Binary privilege.

[EchelonHunt]

We have a long, long way to go if we cannot discuss a topic about privileges without getting offended, defensive or throwing sarcasm around.

Privileges are a touchy subject, no doubt about that. Saying there is binary privilege should not be considered an attack on anyone's transition or their identity. Saying that transgender binary individuals have easier access to transitioning than non-binary should not invalidate your experiences nor should it make you feel compelled to defend yourself.

Because really, it's not about you, me or anyone else here. It's never been personal, only if you make it such. Binary privilege is about society, the binary rules that have been shoved down people's throats as the norm, the backwards thinking that if you act a certain way, you will be accepted and if you identify as anything else that is not accepted as the norm, we will either tear you down, make sure you fit our stifling standards or claim you do not exist and reject you.   

It is not about being better or being less than anyone. Having a privilege means as a group in general, people are granted a right that others aren't privy to.

Transgender binary individuals are granted the right to have access to transitioning, as long as they fit the SOC.

Non-binary individuals are ... sort of given that right, there is access to HRT and some surgeries available but as far as I am aware, bottom surgeries are completely off-limits to non-binaries unless they pretend to be binary to achieve those surgeries.

But nobody should have to pretend to be binary, nobody should have to pretend to be something they are not in order to receive the surgeries they require to elevate body dysphoria. It is a harsh reality for many of us, it is something real that people go through and suffer because they are not binary, because they do not fit perfectly in one box.

That's the society we live in now. The doors are open if you present as binary but if you present as non-binary, they will give you limited options. God forbid if you want a complete transition as a non-binary, you'll get laughed out of the office and the door slammed behind you. Alternatively, you can fight the system or die trying.

I have suffered this myself, even being raised as a biological female - I was denied mastectomy and hysterectomy because I had a healthy body and the view was, "Well, you're a young woman, you're going to have children one day, it's inevitable so no, you cannot have those surgeries." I was not allowed to control what I could do to my body, the decision had already been decided by doctors who were not the least bit sympathetic to my troubles and instead more concerned about their reputation.

The same thing happened again with my psychiatrist. I was very feminine in appearance and he would suggest I get a masculine haircut. Because yanno, there are no cis-guys who have long hair or anything. But I understood why my psychiatrist was suggesting to conform to gender stereotypes, it's so that the binary-populated society won't mistake me as a woman, it's so that the society can look at my gender expression (flat chest, short hair, male clothing, etc) and assume I am a man based on that.

I have had partners attempt to force me to be somebody who I am not. Being a feminine transguy, one partner expected me to be a walking example of a stereotypical sexist, hyper-masculine cis-guy. She expected me to be the "man" in the relationship, the one who initiates sex and who is highly sexual. If I did not wear traditionally male clothing, she would look horrified. If I expressed wanting to be on the receiving end of sex, she would be horrified. A heterosexual cis-female who was so incredibly close-minded by her views on binary and gender... well, it's no surprise that my relationship with her prompted me to question my identity as a male and whether or not I cared about fulfilling binary roles.

Turns out I don't care about binary roles whatsoever. Like rules, they are made to be broken and changed into rules that will allow me my freedom as an individual, not what society dictates.

In regards to the community, support and compassion for one another is crucial. The us vs. them mentality will not help anything except further divide the gap between us. We are all in this together, if we separate from one another, become apathetic about each other's troubles... What's the point? What's the point of being in a community together if we cannot empathize with each other's plights as human beings but instead continue to keep treating each other as two different sides of the same coin?

What will that achieve?

Absolutely nothing but endless bickering.

[skin]

Yikes, this thread is making me sad.  Everyone has some sort of privilege.  Acknowledging that you have an advantage in one aspect of life over another group isn't saying you have it easy.  I would expect someone who is already in an marginalized group would be able to have a healthy discussion about other people's experiences without trying to tell them that they are wrong.

[Jessica Merriman]

Privileges are a touchy subject, no doubt about that.

Where I live being told you are privileged is an insult. This is why I am so triggered and defensive as the word privilege is a derogatory comment here. I respect others rights to do what they will and always have. I have supported members anytime and as long as they needed it and been there for them. Sadly I now see the reverse respect does not come to me. I am triggered by the word "privilege". I have explained why. Support for me in a tough time, non existent as I am being judged and slammed for trying unsuccessfully to explain why this triggers me so much. I suppose my feeling do not matter as others do. 

