We’re 35 conversations deep on The Commentary, and yet, even though it says right on the intro page that the conversations here will be about race, politics and culture, they’ve been almost exclusively about race. So let’s switch gears. In my article Lost In Transition, I argued that one of the main reason we’re having such a hard time talking about trans issues is that the language we use to talk about them is woefully imprecise and often poorly understood. What’s the difference between sex and gender? What exactly do we mean when we say female or male? How do these terms differ from man and woman or masculine and feminine?
"We stand on the peak of the consciousness of previous ages, and their wisdom is available to us. History — that selective treasure house of the past which each age bequeaths to those that follow — has formed us in the present so that we may embrace the future. What does it matter if our insights, the new forms which play around the fringes of our minds, always lead us into virginal land where, like it or not, we stand on strange and bewildering ground. The only way out is ahead, and our choice is whether we shall cringe from it or affirm it." For in every act of love and will — and in the long run they are both present in each genuine act — we mold ourselves and our world simultaneously. This is what it means to embrace the future." Rollo May, Love and Will
"Genuine acts" - not belligerence, willful ignorance or sophistry - I always get the sense you're pulling for them - genuine conversations, genuine explorations - the only way out indeed. Thank you.
I appreciate what you’re doing here in modeling reasonable discourse about an issue that impacts a minority group to which (I assume!) you don’t belong.
If you’re looking for a more fodder along these lines, the issue of stating our pronouns in meetings could use some debate. Since we don’t generally use pronouns in meetings, it always strikes me as performative. As a queer person who knows the intense anxiety that can result from coming out in any setting, I also wonder if forcing folks to announce their gender identity in all kinds of settings isn’t counterproductive wrt our goals of supporting trans people. As a woman in a heavily male-dominated field, I don’t appreciate being asked to call attention to my minority status at work, etc. If the benefits greatly outweigh the risks, I am willing to do it, but it seems worth assessing as a community.
I should write about this myself but have been too chicken. The cost of going against the grain wrt wokeness is high.
"Since we don’t generally use pronouns in meetings, it always strikes me as performative."
Yep, I couldn't agree more. The performative nature of the pronoun game drives me crazy. Human beings are highly evolved to distinguish between male and female. We don't need to be told in over 99% of cases. If somebody prefers pronouns that aren't immediately obvious by looking at them, they're going to have to "out" themselves anyway. So while I'm all for working towards a society where people feel safe to do that, pretending that we've suddenly lost the ability to distinguish is asinine. And as you say, in most settings we'll use names rather than pronouns anyway.
Honestly, I think the problem is that we normalised the idea that pronouns are identity markers rather than descriptors. People don't say I'm black because I *identify* as black. Nobody asks me in meetings if I'm white or black or hispanic. I'm black because it's a common (and slightly inaccurate) descriptor of my skin colour. I think things would be a lot less fraught for everybody if sex was treated in the same way.
Male and female are descriptors, not identities. and the pronouns go along with those descriptors. that's why we also call animals "he" and "she". But yes, there are a lot of layers to this. And that's a very interesting point you make about highlighting your minority status at work. I hadn't thought about that, but it's absolutely true.
This idea of identity markers vs. descriptors is interesting. I need to mull it over, as I hadn’t considered it before. It does make me think though about how ridiculous and/or inappropriate it would be if we were asked to describe other aspects of our identities at work. These questions are too deep for that setting.
Thank you for the Medium article and this exchange with Michael. I grew up in a very religious environment, and I would never have imagined we'd be having these debates about sex and gender. Man was man, and woman was woman, and marriage was between and man and woman – period. There really wasn’t a debate. My mind evolved over time as it relates to gay marriage, mainly because as religious people speak of the “sanctity of marriage” they fail to mention how dysfunctional marriage is with a not so great divorce rate (though divorce isn’t a barometer for a bad marriage – there are plenty of bad marriages where the couple remains married out of fear or convenience). A bad marriage/divorce can have a detrimental impact on children. Because hetero marriages haven’t been a model for whatis good or bad, I’m not sure we can state that gay marriage is bad. In the end, I’m most interested in providing strong family units for our youth, regardless of their makeup, and therefore, there’s nothing stopping me from supporting gay marriage. There may be some flaws in my logic, but it’s where I’m at.
I was recently thrust into the gender debate when my eldest child (born male), at the age of 24, mentioned that their preferred pronouns were 'they/them', and that they'd be embarking on a journey to figures things out, as they’re not so sure themselves. They had hesitated telling me for several years because of our religious background and their fear that perhaps I would not be accepting. I had made it clear that although I did not fully understand what they were going through, that my love was unconditional, and that I would support them however I could.
