Trans People Were Never Cis

http://www.pqmonthly.com/trans-people-were-never-cis/23355

PQ Monthly/By Leela Ginelle

"There's a trope present in certain lesbian feminist circles, aimed at discrediting trans women, which claims we, as a group, prior to transitioning, enjoyed "male privilege." Those who argue this often claim that we bring "residual male energy" with us into social situations.

Throughout all culture, cis people, when speaking about trans folk, make reference to the genders we were assigned at birth, in phrases such as, "born a man," or "female to male."

Statements such as these, like our culture overall, are cissexist. They view all identities through a cisgender lens."

Great article which I completely agree with. The sad part is we do it to ourselves too - on this forum the sections are labeled MtF and in it you will find frequent postings by people about losing male privilege.

Quite asside from the fact that I had a minor intersex condition and therefore am presumably more accurately ItF, it
was my perception and experience that I never ever had "male" privilege and I have always found it curious that some people here seem to have the impression that they (and I suppose by extension I) did.

So its not just "then" cis-folk that need to get their heads straight over this lie. In my opinion a lot of trans-people also need to wake up and smell the coffee and stop refering to themselves using inappropriate social modeling. 

my life has been the farthest thing from male privilege since 1st grade.

"Enjoyed" male privileges is key in this belief that even I, a transguy feminist find as being false, needlessly cruel, and possibly, transphobic.  While it is true there have been several transwomen who received career and social benefits and advantages of male privileges before coming out and transitioning to their true, female identities, I highly doubt these women were happy living a lie and remaining closeted and even trapped in their own facade.  How on earth could this be enjoyable? The male energies are leftover remains of the life they lived pre transition. All of that is culturally based, learned behavior and it has nothing to do with one's own identity.  I can relate, because I did the same thing, only from the other side.  I lived the first 45 years as female and am now one year in my transition to my identity, being male.  I was trapped in my own facade and it made me miserable.  I also ended up in really bad situations with unwanted attention by various men, which I'd rather not talk about.  I will always be a feminist no matter what. 

As for these feminist radicals who believe transwomen should be excluded from their groups because of their "enjoyed" male privileges, they are out of line and need to learn the meaning of feminism.  The goals of feminists includes supporting women's interests, yes, but the focus is to fight for fairness and equality between the sexes, regardless of gender and all other aspects of being human.     

Miles

It's the gender binary all over again, isn't it?

I just read a very insightful book called "Gender Failure" that was written by two lovely genderqueer individuals named Rae Spoon, and Ivan Coyote.  The book was really great, and helped me come to terms with quite a few things about myself and the world.

The Gender Binary harms both sides of the debate by making it a battle.  This is the same thing that happens in any situation that can be painted as a polarizing issue, and the easiest way to get there is to put two sides on the table.  If your for one side obviously you must be violently against the other.

I don't believe any transgender people have ever gotten "privilege".  We aren't good at hiding ourselves, and even when we find a modicum of ability to do so, it's a painful act that causes intense mental anguish(speaking from personal experience here), that being said I have begun to reject the idea that I am female too.  I am an mtf transsexual because the journey has painted my mindset in a way no "female" could ever see, and I will never fit into that camp completely because I've always seen the world from both sides.  We are given a very painful stark view of what people do, and it all amounts to a lot of silly that ends up being hateful and painful to the majority of those involved.

We'll get through it eventually.

I agree to a great extent with Jenny. I prefer using the acronyms AFAB (assigned female at birth) and AMAB (assigned male at birth) if I need to explain my past. The terms also help people to understand that my gender was assigned on physical features rather than my developing gender during childhood.

I also agree with Going4miles, true feminism seeks to support equality and inclusion of anyone in the same way that supporters of human rights support all people of all ethnic, religious and social groups and not just groups of people they may 'like'.

What frustrates me, though, is that this article appears to invalidate my identity instead... because I believe I *was* cis, once. I just got over it. I am as real as any of the trans women who always knew/never were cis, and I believe them and am happy to allow them to tell their stories; I just wish that narrative didn't so often come with trying to silence my own story. Heck, in some ways my story annoys cis people even more, because it suggests that being cis is a) not necessarily a lifelong trait and b) something I was willing to walk away from.

I'm not getting into the privilege argument, because I'm just too tired today. But I do exist.

