There is a limit

There is a limit to tolerating jokes about transpeople, or worse non-transpeople who people try to make into transpeople. Daniel Tosh on Comedy Central did just that when the network ran a 1:20 (min:sec) segment by him on the worldest tallest model. She is 6'8" among other measurements he cites, but more so, he tries to make her into a him.

There is a point where tasteless becomes offensive, and this segment passed it at great speed into the area that not just Mr. Tosh should apologize, which wouldn't be serious or accepted anyway, but Comedy Central should apologize to viewers but more importantly to the model and to transgender people. It's beyond comedy.

Apparently Mr. Tosh hasn't spent any time around tall women. Maybe he should visit a WNBA game and make similar comments about the women players. How long do you think he would last against them? How long would you think they'd take before they (verbally) cut his dick and balls off and stuff them down his throat?

And apparently Mr. Tosh thinks height equates to sex or gender. Obviously he hasn't spent much time observing the diversity of people. They come in all shapes and sizes. They come in all heights too. Maybe a group of tall(er) women should corral him and have a short conversation about his size as a man. Obviously Mr. Tosh isn't very tall. And mabye Mr. Tosh is hiding something too which isn't appropriate for his sex?

Mr. Tosh deserves whatever crap people can give him. Maybe someone should do a segment on him, the world's most tasteless gay man, who despite appearing to be of normal height, weight and physical size has his brain is in his dick, and is so small it took a microscope to find it. You could do a whole line of jokes about him similar to those he made about the model.

He only goes to show there is a limit to being totally tasteless, insensitive and offensive. Sometimes we see examples of the extremes well past the limit to remember where the limit is when being human, and leave it to Comedy Central to ignore the limits of decency to show the extreme. All the more reason I don't watch the channel.

Don't confuse the two

Under the transgender (trans)community umbrella exist quite a few divergent and diverse groups, some people living in more than one and some moving between during their life, but most just sit in one. This is where the public gets confused and mixes one or more together or uses characteristics of one for another. They're all really vastly different and almost exclusive of the other groups.

And this is where the community at large and many of the groups confuse the public, sometimes intentionally and sometimes inadvertently to define the larger umbrella than the different groups. This is where some groups and members of those groups get misunderstood and face discrimination and often hate or anger. They're not what the people think but only what the community has presented.

Harsh? Maybe, but I was reading a column by a pair of transvestites or crosse-dressers, they didn't say which but they're two gay men who love to play dressup and go out as caricatures of women. Women they think women should be and they love to pretend to be. But they're not transgender, which they claim they are.

I say this because transgender means possessing characteristics signifcantly more of the opposite sex or gender than their birth sex. This means men who are women in their mind, and usually want to be and live as women, some to the extent they transistion into becoming physically female as much as medically possilbe.

Some call these people transsexuals to distinguish between transgender people. But the truth is that either way, men who only like to present themselves as women because it's fun, a hobby or other reasons aren't transgender in any sense of the definition, but they like to claim it for the purposes of discrimination laws.

And this is where the transcommunity shoots itself in the political foot. By wanting laws for the rights and protections of everyone under the umbrella, they hurt the ones who really want to be women, not occasionally, but 24/7, complete with changes to their birth certificate and all documents. They want to be women and leave their male history behind, far behind.

This is a divisive issue in the transcommunity and people who espouse separation between groups and especially independence from groups and the community are most often treated as traitors and enemies of the community, but this is the prevailing view of many in and post transistion women. The don't see themselves as trans anything and have little interest in the transcommunity.

And this is where they look at other groups in the transcommunity as hurting them and their efforts for acceptance and integration into mainstream life. When people keep identifying them as or with other groups, they feel they have to start all over explaining themselves. It's the never-ending cycle of misunderstanding.

It's why the vast majority simply walk away from the transcommunity, and since they are legally women, where the others aren't, they can and usually decide it's not their world or issues. It's why the transcommunity has a hard time keeping post-transistion women, they walk away and never look back.

Why should they? They were betrayed by the other groups in the transcommunity who confuse the distinction, claim they're like them, and then demand the same rights and protections. And then the "trannies", like those in the column, wonder why they're not liked? Where are gay men playing dressup the same as in or post-transistion women?