As a result, I've sort of embarked on my own journey to figure out what is what, and what my position statement should be if I’m ever asked the question, though the very idea of “figuring out what is what” may be a never-ending journey. It’s such a complex topic, and poses an incredible societal challenge. Heck, even as I write this I find myself going back to what I wrote earlier to make sure I used the correct pronouns to describe my child (even using “child” ilo “son” is weird). I’m sure I missed one here or there…
Now, if I understood you correctly from the article, sex is sex (based on whether you produce sperm or eggs), and that is a matter of biology/science, yet gender can be fluid, in the sense, that how we identify ourselves, or how we behave can be independent of our sex (I hope I got that right). I think that’s where I find myself today. I may not fully understand (I may never) the fluidity of gender, or how it feels being trapped in a body that does not align with my gender; however, that shouldn’t stop me from treating people with respect and dignity (on the flip side, my lack of understanding shouldn’t give someone the right to label me a bigot or anti-trans). We are all humans who have lived somewhat different lives with unique experiences that have shaped who we are and how we reason. What I believe is good for me may not necessarily be good for someone else. If we could just all acknowledge this, and be more compassionate with each other, I believe it would help us navigate the choppier waters.
Keep up the great work, Steve. I truly appreciate the patience you exhibit with some of your commentators. I wish there were more of you out there!
"Now, if I understood you correctly from the article, sex is sex (based on whether you produce sperm or eggs), and that is a matter of biology/science, yet gender can be fluid, in the sense, that how we identify ourselves, or how we behave can be independent of our sex"
Yes, gender *is* fluid. There's no cast-iron set of rules defining what a "man" is with regards to how he should behave or what he can wear or who he should love. There's nothing preventing a man from wearing a dress or makeup except for arbitrary societal expectations. And indeed, in many cultures, men *do* wear "dresses" or paint their faces and it's considered the height of masculinity. I'm more masculine than some men, less masculine than others (heck, I'm less masculine than some women), but I'm still a man. Until very recently, this was simply a way of saying that I was an adult with a penis.
As for the idea of being trapped in a body that doesn't align with your gender, this is a concept I struggle with too. But as you say, that's no barrier to treating people with respect and dignity. And yes, I think that saying somebody is a bigot because they have questions about the deeply metaphysical question of what it means to be "trapped in the wrong body" is ridiculous. It would be crazy *not* to have questions.
Ultimately, we're all on a journey to "figure things out". We're all going to express our maleness or femaleness in unique ways. I don't think there are any wrong answers. But I also don't think there are any permanent answers that won't shift and change throughout our lives. I think young people today are being sold this gender ideology as a way of *solving* these issues of identity, and it's a pipe dream. Life is just complicated. Instead of figuring out how to be a "man" or a "woman" they'd be much better served figuring out how to be themselves.
(Just as an aside, as I came back here to comment a pop-up asked me to share this article on other social media with the question, "What do you think of when you see Steve QJ?" and showed the photo of the white transfemme whatever guy with the beard. So...I declined to share it, but only because...well, you don't remind me of THAT! LOL)
Good point that 'Christians' have a long strong history of resisting human rights. They will one day come to accept the alphabet-soup gang (sorry, it's a convenient label) and folks who are genuinely trans although I suspect there will be a reverse transition in the future (how big, I'm not sure, but I'm quite sure at least some folks are doing it because it's fashionable, or for some fairly fucked-up reasons involving not wanting to live in a misogynist or homophobic world). But, I'm with you on, "Live your life as authentically as you can." It's no skin off my nose what people want to look like and call themselves, as long as it's not some guy who's been a woman for like 45 minutes who thinks he knows more about being a woman than I do (the inherent narcissism and male privilege in at least some of these trans'women' is something I've challenged on Medium).
Not all Christians will come aboard, obviously...nor Jews nor Muslims nor other religions who are still more than a little fucked up about sex and gender. But...the more rational-minded ones will.
"I suspect there will be a reverse transition in the future"
Yeah, it's already happening. Particularly among young women who transitioned to male and regretted it. It's verboten to talk about this of course, but it's pretty much impossible to deny that a significant number of young girls are transitioning due to social factors (peer pressure, social contagion, group identity, conformity) rather than gender dysphoria. The "affirmation at al costs" model of trans care is badly failing these girls.
But yes, on an individual level, opposition to trans rights is a mystery. Same as with same-sex marriage or any number of other topics. The amount of time and energy some people invest in what other people are doing with their lives is bizarre.
