Fragile Femininity

At some point I decided that I must be a feminine kind of man. A flaming fag, a queen, a femme FTM. I am not exactly sure what led to this self-assessment. Perhaps influenced a lot by others telling me that I am too feminine to be a trans man.

Last Monday my boss told me that he and the other guys in my department had thought that I was a ‘relatively butch lesbian’. I had never heard myself described as “butch” before that moment. It was a bit of a surprise really. I’ve never seen myself as butch. In fact, because my last girlfriends ‘type’ had been ‘butch dykes’, I had wondered what she saw in *me*.
Since last monday I have been called ‘butch’ a few times. I am starting to reassess my ‘femininity’. Particularly when I said to a friend tonight that I consider myself a rather femme guy, and she said ‘Femme!? No, no honey, I’m really not seeing it.’

It then occurred to me that perhaps, just perhaps, I am not a feminine guy. Perhaps my ‘femininity’ was just an ILLUSION created by my previous conformity to various gender norms that I have since thrown out the window.
I mean, there isn’t really anything that ‘femme’ about me, that isn’t directly related to the effects of estrogen on my body. Well, other than my pink mobile phone, and my satchel with the retro 80’s flower motif on the lining fabric, and most people are various levels of shocked when they see me reveal those items.

I’ve been feeling a little insecure over the last few days. I don’t actually like transgressing the norms I was raised to accept and abide by. I don’t feel comfortable perched outside the gender binary. That said, I don’t want to trade one kind of gender oppression for another. What is the point in stepping off the feminine pedastal, only to pick up and carry the heavy weight of masculinity?

Last Monday I started living ‘as a man’ in every aspect of my life. I am Mr Ryan to everyone. At work, as well as socially. I think that change has subtly changed my attitude, and as such I am being misgendered less than every before. I have noticed that strangers refer to me as ‘mate’ a lot. Its a guy thing that I had never noticed before. ‘Excuse me, mate’, ‘Sorry, mate’, ‘Yeah, they’re open, mate’. Three times just this evening.

I don’t feel a need to pretend that I am more masculine than I am. In the past I have felt extremely insecure about being a ‘real girl’, and behaved in hyper-feminine ways to overcompensate for what I saw as my shortcomings as a woman. Now days though, I feel kinda content to just be me, and I am discovering that the person I am, and the person I thought I would be are a little different. I am in fact, more masculine than I thought I was, now that I feel free to express that part of myself.
I have to say that I am a little surprised.

I am left sitting here tonight feeling slightly amazed and bemused by my extreme average-ness. I’ve always been a rather exceptional girl. Into ‘non-traditional’ pursuits, so to speak.
However, I am not special anymore. Not particularly non-conformist, or non-traditional, or subversive. I’m not shattering gender binaries, or being a gender warrior, or trail blazing in any way shape or form.
I’m just a regular guy.

I feel normal for the first time in my life, even though I am about as far from *normal* as one person can get.

Privacy of Information

I have recently been going through a Google Purge. I have been removing the connection between my blog and my person, but not vice versa. That is, if you are my friend IRL, you can read my blog, but if you read my blog, you probably wont be able to figure out who I am IRL. Thats the theory anyway. I’ve had a few slip ups, but now if you google my name, or my old name, my blog isn’t a result.

This is in keeping with a new desire to not have incriminating information about me easily found by people that don’t know more than my name (prospective employers for example). Its also because I don’t want people finding out who I am easily using only a google search.

One thing that I have never put on the internet is my phone number. Its there in my facebook account, but they have fairly decent security, and I wanted it there for my friends. Its actually more restricted access there, than if it was in the White Pages.

Now, its well known that I am a queer rights activist. Its not something I hide. I am involved in the CCU, and will probably get involved with Good Process and/or Gender Agenda soonish. All of those organisations have excellent reputations, and so I can be proud to count myself a member of them, if I choose to join.

During a routine google search of my name on Tuesday evening I noticed an odd listing… it was 3rd… right after my Facebook ‘This profile is restricted!’ result, and my employers directory listing for me.

Word! TRANS PRIDE MOMENT!

If ever a real man existed
He was trans

You know why we rock YOUR world?
Because we’ve seen the best and worst of both

We are fighters.
Champions
Survivors
Lovers
Listeners
Boulders

Not just because we were made this way
But because we chose to carry on

We don’t need your pity
We don’t need your accusations
Or your psychological analysis

We know who we are
And we’re probably a lot more stable than you will ever be

If you had the power to stand
When chains were dragging you down
The power to survive alone
When no one was around
If you had found compassion
In no one other than yourself

You have become a real man
Without the pity of someone else

just gimme some freakin T.

