I am somewhat worried that during this post I’m going to want to use the phrase “I’ve been on a journey” but with the extreme level of cliché that would entail I shall do my best to avoid it.
So recently I’ve been on a journey…
Today I was asked about the point of the ‘T’ in LGBT. It was the same question I was asking myself a few months ago. I just couldn’t see the point of it, couldn’t see the similarities with LGB and although I was never transphobic as such I certainly was very trans-ignorant! Over the last few months however, I have the pleasure of spending time with some really lovely and interesting people who’ve helped change my mind about this and I now consider myself pretty good on the issue. Admittedly ’good’ is a rather bad word to describe it but hopefully it is obvious what I mean.
I still struggle to understand trans issues. In the sense that as a cisgendered person (my gender identity matches my sex) I cannot hope to understand what it’s like to be trans. In that regard I have made absolutely no progress. I still cannot understand why someone would be trans and I struggle to see what the big deal is about it. Of course this all seems somewhat contradictory to my claim of being ‘good’ with the whole trans thing.
What has changed is that I now don’t care whether I can understand it. It doesn’t matter that I don’t really see the point. What matters is that there are people out there who are trans and our current society is massively unfair to them. It annoys me to no end that straight people don’t get what it’s like to be gay. Obviously some can empathise and thankfully progress is slowly being made in terms of gay rights across the world. The problem is this took way, way, way too long. We had the mad rush of civil rights for black and ethnic people. We finally made progress in this area and although there is still a way to go the majority of people view racism as a bad thing and we bemoan our previous generations for the mistakes they made. To a much more limited degree this is happening with homophobia. Slowly it is fading and gradually the younger generation is judging previous generations for their mistakes. However, there was no natural transition. People still struggle to see the similarities between the black rights movement and the gay rights movement. People didn’t suddenly ‘get’ what it is like to be black or gay or a woman. They saw injustice and finally started to object to it after years of failure.
Effectively what I’m trying to say is that I support human rights. Now this may mean that I focus a lot of my attention on LGBT rights but that is only because it is something close to my heart that I see needs fighting for. One of the main reasons I have for doing this is because in 40 years time (or however long) when homophobia is something that the majority of people reject I don’t want to be embarrassed about what my generation did. I want to be able to say that I did all I could to fight against it. Now this is all very well and good and I am aware that I sound a little bit holier than thou (I honestly don’t mean to be) but perhaps it isn’t instantly obvious how this relates to trans issues.
The point I’m trying to make and, characteristically the point that is taking me far longer than it should to make, is that it doesn’t matter if you cannot understand something like transgenderism; if you can see people being discriminated against you should object to that. As long as the human right being fought for doesn’t hurt anyone it is worth fighting for. We shouldn’t need time to work out whether we understand or can empathise. If someone feels discriminated against and we can prevent that we should. It shouldn’t require generations of failure to finally rectify our mistakes. It is 40 years since the fight for gay rights really kicked off and we are still only just approaching the point where equality is on the horizon. We can’t afford to make the same mistakes again.
Now I don’t mean getting overly PC about stuff. We all dread the phrase “political correctness gone mad” but trans discrimination is so easy to avoid. You can avoid using gender pronouns and use someone’s name or ‘they/their etc’ instead. You can stop asking for people’s gender when it is completely unnecessary. You can accept that not everyone is cisgendered and, if you meet someone who isn’t, not question that. All of these things and more require such little effort and certainly don’t harm anyone but make such a huge difference to trans people.
You don’t need to understand why people are trans. You don’t need to see the point of it all. All you need to do is see the really easy ways you can make a positive impact in people’s lives and help make the world a more tolerant and inclusive place.
I am so glad we ‘lump’ the T into LGBT. It may not be exactly the same but it is still the same fight. It is about allowing people to live their lives as they want to and not enforcing cisgenderism on people the same way we enforced heterosexuality on people in generations past.
