Question: Why do people add that little "*" when they type "trans"? Like this: "trans*".
Just curious.
Detect - I'm guessing to allow it to refer to trans-woman, trans-man, trans-sexual, trans-gender all in one - trans*
Wouldn't "trans" suffice for them all? What benefit is an asterisk?
Still not entirely certain I understand, but that's okay. Thanks for providing the link, Mark.
Children are easier, not harder, than adults. They will likely stare, then ask you something like "why are you dressed like a girl?" If you tell them, they will most likely accept it and that will be that. They do not have decades of experience of social memes and judgements.
I'm more concerned with them having a hard time adjusting to me being Bob one day and Cindy another. My adult friends accept it and have adjusted just fine. Those who don't know me might have other problems. As children get older, if they haven't been exposed to it it can be confusing for them. If I were to introduce myself as Cindy to my teenage nephew, he might not understand. I know that the only way to get people to understand is to expose them but I'm also wary of how my family will accept it still.
Bob, I would suggest that you ask the parents to explain ahead of time that Uncle Bob and Aunt Cindy are the same person. Just that. They can answer any questions the kids have obviously. But my advice is keep it simple and matter of fact. As long as it's not a surprise, most kids just shrug and move on. Teens are another matter and honestly as complex to deal with as adults. But with little kids, in my experience Sissyl is right. It's easier not more difficult.
Still not entirely certain I understand, but that's okay. Thanks for providing the link, Mark.
It creates space within the term for people who don't fit into or identify with the gender binary.
Some trans people identify within the conventional gender binary but find themselves having been born physically on the wrong side of the binary. That's how I identify myself. I'm a trans woman who's working on getting her body where it should be via HRT.
Others don't identify so readily with that binary gender divide, whether they're genderqueer, or genderfluid, or agender, etc. Trans* creates a space for them within the larger umbrella term.
There's a good visual representation of this idea in this article, which was put up by the same guy whose TEDx talk you linked to. Scroll to the bottom of the article. Or just click here for the image itself.
Edit to add: That talk's pretty good. Thanks for posting it.
No problem; I found it both educational and entertaining. He's a pretty charismatic guy.
Bob, I would suggest that you ask the parents to explain ahead of time that Uncle Bob and Aunt Cindy are the same person. Just that. They can answer any questions the kids have obviously. But my advice is keep it simple and matter of fact. As long as it's not a surprise, most kids just shrug and move on. Teens are another matter and honestly as complex to deal with as adults. But with little kids, in my experience Sissyl is right. It's easier not more difficult.
For the time being I don't have a lot to worry about. I'm still getting used to being myself and I don't generally leave home as Cindy, although I want to more often. I don't see my family very much due to distance and work. I'm probably making more of an issue out of this than I should be. It's weird, I'm a positive person when it comes to anything that doesn't deal with me. When it comes to dealing with myself, I'm a very negative person. I try. I really do try to be positive but I just can't seem to do it. Whenever something like this comes up, all I can do is think of the negative effects.
The argument that popped up about "neurotypical" and the possible misunderstanding of what that word connotates, FWIW, is strangely reminiscent of how a lot of "normal" people feel when they get bashed for misusing language or accidentally offending someone who is LGBTQ.
Be careful whom you choose to attack for their diction when discussing these matters. Sometimes poor, potentially offensive, word choice is simply a mistake or an omission of non-malicious ignorance... and negatively overreacting to it can turn a potential ally into a lifelong enemy.
As pro-LGBTQ as I am, I think the community sometimes forgets that, to their own detriment.
Digital Products Assistant
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The argument that popped up about "neurotypical" and the possible misunderstanding of what that word connotates, FWIW, is strangely reminiscent of how a lot of "normal" people feel when they get bashed for misusing language or accidentally offending someone who is LGBTQ.
Be careful whom you choose to attack for their diction when discussing these matters. Sometimes poor, potentially offensive, word choice is simply a mistake or an omission of non-malicious ignorance... and negatively overreacting to it can turn a potential ally into a lifelong enemy.
As pro-LGBTQ as I am, I think the community sometimes forgets that, to their own detriment.
