Transphobia and the icky people
On January 12, 2011, By Antonia D'orsay
http://www.thespectrumcafe.com/?p=2249 (http://www.thespectrumcafe.com/?p=2249)
It is transphobic to say that cross dressers just want to dress up. It is a falsehood. IT is reliant on a long held and ongoing prejudice against them derived from a stereotype that has been supported by the medical community for years — the same medical community that people are trying so hard to say is mistreating transsexuals by saying they are mentally ill. As in, the same f---ing people.
[...]
Now, understand this. The same physiological issue that creates transsexuals creates crossdressers.
That does not mean that all cross dressers are going to become transsexuals. IT does not mean that all transsexuals are cross dressers. This is not an off or on switch.
Hey look, it's a trans woman speaking on behalf of crossdressers and defining them to fit her (narrow) interpretation of the woefully lacking etiology of transgender peeps.
I bet she'd be furious if a crossdresser did the same to her.
"Why they do it is the same" uhm... Sometimes I just kind of like to put on a skirt. Sometimes it's just fun to play with the body I've got. I know I'm just one person, but doesn't that mean what she's saying simply cannot be fact if there's even one person it doesn't apply to?
I especially disliked the intimation that crossdressers are FORCED to crossdress by some kind of GID effect, not because they might enjoy it and could actually take it or leave it as they desire.
Yeah. I can't figure out if the writer is innocent, malicious, or just dumb. From the cursing I'm thinking it's probably not the first one, and from the defensive tone of the entire thing I am thinking it is also not the last.
Her whole blog sounds like its copied straight out of the crossdresser media guide. I still find it an interesting division within the T spectrum that the harder they try to associate themselves with our issues, the more we try to distance ourselves from them.
Its been my understanding that in the past Premarin was used extensively by many doctors, well for alot of reasons, but also becuase breast development was more rapid with it then other drugs. It served well to weed out crossdressers, their breasts grew and they became horrified, non-crossdressers experienced rapid breast development and were delighted.
Its either your life, or its a hobby. There is no in between.
It perpetuates the gender binary.. saying all trans women should wear their gender's clothes. It's just a piece of material you use to clothe yourself. It doesn't contribute so massively to the reasons people transition.
Actually I thought the blog did an excellent job of presenting something that I have felt strongly about when I come across it here on Susans. I see posts putting down cross dressers with exactly the same kinds of language and ignorance used by the transphobes. Afro-American pastors who fought segregation and racial hatred here in the U.S. are some of the worst anti-gay bigots. I suppose that it is easier to pretend you are standing on the high ground if you can push someone down to a lower level. Even if it is an imaginary level that only exists in ones own brain. Hate is hate no matter where it comes from. I know it when I see it, because I have had that filth spewn at me.
I didn't see any of that. I saw one person trying to force two separate but similar groups into the same category, saying that none of them have a choice in who they are and what they do.
Quote from: Vexing on January 12, 2011, 04:24:55 PM
I especially disliked the intimation that crossdressers are FORCED to crossdress by some kind of GID effect, not because they might enjoy it and could actually take it or leave it as they desire.
I dislike it too. I have either met or am friends with most of the people who perform at the local clubs here in 'drag shows'. I am not saying that the entire trans community is representative of the participants in a show, not at all. I am using this as an example because it includes different types of people that dress opposite to society's notion of what is male and what is female. It most definitely includes a type that is in direct opposition to what this author seems to be saying.
Being the philosophical type, I am always talking and trying to analyse things about myself and others, even when at the club drinking (I don't recommend drinking) and dancing lol. It is not hard for me to take things deeper and end up talking for hours about this or that. :) From quite a few years of experience with this very diverse group of performers, 16 years in fact, I say the following because it was they that expressed it to me. Some identify as women and have transitioned to varying degrees, others feel they are not women, not transsexual, but do have some gender incongruence, and lastly, some say that they 'dress for the show'. This last category, I dislike putting labels on my friends (maybe I secretly like to indulge), self identify with the term 'drag queen' or 'female impersonator'. They have often expressed to me that 'when the show is over the show is over' and they have no desire to be women, consider themselves transsexual or transgender, nor do they have any issues with GID.
