To Render Gender (Invisible)

[bcholmes]

So I snarked at Fiona Patton, yesterday.

There was a panel at Gaylaxicon yesterday called "Constructing a Third Gender". Four panelists, none of them self-identified as trans, all wondering: "if there was a third gender, what would it look like?" Which, um, given that human culture contains several examples of third gender and that it's a big part of my life and the lives of several people I know, kinda made me feel a bit invisible.

Y'know: I'm Irish. I'm other things, as well (a Canadian mutt), but Irish was the only cultural identity that was strongly embraced in the household of my childhood. And, in the recent cultural appropriation discussion on LJ, I found it painful to hear people bring up the "special case of Irish" in those discussions. I think that the analogy is flawed. And I agree, strongly, with the voices that say that "stop trying to lay claim to authority in the cultural appropriation debate, and listen ferchrisakes."

But, sitting in this panel, I had this strong feeling, that I can't fully explain, that my gender identity was being appropriated. Part of it might have been that after raising a point about lack of awareness of third gender cultures, Caro Soles said (I'm paraphrasing), "Research doesn't matter; what matters is the story. All I'm obligated to do is use what works for my story." To which, my immediate gut reaction was: "how dare you?"

I've been trying, for a while, to figure out what made me react so strongly to that panel. I'm sure part of it was the complete absence of trans people on a third gender panel at a queer sf convention. And a big part of it was their lack of awareness of any third-gender writings outside of sf.

And to be clear, I don't think that what I felt was "the same as" cultural appropriation. I don't think I can adequately articulate what I perceive to be the differences at this time, but I feel confident that those differences exist.

Comments

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Aah, gotta love self-styled experts who don't actually know anything about their field.

Did their panelist selection work the same way as it does at TT? Because if so, the lack of trans people on the panel would only mean that none of them were interested in being on it. I hope the moderator was giving audience members an opportunity to contribute, if the panel itself ended up being not very diverse.

I probably would have walked out of the room if an author scoffed so openly at doing research. :P Yes, the story is important, and the story will be more meaningful to people if it has some reflection of reality in it. Pure gosh-wow mindwankery, where we're supposed to worship the author's all-powerful imagination, is only fun for so long.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

I'm glad I didn't just choose not to read all of the posts that were made over the weekend...

Did their panelist selection work the same way as it does at TT? Because if so, the lack of trans people on the panel would only mean that none of them were interested in being on it.

That's exactly how it worked. We had a panelist signup form on the website, which went up months ago. About 12 people signed up, and we had to go through the membership database about two weeks ago and beg people to sign up to be panelists.

If you don't have the volunteers, it's hard to get anything done.

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Oh, and: quite frankly, if you hadn't said trans was a third gender, I wouldn't have thought of it, as an outsider. Someone needed to introduce that possibility to the panel if it was being overlooked, because it may just be that it's not obvious to anyone else. Just because people don't see something on their own doesn't mean they'll be closed-minded to the idea when it's put out there.

I would have interpreted 'third gender' as 'third physical sex', as in 'it takes three to tango'. I can't remember some of the more highbrow literature I've read on the subject, but it's not all that obscure... I found it in a frigging Star Trek novel once. There was a race with three sexes required for reproduction: a standard sperm-producing male, an ova-producing female who had no uterus or analog, and a carrier sex that would take the reproductive material from the other two for internal fertilization, incubation, and birth.

[nexstarman.livejournal.com]

Was it the Andorians?

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

The more I think about that, the more I think there was something in canon to back that up... but I can't remember what. We've only ever seen men and women Andorians as far as I can remember.

It wasn't Andorians in that book, it was some kangaroo-like species created by the author for that story. A pregnant carrier was in a coma in the Enterprise sickbay, being kept alive so that the babies wouldn't die. I can't remember what happened in the end, but that's a whole other kettle of philosophy and ethics.

