WisCon: Not Letting Go of a Topic

[bcholmes]

The other trans woman on "Transsexualism as Trope" panel posted her assessment of the panel on her journal. Which, of course, fires a lot of thoughts in my brain that I want to respond to. I want to be clear that I'm not say, "no, no, no, Charlie has it all wrong!" But I do think that the points of disagreement are interesting sites of exploration.

I think, at the high level, I'm moved to explore, in greater depth, these three points:

1. Why Can't They Call Themselves Trans?
2. What do I mean when I say I'm interested in seeing "Transsexuality as Process"?
3. When does a metaphor end?

This post will probably only really touch on the first bullet item.

Part the First: Why Can't They Call Themselves Trans?

I think I've only recently become clear about something: I think I was arguing two things in the panel, and probably wasn't arguing them as distinctly as I could. Let me see if I can tease them apart.

Here's a question I find myself thinking at this exact moment of time: are Brainiac 5 and Shadow Lass good, non-white characters? When people of colour look at historical examples of representations of non-white characters, do they say, "Hey, back in 1961, DC Comics was breaking good ground by showing a super-genius person of colour?" If not, why not?

Okay, that's not a terribly deep question. No biscuit. But I pose it to frame another question. The panel description for "Transsexuality as Trope" reads:

Much science fiction and fantasy of recent years deals with changing sex. But it treats it as a trope rather than a process: Larque on the Wing, I Will Fear No Evil, "Changes," the work of John Varley. While there is no denying the usefulness of transsexuality as a trope in discussing the social construction of gender, what are we missing by eliding transsexuality's nature as a process?

Is it clear to you precisely when and why this conversation traverses from talking about science fictional forms of changes of sex and when it talks about transsexuality? Did it seem to you that it was using those concepts interchangeably? Are they interchangeable?

One of the introductory points that I made on the panel was this: that I've often had the experience of sitting in on panels about "GLBT Characters in SF". And at some point in such panels, usually some (non-trans) panelist says, "and of course there are lots of representations of trans characters in sf: take Left Hand of Darkness, and Steel Beach, and The Marvelous Land of Oz" And I wonder: are you sure that those characters are trans characters? Have they ever uttered any of the trans words? Or are they trans characters in the same way that Brainiac 5 and Shadow Lass are people of colour?

I'm not trying to invoke any sort of essentialist argument here, but I do think there's something flawed when the characters who represent the trans constituency in these list-making exercises don't actually self-identify as trans. And, increasingly, it has really started to bug me that GLB people are checking off their lists and saying, "it's okay; trans people are well-represented. No work required."

That's a very specific message. I am not saying, "all trans stories must look like the Transsexual Road Map". But if you're gonna tell me that there are a host of trans depictions in sf, can the stock answers at least include one book where the character in question self-identifies as trans? And, really, is there no room in all of those books for a trans protagonist whose life looks similar to someone I might have met? Do they all have to be the victims of evil, personality-switching aliens (as in The Identity Matrix) or involved in a strange alien gender experiment (as in Commitment Hour)?

And, no disrespect to those books. I liked them. Well... that is... I liked Commitment Hour.

So that's one of the two points I was arguing.

Comments

[serenejournal.livejournal.com]

My gut reaction is that there aren't *enough* trans characters (in literature of any time), and until there are more, there won't be more diverse representations of them.

In answer to your question, no, it wasn't clear to me at first that the third sentence in the panel description wasn't equating "transsexuality as a trope" with "changing sex[...] as a trope". Now that you've elaborated, it seems obvious to me that you were shifting gears, but I didn't catch it when I was reading the description here or elsewhere.

[jiawen]

I thought, to be honest, that you and Charlie were saying the same thing from different ends of the argument. You wanted to see at least some representation of real-world trans experiences in SF&F; she didn't want to see nothing but real-world trans experiences in SF&F. I assume that you vary in the amount you want to see -- she wants to see less, you want to see more -- but you seem to agree that there should at least be some.

Is that an oversimplification?

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

My sense was that she didn't think that sf was a good genre for showing trans experience, and that she thinks that non-genre novels are a better place for those representations. That kinda left me with the feeling that she wanted to see none, really.

But I think you're doing a good thing looking at it from the point of view of "where do these opinions align".

[redbird]

I don't know whether a character has to self-identify as trans to count. But the Gethenians aren't transgendered: they're something else. (Trans, to me, implies that a person is moving from one more-or-less stable point to another, not living in a world where everyone has the same range of gender identity and varies within it on a monthly basis, spending most of their time basically neuter.)

[kightp.livejournal.com]

Just popping in to say that reading your posts on this topic, and through them the links to charliegrrrl's posts, and the side commentary by epi_lj ... all make me more determined than ever that, OK, I really do need to get to WisCon one of these years.

But then, intelligent, respectful discourse on fascinating subjects among thoughtful people with strong but opposing viewpoints is one of my fetishes ...

[charliegrrrl.livejournal.com]

I think jiawen is sort of right... you and I disagree mostly on how much reflection of the current real-world trans experience we're interested in seeing in SF.

I did say that I felt that if what you're looking for is a "realistic" depiction of what it's like to be a trans person in early 21st century America, then mainstream literature is better suited to the task. Realism is what mainstrem literature (supposedly) does, after all.