Part of being a good ally to a minority group is understanding that their struggle isn't really about you, and entering into our safe spaces as an outsider means you're expected to know and respect our social ques. A lot of us are crass and angry about the way society treats us, and that tends to come out more in queer spaces because we don't have to wear that cheerful facade.
And yes, many of us can get angry about abuse or discrimination regardless of the intention behind it. A gay or trans* person may sound frustrated explaining to you not to use certain words, and it could be your first time hearing it, but keep in mind we've had to make that same speech ten or twenty or fifty times before and are mentally asking "Why do these people not GET IT yet?!" And from the other side, I often see straight people get incredibly defensive and tell me not to be so sensitive when I tell them certain words aren't appropriate or are insulting, and sometimes even get angry because I didn't bend over backwards to reassure them after they said something incredibly dehumanizing to me.
Ultimately, there are enough information resources out there for people to educate themselves with that it shouldn't fall on every gay person to endure "poor, potentially offensive word choice" with a smile and a pat on the back.
Yeah, and I get that insofar as homosexuality and bisexuality are concerned. Those are accessible--dare I say normal?--enough concepts by now that folks should know better.
I think trans* is a different ballgame though (and polyamory, too, to some extent). I had never heard the term 'cisgendered' until I began reading this thread, for instance. I also wasn't aware that 'neurotypical' was meant to connotate someone who doesn't register on the autistic spectrum. (I would've guessed it was coined on the fly by Tanith until I Googled it, TBH.)
There's a lot of confusing terminology that exists within the transgender community that isn't readily understandable to an outsider, even one well-acquainted with the gay and lesbian community (or even a member thereof). And some polyamorists don't even know what to call themselves when other people ask.
I just think that getting mad at people for asking questions is a poor way to foster understanding... but I totally get that it gets tiring to explain the same stuff over and over. ("So, you have a wife AND a girlfriend? And they're girlfriends, too? Wait... how does that, like, work?")
Ultimately, there are enough information resources out there for people to educate themselves with that it shouldn't fall on every gay person to endure "poor, potentially offensive word choice" with a smile and a pat on the back.
This reminds me of something Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a few years ago with regard to racism. I can't dig up the exact quote right now, but he pointed out that the tacit assumption in a lot of conversation is that the burden rests on the minority to decide when and when not to be offended or call someone out, rather than on the thoughtless majority to exercise their own better judgment.
I think that's both broadly true and completely backwards. It's more or less a way to dress up the old accusation that minorities don't actually have any legitimate cultural grievances and are just making trouble.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In a lot of cases, offense over terminology is a symptom of crossing of personal boundaries, rather than group ones. Example: I'm good friends personally with both Abel and Charlie [not their real names], a homosexual couple. If we go to a wine bar, I can make fun of Abel if he orders a rose: "Why am I not surprised you princesses immediately go for the one that's pink?" And, more likely than not, he'll reply, "Yeah, I notice you ordering the red, like you think you're a predator drinking blood or something -- how pathetic!" And we both grin and have a toast and drink our wine together.
But then they invite me to a party they're throwing, at which Mrs Gersen and I are pretty much the token straight cis-genders. I don't know most of the other guests real well, so not only are those sorts of jokes verboten, but also I understand I need to watch my speech a bit more carefully than normal to avoid ending up with my foot in my mouth. It would be the same if I showed up to a biker rally and started talking about how we need more helmet laws.
It has everything to do with what level of personal relationship exists. Treat people as people first, and as groups second -- but be aware if you're the odd person out in a group. And ultimately, if you put enough time and effort in to actually establish that level of relationship, then the group stuff can sort itself out.
|
Digital Products Assistant
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, and I get that insofar as homosexuality and bisexuality are concerned. Those are accessible--dare I say normal?--enough concepts by now that folks should know better.
I think trans* is a different ballgame though (and polyamory, too, to some extent). I had never heard the term 'cisgendered' until I began reading this thread, for instance. I also wasn't aware that 'neurotypical' was meant to connotate someone who doesn't register on the autistic spectrum. (I would've guessed it was coined on the fly by Tanith until I Googled it, TBH.)