My only concern when it come to trans rights are, as I said, the areas where trans rights intersect with women's rights (sports, prisons, single-sex spaces, etc.). And the way we approach care for young kids who are figuring out their identity. The idea that, for example, children should be able to get access to cross-sex hormones without any parental intervention is a huge minefield. And while I understand the reason trans activists support this, it's ridiculous to pretend that this isn't also fraught with problems, as the de-transitioning teenagers I mentioned will attest to.
Religious groups are always going to be behind the curve on issues like these. That's unavoidable I think. We've long been in territory as a society that a millennia old book wasn't prepared to offer guidance on.
I replied the following to a Medium article about heterosexual men being attracted to transwomen. At first his response was favorable, and then he blocked me:
"Your story here is certainly a different twist on the subject with some hard to deny truths.
Years ago in Bangkok I was eating in a restaurant in the mall that burned and is now a giant aquarium. The restrooms were out in the mall, rather than in the restaurant. Walking thru the mall after the meal, heading for the WC I saw a lovely who gave rise to a Jimmy Carter moment. In Thailand you use the room you are plumbed for so to my surprise we ended up at adjacent urinals. S/he fooled me and yes, it was femininity. Notice that I used the word fooled. I'm not a urinal meat peeper, the sight of a sausage would have been a turd in the femininity punchbowl. Gender at that point would have become sex.
My wife is Thai. She once commented about a kathoey which caused me to ask "Where?" Looked like a pretty woman to me. Her reply is relevant to your story. She said, "Kathoeys overdo femininity, it is not the natural femininity of a woman." If they are attractive, which is not universally true they do catch the eye of heterosexual men, at least up to a certain point. The point of this is they don't fool my wife or as best as I can tell, heterosexual women in general. Is it because they are attracted to masculinity, rather than femininity so their perceptions are not clouded?
Sooo, adding this thought. Should transattracted be replaced with femininity attracted since the attraction will end for many when the whole truth is known?"
And to the idea of homosexuals destroying marriage, it's hard for me to see how they can do any more damage to the institution than heterosexuals have dome given the current divorce rate.
The alphabet people (no insult intended) are all a part of our society and we need to be able to give everyone human respect and dignity, but belief in some of the extreme demands will be a long time coming.
"Kathoeys overdo femininity, it is not the natural femininity of a woman."
Hmm, I think this is often true for kathoey, but less so for trans people in the West. Or maybe it's fairer to say that Thai women seem less inclined to "overdo" femininity than western women are (it's also worth pointing out that many Kathoey are sex workers, so the overdoing of femininity kind of comes with the job.).
Hyper-femininity is increasingly common among women in the West, so of course, some trans women mimic that. But many trans women don't seem to to embrace the whole lipstick/makeup/tight dress vision of femininity any more than most women do.
But I think that's a good point about being femininity-attracted. I saw many very beautiful kathoey when I was in Thailand, but the knowledge that they were born male, regardless even of what surgeries they might have had, killed any attraction for me personally. In my mind, womanhood isn't something you can simply "put on". Even if you put it on with hormones and surgery.
It's similar to how I find natural female bodies more attractive than plastic surgery. It's not a criticism of those who choose to have plastic surgery, and certainly not a challenge to their right to do so. I'm 100% supportive of people's rights to live however feels authentic, but I also think it's important that we accommodate everybody's rights and feelings when we figure out how to live together.
This probably has a bit to do with my age and evolution of thought. A little over thirty years ago I was an expat in Saudi Arabia, with my family. We lived on a compound that among other things had a barber/beauty shop. The beautician was a Thai kathoy. He had to tone down the drag there since he didn't want to be thrown off a roof. There were quite a few Asian wives on the project who got together for mahjong. Tong joined in and wanted to be treated like the ladies. My wife and I politely did that though we didn't pretend that we thought he was actually a woman. He told me he was saving money for transition surgery. You may have noticed that I used he, rather than she. In those days I just considered him to be flaming gay, perhaps because I didn't see him in drag and transexual was not a part of the lexicon. On one of our vacations in Thailand we ran across him, also on vacation. He was not in drag accompanied by a super flamer, also not in drag. I mention that because kathoy has some ambiguity in that Tong presented as openly homosexual, even in Thailand where transvestite presentation was common.