From The Hottest Transbois

37th Disability Blog Carnival

Over at CripChick’s blog: totally awesome stuff.

Go read it.

Petition and More Contact Details

Forget about my last two posts and just go read about stuff at Mercedes blog.

Pay special attention to the petition and the Yahoo group.

Who to contact about the APA

From FTM’s livejournal community:

A suggestion of who to contact:

My best suggestion would be to contact the Public Interest Directorate at APA (202-336-6050). They staff the Committee on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Concerns. Also you could contact Divsion 44 The Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Issues. The President is Ruth Fassinger, 301-405-9995, rfassing@umd.edu

and a fabulously concise argument about why this situation is so concerning to the trans community by Kelly Winters:

Here is my short list of concerns about the current GID and TF diagnostic categories:

· Social stigma of mental illness thrust upon gender nonconforming children and adults regardless of presence of distress or impairment.
· False positive diagnosis of people who meet no scientific definition of mental disorder.
· False positive diagnosis of children, who have stated no desire to be the other sex, strictly on the basis of gender role nonconformity.
· Absence of exit clause for diagnosis of those whose gender dysphoria has been successfully ameliorated by social transition, hormones or surgery.
· Contradiction of the medical necessity of hormonal and surgical treatments, which are well proven to relieve distress of gender dysphoria.
. Implied support of reparative therapies, intended to change one’s innate gender identity.
· Misleading title of “Gender Identity Disorder,” suggesting that cross-gender identity is itself disordered or deficient.
· Maligning terminology, which disrespects transitioned individuals with inappropriate pronouns and labels.
· Pathologization of gender expression that would be ordinary or even exemplary for non-transgender children or adults.
. Introduction of very damaging nomenclature of ‘autogynephilia’ into supporting text.
· Classification of “fetishism” and sexual paraphilia for cross-dressing that is not necessarily sexually motivated.

Drakyn also has a list of email addresses and other contact details up at Monsters Creed.

I’ll post here when I have actually written something coherent to the APA.

APA STATEMENT ON GID AND THE DSM

From QueersUnited

May 9, 2008

The American Psychiatric Association has received inquiries about the DSM-V process, particularly concerns raised about the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group.

The APA has a long-standing mission to provide guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders, based on the most current clinical and scientific knowledge. Through advocacy and education of the public and policymakers, the APA also affirms it commitment to reducing stigma and discrimination.

The DSM addresses criteria for the diagnosis of mental disorders. The DSM does not provide treatment recommendations or guidelines. The APA is aware of the need for greater scientific and clinical consensus on the best treatments for individuals with Gender Identity Disorder (GID). Toward that end, the APA Board of Trustees voted to create a special APA Task Force to review the scientific and clinical literature on the treatment of GID. It is expected that members of the Task Force will be appointed shortly.

There are 13 DSM-V work groups. Collectively, the work group members will review all existing diagnostic categories in the current DSM. Each work group will be able to make proposals to revise existing diagnostic criteria, to consider new diagnostic categories, and to suggest deleting existing diagnostic categories.

All DSM-V work group proposals will be based on a careful, balanced review and analysis of the best clinical and scientific data. Evidence accumulated from work group members and hundreds of additional advisors to the DSM-V effort will be considered before final recommendations are made.

The Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group, chaired by Kenneth J. Zucker, Ph.D., will have 13 members who will form three subcommittees:

* Gender Identity Disorders, chaired by Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis, Ph.D.
* Paraphilias, chaired by Ray Blanchard, Ph.D.
* Sexual Dysfunctions, chaired by R. Taylor Segraves, M.D., Ph.D.

Each subcommittee will pursue its own charge, provide ongoing peer review, and consult with outside experts. The DSM-V is expected to be published in 2012.”

(This was a response given to Jessica L. off of Susans.org Forums)

Sneaky, Geeky, Advertising

Check out this post about how WordPress makes money from these here free blogs.

I am so impressed. Thats a BRILLIANT concept.

Civil Partnerships Bill Passes at 3am

I am pretty heavily involved in the local battle for same-sex marrriage, with the past five months being dedicated to the battle for Civil Unions with Ceremonies. Last night a much watered down version of the Civil Partnerships Bill we’ve been fighting for was passed. A bill that doesn’t include ceremonies.

My housemate and I headed out to the legislative assembly at about 8.30pm and ran into a couple of local Queers. We spent the next 5 hours popping in and out of the assembly, chatting to MLA’s, drinking beer, and waiting. At about 1am the debate on the Civil Partnerships Bill started. I am, in spite of my recent involvement in Politics, very new at this, and so didn’t know any of the speakers other than Deb Fosky (Greens), Andrew Barr (Labor) and Simon Corbell (the Attorney General, Labor), and I only knew them because of their involvement in the protest movement. I spent most of the night not knowing the rules, and didn’t even bow the first couple of times we went in and out of the Assembly.

