Wow, Loren is a real cutie!
Thank you Broomstick for posting all of that for us! I had also heard references to their theories, but had never actually looked anything up about it. Now, I’m glad, because I may have walked away with a gross misunderstanding.
Hey Eve, did you consider the possibility that those people who posted mean (and untrue) things about you may have had some other issue with you? Like maybe you posted something on the boards they didn’t like?
Honestly, I didn’t know that you were a MtF transsexual until now, but I’ve visited your website a few times before today, and seeing your picture, I never thought there was anything odd or “unfeminine” about you. I think you’re a looker, girl!!!
That’s why I wanted to link to the actual article. This article is by no means a flattery piece for Bailey. This was NOT a promotion of Bailey’s book or views, it is an article about the controversy surronding the book. The article lets all sides air their views. His views are rebutted quite eloquently by several Chicago transsexuals who are in respected positions and very, very far from “freak show” status, or criminal, or prostitutes.
Let’s quote a few:
Deirdre McCloskey:
Randi Ettner (not a transexual, but a psychologist who counsels transexuals during the transformation process):
Anjelica Kieltyka:
Northwestern is interviewing Kieltyka as part of the investigation into whether or not Bailey obtained proper informed consent or violate and ethical requirements in his research.
Oh, and here’s a good one that makes me want to slap Willow Arune, the one transsexual MtF who agrees with Dr. Bailey, on why all these “older trannies” attack Dr. Bailey:
You know, the other people quoted in this article used respectful terms when referring to each other, even when obviously upset. Only Arune used “tranny”, which sounds like a slur to me.
Also, as a rather agressive, strong-minded woman (the term “uppity bitch” has been used on occassion, and I was accused of flying broomsticks long before I earned a pilot’s license, hence the nickname) I must take issue with her implied views that
-
women don’t shout to get what we want (or perhaps, shouldn’t shout - oh, yes, we should)
-
that it’s somehow womanly to suppress feelings of outrage, anger, and injustice, with the implication that if you don’t you’re less a woman
-
and that somehow only men respected in their fields demand to be listened to. Um… no, women who are powerhouses in their chosen fields also demand to be heard.
Basically, sounds to me like Arune is saying if you don’t shut up and submit and believe the nice doctor you’re not a “real woman” (whatever the hell that means in this context) I also find her emphasis on the young and the beautiful unsettling - hey, best case sceanario finds us all 110 years old, toothless, wrinkled, and balding. Maybe this Arune has a youth fetish or something. See how easy it is to use the fetish brush to color other people with?
But easily half the print in this article is from highly educated, articulate, and respected members not only of the transexual community, but also of the greater Chicago society at large. McCloskey, for instance, is a tenured professor at the University of Illinois, an institution every bit as important and respectable as Northwestern University. She’s been “out” for some time and is very much an example of the professionally succesful, respected transexual.
Actually, I think the article serves a very good purpose. With Bailey’s credentials, his book lends the weight of scholarship and science to what he says (frankly, there are no excerpts from his book in this article, so what I know of his book is all second hand). By writing this article it alerts people such as myself (who are not involved with the transgender community) that this book may not be the product of good or unbiased research, that the people this book is actually about - the transgendered - have some real and serious issues about this guy. Just because it’s science doesn’t mean it’s good science. (Stephen J. Gould was far more eloquent on the consequences of bad science in social engineering and wrote extensively on that topic, among others, even if he concentrated more on racism and IQ and never touched transgenderism - the problems and issues he raises apply to many areas)
It somewhat reminds me about that mess involving the little boy who was (most tragically) injured during a circumcism then subsequently raised as a girl. The doctor involved was praised to high heaven - until someone went back and found the “little girl” and discovered that not only had the “little girl” grown up to be a man who underwent reconstructive surgery and is now married with adopted children, but that some abuse with sexual flavoring might have occurred to both of the twins involved in the mess. Yet another “expert” pontificating about real flesh and blood, and ignoring what didn’t fit his theories, but in that case he was not questioned for decades and probably a lot of harm occured to intersex children along the way.
I think that Bailey and Blanchard’s view could be very damaging to the transgendered, and think people who buy their books should be aware there is a controversy so they will not accept the “expert” opinions without question. I say bravo to those transgendered who speak out publically on these topics.
