The Sylvia Rivera Law Project in New York has created an excellent fact sheet about gender non-conforming students:
Posts
One Land, One Justice.
14 hours ago
10 November 2014
09 November 2014
What A Day (Date)!
Today's post won't be about transgender issues--at least, not directly.
That's because I was struck by how many historical events happened on this date, and I just had to talk about them.
You probably know about two of them. If you think one of them was great, you think the other was terrible.
I am referring, of course, to the fall of the Berlin Wall (Was it really 25 years ago?) and Kristallnacht.
For all that I denounce the ways in which my native country abuses its power in the world, I still that the US and its allies can be made to offer a better life for their citizens in ways that totalitarian and collectivist states can't. That is why I, like most people who have no connection to the Soviet system, think that puncturing that partition in the old German capital allowed a light to stream in. Whether that light is used to make our lives brighter or turned into a kleig that breaks us down is still, I believe, a question that has not been decided, though it we are being nudged toward the answer most of us wouldn't want.
Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet premier at the time, is widely hailed as a hero in the West even if his policy of "glasnost" and "peristroika" inadvertently led to the collapse of the empire he headed. Not surprisingly, leaders of the old Soviet heirarchy as well as anti-nationalists of the states formerly included in the Soviet Union despise him as much of the world reviles Hitler.
Speaking of the latter: One of the most perversely brilliant things the Fuhrer (or, more precisely, his propoganda minister, Joseph Goebbels) did was to foster the perception that the burning of homes and looting of buinesses belonging to Jews in Germany, Austria and the annexed areas of adjacent countries--and the killing of some of those Jews--was a spontaneous popular uprising in response to a young Polish Jew's assassination of a German embassy official stationed in Paris.
It is often argued that this deception is what rallied young Germans to "defend" their country. What it did, of course, was plunge the world into darkness. Hmm...Where else have we seen anything like that?
As for being plunged in darkness: On this same date in 1965, nine northeastern US states and parts of Canada experienced the largest blackout when a switch in a power station in Niagara Falls failed. I remember that one well: I was seven years old and, being accustomed to seeing my Brooklyn neighborhood illuminated by tall streetlamps and light from neighbors' windows, simply could not comprehend what had just happened. Nor, for that matter, could most of the adults in my neighborhood.
What I recall most clearly, though, is my father not coming home from work that night. I think it was the first time I experienced that. He, like many others, took the subway to and from his job in Manhattan. Thankfully, he hadn't yet boarded a train before the lights went out and was thus spared being marooned in a pitch-black tunnel as so many other commuters were that evening!
What I wouldn't know, until much later, was that on that same day in 1965, a former seminarian named Roger LaPorte immolated himself in front of the United Nations in protest of the Vietnam War.
Believe it or not, the events I've mentioned aren't the only ones of note to have happened on this date: Napoleon Bonaparte declared himself the dictator of France. Teddy Roosevelt left the White House for what would be the first official visit outside the US by an American President. The Kaiser abidicated and fled to the Netherlands as Germany declared itself a republic. And the great Russian writer Ivan Turgenev was born. As if he needed more material to work with!
That's because I was struck by how many historical events happened on this date, and I just had to talk about them.
You probably know about two of them. If you think one of them was great, you think the other was terrible.
I am referring, of course, to the fall of the Berlin Wall (Was it really 25 years ago?) and Kristallnacht.
For all that I denounce the ways in which my native country abuses its power in the world, I still that the US and its allies can be made to offer a better life for their citizens in ways that totalitarian and collectivist states can't. That is why I, like most people who have no connection to the Soviet system, think that puncturing that partition in the old German capital allowed a light to stream in. Whether that light is used to make our lives brighter or turned into a kleig that breaks us down is still, I believe, a question that has not been decided, though it we are being nudged toward the answer most of us wouldn't want.
Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet premier at the time, is widely hailed as a hero in the West even if his policy of "glasnost" and "peristroika" inadvertently led to the collapse of the empire he headed. Not surprisingly, leaders of the old Soviet heirarchy as well as anti-nationalists of the states formerly included in the Soviet Union despise him as much of the world reviles Hitler.
Speaking of the latter: One of the most perversely brilliant things the Fuhrer (or, more precisely, his propoganda minister, Joseph Goebbels) did was to foster the perception that the burning of homes and looting of buinesses belonging to Jews in Germany, Austria and the annexed areas of adjacent countries--and the killing of some of those Jews--was a spontaneous popular uprising in response to a young Polish Jew's assassination of a German embassy official stationed in Paris.
It is often argued that this deception is what rallied young Germans to "defend" their country. What it did, of course, was plunge the world into darkness. Hmm...Where else have we seen anything like that?
As for being plunged in darkness: On this same date in 1965, nine northeastern US states and parts of Canada experienced the largest blackout when a switch in a power station in Niagara Falls failed. I remember that one well: I was seven years old and, being accustomed to seeing my Brooklyn neighborhood illuminated by tall streetlamps and light from neighbors' windows, simply could not comprehend what had just happened. Nor, for that matter, could most of the adults in my neighborhood.
What I recall most clearly, though, is my father not coming home from work that night. I think it was the first time I experienced that. He, like many others, took the subway to and from his job in Manhattan. Thankfully, he hadn't yet boarded a train before the lights went out and was thus spared being marooned in a pitch-black tunnel as so many other commuters were that evening!
What I wouldn't know, until much later, was that on that same day in 1965, a former seminarian named Roger LaPorte immolated himself in front of the United Nations in protest of the Vietnam War.
Believe it or not, the events I've mentioned aren't the only ones of note to have happened on this date: Napoleon Bonaparte declared himself the dictator of France. Teddy Roosevelt left the White House for what would be the first official visit outside the US by an American President. The Kaiser abidicated and fled to the Netherlands as Germany declared itself a republic. And the great Russian writer Ivan Turgenev was born. As if he needed more material to work with!
08 November 2014
Why We Don't Come Out
Most people don't realize that, for all of the advances made in attaining equality for LGBT people, we still face suspicion, hostility; the prospect of losing our friends, families, jobs and housing; and even the risk of violence against us.
