I had a thought the other day as I was re-reading the Newsweek article about transgendered people. It struck me that if more "normal-looking" or "passable" TS people were portrayed, it might help us become more accepted. It seems like most articles (though not the Newsweek one) try to find the least passable transsexuals and put them on the front cover to draw attention and sell copies. ("Oh, no! That guy's wearing a dress!") There are many passable transsexuals out there, and it shouldn't be too hard finding us. If people could see that most of us are normal-looking, normal-acting people, it might help them accept us more. This also applies to portraying successful, healthy transsexuals instead of prostitutes or drug addicts.

Then again -- and here's the counterpoint -- "unpassable" transsexuals also need media exposure. Stereotypes of transsexuals as "beauty queens" or the like might stigmatize them even further. If every transsexual in the media is straight, beautiful/handsome, and young, it could create an environment in which transsexuals are only welcome if they conform to society's norms. We also don't want to overlook poor transsexuals, those who have been forced into prostitution, or those with AIDS by portraying only healthy, successful transsexuals.

So, on one hand, we want to create a positive, healthy image of our community. On the other hand, we don't want to stigmatize people because of their looks, job, or AIDS status. What are your thoughts?

hehehe.. hey Andrew, the passable topic is a timebomb round here. boom! hahaha...

in regard to spokespeople or the "face" of tsfolk, you'd probably want to have both sets because passable and unpassable ts people face different sets of obstacles, with the ones for unpassable quite onerous.

however, in my mind, if i'm passable, i would take the advantage and melt back into society--no need to draw attention and be the focal point of hate and stalking.

but, that leaves the trailblazing and fight to the unpassable ilk, whom already have it tough enough.

Graciously, I think there are all types out there representin', and the internet has been huge. Anyways, I think you're on target about who the media pick to speak. It is about drawing headlines, and regular looking passable tfolk doesn't get the Springer crowd going whoop whoop.

This has always been the case and rarely are transsexuals portrayed in a good light. This is usually the case for male to females and the images are not favourable to what a female looks like which enables the public to be less excepting or take gender dysphoria seriously.

The main reason is that the passable transsexuals do not want to expose themselves on TV or in the media otherwise their lives are ruined. The less passable are happy to go on TV and earn some money out of it as they are still seen as men in a dress...

I've been watching a program on U.K TV called 'Sex change doctor' which I think is an American import and each week they do GRS on a man who looks like a man and many have male mannerisms but try to act feminine.
All the people in the program seemed very nice but the public perception of transsexuals is the programs they see on TV which isn't going to change overnight.

I agree with Redfish, It's a double edged sword....if TV companies had gorgeous feminine Transsexuals on their programs people would be more aware that there are passable transsexuals around and it would open things up to closer scrutiny......

I think I would like it if the full range of TS men and women were portrayed. From passable to struggling. I am against TG people being "marketed" for easier public consumption. I would rather we be portrayed honestly in all our diversity.

Quote from: Andrew on September 03, 2007, 05:10:18 PM
I had a thought the other day as I was re-reading the Newsweek article about transgendered people. It struck me that if more "normal-looking" or "passable" TS people were portrayed, it might help us become more accepted.

QuoteI think I would like it if the full range of TS men and women were portrayed. From passable to struggling. I am against TG people being "marketed" for easier public consumption. I would rather we be portrayed honestly in all our diversity.

That's about what I thought. A balance between what society would see as "outside the norm" and "within the norm." Acclimate them to the diversity of the trans spectrum, but make them aware that we walk among them unnoticed, to.

Quote from: redfish on September 03, 2007, 08:20:30 PM
There is another element to this. The more exposure/knowledge that people receive about passable TS people, the higher the bar will be to actually pass.


There exists another spectrum between acceptability of not passing and ease of passing.

I really don't buy into this myth.  And thats exactly what it is a myth. 
The idea that increased media exposure calls out to people what a passing TS looks like, thus raises the bar to passing is silly.  People will see what they want to see, and very few people will read you one way or the other.  Most people do not even read gender consciously. 