I think it gets back to worrying too much about what other people are doing to other people in private. My ethics say that whatever goes on between consenting adults, provided no one gets hurt, is THEIR business and no one else’s. I may be strictly a vanilla person and not like rocky road ice cream, but I have nothing against those who do and wish them much pleasure in consuming it. (The “getting hurt” issue is a bit touchy with the bondage/SM crowd - I’ll even tolerate that sort of goings on up to a point, usually drawing the line at permanent mutilation)
As I mentioned before, I don’t “get” transgenderism on an emotional level. My understanding of it is purely an intellectual thing, and in real life I have, on occassion, been greatly disturbed to be in the presence of a transgendered person (usually one only partly through the process). Drag queens, gays, bi’s, and so forth don’t disturb me as much as some encounters I’ve had with transexuals. Other times, I was not disturbed at all. When I am confronted with these feelings I view it as an internal disturbance that should remain internal and do my best to treat people in a polite and respectful manner. I read threads like these to gain a better understanding of this issue, and over time as understanding has grown the disturbing feelings have ebbed. I don’t think I’ll ever “get” it on the emotional level, any more than I will ever understand emotionally why a woman’s body is sexually arousing to either a straight man or a homosexual woman. It’s not something I experience on an emtional level at all. But I still think the attempt to better understand the people I share this planet with is worth the effort.
I think the Internet IS a valuable aid in this - it does allow me to come to know on some level various transgendered people without, as someone earlier pointed out, the “physical issues” getting in the way. I like to think that if I met Eve, for instance, we’d be comfortable in each other’s presence (although she comes off in her posts as such a lady I’d be concerned about forgetting my table manners or perhaps acting unintentionally uncouth in her presence). Given that KellyM and I have at times butted heads on this board I don’t know how well we’d get along in real life, but I’d like to think I would judge her as a human being and be as comfortable debating her face to face as here. As for the other wonderful people who have contibuted to these threads over time - please, do, keep up the effort to educate others. I’m sure at times you get discouraged, but those of us, like myself, who try to journey from ignorance to understanding are thankful for your efforts. If I am ever awkward or uncomfortable in your precense my apoologies in advance - it is a reflection of my own faults and shortcomings and not yours.
Broomstick, the one time we’ve “butted heads” was on an issue that you care strongly about, and I understand your feelings on that issue. I’ve found that, otherwise, you’re quite reasonable. And I tend to be less confrontational in person.
Randi Ettner’s husband Fred is my endocrinologist.
I’m glad the Reader’s coverage was more balanced than I originally thought. Bailey’s conduct is especially bothersome to Chicagoland residents, in part because Chicagoland has, in recent years, been a good place to be trans (relatively speaking), and having such a traitor in our midst is very disquieting.
The boy who was converted to a girl and then converted back sounds like the celebrated case of Joan/John and comes out of John A. Money and John Hopkins in the 70s. The dispute about what to do with intersexed children still rages. Dr. Money’s theory of developmental gender (“gender is determined by environmental influences in the first year or so of life; consequently, any child can be genderswapped at birth”) is now completely discredited.
There is a division in transsexuals between young trannies and old trannies. The younger ones (called “primary” by the DSM) often feel that older ones are “less” transsexual than they are (a belief echoed by many therapists, who claim that primaries have better outcomes on average than secondaries), and are often suspicious (in social settings, especially) that secondaries are really just transvestites who are looking to have sex with transsexual women. Primaries also sometimes resent the fact that some secondaries were able to have somewhat meaningful and successful male lives before transitioning, which means they’re more likely to have the resources necessary to transition. Secondaries seem to be more likely to buy into annoying stereotypes about women (although Ms. Arune proves that not primaries are not immune to this).
Secondaries, on the other hand, often have a half lifetime of regret (such as passing up opportunities to transition), not to mention often have a lot more “loose ends” (such as wives and children) to wrap up as part of a transition. And we lost a chance at being a teenager of the proper sex (which many primaries often do because they transition very young).
Bailey’s classification system does actually correspond pretty closely to the primary/secondary division, and since Bailey is harsher on the “autogynephiliac” type than the “homosexual” type, primary transsexuals with unreasonable attitudes toward secondary transsexuals are sometimes attracted to his theory because it justifies their distrust of secondaries. The one individual quoted by Broomstick illustrates this attitude quite nicely. (“Tranny” is kinda like “fag”. You probably shouldn’t use it if you’re not one.)
Well, I think that transexuality and transgenderism (is that right?) is kind of hard to wrap one’s brain around.
But then, so is life.
F**k all that medical crap, its the attitudes of the prejudiced that need adjusting - not the bodies of the gender-gifted.
I’ll concede that there are many TSs who are genuinely not happy with their biological gender, but how many are there who would settle for androgeny, but are forced to pick a gender because of narrow-mindedness?
“gender-gifted”???