I suppose I could say 'well they are just lying to me'. lol (at the absurdity of that perspective). To say so would be false in my opinion. I guess the author of this piece might say 'THEY MUST PERFORM AS WOMEN FOR 30 MINUTES 2-3 TIMES A WEEK to alleviate symptoms of GID. I disagree with that assumption. While someone might seek out methods of expression such as performance in relation to GID, it most certainly is not that way in all cases. I will even go so far as to say that any person that says it to be true and holds a professional title such as psychiastrist or psychologist could possibly be a quack (did I say possibly?). At the least, they do not have enough experience to actually make an all-inclusive statement such as that. I have never seen this person's blog (not surprising) until this was posted. To make the MUST statement that the person makes, being all-inclusive such that it is, the author effectively revealed their ignorance about the subject matter imo.
Forgive me for being MtF sided in this post. For some reason or another, I have known personally only 1 FtM performer in the 16 years I have been frequenting the clubs. I can say that this performer also expressed to me that she was not affected by any sort of GID. She is a very close relative of one of my MtF friends and starting doing shows because she thought it was fun and in support of my friend :) I believe her. I suppose the author of the blog post would think that she is lying too and has some hidden GID lurking around somewhere, if she could just get to the bottom of it. ::)
Quote from: Cindy Stephens on January 12, 2011, 06:19:03 PM
Actually I thought the blog did an excellent job of presenting something that I have felt strongly about when I come across it here on Susans. I see posts putting down cross dressers with exactly the same kinds of language and ignorance used by the transphobes. Afro-American pastors who fought segregation and racial hatred here in the U.S. are some of the worst anti-gay bigots. I suppose that it is easier to pretend you are standing on the high ground if you can push someone down to a lower level. Even if it is an imaginary level that only exists in ones own brain. Hate is hate no matter where it comes from. I know it when I see it, because I have had that filth spewn at me.
Personally I did not have a problem with most of the blog post up until the MUST part. That is when I stopped reading the post itself and jumped to the comments. Many people dress differently than what society expects them to. It is not up to me or anyone else to judge why they do it. To say that all do it for this or that reason, is false. Coming from a person that claims to be both psychologist and sociologist, it is disturbing.
Well, one has to question how a primal drive to wear frilly pink knickers gets hardwired into the brains of crossdressers, considering that frilly pink knickers didn't exist until sometime after the 18th century.
Quote from: Vexing on January 12, 2011, 07:19:10 PM
Well, one has to question how a primal drive to wear frilly pink knickers gets hardwired into the brains of crossdressers, considering that frilly pink knickers didn't exist until sometime after the 18th century.
I think there might be a degree of socialization and upbringing to it.
I suspect this personally through various accounts throughout history (including quite old history) of what happens if you take a person born as one gender and raise them as the opposite gender.
This behavior dose NOT produce a transsexual as we might guess but it dose produce a non-sexual transvestite who in all the cases I read are happy with there bodies but just innately much more comfortable in clothing of the opposite sex. They could push themselves out of it but they don't usually unless they are persecuted for it.
How do the Sexual transvestites come about? I don't know but the appeal and motivations vary between each individual I've questioned and many of them are lovely people. Some will confess to a sexual side others report to that and something else.
I think cross-dressers are alot more complicated than transsexuals.
Kitian...
I read your comments of Dysonnance's article and noticed you continually asked for links substantiating her position...and never got them. I can tell you from experience that you never will; Toni is noted for making broad philosophical personal statements to which she attributes as facts . She is known for that tact, either not realizing, or more probably, refusing to acknowledge, that no one but the most naive is going to see her as credible by taking that stance. Almost all who blog, including myself, very liberally footnote or link directly to the source of our statements...more often than not, even then, inserting or implying that what we are saying is strictly an opinion. Dysonnance (Antonia D'orsay) rarely does...instead, sending those who ask for such substantiation on a wild goose Google chase in search of data that is more likely than not never found, and if it is found, is distorted beyond all reason...yet is presented by her as if it were absolute, undeniable, undisputed truth.