That is one reason why, even as the social and legal climate are changing, nearly half of all LGBT people don't come out to anyone:
Moreover, the reasons why some of us don't "come out" are depressingly familiar:
and the repercussions of "coming out" are still too common:
These charts came from an excellent article Tabitha Speelman wrote for The Atlantic last year.
That is one reason why, even as the social and legal climate are changing, nearly half of all LGBT people don't come out to anyone:
Moreover, the reasons why some of us don't "come out" are depressingly familiar:
and the repercussions of "coming out" are still too common:
These charts came from an excellent article Tabitha Speelman wrote for The Atlantic last year.
07 November 2014
A Frontier Of Transphobia In Healthcare
On the whole, I've been a bit more fortunate than other trans people in my experiences with health care providers. I was able to find a doctor who treated many trans patients and he referred me, as needed, to others who were affirming or who, at least, cared enough only to use the right pronouns.
Still, in the early part of my transition, I had an encounter with some nasty, transphobic nurses at the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, to which my ophthalmologist sent me. The nurses laughed, used every derogatory term ever invented and made rude gestures. The receptionist witnessed everything; I told her I was leaving; she summoned the doctor who talked to me in a reassuring way and promised that if I ever went there again, neither those nurses nor anyone else would treat me that way again.
A decade has passed since that incident. Still, I think about it from time to time, especially when I hear or read about mistreatment to other trans people. Even so, I simply can't imagine what a small but very visible group of trans people experiences. I'm talking about pregnant trans men.
To tell you the truth, I'm not sure of how I'd react upon seeing a pregnant man. I don't think I'd make rude comments or be mean in any other way. Still, I'm not sure I could stop myself from staring.
Knowing that, I can only imagine how it must be for them to go out in public every day, let alone deal with health care providers. Most, I'm sure, would treat them as best they knew how. But if some health care providers can be as mean and rude as the nurses I encountered at NY Eye and Ear, I can only imagine what it's like for those pregnant trans men.
Still, in the early part of my transition, I had an encounter with some nasty, transphobic nurses at the New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, to which my ophthalmologist sent me. The nurses laughed, used every derogatory term ever invented and made rude gestures. The receptionist witnessed everything; I told her I was leaving; she summoned the doctor who talked to me in a reassuring way and promised that if I ever went there again, neither those nurses nor anyone else would treat me that way again.
A decade has passed since that incident. Still, I think about it from time to time, especially when I hear or read about mistreatment to other trans people. Even so, I simply can't imagine what a small but very visible group of trans people experiences. I'm talking about pregnant trans men.
To tell you the truth, I'm not sure of how I'd react upon seeing a pregnant man. I don't think I'd make rude comments or be mean in any other way. Still, I'm not sure I could stop myself from staring.
Knowing that, I can only imagine how it must be for them to go out in public every day, let alone deal with health care providers. Most, I'm sure, would treat them as best they knew how. But if some health care providers can be as mean and rude as the nurses I encountered at NY Eye and Ear, I can only imagine what it's like for those pregnant trans men.
06 November 2014
Why Parental Support For Trans Youth Matters
For two years, I co- (as a volunteer) a group for LGBT teenagers and young adults. It was one of the more rewarding--and heartbreaking--things I've ever done.
One of the things that made it rewarding--apart from knowing (or hoping, anyway) that I helped--was seeing just how smart and resilient young people can be. The heartbreak came in knowing the circumstances of some of those kids--especially the ones whose parents threw them out of their homes when they "came out".
After a while, I didn't have to ask--and the kid didn't have to tell--for me to know that he or she had suffered such a fate. Much of that had to do with the kids' body language and overall bearing which, of course, are a reflection of how confident or beaten-down the kid was.
Having seen such things, I wasn't at all surprised to learn the results of a study conducted in Canada two years ago. In six different categories of well-being, trans youth with supportive parents did much better than those with unsupportive or hostile parents. The only thing that shocked me was just how stark the differences were between the two groups of trans kids.
One of the things that made it rewarding--apart from knowing (or hoping, anyway) that I helped--was seeing just how smart and resilient young people can be. The heartbreak came in knowing the circumstances of some of those kids--especially the ones whose parents threw them out of their homes when they "came out".
After a while, I didn't have to ask--and the kid didn't have to tell--for me to know that he or she had suffered such a fate. Much of that had to do with the kids' body language and overall bearing which, of course, are a reflection of how confident or beaten-down the kid was.
Having seen such things, I wasn't at all surprised to learn the results of a study conducted in Canada two years ago. In six different categories of well-being, trans youth with supportive parents did much better than those with unsupportive or hostile parents. The only thing that shocked me was just how stark the differences were between the two groups of trans kids.
05 November 2014
This Elephant Didn't Make It Into The Room
Contrary to what you've heard, not all Republicans won their elections yesterday.
Of course, here in New York, Rob Astorino lost his bid to unseat incumbent Governor Andrew Cuomo. That, really, was no surprise at all.
Perhaps the same can be said for Lauren Scott's defeat. After all, she lost in a heavily Democratic and blue-collar district of Sparks, Nevada. Although it's not California or New York, Nevada has many union workers, which is one reason why it "tilts" (but is by no means predominantly) Democrat.
Had she won, she would have been the first openly transgender person elected to statewide office in the United States. She also would have been one of the most centrist or left-leaning Republicans: Although she became disillusioned with her former party, the Democrats, she claims she still shares its professed stances on social issues and human rights. However, she explains, she disagreed with the party on issues of taxation and business development, which led her to become "non-partisan". Soon she realized, however, that "non-partisan candidates rarely win elections", which led to her decision to run as a Republican.
In all, the sum of her stated positions is more palatable to me than that of most other Republicans. On the other hand, you have to wonder just how much to trust someone who joined a party just because she thought it would make her more electable.
Of course, here in New York, Rob Astorino lost his bid to unseat incumbent Governor Andrew Cuomo. That, really, was no surprise at all.
