Genitalia doesn't define us! Gov't, society disagrees

Okay, I'm getting really fucking tired of labels.

I'm in the process of changing my name and gender marker on most legal documents. I have been living and passing as the gender "opposite" from that which I was assigned at birth for 1/3 of a year. As I transcend the labels which have so defined me for the last 23 years, I cannot help but realize how damn silly this labeling is to begin with.

Let me start from the beginning, conceptually: at conception, we are labelled by our weight and ancestry. Oh, and our genitalia... unless it doesn't resemble a typical vagina or penis, in which case the doctor will just forcibly transform the ambiguous genitalia to appear more like a typical vagina or penis.

Does that sound just the tiniest bit unreasonable to anyone else? How about (usually) unnecessary? How about oppressive? How about unethical?

What is it abouta a vagina, penis, ambiguous genitalia, or any other body part that should define our identities as people?

Why does there exist a system that restricts the types of genitalia people are allowed to have? Some reasons are medically necessary. Some are downright ridiculous. From Wikipedia:

1. to improve the potential for fertility
2. to provide an outlet for menstruation
3. to prevent or reduce urinary tract infections or obstruction
4. to reduce risk of cancer in abnormal gonads.
5. to close open wounds or exposed internal organs
6. to improve urinary or fecal continence.
7. to alleviate parental distress over the atypical genital appearance.
8. to make the appearance more normal for the person's sex of rearing
9. to reduce effects of abnormal genitalia on psychosexual development and gender identity
10. to improve the potential for adult sexual relationships

#2, #3, #5 and #6 I can see as being sometimes necessary...

#1, #8 and #10 are just ignorant and

#4 I need more clarification on.



How can enforcing a label onto an individual

at birth or

based on their genitalia
be important or necessary?

Sex/gender is a huge bucket of steaming crap.

Unless anyone's got a better answer, my only guess is that our recent ancestors have designed a system of ideals to oppress one another.

And it's not just typical-penis people who oppress typical-vagina people.

I like that terminology. Typical-[binary genitalia] people. Legal "male" or "female" labels are only determined by genitalia. And this legal delineation leads to a "gendered" childhood upbringing, which typically leads to being "properly" "gendered" by the rest of society, and we all live happily ever after.

Except you hate your gender.

Yes, I mean you.

Maybe you've never had a single thought to cross gender lines.

I bet you've been jealous of the "opposite" gender at least once.

That doesn't mean you're like me, and want to completely cross the line, so to speak.

But you could. Yeah. You totally could. And that would be okay.

It's that in-between stage that really pisses society off, however.

It's unsafe to not clearly fit into the proscribed "male" or "female" categories. "This is 2013!" Trust me, we're in the identity stone age.

Whether you actually care to transcend genders or not, you should know that society will get pissy if you try to. Doesn't that make you angry? I guess if you have no desire to transcend you probably wouldn't care. You might even be one of those people who gets pissed when others do it. Or you're just totally fine with the way you are, and wouldn't change a thing.

Do these eugenic practices occur in other ways in our society?

How can the "gender roles" which result from assigning a legal "sex"/"gender" fulfill the desires of every individual?

To me, sex/gender seems like just another excuse to segregate people. It may even be the absolutely most insidious one.

"Male" and "female" categories dominate the identities of our species. There are extremely vague and unusual "roles" and characteristics associated with those categories which are reserved for only one or the other. These roles/characteristics do evolve, but remain independent of one another.

We may fear the "opposite" sex/gender.

We may love the "opposite" sex/gender.

We may hate the "opposite" sex/gender.

We may be "attracted" to the "opposite" sex/gender.

We separate ourselves from another group of people in order to _________. Segregation. But why?! The system itself is oppressive, and certain separations may result in an oppressive outcome, but the need for separation itself doesn't necessarily strike me as oppressive.

I don't know why we do it. That's why I left a blank.

Maybe it's to seemingly "make things easier." Or is that just the system's deception? We're just so used to it that we assume it's easier?

Is it to facilitate reproduction? No, that would disregard human ingenuity. Many babies are born through a surrogate parent; such a practice implies that reproduction does not necessitate any attraction between people of "opposite genders" or attraction to people with different genitalia.