Is that like “handi-capable”?
Look, as much as I’d like to live in an ideal world where everyone truly is regarded on their own merits and we don’t get twisted up about who’s plumbing looks like what and what they choose to do with it, that’s not reality. The transgender folks have two problems:
-
Their bodies don’t “fit”. We can argue until the cows come home in what way they don’t “fit”, and what, if anything, should be done about it but even in my hypothetical ideal society they’d still have a problem of “my body doesn’t fit me”, which would need to be addressed. (If I’m wrong on this, any transexual is welcome to correct me)
-
Society compounds #1 by being uptight, kneejerk, and insistent on pigeon-holing everyone into “ideal male” and “ideal female”. In addition to keeping transexuals unhappy, this also sells a lot of stuff like facial depilatories and counseling for hirsuite women (never mind they might come from an ethnic group where hairy women are perfectly normal - if we can learn to accept different skin colors we should be able to learn to accept women with goatees), and growth hormone to insure little boys grow up to be big men, even if genetically they should be growing up to be perfectly healthy short men.
This also connects to the world of the intersexed, who are born physically intederminate. In addition to societal attitudes imposing what is, essentially, cosmetic surgery on people too young to understand or give consent, surgery with life-long consequences for those people, such folks also commonly have physical issues such as urinary tract abnormalities and hormone imbalances that would have to be dealt with even in an ideal, totally-accepting-of-differences society.
I have a question-what if there was found, a way to prevent babies from being born transsexual-would that be bad? Or good.
I don’t think that way because of bigotry, but so that no one would have to suffer being born with the wrong genitalia/gender/body-whatever the term should be?
Sure, there are trans people who would be most comfortable living in an androgynous/third gender/other space, with or without surgery/hormonal intervention… I have several friends who fit this situation.
But this is a thread about transsexuals not the gender-diverse community as a whole.
I think it depends on who you talk to. Some people may welcome such an idea, especially if they’ve had a hard time themselves. However, to others (myself) being trans* is or has become an important part of their self concept, and while it presents its own unique challenges, it also presents the opportunity to learn things about yourself and others that you might never otherwise get to experience.
Trans* and third gender people have a place in the mythology of several cultural groups, in some cases an important spiritual place or roles of social importance.
If I had the choice - I’d be born in the body I’m in now (although there are a few things I wouldn’t mind fixing… like the RSI rolls eyes)
My housemate, post-op MTF transsexual, would have preferred to be born biologically female.
My friend Robin, who is intersex, finds gender to be an important part of how ze interacts with the world, especially in the shamanistic tradition of hir religion.
I can’t speak for that, but I can attest that it is too common for transsexuals to be dragged onto TV shows to be used as human punchlines (hahahaha! That character accidentally dated one!), as killers (see above) or as poor pitiful freaks (oooh, the poor thing killed itself/got fired/got murdered).
I would be so happy to see a transgendered person as “just a character” on a TV show . . .
Re- Autogynephilia and Extreme Homosexuality
B&Bs theory may seem stupid at first. However, further thought and examination reveals it to be exceedingly stupid.
With the amazing variety of the human mind, I’m sure that there are some people who fit this theory. I’m also sure that they account only for a vanishingly small percentage of transexuals.
To state that MTFs are homosexuals is to miss the fundamental difference between the two groups. Namely, that gay men are happy being men and having penises.
BTW- The webstrip VenusEnvy is written and drawn by a post op MTF. Check it out at
venusenvy.keenspace.com
Re Transsexuals On Television
I recommend the ER episode Next Of Kin
It isn’t TV, but on the web, the Bruno Baldwin comic has a transexual woman as a minor character. Although there was a plot line around her past, she was a just another character long before the reader knew she is transsexual, and since the plot, she is just another character. I rather like her. I won’t say more for fear of spoiling, but it is a beautifully drawn and written comic. The character was introduced in 2001.
Kelly has said to me that she wishes this condition on no one. She took pains to avoid exposing me to anything that could possibly make my baby transsexual, including changing her prescriptions. She warned me of the danger of exposure to certain things that are believed may cause babies to be transsexual even before I became pregnant or even tried to get pregnant.
But . . .
If they believed they had found a way to prevent babies from being born transsexual, then if there were still people who were transsexual, what then?
In 1987, a psychologist told me that 90% of the cases of male impotence had pure psychological causes. Only 10% could be addressed by medicine or surgery. Men coming to the doctor were told that it was all in their mind. Many a man with impotence that had a physical cause was told they had a mental problem. Today, we understand the causes of impotence, have better diagnostic methods, and many cases that would have been refered to a psychologist, are treated sucessfully by drugs.
