Double Standard

I was reading the case in Australia where two transmen (men born female) won the right for legal recognition as male despite not complying with the law to have hysterectomies, see article. The Gender Reassignment Act requires transwomen (male to female) to have sex reassignment surgery and transmen to have a hysterectomy to ensure they don't have the reproductive organs of their birth sex.

The judge granted their legal recognition in violation of the law and the Attorney General there is fighting the court order. While that seems a fair standard, here in the United States, we have a double standard. Transwomen have the same requirements for legal recogntion, meaning getting your birth certificate changed, which is sex reassignment surgery, rarely covered by insurance and costs $15-20K.

The difference here is transmen only have to have hrt and "therapy" for one year to certify they're being and living as men. No surgery required even though almost all have a double mastectomy to get the male feeling of their chest without breasts. Only a very few have hysterectomies, and mostly to remove the possible of cancer later in life. And even fewer transmen go for sex reassignment surgery, which is problematic and expensive.

This means transwomen take 3-5 years to transision, although it can be done in a year or so if you pass, have money and very motivated with a good therapist and physician, while transmen usually transistion in 1-2 years, often about a year as male hrt is quick and very effective after a few months. Transmen usually fully assimilate into life as men before the one year period.

Transistions for transwomen often costs $30-50K with minimal surgeries and other expenses and can cost $50-100K with the suite of surgeries. Younger transwomen transistion for $20-25K because they easily pass and integrate easier into society. Ah, the advantages of youth and the reason the rate of young transwomen is growing. Do it young and have a life as a woman.

Transistion for transmen often only costs about half the common costs for transwomen since surgery isn't a necessity and sometimes mastectomies can be covered by insurance for health reasons. This means it's cheaper and quicker to transistion from female to male than the reverse.

So the problem? The standard. As we saw in the case of the Oregon transman who kept his female reproductive organs to have a baby when his wife couldn't, there's a disconnect between what's male and being a man than what's female and being a woman. The double standard for women apply more so to transwomen, a double standard on an already existing double standard.

But my point is about the surgeries. And while the transcommunity will argue it's not about the surgery because being a man or a woman is more mental than physical, it is about both. And it's unfair to make transwomen go down a different legal path than transmen. You can't give a woman a penis, although surgeons have made strides through grafts and/or artificial means, but you can give a man a vagina sans the reproductiive parts.

And so the standard sits for legal recognition, transmen can keep their female anatomy as men, but transwomen can't keep the male anatomy. I can understand the latter because no woman wants a penis and testicles. I can't understand the former, why a man wants to keep his ovaries and womb to get and be pregnant. While these will atrophy with hrt (Oregon man stopped hrt to become pregnant), it's the logic of it.

I agree with the Gender Reassignment Act in Australia. It clearly and fairly levels the standards between and for transpeople. It's fair and reasonable. And I hope he wins the day. I'm sorry for the two transmen, but they knew the standards and they decided not to comply. They should be held accountable and do what the rest of transpeople have to do. That's also a fair standard.