[Dee Marshall]

Jessica, I'm so very sorry you're being triggered. I didn't catch on that you were although it was obvious that the topic bothers you. Please feel better. You're a valuable person here.

[Jessica Merriman]

You're a valuable person here.

Thank you Dee, but not according to everyone else.

Yes, this topic hurt me, but smites and reports are what I get, not someone asking if I am OK. I was stupid to think support was a two way street. 

[skin]

You keep saying respect and support are a two way street, but you have shown none of it in this thread.

There is nothing like binary privilege out there. People are treated the same or doctors face malpractice and legal entanglements. There was no binary privilege on my Ambulance, Helicopter or any Emergency Room I ever worked in. I have never seen anything closely resembling special care for binaries. Where this binary privilege idea came from is anybody's guess and has no merit at all. What next? People who eat creamy peanut butter get preference in treatment over those who eat chunky style?

This is not explaining why you are triggered by privilege discussions.  This is telling people that they are wrong and you know their experiences better than they do.

Yes I do, but since my OPINION is not with the status quo of this topic MY opinion is invalid.

Again, what you stated in that first quote was invalidating their experiences.  To turn around and accuse others of stomping out what you say is rather hypocritical.

I do not care what non binaries do or believe because that is their prerogative and kind of what freedom is all about.

You're right, respect and support should be a two way street.  If you don't care what other people think, why do you expect them to support you?

Enough of the pity party as a lot of us see non binaries with the same access and respect for treatment we binaries have. Both groups have to prove themselves just to get care they need just the same. YOU are placing a division when you say another group has privilege, not me.

They are discussing their challenges and you accuse them of having a pity party.  After they are (rightfully) offended, you expect them to have sympathy for you now?  First off, I am sorry you have a bad history that causes privilege discussions to be triggering.  Maybe in the future you should excuse yourself from them?  At the very least, if you do participate, clearly explain that you have a past that makes it a sensitive topic for you so people can work with that.  Because you do not get a free pass to disregard other people's experiences because you are triggered.

I highly recommend taking a step back, acknowledge you are going about this in an unproductive manner, and commit to learning from it.

[Deinewelt]

I think in some respects it could be related to the fact that a personal preference, which falls on the binary spectrum, attempts to more closely conform to the gender roles produced by the culture of our society; on the other hand, non-binary is much more non-conforming to this.  People may conform because that is how they identify and wish to present or because it is required in order to get something they need.  When I first decided to be trans, I wanted to get an orchi and just remain a guy.  After researching this, I found that it would be pretty difficult to do this.  The thing is, I identify with female so more research opened up my mind to trying more.  At the same time that I want to be defined as female, I have a complete utmost respect for not wanting to conform to the *ahem* guidelines if you identify yourself as being somewhere in between because I think that the fact that gender is so rigid is a root cause for the problems that we all experience.

[Jessica Merriman]

OK, please don't jump me here as I am only asking a question. Let's say there is a bias against non binaries which is rooted in the WPATH SOCs. How do you get it changed when stealth is a big component in transgender people? If I don't totally understand it (non binary) and I am under the same umbrella how do you get medical professionals to acknowledge and write protocols for treating it? How would you be able to satisfy therapist's of stability to pursue surgery? If therapist's were out of the loop would post op regret non binaries sue surgeons for damages and how would that impact other trans people who may not be able to get surgery because of doctors exiting the field do to judgments being paid out by malpractice suits? 

[androgynouspainter26]

Firstly, nobody is going to exit this field any time soon-if you havn't noticed, people will pay insane amounts of money for SRS.  Also, I'm not sure what it's like in the UK but stateside you sign away the right to sue if you regret anything.

Ok, so let's say stealth is a big component for many transexuals.  Well, what about trans women who don't pass?  I'm sure you've been clocked at least once since having your surgery.  Does not going stealth mean one should not have surgery?   Anyhow, that's not really the point.  What we need to do is expand the current umbrella to anyone who feels body dysphoria. Obviously we should have evaluative procedures, make sure people know what their getting into-we just need to do this on a more case-by-case basis.  For example, we should not require someone to live as what we percive as "female".  Rather, we should have a general period of commitment where someone takes steps to gain the body they feel they ought to have even if it doesn't involve fitting into someone else's idea of gender.  After that period of time, a therapist evaluates the case and gives them their letter if the therapist likes what they see.  Simple as that-it doesn't discriminate against people who may not have the same story as the majority of trans* people, and it's still far from easy to slip through the system if you aren't ready.

