(There are some other really great ones, like coccyx, synechdoche, and carpe diem.)

Lots of arguments given here, and points made, that are equally relevant to people using the T Word.

I have found myself using the term “traditional transsexuals” – which I love because the idea seems oxymoronic on first glance to many people – because there is a certain type of transsexual person who really doesn’t have much in common with the larger trans community. Jamison Green calls them the “mow the lawn” transsexual people – the people who come to a meeting to find out what to do & how to do it, who then do it, & then they go home & mow the lawn. Transition as a medical, legal and social pathway is effectively curative: I had the wrong body, and now I don’t, & let’s all move on with our lives. Ideally, for some people, this is exactly the solution, and I have known far too many trans people for whom this is the only answer that makes any sense. They are not necessarily stealth or closeted; they are not ashamed of their transness, and they are open about it with a very select group of people – close friends, children, partners – but otherwise are not. That is, they tell people on a need to know basis, and most people need to know someone is trans about as much as anyone needs to know if someone has had any other medical procedure.

Because people often re-gender people who are trans once they find out they are trans. I’ve seen it happen too many times.

That said, many of the things needed by transgender people – the umbrella – are also needed by “traditional transsexual” people while they’re transitioning: Legal & safe use of public bathrooms, access to hormones, non-discrimination legislation, etc. I worry more about trans people who live lives in which people don’t know they’re trans far more than I worry about those who are out — exactly because you really don’t know how someone will react when they don’t know, and many will feel betrayed — even if and when they wouldn’t otherwise have a problem with someone being trans. It sucks, but it’s true. It’s not fair, but it’s true.

The one thing I can say about the transgender communities: stuff changes. Roll with it. It’s the most exciting thing about this social movement.

First, a fact sheet – with grammatically correct chart - of how to use the various gender neutral pronouns, including possessives and pronunciation. I’d love it if someone wanted to write a sample sentence so that the syntax of them could be demonstrated.
Second, a list of rules to practice good manners with other people’s pronouns and genders.

The only other thing I would point out is that all of us have pronoun preferences. Every single one of us, so please don’t get all “ugh, trans people” about it unless you’re a woman who doesn’t mind being called “he” or “sirred” when out to dinner.

About Purportedly Gendered Body Parts

I have been thinking about how much I would like it if people, especially health practitioners, exercise instructors and others who talk about bodies a lot, would adjust their language about body parts heavily associated with gender norms. Lots of people who identify as feminists and allies to trans people still use terms like “female-bodied,” “male body parts,” “bio-boy,”and “biologically female.” Even in spaces where people have gained some basic skills around respecting pronoun preferences, suggesting an increasing desire to support gender self determination and release certain expectations related to gender norms, I still hear language used that asserts a belief in constructions of “biological gender.” From my understanding, a central endeavor of feminist, queer, and trans activists has been to dismantle the cultural ideologies, social and legal norms that say that certain body parts determine gender identity and gendered social characteristics and roles. We’ve fought against the idea that the presence of uteruses or ovaries or penises should be understood to determine such things as people’s intelligence, proper parental roles, proper physical appearance, proper gender identity, proper labor roles, proper sexual partners and activities, and capacity to make decisions. We’ve opposed medical and scientific assertions that affirm the purported health of traditional gender roles and activities and pathologize bodies that defy those norms.As feminists and trans allies, we continue to work to dispel myths that body parts somehow make us who we are (and make us “less than” or “better than,” depending on which we may have). But feminists and trans allies sometimes (often inadvertently) prop up these sexist and transphobic ideas just by using language that is shaped by biological determinism. I have heard language used by many smart trans people and allies that I would like to suggest as an alternative to language that is invested in the myth of biological binary gender:

1) We can talk about uteruses, ovaries, penises, vulvas, etc. with specificity without assigning these parts a gender. Rather than saying things like “male body parts,” “female bodies” or “male bodies” we can say the thing we are probably trying to say more directly, such as “bodies with penises,” “bodies with uteruses,” “people with ovaries” and skip the assumption that those body parts correlate with a gender. Examples: “Unfortunately the anatomical drawings in this book only represent bodies with penises and testicles, but I think this picture can still help you get a sense of how the abdominal muscle is shaped.” “People with testicles may find this exercise easier with this adjustment.” “Some people may feel a sensation in the ovaries during this procedure.”

2) The term “internal reproductive organs” can be a useful way to talk generally about ovaries, uteruses, and the like without calling them “female reproductive organs.” Example: “The doctor might think it is necessary to have some ultrasounds of the internal reproductive organs to find out more about what is causing the pain.”

3) We can use “people who menstruate” or “people who are pregnant” or “people who produce sperm” or other terms like these rather than using “male,” “female” or “pregnant women” as a proxy for these statuses. In this way we get rid of the assumptions that all people who identify as a particular gender have the same kind of body or do the same things with their bodies, as well as the mistaken belief that if your body has/does that thing it is a particular gender. Examples: “This exercise is not recommended for people who are menstruating.” “People who are trying to become pregnant should not take this medication.” “People who produce sperm should be warned that this procedure could effect their fertility.”