Is it to make people easier to identify? Well that would depend. If I'm showing my ID to security at a bar, it's the picture they're probably comparing me with - the gender marker may helps them if my presentation aligns with the legal delineation. But what if it doesn't? Not shit. Unless you've come across an enormous bigot, such an "inconsistency" is not going to prevent you from access.

While presenting and passing as "female," I've handed my male-gendered ID with a facial-haired and balding picture to numerous security guards, and have - at oddest - received a double take, or a curious grin. It has never caused me problems.

An inconsistent actual-appearance with your ID photo may lead some security folks to believe you are not who you say you are. In this case, I think it's important to consider what sounds less oppressive:

A society with no legal, gender-labeling system based on genitalia, thus allowing anyone to present themselves at any point on the gender spectrum without facing social or official repercussion(s), or

Forcibly labeling people as male or female, thus preventing them from presenting themselves at any point on the gender spectrum, by enforcing social and/or official repercussions.

One of those statements doesn't reflect our society.

I can't tell you how society could ever become like my first description, but, to me, it sounds a lot better than the latter one.

Gender is a valid way to describe differences between people's interests and presentations, in my opinion. Unfortunately, presentation is not the only association we as a society make as the distinction between genders or "sexes."

Other than "gender roles," genitalia is defined by gender or "sex," according to the law and doctors and science textbooks, therefore society generally accepts this to be true, and decides what others' genitalia may be, based on their presentation.

If you can't already tell, I strongly believe in the importance of eliminating the existing, proscribed association of genitalia to binary identities.

Now that I've written this I'm much less pissed off, only because I've at least proposed a solution to some of my angst. If only I could convince the government.

Thoughts: Presentation and Reception; Related(ish) Material

Here are some videos I came across, which touch upon some of ideas I expressed in my last post; ideas of a genderless society, or how gender roles and perceptions of others' presentations interact with modern life.

The videos also provide insights into other topics that are important to me, which I feel are worth sharing.


This one is especially wonderful to me, because it helps to bridge the gap between the prolix radfem vs trans activist "debate". Most relevant information comes near the end, but I recommend hearing the full context.




The next video is great, although it is limited to heteronormative perspective. I share it because the speaker brings up the point that many modern ideas about natural attraction is flawed.

Thoughts: Presenting and Reception

Since I began presenting full-time as a socially-defined female, I've noticed, more than anything, that strangers who are ostensibly-straight men make more public comments to me about my appearance than ever before. (Some gay men do, too.)

In fact, I never got comments on my appearance before. Or about what someone would like to do with me. *Shudder*

This is of course no surprise; I'd heard such completely sexist men utter these comments to other women before, and I've read/heard my fair share of societal critiques on the phenomenon (as many of any of my readers have as well, I'm sure).

But nothing compares to the experience of real, live, daily objectification.

So I won't go on telling you about the comments I get in particular, as I'm sure they'd be no surprise (however hilarious yet pathetic some may be).

I find fascinating however, that the straight men who openly objectify me have absolutely no idea that I was born biologically male.

I mean, how many times have we all heard a straight guy gloat about how "secure" he is in his heterosexuality? And yet - only 3 months into hormone replacement therapy - I am being objectified by these very men, who (at "best") might react to the knowledge of my transness in a manner not dissimilar to the men in the transphobic conclusion to Ace Ventura: Pet Detective; at worst, I could be physically and/or sexually assaulted.

(BTW, "transphobic" has gotten a red squiggly... I guess we're not using it enough!)

To me, this experience - of objectification by men who are so allegedly secure in their sexualities - completely blows apart any traditional conception of sexual attraction.

That is, unless we believe that sexual attraction boils down to one's presentation, and how that aligns with gender norms.

But in my opinion, this is not the most common belief in my society. In fact, it seems - by my crude guesstimation - that most people in my society define their sexuality by their feelings about others' physical body parts.

In public, many of these body parts are not visible. I'm focusing of course on sex/gender related characteristics only, and I'm not talking about secondary sex characteristics (e.g. height, body hair, voice, skin, distribution of body fat, etc).

The physical body parts I'm focusing on - in relation to how most people seem to define their sexuality - are primary sex organs like the vagina, penis, breasts, and/or other configurations of the "private areas."