[Kaelin]

I'm going to park binary to the side for a moment.

Differential treatment within a community is common.  Feminism's origins were well-intentioned, but the face of the movement was overwhelmingly middle/upper class, white, Christian, heterosexual, and cisgender, and some of its early work provided no benefit to "other" women until other barriers were lowered and those other circumstances were taken into account ("intersectionality" is a key word with feminists for good reason).  Race movements, GLB movements, class movements, non-denominational movements, they've all experienced shortcomings in protecting "others," but they have had members with a broader vision to better-empower *all* people.  TG-support movements are not above this problem, even their relatively-fringe nature may make them more-aware of other struggles compared to other groups.

"Privilege" is a label, and while labels can provide convenience, that convenience is sometimes too slick for people to appropriately respond to.  Using a label tends to stop conversation rather than start it.  Furthermore, I think the privilege label is (typically) focused on the wrong place: what many people call privilege is usually not a case of the majority/power group enjoying a special benefit but instead the minority/outsider group being denied a right.  The segregated fountains/restaurants/schools up to the 50s did little to support white people -- rather, they subjugated and harassed racial minorities.  In that light, it is worth considering whether a particular issue is a denial of a right to the outsider or a special perk for an insider.

Binary privilege in particular seems to be an extreme example of this issue.  As a rule, I don't think that many people favor binaries as much as hurt (or simply overlook) non-binaries.  If we can look to elevate non-binaries so they can properly participate in society (selecting an appropriate gender box, having an appropriately-labeled bathroom to use if needed, expressing their identity, having a reasonable expectation of respectable pronouns being used, not being denied service, etc), that would constitute us getting the job done.  Challenging binaries to "get it right" will be a part of that process, but we don't have to take away anything from them (other than a little time and effort) to do it.

[skin]

OK, please don't jump me here as I am only asking a question. Let's say there is a bias against non binaries which is rooted in the WPATH SOCs. How do you get it changed when stealth is a big component in transgender people?

Stealth is a big component for some transgender people.  To those who wish to be stealth, changing the SOC to be less focused on living in a rigid gender role would not negatively affect them.  On the other side of the coin, I don't think being successfully stealth proves stability.  Even those of us who are pretty much shifting from one binary role to the other are still challenging gender norms, so the idea that successfully conforming to a different gender role is what determines whether we can get our ticket punched to do so is pretty illogical to me.  I think the "If significant medical or mental health concerns are present, they must be well controlled" bullet point sufficiently encompasses the stability for surgery without needing the 12 month in a role requirement.

[Dread_Faery]

Unfortunately WPATH has been set up so that while anyone can join, only professionals in the fields of transgender health have a vote. I won't pull figures out of thin air, but I'm willing to bet that their largely cis and binary identified. It's a problem but not one that can be easily solved, though I think we can do stuff from within the community. Certainly respecting non-binary paths as valid is a good start, and we should all be careful and respectful of people's paths when offering advice, it can be a habit for sure, but if people take a bit of time thinking about what they've said before posting things might flow more smoothly. Obviously we have the mod team for when that goes awry.

Blending in is obviously a huge goal for many trans people, but as a forum and as a wider community we need to push back against the culture of judging people's worth as trans by their appearance and ability to blend in. Obviously this has it's source in WPATH, which is going to be harder to change, but hopefully we could lead the way. No one should have to live visibly if they don't want to, but people also shouldn't feel less for not wanting to or being able to. Again, all paths are valid, being different =/= being less.

In hindsight binary privilege was a provocative descriptor, but it incited real discussion over the issue which is what I wanted.

[suzifrommd]

Where I live being told you are privileged is an insult. This is why I am so triggered and defensive as the word privilege is a derogatory comment here. I respect others rights to do what they will and always have. I have supported members anytime and as long as they needed it and been there for them. Sadly I now see the reverse respect does not come to me. I am triggered by the word "privilege". I have explained why. Support for me in a tough time, non existent as I am being judged and slammed for trying unsuccessfully to explain why this triggers me so much. I suppose my feeling do not matter as others do. 