The trans* community is very different than the gay community, and they're mostly grouped together because every trans person was just assumed to be gay 50+ years ago (and many people still make that assumption today), so even a lot of people within the larger gay community aren't well-educated on trans* issues. Likewise with issues like polyamoury, asexuality, and other groups. There are a TON of online resources reviewing the basics of the various communities for anyone willing to look. You did the right thing in goggling a term you didn't recognize; I wish more people would be that responsible.
This reminds me of something Ta-Nehisi Coates wrote a few years ago with regard to racism. I can't dig up the exact quote right now, but he pointed out that the tacit assumption in a lot of conversation is that the burden rests on the minority to decide when and when not to be offended or call someone out, rather than on the thoughtless majority to exercise their own better judgment.
I think that's both broadly true and completely backwards. It's more or less a way to dress up the old accusation that minorities don't actually have any legitimate cultural grievances and are just making trouble.
That's not what's meant by that line at all. Its a reminder that we always have to weigh in our minds whether correcting a member of the minority, and risking it becoming A Thing. It's never appropriate for racist/sexist/homophobi/transphobic/ect to be tossed out in conversation, but more often than not if we speak out it causes a fight or gives someone the impression that we're "too sensitive" or holds back our career or ruins Thanksgiving, and so we always have to decide whether or not to let something insulting slide or if we have the time and energy to invest in something like that.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I experience people trying to be careful with their language, in my case, with regard to disability.
I have an autistic son, and very often the person I'm talking to will use a term like 'normal', 'disabled', and then realise that's not part of the approved lexicon, and start trying to over-explain what they 'actually meant'.
I find it draining, time-consuming, and unnecessary, to deal with this backtracking, but I know that they've probably been verbally slapped down by someone in the past, and are trying to make things right.
I'd like to think I can judge when someone means well, and when they mean harm, via the context of the situation and their past behaviour.
There are people I trust implicitly, because they have proven their commitment to my son, via their tireless practical help. I'm not going to disown them over their accidental use of an unapproved term from an earlier time.
Conversely, there are people out there who can use all the right community-approved terms, to advance vile, hateful beliefs, safe from censure, because they ticked all the correct grammatical boxes and jumped through the linguistic hoops.
The trans* community is very different than the gay community, and they're mostly grouped together because every trans person was just assumed to be gay 50+ years ago (and many people still make that assumption today), so even a lot of people within the larger gay community aren't well-educated on trans* issues.
I have a very close friend that I've known for over 10 years who recently came out as a crossdresser. A big part of his reluctance to tell people is that he was concerned that they would simply assume that he was gay and/or transsexual, when in fact he identifies very strongly as a straight male (he just happens to have too much fashion sense and gumption for a typical male wardrobe).
It has been interesting--and at times heartbreaking--to see how others react to him. My wife asked a group of ladies, with whom she regularly meets to dress up in formalwear and have dinner, if they would mind him joining them one night. The response of about half the women was surprisingly negative--and it wasn't just a "let's raincheck this for another occasion" response, it was a "I never want to do this at all" response.
The strange part is that this group of women HAS allowed both gay men who don't crossdress and gay men who do (i.e. drag queens) to join them at these gatherings--the objection really seemed rooted in a concern that they could not be themselves around a straight male crossdresser, but had no problem expressing themselves openly around someone who is homosexual regardless of their choice in clothing. This was understandably hurtful to him; he was hopeful that they would be as accepting and welcoming of him as they have been to other gay and transsexual individuals that they know.
|
Digital Products Assistant
|
I have a very close friend that I've known for over 10 years who recently came out as a crossdresser. A big part of his reluctance to tell people is that he was concerned that they would simply assume that he was gay and/or transsexual, when in fact he identifies very strongly as a straight male (he just happens to have too much fashion sense and gumption for a typical male wardrobe).
It has been interesting--and at times heartbreaking--to see how others react to him. My wife asked a group of ladies, with whom she regularly meets to dress up in formalwear and have dinner, if they would mind him joining them one night. The response of about half the women was surprisingly negative--and it wasn't just a "let's raincheck this for another occasion" response, it was a "I never want to do this at all" response.
The strange part is that this group of women HAS allowed both gay men who don't crossdress and gay men who do (i.e. drag queens) to join them at these gatherings--the objection really seemed rooted in a concern that they could not be themselves around a straight male crossdresser, but had no problem expressing themselves openly around someone who is homosexual regardless of their choice in clothing. This was understandably hurtful to him; he was hopeful that they would be as accepting and welcoming of him as they have been to other gay and transsexual individuals that they know.
