I Am Not a Product of a Problem

[bcholmes]

Earlier today, I attended a panel called "Pushing the Envelope". It was an interesting panel, mostly because of some of the names that were on the panel: Jed Hartman, Aaron Lichtov, Melissa Scott, Joan Horan, and Elizabeth Bear.

The panelists were really great (and Aaron consistently says things that prompt me to Deep Thoughts), but there were some things said by panel attendees that kinda bugged me.

Jed told a story about a Gordon Van Gelder editorial that summarized a number of trends he'd seen. One of those trends was that Van Gelder received a lot of complaints about the number of gay-themed stories. Jed even went on to talk about his editorial about the dearth of sexual minorities in SF; Jed reported that he received several e-mails from people saying, in essence, that in the future, the queer problem will have been resolved and therefore it only makes sense that they won't show up in future worlds. Jed told these stories in a voice heavy with "I wish the universe was different than it is."

Anyway, it was with some annoyance that I heard audience members talk, not too long afterward, about the idea that in a nice, utopian future, trans people shouldn't exist. And that got me reflecting.

Aaron made an explicit call to talk more specifically about what "the envelope" was and what it meant to "push" it. And I think that made me reflect on what my particular envelopes are and what they have been in the past. For me, getting beyond binary thinking has long been a Topic To Consider. But I think, at some time in the past, the big cultural story I wanted to attack was the cultural story that there are only two genders: man and woman.

I didn't feel like that story included me, and I tried to challenge the story whenever I could. And what's more, I felt sustained by any depiction of non-binary sex/gender. When the planet of Gethen was described in The Left Hand of Darkness, I felt validated because there was at least some inhabitants outside of the binary. When I read Varley's works, I felt validated. But neither of these were my story. These people didn't have to come out; didn't have to make difficult choices in a society that worked against them; didn't have to loose family, friends or jobs. But, nonetheless, I was willing to claim those stories as somehow being like me in a way that so much else was not.

I am less sustained, now, than I was then by pushing on the envelope of binary sex/gender. That's not the binary that bugs me now. And I think I had a bit of a flash of insight today. The binary that bugs me, now, is this: there's a way of looking at the trans phenomenon that says that trans people are the result of unusual biology. Something happens: maybe it's pre-natal hormones or whatnot. But this point of view says that transness exists because of a biological quirk. In essence, a biological problem. Some of our own language buys in to thise point of view. Some trans folk say "I was born with a minor birth defect that, with the help of surgery, was corrected."

Run with this in SF, and you get the scene in which the doctor tells the expectant mother, "Tests were almost completely normal. We noticed a minor problem with gender non-congruence, so I'm prescribing 2 milligrams of Regenderex 5. Take one pill a day after meals." Problem solved, and here's another future universe without trans people.

On the other end of the binary, you get the whole "gender is social construct, and your gender discomfort will go away completely once we have created the future that's less hung up on gender roles. You won't have to change your body to express yourself, 'cause what the bodies look like don't matter." One woman in the panel today said almost exactly that (complete with "This may offend some trans people but..." caveat). (I've seen her on other panels, and I get the impression that she is wreslting to understand the Why of Trans, and can't, but is willing to opine about it in the meantime).

I was talking about this statement with wild_irises afterward, and she likened that response to the whole "I think everybody's really bisexual" argument. wild_irises described the "everybody's bisexual" position as a "heterosexual fantasy", by which she meant that het people say things like this to, at the same time, say "it's just a fault with society and that's too big for me to take any responsibility over trying to fix it" and also to glom on to the problem in a way that says, "as a het person, I'm affected by society's lack of acceptance of the idea that everybody's really bisexual, and I should therefore get the same kind of sympathy and consideration that people who deal with minor things like homophobia get."

So I've described two poles. On the one hand, in the "biology quirk" view, trans people are a result of a congruence "problem" that can be corrected via surgery, and in the other extreme, trans people are the product of the rigidity of social expectations about gender roles. Since both of those problems are going to be fixed Real Soon Now, trans people just go away. No trans, no problem.

But now, that's the envelope that I want to push against. I want other options. I want out-of-the-box thinking about where gender comes from. Maybe it's metaphysical, or transdimensional, or something. I want a new narrative about gender that doesn't have to eradicate my existence in order to arrive at a happy ending.

Technorati tag: wiscon.

Comments

[cigfrain.livejournal.com]

thank you. i have ganked that last paragraph.

[beaq.livejournal.com]

I want out-of-the-box thinking about where gender comes from. Maybe it's metaphysical, or transdimensional, or something.

I wonder if that's really out-of-the box. Isn't it essentialism in one form or another -- metaphysical or evolutionary -- that gets us assigned a role and supposed personal characteristics to go with our gender?