Perhaps the same can be said for Lauren Scott's defeat. After all, she lost in a heavily Democratic and blue-collar district of Sparks, Nevada. Although it's not California or New York, Nevada has many union workers, which is one reason why it "tilts" (but is by no means predominantly) Democrat.
Had she won, she would have been the first openly transgender person elected to statewide office in the United States. She also would have been one of the most centrist or left-leaning Republicans: Although she became disillusioned with her former party, the Democrats, she claims she still shares its professed stances on social issues and human rights. However, she explains, she disagreed with the party on issues of taxation and business development, which led her to become "non-partisan". Soon she realized, however, that "non-partisan candidates rarely win elections", which led to her decision to run as a Republican.
In all, the sum of her stated positions is more palatable to me than that of most other Republicans. On the other hand, you have to wonder just how much to trust someone who joined a party just because she thought it would make her more electable.
04 November 2014
Voting While Trans
Today is Election Day in the US. Many of us can't vote on what, for us, is the most basic issue of voting: actually having access to the voting booth.
You see, some states have instituted voter ID laws, or made the ones they already had on the books even more restrictive.
Those laws keep trans people from voting because many of us live in a legal limbo in which we can get one kind of ID but not another in our names, and the jurisdictions in which we live will only accept the kind of ID we can't get.
As an example, some states won't allow us to change the names on our drivers' licenses until/unless we've had gender reassignment surgery--even if we've changed our names in the local court. Or we've changed our state IDs but the local boards of elections still list us under our old names.
I was in a really peculiar situation: After changing my name, I was able to get a new state (non-drivers' license) ID with my chosen name and a female gender marker. I also got a passport as a woman named Justine, but was not allowed to renew it as such until I underwent my surgery.
Anyway, I will leave you with this "Voting While Trans" guide:
You see, some states have instituted voter ID laws, or made the ones they already had on the books even more restrictive.
Those laws keep trans people from voting because many of us live in a legal limbo in which we can get one kind of ID but not another in our names, and the jurisdictions in which we live will only accept the kind of ID we can't get.
As an example, some states won't allow us to change the names on our drivers' licenses until/unless we've had gender reassignment surgery--even if we've changed our names in the local court. Or we've changed our state IDs but the local boards of elections still list us under our old names.
I was in a really peculiar situation: After changing my name, I was able to get a new state (non-drivers' license) ID with my chosen name and a female gender marker. I also got a passport as a woman named Justine, but was not allowed to renew it as such until I underwent my surgery.
Anyway, I will leave you with this "Voting While Trans" guide:
03 November 2014
What We Say
However, many otherwise well-meaning people make comments or use terms that make us cringe. I know I did before I "came out" and started my transition.
The well-meaning but ignorant are at least educable. This chart might be a good place to start, even if I don't think its title works:
 |
| From Rebloggy |
02 November 2014
Day Of The Dead
In Mexico, today is celebrated as el Dia de Muertos, or the day of the dead. The holiday originated with indigenous people, and current ways of celebrating it can be traced back to the Aztec beginning-of-summer festival honoring the goddess Mictecacihuatl (If anyone has an Aztec spell-check, let me know!) After los conquistadores arrived in the 16th Century, the holiday was moved to the beginning of November to coincide with the Roman Catholic feast of All Saints' Day.
In France and some other countries, families leave crysanthemums on the graves of deceased relatives on Toussaint. (During my childhood, many Italian-American families did the same thing.) In one of her essays, Marguerite Yourcenar observed that autumn rites are among the oldest and most universal, and are held after the last harvests, when "the barren earth is thought to give passage to the souls lying beneath it".
In the spirit of this day, I offer a poem from--who else?--Emily Dickinson:
In France and some other countries, families leave crysanthemums on the graves of deceased relatives on Toussaint. (During my childhood, many Italian-American families did the same thing.) In one of her essays, Marguerite Yourcenar observed that autumn rites are among the oldest and most universal, and are held after the last harvests, when "the barren earth is thought to give passage to the souls lying beneath it".
In the spirit of this day, I offer a poem from--who else?--Emily Dickinson:
Because I could not stop for Death –
He kindly stopped for me –
The Carriage held but just Ourselves –
And Immortality.
We slowly drove – He knew no haste
And I had put away
My labor and my leisure too,
For His Civility –
We passed the School, where Children strove
At Recess – in the Ring –
We passed the Fields of Gazing Grain –
We passed the Setting Sun –
Or rather – He passed us –
The Dews drew quivering and chill –
For only Gossamer, my Gown –
My Tippet – only Tulle –
We paused before a House that seemed
A Swelling of the Ground –
The Roof was scarcely visible –
The Cornice – in the Ground –
Since then – ‘tis Centuries – and yet
Feels shorter than the Day
I first surmised the Horses’ Heads
Were toward Eternity –
01 November 2014
Can Someone Explain?
For all of my libertarian leanings, I never could understand Log Cabin Republicans. All right, I take that back: If the ones I've met are typical, they are--like the Romney/Cheyney/ Bush the Elder/Reagan wing of the party, concerned only with themselves. They've made money and don't want to be bothered with anyone who hasn't--unless, of course, they can dupe is into helping them with their work. A group of LCR's tried to do just that to me once, at an event in the LGBT Community Center of New York. I told them something to the effect that I wished I could afford to be one of them, but that even if I could, I don't think I would join them.
Then, of course, there is the Tea Party element. I don't know how any gay or lesbian can align him or her self with them, but I hear there are such people. I guess I shouldn't be surprised: It also has people who have gotten and want to keep, and want to slam the door behind them. (I must say, though, I've yet to hear of a gay or lesbian say that climate change or the Ebola outbreak are God's vengeance against gay people.)
Whatever motives a gay man who looks like he just stepped of the pages of Gentleman's Quarterly has for being a Republican, I don't think very many trans people share them. In fact, I can't think of any reason for any trans person to vote for any Republican, even the ones who profess their support of same-sex marriage or other forms of equality for LGBT people. Too many other policies in the GOP platform work against us. I wonder whether the "gay-friendly" Republicans can see the inconsistencies in their platform.