It's entirely possible that some or all of this group would be fine having him come along for a different event--they likely have a mental parameter of "this is a ladies-only event" and (for whatever social or homophobic reasons) they consider gay men to be honorary women. Not being a part of the group, I can't really say.
From the side of being a generic gay woman looking in, I can tell you that gay men, straight crossdressers, and trans women all put off a very different "vibe", and while I'd date trans women and am happy to have them at lesbian bars alongside me (especially the cute trans lesbians), having a straight male crossdresser walk into a lesbian bar is begging for a fight unless he's there with friends to vet for him.
There is/was (I haven't been up that way for a year two) an excellent Lesbian pub in Oxford Street in Sydney the bottom floor and restaurant was open to all the upper floors were ladies only. They had excellent Thai food.
When I was on summer break from uni and I was having a week or two visiting Sydney I would stay at my uncles place at Taylor's square, I would drink at the Court House Pub and wander down Oxford Street.
Any LTGBIQ folks thinking of visiting Australia, I recommend coming during Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras and staring off in Sydney.
Quick question... GLTBIQ is there a standard order of letters... I alternate them but I have noticed I usually put L or G first.
I am not sure I can keep up with all the new terms for all the different versions of being attracted to people of your own gender.
As I grew up if you didn't care for the opposite sex you were queer, that was it. It is interesting to see everyone try to find a place to fit into society these days, but I wonder if it isn't dividing instead of empowering us.
Just my 2 cp.
No offense intended to anyone.
|
Digital Products Assistant
|
Quick question... GLTBIQ is there a standard order of letters... I alternate them but I have noticed I usually put L or G first.
There's no "official" order handed down by the High Council of Queer, but the Chancellor usually insists we put "G" or "L" first
As I grew up if you didn't care for the opposite sex you were queer, that was it. It is interesting to see everyone try to find a place to fit into society these days, but I wonder if it isn't dividing instead of empowering us.
That's why "Q" is usually included in the alphabet soup, and the larger community is usually referred to as the "queer community" in blogging circles.
High Council of Queer... That would be spectacular :-)
Quick question... GLTBIQ is there a standard order of letters... I alternate them but I have noticed I usually put L or G first.
About the only time I see it without an L or G first is on the rare occasion I see someone use QUILTBAG (Queer/Questioning, Undecided, Intersex, Lesbian, Trans, Bisexual, Asexual, Gay).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The strange part is that this group of women HAS allowed both gay men who don't crossdress and gay men who do (i.e. drag queens) to join them at these gatherings--the objection really seemed rooted in a concern that they could not be themselves around a straight male crossdresser, but had no problem expressing themselves openly around someone who is homosexual regardless of their choice in clothing. This was understandably hurtful to him; he was hopeful that they would be as accepting and welcoming of him as they have been to other gay and transsexual individuals that they know.
I think there's a couple things behind the discomfort, and they both are knotted up pretty firmly with how deeply gender ties into who we perceive ourselves and others as being. It envelops personality and appearance and names and almost all the components that we put together when we think about what constitutes a person, and usually we treat that as static. Gay men are men. They can come to your dinner party and be men and they'll still be men next time you run into them. Transwomen are women. They'll still be women next time you run into them. But a straight guy who comes to your dinner party as a woman but the next time you run into him is a man?
The performative nature of crossdressing intersects with the idea of gender binaries in some uncomfortable ways, and the idea of blurring that binary is difficult for a lot of people. When you're used to thinking of who someone is as static, and you're dealing with someone for whom gender is fluid, that binary insists that one gender must be true for that person, and the other one must be false. So the route for people who want to be accepting (or at least not disrupt the dinner party) but have trouble holding those two seemingly conflicting things as equally true, is to treat one as authentic and one as a performance. (It can also highlight the idea that all gender is performance, which is uncomfy if your gender is central to who you think you are.)
