When Will Trans People Live Cisgender Lives?

I was rather pleasantly surprised by this article in the New York Post. Its author, Eric Hegedus, seems pleased that more trans actors are appearing in films and television series.  On the other hand, he points out that there is a danger of trans actors being typecast if they are called upon to play nothing but trans characters. 

To me, an actor is someone who can step into a role, even one completely different from his or her own experience.  Of course, by that definition, there aren't many true actors.  But the day is coming, I think, when we'll see just how good some trans actors are when they play cisgender characters.

I had to laugh, though, at the title of the article:  "When will we start seeing transgender actors in non-transgender roles?"  Fact is, it's happened, at least once.  And the trans actress I'm thinking of played a cis woman all the way back in 1981.

Back in my previous life, I would sometimes go to the movies with my father and brothers (My mother has never been much of a movie-goer!) and, later, with male buddies or co-workers.  Some of the most popular "guys' night out" movies (I almost typed "films") are the James Bond flicks. I think the last one I saw was For Your Eyes Only.

And, yes, that was the one that featured the trans actress:  Caroline "Tula" Cossey, who played the obligatory "Bond Girl" in the movie.  To promote the movie, she also posed for Playboy magazine.  She was probably the first trans woman to do that as well, although nobody--at least, nobody in the general public--knew about her identity at that time.

However, a year later, News Of The World, a British tabloid, "outed" her.  For the next decade, she fought for transgender acceptance and worked to educate people.  In 1991, she approached the editors of Playboy, who did another pictorial of her. 


Now 60 years old, she lives in the Atlanta area with her husband.  She says she is happy that there is more acceptance for trans people, though she was still shocked when Bruce Jenner became Caitlyn before the eyes of the world.   Ms. Cossey empathises with Caitlyn's pain and suffering, so she knows just how difficult the road ahead could be for Caitlyn, in spite (or perhaps because) of her fame and fortune.  

Even with such changes, and with the love and support she's received, "Tula" says doesn't know whether she'll ever "stop feeling like a second-class citizen".

Unfortunately, even her looks and talent aren't a shield against internalizing the hate and meanness that was directed at her.  So,  I believe, the question shouldn't be about when we will see trans actors play cis parts.  Instead, we should find when people who just happen to be a little different from what society deems "normal" will be able to  grow up and live without bullying, shame, discrimination and the threat of death for simply being who they are.

(Aside:  Angelina Jolie was offered a role as a "Bond Girl" in Casino Royale.  She turned it down.  "I'd rather be Bond," she said.  Now that, I would pay to see!) 

Transphobia Is Hazardous To Our Health

When some people are bulied, harassed or otherwise intimidated, they become more determined to fight, to move toward their goals, to do whatever they need to take care of themselves.  And they might even be motivated to help others in situations like their own.

Still others take out their anger on the world.  If you get close to such people, you are likely to bear the brunt of their rage. I know:  I was in intimate relationships with two such people.

Then there are those who retreat and withdraw.  I've seen trans people who go from their homes to their cars and back--never venturing even into the immediate environs of their homes and neighborhoods, let alone the larger world.  Some of them even forego health care and other services they need because they feel so beaten down by the prejudice they experience.

That last category of hated-upon folks (transgenders, specifically) is the subject of this infographic from Fenway Health:

I Always Thought They Were Better Than This

Even when I wanted nothing to do with religion and was denying my spirituality, I had respect for the Quakers.  For one thing, they played important roles in helping to end slavery in the US.  For another, they have always been (officially, at least) pacifistic.  Plus, they were among the first congregations to accept LGBT people.


And now they are running a modern version of the "Underground Railroad" to help LGBT Ugandans the harsh sanctions and punishments their country imposes on them simply for being who they are.


So how do any of these things square with what's happening at George Fox University?


The Quaker-run school is denying a student named Jayce the opportunity to live with his male friends on campus.