[kat-chan.livejournal.com]

That race was even included in an Enterprise episode. It boggled my mind why the ova-producing gender needed mammaries, though, or what all three didn't. But then, I think way too much about these things. ;)

[kat-chan.livejournal.com]

See, the problem is that, as writers, they're probably focusing on "what would a third-gender look like" as a physically evident third, rather than one that is more psychological. We tend to be a very visual species, especially as regards sexuality. With the way that gender gets tied to sexuality, and is often used as a marker for helping to determine sexuality, it's only natural that people are thinking that there needs be a visual cue for "otherness" that would make someone a third-gender, rather than male or female.

Not to say that this is right, nor to defend them. I simply think I can see where people who have never really questioned the gender-binary dominant paradigm may not consider that there are an entire group of "third-gender" people right under their noses. Soles' reaction is pretty much evidence that they don't really think about those things outside of their realm of experiences, to boot.

And considering the invisibility of the trans community to the wider LGB community in other matters in the past, I'm not shocked that the panel was without a trans person. In fact, I think that I'm still more shocked when trans people are considered, at least by any group that is dominated by those over 35. It's getting better, but it's still lagging behind the times.

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

Geez... now I'm running around with this idea in my head. Fortunately I'm also cleaning my apartment, otherwise this weekend would have been a total waste at home and I should have gone to Gaylaxicon. :P Yeah, I don't think I'll be going to Atlanta in June if I can't make myself go outside into the heat today in Toronto.

Okay, if trans is a third gender, that means the number of possible genders or gender identities is actually more than the number of physical sexes required for reproduction. In addition to the standard-issue female and male, you've got trans, you've got intersexed, you've got people who consider themselves to be both genders or neither... the list probably goes on beyond what I can come up with while cleaning my kitchen table.

In a species with three sexes needed for reproduction, there are still going to be lots of other possible gender identities beyond those basic three.

So a third reproductive sex doesn't take the place of trans as third gender; trans (and all those other ones I thought of, and more) is probably still there. There must be people born with carrier bodies who think of themselves as female, for example. If N sexes are needed for reproduction, the total number of possible gender identities is going to be something like N + M.

And anyone who hasn't been exposed to the idea that there could be more genders than there are sexes isn't going to be thinking of it this way. In a s/f context, people are probably going to focus on the 'weird aliens' aspect of it, as in 'woo, threesomes are the rule instead of the exception!'

[kat-chan.livejournal.com]

I think that the problem that we're running into here lies in the idea that "gender" = "sex" and the work that people in the trans community have been trying to do to disabuse people of that notion. Me, I tend to be more forgiving, simply because I don't expect people to get that gender (psychological) and sex (physical/biological) are two different matters. Heck, it's still a matter of debate in many places that are far more educated on the matter than sci-fi writers. And so I think that's where the disconnect is coming into play.

But I could be WAY off-base here.

And I'm with you about the heat. It's 90+ here in Columbus, and I want to die from the heat in my air-conditioned workplace, let alone the flames I would burst into the moment I would step outside.

Snarking

[robgates.livejournal.com]

I know that there were some details left to what could be thought of as the last minute in programming for Gaylaxicon - one of those being arranging panelists - so I suspect the lack of what I would consider salient representation was pretty much a reflection of that rather than anything else.

Talk to me offline.....I really want to make sure we have a couple of insightful panels touching on this general area in 2008 (I'm doing programming) and I'd trust your guidance on what sorts of topics would work and thoughts on who might be good people to approach.

Re: Snarking

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

I know that there were some details left to what could be thought of as the last minute in programming for Gaylaxicon - one of those being arranging panelists

That's not quite fair - the panelist signup and panel suggestion forms went up on our website months and months ago, and I made reference to it in a few emails to the various Yahoogroups when I was promoting the con (as well as in the Progress Report). We only got about 12 people who signed up to be on panels before I emailed everyone in the membership database and practically begged them to sign up.

It may be another difference between the way things are done at American vs. Canadian cons. At least, the cons I've worked on. We tend to ask people to let us know if they want to be on panels (via the webform, or contacting our Programming department) rather than go out and actively seek out panelists from the community. Because despite my reputation, I don't know everybody in fandom. If nobody is going to sign up to be on panels, it's really hard to get the appropriate people.

