LGBTQI - The NYT says genderqueers are Real!

[Weeping Sore]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/education/edlife/a-university-recognizes-a-third-gender-neutral.html?_r=0

It's always nice to be recognized by the newspaper of record.

[protar]

Doesn't matter if it's just in their room, it's exploration and will help you decide if you like how you look/want to look better or don't like it at all. It's a really positive step. I did the same, a friend of mine came over and did my make up while I was living alone and we tried a few different wigs. I showed the photos to someone else a week ago, as while I look terribly awkward those photos were also a big part of convincing myself with estrogen I could do it.

Yeah, I expect this first time I'll feel a bit weird and uncomfortable just due to nerves. And my hair's going to be quite short so I won't be able to achieve precisely the look I want. But that said, I've always been petite and not particularly masculine in my features, so aside from the hair I'm pretty certain I'll make a convincing and - if I may say so myself - attractive girl.

[Robin Of House Hill]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/education/edlife/a-university-recognizes-a-third-gender-neutral.html?_r=0

It's always nice to be recognized by the newspaper of record.

A good article, but I have a concern with whether the general public will ever be able to wrap their heads around this paragraph.

Gieselman, too, was born female, has a gentle disposition, and certainly appears feminine (save for a K. D. Lang cut). But Gieselman self-identifies not as a gay woman but as transgender. Unlike men and women who experience a mismatch between their bodies and their gender identities and take steps to align them, Gieselman accepts having a womanly body, and uses the term — along with “genderqueer” — to mean something else: a distinct third gender.

Would it be so wrong if people felt the need to use a label to identify themselves by, that they actually used one that really applies to them in a meaningful way? A while back, I saw a graphic of all the terms that were included under the imbrella term, "transgender." There were 26, of which 23 did not pertain to me and 3 did. Except for social/political goals which work best if you can show that there are large numbers, does the term transgender, have any use?

Yeah, I expect this first time I'll feel a bit weird and uncomfortable just due to nerves. And my hair's going to be quite short so I won't be able to achieve precisely the look I want. But that said, I've always been petite and not particularly masculine in my features, so aside from the hair I'm pretty certain I'll make a convincing and - if I may say so myself - attractive girl.

Enjoy the moment. It may not feel weird, at all. :)

[Weeping Sore]

I'm excited for you Protar!

[Weeping Sore]

Would it be so wrong if people felt the need to use a label to identify themselves by, that they actually used one that really applies to them in a meaningful way? A while back, I saw a graphic of all the terms that were included under the imbrella term, "transgender." There were 26, of which 23 did not pertain to me and 3 did. Except for social/political goals which work best if you can show that there are large numbers, does the term transgender, have any use?

I don't know. I do think there's a language problem there. Maybe intergender would be a better descriptor for someone who feels that they are in a spectrum between male and female, as opposed to trans with its implication of crossing over to the other side.

ETA: Also, I imagine that many who might identify as genderqueer might be proto-transgender, that is questioning now before making a full transition. Or not.

[Fez]

I'm all for people self-identifying however they want. But for purposes of public discussion and policy, I really think the fewer terms, the better, for both gender and sexual orientation. The fewer terms used, the more easily the total population not following traditional genders/sexual orientations can be identified. And its important that that population is identified, since they are, statistically, some of the most likely in need of public services and supports.

With too many terms, you start conflating those people with people who maybe aren't 100% traditionally straight or male or female, but are very close and are not statistically likely in need of services.

[Robin Of House Hill]

@Fez,,

There is truth in what you say, but only insofar as social/political/legal goals The person referenced in http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/08/education/edlife/a-university-recognizes-a-third-gender-neutral.html is as different from me as any cisgender woman, save for the fact that we vary (but in different ways) from societal norms for gender. So, using the word, "transgender", fails at conveying how we actually identify. So why the resistance to people identifying in a manner that actually identifies them?

I know some transgender people who rankle when people identify themselves as transsexual, because they see it as some form of elitism. I know gay men who have expressed objection to the term lesbian because gay applies to both sexes.