All that wordiness points to my confusion which I do not think is a matter of bigotry. People are what they are, there's a place at the table for everyone and you'd be hard pressed to name a representative of a marginalized group that hasn't sat at mine. The word "trans." Trans-what, transexual, transvestite? Does it matter? In most aspects of life a person's gender or sex is irrelevant (cloths on, non-sexual, non-medical patient). I couldn't care less if a health care provider, technical support, cashier in a store, person in a recreational setting, is male, female or androgynous. "You must acknowledge my gender identity." OK, it's important to you, but it isn't to me and likely never will be. I'll be polite and treat you as you wish, which in many cases changes nothing since I'm a fan of gender equality and probably won't be treating you differently if you present as male or female. A bit like race. Some people don't like that, they want to be treated differently.
For a man in his 70s (me), much of the current focus on marginalized groups victim/oppressor is a bit disturbing. Not that the issues don't matter and need to be addressed, but the radical way people promote then seems counter productive. But then that is an issue for you too or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
The trans subject is blowing up thanks to Dave Chappelle's latest Netflix. I have a bit to say about that, but not in this comment which has grown too long.
"You must acknowledge my gender identity." OK, it's important to you, but it isn't to me and likely never will be. I'll be polite and treat you as you wish, which in many cases changes nothing since I'm a fan of gender equality and probably won't be treating you differently if you present as male or female. A bit like race. Some people don't like that, they want to be treated differently."
I fear that the ship might have sailed, but I completely agree with you. Dave Chappelle put it brilliantly in one of his other specials:
"To what degree do I need to participate in your identity?"
I'm happy to call you "she" or "he", "sir" or "madam", but when you ask society in general to pretend you're *identical* to the sex you identify as, we inevitably find ourselves in difficulty. "Woman" is a meaningful category. And has certain protections because women *need* them. Eroding those protections because some males want to be considered identical to women is a problem. Pointing that out has nothing to do with bigotry.
I wish we could just normalise the idea that men can wear dresses and makeup if the like and women can brow facial hair if they like and that doesn't *make* them the opposite sex. This is a tricky thing to do as well. But it strikes me as a more progressive way to look at gender and to dismantle the stereotypes associated with it than saying if you want to wear dresses and play with dolls you must be a girl. But as I said, I think that ship has sailed.
I haven’t seen the Dave Chapelle thing, but I admit that this comment is making me cringe a little. Being trans is an extraordinarily difficult experience, so I am not really worried that people are going to put themselves through that in order to benefit from whatever advantages society offers me to make up for all of the disadvantages I face. I agree though that elite sports has/needs special rules and is a separate discussion entirely.
I also agree with others that the alphabet soup of labels is not useful. Encouraging kids to choose a label and fixate on that limits their freedom to move naturally through gender and sexuality as they grow. At the same time, I know trans people who suffered from lack of affirmation when they were young. It seems like our approach needs to adjust depending on the degree of dysphoria. Taking the nuances of a situation into account and adjusting fluidly and rationally is not exactly our forte right now as a society.
"Being trans is an extraordinarily difficult experience, so I am not really worried that people are going to put themselves through that in order to benefit from whatever advantages society offers me to make up for all of the disadvantages I face"
I agree. Or at least I agree that being trans *can* be a difficult experience. But being a woman in prison is also a difficult experience, being a woman in a battered women's shelter is a difficult experience, being a survivor of sexual abuse is a difficult experience.
So all I'm advocating for is that when we think about how to accommodate trans women, we also consider how to accommodate *these* women. I occasionally hear women say that they aren't personally concerned about trans women in female-only spaces. And that's great. But I think there are many women who are concerned, and concerned for reasons other than bigotry. It's important to consider all women in this.
We also have to consider the fact there's a significant push to make being trans as *easy* as possible. The positives of this are obvious, but there are obvious negatives too. If we affirm everybody who declares themselves a woman, we have no way to prevent situations like the one that happened in Wi Spa in LA, where a male sex offender, was able to gain access to the female changing rooms simply by declaring himself trans (to be clear, as I understand it he wasn't trans, but the staff had no means of distinguishing this and were instructed to unquestioningly allow people to use the changing rooms of whatever gender they claimed). He then went on to expose himself to the women and young girls inside.
There have also been cases of trans women gaining access to women's only spaces and attacking women. I'm not pretending that there's an epidemic of these cases at the moment, nor am I indifferent to the fact that trans women also live with the threat of violence, but I care about both sides of this equation.
I wish I had a genius solution that would satisfy all parties, but I don't. This is a difficult problem. But the current dogma of "either you affirm trans women at all costs or you hate them," is, in my opinion, pushing people to take harder line positions than they otherwise would.