Because you're reading this blog, you've probably deduced that Jayce is a trans man.  Having undergone his transition process, both the governments of this country and his home state (Oregon) classify him as male.  His birth certificate, driver's license and Social Security card say as much.


But, for some reason, the folks who run GFU don't see it that way.  In fact, they even lobbied for, and got, a religious exemption that allows them to deny Jayce his housing choice.  Worse, they made their request without notifying Jayce or his lawyer.


School officials have offered him the choice of living in a single on-campus apartment. However, he says, such a living arrangement would cut him off from the social life and much else he likes about the college. 


Now tell me:  How can a congregation with such a long history of welcoming people do something that further marginalizes someone from a marginalized group?  Given that many other people, organizations and communities are doing the same, and worse, is it any wonder that trans people have such high rates of depression and self-destructive behavior?


I always thought better of the Quakers.  And now I don't think I'm out of line in expecting better of them.

A Failed Attempt To Disguise Hate As Comedy

Looking back, I’m not surprised that Joan Rivers attained the peak of her popularity during the 1980’s.  After all, it was a time when everyone from the President (Ronald Reagan) to the actors in, and producers of, popular television programs like Dallas and Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous were teaching people to identify with the rich and powerful and to despise those who made the mistake of being born the wrong color or the wrong gender, in the wrong country or social class, or to love the wrong people.  And those avatars of the culture managed to convince people that adulation of the more fortunate and hatred of those less so was really an affirmation of their own heroic struggles to survive in a world where the less-fortunate were given “special treatment” with laws that kept them from getting fired from (or not hired for) jobs, or from being evicted from apartments or refused services simply for being who they are while corporate executives who bought companies simply to blow them up and shipped jobs overseas were “oppressed” by taxes and environmental regulations.

In such an environment, “gay” or “lesbian”—not to mention “transgender”—are derogatory terms rather than mere adjectives or nouns.  And a woman like Ms. Rivers can put a man down by making a claim, however baseless, that President Barack Obama is gay –in her world-view,less than a man--and his wife is a “tranny” –in other words, not really a woman, for who else would be with a man who’s not really a man.

Mind you, I’m not a fan of the First Couple.  They are two of the most disingenuous people ever to occupy the White House:  They talk about human rights while taking money from the very banks and corporations that have done more to widen the gap between the “haves” and “have nots” than any other individuals or institutions ever could have.  After accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, Barack—who was a Constitutional Law Professor—continued two illegal wars and arrogated unto himself the right to assassinate anyone anywhere in the world, with or without cause.  And Michelle’s hobby horse is an anti-obesity campaign that she finances with contributions from the very companies that have contributed to the epidemic that has, among other things, led health officials to reclassify what used to be known as “Adult Onset Diabetes” to “Class II Diabetes” after it developed in eight-year-old children.

Perhaps Ms. Rivers is unaware of such facts.  Otherwise, I believe (or hope) that she (or, at any rate, her writers) could have come up with more trenchant ways of criticizing, or even merely poking fun at, the Mendacitor In Chief and His Enabler.

Disinformation In The Service Of Hate

One of the easiest ways to make an inaccurate case against--or simply to slander someone or something--is to use outmoded or discredited information that many people don't know (or don't want to know) is outmoded or discredited.

That is essentially what pyschiatrist Paul McHugh did last month in a Wall Street Journal editorial.  He characterized trangenderism as a "disorder", something the DSM no longer does.  He also cited the studies showing poor outcomes for people who underwent gender-reassignment surgery.  Those studies led to the closure of the Johns Hopkins program in 1979.  But surgeries as well as psychotherapy and other treatments for transgenders have improved greatly since then.  With those developments have come greater understanding among the general public about what transgender people are.  (Whenever I remember that, I am grateful I transitioned in my 40's and my early 50's rather than in my 20's!).   

