This diary, unlike those originally posted through the TransAction group, is not a “safe space” for transsexuals. I also don’t intend it to be a hostile place. It will be a place where certain assumptions that it has been argued are required for transpeople to “feel safe” will not necessarily be honored. Difficult questions will be asked; questions, by the way, that I personally don’t know how to answer, but that arise in legal conflicts. Cis or Trans, I expect that many readers (and writers) will find some questions disturbing. Consistent with the willingness to challenge certain assumptions, I expect people here whose statements would be HR’d in the TransAction diaries to be serious and courteous. Expressions of bigotry – let’s say actions that would be condemned at your average Democratic Party convention – will be fair game for HRs. On the other hand HR’ing statements and arguments that are not presented as hostile, but that depart from the orthodox views presented in TransAction diaries, are also inappropriate on First Amendment grounds. If you don’t like that, don’t participate.
We all have things in the political world that bother us. Many posters have recently stated strongly that one thing that bothers them is when transpeople – including post-operative transsexuals, transsexuals partway through the physical process of transition, transsexuals who desire but have not begun the process, transsexuals who wish they could begin the process but never expect to do so, and transsexuals who for whatever reason don’t wish to do so – are not credited with “really being” their professed gender, regardless of presentation. Robyn Serven, as “rserven” more or less the “Godmother” of trans causes here on DKos, set out (in response to my questions) what she felt was the foundation for reasonable discussion between transpeople and others, which I paraphrase as:
believe transmen when they say they are men and believe transwomen when we say we are women
I always get disturbed in politics when people tell me what I must believe, as opposed to how I should act. In some roles, though, it’s understandable and appropriate. Robyn is here as an activist, often turning discussions to her prime issue as part of raising consciousness. She’s not here to compromise or to soft-soap anything, though hopefully she is willing co-exist with those who challenge her. Even though her writings and logical conclusions often irritate me, for reasons I’ll express below – as I know mine do her – I wouldn’t change her in the slightest. She’s being a lioness for her brood, one which desperately needs care and protection, and DKos is lucky to have her here, being who and how she is.
That said, let's talk about the "non-issue" of transsexuals not revealing their history as such to prospective sexual partners.
First, a little more overview:
My concern is that when one sets up a safe, “hothouse” environment in which the rare blooms can prosper, one runs the risk of developing in a way that cannot survive outside the hothouse. It is outside the hothouse of TransAction diaries that most policies involving transexuality and transgender issues are made.
When people start reaching conclusions within that “safe place” that I think would horrify even those inclined to be sympathetic – and, by the way, gratify those who are the strongest opponents of equal civil rights for the trans community – I don’t think that I do anyone any favors by keeping quiet about my beliefs and opinions. I’m willing (after much schooling by people here) to keep them out of a diary where they’re considered unwelcome, but not off the site as a whole. That’s being a false friend. If you're not bothered by the position I criticize, then that's great for you; one less moral dilemma for you to wrestle with. I, though, am.
I'm not a single-issue (or even primary-issue) person. My issues are (1) pushing a broad progressive agenda and (2) maintaining enough control over the government that Republicans never come near power again. These two are at odds; neither entirely trumps the other -- especially because figuring out how to do (1) is a lot easier to figure out than how to do (2), although most people are as or more confident about (2) versus (1).
On the issue of alleged “deception” of potential romantic partners by transsexuals – in other words, is there a duty to divulge one’s status – I think that some trans people have taken a disrespectful and self-defeating position. I’ll develop that at length below. But I want to make some things clear at the outset:
(1) No one has the right to physically injure a romantic partner after something has been divulged during or after sex
(2) No one has the right to physically injure anyone due to their sexuality.
(3) The reasons that transpeople may choose not to divulge are sensible. If someone gets "deceived," the only legitimate answer is non-violent -- and if one decides that it was actually just fine, so much the better.
I'll start out by transporting over some comments from Robyn's diary of eight hours ago as I publish, which should set the stage well enough.
About deception... (24+ / 0-)
...from the point of view of transfolk, we were deceiving people about who we were during our lives before transition.
That's often done in the interest of safety and the fear of being ridiculed.
by rserven on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 05:18:59 PM PDT
I don't think there is any possible way to be (14+ / 0-)
transsexual, either pre-transition, post-transition or in transition without being perceived as being deceptive by someone.
by Julie Waters on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 05:23:05 PM PDT
I understand why transpeople do it (4+ / 0-)
and I recognize that it's a cogent and compelling reason. The question would be whether there are countervailing arguments of any substance. I will not explore that question here. My not doing so is not a major tragedy for anyone.
By the way, I do appreciate the work you do on these issues, even where I disagree with aspects of how you sometimes do it, and hope that others who have similar reservations about points will follow my lead here. I would like for the TransAction diaries, at least, to be a "safe place" for transpeople.
by Seneca Doane on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 05:24:40 PM PDT
I have no idea . . . (17+ / 0-)
what kind of discussion can be had about this so-called "deception." Why is it called "deception" at all? A transwoman presenting as a woman isn't deceiving anyone. Same with a transman.
And as a practical matter, there are many transpeople whose trans status is visible. Are they not being "deceptive," merely because the average person can tell what their biological gender was at birth? Honestly, I'm confused by this whole idea.
by FogCityJohn on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 05:52:30 PM PDT
I believe your initial statement (4+ / 0-)
I'm not going to discuss it here, out of respect for Robyn's stated rules. That doesn't mean that there's no answer, although you will believe what you will.
by Seneca Doane on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 06:11:49 PM PDT
You're free to write your own diary . . . (11+ / 0-)
in which you can violate what you seem to believe are Robyn's unduly restrictive rules. You can give everyone the benefit of your views on trans issues.
by FogCityJohn on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 06:47:25 PM PDT
I'm surprised that you seem to think (1+ / 0-)
that I didn't know I could do so, but, um, thanks for permission?
Just so that we are clear: it is the case that to you the "deception" issue is, 100%, a "trans issue"? No other considerations? I need to know for the diary I don't currently intend to write.
by Seneca Doane on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 07:20:32 PM PDT
To me, there IS no "deception issue." (12+ / 0-)
So I'm not entirely clear what the hell you're talking about. When Robyn or another transwoman tells you she's female, she's not deceiving anyone. There is no deception. Sorry if you somehow feel deceived by her entirely truthful statement about her gender.
by FogCityJohn on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 07:31:07 PM PDT
Yes, to you there is no deception issue (1+ / 0-)
Got it. And that solves everything except what is perceived, in the unsafe confines beyond this diary, as the deception issue.
I don't feel deceived by Robyn at all. Why would I? We don't have any interactions in which her gender affects me.
by Seneca Doane on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 09:00:03 PM PDT
Look (4+ / 0-)
Robyn laid down only a single rule in this diary. And that is that you accept the gender identification of transpeople. If you have a problem with that, then I think that's your issue.
And let me just spell it out here. If your concern with "deception" revolves around the possibility that some poor straight man might unwittingly have sex with a transwoman, then relax. Since transwomen are women, having sex with a transwoman doesn't make you gay. There. All better?
by FogCityJohn on Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 10:05:42 PM PDT
Because the people to whom I reply froze their writings into non-editable comments, it's only fair that I freeze my reply as well. So: this diary's discussion will conclude in its tip jar. (Feel free to post your on-topic reply there.) I'll post an alternative tip jar beneath it, for those who prefer one; it explains why I've written this as a separate diary.