And the same applies to cross-dressers, only less so for the small percentage who do transistion, who are men who just want to dress as women. They're no different than drag queens or transvestites, only the reasons are different. They live and work as men, identify as men, usually married with families, and don't want to transistion to be or live as women.

So what's transgender about them? There's no overwhelming self-identity as women to want to be women, only to wear the makeup and clothes. That's not different, just their clothes, which often are similar as they like to dressup for parties, events or weekends, but not just simply living.

Still harsh? Yes, but I know some in and post-transisition women who feel that way, only those who stay with the community, as some are public or media people, have to or choose to keep their personal views to themselves, but most just walk away and forget the transcommunity exists. I don't and won't blame them. I agree with them. It's their life and right, not to be confused or misrepresented.

These two gay men aren't the transcommunity and should not decide or speak everyone in the community, and definitely should not think they're transgender. Don't confuse real differences, don't confuse the truth and reality, and above all else, don't consider you're the same as (trans)women. Clothes don't make you one, being and living does.

Being Touchy

I'm a fan of the NPR show, "Wait, wait, don't tell me." with Peter Sagal, Carl Castle and the 3-panel guests. It's irrevelently funny, not just pushing the boundaries of satire, but often going beyond into bad reactions even from the audience long known for being understanding and tolerant of the show. But apparently they touched a raw nerve making fun of the term hermaphrodite, used by a Representative Duncan Hunter about the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy.

The truth is the show routinely does this in the obvious way. It's the nature of the show, so listeners must learn to leave their sentiments and sensitivities outside the theater when listening. And this was just one of those jokes. It wasn't meant to discriminate or hurt anyone. It was to make fun of Rep. Hunter's remark and not toward intersexed people.

And yes, I heard the show, as I try to do every week (and not on a podcast). And yes, I heard the remarks and cringed a little. But then I've cringed a little listening to many shows in the past. This is one of NPR's most popular programs, and maybe they give them a little more latitude than others, but it is the show's format and style too, and has won many listeners and supporters.

The issue with the show with the transcommunity and the intersex community is the use of the term hermaphrodite, used by Rep. Hunter and not the show. But, let's be clear here, the intersex community is not the one and sole judge of word usage. They're not the word czar with the word hermaphrodite or intersexed. And that's what seems to bothers both communities, the term offended both because they saw it as offensive.

And true to form, Ms. Autumn Sandeem, on Pam's Houseblend Website (trans issue blog of several contributors), took issue with the show over the term and remarks, apparently not understanding the show. She needs to step back and get a view of the larger picture. She's not the NPR's censor or guardian of taste or senstivity, just a listener, and apparently not one who undestands the show's premise.

She seems to have forgotten the content and context of the piece in the show. As Foghorn Leghorn would have said, "Relax, son, it's a joke." Maybe a bad one to you, but not to many who are just as sensitive to bad seemingly off-hand remarks, which these weren't if you know how the show is produced and presented. In short, she and others need to lighten up.

And yes, Ms. Sandeem, the show had mocked and satrized blacks, disabled and other people and groups, but always in a way it's obviously not hateful or mean. Tasteless maybe, but that's their style. The whole show is done with their tongues in their cheeks and sometimes sticking out.

The Double-edge sword

It was announced this week a woman in Massachusetts won her case with the IRS in the US Tax Court. She filed her income tax statement deducting $5,000 for her sex reassignment surgery and other related expenses associated with her treatment for "Gender Identity Disorder", the term used in the DSM-IVTR for treating patient who are diagnosed with the identity opposite their birth sex.

The medical procedures are well defined in the Standard of Care under WPATH's oversight formerly the HBIGDA and endorsed by both APA's (psychological and psychiatric associations) in the DSM. Ok, seem straight-forward, except the IRS has routinely denied anyone the deductions on the patients taxes, even though the majority of health insurance companies refuse to cover the costs (considered cosmetic or elective surgery, depsite the medical evidence to the contrary).

This time the person won. The surgery, almost always paid out of the person's pocket (except those who sell their stories for TV news documentaries where the TV station usually picks up most if not all of the cost, which runs $20-25K). A few employers now pay some to most of the expenses for permanent employees under their health coverage (after the health insurance coverage).

That's cool, huh? Well, sorta', as someone may say. While many transpeople advocate for removal of GID from the DSM, called the depatholization, and some called for a new name as a condition, both of these would provide the avenue to deny or reject coverage for the therapy, hormones and surgeries necessary for a sex change (often called sex transformation now in the insurance handbooks).