You didn’t actually respond to my comment yesterday until the last paragraph. I wasn’t arguing against transgenderism or their rights, simply that it was odd that they were being tacked onto the end of lgb. It’s a completely different situation, give them their own group. :p
In response to the main article, I have to admit I’m sceptical about transgenderism. I am all for their rights and, as you pointed out, it is easy to accommodate them. however, your gender is not impacted by the way you feel, only by your biochemistry. If you have a y chromosome you are male. If you do not you are female. You can have turner females (singular x chromosome) and kleinefelter males (extra x chromosomes but still have a y) which are obviously special cases but other that that it is very simple.
Yer, this wasn’t supposed to be a direct response to your question, more just some thoughts that were sparked by the discussions we were having. I think that trans is linked. LGB people are discriminated against because they are attracted to people of a gender/sex that is different to the norm. Trans people ARE (or want to be) a different gender/sex to the norm. Yes, it’s distinct and I totally reject people who assume trans people are just ‘extreme’ gay people, but it is still related and worth being considered together.
The mistake you make in the second paragraph is confusing sex and gender. What you’ve said is an absolutely correct appraisal of sex. For the vast majority of people sex is easy to define by physical characteristics or chromosomes. However, gender is something that, according to trans people, is much harder to define and is a psychological thing rather than a physiological thing that doesn’t have to be the same as one’s sex.
The point I was trying to make in this post is that you don’t have to understand or agree with that opinion to avoid discriminating against people who do.
(Full disclosure: My gender identity is in a state of fair amount of flux at the moment.)
@David cole: Ahh, you managed to hit quite a few false statements there.
The trans and the queers have always formed a community – if I may sloppily quote the Wikipedia article on the Stonewall Riots: The Stonewall Inn catered to “drag queens, representatives of a newly self-aware transgender community, effeminate young men, hustlers, and homeless youth.”. The T in LGBT isn’t ‘tacked on’ the end – we’ve been here standing with everyone else from the start.
The LGB and the T aren’t in such a different situation, either; over the last 50 years an awful lot of rights have been won in the West. Black civil rights, the recognition of intramarital rape, gay marriage, the gender recognition act – it’s all symptomatic of a society growing up. You can’t fight for one freedom without simultaneously fighting for all of the others. Sure, there’s a difference of scale; there always is – but the problem is always people being inhumane to others.
(Dan’s already responded to your confusing of “sex” and “gender”. In this context, they aren’t ever used interchangably.)
I don’t interact much with the LGBT community as a whole – my life is rather busy as is. I do (mis?)recall[1] at one trans meet last term the point being made that transfolk experience the most blunt vitriol from feminists (like Bindel and Greer) and the rest of the queer community. I’m sure you meant no ill will, but sometimes when you write “give them their own group. :p” it’s hard not to read “kick them out of mine[2]“.
[1] My memory is dire – I might be conflating two different speakers here.
[2] Of course, I have no idea about who you are or what your sexuality might be, etc.
I remain to be convinced that gender has such a meaning. Let me give you an example: thinking or believing that you are beautiful does not make you such, just as feeling that you are a man does not make you any more so than otherwise. Yes I believe transgender people should have rights and should not be discriminated against but their gender is not impacted by their feelings.
I think what irks me is the use of the word gender to describe a state of mind. The word gender is a synonym of the word sex and the word has been hyjacked and given a different meaning. By all means make up another word for it but give me back my word
(Ah, David… if you’re more self confident in your body people /do/ perceive you as more attractive. We also have that famous saying about the “eye of the beholder” – beauty isn’t an absolute. I’ll assume you picked a poor example innocently – it’s not central to Dan’s enjoyable blog post.)
Your post again is based around the definition of the word ‘gender’. There’s no real gain to be had discussing definitions; everyone who speaks about this topic with a genuine desire for conversation naturally uses the language (also in use by the medical community) which has evolved to suit the situation. It’s certainly not ‘your word’ any more than it is anyone else’s.
Right, things to do, people to be.
First things first, I didn’t realise that you had posted before me CJ so I shall respond to your first post first.
I know that the ‘T’ has been there from the start and has always had a link to LGB as it is similar in many respects. I also accept your point about fighting for one is fighting for them all however LGB are essentially the same thing whereas being transexual is definitely different.
Let me give you an example (lets hope this one is better than my last). By your logic, badminton and tennis should share an organisation. They are very similar in that there is a net, a projectile of some sort, two people playing, a court but they are not the same… Also, your fighting for one is fighting for them all argument is invalid because then LGBT should be LBGTBW to include black people and women.