With passing TS, you know what most peoples thoughts are, not that is what they look like, but rather I can't even tell they were every a boy/girl beforehand. 
People are not looking out for signs of somebodies past life, honestly if you don't pass with somebody, you don't pass, if you do, you do, and greater awareness of TS is not going to change that circumstance. 

The people who are able to pick up on it will ALWAYS be able to do so.  Its not something they gained from watching a television program.  This does not raise the bar for passing in the very least and if you really think it does you are mistaken and need to get out a bit more. 

Quote from: Amy T. on September 19, 2007, 12:08:59 PM

Quote from: redfish on September 03, 2007, 08:20:30 PM
There is another element to this. The more exposure/knowledge that people receive about passable TS people, the higher the bar will be to actually pass.


There exists another spectrum between acceptability of not passing and ease of passing.

I really don't buy into this myth.  And thats exactly what it is a myth. 

I think Redfish is spot on with her comments.....I don't understand what you mean about it being a myth Amy?

Berleigh, it is.  Read my above expanded commentary.  If you don't pass you don't and greater awareness and media exposure is not going to change that.  I think this is just the fear of this raising the bar for passing is another fear perpetuated by some in the Trans community, which is exactly that, a fear. 

There is often something that was making it more difficult to pass in the first place.  If anything it may make somebody more SELF AWARE, but not necessarily society more aware.  Those who may read you, honestly will have always read you one way or another.  And honestly people are not seeking out people who are TS to begin with.  The truth is if you are ACTUALLY passable, you are just as likely to be read as somebody who is not trans at all.  Basically the situation is the same as before. 

Positive media exposure is a good thing, if you think it is a barrier to passing and raising the bar you are mistaken.  I have no clue what your experiences may be, but there maybe something that is keeping somebody from passing in the first place. 

I am not saying passing is everything, but I am very sorry the whole increased media exposure raising the bar for passing is complete bull and reflects some of the generally paranoid attitudes of those who profess deep stealth above all else.   

Quote from: Amy T. on September 19, 2007, 12:28:46 PM
Berleigh, it is.  Read my above expanded commentary.  If you don't pass you don't and greater awareness and media exposure is not going to change that.  I think this is just the fear of this raising the bar for passing is another fear perpetuated by some in the Trans community, which is exactly that, a fear. 

Positive media exposure is a good thing, if you think it is a barrier to passing and raising the bar you are mistaken.  I have no clue what your experiences may be, but there maybe something that is keeping somebody from passing in the first place. 

I am not saying passing is everything, but I am very sorry the whole increased media exposure raising the bar for passing is complete bull and reflects some of the generally paranoid attitudes of those who profess deep stealth above all else.   

I always thought the one's who pass don't ever want to ever go on TV shows and expose their whole life to the media and it would ruin it forever. They can intergrate and are not known as transsexuals so why would they want to create problems for themselves?

I was once asked by a TV company of they could make a documentary on my life story......I said no way.... but I would like to make a documentary on the U.K NHS GIC system which they declined......they wanted superficial sensationalism not the real issue's that we as transsexuals face.......

I appeared on TV a almost month or so after I went full time. I didn't look that great, but a lot of people said I did. I was on TV being interviewed the about school shootings that happened in Montreal. They interviewed me because I'm part of the "goth" community and they wanted to see what local goths thought, etc.

I was proud of myself -- but it was hard. I struggled for a bit because I wasn't sure if I should go as the old me or not. I mean, I just started HRT a month ago and I wasn't full time for long. But I did it.

I remember seeing myself on the news, aired several times that day. "Natalie Morrissey" was splashed across the screen as millions of people were watching me... the goth looking transsexual telling the world that violence is bad. I did a good interview. I knew that some people would recognize me as TS, while others might not. I know that TS people saw the video because the following month I actually had a couple of people remember me from the news and said, "Thanks."