I think you’re right and that if we made room to explore folks’ genuine fears, we could identify some solutions. I hear you that dismissing people’s fears as transphobia alone makes it impossible for us to even have that conversation.
"We stand on the peak of the consciousness of previous ages, and their wisdom is available to us. History — that selective treasure house of the past which each age bequeaths to those that follow — has formed us in the present so that we may embrace the future. What does it matter if our insights, the new forms which play around the fringes of our minds, always lead us into virginal land where, like it or not, we stand on strange and bewildering ground. The only way out is ahead, and our choice is whether we shall cringe from it or affirm it." For in every act of love and will — and in the long run they are both present in each genuine act — we mold ourselves and our world simultaneously. This is what it means to embrace the future." Rollo May, Love and Will
"Genuine acts" - not belligerence, willful ignorance or sophistry - I always get the sense you're pulling for them - genuine conversations, genuine explorations - the only way out indeed. Thank you.
What a lovely comment! Thanks Bill.
I appreciate what you’re doing here in modeling reasonable discourse about an issue that impacts a minority group to which (I assume!) you don’t belong.
If you’re looking for a more fodder along these lines, the issue of stating our pronouns in meetings could use some debate. Since we don’t generally use pronouns in meetings, it always strikes me as performative. As a queer person who knows the intense anxiety that can result from coming out in any setting, I also wonder if forcing folks to announce their gender identity in all kinds of settings isn’t counterproductive wrt our goals of supporting trans people. As a woman in a heavily male-dominated field, I don’t appreciate being asked to call attention to my minority status at work, etc. If the benefits greatly outweigh the risks, I am willing to do it, but it seems worth assessing as a community.
I should write about this myself but have been too chicken. The cost of going against the grain wrt wokeness is high.
"Since we don’t generally use pronouns in meetings, it always strikes me as performative."
Yep, I couldn't agree more. The performative nature of the pronoun game drives me crazy. Human beings are highly evolved to distinguish between male and female. We don't need to be told in over 99% of cases. If somebody prefers pronouns that aren't immediately obvious by looking at them, they're going to have to "out" themselves anyway. So while I'm all for working towards a society where people feel safe to do that, pretending that we've suddenly lost the ability to distinguish is asinine. And as you say, in most settings we'll use names rather than pronouns anyway.
Honestly, I think the problem is that we normalised the idea that pronouns are identity markers rather than descriptors. People don't say I'm black because I *identify* as black. Nobody asks me in meetings if I'm white or black or hispanic. I'm black because it's a common (and slightly inaccurate) descriptor of my skin colour. I think things would be a lot less fraught for everybody if sex was treated in the same way.
Male and female are descriptors, not identities. and the pronouns go along with those descriptors. that's why we also call animals "he" and "she". But yes, there are a lot of layers to this. And that's a very interesting point you make about highlighting your minority status at work. I hadn't thought about that, but it's absolutely true.
This idea of identity markers vs. descriptors is interesting. I need to mull it over, as I hadn’t considered it before. It does make me think though about how ridiculous and/or inappropriate it would be if we were asked to describe other aspects of our identities at work. These questions are too deep for that setting.
Thank you for the Medium article and this exchange with Michael. I grew up in a very religious environment, and I would never have imagined we'd be having these debates about sex and gender. Man was man, and woman was woman, and marriage was between and man and woman – period. There really wasn’t a debate. My mind evolved over time as it relates to gay marriage, mainly because as religious people speak of the “sanctity of marriage” they fail to mention how dysfunctional marriage is with a not so great divorce rate (though divorce isn’t a barometer for a bad marriage – there are plenty of bad marriages where the couple remains married out of fear or convenience). A bad marriage/divorce can have a detrimental impact on children. Because hetero marriages haven’t been a model for whatis good or bad, I’m not sure we can state that gay marriage is bad. In the end, I’m most interested in providing strong family units for our youth, regardless of their makeup, and therefore, there’s nothing stopping me from supporting gay marriage. There may be some flaws in my logic, but it’s where I’m at.
I was recently thrust into the gender debate when my eldest child (born male), at the age of 24, mentioned that their preferred pronouns were 'they/them', and that they'd be embarking on a journey to figures things out, as they’re not so sure themselves. They had hesitated telling me for several years because of our religious background and their fear that perhaps I would not be accepting. I had made it clear that although I did not fully understand what they were going through, that my love was unconditional, and that I would support them however I could.