If they do identify causes that account for nearly all cases of transsexuality and eliminate them, the remaining transsexuals may find themselves in a similar predicament to the men suffering impotence in 1987. “Sorry, you aren’t a woman, you have a penis. Yes there used to be some women who were born with a penis, but we pervent that now, just get over it, it is all in your mind.”
I’d say it would have to depend on how you “prevent” the problem.
If it were a matter of either avoiding anything that could trigger this disorder, or fixing it before birth, yeah, I think you can argue it’s a good thing, or at least a potentially good thing.
If it were a matter of testing for the disorder before birth, followed by a mandatory abortion if the disorder is detected - no, I don’t think that’s a good thing at all. I don’t think being transexual warrants the death penalty.
Germany in 1939 emptied the hospitals of the crippled, retarded, and insane and hailed it as a social good that they had reduced the burden on society at large. They didn’t cure them - they killed them. I don’t think we should re-run that “experiment” again. For any disorder or deviation from the norm.
But even IF we knew exactly what caused transexualism, that doesn’t mean we could truly prevent all cases - accidents do happen.
My doctors think my condition was caused by hormones my mother was given during her 7th week of pregnancy to prevent a miscarriage (she’d had two). So . . . If she hadn’t been given the drugs and had miscarried me? I’m glad that didn’t happen. And while I wouldn’t wish this on anyone, if I had to go through what I went through in order to become who I am and land where I’ve landed, then I don’t regret a thing.
Oh, as for those people who said unpleasant things to me in that other thread? I have no idea. I thinks it’s a combination of what they really thought with a total lack of social skills.
Joe Haldeman’s Forever Peace included a character who happened to be transsexual.
Oh, I don’t think we should go about “eliminating transsexuals!”
What I mean is, I hate the thought of people suffering so much, that’s all.
I can’t help but think a lot of the suffering is societal attitudes. I mean, no one condemns or threatens a child because they know he or she was born with, say, congenital cataracts and required surgery to see properly. If society was more accepting of the differently gendered then the suffering would be on the physical level - there’s a problem here, we need to apply these surgical techniques and these medications to alleviate it - and transsexuals would be more like the thousands of other people bearing scars from medical episodes that are now over and down, or on medication to keep faulty body systems functioning more normally. The mental suffering would be considerably less.
It used to be that being left handed induced much suffering - my mother is old enough to remember such a time. I don’t know if it happened to her, but many people thought it perfectly OK to tie a child’s dominant hand up to make it unusable, or beat the child for reaching for something with his or her left hand, in order to “teach” them how to be right-handed. Well, you can learn to use your non-dominant hand for many things, but that doesn’t change the brain architecture that makes a person left or right handed. At best, you’d have a lefty pretending to be a righty in a very convincing way, but they’d still be right-brain dominant. Nowadays, though - for the most part, no one notices much or cares if a person is a lefty or a righty (there was a point in time where much concern was voiced over the “increase” in left-handedness. Nonesense. It was just that the lefties stopped pretending to be righties) It is still statisically “normal” to be right handed, but it’s no longer considered pathological to be left-handed. You can toss terms around like “benign abnormality” or just say “it’s different but harmless”.
I hope for a day when gender issues are seen in the same light. I think the majority of people will always be heterosexual, or bi leaning towards heterosexual. When the barriers drop, though, we will (and have) seen a sudden upsurge in identified gay/lesbian/bi/transgendered. This will (and has) freak out the conservatives and the reactionaries who think the “disease” is spreading. Nope, it isn’t. It’s just that all the “perverts” who have been in hiding for their own protection are now visible.
I do believe a lot of these orientations have a biological basis. Used to be, it was thought lefthanders were being “contrary”. Nope, it’s just that what made them lefties wasn’t visible. Likewise, I don’t think we can see what makes a person the gender they are. My personal theory is that it’s brain structure AND hormones AND the environment - including the environment of the womb, but not excluding later severe trauma in some cases. And while a person with XY chromosomes might learn to fit into society as a man, that doesn’t mean that deep down where gender really exists he actually IS a man.
Jonathan Del Arco played a character called Sophia Lopez in Nip/Tuck on F/X. Sophia is a MtF and undergoes her transitional surgery as part of the show (the show is centred on a plastic surgery practise).
Sophia is also ‘just a character’ aside from the transition, in other scenes in the show. She is shown as a loving, caring, understanding person. Person. Not some sort of weirdo. That’s the reason I continued watching after flipping channels, and I’ve come to really enjoy the show.