As someone who has studied transgender long before the term was coined I can say this: There is noone who can say it is this or it is that and claim their theory is correct for all. We are all as unique as a fingerprint.
What compels a crossdresser to crossdress? Back when I thought I was a crossdresser I asked myself that question ad nauseum. And never did I arrive at that epiphany, that AHA! moment.
When I later realized this was more than crossdressing and I was given clinical definitions for crossdresser, transgender, transsexual and fetishistic transvestite, I thought maybe I was transgender which was defined at the time as "a person who has one foot in each camp." And I then begun asking those questions. Again, no enlightenment.
So when I read a post such as this woman's, I see it only as her opinion. That she chose to take on a defiant stand, complete with numerous expletives, I saw as either something she wanted to say to stir up conversation or maybe just simple frustration. Whatever, this is hers and not mine. I do not give her permission to define me.
I still wait for the AHA! moment but I no longer actively search for it. I'm finally okay with who I am. So when I have the opportunity to educate, I do so with the caveat, "This is my experience" and let the listener walk away with the knowledge we are all unique.
Since making my original post regarding the author's blog post, I have read more of the author's blog and feel that I have a better sense of the ultimate message she is trying to convey. In doing so and becoming more aware of this, I think I judged the author in haste. I also made a comment that was uneducated and unfounded in the second part of my post. I reacted strongly and harshly before I knew the entirety of the issue. In the second part of my post I said that she lacked intelligence and made a couple of sarcastic and imo, very judgemental remarks. I made these before fully understanding both the context and the author to any real degree. At this point I wish I had kept my mouth shut but that is becoming increasingly difficult to do.
I stand by my opposition to the all-inclusive statement that the author made, because there is rarely a case where ALL fit into a classification or idea. However, I myself might make a similar statement but leaving the MUST portion out.
I would word it: What causes a crossdresser to crossdress and a transsexual to transition is essentially the same force in some cases.
When said this way it is not all-inclusive, which was my main argument with the author's post. I reacted too strongly to begin with for some reason. Possibly because I had never seen the blog before and I had not heard of the author. Possibly because I am fed up with people that have no idea what they are talking about, making decisions for me and others. I am quite capable of making my own decisions and so are many others. When it boils down to it, I think that we, as individuals are really the only ones that can make our decisions. I disregarded the author as misinformed because of the way she worded her statement. I apologize and while I could delete or edit my original post. I felt it better to explain my reasoning and change of opinion instead. I no longer feel that the author is misinformed of the subject matter. I have read much more of her blog now and tend to agree with much of what she expresses. While I understand that may not make a difference to others that view her with contempt, I had to post my change of opinion for my own conscience. The author seems to be very intelligent and quite informed of the subject matter IMHO.
Since coming to Susan's I am becoming more aware of how deep the divide seems to be between individuals within the transgender, transsexual, and crossdressing communities. On the flipside, I also am becoming aware of the great number of people that wish for us to unify in some way or another, for a multitude of different reasons. I am one of the unifying type of people. I do not wish to separate, judge, exclude, or criticize anyone for being who they are. The reasoning behind who they are is not for me to judge or anyone else for that matter. It is wonderful that we, as humans, are a very diverse group of beings. While I may not agree with everything that another thinks or feels about themselves, and most definitely don't agree with everything that anyone thinks about me, I love each and every person and truly hope that we can come together for the betterment of all people, regardless of sex, gender, orientation, hair color, skin color, language, the list goes on.