[emberling]

Disqualifying nonbinary people from 'transgender' unavoidably delegitimizes nonbinary identity.

Hypotheticals:

Annie was assigned male at birth and transitioned to female. Annie is a transgender woman.

Billie was assigned female at birth and transitioned to a non-binary gender. Billie is a transgender genderqueer person.

If you say that Billie is not "really" transgender because they did not go from one binary gender to the other binary gender, you are assigning extra importance and privilege to binary genders that you deny to non-binary genders.

[Robin Of House Hill]

I'm not saying anything of the sort. I'm saying that the word as popularly defined, is useless as an identifier unless additional verbiage is added.

The only value the word has, is to create a larger demographic.

[karaddin]

That is the point of it. To form a larger group, all of whom vary from their assigned gender in some, and say we are real, we are legion, the variety to us is also legion. Stop putting us in a box and give us support. It's a term primarily used for political reasons, you want a term that describes your experiences more accurately - you have it and you use it, transsexual. It doesn't describe all of you of course because no one can be boiled down to one word, but the use of transgender as an umbrella doesn't eliminate transsexual. Some members of the public might be confused, but they will be anyway.

[all swedes are racist]

I'm all for people self-identifying however they want. But for purposes of public discussion and policy, I really think the fewer terms, the better, for both gender and sexual orientation. The fewer terms used, the more easily the total population not following traditional genders/sexual orientations can be identified. And its important that that population is identified, since they are, statistically, some of the most likely in need of public services and supports.

With too many terms, you start conflating those people with people who maybe aren't 100% traditionally straight or male or female, but are very close and are not statistically likely in need of services.

Well, one problem I would have with this approach is it serves a de facto dismissal of the differences between various aspects of LBGTI persons, leading to, in the cis-/hetero-/"traditional"/whatever publics mind, a monolithic bloc of Otherness, and everyone under that label has similar experiences and obstacle and goals... It seems that would only lead to reinforcing ignorance, not break it down.

[Robin Of House Hill]

That is the point of it. To form a larger group, all of whom vary from their assigned gender in some, and say we are real, we are legion, the variety to us is also legion. Stop putting us in a box and give us support. It's a term primarily used for political reasons, you want a term that describes your experiences more accurately - you have it and you use it, transsexual. It doesn't describe all of you of course because no one can be boiled down to one word, but the use of transgender as an umbrella doesn't eliminate transsexual. Some members of the public might be confused, but they will be anyway.

I think the point I was making was that for purposes of social/political clout, having bigger numbers makes sense, but as something to identify oneself, it provides very little.

I may be part of a broader group, but my identity is personal and unique. Transsexual would work if it were narrowly defined.

[emberling]

It sounds like you feel about 'transgender' very much the way that I feel about 'woman'. I may be part of the broader group of women, but that speaks nothing of my personal and unique identity. So I call myself non-binary, as in not restricted to or invested in the binary, but I refuse anything like third-gender or other-gender classification because I don't see myself as outside women, just more specific than a woman, or put another way, that there are many women who are as different from me as men are, or as different from me as the person in the NYT article is from you.

[Robin Of House Hill]

I think that is a good parallel.

[Fez]

Well, one problem I would have with this approach is it serves a de facto dismissal of the differences between various aspects of LBGTI persons, leading to, in the cis-/hetero-/"traditional"/whatever publics mind, a monolithic bloc of Otherness, and everyone under that label has similar experiences and obstacle and goals... It seems that would only lead to reinforcing ignorance, not break it down.

So long as the general, "traditional" public is being generally tolerant (which, as I member of that, I think we've got a long way to go; albeit with progress being made), I don't think its really that important if they understand all the differences. Obviously if they do, that's great; but I think its more important that they understand that's there's this fairly large group of people, likely in need of support (I'm not even necessarily talking specific services; just ensuring they have things like health insurance), and that they should support public policies that provide it. When you start breaking everyone out into their own groups, beyond the issue I brought up before of blurring the lines of who actually needs support, you also run the risk of making it easier to ignore certain people (ex. "Oh that's only X number of people, that's not a big deal).