Interesting article, but I think the author's got it all wrong. She rightly points out that certain feminist (more accurately, TERF) voices claim that we bring "residual male energy" with us into social situations (we don't), but she states that the male privilege trans women are accused of having enjoyed prior to transitioning is specifically a cis male privilege.

It is not.

Whether I like it or not, I (and pretty much much every trans woman who previously presented as a socionormative male) had male privilege prior to transition. This privilege is not based on cisnormativity but rather on my socially perceived gender normative presentation. It has nothing at all to do with how I might see myself, with my own transgender identity or with my own acceptance or rejection of cisnormativity. It has everything to do with how I am perceived by others and thus male privilege is based on the value that is (or was) conferred upon me by others as they [incorrectly] evaluated me as being male.

That value must be conferred upon me before I can claim it and exercise it. If you doubt that then just try and claim male privilege while presenting as female and see what happens. Also, note what happens to trans men as they go through transition and present (and pass) as male. Male privilege is conferred upon them irrespective of any internal sense of gender identity and it is not, as the author claims, specifically a cis male privilege. It's a privilege accorded to anyone who is deemed to be male, whether the recipient agrees to accept that privilege or not.

The assertion by TERFs that we hold residual male privilege is merely a smokescreen to devalue our gender identities. It has no basis in cisnormativity, it is merely a dog whistle tactic to shore up a failed ideology that is getting weaker and weaker as society begins to understand and accept trans people.

EDIT: did hae a quote, but after reviewing my post, The quote was found un nesscessary, as my post is still aimed at no one person.

If privilage is offered based upon how you are viewed, this residual male energy is reffering to that in the eyes of TERF we are seen as men?
And as men are seen as angry and violent and bring residual ellemts of the male privilage intimidation?

I know thats going to offend some poeple, but its not an acusation. and ofending people isnt my intent.

When I READ THE ARTICLE i saw a cupple of coments about it, and had to reply ther.

Wether or not we had privlalige isnt the problemb, the problemb starts when, privilage it talked about as if it was enjoyed, or our fualt for not enjoying.

I mentioned how, the same privalige, can be offered to two people, and that privalige bring gratitude to one and offence to the other.

Is it a privalige to be offended? (this is a genuin question as I realy dont know)

The trouble is, sometimes, I feel privaliged. And its that feeling that I think of when I see the word privilage.
So if you can feel privaliged, doesnt that mean that privilage equates to how one feels?

So Lets say I can grasp the concept that privilage doesnt care, thats ok. That mens that having had a privilage is irelavsnt. Because it means how one felt about exsperiencing any given prvivilage is what is relavant?

So I guess that even if I privilage doeasnt care how i feel/felt, people should and thats the actual problemb?

Quote from: ButterflyVickster on August 27, 2015, 05:36:48 PMIf privilage is offered based upon how you are viewed, this residual male energy is reffering to that in the eyes of TERF we are seen as men?
And as men are seen as angry and violent and bring residual ellemts of the male privilage intimidation?

That is exactly the point that these people claim to be making. Of course, it's nonsense. It only caters to the prejudice of their disciples by denying the reality of who we are.

Regardless of cis or trans status, men do have certain privileges that most arent aware of. They're more likely to be listened to, hired, agreed with etc. That's just facts and it has been backed up.

Now excluding transwomen simply because of their past i do not agree with. If anything all feminist circles should include transsexuals because we have seen both sides of how society treats the perceived sexes. We are living evidence of how sexist society can be in the most subtle situations.

Quote from: BenKenobi on August 27, 2015, 09:10:40 PM
Regardless of cis or trans status, men do have certain privileges that most arent aware of. They're more likely to be listened to, hired, agreed with etc. That's just facts and it has been backed up.

Now excluding transwomen simply because of their past i do not agree with. If anything all feminist circles should include transsexuals because we have seen both sides of how society treats the perceived sexes. We are living evidence of how sexist society can be in the most subtle situations.

Except almost all of these come with caveats designed to keep the weird out.  I'm not saying we don't get the occasional fringe benefit, not at all.  We get those when they confuse us as "normal", but the moment it comes out that we want to be women, not only do the privileges fly out the window, but they actually get more vehement in putting us down, stopping us, and shutting us out.  Violence becomes a regular concern, often up to death.  We get shut out of over half the jobs that would take us if we presented normal and we become more than pariahs, they shun us as crazy, to be put away.