But, I suppose, some trans folk are smarter than I am. Or, at least, they can rationalize things I can't. One of them is, apparently, Lauren Scott. She is trying to unseat an incumbent Democrat assemblyman in a blue-collar district of Sparks, Nevada.
What's really striking, though, is that she worked on John Kerry's Presidential campaign in 2004 and has a picture of herself with Vice President Joe Biden on her website.
I wonder: Did she get rich since then? Or is she doing something trans people were advised to do in the days of Christine Jorgensen: abandoning her past and re-inventing herself? If she's doing that, why does she have the photo with Biden on her website?
Some things, I'll just never understand.
Then, of course, there is the Tea Party element. I don't know how any gay or lesbian can align him or her self with them, but I hear there are such people. I guess I shouldn't be surprised: It also has people who have gotten and want to keep, and want to slam the door behind them. (I must say, though, I've yet to hear of a gay or lesbian say that climate change or the Ebola outbreak are God's vengeance against gay people.)
Whatever motives a gay man who looks like he just stepped of the pages of Gentleman's Quarterly has for being a Republican, I don't think very many trans people share them. In fact, I can't think of any reason for any trans person to vote for any Republican, even the ones who profess their support of same-sex marriage or other forms of equality for LGBT people. Too many other policies in the GOP platform work against us. I wonder whether the "gay-friendly" Republicans can see the inconsistencies in their platform.
But, I suppose, some trans folk are smarter than I am. Or, at least, they can rationalize things I can't. One of them is, apparently, Lauren Scott. She is trying to unseat an incumbent Democrat assemblyman in a blue-collar district of Sparks, Nevada.
What's really striking, though, is that she worked on John Kerry's Presidential campaign in 2004 and has a picture of herself with Vice President Joe Biden on her website.
I wonder: Did she get rich since then? Or is she doing something trans people were advised to do in the days of Christine Jorgensen: abandoning her past and re-inventing herself? If she's doing that, why does she have the photo with Biden on her website?
Some things, I'll just never understand.
31 October 2014
The Wrong Way To Go About It
None of us likes to hear ignorant, hateful comments, especially when they're directed at us--or, at least, some notion that the person making the comment has about us. I really hope that one day we will live in a world in which we--and the trans people who are coming after us--don't have to hear such things.
At the same time I oppose, and have always opposed, censorship and in any form. People--at least in this country--have a right to say what they please, even if it's something people don't like or is simply wrong. If the latter is true, it's our job to point out the error in their thinking or expression; if we find something not to our liking, we should say what we find objectionable about it.
That is the reason why I think Houston mayor Annise Parker was wrong to subpoena pastors who oppose the recent city ordinance prohibiting businesses from discriminating against transgender people.
Now, I don't want you to think that just because I've become involved in a church, I've begun to side with all members of the clergy. Far from it: I still cringe when I hear of some of the pure and simple hate some of them are spewing from their pulpits, and I have to remind myself that not all ordained people do such things. In fact, the priests at my church make great efforts to make trans people welcome and the senior pastoral associate--a very intelligent and compassionate straight woman--spends time with me and other trans members of our congregation in an effort to better understand our needs and wishes.
It is precisely because I've found her, and the other priests and the congregation of my church that I know things can be better. And that is another reason why I think that we should--no, must--allow bigoted clergy people to express their opposition to laws designed to protect us, or simply to whatever they think we represent. Simply demonizing, and trying to silence, them will only deepen their opposition to us because it shuts off any possibility of dialogue. Even if they don't want to talk to us, we can't win the right to exercise the rights God and the Constitution gave us, let alone any possibility of gaining the respect of others within and outside our community, if we deny the rights and humanity of those who want to push us back into the closet.
Please understand that I am saying things that I have a difficult time accepting myself. A part of me still wants to dismiss those "fundamentalist" pastors as barbaric and hypocritical. (After all, how can someone preach the love of God and hatred, or simply bigotry, against human beings?) Having said that, it almost goes without saying that I cringe at the thought of having to love such people. But, really, there is no other choice: No one has ever won a battle against hate by using hate.
At the same time I oppose, and have always opposed, censorship and in any form. People--at least in this country--have a right to say what they please, even if it's something people don't like or is simply wrong. If the latter is true, it's our job to point out the error in their thinking or expression; if we find something not to our liking, we should say what we find objectionable about it.
That is the reason why I think Houston mayor Annise Parker was wrong to subpoena pastors who oppose the recent city ordinance prohibiting businesses from discriminating against transgender people.
Now, I don't want you to think that just because I've become involved in a church, I've begun to side with all members of the clergy. Far from it: I still cringe when I hear of some of the pure and simple hate some of them are spewing from their pulpits, and I have to remind myself that not all ordained people do such things. In fact, the priests at my church make great efforts to make trans people welcome and the senior pastoral associate--a very intelligent and compassionate straight woman--spends time with me and other trans members of our congregation in an effort to better understand our needs and wishes.
It is precisely because I've found her, and the other priests and the congregation of my church that I know things can be better. And that is another reason why I think that we should--no, must--allow bigoted clergy people to express their opposition to laws designed to protect us, or simply to whatever they think we represent. Simply demonizing, and trying to silence, them will only deepen their opposition to us because it shuts off any possibility of dialogue. Even if they don't want to talk to us, we can't win the right to exercise the rights God and the Constitution gave us, let alone any possibility of gaining the respect of others within and outside our community, if we deny the rights and humanity of those who want to push us back into the closet.
Please understand that I am saying things that I have a difficult time accepting myself. A part of me still wants to dismiss those "fundamentalist" pastors as barbaric and hypocritical. (After all, how can someone preach the love of God and hatred, or simply bigotry, against human beings?) Having said that, it almost goes without saying that I cringe at the thought of having to love such people. But, really, there is no other choice: No one has ever won a battle against hate by using hate.
30 October 2014
What's It Like To Be A Trans Girl?
Sometimes I'm asked "What's it like?" to be transgendered or, more specifically, a trans woman. The best answer I can give is that I can't answer the question, but I can tell you about MY experience.