I think that people who saw it saw a normal girl who wasn't any more different than them (ur, except my hair was black with red chunks, and I was wearing cool make up). 

--natalie

Posted on: September 20, 2007, 11:28:12 AM

---

Although youtube isn't traditional media, I'm also on there. I put my self on a big limb doing that, actually. It's not easy, especially since I'm outing myself.

You should be VERY VERY proud of yourself it takes courage to not only expose yourself in that way but to stand up for what is right. Kudos!

Quote from: gothique11 on September 20, 2007, 11:30:19 AM

I was proud of myself -- but it was hard. I struggled for a bit because I wasn't sure if I should go as the old me or not. I mean, I just started HRT a month ago and I wasn't full time for long. But I did it.

I don't think passability or unpassability is really much issue in how ts people are portrayed in media. I see both kinds of images in about equal measure.

I do agree with what Julia Serano had to say in her book, The Whipping Girl -- the media often depicts transwomen putting on makeup, dressing their hair, etc., images that seem contrived to communicate the idea that the femininity of transsexual women is artificial. Articles about transpeople that include photos almost always include 'before and after' shots. As transpeople, we want to see them because we want to know what HRT and surgeries might do for us. But the photos that get published tend to be selected for drama -- the 'before' picture shows the pre-transition woman looking her most masculine, (here she is, smiling naturally and wearing a tie and mustache) and the after shows her dressed up for glamour (here she is in a cocktail dress and evening-wear make-up, posing like a model). Again it seems to communicate the message that the femininity of the woman is artificial and her past masculinity was 'natural.' The self-selected 'before and after' shots posted by Susan's members usually create a different impression, and a more accurate one -- 'before' shots often show the uncomfortable sad girl behind the male face, the after-shots show a woman who is much more at ease and natural-looking.

It's those kinds of pictures that we need to get out into the media. It doesn't matter how well the 'after' image passes, what matters is that the selected images reveal the fact that the 'after' image is the natural home of the person.

Doc I agree with you completely.  I read Serano, I read whipping girl long before most people, and in fact email Serano back and forth quite bit. 

I completely agree with you with regards to what the media uses in imagery.  But the very fact it seems like a more honest portrayal of trans people is begining to emerge with the focus on younger transitioners.  The Newsweek story, and transgeneration and have largely put forth of a more realistic  portrayal of trans people.   Thus my word "positive" portrayal of transpeople, one which avoids the stereotypes that were so typical in the media before and actually puts forth a realistic dialog.

With regards to making it harder to pass: Most people do not care.  Once you realize this, you will stop being so concerned about these portrayals making it harder to pass by raising the bar.  Gender identification is a subconscious thing for most people.  Once you realize the fact that people are not actively looking out for trans people and that people by in large care you should quit being so stressed about this. 

Quote from: Berliegh on September 19, 2007, 06:32:34 PM

Quote from: Amy T. on September 19, 2007, 12:28:46 PM
Berleigh, it is.  Read my above expanded commentary.  If you don't pass you don't and greater awareness and media exposure is not going to change that.  I think this is just the fear of this raising the bar for passing is another fear perpetuated by some in the Trans community, which is exactly that, a fear. 

Positive media exposure is a good thing, if you think it is a barrier to passing and raising the bar you are mistaken.  I have no clue what your experiences may be, but there maybe something that is keeping somebody from passing in the first place. 

I am not saying passing is everything, but I am very sorry the whole increased media exposure raising the bar for passing is complete bull and reflects some of the generally paranoid attitudes of those who profess deep stealth above all else.   

I always thought the one's who pass don't ever want to ever go on TV shows and expose their whole life to the media and it would ruin it forever. They can intergrate and are not known as transsexuals so why would they want to create problems for themselves?

I was once asked by a TV company of they could make a documentary on my life story......I said no way.... but I would like to make a documentary on the U.K NHS GIC system which they declined......they wanted superficial sensationalism not the real issue's that we as transsexuals face.......