I was pleased to see that the members were eager to put their opinions of the Federal Governments push to have the bill watered down on the record. The bill doesn’t allow for legal ceremonies for same-sex marriage and requires that one member of the couple be resident in the ACT (ie you move across the state border to Queanbeyan, and your Civil Partnership isn’t valid anymore). Those are the two amendments we were most opposed to, however there were 15 homophobic amendments forced upon us by the Federal Government all together.

Some of my colleagues and friends from the CCU are extremely disappointed in the results from last night. However, I think that even if the bill is not the bill we hoped for, we should keep in mind the position that places the Tasmanian and Victorian lobby groups in to fight for inclusion of various rights we were granted, that they still do not have. We can fight for amendments, the battle is not over, neither here in the ACT or around the country in other states and territories.

I fought hard for this bill, and it is a step in the right direction. I was one of the queers in the gallery that stood and clapped when the bill was passed. I do not agree that the Bill is a ‘skull fucked corpse‘ of its former self, and find that phrasing deliberately inflammatory. Yes, the territory could, and SHOULD have done things better. Yes, its not the bill we hoped for. Yes, its been amended into a registration scheme by another name. However, it is still a step in the direction of legal equality for LGBT people in the ACT, and around the country.

Link Round Up: DSM-V

Read the discussion at Bilerico. Right now. The comments are most enlightening.

Galling Galla has a post about it too.

This is EmmaG’s commentary.

Alma Cork also has a post.

Check out Lynn Conways excellent transgender news site.

Download the APA’s press release.

This is a copy of the disclosure that each of the members of the ‘task force’ had to produce before selection. Thankyou to my boy for digging this up for me.

I know that the DSM-V wont be instituted until 2011… 3 years away. I am also in Australia, where the American Psychiatric Association is influential, but not the be all and end all of thinking on these matters.
I have been asked… why do I care? I’ll get to transition. I’ll be ok. I’ve been told I am over reacting.
I don’t think so. This has massive potential to adversely effect trans rights and deserves an international response.

Lets face it, transgendered people already get the raw end of the deal. We are beaten up, killed, raped, fired, refused treatment, evicted from home, disowned from families… I am not playing ‘Our Oppression is Worse than Your Oppression’, I am just saying that we get FUCKED OVER. We have a reason to fight even if this wasn’t happening. It is happening, and it is a threat to those few rights we have managed to eke out.
All the more reason to fight. The DSM-V should be an opportunity to make sure that things are about to get better for us.

Now I would like to echo Emma G’s comment:

The personal and emotional impact of this announcement are high for me. Which seems to require that the degree of careful rational thought be proportional to that impact. I’ve cross posted Mercedes post & links, and have received a few responses. This has lead me to ask further questions of myself.

1) What & How: What can I do to have any impact on this and how do I go about exercising any options? As satisfying as expressing anger, frustration, disagreement or annoyance may be personally, I fear that such expressions will not be heard by anyone who needs to hear them. In the worst case scenario, they might be dismissed as an attempt by the “inmate” (me) attempting to take charge of the “asylum” (the APA in this case). Therapists do not routinely allow their patients to direct the methods or guidelines under which they deliver therapy.
Academic structures are at least somewhat susceptible to peer pressure. I assume “professional” sympathy and advocacy would be beneficial. Peraps my own GP and therapist to start, but there are other gender specialist internationally who might not be commonly identified.

2) Who & Where: Where and who provides accurate and necessary information in an accesible method and where do we refer to if we need or acquire information ourselves? As has been pointed out, partial and presumed information opens the door to discrediting information itself. The emotional and personal importance cannot be allowed to taint the information.

3) Can we define a commonality of impact beyond our personal interests? I do not presume that my right to define my gender identity is in any way “secured”. If the medical basis for transition is removed, I do not expect any legal right to self identify to be maintained.
If GID is removed from the DMS are there other, unassailable legal protections in place? I would not want to rely on a presumption that such protections will continue to exist or that they would be entirely maintained as is.
Both Blanchard and Zucker base their “treatment” theories currently on implied “homosexuality” and that implication is very much additionally treated as a disorder which necessitates “Treatment”
Could their influence return homosexuality to an inclusion in the DMS?

I don’t see any of these questions as being alarmist inherently considering how poorly my rights have been served by the current DMS-IV. The addition of two blatantly anti trans appointees to the work group does nothing to lend creedence to an expection of improvement of conditions.

The hair splitting over labels of self definition becomes meaningless if you no longer have the right to self define.