In other words, there isn't one kind of trans woman, or trans person. Part of the reason I didn't start my transition earlier is that I didn't think I fit the profiles of trans women I carried in my mind. I thought I was too tall, to broad-boned or deep-voiced. Or I thought I wasn't, on the outside "feminine" or "pretty" (at least, as those terms are commonly defined) in our culture. Plus, I have always felt more attracted to women than to men.
Some graphic artist must have been thinking what I thought. Let us thank "Kyle"--that is the only name I could find--for this wonderful graphic:
In other words, there isn't one kind of trans woman, or trans person. Part of the reason I didn't start my transition earlier is that I didn't think I fit the profiles of trans women I carried in my mind. I thought I was too tall, to broad-boned or deep-voiced. Or I thought I wasn't, on the outside "feminine" or "pretty" (at least, as those terms are commonly defined) in our culture. Plus, I have always felt more attracted to women than to men.
Some graphic artist must have been thinking what I thought. Let us thank "Kyle"--that is the only name I could find--for this wonderful graphic:
29 October 2014
Don't Tell, Don't Transition--Not Yet, Anyway
Even after the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," transgender people who live--and want to serve--in the gender of their mind and spirit aren't allowed to be in the Armed Forces. A trans person who begins his or her transition is supposed to be discharged, under current rules.
However, there is a widespread expectation that the ban will soon be repealed. As a result, Captain Sage Fox, who had been an Army Reservist for fourteen years, received a call she hadn't anticipated: a call from her commander telling her that she could continue to serve in her preferred gender. She would even have permission to be called "ma'am" and use the female latrine.
Or so she--and her commander--thought.
A short time later, her orders were reversed. She wasn't exactly discharged, at least as the Army defines it. Instead, she was placed on Individual Ready Reserve, meaning that she could be called back to duty but, in the meantime, would not show up for training, draw a paycheck or have access to benefits.
In other words, the Army was, essentially, disowning her without discharging her, leaving her in a career and legal limbo. So, trans people are being advised not to come out because of scenarios like Captain Fox's.
Or that of someone named "Hunter", who is transitioning to male. Even though his hair is short and testosterone has done its work on him, he still has to use a female latrine (which causes women to flee) and, when attending formal dinners at the officer's school, wear a form-fitting jacket and skirt.
The question of allowing trans people to serve as who they are is much greater than it seems: Our estimated population of 15,000 in the Armed Services actually represents a somewhat higher percentage than in the population as a whole. Many serve for years, or even decades (as Captain Fox did) before having their "epiphanies" that cause them to begin psychotherapy, hormones and the other aspects of a gender transition.
The irony is that trans men and trans women are drawn to enlist for essentially the same reasons. One, of course, is job prospects. But another is the hypermasculine culture of the military. To a non-trans person, it makes sense in the case of female-to-male transgenders. But male-to-females also want to be in such an environment as a way (that ultimately doesn't work) of suppressing their femaleness or, at least, accentuating maleness they may or may not have. In other words, it's the same sort of impulse that drives some to become police officers or firefighters. (My therapist told me she's treated a number of male-to-female trans people who worked in those professions, as well as the military.) It's also the same sort of impulse that led people like me to spend lots of time in sports and physical training--or any number of closeted or manque gay men to marry women.
Some of us (male-to-females) are also motivated by a "desire to serve our country", in the misguided way we're taught to understand it. Again, just like our female-to-male bretheren. And gay men. And lesbians. And straight people.
However, there is a widespread expectation that the ban will soon be repealed. As a result, Captain Sage Fox, who had been an Army Reservist for fourteen years, received a call she hadn't anticipated: a call from her commander telling her that she could continue to serve in her preferred gender. She would even have permission to be called "ma'am" and use the female latrine.
Or so she--and her commander--thought.
A short time later, her orders were reversed. She wasn't exactly discharged, at least as the Army defines it. Instead, she was placed on Individual Ready Reserve, meaning that she could be called back to duty but, in the meantime, would not show up for training, draw a paycheck or have access to benefits.
In other words, the Army was, essentially, disowning her without discharging her, leaving her in a career and legal limbo. So, trans people are being advised not to come out because of scenarios like Captain Fox's.
Or that of someone named "Hunter", who is transitioning to male. Even though his hair is short and testosterone has done its work on him, he still has to use a female latrine (which causes women to flee) and, when attending formal dinners at the officer's school, wear a form-fitting jacket and skirt.
The question of allowing trans people to serve as who they are is much greater than it seems: Our estimated population of 15,000 in the Armed Services actually represents a somewhat higher percentage than in the population as a whole. Many serve for years, or even decades (as Captain Fox did) before having their "epiphanies" that cause them to begin psychotherapy, hormones and the other aspects of a gender transition.
The irony is that trans men and trans women are drawn to enlist for essentially the same reasons. One, of course, is job prospects. But another is the hypermasculine culture of the military. To a non-trans person, it makes sense in the case of female-to-male transgenders. But male-to-females also want to be in such an environment as a way (that ultimately doesn't work) of suppressing their femaleness or, at least, accentuating maleness they may or may not have. In other words, it's the same sort of impulse that drives some to become police officers or firefighters. (My therapist told me she's treated a number of male-to-female trans people who worked in those professions, as well as the military.) It's also the same sort of impulse that led people like me to spend lots of time in sports and physical training--or any number of closeted or manque gay men to marry women.
Some of us (male-to-females) are also motivated by a "desire to serve our country", in the misguided way we're taught to understand it. Again, just like our female-to-male bretheren. And gay men. And lesbians. And straight people.
28 October 2014
E-Mail Error Exposes Identites of Transgender Patients
You've been going to the clinic for a while. Hopefully, you have--or are developing--a rapport with your doctor and therapist. Perhaps you've begun to take hormones--or it's not far in the future.
But you're still going to work under the name you were given at birth, in clothes and hairstyles deemed appropriate for the gender in which you were assigned. Maybe your friends, family--or spouse or kids--don't yet know what you're doing. You're preparing yourself for the "right" moment, whenever that comes, to "come out".