As a result, I've sort of embarked on my own journey to figure out what is what, and what my position statement should be if I’m ever asked the question, though the very idea of “figuring out what is what” may be a never-ending journey. It’s such a complex topic, and poses an incredible societal challenge. Heck, even as I write this I find myself going back to what I wrote earlier to make sure I used the correct pronouns to describe my child (even using “child” ilo “son” is weird). I’m sure I missed one here or there…
Now, if I understood you correctly from the article, sex is sex (based on whether you produce sperm or eggs), and that is a matter of biology/science, yet gender can be fluid, in the sense, that how we identify ourselves, or how we behave can be independent of our sex (I hope I got that right). I think that’s where I find myself today. I may not fully understand (I may never) the fluidity of gender, or how it feels being trapped in a body that does not align with my gender; however, that shouldn’t stop me from treating people with respect and dignity (on the flip side, my lack of understanding shouldn’t give someone the right to label me a bigot or anti-trans). We are all humans who have lived somewhat different lives with unique experiences that have shaped who we are and how we reason. What I believe is good for me may not necessarily be good for someone else. If we could just all acknowledge this, and be more compassionate with each other, I believe it would help us navigate the choppier waters.
Keep up the great work, Steve. I truly appreciate the patience you exhibit with some of your commentators. I wish there were more of you out there!
"Now, if I understood you correctly from the article, sex is sex (based on whether you produce sperm or eggs), and that is a matter of biology/science, yet gender can be fluid, in the sense, that how we identify ourselves, or how we behave can be independent of our sex"
Yes, gender *is* fluid. There's no cast-iron set of rules defining what a "man" is with regards to how he should behave or what he can wear or who he should love. There's nothing preventing a man from wearing a dress or makeup except for arbitrary societal expectations. And indeed, in many cultures, men *do* wear "dresses" or paint their faces and it's considered the height of masculinity. I'm more masculine than some men, less masculine than others (heck, I'm less masculine than some women), but I'm still a man. Until very recently, this was simply a way of saying that I was an adult with a penis.
As for the idea of being trapped in a body that doesn't align with your gender, this is a concept I struggle with too. But as you say, that's no barrier to treating people with respect and dignity. And yes, I think that saying somebody is a bigot because they have questions about the deeply metaphysical question of what it means to be "trapped in the wrong body" is ridiculous. It would be crazy *not* to have questions.
Ultimately, we're all on a journey to "figure things out". We're all going to express our maleness or femaleness in unique ways. I don't think there are any wrong answers. But I also don't think there are any permanent answers that won't shift and change throughout our lives. I think young people today are being sold this gender ideology as a way of *solving* these issues of identity, and it's a pipe dream. Life is just complicated. Instead of figuring out how to be a "man" or a "woman" they'd be much better served figuring out how to be themselves.
(Just as an aside, as I came back here to comment a pop-up asked me to share this article on other social media with the question, "What do you think of when you see Steve QJ?" and showed the photo of the white transfemme whatever guy with the beard. So...I declined to share it, but only because...well, you don't remind me of THAT! LOL)
Good point that 'Christians' have a long strong history of resisting human rights. They will one day come to accept the alphabet-soup gang (sorry, it's a convenient label) and folks who are genuinely trans although I suspect there will be a reverse transition in the future (how big, I'm not sure, but I'm quite sure at least some folks are doing it because it's fashionable, or for some fairly fucked-up reasons involving not wanting to live in a misogynist or homophobic world). But, I'm with you on, "Live your life as authentically as you can." It's no skin off my nose what people want to look like and call themselves, as long as it's not some guy who's been a woman for like 45 minutes who thinks he knows more about being a woman than I do (the inherent narcissism and male privilege in at least some of these trans'women' is something I've challenged on Medium).
Not all Christians will come aboard, obviously...nor Jews nor Muslims nor other religions who are still more than a little fucked up about sex and gender. But...the more rational-minded ones will.
"I suspect there will be a reverse transition in the future"
Yeah, it's already happening. Particularly among young women who transitioned to male and regretted it. It's verboten to talk about this of course, but it's pretty much impossible to deny that a significant number of young girls are transitioning due to social factors (peer pressure, social contagion, group identity, conformity) rather than gender dysphoria. The "affirmation at al costs" model of trans care is badly failing these girls.
But yes, on an individual level, opposition to trans rights is a mystery. Same as with same-sex marriage or any number of other topics. The amount of time and energy some people invest in what other people are doing with their lives is bizarre.
My only concern when it come to trans rights are, as I said, the areas where trans rights intersect with women's rights (sports, prisons, single-sex spaces, etc.). And the way we approach care for young kids who are figuring out their identity. The idea that, for example, children should be able to get access to cross-sex hormones without any parental intervention is a huge minefield. And while I understand the reason trans activists support this, it's ridiculous to pretend that this isn't also fraught with problems, as the de-transitioning teenagers I mentioned will attest to.