That's the double edge sword. This decision opens the door to mandate coverage by insurance companies to cover a disorder defined in the DSM. Almost every other disorder or disease is covered to some extent. GID isn't to any extent. But to push for coverage, the name and label would persist. The patient would be diagnosed with a recognized disorder and open to a treatment plan with a "cure" including SRS.

The problem is that few, if any, transpeople call or consider themselves "sick" in need of a cure. It's a simply birth defect (wrong physical sex) than a mental disorder. This is in part what Alice Kalafarski makes in her essay at Bilerco. Unfortunately I think she misses a point.

While I agree with her view on the matter of being trans or having GID, I think she misses the point about the tax dedcution. It's easy for those who can afford SRS or those young enough to go in debt ot pay it off later. But the vast majority do need the tax deduction as the cost is prohibitively expensive, causing great financial sacrifice to the woman.

And for that, having a disorder and be "cured" is only temporary to getting the tax deduction. You can forget the label in time, but you may not be able to recoup the lost money. It's a trade-off each transwoman should have the right to choose than facing no choice.

And I don't agree it's about rights of transpeople over the rights of the individual transperson. I'll take the individual's rights any day. It's easy for those who have the freedom, and usually have finished their transistion, to forget others and their rights and often their problems to transistion, where money is almost always the overriding issue.

We shouldn't forget to fight for the medical community and especially the insurance companies to do what is best for the patient, provide the treatment for transpeople so they can affordably transistion and get on with their life and work as they know themselves to be. That's the priority, the everything else is later.

Misperceptions

As much as the "transgender" community, called transcommunity here, strives for unity, and the much-sought but never realized commonality, it suffers from that very idea in the media and with the public, and feels totally frustrated with what's going on in and around it, bite their tongue and ego, not to create dissenstion and criticism at themselves, or simply become silent. Unfortunately, that's not solving the problem.

And the problem very simple, the very thing they promote, which is diversity. But unlike other diverse groups, who have some measure of commonality among the member or the goals of the group, the transcommunity doesn't have that because all the different subgroups don't have anything in common with other groups and don't have common goals.

It's due to the people in the subgroups, which is why they have the diversity and not the commonality. Don't believe me? I say this for several reasons.

Look at any pride parade. How many different types of groups of people do you see? Look at the LGBT community and support groups. How many different types of them are there and how many different types of people are in each of them? The reality is there is very little overlap between the types and groups, and it's usually only at public events where they can present unity. Except it's not there once the event is over.

Read the different media stories on "transgender people" or "transsexuals."

Look at all the subgroups. There are drag queens, often called female impersonators or illusionists, transvestities, cross-dressers, gender-queer, pre/in-transistion people and post-transistion, or legally recognized, people. Look at how the media often lumps them together or under common terms, so the reader can't tell if the person in the story is in what type and group.

Notice how the media overlaps the characteristics of one type into the other, even when describing individuals. Usually only in longer documentaries do you get to see the distinction and differences between the person in the story and the rest of the transcommunity.

Aake a look at the LGB community (without the T). They don't need, and often don't seek or want help from the transcommunity to advance their goals. They will more often than not forget if not exclude the transpeople in their work, discussion, publicity, events, etc, unless of course there are some drag queens for the media to call transpeople.

And they will drop the T when it suits their personal or political agenda. Look how long it took to get transpeople in the hate crimes laws. Look at the efforts to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). It wouldn't and won't pass with transpeople, but they promised to include it, except in the final version, it wasn't there. No thanks to Representative Barney Franks himself.

Take a look at cross-dressers' organization. They're independent of any other groups in the transcommunity and only get involved in "transgender" events or groups to put themselves under that umberella name, when in fact they aren't transgenders, but just men who like to play dressup (ok, a few transistion but 95+% don't).

Take a look at the trans-only groups. The run the gamut in their life, views and presentations, from the totally, and often long, stealth, to the totally non-passable. They disagree about every issue relevant to the members and community, and they're often the most unwavering people in their views, because in the end, it's about identity and being trans or not.

Take a look at post-transistion men and women. Where are they? Nowhere because they're legally recognized as men and women and don't need or want the transgender label or the help of the transcommunity. They have the Civil Rights Act to protect them as men and women.