4) When we want to talk about someone and indicate that they are not trans, we can say “not trans” or “non-trans” or “cisgender” rather than “biologically male,” or “bio boy,” or “bio girl.” When we talk about someone trans we should identify them by their current gender, and if we need to refer to their assigned gender at birth we could say they were “assigned male” or “assigned female” rather than that they are “biologically male” or “biologically female.” These “bio” terms reproduce the oppressive logic that our bodies have some purported biological gendered truth in them, separate from our social gender role. Our bodies have varying parts, but it is socialization that assigns our body parts gendered meaning. If we know we’re going to be talking about bodies, taking the adjectives “male” and “female” or “masculine” and “feminine” out of our vocabularies for describing body parts or systems can help us avoid alienating or offending the people we are talking to. This may help improve access to whatever we are offering for people who are often alienated from much needed health services. As we all know, lots of people’s bodies do not fit the rigid story about “biological sex,”including trans people, genderqueer people, people with intersex conditions, people who cannot or choose not to reproduce, non-trans women who have had hysterectomies, non-trans men who do not have testicles, etc. Many people will benefit from our efforts to dismantle gendered language about bodies that enforces harmful norms. Taking these gendered framings off of medical intake forms, and making sure that the “gender” question on such forms is a blank space where people can write what they want rather than check a box, are also important steps for improving access. I’m sure that depending on the context in which we’re talking about bodies, other phrasing might be useful, but I believe that we can talk in ways that get out of compulsory gender assignment of these body parts and reflect our rejection of the notion that binary gender is “natural” or pre-political. I would love to hear other people’s examples of good use of language to move away from these assumptions.

Reprinted here with his permission. It’s also available as a .pdf from his site.

Apparently, transsexuals and transvestites are waning, and transgender is ascendant. Not that we didn’t know that, but there it is in red green and blue.

I like the way dyke has remained a subcultural word (consistently small percentages over time), while I assume queer went from being used in the “odd or weird” way to the current meaning, dipping in the late 80s/early 90s.

]]> http://www.myhusbandbetty.com/2011/01/19/charting-identities/feed/ 1 http://www.myhusbandbetty.com/2010/12/23/how-the-other-half-lives/ http://www.myhusbandbetty.com/2010/12/23/how-the-other-half-lives/#comments Thu, 23 Dec 2010 05:44:34 +0000 helenboyd http://www.myhusbandbetty.com/?p=11080 More→]]> My friend Lynne alerted me to a post about the uselessness of women. I wish I could say it surprised me, even a little, but essentialism is essentialism is essentialism, whether that’s expressed in “women should rule the world” attitudes or “women are useless” attitudes. To me: same coin, different sides.

What amazed me even more was this post on the same blog about terminology in this “manosphere.” I hate to say it, but the stuff is so pathetic I just feel sorry for them in their hateful little world. Okay, not really, but I can’t even imagine what it’s like to live in that tiny a brain.

The Day of Remembrance, which we commemorate tomorrow, is a time of mourning for transgender people, a time to honor the lives tragically cut short by another person’s hatred or fears. It is also a time to look at how we can have fewer and fewer deaths to commemorate on this day in years to come.

Each year as I look at the names and faces of those we have lost, they touch me profoundly and they also call me to a renewed commitment to the work ahead of us. We have to use every tool available to us to stem the tide; one of those tools is federal law.

A full year has passed since the passage of the first federal law to offer protections to transgender people-the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. While the law certainly won’t end the problem of hate crimes, it does provide new avenues to address violence when it occurs. For the very first time, the Department of Justice and federal law enforcement officials have been authorized to take action to address the violence that transgender people face. And, while it’s easy to be cynical about the government, there are people in law enforcement who are truly and deeply dedicated to working with us to address the violence.

We’ve been at the table with the FBI and other departments as they’ve worked to update their training programs to include explicit information about gender identity and change the way they record information so we gain vital knowledge about the extent of the problem. I know, paperwork doesn’t seem like it will do anything. There is something very important about seeing the word “transgender” there in the manuals and forms because it means that the federal government is making a record and taking notice of the horrific violence we as a people face. It is information they can use to prosecute a crime and ensure that local law enforcement takes violence against us seriously. It will also help formulate violence prevention programs.

But there’s also something awful about knowing that those forms will record the terror of victims of hate-motivated violence. Law enforcement officers will note down the weapons used, the damage done and the derogatory words that are said to harm a transgender person-someone’s child, or partner, or parent, or loved one.

One of the reasons that we don’t use the word “tranny” at NCTE is because we’ve heard too many stories of violence. We know that when someone hears that word, it often heralds the beginning of an attack. And words matter when we look at hate crimes; the language used is, in fact, part of how we determine if something is a hate crime, because words are one of the weapons used to hurt the target of the violence. Because in a hate crime, damage is done to hearts and spirits as well as to bodies-and sadly, that’s the perpetrator’s point. We hear regularly, especially over the past few weeks, from transgender people who tell us that “tranny” is a word that feels hostile and hurtful to them. We shouldn’t use words that cause pain to others, especially when the word is one that, horrifyingly, transgender people hear as they are being bludgeoned. We have to use our words differently than that.

This week, the Department of Justice brought federal hate crimes charges under the new law for the first time, against white supremists who attacked a developmentally disabled Native American man in New Mexico. Disability was one of the other new categories added to the hate crimes laws, along with gender identity. It is a reminder that violence to any of us hurts all of us.

There are many more cases that are currently in the midst of the legal and investigative processes that have to happen before charges are filed. Each of these cases makes a statement that hate crimes are intolerable and illegal.

But we also have to keep our eye on our goal-ending violence against transgender people. We do this by educating people about the realities of our lives and by asserting our human rights to express who we are and to live in safety. To make this a reality, we have to build a climate of acceptance, free of derogatory words and angry fists, and filled with respect for the differences among us.

(For the record, almost no one would consider permanent facial hair removal a medical, transsexual-oriented procedure, unless, of course, it’s the first of other procedures. Crossdressers might do the same in order to make passing easier while crossdressed.)