Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Transition As Transaction: "Passing" And The Commodification Of Womanhood
November 9, 2012 at 8:09 pm Natalie Reed

http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed/2012/11/09/transition-as-transaction-passing-and-the-commodification-of-womanhood/ (http://freethoughtblogs.com/nataliereed/2012/11/09/transition-as-transaction-passing-and-the-commodification-of-womanhood/)

Very early in the film Transamerica, the trans woman protagonist, Bree, is seen practicing along to a "Finding Your Female Voice" video, from Deep Stealth Productions. Deep Stealth is partly owned and operated by Andrea James, who acted as a consultant for the film.

I've never been quite able to shake the sense of this as being far more an act of commercial product placement than an attempt at verisimilitude and accurate representation of trans women's experiences.

Later in the film, we hear Bree listing the various surgeries and procedures she's undergone in the process of her transition: tracheal shave, brow recontouring, extensive electrolysis, etc. We also see her attend a trans support group filled with trans women (played by actual trans actresses) who, deliberately, are meant to be more "passable" than Bree and proceed to offer her a litany of unsolicited "passing advice"; despite the immense investments Bree has made into her appearance, to looking like a "real" woman, the story wants us to regard her as "trying too hard" and therefore her womanhood still appears "artificial" and "fake". The narrative takes Bree's quest to attain "passability", her efforts to make her appearance match a normative standard of female beauty, and directly equates this struggle with Bree's "redemption", her character arc, her "growth", her psychological development, her emotional well-being.

As far as Transamerica is concerned, Bree's efforts to acquire normative female beauty, as defined by the narrow terms of our cis-patriarchal, white-centric, able-centric culture, is interchangeable with the whole her worth, validity, struggle and growth as a human being.

what a bunch of socialist psycho babble.

Most girls grow up to be woman by adopting their societies norms of womanhood. Womanhood is but a construct that is acquired by any female as part of growing and aging.

For MTF who have playing the male role in whatever society they live, transition is precisely acquiring womanhood by emulation, observation, and practice.

Now, of course there are people selling products and service that help you transition, nothing wrong with that, it is what jamieD calls "Free market." It is up to the costumer to pick and chose what ever products are there. Cis-woman do this all the time, and each and everyone of them have their own "woman style.'

Society decrees what is regarded as acceptable in the way of appearing feminine however, and the way Bree is treated shows the coercive nature of the drive for an unattainable perfection.  Society's message changes with time and place but has never been dispensed with.  Failure to measure up is seen as a failure as a person.
I spent an hour in a Gender Studies exam yesterday writing about this very subject, so have a proprietary interest.  Am so over Gender studies too!

Karen.

I think I might enjoy this article if I could understand it.

Quoteacquire normative female beauty, as defined by the narrow terms of our cis-patriarchal, white-centric, able-centric culture, is interchangeable with the whole her worth, validity, struggle and growth as a human being.

And

Quote
it falls deeply into the usual white/middle-class/adult/American/non-immigrant/binary-identified/linear-history/able-bodied centrism, it lends implicit legitimacy to a variety of extremely destructive concepts such as  ->-bleeped-<-, Harry Benjamin Syndrome and "true transsexuals" being (somehow?) something different from "just thinking you're trans", it plays upon the ridiculous standard that one must be "absolutely certain" before undertaking transition, and it assumes that "passing" is/must be a primary goal, if not THE primary goal, of medical intervention (as opposed to the FAR healthier goal of simply getting to a place where you feel happy and comfortable with your body).

I get the impression that the writer is ranting about:

Quote
(as opposed to the FAR healthier goal of simply getting to a place where you feel happy and comfortable with your body).

But sadly, I can't honestly be sure.

Quoteand the riot-grrl homeland of Olympia, Washington, where she earned a BA in something-erather in 2007. She can't quite remember.

Well, I'm sure we can all identify with that!

Thanks, very thought provoking. I read some of her other essays; now my brain is fried.

And I'm feeling a little guilty because I just picked up a copy of Allure to read on the plane. :b

Quote from: spacial on November 11, 2012, 05:55:50 AM
I think I might enjoy this article if I could understand it.

I read her stuff sometimes, some of it makes more sense if you've read her other articles and she references academic  feminism relatively often. Basically some stuff is written so that anyone could read it and some stuff assumes you're already aware of some ideas, background, etc.

Quote from: Isabelle on November 11, 2012, 06:17:27 AM
Interesting. Where do you get socialism from in this article?

All the bitching about the people who sell products, TS Road map, etc

Quote from: Carbon on November 11, 2012, 09:35:09 AM
I read her stuff sometimes, some of it makes more sense if you've read her other articles and she references academic  feminism relatively often. Basically some stuff is written so that anyone could read it and some stuff assumes you're already aware of some ideas, background, etc.

I understand and that you have absorbed some of her other articles.

I have to be frank, anyone who makes a point of telling us they have a degree, but can't remember what it was for, seems somewhat affectatious.

Quote from: spacial on November 11, 2012, 10:59:39 AM
I understand and that you have absorbed some of her other articles.