I wonder also how people can look at trans people who don't conform to the mainstream norms of their appropriate gender and cling to the idea that it's all about social expectations.

I do have a question about the "problem" thing, though. Can you describe a situation or state in which it isn't a problem, per se, to be perceived to be a gender that doesn't fit you? Or is it the idea that everything would be OK if one could be physically assimilated into a het-norm dual-state pattern that you are concerned about? Or is it the idea that other people's perception is most important? Or?

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Can you describe a situation or state in which it isn't a problem, per se, to be perceived to be a gender that doesn't fit you?

Regardless of where the mental concept of one's own gender comes from, I think the point is that trans status wouldn't involve anywhere near as much suffering if society had a different attitude towards it.

Sure, there'd still be people who felt that they were born with the wrong bits, but they could take time to ponder it, play with it, and experiment with being male, female, or androgynous whenever they wanted. They could get surgery if they really needed the physical change, or they could live in flux like that all their lives if they were comfortable with it. Imagine if that stuff was considered to be a normal variation of human behaviour/neurology/etc. instead of something shameful or a freak of nature.

[beaq.livejournal.com]

That's fair. Not the individual's problem, then, but the world's.

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Almost.

If you're deaf, and you're walking down the sidewalk and a bike with a busted chain is speeding towards you from behind, you might get hit because there's no way you can hear the bell or the rider yelling at you. But if a potential employer assumes that you have lower intelligence because you're deaf and refuses to hire you (and many people do believe things like that), that's someone else making things needlessly harder for you because of their own ignorance.

In other words, some aspects of being 'different' are intrinsic disadvantages or sources of discomfort, while others are preventable and serve no useful purpose to anyone.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

Isn't it essentialism in one form or another

Yeah, I guess there's some truth to that. I'll need to think about that further.

Can you describe a situation or state in which it isn't a problem, per se, to be perceived to be a gender that doesn't fit you?

I guess I have a few thoughts, here. I hang out with a lot of people who talk (in ways I'm not entirely comfortable with) about trans experience being a gift, in the sense of "hey, I have all these life experiences that most people don't get, and that puts me in an ideal position to talk/teach others about X, Y and Z."

Another thought: some people are driven/obsessed/whatever to become champion athletes. They know they're not naturally champion athletes, but they know that it's something that they can accomplish. It just takes a lot of energy. Could people view transness similarly? (The metaphor is a bit hard to apply, given that nobody is born a champion athlete, but perhaps the point makes some sense).

Another: maybe it is a problem, but it's not only a problem. Maybe it's a problem and something rewarding at the same time. Maybe the "problem" is more akin to an initiation cycle -- something hard that we go through to have our awareness altered.

[kalmn.livejournal.com]

Another: maybe it is a problem, but it's not only a problem. Maybe it's a problem and something rewarding at the same time. Maybe the "problem" is more akin to an initiation cycle -- something hard that we go through to have our awareness altered.

hm.

some people say things like that about being disabled, as well, that there are all these things in their life that are new and good and mindexpanding and it makes it worth it to have a disability and they wouldn't trade it for anything.

oooh uh er. hm.

much ranting about how much my knees hurt and how cranky it's making me derailed here by a thought-- i think that in this case being trans might be similar to being deaf (Deaf, i mean, rather than deaf).

being deaf can be looked upon as a medical problem to be cured. it can also be looked at, and is, by many people who call themselves culturally deaf, as just a difference, and one that they are happy to have.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

To what extent do you think of being disabled as part of your identity?

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

Note: I saw your post while looking through supergee's friends list.

In Arthur C. Clarke's Imperial Earth, bisexuality is the norm; and both heterosexuals and homosexuals are considered perverts and are physically isolated from the normal population. I gather Clarke himself is homosexual.

I think being trans will be less of a problem in one way; the medical treatments will improve. (Though they won't be as simple as in H. L. Gold's short story "No Charge for Alterations" or even as in Varley's fiction.) But this won't solve everything.

For one thing, there seems to be a more general problem of people who feel they're in the wrong bodies. "Otherkin," to begin with -- people who consider themselves elves, dragons, etc. in human bodies.

I'm lefthanded, and I find it harder to imagine being righthanded than being female. In my case, there's a fair chance that lefthandedness is due to something wrong in my brain. If the medical technology existed to solve the problems (the things I consider problems) I have, and my body/brain became righthanded as a side-effect of treatment, I suspect I would have a hard time adjusting.

[thespian.livejournal.com]

I'd like to link to this. I think several of my friends would very much appreciate it.