Fortunately, Dan Karasic got wind of it and responded as only he could.  Dr. Karasic is conversant with the most recent studies of, and treatments for, transgenders.  That's no surprise, really:  He's on the Board of Directors for the World Professional Association of Transgender Health.   More to the point, he approaches transgenderism as a scientist and health professional and does not let ideology or warped religious ideas cloud his thinking.

He notes that since 1989, the mortality rate for trans people is not significantly different from that of the general population.  Moreover, the "regret rate" of those who had surgery between 2001 and 2010 (which includes yours truly) is only 0.3 percent.   Can you think of any other human endeavor with such a low percentage of people who regret doing it?  (Before I began this post, I talked to two women who told me that if they "could do it all over again," they wouldn't get married.)

Anyway, as we start to gain our rights and greater acceptance from society, there will be folks like McHugh who will try to use outmoded studies and stereotypes to cast us in a negative light.  Fortunately, if we keep ourselves informed, it won't be hard to debunk their hokum.

How Many Stereotypes Can You Maintain With $200,000?

Sometimes you can tell that someone just had to get a grant--whether to secure tenure or some other kind of promotion, justify his or her (or his or her organization's) existence--or get another grant.

Actually, sometimes it seems as if at least half the grants in this world fall into that category.  Perhaps I'm cynical from having spent so much time in the academic world, but I have heard of more than a few studies or projects and wondered, "The world needs this...how?"

I found myself asking that question when I read that the National Institutes of Health are  spending nearly $200,000 ostensibly to study how transgender women use social networking sites like Facebook, and how said use affects their chances of getting HIV.

What have the folks at NIH learned?  Well, they say, transwomen use Facebook and the like to "develop social support structures, connect with members of their community, receive positive and re-affirming perspectives on their gender identity and inform behavioral norms."

No!  Really?

I mean, couldn't the same be said of any member of an isolated, discriminated-against community...or any number of teenagers?  Or Goths? Or anyone with a hobby, a fetish or any interest, whether or not it's in the mainstream? Isn't that one of the reasons why people--especially the young--use Facebook:  to engage with people they can't meet in person or to enter worlds they're too shy to encroach upon?

The study also says trans women use social media to find illegal hormones and sex-work partners.  I mean, really:  This reinforces stereotypes about us that, really, are just exaggerations of the worst characteristics of the most deviant members of any group of people-- the ones who want to use engage in illegal or un-approved behavior.

Plus, as Kelli Busey of Planetransgender, points out, plenty of trans people have no access to the Net because they're homeless or simply too poor to afford a device or connection, or even time in an Internet cafe. We are disproportionately poor and homeless, and many spaces are off-limits to us, especially if we are, or are perceived as, poor, homeless or sex workers.

So what, exactly, is the NIH trying to accomplish with the study?  Kelli and others have suggested that it might be a way the government is spying on us.  I wouldn't discount that idea.  But I stick to my theory about needing a grant for the reasons I mentioned.  When people and organizations get and use grants for those reasons, they've already made up their minds about their subjects and the conclusions they will reach about them.  

Charges Dropped, But Is Anything Resolved?

The good news:  Battery charges against her were dropped.

The bad news:  She had to complete a conflict-resolution course.

I'm referring to Jewlyes Gomez, the 16-year-old transgender girl who was bullied and harassed by other students in her high school.

She'd put up with the taunting, teasing and physical assaults for years, she said, while no one responded to her complaints.

Finally, she "lost it."  Or, more accurately, she found her sense of dignity and her strength, enough so that she decided she wasn't going to take any more.

Whenever we reach that point--that is to say, whenever we decide to defend ourselves as anyone else, trans or not, would in a similar situation--our tormentors and other people react with shock.  If they don't huff, "How dare you!" or other words to that effect, they accuse us of "overreacting" or simply being "too sensitive".  That's if we're lucky.  Other times, we're told that such abuse "comes with the territory" when we "pursue" our "lifestyle".  In other words, they tell us we "had it coming" to us.