I have to be frank, anyone who makes a point of telling us they have a degree, but can't remember what it was for, seems somewhat affectatious.

I really don't think that's her goal. Saying that as someone who has come across that way when she didn't want/intend to come across that way and when impressing people was the furthest thing from her mind.

If you don't like her writing style or whatever that's obviously okay though.

I'm sure she's a peach and no-doubt, her style is just some sort of disability.

But I just don't know what she's on about!

Socialism aside, or not, I'd still like someone to say what it is she said!

Quote from: spacial on November 11, 2012, 04:56:11 PM
Socialism aside, or not, I'd still like someone to say what it is she said!

It's basically about how "womanhood" is treated as a commodity and that while most women have to do all this stuff in order to be seen as valuable trans women have to do all that stuff just to be seen as women at all. And then there are some of the ways that people do that and how this stuff actually plays out, like "if I take hormones, get electrolysis, and have FFS and SRS then I'll get to be a woman finally" when this is all stuff that's bought/sold applied to our own bodies.

There's a lot more too it but I think that's the basic idea behind it. She also says that people being allowed to get things like FFS, electrolysis etc isn't the problem and that people should be able to make those decisions about their own lives, they just shouldn't be presented as "the goal" for all trans women.

Like a lot of things, 'cool' or 'education' or 'social status' Womanhood is something that can be bought.  Why not?  It's the American way, 'Trans' is just one more niche market, one more group who is willing to give away money in the hopes that it will buy them what they want.


And gosh, don't even try to understand how American's massacre the notion (not to mention the definition and reality) of what 'Socialism' is, or means, or what it does, or does not do.  It's basically used in the place of "Boogieman" for people who are too old to worry about what's asleep under their bed or in their closet.

Quote from: spacial on November 11, 2012, 04:56:11 PM
Socialism aside, or not, I'd still like someone to say what it is she said!

The "gender study circles," and are most often populated by "twitchy"  individuals who complain to no end as how women are victimized and exploited by man and the chauvinist patriarchal society. The fact is that is that the interaction of humans with society is a  interaction in which everybody is exploiting everybody. True that this generates a few very rich victors, a majority that is OK, and a few looser.

The article in question claims that "transitioners" are like cis-woman, exploited by society. I would say, welcome to reality, get a life!

The other point that comes across in her diatribe is the fact that she attack people who sell goods or services to those transitioning.

Thank you Carbon. Sounds like another self centered rant by a feminist frankly.

Women have so many problems and difficulities in the world. Sadly, feminism is one of them.

Sorry, removed my comment on Peaky's post. Leave that to others.

While the discussion of the definition of socialism is interesting, it is way off topic, and belongs in the politics area of the forum. Please keep discussion on topic of the original article. Thanks!

News Admin

I think we have to differentiate between people making a conscious choice, as in deciding to transition and deciding how they want to express their femininity on the one hand, and on the other being led passively to conform to a standard that is decreed by the social imaginary. 

It's a pity the original author didn't express herself in clear, concise language.  She obviously didn't read her guides on how to write essays when doing her BA in "whatever."

Karen.

@Karen: Agreed, and I feel the article makes me think about what I want and the motivation for it in relation to societal gender norms and marketing. So in the end, is this what makes me happy or am I happy because the marketing tells me this is what is going to make me happy?

In my exam answer I contrasted people in the Goth/Emo scene, for example  who conform to a particular mode of personal expression as a matter of personal choice with the stereotypical "fashion victim." 
Our situation is one that can vary between the two, but by transitioning we have made ourselves responsible for our identity in a way that other members of the community rarely choose to do. 
Detransitioning is far more serious a matter than leaving the Goth scene.

Karen.

Quote from: justmeinoz on November 11, 2012, 07:23:03 PM
I think we have to differentiate between people making a conscious choice, as in deciding to transition and deciding how they want to express their femininity on the one hand, and on the other being led passively to conform to a standard that is decreed by the social imaginary.

There's an interesting assumption in there that for any transitioning MTF, femininity is an implicit goal. Society assumes all women want to be (and should want to be) feminine, in spite of the rather obvious evidence of a proportion of women who aren't and don't wish to be. The 'norm' (the peak in the bell curve) of what constitutes femininity in the first place is just 'what most women are doing this decade'.

Uhhh everything is a commodity. Just look at what's happened to breast cancer. People have to make a living. This is just more anti capitalist feminist noise.

But one aspect in particular interests me here, which is how the primacy of "passing" as the implicit goal of transition is hooked up to extremely narrow, culturally-rigid standards of female beauty and feminine dress, appearance and mannerism... which are each in turn inseparable from commerce, commodity, transaction and the beauty industry. (quote from article, emphasis mine)


I don't find that very far off.  It's not an occasional deal, but almost the manta around here that consistently - and constantly - holds out the most mainstream and one-dimensional stereotypes about gender.  There are times that I have to check my calendar because I swear I'm stuck in some bad 1950s time warp (complete with the 'man to take care of me' -- presumably so I can sit and eat bon-bons all day).  It's an image not forged out of real life, but directly out of the media.