I feel better now. lol. If you took the time to read this entire post. Thank you! =) xo
I have known Dyss for a couple of years now from another board, and she can be pretty abrasive on some issues. It also takes me a couple of times of reading to get up to her altitude of thought. As she points out here though, she has not been in the CD part of our TG population. For many years though, I was and yes the view is a little different there. Not everyone who has ever cross dressed is a cross dresser. The circle labled "All who have cross dressed" does in fact have a small sector that goes into the circle labled "Cis gendered, straight", the larger part does however end up in the Trans Gender population circle. Those people who are in that area do need to be accepted and welcomed into the TG circle along with even those of us whose path is toward SRS and the life beyond it. The Cross Dresser's I have known do have an inner conflict of spirit, and do have an inner "need" to be what they are. It is up to the individual to reject population inclusion as a transgendered person. It is not up to me as a now realized transexual to deny them inclusion, nor is it up to me to declare degrees of status among those who claim transgendered status. I have felt the gaps between Cross Dresser and Transexual, and the two segments of the population do perform a dance with each other that can be like the dance of waves and lightning in a storm.
Quote from: VanOcc on January 12, 2011, 05:49:31 PM
It perpetuates the gender binary.. saying all trans women should wear their gender's clothes. It's just a piece of material you use to clothe yourself. It doesn't contribute so massively to the reasons people transition.
I have considered that irony many times, the vast sums of money I will spend just to bum around in t-shirts and jeans (however girly they may be) most of the time. :)
Recalling the blog and reading all of our comments, I think we can all acknowledge there is a divide. In my own post I stated it was either a hobby or it was your life. I still stand by that.
I do believe there is a need for crossdressers to assert that they are driven to do what they do, that they have no choice in the matter, in a desire for acceptance by larger society. In that push, they try to align themselves closer and closer with the other end of the GID spectrum that chooses to transition fully to the opposite gender. For the average person seeking a full transition, the crossdresser is regarded with disdain for their take it or leave it attitude, in other words the makeup comes off, the boobs go back on the closet shelf and monday comes and Frank goes back to work speaking nothing of his weekend "activties" to his co-workers. For the remainder, there is no luxury to pick and choose their moments of self expression.
We are thrown together by society, but our needs are as different as black and white.
Quote from: regan on January 14, 2011, 09:10:15 AM
We are thrown together by society, but our needs are as different as black and white.
At least some (notice how I leave the option open for those that have not experienced this and for those that wish to refute what I say) 'crossdressers' become transsexuals. On the flip, at least some transsexuals have 'crossdressed'. At this point one really needs to stop and consider the whole idea of 'crossdressing'. It is obviously socially constructed. In reality, I think most (both transsexuals and crossdressers) simply dress the way they feel comfortable. IMO, there is no need for anyone to even think that they are 'crossdressing' unless a person chooses or feels compelled to choose that term. At least some enjoy the aspect of dressing opposite to society's notion of what male/female are supposed to dress like. For these it might simply be fun to varying degrees or done for other reasons. That is fine and there is nothing wrong with either imo. But crossdressing, philosophically speaking (as me the philosopher), doesn't exist. It is a created notion.
That being said, some crossdressers who ultimately decide to transition (that is take hormones, get surgeries, train voice, etc) have noticed that the intense need to 'crossdress' leaves them and is replaced by a comfortable feeling of knowing they are now taking steps to change into what they have always felt comfortable as. I am not saying that the hormones, surgeries, etc make someone a woman or a man because imo they do not. Being a man or a woman is much more than clothes, hormones, surgeries, or any of this. I would say it is more an inner feeling of self. Those things do, however, help to align the body or presentation with this inner sense of self. That is extremely important for many.
At the point one chooses to identify with transsexual (which would be taking steps to transition into what they feel comfortable as, by definition) they no longer have to feel that they are crossdressing, if they ever did to begin with. At the point they (some) completely identify with their inner sense of self, which in many cases is man or woman, the created notion of crossdressing goes away altogether of course.
The needs of (some) crossdressers to dress up and the needs of (some) transsexuals to transition is not always different and it is most (of the time) certainly not black and white. IMHO.
Quote from: regan on January 14, 2011, 09:10:15 AM
In my own post I stated it was either a hobby or it was your life. I still stand by that.
There was this person that one day realized that their hobby was actually their life and that their life was actually their hobby. At some point there was a merge of hobby and life, at the least an intersection, and they both existed within the individual's mind simultaneously.