I've always wanted to see a future in which changing your gender is a complete non-issue. Not in terms of the emotional weight, which will of course not change and people are fools to not understand that, but I mean that it won't take years of therapy and invasive surgery and blah blah. Where it's accepted that you'll change gender a couple times over your lifetime according to your own emotional needs at that time.

Transpeople won't disappear in either of the ways you've described - in point, I think that people who express the idea that either will happen are actually just expressing their own ignorance about the scope of things. Though a Logan's Run type story of someone whose mother refused to take the Regenderex might be an interesting way of addressing that. Considering that people who have the option to correct other issues are in fact refusing to do that already now, it would be timely.

I remember being irritated by The Gate to Women's Country because they referred to being gay as an easily fixed issue in the womb. It was necessary in that story because the story is really a parable and dependant on everyone being straight - the base needs that simplification. But it still bothered me for years until I realized why she'd needed to do that.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

I'd like to link to this.

Feel free.

[pir-anha.livejournal.com]

wild_irises described the "everybody's bisexual" position as a "heterosexual fantasy"

*heh*. i guess she hasn't heard this same idea expressed by bisexual people -- that's from whom i hear that most.

i view being transgendered neither as purely a problem nor as a gift, though it has aspects of both. but it goes beyond that. and no, i don't think this will go away as society progresses, because even if one can just take a few mg of regenderex, there's still the question as to whether one really wants to. people will still have to work out who they are, what's essential to their concept of 'self'. i can't even really conceive of people who won't go through that, and bodies, minds, as well as social expectations are all part of it.

[(Anonymous)]

>i view being transgendered neither as purely a problem nor as a gift

precisely. either, requires it to be "other". for me, it just is, and from behind my eyes, i'm a natural being.

[cigfrain.livejournal.com]

stupid thing had logged me out, and i wasn't aware of it when i commented.

[orangemike.livejournal.com]

I wasn't at the panel, but I really appreciate this posting as Giving this boring ol' hetboy Furiously To Think about these matters.

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

Well, I know I wouldn't want anybody "correcting" my sexuality with surgery. And it seems to me that a lot of us are going to continue to conduct some of our interactions in gender roles. Conversely, gender is very unimportant in some interactions. If I interacted with employees or customers as if they were girlfriends or daughters, I'd be looking for another job soon. I may not understand every sexual, political, religious, or cultural permutation. However, I show other people the same courtesy and respect that I expect from them. I have a few quirks and personal choices that are different from the majority, and I sure as heck don't want society imposing a lot of choices on me. From my perspective, one of the chief measures of liberty in society is the range of options it allows citizens to choose from and the number of subjects that aren't restricted.

In business there is a saying that if two people agree on everything, one of them is unnecessary. On an individual path to... wisdom, understanding, maturity, enlightenment, whatever we want to call it, the more we learn about the world and people around us, the better we become.

I don't know why some people want to use social power to restrict the choices of others. All I can tell you is that not everybody wants to do that.

Rambling

[lovelyangel.livejournal.com]

So I've described two poles. On the one hand, in the "biology quirk" view, trans people are a result of a congruence "problem" that can be corrected via surgery, and in the other extreme, trans people are the product of the rigidity of social expectations about gender roles. Since both of those problems are going to be fixed Real Soon Now, trans people just go away. No trans, no problem.

But now, that's the envelope that I want to push against. I want other options. I want out-of-the-box thinking about where gender comes from. Maybe it's metaphysical, or transdimensional, or something. I want a new narrative about gender that doesn't have to eradicate my existence in order to arrive at a happy ending.

You're saying you'd like this other option for the purposes of storytelling, right? ...not an additional axis or dimension for exploring the world we actually live in. In the "real world" the biology/society poles keep us flummoxed enough, I should think.

In the future, the supposition is that society and technology leads us towards one of two states: 1) we are much more accepting of diversity or 2) we've found more ways to eliminate diversity. In option 2, the transfolk, the deformed or uglyfolk, the ADHD and bipolar folk -- and any other edge cases -- are eliminated (pre-birth or very early in life, presumably). In option 1 it's OK to be trans or gender queer, to live with ADHD -- to look or behave in what we think today of as extreme ways. In option 1 the edge cases are no longer on the edge but are in the mainstream.

I know of people, some with ADHD, others with bipolar disorder, who do think of their conditions as gifts -- and who oppose being "cured" and want only to be accepted for who they are and how they behave. Our society certainly seems to be driven more towards elimination of this diversity rather than accepting it. Perhaps we look at those with ADHD in the same way that others look at us transfolk.