Berliegh not everybody thinks this way.  In order to change the world you need people to speak up for their civil rights whether they pass or do not.  Some of us have a mindset of a feminist or social justice crusader, and are sick and tired of the world making us hide in the shadows, trying to make us look crazy or demonize us, and metaphorically speaking "sit in the back of the bus".  As much as you stress this idea of stealth, many of us think that the only way society will change is to start speaking up for our own civil rights and educating in a public manner.  It is also the only way that life will improve for trans people who will transition in the future.   

Quote from: Amy T. on September 24, 2007, 02:10:52 AM
Berliegh not everybody thinks this way.  In order to change the world you need people to speak up for their civil rights whether they pass or do not.  Some of us have a mindset of a feminist or social justice crusader, and are sick and tired of the world making us hide in the shadows, trying to make us look crazy or demonize us, and metaphorically speaking "sit in the back of the bus".  As much as you stress this idea of stealth, many of us think that the only way society will change is to start speaking up for our own civil rights and educating in a public manner.  It is also the only way that life will improve for trans people who will transition in the future.   

I agree in speaking up for your rights and have done though various organisation mouthpieces, but in the majority of cases rightly or wrongly transsexuals are percieved by the media that they respresent the same image as a dodgy ->-bleeped-<-. This is then fed to the public.........But very gradually the public image is changing and the public is starting to become aware that not all transsexuals look like men dressed in drag......

I do know of some transsexuals who are very active in civil rights but they still seem to fit the stereo type public image I mention above.......why?.... possibly because the stealth transitioners are not in any need of proving themselves or have to. I'm not saying that's right but that's what usually happens..

QuoteIt doesn't matter how well the 'after' image passes, what matters is that the selected images reveal the fact that the 'after' image is the natural home of the person.

I wholeheartedly agree with you on that point. I've often thought that the transsexuals portrayed on cheesy "Springer" or "Ricky Lake" type talk shows never seemed comfortable in their roles. Sometimes I wonder whether they're "real" or whether they just paid some hick to put on a dress. When they did look "real," they seemed to be constantly trying to "justify" their transition instead of accepting it as natural. This isn't the image we want for ourselves! We want people to accept us as our natural gender, not to constantly have to confirm its reality.

BTW, I'm sure most of you have seen pictures of Jan Morris, the British transsexual. She's not exactly beautiful, and one might question her gender upon first meeting her, but all of her pictures display an image of a warm, kindly "great-aunt" type. Doc's comment about the "natural home of the person" is right on target here. She may not be a glamor queen, but she's comfortable being who she is -- and that's how the media should portray us, whether or not we're passable.

The line of inquiry in this topic is intriguing.  Especially the part about the very-passable never making an appearance on the various shows -- mostly shock TV -- where transsexuals are seen.  Also there is the angle about the damage the marginally-passable and the blatantly unpassable are doing to the TG community via their appearance.

I'd like some feedback, please;


(photo taken this morning with my cellphone camera)

If there were a committee that approved transsexuals to appear on TV, with the goal of manipulating the public image via presenting only the ones among us who meet some minimum standard of passability, what would those standards be?  How high the bar?

Further, if you were a member of this committee, would you vote for me to appear, or not to appear, based on the above picture?  Do I present a positive enough image for the trans community, or not?

Why?

I do understand the desire to present a good image.  Saturday night, I attended a local event for some of us trans-women.  Some were blatantly unpassable, and got the rest of us read.  One asked a waitress if the waitress found her attractive, and when the waitress said (politely) 'yes', asked her for a date.  You don't think her actions reflected badly on all of us, even the very-passable, well-dressed, well-behaved among us?  The only thing I could do was damage control by being very polite and well-mannered to the staff, and thanking them for accommodating our party on short notice with no reservation.  And that the assembled members exceeded the 18% gratuity added to the bill by a significant amount helped.

Pardon my long winded, melodramatic post.  I hope I've made my points that: While controlling our image would help, it raises some other issues such as what standards will be used to govern access to the media; and I feel we must take into account event the marginally passable and unpassable in constructing the image we wish the public to have about us.