But, don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that they shouldn’t be in the same group, just that it surprises me that its so universally that way.
and now in response to your second comment CJ
Yeah that was a bad example. I chose looks because its easy for people to be deluded about it but skill at sport is another example. If you think you are good at sport it does not make any better than you actually are.
I think my annoyance is that is you were to ask random people on the street who had no involvement with the transgender community what gender is they would respond that it is whether you are a man or a woman. If then asked to define what being a woman or a man is then most would probably mention various body parts. The English language is what the English speak, not what a minority decide.
Apologies for the fairly rambling argument, I didn’t get up very long ago.
(I’m going to stop bothering to edit my comments for sentences which might give affront – it’s just taking too long.)
Re: Inclusion into LGBTQ:
If we’d reached this point with gay rights when we reached it with Black Rights, you’d be entirely right. When we changed the laws so that a black woman could marry a white man and vice versa, it would have been great if society had been ready to say “Hey, while we’re at it, gay and transfolk deserve equality under marriage laws, too!”. They weren’t ready to say that.
The legislation which marginalises transfolk is largely the same legislation that marginalises gay folk. Marriage, the right to see a GP who doesn’t treat you like dirt, the right to work, the right to walk down the street without being kicked to death. If you’re saying you don’t think society is ready to accept the trans, but is ready to accept gay people, just say so. I think you’re wrong.
(Re ‘Women’: http://pennyred.blogspot.com/2009/11/no-feminism-without-trans-feminism-for.html)
Re: Use of language.
It’s clear that words often have multiple meanings; I could hardly try complaining about rock musicians talking about “bridges”. Bridges are constructions that go over water! Politicians and spin? Ridiculous – they’d get dizzy.
It’s clear also that words that might mean one thing in a general context might mean something very specific in a given context. What about depression? The vernacular use – “feeling sad” has nothing to do with the crippling mental condition of “major depressive disorder” – but I take it if you were talking to someone about mental health you wouldn’t say “People with depression should cheer up and go to the cinema!”.
If you come into a conversation about gender identity and say “gender is sex and sex is gender” you are projecting the same message as you would saying “depression is ordinary sadness and ordinary sadness is depression” to depressives. You’d come across as… “wrong”. It doesn’t matter what “the English” decide – if you’re talking about a specialist subject, you’re going to have to use the language of the people who talk about it.
Unless, of course, you’re happy communicating badly.
I take your first point regarding the development of rights over time. I quite agree that that society is ready to accept trans. I’m not going to lie, I didn’t read the article you quoted.
Regarding the rock musician bridges argument, your argument is incorrect since the word bridge as it is used in music does not impact the word bridge as a device for crossing water etc. whereas you specifically told me I was using the word gender wrongly. Besides you picked a poor example as the bridge in music was originally (and often still used) as a bridge between sections of music in the same way as a bridge is between two sides of a river.
Also, according to an unnamed (she is an expert because she is both a doctor and has struggled with depression for some time) person in the know, the word depression was used as a specific medical term before it was used colloquially. Taking a technical word and giving an incorrect, more general meaning is okay because it will be the general public that does this not a small minority. As I stated before, the word of the majority is being stolen by the minority.
I’m not going to lie, I didn’t bother reading your first two paragraphs.
Etymology is an interesting area of study, but completely irrelevant to modern use of language. If we have two words (and I’m certain that there are many, many more – “entropy”, “proven”, etc. etc.) which mean one thing in a general context and something more precise in a specific context, we cannot cry that they arose in different ways. It simply doesn’t matter.
If we were to carry on and have a discussion about gender in people and in society, we would then have to make up some neologism to describe the concept which we already have assigned to a word. Your refusal to accept that /when talking about this subject/, the word gender /does not refer to birth sex/ is a refusal to communicate. So, I’m not going to bother replying to you on this blog again (although I’ll certainly keep reading, Dan!).
I’ll keep this one short for you then.
I am quite surprised how closed minded you are considering Dan accused me of being so and I am quite amused by how angry you seemed to get. You appeared to miss my point. I blame my own inability to express myself and apologize.