Evidence comes out everyday that gender identity may be even more stable than sexual identity, and transgender people make up some of the worst statistics in the world if we are going to play the "who is more ostracized" card, which is a stupid card to play.  The problem is that isolationism and splitting hairs over who is where is how you end up with small groups and not a unified whole.

Repugnant intolerance lives everywhere. So do love and kindness.

Cindi

I like how the author brings up cis privilege but why stop there, what about the privilege of beauty?  What about the privilege of being born wealthy?  What about the privilege of being born Caucasian?  I could go on and on.   There are lots of privileged people on this planet and lots of disadvantaged people too.  To think that all males are privileged and all females aren't, is incredibly naive.

Anyway, just a thought,
Paige

Quote from: Paige on August 27, 2015, 11:06:43 PMTo think that all males are privileged and all females aren't, is incredibly naive.

Right. As you point out, there are different kinds of privilege. While I may have lost my male privilege I have not lost my white privilege or my heterosexual privilege. And within the trans community we often defer to those who have passing privilege, even though we are painfully aware of the negative social consequences of that deference.

All males will have male privilege unless that privilege is degraded in some way. An effeminate man may be accorded less male privilege, but he still has it and a butch woman does not. A woman may have many types of privilege, but very rarely will gender privilege be one of them.

Quote from: Everbrooke on August 27, 2015, 10:13:40 PM
Except almost all of these come with caveats designed to keep the weird out.  I'm not saying we don't get the occasional fringe benefit, not at all.  We get those when they confuse us as "normal", but the moment it comes out that we want to be women, not only do the privileges fly out the window, but they actually get more vehement in putting us down, stopping us, and shutting us out.  Violence becomes a regular concern, often up to death.  We get shut out of over half the jobs that would take us if we presented normal and we become more than pariahs, they shun us as crazy, to be put away.

Evidence comes out everyday that gender identity may be even more stable than sexual identity, and transgender people make up some of the worst statistics in the world if we are going to play the "who is more ostracized" card, which is a stupid card to play.  The problem is that isolationism and splitting hairs over who is where is how you end up with small groups and not a unified whole.

This literally has nothing to do with my post at all

I still dont quite get it.
If privilage has nothing to do with how I feel, how is it, I can feel Privilaged?

A privilage can be taken for granted, and therefore overlooked? Un-noticed?

So lets say, I understand this overlooking and un-noticing pricible.Wouldnt that suggest that upon being told about said, "exsperienced" privilages, wouldnt I then feel better? Feel more privilaged?

Here, is what I consider my privilages, any and all respect offered after being seen as trans? The funny thing is, when I pass, or I believe I pass, anything welcomes into female domain I exsperience I dont feel privilaged about. But when those welcomes are still exstended to a transwoman then It becomes a privilage?

You see, before the start of transition, yes I looked male, and was treated as a male.(Many would say I recieved male privilage.) But I didnt, the fualse presentation recieved those privilages. Which in turn made the supposed privilage fualse.

Eample, I looked mean, and mean was offered the privilage of scary.
Im not mean, and once I stopped pretending to be, I, as a not mean person was privilaged to not be scary.

When ever sombody Is nice to me, If I believe for a second their atittude would change, upon descoving Im trans. Then that atittude is not a privilage.

But, lets look at it this way, If I pass, and then come out as trans to said person, is that trans privilage to be treat the same? Or is it, pass privilage? honesty privilage? respect privilage? beauty privilage?

So basically, a privilage, is anything sombody ells, sees as benaficial, offered to you based upon how you are percieved?

This has to exstend further then external presentaion, because is being respected not a privilage? and if sombody respects you because they see you as honest, and respect is offered to your percieved honesty?

So we have, presentational privilage? (percieved benifits offerd to how we are seen via our presentation)
And personalty privilage? (percieved benifits offered via our personality)

So realy, If we have somthing, sombody ells wants, regardless of what or why we have it, acces to said thing is a privilage?

So, is privilage then not a word used to describe things of desire, envy, jelousy?

So that would exsplain why ther is so much confusion as to what a privilage is. If a privilage is something, sombody desires, and is called so, if we have it, and do not desire it, to us it is catagorically not a privilage due to not being a thing we are jelouse of people having, envyouse of people having, or even in anyway desire having.