Religious groups are always going to be behind the curve on issues like these. That's unavoidable I think. We've long been in territory as a society that a millennia old book wasn't prepared to offer guidance on.
I replied the following to a Medium article about heterosexual men being attracted to transwomen. At first his response was favorable, and then he blocked me:
"Your story here is certainly a different twist on the subject with some hard to deny truths.
Years ago in Bangkok I was eating in a restaurant in the mall that burned and is now a giant aquarium. The restrooms were out in the mall, rather than in the restaurant. Walking thru the mall after the meal, heading for the WC I saw a lovely who gave rise to a Jimmy Carter moment. In Thailand you use the room you are plumbed for so to my surprise we ended up at adjacent urinals. S/he fooled me and yes, it was femininity. Notice that I used the word fooled. I'm not a urinal meat peeper, the sight of a sausage would have been a turd in the femininity punchbowl. Gender at that point would have become sex.
My wife is Thai. She once commented about a kathoey which caused me to ask "Where?" Looked like a pretty woman to me. Her reply is relevant to your story. She said, "Kathoeys overdo femininity, it is not the natural femininity of a woman." If they are attractive, which is not universally true they do catch the eye of heterosexual men, at least up to a certain point. The point of this is they don't fool my wife or as best as I can tell, heterosexual women in general. Is it because they are attracted to masculinity, rather than femininity so their perceptions are not clouded?
Sooo, adding this thought. Should transattracted be replaced with femininity attracted since the attraction will end for many when the whole truth is known?"
Participation in sports - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parinya_Charoenphol
And to the idea of homosexuals destroying marriage, it's hard for me to see how they can do any more damage to the institution than heterosexuals have dome given the current divorce rate.
The alphabet people (no insult intended) are all a part of our society and we need to be able to give everyone human respect and dignity, but belief in some of the extreme demands will be a long time coming.
"Kathoeys overdo femininity, it is not the natural femininity of a woman."
Hmm, I think this is often true for kathoey, but less so for trans people in the West. Or maybe it's fairer to say that Thai women seem less inclined to "overdo" femininity than western women are (it's also worth pointing out that many Kathoey are sex workers, so the overdoing of femininity kind of comes with the job.).
Hyper-femininity is increasingly common among women in the West, so of course, some trans women mimic that. But many trans women don't seem to to embrace the whole lipstick/makeup/tight dress vision of femininity any more than most women do.
But I think that's a good point about being femininity-attracted. I saw many very beautiful kathoey when I was in Thailand, but the knowledge that they were born male, regardless even of what surgeries they might have had, killed any attraction for me personally. In my mind, womanhood isn't something you can simply "put on". Even if you put it on with hormones and surgery.
It's similar to how I find natural female bodies more attractive than plastic surgery. It's not a criticism of those who choose to have plastic surgery, and certainly not a challenge to their right to do so. I'm 100% supportive of people's rights to live however feels authentic, but I also think it's important that we accommodate everybody's rights and feelings when we figure out how to live together.
This probably has a bit to do with my age and evolution of thought. A little over thirty years ago I was an expat in Saudi Arabia, with my family. We lived on a compound that among other things had a barber/beauty shop. The beautician was a Thai kathoy. He had to tone down the drag there since he didn't want to be thrown off a roof. There were quite a few Asian wives on the project who got together for mahjong. Tong joined in and wanted to be treated like the ladies. My wife and I politely did that though we didn't pretend that we thought he was actually a woman. He told me he was saving money for transition surgery. You may have noticed that I used he, rather than she. In those days I just considered him to be flaming gay, perhaps because I didn't see him in drag and transexual was not a part of the lexicon. On one of our vacations in Thailand we ran across him, also on vacation. He was not in drag accompanied by a super flamer, also not in drag. I mention that because kathoy has some ambiguity in that Tong presented as openly homosexual, even in Thailand where transvestite presentation was common.
All that wordiness points to my confusion which I do not think is a matter of bigotry. People are what they are, there's a place at the table for everyone and you'd be hard pressed to name a representative of a marginalized group that hasn't sat at mine. The word "trans." Trans-what, transexual, transvestite? Does it matter? In most aspects of life a person's gender or sex is irrelevant (cloths on, non-sexual, non-medical patient). I couldn't care less if a health care provider, technical support, cashier in a store, person in a recreational setting, is male, female or androgynous. "You must acknowledge my gender identity." OK, it's important to you, but it isn't to me and likely never will be. I'll be polite and treat you as you wish, which in many cases changes nothing since I'm a fan of gender equality and probably won't be treating you differently if you present as male or female. A bit like race. Some people don't like that, they want to be treated differently.