So, of the men who decide to share their interest in having sex with me, let's suppose that most of them define their sexuality by what they assume is under my clothing (but in reality, isn't). What is it that they are really attracted to? My presentation, or what they imagine is underneath my clothing?

Does my presentation validate their imagination? Or is my presentation the very thing to which they are attracted?

In general, it's possible to assume that it could go either way, and/or be both. But of those individuals who openly objectify me, I think it is safe to assume that my presentation is just a means by which to justify what they assume must be underneath my clothing.

So what is it about my presentation that has this effect? My long hair? My breast forms? My cowboy boots? My tight pants? My puffy jacket, sewn in such a way that it creates the illusion of wide hips?

Not to get too personal - except completely personal - if a group of test subjects were to look at me naked, right now, most of them would "gender," or "sex" me as male (unless you had trained yourself to never assume anyone's sex/gender, in which case... I would love to get coffee with you). But if I throw on a few external "female" cues, all of a sudden everything changes.

I am privileged in some regards. I have mostly soft facial features. But this doesn't change the fact that I was born biologically male, and I have only been taking female hormones for a very short time.

It seems to me that somewhere in society, people are being taught what to imagine "should" be underneath others' clothes.

In America, we have a thing called Junior High - I'm not sure if it's called the same thing in other countries, but during the 8th grade of this academic institution (I was 14 years old), we were introduced - way too heteronormatively and gender-binarily - to the "two" human sex/genders and how they "should" interact.

Of course, like many young people of my and later generations, this was not my first brush with the "private" regions and acts associated with sex and gender. (Although pornography, for example, really only confused me; the first porn I saw was a picture of an older woman with a double-sided dildo emerging from her vagina, which I assumed was actually a phallus growing out of her body. Oh, the seeds of my non-binary perceptions!)

Anyway, I wonder if sex ed has anything to do with the way we imagine what is underneath others' clothing. Media and society show us how what presentations and secondary sex characteristics "match" with which sex/genders, and then sex ed swoops in and gives us all the details about what should be underneath, why it's there, and what you will probably want to do with it.

And then... puberty swoops in and pulls the whole meal together. Especially given how age-segregated our educational institutions are, youngsters are bathed in reinforcement of all those previously learned roles, norms and expectations about sex and gender.

Puberty acts like cement for the mold.

Suppose we weren't taught that sex and gender is typically heteronormative and binary. What if every person, by the age of 14, knew that any one of those folks with a "male presentation" could very well have "female private parts?" Or those with a "female presentation" could have "male private parts?"

If those guys who objectify me on the street had grown up in such a society, I wonder if they would still risk "emasculating" themselves by openly objectifying me?

If male/female norms weren't established, could a concept like "emasculation" not even exist?

Without concrete presentations on which to base our assumptions about another person's sex/gender, how would we define our sexualities? Would we define our sexualities?

Given the democratic nature of my society (i.e., majority rules), I expect that most people would still resort to equating presentations with sex/gender.

But I still like to imagine all the different ways people could decide what attracts them to others - in spite of sex/gender - without fear of repercussion or shame.

Detour: Why Blog About This?

I want to clarify a little about why I'm starting this blog.

My problems with identity, like most trans* people, began at a very young age.

As I became more entrenched within society - e.g. peers and the media - I began to construct ideas about identities and labels.

Like many people from and since my generation, I felt empowered by the messages about "being yourself," "you can be whatever you want," "you are unique," etc.

But my empowerment quickly became a tangled mess. Of the self-identifying categories from which to choose, I was not able to find one that fit. Ignorance had a lot to do with it, but even if I'd heard the word "transgender" or "transsexual" any sooner, I'm not sure I would have thought it applied to me.

Labels for sexuality were very familiar to me. I had been called "faggot," "queen," and such pejoratives. There were whispers amidst the boys about "lesbians." And it seemed like another, high-profile person was being "outed" every day.

Within the last thirty years or so, the media, society and the arts have placed heavy emphasis on the subject of sexuality. In fact, you might even say sexuality was "in vogue." Which is a very good thing. But knowing is only half the battle.

Feeling as though I was as normal as anyone else I'd heard about, I decided that sexuality must have been the cause of my pain and confusion. Thus, instead of seeing my problem as a gender issue, I allowed my gender problems to get masked by a conflict with sexuality.