Or, perhaps, you're living in the gender of your mind and spirit. But, to do that, you moved to a new community and, maybe, into a new line of work. None of your neighbors or co-workers--or students or instructors, if you've decided to go back to school--knows about your former life, and you want to keep it that way.
Then the worst happens. At least, it's one of the worst possible things for someone in your situation.
Such a thing happened in Glasgow, Scotland. Someone at the Sandyford Clinic in that city sent out an e-mail announcing an upcoming event to 86 patients. That e-mail included recipients' e-mail addresses in the "to" section. Worst of all, some of those addresses included all or part of the patients' names and birthdates.
I'm willing to believe that the error was accidental, as the clinic stated. But that, for me, makes it even more worrisome, for it's a reminder that it doesn't take malice or violence to put us in danger.
But you're still going to work under the name you were given at birth, in clothes and hairstyles deemed appropriate for the gender in which you were assigned. Maybe your friends, family--or spouse or kids--don't yet know what you're doing. You're preparing yourself for the "right" moment, whenever that comes, to "come out".
Or, perhaps, you're living in the gender of your mind and spirit. But, to do that, you moved to a new community and, maybe, into a new line of work. None of your neighbors or co-workers--or students or instructors, if you've decided to go back to school--knows about your former life, and you want to keep it that way.
Then the worst happens. At least, it's one of the worst possible things for someone in your situation.
Such a thing happened in Glasgow, Scotland. Someone at the Sandyford Clinic in that city sent out an e-mail announcing an upcoming event to 86 patients. That e-mail included recipients' e-mail addresses in the "to" section. Worst of all, some of those addresses included all or part of the patients' names and birthdates.
I'm willing to believe that the error was accidental, as the clinic stated. But that, for me, makes it even more worrisome, for it's a reminder that it doesn't take malice or violence to put us in danger.
27 October 2014
Church Reinstates Minister Defrocked For Helping His Son
When I was researching gender-reassignment surgeons, I read about Dr. Stanley Biber, whose practice my surgeon, Dr. Marci Bowers, continued.
Dr. Biber worked at Mount San Rafael Hospital in Trinidad, Colorado--a facility founded by the Sisters of Charity. Even though the hospital was in the process of being taken over by the Trinidad Area Health Association by the time Biber started performing the surgeries in 1968, there were still Sisters associated with the facility. Also, some members of the TAHA were, to put it mildly, conservative. So Dr. Biber had to conduct his surgeries "underground", so to speak.
Given that he had established his reputation as a surgeon, having worked at the hospital for several years before that first GRS, he was able to convince anyone who questioned him that he was, in fact, doing other surgeries.
I thought of that as I read about Rev. Frank Schaefer. Granted, what he did "under the radar" was very different from what Dr. Biber did. But the Methodist minister suffered in a way that Dr. Biber could have.
Rev. Schaefer secretly performed a same-sex marriage--his son's-- in Massachusetts. At least, it remained secret for a few years. Then, a member of his conservative Pennsylvania congregation got wind of it and filed a complaint, which led to his being defrocked--even though he promised never to perform another same-sex marriage.
Given the climate of the time and place in which he worked, Dr. Biber could well have lost his hospital privileges--or even his medical license. That he didn't is--if you'll indulge me in using a religious term--a miracle.
Now the judicial council of the United Methodist Church has ruled that the Pennsylvania church jury was wrong to defrock Rev. Schaefer. The council based it ruling on "technical grounds", but emphasized that their decision should not be interpreted as support for gay marriage.
Dr. Biber worked at Mount San Rafael Hospital in Trinidad, Colorado--a facility founded by the Sisters of Charity. Even though the hospital was in the process of being taken over by the Trinidad Area Health Association by the time Biber started performing the surgeries in 1968, there were still Sisters associated with the facility. Also, some members of the TAHA were, to put it mildly, conservative. So Dr. Biber had to conduct his surgeries "underground", so to speak.
Given that he had established his reputation as a surgeon, having worked at the hospital for several years before that first GRS, he was able to convince anyone who questioned him that he was, in fact, doing other surgeries.
I thought of that as I read about Rev. Frank Schaefer. Granted, what he did "under the radar" was very different from what Dr. Biber did. But the Methodist minister suffered in a way that Dr. Biber could have.
Rev. Schaefer secretly performed a same-sex marriage--his son's-- in Massachusetts. At least, it remained secret for a few years. Then, a member of his conservative Pennsylvania congregation got wind of it and filed a complaint, which led to his being defrocked--even though he promised never to perform another same-sex marriage.
Given the climate of the time and place in which he worked, Dr. Biber could well have lost his hospital privileges--or even his medical license. That he didn't is--if you'll indulge me in using a religious term--a miracle.
Now the judicial council of the United Methodist Church has ruled that the Pennsylvania church jury was wrong to defrock Rev. Schaefer. The council based it ruling on "technical grounds", but emphasized that their decision should not be interpreted as support for gay marriage.
26 October 2014
Now They're Blaming This On Gays
Here I was, worrying that a President who's even worse on civil liberties than George the Younger would use the Ebola outbreak as an excuse to trample whatever rights we still have.
Well, my worries were misplaced. Governors Christie and Cuomo didn't wait for Obama to out-Bush Bush. Not long after they ordered mandatory quarantines of people suspected of having the virus, a nurse returning from volunteering with Medecins sans Frontieres in Africa is treated to a new version of stop-and-frisk--in Newark Liberty Airport.
(You can't make this shit up.)
But, as bad as Kaci Hickox's experience was, I am now even more worried about some folks in Africa. As an example, Leroy Ponpon is one of many Liberians who might lock himself in his flat because of the virus. If he doesn't do that, he has another option: He can lock himself in his flat (in Monrovia) because he's gay.
In his country, church leaders are telling people that Ebola was a curse sent by God to punish sodomy. That is, really, not surprising: LGBT people have been blamed for the Newtown Massacre, Hurricane Katrina, the economic disaster of post-World War I Germany, Superstorm Sandy, the events of 11 September 2001 and all manner of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, floods, climate change and other natural and human-caused disasters. Oh, and let's not forget the AIDS epidemic.