Edge cases are what make characters interesting in stories and what drive conflict in stories. As you've noted, in either scenario above, transfolk are no longer edge cases. That is, being trans (in option 2) is no more of an interesting or distinguishing characteristic of a person as is the kind of food she likes or the color of her skin. Would I feel OK, being rather invisible in that sort of world? I think so. When I read stories where transfolk are a non-issue or non-existent does that bother me? Not that I'm aware of, assuming the societal construct presented me is consistent. The Star Trek Federation of Planets is that sort of utopia, where gender and sexual orientation are non-issues. (The stories have to take us outside of the Federation to explore those issues.)

I suppose the trick in writing the good SF story is devising the dystopia where being gender queer or a sexual minority remains an edge case, outside of the norm.

Re: Rambling

[kenazf.livejournal.com]

I suppose the trick in writing the good SF story is devising the dystopia where being gender queer or a sexual minority remains an edge case, outside of the norm.

Alternately, you could write a story about a world where the terms "genderqueer" and "sexual minority" had little meaning. Imagine a world where choosing to alter one's gender presentation was no more shocking than changing one's haircut. In fact, suppose this kind of fluidity were the norm, and strongly gendered "macho men" and "girly girl" presentations were seen as distasteful. What would a femme woman or a butch man -- of any combination of body parts -- do in a culture like that?

Alternately (2): what about a world where those "fully-gendered" people were seen as rare and beautiful sources of power? They were priests and priestesses while the genderqueer or genderfluid folks were seen as the hoi polloi. (Except, of course, for certain sects which considered the fully gendered to be an abomination... ). In this world butches and femmes would play the role which third-gendered people play in many shamanic cultures.

This wouldn't necessarily be a dystopia, but it would certainly be a very different world than our own.

Re: Rambling

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

Alternately (2): what about a world where those "fully-gendered" people were seen as rare and beautiful sources of power?

I've usually stopped mentioning this, 'cause I'm not fond of the end result, but that was the starting point of my story in Strange Horizons.

[epi-lj.livejournal.com]

This is an interesting post. I think I'm in the group of people who are still struggling to undertstand the issue, although I'd like to think that I opine about it less and acknowledge my struggle more. I've left some comments in lovecraftienne's journal over time about all of this.

I've got some fiction that I want to try to write at some point that may touch on some of this, but in ways that I don't think would be any more satisfactory. I wonder if it's possible for someone who hasn't been through those experiences to really talk about them effectively.

[kenazf.livejournal.com]

My friend Elizabeth Barrette has strongly recommended Wiscon, specifically for the gender-related panels and workshops.

Taking a postmodern perspective, I might say that folks like us might choose to express our condition in a different way depending on the resources and options we have at hand.

For example, I've gathered that in Haiti the terms "Masisi" and "Madivine" (sp?) -- "gay man" and "lesbian" -- are used to describe deviance both in object choice and gender presentation. The "homo/hetero/bi" mapping doesn't really apply well either, since most gay and lesbian Haitians also have heterosexual partners and children. And of course separating people into "preop" or "postop" doesn't make a lot of sense in a culture where most of them will never have access to hormones or electrolysis, never mind SRS.

A story which discusses the ways in which we express (or do not express) gender dysphoria(*) need not have a happy ending, nor does it need to eradicate the existence of gender dysphoria. It merely needs to explore the resources at hand and figure out a way that said GD character(s) would use those resources.

(*) I'm not particularly thrilled about that term -- it problematizes and medicalizes the condition. However, it's the best one I can think of to describe it at present.

I'm also VERY skeptical about the claim that being transgender is merely the product of rigid gender roles. More precisely, I doubt that we will ever have a chance to test this claim. The vast majority of people are by and large satisfied with those gender roles. They may think that certain aspects and expectations which come with the roles are stupid, sure. But they don't feel anything which would lead them to change their names, bodies, manner of dress, etc. I definitely see gender roles changing and evolving.

But I don't see them disappearing. And so long as there are boxes labelled "man" and "woman" -- no matter how big, spacious and inclusive those boxes may be -- there will always be people who have problems with their assigned box.

[lcohen]

a lot of what you say here corresponds to conversations, thoughts, etc., that i've heard and had about being a lesbian or gay. not bisexual so much so far, but hey, early days. but i always knew, for example, that i wouldn't have taken a pill to make my attraction to women go away, if such a pill existed. i left therapy for years because i ran into a therapist who wanted to figure out why i was a lesbian and "fix" it.

meh, lots more to say but sleepy brain at the moment.

[elysdir.livejournal.com]

Belatedly: thanks much for posting this. I've had some fascinating conversations with trans people since that panel; I'm trying to listen carefully and take notes, and I'm hoping to put together a journal entry sometime soon. Too many incoherent thoughts about all this right now to be able to respond to your entry here, but I very much appreciate your having written and posted it. I had wondered what you thought of the panel -- I saw you in the audience.