Which would mean. That, yes to sombody ells IT IS a privilage, but that doesnt necesserily make said thing a Privilage for you?

Which basically means, one persons privilage, IS another persons insult?

Which brings me back to, my origional thought, How one feels about sothing IS a deciding factor in wether or not IT is a privilage for them as a person.

So privilage is a completelly personal perspective?

So lets say I agree that if you have a hardship, people without that hardship are privilaged? (true)
Exsperiencing male privilage for those that this is a hardship, is not a privilage? Because the percieved privilage being a hardship stops being a privilage? Because privilage is percieved lack of hardship?

And being told your hardship is a privilge, makes no sence when, lack of hardship is a privilage?


EDIT: Just went down and asked my dad what a privilge was, he said, "well it would be a privilge for me to be able to sit down and watch tv without being interupted" (I didnt get the answer I was looking for)

So I said, Ok whats male privilge? He said whats that.

I said, "if people are more likely to listen to you because you are a man and not a woman thats male privilage" He goes "no its not". So I ask, "what would you call it then" and he says, "sexisme"

So one could argue with the pressent concept of privilages.
Saying that, male privilage is the other half of sexisme?
white privilage is the other half of racisme?

The question isn't whether or not you want it because you grt it anyway. You experience male privilege whether you like it or not. You don't want it, fine. But don't pretend it's not there.

Male privilege is a specific form of sexism so yes and no. People listening to men over women is sexist but because it benefits men it is their privilege.

Quote from: Cindi Jones on August 27, 2015, 10:29:10 PM
Repugnant intolerance lives everywhere. So do love and kindness.

Cindi

For me, the feeling of true contentment, is in the realisation and appreciation that the vast majority of one`s life has been blessed with the latter. 

If you think, that Im trying to deny the exsistance of what you are reffering to as "male privilage" Im not, In fact I see and understand it is there. But although it is there, Privilage doesnt describe it.

If you are more likely to get a job as a man, that is sexisme not privilage.
If you are more likely to be listend to because you are white, that is racisme.

And if Im wrong here, please exsplain the differece.

I just dont see how, sexisme, and racisme stop being so, on account of the difference in treatment being benificial.
Aka a white person getting work easier, is the same as a none white person finding it harder.

And a man being treated with more respect on account of being male, is the same as a woman being treated with less respect on account of being female.

Saying that these two things are different adds tolerance. Its ok to be sexist as long as the respect for woman doesnt drop below a certian standard.

But Ill move away, Its seems my understanding of privilage, is hard wired incorectly. And Ill stop conversing about somthing I know nothing about. Exspecialy when, What I thought a peicefull debate, seems to be becooming heated on account of my inability to comprehend.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit: PS, sorry for my behaviour before. It was rude of me to give up on trying to understand what Privilage ment. I felt as though I was sugesting understanding what people where trying to say wasnt worth my effort, and as a result, I return with an apology for any offence.


Privilage:
A special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group:

Privilaged:
Having been granted a special honour:

Honour:
regard with great respect:

Now I get it.

So, Privilage. Means the greater respect, offered to a person or group regardless of why. Why do I need to bounce off of the meanings of two other words, In order to find out the meaning of a third. Beause I thought, that both honour, and Privilaged, Were feelings due to those situations, when In-fact they are the situations themselves.

So if, in another persons mind, they exstend us a greater respect this is a privilage. Even if, the reasons for that extra respect, is found to be offensive. Because a privilage is granted it means that, they honour us (grant us greater respect), From their perspective, not ours

So Even if we feel, dis-respected, it doesent mean we wasn't granted greater respect. It just means, we and the person offering respect, disagree as to what is respectfull behaviour. Because the respect is still ther, in the minds of those offering, even if not in our own.

Male Privilage: Greater amounts of respect offered to a person due to being percieved as male, and how worthey of respect that male perception is seen as deservng.

So isnt it fair to say, that people for the most part unfairly reaspect one perticuler image over another, and this respect is offered to that portrayal and not the person?

So No I wasnt offered greater respect, but my presentaion was?  And those special rights, advantages, or immunitys, were exstended to that image?



(please I am trying here, I dont want to argue I just want to come to some understanding)