For a man in his 70s (me), much of the current focus on marginalized groups victim/oppressor is a bit disturbing. Not that the issues don't matter and need to be addressed, but the radical way people promote then seems counter productive. But then that is an issue for you too or we wouldn't be having this discussion.
The trans subject is blowing up thanks to Dave Chappelle's latest Netflix. I have a bit to say about that, but not in this comment which has grown too long.
"You must acknowledge my gender identity." OK, it's important to you, but it isn't to me and likely never will be. I'll be polite and treat you as you wish, which in many cases changes nothing since I'm a fan of gender equality and probably won't be treating you differently if you present as male or female. A bit like race. Some people don't like that, they want to be treated differently."
I fear that the ship might have sailed, but I completely agree with you. Dave Chappelle put it brilliantly in one of his other specials:
"To what degree do I need to participate in your identity?"
I'm happy to call you "she" or "he", "sir" or "madam", but when you ask society in general to pretend you're *identical* to the sex you identify as, we inevitably find ourselves in difficulty. "Woman" is a meaningful category. And has certain protections because women *need* them. Eroding those protections because some males want to be considered identical to women is a problem. Pointing that out has nothing to do with bigotry.
I wish we could just normalise the idea that men can wear dresses and makeup if the like and women can brow facial hair if they like and that doesn't *make* them the opposite sex. This is a tricky thing to do as well. But it strikes me as a more progressive way to look at gender and to dismantle the stereotypes associated with it than saying if you want to wear dresses and play with dolls you must be a girl. But as I said, I think that ship has sailed.
I haven’t seen the Dave Chapelle thing, but I admit that this comment is making me cringe a little. Being trans is an extraordinarily difficult experience, so I am not really worried that people are going to put themselves through that in order to benefit from whatever advantages society offers me to make up for all of the disadvantages I face. I agree though that elite sports has/needs special rules and is a separate discussion entirely.
I also agree with others that the alphabet soup of labels is not useful. Encouraging kids to choose a label and fixate on that limits their freedom to move naturally through gender and sexuality as they grow. At the same time, I know trans people who suffered from lack of affirmation when they were young. It seems like our approach needs to adjust depending on the degree of dysphoria. Taking the nuances of a situation into account and adjusting fluidly and rationally is not exactly our forte right now as a society.
"Being trans is an extraordinarily difficult experience, so I am not really worried that people are going to put themselves through that in order to benefit from whatever advantages society offers me to make up for all of the disadvantages I face"
I agree. Or at least I agree that being trans *can* be a difficult experience. But being a woman in prison is also a difficult experience, being a woman in a battered women's shelter is a difficult experience, being a survivor of sexual abuse is a difficult experience.
So all I'm advocating for is that when we think about how to accommodate trans women, we also consider how to accommodate *these* women. I occasionally hear women say that they aren't personally concerned about trans women in female-only spaces. And that's great. But I think there are many women who are concerned, and concerned for reasons other than bigotry. It's important to consider all women in this.
We also have to consider the fact there's a significant push to make being trans as *easy* as possible. The positives of this are obvious, but there are obvious negatives too. If we affirm everybody who declares themselves a woman, we have no way to prevent situations like the one that happened in Wi Spa in LA, where a male sex offender, was able to gain access to the female changing rooms simply by declaring himself trans (to be clear, as I understand it he wasn't trans, but the staff had no means of distinguishing this and were instructed to unquestioningly allow people to use the changing rooms of whatever gender they claimed). He then went on to expose himself to the women and young girls inside.
There have also been cases of trans women gaining access to women's only spaces and attacking women. I'm not pretending that there's an epidemic of these cases at the moment, nor am I indifferent to the fact that trans women also live with the threat of violence, but I care about both sides of this equation.
I wish I had a genius solution that would satisfy all parties, but I don't. This is a difficult problem. But the current dogma of "either you affirm trans women at all costs or you hate them," is, in my opinion, pushing people to take harder line positions than they otherwise would.
Thanks, Steve, for clarifying.
I think you’re right and that if we made room to explore folks’ genuine fears, we could identify some solutions. I hear you that dismissing people’s fears as transphobia alone makes it impossible for us to even have that conversation.
Once again, individualism is the right answer. In this case, it's individual restrooms. :)