Drag queens, at least if they're campy, ease that discomfort by highlighting that the whole thing is a performance, and an over-the-top one at that. They know they're performing, everyone else knows that they're performing, everyone's clear on what's going on. A straight male crossdresser, on the other hand, blurs a lot of lines. Is it a performance? Or is he sincere? How are you supposed to act around him when you meet him in a different context?
For women who were brought up to see traditional femininity as something essential to being a woman, even if they try to reject those expectations, there can be a whole ugly dimension of pity evoked by women who are clearly trying to be traditionally feminine and not doing it well, and it goes even worse and weirder places when you're watching a man try to do it. There can be a feeling of being mocked -- it's hard not to internalize our culture's messages that straight men are superior to women, so watching someone you know is a straight man temporarily act and dress like a woman can evoke that. (Again, it's something drag queens tend to defang though camp, and gay men's status shares some of the vulnerabilities of women's status, which also helps defuse it.) And all of these feelings can come up even among women who support different forms of gender expression. It can be hard to escape a lot of those scripts on an emotional level, even if you're intentionally rejecting them.
I don't think exclusion is the best answer, and I feel bad for him that it was the one they chose, and I wish they would give it a try, at least, but as to why they can be accepting of other gay and transsexual people they know and balk at this, I'd think it has to do with discomfort at that fluidity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmn. All this discussion makes me wonder; I've had a couple of trans* friends over the years, and we NEVER had any discussion regarding what it means, what it's like, how it differs from simply being gay.
So now I'm wondering if they were (a) comfortable enough with me not to need to have the discussion, (b) not comfortable enough with me to have the discussion, or (c) just tired of having the discussion at all.
And I'm still flabbergasted by the number of GLB folks who exclude the T crowd... seems like we (as a group) ought to know better.
There are L and G folks who exclude B folk. :\ Intolerance is found everywhere, even where you wouldn't expect it.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmn. All this discussion makes me wonder; I've had a couple of trans* friends over the years, and we NEVER had any discussion regarding what it means, what it's like, how it differs from simply being gay.
So now I'm wondering if they were (a) comfortable enough with me not to need to have the discussion, (b) not comfortable enough with me to have the discussion, or (c) just tired of having the discussion at all.
And I'm still flabbergasted by the number of GLB folks who exclude the T crowd... seems like we (as a group) ought to know better.
From my experience it's mostly A or C. I love it when a friend just shrugs it off and treats me the same as before. Because truly nothing changed about my personality.
Hmmn. All this discussion makes me wonder; I've had a couple of trans* friends over the years, and we NEVER had any discussion regarding what it means, what it's like, how it differs from simply being gay.
So now I'm wondering if they were (a) comfortable enough with me not to need to have the discussion, (b) not comfortable enough with me to have the discussion, or (c) just tired of having the discussion at all.
And I'm still flabbergasted by the number of GLB folks who exclude the T crowd... seems like we (as a group) ought to know better.
Are any of your trans* friends gay? If so, that might contribute to (a), in addition to what Cori said.
(c) is a big factor for a lot of trans folk, especially as they get further away from their time of coming out, or the more... involved part of their transition. I've seen it happen with a few of the trans video bloggers I followed on youtube for a while before I came out, where they just get caught up in living their post-transition lives, or they feel they've said what they needed to say on the subject, and post less and less, then stop entirely.
Quick question... GLTBIQ is there a standard order of letters... I alternate them but I have noticed I usually put L or G first.
I think the older ordering is GLBT, but LGBT is usually what I see preferred now. Honestly, guys usually get to go first and a label attempting to be inclusive benefits from being aware of that and making an effort not to just automatically carry on the usual male primacy stuff.
I am not sure I can keep up with all the new terms for all the different versions of being attracted to people of your own gender.
As I grew up if you didn't care for the opposite sex you were queer, that was it. It is interesting to see everyone try to find a place to fit into society these days, but I wonder if it isn't dividing instead of empowering us.
Just my 2 cp.
No offense intended to anyone.
I too wonder. And worry.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally find a lot of the labels completely asinine (some of the things I've seen on tumblr in particular - demiromantic for example... apparently that's "only forms romantic attraction after developing an emotional connection with someone"... isn't that what everyone does?) and find them needlessly constricting... but I figure a lot of people find comfort in having some named group to fit into. I hate the labels personally.