That, essentially, is the message Jewlyes was sent when she was ordered to participate in conflict-resolution training.  

After my experiences with Dominick and others who've harassed and intimidated me in other ways, I've learned that you don't try to "resolve" the conflict or negotiate with them in any way.  When someone is committing violence against you--whether it's physical, mental, verbal or emotional--they, by definition, cannot be negotiated with. Your only choice is to do whatever you have to do to defend yourself.

That said, you should do exactly that: defend--nothing more, nothing less.  It seems that is just what Ms. Gomez did.

Where We're Covered

Right now, laws prohibiting employment discrimination based on gender identity or presentation are in effect for jurisdictions in which 47 percent of the US population lives.

Of course, that means if a couple more states or some more cities pass such laws, the majority trans people will be protected.  Still, there will be large "deserts" in this country.  

What is most troubling, though, is only pockets of New York and other states are covered.  Granted, cities with such laws are home to vast majority of the Empire State's people. Still, it's troubling that such a supposedly progressive state is not fully on board with transgender equality.

Of course, laws by themselves don't protect us against discrimination.  Too often, we are fired or hounded out of our jobs on spurious, trumped-up charges.  I'm not using the "imperial 'we'" here:  I know from whence I speak.

Extra! Extra! Read All About It! Trannie Kills Baby!

The death of a small child is, of course, a tragedy.  It's all the worse when the child died in some brutal, painful way--particularly if he or she was abused by someone who was trusted to care for him or her.

Such is the story of Myls Dobson, a four-year-old boy found dead in a Manhattan apartment a month ago.  Shortly thereafter, Janaie Jones--his babysitter--was arrested and charged with his murder.

The police weren't sure who his legal guardian was:  His mother lost custody of him, which was granted to his father, who was in a New Jersey prison at the time of Myls' death.

Aside from the boy's death, the facts in the previous paragraph are--to me, anyway--the saddest part of this case.  However, those details have been, for the most part, lost in what has passed for reporting on his case.

Every story I've read in print or online, or heard over the radio, regarding Myls' death has led off with this:  The babysitter is transgendered.

She was born in Jamaica as Christopher Jones and, since coming to New York, has worked as a performer under the name Kryzie King.  Little else is known about her, except that she was, apparently, the girlfriend of the boy's father.

In the month that has elapsed since they found Myls' battered body in a bathtub, I have heard almost nothing else about him, his parents or the case.  Moreover, about all I know, to this day, is that Janaie Jones/Kryzie King was a transgender performer.  And all almost anybody else knows is that she's a transgender who killed a child--which, in many people's minds, makes the incident all the more lurid and sensational.

Kincannon Uber Alles

As Horace Boothroyd III so aptly put it, Todd Kincannon wasn't talking about places where kids sit around campfires toasting marshmallows and singing Kumbayah.

Who is Todd Kincannon?  He's the former head of the Republican Party in South Carolina--the state that, per capita, has put more flat-out lunatics into public office than any other. 

That state gave the world none other than Strom Thurmond,  who defended his support of segregation and opposition to civil rights legislation long after the last Tyrannosaurus Rex died out. All right, I'm exaggerating a bit, but you get the idea.  The guy lived to be 100, and served as a Senator right up to the end, all the while trying to bring back Jim Crow laws.  Finally, just after he died, it was revealed that in his early 20's, he fathered a child with his family's then-16-year-old Black housekeeper.  

Todd Kincannon follows in that noble tradition.  This is what he tweeted:  "There are people who respect transgender rights.  And there are people who think you should be put in a camp.  That's me."

What I find really astounding is that he actually acknowledges that some people respect transgender rights.  If he doesn't respect them--even if he hates us--what does that make him?

Oh, but that wasn't enough.  He followed up his twit's twitter with this:  "If concentration camps aren't going to work, mental institutions will do just fine."

Somehow it seemed appropriate to post Kincannon's remarks on the 75th Anniversary of Kristallnacht.