What is held up as the 'feminine ideal' all too often is not a reality, but an image - mirage if you will - made up by the advertising industry to sell more stuff.  And while many women (and men too, in the reverse) are attempting to break free of those confining notions, many trans persons seem to want to double-down on them.

Sadly, I'm sure the author could find many examples in here to support her thesis that all too often in the trans world true womanhood (or manhood) is a matter of buying, not being.

One way to consider what she's saying is to look at the way Western women stereotype Hijabi Muslim women who cover their heads as being "oppressed" by the patriarchy in the Arabic world.  It is rarely regarded as an empowered action even though nearly all of the women I know who do cover,  do so out of a sense of autonomy and respect for their own body.

They will often look at American women as sexually objectified in society.  Women in western cultures are so used at being in the public eye that they don't comprehend what it is like not to have to be prepared to be looked at all the time.

A few years ago I did a paper on my experience taking photographs of my sons.  For the most part they were completely uncooperative in the shoots.   Pictures woud be ruined by a shifted eye or collapsed posture.   I got so used to this that I was startled when I visited my girlfriend and found that her girls posed, smiled and were completely used to being expected to sit and be looked at.

Laura Mulvey  discusses this as the female gaze of "to be looked at ness"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaze (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaze)

I think it's interesting that, according to some feminists, when non-Western women do things that are distinctly female, such as covering themselves, even wearing cultural jewlery make up and so on, it' their culture. But when western women do it, it's a sign of an oppressive misogynist, All men are rapists, society.

http://www.ssps.unimelb.edu.au/about/staff/profiles/jeffreys (http://www.ssps.unimelb.edu.au/about/staff/profiles/jeffreys)

As I said, I'm sure this young woman has something to say, possibly even interesting. But I don't understand a word of what she's written. And I have a feeling that was the point.

She has said nothing.

She has nothing to say.

She just wants to rattle her cage.

But much like the Emperor's new clothes, anyone who notices she and similar are talking nonsense, are generally rounded upon by those that are still too scared to say it.

Quote from: spacial on November 13, 2012, 03:48:09 AM
I think it's interesting that, according to some feminists, when non-Western women do things that are distinctly female, such as covering themselves, even wearing cultural jewlery make up and so on, it' their culture. But when western women do it, it's a sign of an oppressive misogynist, All men are rapists, society.

http://www.ssps.unimelb.edu.au/about/staff/profiles/jeffreys (http://www.ssps.unimelb.edu.au/about/staff/profiles/jeffreys)

As I said, I'm sure this young woman has something to say, possibly even interesting. But I don't understand a word of what she's written. And I have a feeling that was the point.

She has said nothing.

She has nothing to say.

She just wants to rattle her cage.

But much like the Emperor's new clothes, anyone who notices she and similar are talking nonsense, are generally rounded upon by those that are still too scared to say it.

The fact that you couldn't understand it doesn't mean that she didn't have anything to say.  :-\ I can't understand some writers but that doesn't mean there's something wrong with the writing or the people who like it.

Edit: Also Natalie Reed actually criticizes the whole "makeup and jewelry are misogynist" thing in this article.

"And these deconstructions can also manifest as their own problematic, femmephobic tendencies towards things like regarding femininity itself as the problem rather than issues like femininity being simultaneously coded as weak and submissive while imposed upon women as an expected standard."

In other words according to Natalie Reed things that are regarded as feminine aren't a problem, it's just the way those things are regarded as week, submissive, etc while also being portrayed as an obligation for women.

Good point Carbon.

I was attempting to allude to the use of excessive language as a distraction from the lack of argument. Your previously made the point: It's basically about how "womanhood" is treated as a commodity and that while most women have to do all this stuff in order to be seen as valuable trans women have to do all that stuff just to be seen as women at all.

And men need to do XYZ to be seen as valuable. (The penality for men is to be beaten up, humiliated, ect.).

So, we're all comodities. Potential cannon fodder. Those with testicles get to be blown up while those with ovaries get to reproduce the next generation of those with testicles. (Woopee)

Thanks for pointing it out.

Reminder of Rule 10


10. Bashing or flaming of any individuals or groups is not acceptable behavior on this web site and will not be tolerated in the slightest for any reason.  This includes but is not limited to:

Feminists, women, men, etc

My apologies. It was never intended as a personal attack, rather attempting to highlight impressions of the writing style by emulation.

Though I fully understand that it came across as excessively sharp.

You are perfectly right, correct and justified to delete it.

The fact that you couldn't understand it doesn't mean that she didn't have anything to say.

Word.


See: Steven Hawkings, A Brief History of Time.

Thank you tekla.

But your comment is made in reference to a post, I believe was directed at me, the reply to which is now a heavily abridged version, lacking any substantive point.

I guess this will remain one of those subjects that is available for suitably polemical lectures aimed at the so far, unenlightened and the terminally destructive males, but which few can criticise, since to criticise demonstrates we don't understand.

Long live stupidity.  :police: