HRC trans board member marries as sex opposite of post-op gender
Posted by LGBT Weekly
Thursday, October 13th, 2011
BY THOM SENZEE
http://lgbtweekly.com/2011/10/13/hrc-trans-board-member-marries-as-sex-opposite-of-post-op-gender/ (http://lgbtweekly.com/2011/10/13/hrc-trans-board-member-marries-as-sex-opposite-of-post-op-gender/)
Transgender Human Rights Campaign board member Megan Stabler has married another woman in Texas by legally declaring her gender as male, a development that could be considered controversial (and perhaps hypocritical) because of Stabler's national prominence, and because of her position at HRC as the only known trans person sitting on the board.
The lesbian couple could not legally marry in Texas as such. But by declaring male gender-identity, presumably by way of a birth certificate that reflected her gender at birth, their union is recognized by that largely far-right leaning state.
This is completely outrageous. I'm sorry but once you chose to transition you need to stick to the damn gender you have chosen. I would NEVER use my male birth certificate to marry someone, sorry I want people to see me as female.
Whatever works.
To me that de-legitimizes transgender people.
Quote from: Andy8715 on October 25, 2011, 08:44:15 PM
To me that de-legitimizes transgender people.
Exactly. It shows it as a choice.. That we can just choose our gender to benefit our needs.
Considering she wouldn't be able to get married to a man in Texas anyway even with surgery, it's not much of a choice. People can think of it however they want, I like to think of it as a giant middle finger. ;D And you know, it's not about gender, it's about 2 people who want to get married.
Remember that we are all different persons here, only sharing our discontempt of our genetic sex.
If the person in question is okay with using her legal sex in order to marry the person she loves then who are we to judge?
Of course it is okay to disagree with this action personally, but please don't extrapolate your own feelings and ideas upon others.
I was merely ranting, and intended no disrespect to anyone.
I say keep your nose out of her buisness.
I have not changed my gender markers and I have no plan on doing so.
There have been instances arise in the last 2 years where people in official capacity have questioned my marriage to Sevan because we look like a lesbian couple. The second that I point out that I am still legaly male they shut up and put up and I hear no more issues.
Am I takeing advantage of 'male privilage'?
You betcha.
So long as this society has the concept of second class citizens I will stack the deck in my favor every time.
Also....
I will not have my marriage questioned. This is the best way of corking off any issues.
The law is what is dehumanizing to us. Finding loopholes in it is a good thing. That this couple found happiness despite an unjust state is all that matters.
To do it privately is one thing. To do it publically is another. It's giving people who want to hate us more fuel to the fire. "you only want to be a man when it's convenient for you" "you aren't really a same sex couple since you are a 'man' married to a woman"
What you or her wants to do is fine but don't make it public and then expect no one to say anything about it.
Good for her. That law is wrong and circumventing it just shows how pointless it is. Congrats Texas, you just allowed a lesbian couple to marry.
Quote from: Andy8715 on October 25, 2011, 09:47:29 PMIt's giving people who want to hate us more fuel to the fire. "you only want to be a man when it's convenient for you" "you aren't really a same sex couple since you are a 'man' married to a woman"
Not getting married wouldn't have lessened their bigotry.
Quote
What you or her wants to do is fine but don't make it public and then expect no one to say anything about it.
Marriage is by definition public.
She is a public figure.
She could not have married anyone without getting attention.
We need more people to pull 'scofflaw' actions like this to assit in the fight.
As it stands...any post transition trans person who is gay or lesbian can get a 'same sex' mariage in Texas. Just bring your original birth certificate and marry as your birth sex.
I see using her male birth certificate to get married in TX as a form of political protest against an unjust law. Imagine if a few thousands of us did this. Perhaps we'd see change.
Z
With a population of some 30 million people. There's bound to be a few more of these cases.
I would stick to Austin, Dallas, Houston type areas though.
Quote from: Zythyra on October 25, 2011, 10:58:00 PM
Perhaps we'd see change.
Most likely a change to make sure female identified legally male classified people don't marry legally female classified people and vice versa.
Quote from: Andy8715 on October 26, 2011, 12:10:34 AM
Most likely a change to make sure female identified legally male classified people don't marry legally female classified people and vice versa.
I could beat that law with just a para legal and self representation.
Equal protection of the law......
lol i found this to be ingenious.
She played the system and got legally married. They walked down the aisle as two brides and the State of Texas could not do a damn thing about it because of a legal loophole that they (Texas) created themselves.
Love it!
In my opinion she compromised her integrity by declaring her identity as a male. So now that she has declared herself male, I suppose the correct pronoun to use now is he or him.
It is a setback to the transsexual community because the public will see that we are not serious about our gender and cannot trust what we say. Especially coming from someone seen as a leader.
It is true that a man having SRS doesn't necessarily make him a woman. He just proved that with declaring his manhood legally.
Quote from: Valeriedoeswcs on October 26, 2011, 10:29:38 AM
In my opinion she compromised her integrity by declaring her identity as a male. So now that she has declared herself male, I suppose the correct pronoun to use now is he or him.
Don't you think that goes for each and every TS who used his or her genetic sex in an official way even once in life?
If I had to choose between not getting married with the person I love or making use of a loophole in the law by using my official status, then I'll gladly make that sacrifice.
Even though I live nearly fulltime now there are some situations in which I still must present myself as the sex that is written on my ID in order to prevent serious trouble with the law.
Well I guess that makes me a man also...
Damn...time to detransition.
Too bad about that orchi and BA.
I see her act as an act of manipulation of the system and nothing more. If the only way I could have married Sevan was to take a similar path I would have done it.
This way she gets federal recognition of her marital status. If she had gotten gay married in one of the states where that is legal her marriage would not have federal recognition.
This way she gets her cake and eats it too.
And oh ya....
HI VAL!!!!
:icon_hug:
Megan Stabler identifies as a woman. It is certainly within your rights to disagree with her actions and to express a dissenting opinion, however, it is unacceptable to misgender her by using male pronouns here in the News Forum.
Zythyra - News Admin
Whether you like it or not, this gets the conversation going.
People will still SEE two women living together and they will be legally married. And if the "male" in the marriage was born in a state that allows gender change on the birth certificate, she can make that change now and you'll have two women, legally married, in and by the State of Texas. >:-)
The pot has been stirred.
With all due respect to naysayers, she is the one who marked herself as male.
She called herself a man long enough to get a marriage license.
Like I have already pointed out, in my own circumstances I have had to pull the I am 'legaly' male card to make people in an official capacity stop questioning the validity of my marriage to Sevan.
The diferances in how the system treats a lesbian couple and a 'heterosexual' couple is downright draconian.
There are places in this country where being a lesbian wife will get you a blank stare and the door in monumental things like emergency medical treatment of a non cognizant spouse, or inheritance rights or any other number of things.
Every state and city in this country MUST recognise and respect my marriage.
If gaming the system to your own advantage is the mark of a man, then I must be a man.
A suposition I have to regect if for nothing other than my own sanity.
But then I was taught that gaming the system in certain circumstances is perfectly ok by my step mother...
For myself oneof the reasons I divorced my wife is because it is not legal for women to marry women in the State if Florida and I wish to be consistent with my gender.
Also how could I feel equal to my lesbian sisters if my wife and I remained married and my sisters could not. Our best friends are not able to. That would trigger dysphoria in myself if I gave myself rights they do not have. I would not be able to respect myself, even at the cost if my ex-spouses healthcare and other marital benefits. It wouldn't be right to me.
I also divorced because one of my dreams is to marry a man someday. And when I do I won't be selecting male since I am a woman.
God forbid that something happens to separate Sevan and I.
Should that happen....
I might marry a man if I fell in love with one and if I do ... yep gonna marry him as a woman. But if I fall in love with anouther woman...yep gonna game the system and marry her via the loop holes.
I am a bit of a criminal at heart. I can't help but congradulate her on gaming the system.
I hope that you find that man Val. He is gonna get a good woman out of the deal.
;)
Thank you Cynthia, thats brings a smile. I hope so too.
And your love of Sevan is an inspiration to all.
Quote from: Zythyra on October 26, 2011, 10:47:46 AM
Megan Stabler identifies as a woman. It is certainly within your rights to disagree with her actions and to express a dissenting opinion, however, it is unacceptable to misgender her by using male pronouns here in the News Forum.
Zythyra - News Admin
I know Meghan from HRC. I think she would get a chuckle to see how some are saying she's not really a woman.
She can chuckle all she likes, shes the one that marked male. Shes the one that said shes not a woman.
...or do you think she is saying, I am a woman but marking male? She lost credibility there, in my opinion.
It doesnt send a good message to legislators that we are the gender we say we are. There is no getting around what was done.
I think it will show legislators the absurdity of certain laws.
It can however blow up in our face, I will grant you that. But the staus quo should be chalenged and shaken up.
because things are pretty messed up as they are
Quote from: Zythyra on October 14, 2011, 09:20:14 AM
HRC trans board member marries as sex opposite of post-op gender
Posted by LGBT Weekly
Thursday, October 13th, 2011
BY THOM SENZEE
http://lgbtweekly.com/2011/10/13/hrc-trans-board-member-marries-as-sex-opposite-of-post-op-gender/ (http://lgbtweekly.com/2011/10/13/hrc-trans-board-member-marries-as-sex-opposite-of-post-op-gender/)
Transgender Human Rights Campaign board member Megan Stabler has married another woman in Texas by legally declaring her gender as male, a development that could be considered controversial (and perhaps hypocritical) because of Stabler's national prominence, and because of her position at HRC as the only known trans person sitting on the board.
The lesbian couple could not legally marry in Texas as such. But by declaring male gender-identity, presumably by way of a birth certificate that reflected her gender at birth, their union is recognized by that largely far-right leaning state.
I dont like this story.........it's like taking a step backwards.....
Quote from: Valeriedoeswcs on October 26, 2011, 01:48:19 PM
She can chuckle all she likes, shes the one that marked male. Shes the one that said shes not a woman.
...or do you think she is saying, I am a woman but marking male? She lost credibility there, in my opinion.
It doesnt send a good message to legislators that we are the gender we say we are. There is no getting around what was done.
I agree 100%.
Quote from: Annah on October 26, 2011, 01:17:51 PM
I know Meghan from HRC. I think she would get a chuckle to see how some are saying she's not really a woman.
maybe, maybe not.......but didnt she declare herself a man for personal gain? whether she worked the system or not, this does not convey a good message about a very controversial subject in the eyes of the public.
Well they say you can't put the gennie back in the bottle.
What should the reaction of our comunity be to this?
Outrage or support?
Personaly I am definatly in the support colum. But I am a rebel at heart.
;)
Quote from: Valeriedoeswcs on October 26, 2011, 01:48:19 PM
She can chuckle all she likes, shes the one that marked male. Shes the one that said shes not a woman.
...or do you think she is saying, I am a woman but marking male?
I think she's saying, I am a woman, but am using my status of declared male at birth to protest these ridiculous and discriminatory laws.
Quote from: cynthialee on October 26, 2011, 02:15:48 PM
Outrage or support?
100% support!
Z
Quote from: cynthialee on October 26, 2011, 02:15:48 PM
Well they say you can't put the gennie back in the bottle.
What should the reaction of our comunity be to this?
Outrage or support?
Personaly I am definatly in the support colum. But I am a rebel at heart.
;)
outrage!! because to me, by declaring herself as a man for the sole purpose of personal gain, it exemplifies exactly what the majority of society thinks.......that despite completing surgery, we are still "men"......shame on her!
I wholeheartedly agree. It is harmful to the community.
I do believe marriage should be available to everyone. But that is a different issue. If my lesbian sisters cannot marry another woman, then neither can I.
but are we not ourselves men in the minds of the majority of society as it is?
We can not set all of our standards by the standards of society at large.
We have already steped out of the bounds of societies standards as it is.
I see her as a woman who just slapped the face of the Texas legal system.
yes, I agree that that is the case. I dont agree with her declaring herself as male, or should I use masculine pronouns?
Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 26, 2011, 02:56:36 PM
yes, I agree that that is the case. I dont agree with her declaring herself as male, or should I use masculine pronouns?
Naw.
I won't if you don't.
;)
Quote from: Jamie Nicole on October 26, 2011, 02:56:36 PM
yes, I agree that that is the case. I dont agree with her declaring herself as male, or should I use masculine pronouns?
She is a woman, thus female pronouns are appropriate.
I hate to say but, I do feel like it gives the impression to people that we change our gender to suit our situation and that might not sit too comfortably with the public. I do not agree that this suddenly makes her a man, just a self interested human like the rest of us.
I personally dislike the social concept of gender and would love to tear down all the barriers, but taking advantage of a broke system isn't the way to do it. Work to change the system instead.
...but I like the gender binary.
Don't tear it down!
Thinking about it, the Dutch government is going to discuss the possibility to legally change your sex without the intervention of a court or psychologist.
If this passes (It will be a cold day in hell if it will) I am very curious what implications it will have on society's concept of gender.
Whatever, she probably doesn't even care like other uninvolved people do, I know I wouldn't. Don't be so uptight with "Oh she's declared herself male to get a marriage license so she iz a MAN!" because that's messed up.
Trista,
We have kept it amniable so far.
Don't blow it please.
Quote from: cynthialee on October 26, 2011, 12:18:42 PM
I am a bit of a criminal at heart. I can't help but congradulate her on gaming the system.
I hope that you find that man Val. He is gonna get a good woman out of the deal.
;)
??? Gaming the system is criminal? I agree with some other poster in here, the system makes us inhuman.
Ditto on that man too, Val.
How is this any different than a woman pretending to be a man to go to war, or become a priest, or anything else from which she is being unfairly excluded?
Quote from: Joandelynn on October 27, 2011, 03:23:08 AM
You have a source for that? I only know that the current law proposal still requires intervention of both a court and a psychologist.
The national transgender network is currently making a proposal which in turn will be discussed by the government (at least, they said so during a presentation). I am very sceptical of this plan bearing any fruits though.
This can be read on their website (unfortunately in Dutch): http://transgendernetwerk.nl/2011/10/tnn-en-het-wetsvoorstel-genderregistratie-art-128-nbw/ (http://transgendernetwerk.nl/2011/10/tnn-en-het-wetsvoorstel-genderregistratie-art-128-nbw/)
Every time one of us throws a monkey wrench into our antiquated societal rules, it brings to the forefront the fact that those rules need change. The old "one man, one woman", "you should be happy in you're birth gender, if not, you're mentally ill" and all the other myopic indoctrination we endure growing up and even in our adult lives, needs to be challenged.
That Megan chose this path to be legally married was just that, her choice. Now she and her wife get to enjoy the 1100+ tax benefits legally married people enjoy. When one of them passes, the surviving spouse won't get hit with a huge tax burden on top of already having to deal with a personal loss. When one of them gets sick, the other can be there for her and make medical decisions for her wife. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. This was a smart move.
Same sex marriage is not recognized by the Federal Government. But maybe, with enough cases being brought to the attention of the general public, the average Joe will begin to realize, "What has all the fuss been about?" And we can move forward and enjoy real equality.
exactly.
I see her taking the system that is unkind to trans people and finding the loopholes to get herself married. Do you know how many gay and lesbian people would find a loophole if there was one.
People are so quick to judge her and to call her a man or to belittle her because she found a way through the system to be legally married in Texas.
Some people are quick to forget about the girl who married the firefighter and lost everything after his death because she married him as "F" as a transgender. She now has no income and her husband died and yet, based on our arguments here people would saying "good for you because you got married under the "female" gender clause. I am sure she is not reveling in those celebratory responses right now. She was left with nothing and is currently trying to get her lawyers to at least have the state of Texas to give her something because right now the State of Texas regards the marriage as forfeit.
So when Meghan does it the legal way and now is afforded the coverages a married couple has, people point fingers at her, calls her a man trying to be a woman, or accusing her of bringing down trans equality. None of you are in her shoes. She married the woman she loved and she found the loophole for it.
But rather than congratulating her, we condemn her. What does that say about the trans community on the whole.
She did read this thread and she told me she wasn't bothered by it. I give her credit for that.
Quote from: Annah on October 27, 2011, 07:53:57 AM
Do you know how many gay and lesbian people would find a loophole if there was one.
I got a taste of it.
When Julie and I were asked to be on a panel at a LGBT conference, we let it be known we are both trans and in a lesbian relationship. I talked about the process of having the birth marker changed on a birth certificate and mentioned Julie had done it but I hadn't, even though I was post-op. And that meant Julie and I could, at that time, be legally married in the eyes of the state and the federal government. One of the women (GG) in the crowd raised her hand and asked me how she could go about changing the gender marker on her birth certificate so she could marry her partner.
Two GGs in a lesbian relationship with one willing to change her birth certificate to male so she can marry the woman she loves. That was pretty telling.BTW: When I told her the realities, which included the requirement some gender altering surgery had to be performed, she lost her enthusiasm.
I totally agree with Annah here, I wholeheartedly support what she did.
It is ridiculous any hypocritical that some of you are jumping down her throat and calling her a man because she took advantage of the system.
I live in MA so I could legally marry with another woman but I will probably still use my male birth certificate to my advantage. I am not going to punish myself by limiting my marriage rights just because ciswomen aren't allowed to marry other women. I've gone through enough already, I think I deserve to take advantage of the few perks that come from being born male. My love for my partner trumps any judgment society can put on me.
Lastly, she has probably done more for the transgender community than most of the people here.
Lose the elitist attitude.
Let's not forget we're talking about Texas, a state that won't recognize anything but the original birth certificate when considering legal marriage so no matter how Ms Stabler identifies, the state legally sees her as male when considering marriage rights. That's why Niki Araguz was screwed out of her widow's benefits by a Texas court.
So Ms Stabler decided to use the Texas laws against them, partly to benefit from the special rights and privileges that a legal marriage can bring and partly to poke her finger in their collective legal eye. I can't fault her for that.
Quote from: Valeriedoeswcs on October 26, 2011, 10:29:38 AM
In my opinion she compromised her integrity by declaring her identity as a male. So now that she has declared herself male, I suppose the correct pronoun to use now is he or him.
It is a setback to the transsexual community because the public will see that we are not serious about our gender and cannot trust what we say. Especially coming from someone seen as a leader.
It is true that a man having SRS doesn't necessarily make him a woman. He just proved that with declaring his manhood legally.
The above statement was made only as a
supposition and is a common form of argument. I do apologize to Megan and everyone for using incorrect pronouns when referring to her. I was only trying to make a point about it causing confusion to the general public and perhaps legislators and it was meant only in that context. I do not believe Megan is a man but that she was simply using the system to her benefit. Using it in a way I disagree with and is bad for the transsexual community.
I'm pretty sure after the above post I used all references of her using correct pronouns. Even in the quote above I referred to her as she.
I'm big enough to apologize when I do something out of line. I've apologized before and I am sure will in the future as we discuss things with different points of view.
Val
That was a good post Val. Well said.
Thank you for agreeing that she is a woman. (That was the only thorn I had with the other side of this debate.)
Too bad the state of Texas can't agree to that.
I must agree that I do not know if this marriage will be a benifit or a bane to our comunity. I am hopeing it helps us but I must admit that there is a definate chance that this could cause some issues.
The dice have been cast.
Quote from: Valeriedoeswcs on October 27, 2011, 01:13:32 PM
I'm big enough to apologize when I do something out of line. I've apologized before and I am sure will in the future as we discuss things with different points of view.
Thanks for your apology Valerie. I fully support
everyone's rights to having and expressing differing opinions, as long as we can do it respectfully of each other. I also prefer to look for commonalities, in the hopes of greater understanding.
Z
Having it both ways does make it a lot harder to try to argue later for one OR the other. It makes it look like - because it is exactly like - it does not really matter. And it gets hard to get around that point once the tire tracks go both ways around the tree.
Quote from: tekla on October 27, 2011, 03:13:52 PM
...once the tire tracks go both ways around the tree.
your so funny, you always make me laugh.