[charliegrrrl.livejournal.com]

So what you're saying is you don't want characters who change their gender/sex, you want characters who identify as trans? And who speak the language of trans identity as currently constructed? That's an interesting point, and not one I heard you making on the panel.

OTOH, if we're talking about novels set in the far future, or on distant worlds, you're not going to have exactly the same kind of trans identity you get now. Just look at how much our language for discussing these issues has changed since Christine Jorgensen and Harry Benjamin. A twentysomething transperson today will probably describe his/her identity and feelings very differently than a fortysomething TG would, I think. So again, you're talking about something that's at least partly a cultural artefact of this particular time and place. The broader issue, of not feeling at home in the gender you were assigned at birth, will remain a common factor, however.

[charliegrrrl.livejournal.com]

Is this the Kight from Kithology? If so, you'd have a blast at Wiscon, and it would be great to have you there.

[charliegrrrl.livejournal.com]

So to you, transgender people can't exist in a world where everybody is changing their gender? Interesting.

[kightp.livejournal.com]

'Fraid not. Although very likely related, since anyone who spells the name that way usually turns out to be a second or third cousin (including the late, great Morris Kight...)

But enough of my friends are WisCon regulars that I suspect I'd have a blast anyway. (-:

[kightp.livejournal.com]

Or maybe not related; Kight is my surname, whereas Google reveals it to be the first name of the Kithology founder.

[jiawen]

There are other ways of doing it, though. Mission Child is pretty much about trans experience. McHugh has to make the story jump through some hoops to get the experience to be at least a little similar to modern American experiences -- the main world of the story is apparently a "lost colony" of the Earth, just rebuilding itself, so the technology is analogous to the late 19th century US. And the main character's motivations are, as madcapricorn and I discussed later, very murky, and the transition isn't totally realistic. But Mission Child at least proves the possibility of stories that are perfectly good SF yet include highly realistic depictions of what it's like to be TG in the modern world.

I guess what I'm saying is, it seems a little like your argument presumes that SF is always about societies far removed from ours. But there already a lot of SF stories about societies just around the corner, or equivalent to ours in terms of tech, and there's a potential for many, many more. Your list of interesting possible stories -- someone who buys black market hormones with magical properties*, for example -- points to some of these other possibilities.


* Come to think of it, this story should be about an FTM person, so it can be called "Jack and the Magic Penis-stalk". That could be a very interesting story -- an FTM guy who finds magic hormones that grant him a penis with full functionality and sensation. Which is, right now, unfortunately, still fantasy.

[jiawen]

By the way, I hope I'm not shoehorning you two into positions you don't hold. It honestly seems to me like there's a kernel of agreement. I'm just not sure how big it is.

[charliegrrrl.livejournal.com]

I read the panel topic as specifically relating to societies far removed from ours, yes. Those tend to be the societies which authors depict as having the magic easy sex changes 'n' stuff.

And yeah, I deliberately mentioned the "black market hormones" idea as one which could be set in the here and now. In which case, the gender-switching process *deserves* to be the focus of the story.

Speaking of which, that reminds me of another point. The issue of representation keeps getting tangled up with other concerns here. And in fact, if I was writing an SF story set in the here and now with a protagonist who *just happened to be trans*, I might very well not spend much time talking about that person's transition process. In other words, you might get representation, but you still might not get the attention to the details of sex-changes that the panel was bemoaning the lack of. Just thought I'd throw that out there.

[redbird]

It's more that I think they're two (or more) separate things.

In the fictional case of the Gethenians, almost nobody has a fixed gender*, and people don't generally control what gender they'll be in a given month. "Almost" because a small percentage of the population are permanently either male or female, and another small percentage occasionally use drugs to choose one or the other. But those feel like a different change, or choice, than moving from one more-or-less-permanent gender to another. (Something like Varley's easy sex changing seems to have a lot more to do with what I think of as being transgender.)

But I do not claim authority, either from personal experience or extensive study, on transgender issues.

*Elderly Gethenians are permanently in the somer (more-or-less-neuter) state that adults spend about 5/6 of their time in, and children don't have gender for the first dozen or so years of their lives, but that again feels like a different kind of transition.

[jiawen]

Yep, not every aspect of a person is important in every situation.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

I really hope you do attend. I think you'd really like it, and you'd bring great things to the con as well.

[kightp.livejournal.com]

Besides the smoked salmon, you mean?

(-:

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

Mmmm.... smoked salmon....

[herbmcsidhe.livejournal.com]

From the comments I've read here and elsewhere, it seems to me that this panel was inadequately thought out - the purpose seems unclear, the terminology is loose (trophe having several possible applicable meanings, for instance).

I have to agree in part with charliegrrl's comment above regarding how the language in use has changed.

As a 50-something non-op TS (health issues prohibit it, much to my great sadness), I'm occassionally astounded by the 20-and-younger folks and the ease with which they seemingly address many of the issues that I struggled with (and still do) for most of my life. I also have great admiration for them and their courage; it is truly a sign of an evolving society in many ways, although there is still a long way to reach Rivendell - or Gethen, or Secundus.

I'm still mulling thoughts about the brain pan, and may eventually be able to place some coherant ones on the subject.

[bcholmes.livejournal.com]

I understand that point; I guess that I'd still rather see a character take a position of, "I feel this thing about myself (and have for a long time), and here's what I've chosen to do about it" rather than have standard cisgendered character suddenly thrust into some gender-based situation.