On the other hand I've actually had an argument with one of my closest (gay male) friends about the term "queer". I like it for its lack of clearly defined borders and its general solidarity. He hates it because to him it will never mean anything apart from "freak" or "weird".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't like being called queer. To me it makes me feel like I'm even more odd than I usually am. What would really make me happy is if people would stop trying to slap a label on me and just let me be who I am. I can't even figure out where I fit on the LGBTQI(+whatever) spectrum. I don't want to be put into a neat little box. I want to be able to just live my life.
There are too many people who think that labeling is a good thing. It does have it's place. For example, if you are a man looking for another man, knowing that you are entering a gay bar instead of a lesbian bar is helpful. However, it would be nice if you could just go into a bar and if someone isn't interested, they could politely say so instead of being offended.
For the most part I don't care what I'm called. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with them over it unless they meant it as an attack. When one of my friends tries to tell me I'm queer, she's trying to describe me. I have a coworker that would use it as an attack if he knew. Each deserves it's own response. The attack is the one that would get my attention. The other isn't worth the fight in my eyes. Some people want to be offended so they take offense at every perceived slight.
|
|
For the most part I don't care what I'm called. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with them over it unless they meant it as an attack. When one of my friends tries to tell me I'm queer, she's trying to describe me. I have a coworker that would use it as an attack if he knew. Each deserves it's own response. The attack is the one that would get my attention. The other isn't worth the fight in my eyes. Some people want to be offended so they take offense at every perceived slight.
That's my opinion regarding modern disability-empowering language.
If on the one hand, we have a politician using all the right words, to try pass a Bill stripping disability funding,
and on the other hand, a person who rallies his friends to join a fundraiser, "to do something nice for the mental kids.",
Which of those people is my friend?
Which of them is my enemy?
I'd hug the latter, and thank him for his gift in the spirit it was given.
|
|
For the most part I don't care what I'm called. I'm not going to waste my time arguing with them over it unless they meant it as an attack. When one of my friends tries to tell me I'm queer, she's trying to describe me. I have a coworker that would use it as an attack if he knew. Each deserves it's own response. The attack is the one that would get my attention. The other isn't worth the fight in my eyes. Some people want to be offended so they take offense at every perceived slight.That's my opinion regarding modern disability-empowering language.
If on the one hand, we have a politician using all the right words, to try pass a Bill stripping disability funding,
and on the other hand, a person who rallies his friends to join a fundraiser, "to do something nice for the mental kids.",
Which of those people is my friend?
Which of them is my enemy?I'd hug the latter, and thank him for his gift in the spirit it was given.
You are a good person, Snorter. And so is Bob too. We need more people like you in all stripes of life.
|
|
There are L and G folks who exclude B folk. :\ Intolerance is found everywhere, even where you wouldn't expect it.Hmmn. All this discussion makes me wonder; I've had a couple of trans* friends over the years, and we NEVER had any discussion regarding what it means, what it's like, how it differs from simply being gay.
So now I'm wondering if they were (a) comfortable enough with me not to need to have the discussion, (b) not comfortable enough with me to have the discussion, or (c) just tired of having the discussion at all.
And I'm still flabbergasted by the number of GLB folks who exclude the T crowd... seems like we (as a group) ought to know better.
One of my friend had a sadly similar experience. He was born a girl but always felt both more like a man and attracted by women.
Since he was apparently a girl who liked women, he was classified as a lesbian and cheerfully welcomed by the lesbian community.
When he decided to change and become a man, there was an ugly backlash from most of the lesbian community he was part of. He lost his job and had to go and live in another city.
Being a victim of discrimination sadly does not automatically make you a good and understanding person. There are examples of this in any community :-(
There are L and G folks who exclude B folk. :\ Intolerance is found everywhere, even where you wouldn't expect it.Hmmn. All this discussion makes me wonder; I've had a couple of trans* friends over the years, and we NEVER had any discussion regarding what it means, what it's like, how it differs from simply being gay.
So now I'm wondering if they were (a) comfortable enough with me not to need to have the discussion, (b) not comfortable enough with me to have the discussion, or (c) just tired of having the discussion at all.
And I'm still flabbergasted by the number of GLB folks who exclude the T crowd... seems like we (as a group) ought to know better.