I'm so sorry that this has been insulting to you. I'll try to use different language in the future. I asked about that earlier in this thread but the post was buried before it got answered.

Is there another term I could use that wouldn't be insulting? I.e. what word means "having the system set up (through no fault of one's own) so that one has an easier time getting what they need" without using the word 'privilege'? What other word is preferable?

[Jaime R D]

I'm so sorry that this has been insulting to you. I'll try to use different language in the future. I asked about that earlier in this thread but the post was buried before it got answered.

Is there another term I could use that wouldn't be insulting? I.e. what word means "having the system set up (through no fault of one's own) so that one has an easier time getting what they need" without using the word 'privilege'? What other word is preferable?

How about "binary biased system"

[Cindy]

Unfortunately WPATH has been set up so that while anyone can join, only professionals in the fields of transgender health have a vote. I won't pull figures out of thin air, but I'm willing to bet that their largely cis and binary identified. It's a problem but not one that can be easily solved, though I think we can do stuff from within the community. Certainly respecting non-binary paths as valid is a good start, and we should all be careful and respectful of people's paths when offering advice, it can be a habit for sure, but if people take a bit of time thinking about what they've said before posting things might flow more smoothly. Obviously we have the mod team for when that goes awry.

Blending in is obviously a huge goal for many trans people, but as a forum and as a wider community we need to push back against the culture of judging people's worth as trans by their appearance and ability to blend in. Obviously this has it's source in WPATH, which is going to be harder to change, but hopefully we could lead the way. No one should have to live visibly if they don't want to, but people also shouldn't feel less for not wanting to or being able to. Again, all paths are valid, being different =/= being less.

In hindsight binary privilege was a provocative descriptor, but it incited real discussion over the issue which is what I wanted.

Well I have to disagree. WPath and all the *PATHs were originally set up by medical providers from the Benjamin model. They were set up as discussion groups because medical providers had no way of quickly communicating to each other. The need to have community members has been recognised but there is still a need for private areas for medical providers, this has been and continues to be beneficial. I feel there is also disinformation as well as far as gender identification, I know that the executive secretary of ANZPATH is a transwoman - me!  and I personally know the executive of WPATH and the other *PATHS and while not outing anyone, there is not a majority of cis and the gender variance in fact reflects the community.

[Deinewelt]

It seems like non-binary is just more confusing to the system because it doesn't fit their narrative.  It would make sense to try to create a non-binary narrative that is acceptable to the majority of non-binary transgender in order that they can receive the support they need.

[Jaime R D]

It seems like non-binary is just more confusing to the system because it doesn't fit their narrative.  It would make sense to try to create a non-binary narrative that is acceptable to the majority of non-binary transgender in order that they can receive the support they need.

But the issue is that there is no one narrative that is acceptable. And I do believe they can be supported without the whole universal narrative being necessary. Just view them as individuals and go from there, not as a group with a one experience fits all approach.

[Dread_Faery]

Well I have to disagree. WPath and all the *PATHs were originally set up by medical providers from the Benjamin model. They were set up as discussion groups because medical providers had no way of quickly communicating to each other. The need to have community members has been recognised but there is still a need for private areas for medical providers, this has been and continues to be beneficial. I feel there is also disinformation as well as far as gender identification, I know that the executive secretary of ANZPATH is a transwoman - me!  and I personally know the executive of WPATH and the other *PATHS and while not outing anyone, there is not a majority of cis and the gender variance in fact reflects the community.

I freely admit that I was speaking from a position of conjecture, knowing that what I said was wrong makes me feel better about this.

[EchelonHunt]

Jessica, I am sorry that you got triggered by the topic. As hard as it may be to believe, I do respect you and value your opinion highly. It's just the way you went about it in this topic has made me disappointed, to say the least.

How do you get it changed when stealth is a big component in transgender people? If I don't totally understand it (non binary) and I am under the same umbrella how do you get medical professionals to acknowledge and write protocols for treating it?

I am glad you brought this point up.

Cisgender (Majority) <-> Lesbian, Gay and Bisexuals (Minority)
Lesbian, Gay and Bisexuals (Majority) <-> Transgender umbrella (Minority)
Transgender umbrella (Majority) <-> Non-Binary (Minority)

This crudely done scale displays the existing problem - non-binary are a minority within a minority within a minority.