But attributing the Ebola outbreak to gays takes on a particular virulence in a country in Liberia. An acquaintance of mine hails from that country , when asked about LGBT rights in Liberia, says, "You can't say both in the same sentence." As far as I know, he's straight.
Still, he says, the situation for gay and lesbian people in his homeland is better than it is in neighboring Sierra Leone and Guinea. Those nations and Liberia are, in turn, like San Francisco, Berlin and Montreal in comparison to nearby Nigeria.
Now, having never been in Africa and having almost entirely positive experiences with the Africans I've met, both here in North America and in Europe, I have no wish to paint the continent as a hotbed of homophobia. Interestingly, in another of Liberia's neighbors--Cote d'Ivoire--has never criminalized same-sex relations conducted in private, though public same-sex sexual acts are considered punishable offenses.
So how is it that Liberia and its other neighbors have such restrictive laws, and nearby Nigeria has ones that are draconian, even by the standards of such stalwarts of LGBT rights as Putin's Russia? One reason is that Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Guinea were colonized by Great Britain during the Victorian era, when sexual mores were more repressive. While Liberia doesn't have that history, it was founded by freed American slaves who were infused with the conservative Christianity of their time and their former masters.
Cote d'Ivoire, on the other hand, was--as its name indicates--a French colony. Thus, its laws about homosexual relations are basically the same as the ones that prevailed in France at the time it ruled. When you think of it, the law reflects a French attitude that persists even today: Everyone there knows that certain people, some celebrities and others members of the local community, are gay. But it is not discussed and, for the most part, the French don't care--as long the gay people in question keep it as leur propre affaire.
One might wonder why the other countries I've mentioned haven't updated their laws about LGBT people. After all, the British colonizers haven't been in those countries in decades, and Liberians are several generations removed from their history as slaves. The reason, I believe, is that all of those countries are still bound by another, and more insidious kind of colonialization. The kind I'm talking about wasn't brought by merchants or by men in uniforms who arrived on gunships. Rather, the ones I'm talking about--who probably never saw themselves as colonizers--sometimes wore clerical collars and habits. Or they were the kinds of modestly-dressed people one sees handing out pamphlets on street corners.
I'm talking about religious missionaries. They brought with them their churches' attitudes about sex and family that prevailed in their home countries at the time they arrived. Nigeria in particular was affected: It now has, arguably, the most conservative Christian church--the local Roman Catholic--on the continent. (Indeed, in part because of his conservativism, Father Francis Arzine was considered a leading candidate to succeed Pope John Paul II.) Nigeria also is home to Boko Haram, in the mainly-Muslim northern part of the country. The organization's name means, "Western education is forbidden." That, I think, says a lot about their attitudes toward women, let alone homosexuality.
Between the Boko Haram and a conservative Catholic church, how much respect--let alone tolerance--would you expect to find for LGBT people?
If anything, the surprise is that some bishop or imam there didn't beat Liberian officials in blaming LGBT people for the Ebola epidemic.
Well, my worries were misplaced. Governors Christie and Cuomo didn't wait for Obama to out-Bush Bush. Not long after they ordered mandatory quarantines of people suspected of having the virus, a nurse returning from volunteering with Medecins sans Frontieres in Africa is treated to a new version of stop-and-frisk--in Newark Liberty Airport.
(You can't make this shit up.)
But, as bad as Kaci Hickox's experience was, I am now even more worried about some folks in Africa. As an example, Leroy Ponpon is one of many Liberians who might lock himself in his flat because of the virus. If he doesn't do that, he has another option: He can lock himself in his flat (in Monrovia) because he's gay.
In his country, church leaders are telling people that Ebola was a curse sent by God to punish sodomy. That is, really, not surprising: LGBT people have been blamed for the Newtown Massacre, Hurricane Katrina, the economic disaster of post-World War I Germany, Superstorm Sandy, the events of 11 September 2001 and all manner of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tornadoes, floods, climate change and other natural and human-caused disasters. Oh, and let's not forget the AIDS epidemic.
But attributing the Ebola outbreak to gays takes on a particular virulence in a country in Liberia. An acquaintance of mine hails from that country , when asked about LGBT rights in Liberia, says, "You can't say both in the same sentence." As far as I know, he's straight.
Still, he says, the situation for gay and lesbian people in his homeland is better than it is in neighboring Sierra Leone and Guinea. Those nations and Liberia are, in turn, like San Francisco, Berlin and Montreal in comparison to nearby Nigeria.
Now, having never been in Africa and having almost entirely positive experiences with the Africans I've met, both here in North America and in Europe, I have no wish to paint the continent as a hotbed of homophobia. Interestingly, in another of Liberia's neighbors--Cote d'Ivoire--has never criminalized same-sex relations conducted in private, though public same-sex sexual acts are considered punishable offenses.
So how is it that Liberia and its other neighbors have such restrictive laws, and nearby Nigeria has ones that are draconian, even by the standards of such stalwarts of LGBT rights as Putin's Russia? One reason is that Nigeria, Sierra Leone and Guinea were colonized by Great Britain during the Victorian era, when sexual mores were more repressive. While Liberia doesn't have that history, it was founded by freed American slaves who were infused with the conservative Christianity of their time and their former masters.
Cote d'Ivoire, on the other hand, was--as its name indicates--a French colony. Thus, its laws about homosexual relations are basically the same as the ones that prevailed in France at the time it ruled. When you think of it, the law reflects a French attitude that persists even today: Everyone there knows that certain people, some celebrities and others members of the local community, are gay. But it is not discussed and, for the most part, the French don't care--as long the gay people in question keep it as leur propre affaire.
One might wonder why the other countries I've mentioned haven't updated their laws about LGBT people. After all, the British colonizers haven't been in those countries in decades, and Liberians are several generations removed from their history as slaves. The reason, I believe, is that all of those countries are still bound by another, and more insidious kind of colonialization. The kind I'm talking about wasn't brought by merchants or by men in uniforms who arrived on gunships. Rather, the ones I'm talking about--who probably never saw themselves as colonizers--sometimes wore clerical collars and habits. Or they were the kinds of modestly-dressed people one sees handing out pamphlets on street corners.