One of my friend had a sadly similar experience. He was born a girl but always felt both more like a man and attracted by women.
Since he was apparently a girl who liked women, he was classified as a lesbian and cheerfully welcomed by the lesbian community.
When he decided to change and become a man, there was an ugly backlash from most of the lesbian community he was part of. He lost his job and had to go and live in another city.
Being a victim of discrimination sadly does not automatically make you a good and understanding person. There are examples of this in any community :-(
that sounds like a horrifying experience. I'm sorry your friend went through that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sadly, another proof that LGBT people are just like the rest of us (not to be misunderstood - it just makes clear that you can have the best, the brightest, the saddest and the worst of people among them, just like the rest of us].
What happened to my friend is indeed sad to see. But he got back from this and recently bought a house with his girlfriend and they are talking about marriage. Which is possible in France only since this summer since in the eyes of the law, he is still a woman who wants to marry another woman :-)
But, in a way, I do find that what happened to him paradoxically gives me hope. Because it shows that people who may seem "not like us" because of differing skin color, gender identity, sexual orientation and so on are in fact EXACTLY like us (no matter who "us" are really). No better and no worse.
Once you get past the cliches (whether positive or negative), I feel it makes it easier to deal with any person based on their actions and who they are as a human being, rather than as part of some group or another.
|
|
'Us' as in 'All of us, no 'group' excluded.
Once you get past the cliches (whether positive or negative), I feel it makes it easier to deal with any person based on their actions and who they are as a human being, rather than as part of some group or another.
I couldn't agree more, and I strive to always be one who does so.
What happened to my friend is indeed sad to see. But he got back from this and recently bought a house with his girlfriend and they are talking about marriage. Which is possible in France only since this summer since in the eyes of the law, he is still a woman who wants to marry another woman :-)
Yeah, same sex marriage laws can intersect with trans people's marriages in odd ways.
Sorry your friend had to go through that. Glad that he did make it through to a better place.
On the other hand I've actually had an argument with one of my closest (gay male) friends about the term "queer". I like it for its lack of clearly defined borders and its general solidarity. He hates it because to him it will never mean anything apart from "freak" or "weird".
I hadn't realized there was still a rejection of the term "queer" until recently. Which, of course, I'd respect for people who don't want it applied to them (like your friend, or Bob), while at the same time using it for myself. I like it for the same reasons you describe.
Sadly, another proof that LGBT people are just like the rest of us (not to be misunderstood - it just makes clear that you can have the best, the brightest, the saddest and the worst of people among them, just like the rest of us].What happened to my friend is indeed sad to see. But he got back from this and recently bought a house with his girlfriend and they are talking about marriage. Which is possible in France only since this summer since in the eyes of the law, he is still a woman who wants to marry another woman :-)
French law has no provision for legal sex change?
While technically, Polish law has specific rules for this, Polish transsexuals (only in case of strongly m2f or f2m transitions - people with milder gender identity disorders, such as Todd or TanithT probably wouldn't get positive medical opinion required for this) can use the generic rule that any citizen can request the court to determine existence or nonexistence of legal relation/legal status (trying to translate the expression on the fly... legal terms are not my strong suit, both in English and in Polish) or correction of thereoff as long as he has personal interest in this. So they have to request the court to issue correction about their legal status.
There was much racket about that from conservative circles claiming that Polish courts violate constitution by "illegally" declaring legal sex change because (in conservative opinion) court cannot declare things that are "opposite" to the "facts" (i.e. being born with male/female external parts).
Never mind the whole medical and psychological expertise in that matter and so on, and so on. Conservatives (and Church) know better!
Never mind the whole medical and psychological expertise in that matter and so on, and so on. Conservatives (and Church) know better!
Wow, Poland sounds just like the U.S.!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Never mind the whole medical and psychological expertise in that matter and so on, and so on. Conservatives (and Church) know better!Wow, Poland sounds just like the U.S.!
And we were the most progressive country of the Western Culture in the past too before religious fundamentalists and rich oligarchs dominated the politics! :P
*Polish Brethern: They were banned after Swedish Deluge under accusation of cooperation with protestant Swedish invaders. They were early Unitarians.