I do not know what the community's stance in these forums are about same-sex marriage and gay rights but let's say for example, as a community, we supported same-sex marriage and gay rights. Everyone, including the supportive cisgender folks. That would be enough people to gain awareness and more than likely, there will be family members of many lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals who will support the cause as well. We can already see this happening as many states have allowed same-sex marriage to be legalized as each day passes.

Imagine if the non-binary group tried to raise awareness for non-binary rights and adjusting the SOC to support full transition for non-binaries on their own. It would be the equivalent of a single person shouting in the middle of a raging storm. It would be very difficult unless the entire community joined forces and shouted altogether, hand in hand.

How would you be able to satisfy therapist's of stability to pursue surgery? If therapist's were out of the loop would post op regret non binaries sue surgeons for damages and how would that impact other trans people who may not be able to get surgery because of doctors exiting the field do to judgments being paid out by malpractice suits? 

Non-binaries will have to go through the same protocols you do to get the surgeries you desire which would be therapy to ensure there are no underlying psychological issues or mental disorders and to make sure the person is of a stable mind. I'm not expecting non-binaries to get a free-pass, bypass therapy entirely and given a letter for HRT/surgery because I would not agree with that process at all. It would be unfair and it would certainly make NBs privileged - that is not the aim here.

The chances of post-op regret would be greatly diminished if therapy is involved and deep introspection on the individual's part, analyzing every bit of their inner core to ensure that the surgery will elevate dysphoria and improve their life greatly. NB are not fickle, they do not impulsively wake up one morning and go, "Yes, I want a penis/vagina."

It is very similar to the process you go through yourself. You know deep within yourself what you need and you take the steps towards your goal, you will trek through forests, swim through many oceans, stagger through deserts, brave the blizzards and conquer mountains, whatever possible to attain your end goal. We, the non-binaries, the ones who pursue surgery to align our bodies with our mind, just like you, are walking a similar path.

The lack of post-op regret would mean you do not need to worry about how it will negatively affect you and your sisters/brothers. Your fears are valid, I can completely understand the distress and mere thought of having transitioning and the rules being made more tightly than ever before, maybe even losing members to suicide because they are being denied surgery/transition due to the tightened rules.

To clarify, I am not discrediting your fears. I want to point out the fact that your fears appear to be only focused on you and your transgender binary sisters/brothers, fears about how the consequences of non-binaries accessing full-transitioning and backpedaling can negatively hinder you in your/their destinations, fears about your right to surgery/transition will ultimately be taken away from you, fears of respectable surgeons bowing out of the field due to malpractice suits, fears that you and others will never get the body you have been fighting to get your entire life.

This is what closes your heart to us, this is why probably why you will continue to struggle to understand because your fears are closing your heart and casting your eyes away from what really matters. Do you you see us as an obstacle in your path? A threat to you and your sisters/brothers? You say that you are supportive and respectful of others here but your responses and presumptions in this thread say otherwise.

We are not the enemy, there is no need to keep fighting us because we are fighting the same battle. We are not going to take away your right to transition or your right to surgery - that has never been our aim. We just want to be on equal grounds with you, to share the same right as you as equal individuals on similar paths. Why is that so hard to understand..?

Instead of fearing the worst, why not suggest ways we can work together so we can both receive that equal right - ways we can both be happy without giving up anything? We need to come together as one and discuss a solution we can all help work towards, how we can raise awareness together, how we can find out the best way of educating society that non-binaries exist and from there, we can only hope that enough support is raised that we can bring it to the medical board and finally, the SOC can be modified to allow non-binaries to have complete transition.

It will be a long battle but it will be worth it and I truly believe as we work together to reach that goal, fears will be dismantled and our resolve as a community will become stronger.

Again, I am sorry you got triggered. I hope you will take it easy and recover soon. I do not hate you, I do not think of you as the enemy, I just think that you were getting defensive for all the wrong reasons instead of looking at the bigger picture. I do thank you for the questions you have raised though, it brings more to the discussion to talk about.

Kind regards,

Jacey

[Deinewelt]

But the issue is that there is no one narrative that is acceptable. And I do believe they can be supported without the whole universal narrative being necessary. Just view them as individuals and go from there, not as a group with a one experience fits all approach.

I totally agree, I just hope this is possible.