I hope this stimulates thoughtful debate;

Karen

I'd vote for you to appear because you seem confident, self-assured, and successful -- not because you're passable. The main point of this post wasn't really supposed to be about passability. It was about the appearance of success and sanity. "Passable" transsexuals are typically those who are self-assured in their roles: they take care of themselves, they have steady jobs, they don't dress like slobs, they walk with their heads high and look you in the eye. Those are the people we want to represent us, whether or not they're "beautiful" or conform to gender norms.

I wish they would show more FTM.  Don't really know why MTF is always the transgender flag bearer for these photos, but I think on the whole my general problem with the media coverage isn't about the whole passable unpassable thing, but it's more about showing diversity.  The people they show are generally white and MTF.

Plus if the focus were shifted to FTM I think the emphasis on passability would somewhat dissipate, because I don't think the emphasis is there in FTM to the extent that it is in MTF, because guys aren't really evaluated aesthetically, so much as by their presence, attitude, and character.  So coverage skewed that way would seem to be something of an antidote to the Springer-ist coverage we all endure right now.

Quote from: Berliegh on September 24, 2007, 06:01:46 AM

Quote from: Amy T. on September 24, 2007, 02:10:52 AM
Berliegh not everybody thinks this way.  In order to change the world you need people to speak up for their civil rights whether they pass or do not.  Some of us have a mindset of a feminist or social justice crusader, and are sick and tired of the world making us hide in the shadows, trying to make us look crazy or demonize us, and metaphorically speaking "sit in the back of the bus".  As much as you stress this idea of stealth, many of us think that the only way society will change is to start speaking up for our own civil rights and educating in a public manner.  It is also the only way that life will improve for trans people who will transition in the future.   

I agree in speaking up for your rights and have done though various organisation mouthpieces, but in the majority of cases rightly or wrongly transsexuals are percieved by the media that they respresent the same image as a dodgy ->-bleeped-<-. This is then fed to the public.........But very gradually the public image is changing and the public is starting to become aware that not all transsexuals look like men dressed in drag......

I do know of some transsexuals who are very active in civil rights but they still seem to fit the stereo type public image I mention above.......why?.... possibly because the stealth transitioners are not in any need of proving themselves or have to. I'm not saying that's right but that's what usually happens..

As much as you say this the high profile activist I know: Julia Serano, Simon Ornoff, and Mara Keisling are far from stereotypical and are some of the most passable TS I know.  Simon Ornoff is one of the friendliest transguys I have ever talked to by the way.  Same goes for the local activist in DC Trans Coalition, which is made up heavily of younger trans people.  Trans-activist that I know by in large do not fit the stereotypes of transwomen or transmen.  They are not the men in dresses which are often the public perception of transsexuals, rather these are individuals who if they wanted to could easily go stealth.  But the truth is they are people who realize that there is alot of work to be done with regards to civil rights that going stealth is far from constructive, especially for somebody with idealistic mindset. 

I know the

Quote from: Amy T. on September 27, 2007, 09:54:06 AM
As much as you say this the high profile activist I know: Julia Serano, Simon Ornoff, and Mara Keisling are far from stereotypical and are some of the most passable TS I know.  Simon Ornoff is one of the friendliest transguys I have ever talked to by the way.  Same goes for the local activist in DC Trans Coalition, which is made up heavily of younger trans people.  Trans-activist that I know by in large do not fit the stereotypes of transwomen or transmen.  They are not the men in dresses which are often the public perception of transsexuals, rather these are individuals who if they wanted to could easily go stealth.  But the truth is they are people who realize that there is alot of work to be done with regards to civil rights that going stealth is far from constructive, especially for somebody with idealistic mindset. 

You are talking about a Female to Male and most Female to Males pass a lot better than Male to Females. I also object to the word 'transwomans' or 'transman' ...it really sucks! I would never associate with that terminology and it only increases alienation.  It puts people in a 'non gender' catagory instead of either male or female.