People and organizations directly interacting with the LBGTQI community should be aware and sensitive to the differences, as should obviously anyone who knows an LBGTQI person in their personal life. But for the rest of us, I think learning the umbrella numbers and understanding is what's important; and that's hard enough for most as is, without adding issues like having 26 different terms.

[Weeping Sore]

Disqualifying nonbinary people from 'transgender' unavoidably delegitimizes nonbinary identity.

Hypotheticals:

Annie was assigned male at birth and transitioned to female. Annie is a transgender woman.

Billie was assigned female at birth and transitioned to a non-binary gender. Billie is a transgender genderqueer person.

If you say that Billie is not "really" transgender because they did not go from one binary gender to the other binary gender, you are assigning extra importance and privilege to binary genders that you deny to non-binary genders.

This is very cogently argued.

Even the term "non-binary" uses "binary" as its point of reference, though. I think that there's necessarily a difference between language that fluently expresses ones internal state and language that serves as comprehensible shorthand for public consumption.

Which brings me to the term transgender. Doesn't the word overemphasize the idea of movement from one gender to another, anyway? Isn't there something that could imply gender awakening or resolution rather than gender migration or switching?

[Robin Of House Hill]

Most people who use the term, transgender, use it as outside that which was assigned at birth. I know a trans man who refuses to use the term, insisting that the concept of change is invalid. He simply says hes a guy born with a funny body.

[TerraPrime]

Throwing random ideas out here:

Gender Congruent versus Gender Divergent?

Meta-male/female to describe non-traditionally defined men and women?

[Egalitarianism Always]

Even the term "non-binary" uses "binary" as its point of reference, though. I think that there's necessarily a difference between language that fluently expresses ones internal state and language that serves as comprehensible shorthand for public consumption.

Which brings me to the term transgender. Doesn't the word overemphasize the idea of movement from one gender to another, anyway? Isn't there something that could imply gender awakening or resolution rather than gender migration or switching?

This is an excellent post.

Well I think the public need to get further along and see gender roles are adversely affecting many many lives.

We are still living with the idea that some people think it is 'natural' for 'roles' for one or other gender, and that their ideas can be enforced on others based, solely on the 'gender' assigned at birth. The roles might now be called 'man' and 'woman', but that still affects everyone's life hugely, because there are people still using the assumption that they know what a particular gender's role is.

Take for example during the industrial revolution consumers first became a 'necessity'; rich women were forced/cajoled and some chose to take on that role of consumer, over time poorer women took on the role of consumer with the role of carer/mother as a strong carrot to do so. But there were and are countless women who did not and do not wish for that role of consumer and carer or mother to define them, and countless men who wish to take on more responsibilities of parenthood.

U.S. Census, 2011

The U.S. Census reports that 32% of married fathers (approximately 7 million dads) are “a regular source of care for their children under age 15, up from 26% from 2002.” The U.S. Census defines “regular care of children” as an arrangement that is consistent at least one day per week.

Some of these fathers would be considered “stay-at-home dads” by society’s definition. This large and increasing number of fathers as primary caregivers shows that parenting services are needed for both dads and moms.

Once we take away the idea that there are roles which natural go with a gender, then we will have a much happier society.

I may be part of the broader group of women, but that speaks nothing of my personal and unique identity. So I call myself non-binary, as in not restricted to or invested in the binary, but I refuse anything like third-gender or other-gender classification because I don't see myself as outside women, just more specific than a woman, or put another way, that there are many women who are as different from me as men are...

This is an excellent point.

[Weeping Sore]

Gender Congruent versus Gender Divergent?

Maybe once the Divergent YA novels/movies have faded to obscurity...

Meta-male/female to describe non-traditionally defined men and women?

Well, Metawoman sounds vaguely like a superhero(ine), so I could get behind that. :P