And finally - bcholmes certainly had many means at her disposal for expressing an interest in participating. Heck, for a while we were trying to recruit her on to concom, either as a Programming assistant or a Publicity assistant, or in some other capacity. Even though she declined, she knew enough of us who were involved that she could have contacted us ages ago with suggestions or concerns.

(BC, I'm not criticizing you for not doing so... I'm just pointing out to Rob that the model we used wasn't conducive to dragging opinions out of you that you didn't actively offer. :) )

[avt-tor.livejournal.com]

I have heard about six or even twenty variations of gender (twenty was from the Bay area, of course).

Did you say anything to Caro?


I can't speak for the committee, but Gaylaxicon is still at an early stage in its development. A few years ago they skipped a couple years because they couldn't get anybody to run it. Like any rotating convention, it needs a core group to act as institutional memory. No convention is perfect. If this motivates you to get involved in future conventions, that would be a good thing.

[northbard.livejournal.com]

I have two reactions to this:

1)
Much like the confusion straights have around the defs within the queer community ("lesbians that sleep with men are lesbians? What?") I think a lot of cisgendered folk (myself included) have difficulty knowing how to talk about or define/comprehend being trans in terms of gender.

(This is not meant as challenging by the way. I have long appreciated your insights on this and other matters and would love to hear your take on this.)

For example, I have at least one quite well-spoken friend who firmly believes that calling someone trans denies the validity of his/her gender identity, and that to call herself a 'trans-woman' is incorrect, as she is, quite definitely, a woman.

It can be difficult from outside to know how to speak in such a way that honors both the reality of the gender of the person in front of me (when referring to a trans friend) and the very real process that helped to define who s/he is now.

By defining trans as a third gender, or positioning it as such, my friend would argue (has argued as far as I understand) that this creates a false gender thast is not hers. She is a woman, not a third gender 'equal but different'.

The queer community, IMO, is as confused about such things (though growingly well-intentioned in such confusion) as the straight community is about them thar queers.

That said, of course:

2)
Dialogue and theory aside, who the heck didn't think of putting someone from the trans community on a panel like. Really? That's like the alt-sexualities lifestyle panel I went to that had zero poly folk on it. Blind spots can really become evident in panelling choices, and that sucked.

*hugs*

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

By defining trans as a third gender, or positioning it as such, my friend would argue (has argued as far as I understand) that this creates a false gender thast is not hers. She is a woman, not a third gender 'equal but different'.

I think the key point is that while some trans people self-identify as "third gender", others don't. Not all transfolk are third gendered.

I don't think I've encountered any NotTrans people who identify as "third gender", but I suppose it could happen.

[northbard.livejournal.com]

gotcha.

[indefatigable42.livejournal.com]

I don't think I've encountered any NotTrans people who identify as "third gender", but I suppose it could happen.

On the one hand, that seems sort of obvious, since not-trans would mean they have never questioned their gender identity, i.e. they have girl parts and think of themselves as girls, or they have boy parts and think of themselves as boys.

On the other hand, I have met people who think of themselves as androgynous, but who are perfectly content in having been born with a body that is clearly male or clearly female (i.e. they aren't physically androgynous or intersexed). Are they trans because they think of themselves as something other than just 'male' or 'female', or are they not-trans because there is no quarrel between their physical sex and mental gender?

Am I just blithering here, or am I asking good questions? I'm interested in understanding as many perspectives on it as I can, instead of just hiding in my little non-trans hole in the ground.

[lcohen]

I don't think I've encountered any NotTrans people who identify as "third gender", but I suppose it could happen.

i actually have in that i have met people who identify as third in the sense of "both, but not both at the same time." and i would never want to try to explain what they mean by that on their behalf, either.

[boywhocantsayno.livejournal.com]

Dialogue and theory aside, who the heck didn't think of putting someone from the trans community on a panel like. Really? That's like the alt-sexualities lifestyle panel I went to that had zero poly folk on it. Blind spots can really become evident in panelling choices, and that sucked.

If any had signed up to be panelists, we would have gladly put them on panels. We can't put someone on who isn't interested in doing programming.