I'm talking about religious missionaries. They brought with them their churches' attitudes about sex and family that prevailed in their home countries at the time they arrived. Nigeria in particular was affected: It now has, arguably, the most conservative Christian church--the local Roman Catholic--on the continent. (Indeed, in part because of his conservativism, Father Francis Arzine was considered a leading candidate to succeed Pope John Paul II.) Nigeria also is home to Boko Haram, in the mainly-Muslim northern part of the country. The organization's name means, "Western education is forbidden." That, I think, says a lot about their attitudes toward women, let alone homosexuality.
Between the Boko Haram and a conservative Catholic church, how much respect--let alone tolerance--would you expect to find for LGBT people?
If anything, the surprise is that some bishop or imam there didn't beat Liberian officials in blaming LGBT people for the Ebola epidemic.
25 October 2014
Where We (Don't) Live
Ever wonder what young LGBT people are up against? Here's an infographic that gives at least one part of the story:
24 October 2014
A Book About Jazz: Music To My Ears
Lately, I've thought about writing a transgender children's book, or one for young adults.
If I do, I won't be the first: Jazz Jennings of Florida has just published "I Am Jazz".
Her aim, she says, is to show children--whether or not they identify with the gender assigned to them at birth-- what it's like to be transgender.
I want to read it: It sounds like the kid of book I wish I could have had when I was growing up.
Even more to the point, she's living the life I sometimes wish I could have lived: She began living as a girl at age five.
If I do, I won't be the first: Jazz Jennings of Florida has just published "I Am Jazz".
Her aim, she says, is to show children--whether or not they identify with the gender assigned to them at birth-- what it's like to be transgender.
I want to read it: It sounds like the kid of book I wish I could have had when I was growing up.
Even more to the point, she's living the life I sometimes wish I could have lived: She began living as a girl at age five.
23 October 2014
Maybe Justice Will Prevail Now
Good news: Joseph Scott Pemberton, the US Marine accused of killing trans woman Jennifer Laude Sueselbeck, has been turned over to local authorities in the Philippines, where he was stationed and committed the murder.
The Philippines has been rated one the most gay-friendly nations in Asia, if not the world. Even so, some lesbian couples report discrimination and I haven't read or heard much about what trans people face there.
Still, I am more confident that justice will be done in the Filipino civil system than it would be in the US Military, which has a history of covering up sexual assaults and hate crimes committed by its members.
The Philippines has been rated one the most gay-friendly nations in Asia, if not the world. Even so, some lesbian couples report discrimination and I haven't read or heard much about what trans people face there.
Still, I am more confident that justice will be done in the Filipino civil system than it would be in the US Military, which has a history of covering up sexual assaults and hate crimes committed by its members.
22 October 2014
A Prison Within A Prison
A 16-year-old is imprisoned as a form of therapy.
Sounds good so far, right? Well, it gets even better.
The teenager in question has been a ward of the state since the age of five. During the next decade, this teen was beaten, raped, denied food and trafficked for sex--and endured homelessness.
Oh, wait, there's more: This kid is in a boys' detention center. But she's a girl.
Yes, she's transgender. Joette Katz, the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Children and Families, recommended the detention of the teenager, who is identified only as Jane Doe. Ms. Katz's reasoning--impeccable, as she used to be a judge, right?---is that Ms. Doe was "too violent" for the juvenile facilities in which she had been housed.
Forget that, according to some, the charges against Ms. Doe were overstated. Even if they weren't, staffers at such facilities are accustomed to much worse than Ms. Doe dished out. Besides, how is locking up someone--in solitary confinement, no less--going to make someone whose anger issues are probably linked to PTSD and having to deal with her gender identity less volatile?
Ms. Katz hasn't said. So, Ms. Doe's lawyers are filing an amended suit in which Ms. Doe's Constitutional rights are being violated when prison staffers and officials refer to her by her birth name and male pronouns, force her to wear boys' uniforms and don't allow her to wear wigs and makeup. These charges were added to the one that said that her Constitutional rights were being violated when she was kept in solitary confinement.
Whoaa...Solitary confinement? In a boys' detention facility? Even though she was never charged with any indictable offense before the incaluculably wise Ms. Katz put her in prison?
Such a gem of jurisprudence, coming from a former judge. And people wonder why there are so many lawsuits--including the one on behalf of Jane Doe.
Sounds good so far, right? Well, it gets even better.
The teenager in question has been a ward of the state since the age of five. During the next decade, this teen was beaten, raped, denied food and trafficked for sex--and endured homelessness.
Oh, wait, there's more: This kid is in a boys' detention center. But she's a girl.
Yes, she's transgender. Joette Katz, the Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Children and Families, recommended the detention of the teenager, who is identified only as Jane Doe. Ms. Katz's reasoning--impeccable, as she used to be a judge, right?---is that Ms. Doe was "too violent" for the juvenile facilities in which she had been housed.
Forget that, according to some, the charges against Ms. Doe were overstated. Even if they weren't, staffers at such facilities are accustomed to much worse than Ms. Doe dished out. Besides, how is locking up someone--in solitary confinement, no less--going to make someone whose anger issues are probably linked to PTSD and having to deal with her gender identity less volatile?
Ms. Katz hasn't said. So, Ms. Doe's lawyers are filing an amended suit in which Ms. Doe's Constitutional rights are being violated when prison staffers and officials refer to her by her birth name and male pronouns, force her to wear boys' uniforms and don't allow her to wear wigs and makeup. These charges were added to the one that said that her Constitutional rights were being violated when she was kept in solitary confinement.
Whoaa...Solitary confinement? In a boys' detention facility? Even though she was never charged with any indictable offense before the incaluculably wise Ms. Katz put her in prison?
Such a gem of jurisprudence, coming from a former judge. And people wonder why there are so many lawsuits--including the one on behalf of Jane Doe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