But it's not all about sexuality. Gender roles - and how others expected me to fulfill them - also factored into my problem.

When I was expected to be "male," I felt as though I should have been more expected to be "female." The place where I most encountered that expectation was "in the bedroom," so to speak. As a previously heterosexual male, I assumed that if making love to women (as a male) didn't feel right, then I must be gay. I tried and tried to make my homosexuality true (for years!).

"What else could it be?" I thought.

Now, I can't help but wonder if anyone else has experienced such a confusion, and even stifled their own transition(s) in the process.

A typical part of the trans* tale (particularly for late-transitioners) tends to go like this:

"I got married and had kids to make my feelings about gender go away."

Or like this:

"I thought that by doing [hyper-masculine/hyper-feminine thing], my feelings about gender would go away."

But mine goes something like this:

"I thought that by understanding my sexuality, my feelings about gender would away."

Or more specifically:

"I thought that by being a gay man, I wouldn't want to be a woman."

And then after transition:

"I am a woman and I should love men."

But the truth is - and has always been - that I am a transwoman who is sexually attracted to females. You have no idea what a relief it is to understand that.

Or do you?

By starting this blog, I'm hoping to not only educate the public about people like me, but also reach out to others who may have gone through - or are going through - the same or a similar conflict.

Sexuality and gender, while distinctly different, are easy to mix up. And we shouldn't feel ashamed if we do mix it up. I hope to open a thoughtful discussion about the topic, discover ways we can help clarify the differences between sexuality and gender, and push for more education about the conflict, so that more people like us can understand themselves a little better.

Introduction: Denial (x2)

Have you ever denied something about yourself? I've done so in a couple of different ways: primarily consciously and primarily subconsciously. I was shocked upon discovering the denial that was primarily subconscious; it felt paranormal.

The primarily conscious denial, however... was no surprise whatsoever. In fact, I'd always known that I was denying that aspect of myself. It just took Kate Bornstein and female hormones to make me stop.

I don't know Kate Bornstein, but I read her memoir, A Queer and Pleasant Danger. I already knew I was transsexual when I started reading it. I didn't know that I was a lesbian. (...Kind of.)

Why do we deny things about ourselves?

In the case of my primarily subconscious denial - that I was trans - I decided long ago that exploring my gender would be 1) shameful and 2) pointless, because there was nothing I could do about it anyway (so I thought).

But why, oh why, did I deny that I was attracted to women?

Before beginning my transition, I knew that I liked girls. But when gender dysphoria nipped at my loins, I explained it away with the only conclusion my pubescent, subconsciously-in-denial consciousness could come up with: I was attracted to dudes!

I mean, why else would my high school self fear fulfilling the role that my girlfriend so badly needed me to? Why, after starting and enjoying a great relationship with her, would I all of a sudden take issue with that ostensibly glorious act of lovemaking?

"You want me to put what where???"

I'd seen The Man Show. I'd listened to The Howard Stern Show. I had even looked at those pornographic movies on the internet. But I never expected to face what she wanted me to do with her.

So there I was: a seventeen-year old, (mostly) heterosexual boy, who was afraid to lose his virginity with a beautiful girl.

And she was incorrigible! I told her we were too young. She pointed to the law, which said that two, consenting seventeen-year olds were allowed to get down.

I said it was too dangerous. She bought condoms, spermicide, and took birth control.

It came down to doing it, or losing her.

So I did it.

And I did not like it.

"I must be gay!"

I convinced myself that society had brainwashed me into being attracted to women, via programs like The Man Show and The Howard Stern Show; that friends' dirty comments about other girls were infecting my mind and teaching me to like something I didn't like.

Well, I tried to convince myself that.

For six years.

After four boyfriends and more man-on-man flings than I like to admit, it has finally hit me. Even after I began transitioning to "female", I still held onto the possibility that I wasn't really into girls. I didn't want to be wrong.

But I am so glad I was.

So how does Kate Bornstein play into all this? What does HRT have to do with anything? And how exactly did I maintain such a ridiculous falsity for six long, long years?

I'm a little scared to tease out that last one, I hope to answer these questions and more in a future post.