saying that they were not happy with their sex and gender
assignments. I'm not sure how to respond to being unhappy regarding sex, but gender, I can see. So, the way I see it, society, in
creating a male-female dichotomy, also created transsexuals. Instead of letting true "nature" take its course, society has masked
itself and pretended to be nature, creating what we are familiar with as "men" and "women". However, not everyone is pleased
with their gender assignments and how they are supposed to act them out. I certainly am not happy with the submissive,
subordinate, "natural" role that has been assigned to me. That is why there are women's movements, and other such movements
by different ethnic groups in society - the white, upper class man has made it his job to act as nature and make everybody
conform to the roles he has assigned to them. So I guess if the dominant social party would like to look at it in these terms, then
transexual people are another movement of people stating that they want to be themselves, not what society has trained them,
not what their parents have shown them, but what they are - they want their internal to become external. I want to be me; I
don't want to be that person or that person, but I want to be me. But society only shows two ways as being acceptable and
"natural."
So what is "natural"? It seems the natural has been lost. Becuase of the massive construction that society does on people,
generation after generation, I would conclude that we as a people would not be able to recognize true nature if it hit us in the
face.
I know my words are circular and confusing, they just reflect the debates that I have in my head. If anyone can help clear up my
confusion, please don't hesitate to do so.

In regards to the question that you asked, "What is natural?" I think your answer was actually hidden within your own question.
While discussing social construction and society in general--we know that there are two distinct categories when discussing
sexuality. 1) Male and 2) Female. When referring to the male sex we talk about blue, cars, sports, masculinity, male dominance,
etc. and when discussing or referring to the female gender we talk about pink, femininity, beautiful bodies, baking and
homemaking. These are the "natural" categories that society has placed on us. Anything outside of these "natural" distinct
categories is thought of (as Eric mentioned) as deviant or bad within our culture. Therefore, it is not natural to be transgendered
or anything other than a heterosexual male or heterosexual female...right? After all, that is what society is preaching to us
everyday through the media, textbooks, religious groups, etc.

Just a thought...In this weeks section the topic of transgenders challenging or reinforcing the current hierarchal order of gender?
My knee-jurk reaction was to of course say they are challenging the current order by the very nature of their dressing in
opposition to their biology. However upon further analysis it became clear that in many ways they were actually supporting the
current order by playing the roles of the masculine male and feminine female. Transgender do challenge society to view sexual
identity in a different way, but they do not challenge the current order of masculine/ feminine psychology.

I too had the same reaction when discussing the issue. At first I thought, of course they are challenging the the structure because
they are going against society's gender norms. Then I realized that in many ways they are actually reinforcing them. Transsexuals
are basically following the belief that it you are physically male or female, you must in turn follow the gender roles we are
accustomed too. Thus for a biological female to change her sex because she doesn't feel like a "woman", she is supporting the
belief that you must physically be male in order to have those feelings. Thus, although they are challenging the system by
changing their biological sex, they are also supporting it by saying if you look male, then you can have those gender traits.
However if you are biologically female, you must physically look like a man in order to follow society's gender roles.

Here they are...

http://www.gender.org/remember/
Has listing of all those killed because of their transgender status

http://www.NetGSI.com/~listwrangler/
The American Boyz, for FTMs

http://www.ren.org/
The Renaissance Transgender Association, Inc.

http://www.gpac.org/
The Gender Public Advocacy Coalition, or GenderPAC, is a not-for-profit organization, composed of individuals and groups, dedicated to a broad-based, inclusive national movement for "gender, affectional, and racial equality."

http://www.gpac.org/iyf.html
In Your Face online news is an online news service provided by Outspoken.org in the GenderPAC site.

http://www.interlog.com/~sarah/menace.htm
Transsexual Menace Toronto, an advocacy group.