In the end, it's really about six different ingredients when mixed together produce a worse result. It's not the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, but quite the opposite, the parts are better being parts and not being in the whole. And as much as the transcommunity strives for unity and commonality, it's time they woke up and realized it's not working for everyone.

Not true you say? Like many cities, counties and states have laws protecting LGBT people now.

True, but the LGB got that on their own effort and the transpeople got their recogniztion on their own effort. I won't argue the LGBT community has achieved a lot over their history, but it hasn't come with unity and commonality in mind but political expediency in mind. Many in the LGB community supprt transpeople and vice-versa, but rarely has it worked to achieve goals for both in one effort, but in separate efforts.

But I'm not at my point, the post-transistion men and mostly women who have long left the transcommunity and only stay in the LGBT community because they are LGB people now. They're not trans-anything, which is why they don't want the label, which is because they're not seen as men and women, at the fault of the transcommunity, as well as the media.

Really? Read any story about a post-transistion woman. How many times are they described as "transgender" and not transgendered (past tense), or worse they're described as a "transsexual." This is because it sells the story. But in doing that, often with the transcommunity's help and endorsement, it's keeps them under the umbrella, to the detriment of the individual.

Ask anyone about a post-transistion woman and they'll more often thiink of any of the other groups, but not just as men and women. The Amanda Simpson stories are good examples of a woman who transistioned 10 years ago but is still considered transgender. Why? It's not who or what she is now. So why does she recognize as transgender?

Do we call ex-addicts addicts in the present tense? Do we call ex-alcoholics alcoholics in the present tense? And other ex-something the same now as they were then? We don't. So why do we call them transgender when it's their past or history and not their present and future?

And many in the public confuse them with cross-dressers, transvestites, etal, because that's their perception of the whole group of people under the umbrella. They lump their view into a one-fits-all single description, when nothing could be farther from the truth. And worse, they confuse them with gays or lesbians, confusing sexual identity and orientation with gender identity.

Any wonder the vast majority of post-transistion women leave the transcommunity and don't look back.

Closet and Stealth

I was wandering around the Internet, like we all do, and stumbled on an essay by Autumn Sandeen entitled, "The Closet Kills and a response by Helen Boyd, the author of books about her spouse. And I have some arguements with Autumn (who posted a comment here on one of my posts about Amanda Simpson).

She points out, but not in her writing but in her existence and identity, that she is a transwoman, or a transgender women, which ever fits your definition. This is exactly what she demonstrates is wrong with the transcommunity, and it's why the vast majority of post-transitions (legally recognized) women leave the community, if they ever were involved. They don't subscribe to that perspective about being.

The are as stealth as possible today, which isn't entirely possible and not guarranteed in the future, and they simply live their life as women in the world of women and the larger world of family, life, work, etc. They have earned and deserved that stealthness to ensure their privacy, security and safety, much of which Autumn seems to argue against and which she is wrong. Which is why I wrote the essay just before this one about transactivists.

They espouse a view that they think fits, or should fit, everyone, and in many cases, they do it out of choice or necessity. Choice because they could be stealth and for some situation(s) or circumstance(s) they chose to be out. Necessity because they had no choice as their looks or presentation doesn't pass for what many people think of women. So they're obvious and open to the pitfalls of human nature.

This is in part what some in the transcommunity argue about presentation. Namely the face. It's the first thing people look at when seeing, greeting or meeting you and it's the first thing they use to determine your gender. All in a few seconds. And from their own set of clues learned from their experience. Nothing we can change, and nothing we can undo. It's human nature.

It's why some in the transcommunity are baffled why some go through their transistion to get SRS (vaginoplasty) and be legally recognized as female but then have difficulty integrating into the world as women because they're not seen as women. Not as men, but obviously different. And then some wonder why they're not readily accepted and why their life is as hard or harder than before or even duing their transistion.

Stealth and closet isn't their public life. And often these are the ones espousing and sometimes shouting what others should be, like them, not stealth or in the closet, but out and even proud to be different. And they wonder why the message isn't followed except by those similar to them. All the ones who could be stealth are stealth, minus the few public ones where work, life or circumstances outed them.

But even then, they espouse a different view, one of being women. And the world doesn't seem to worry because they appear and present themselves as women, forgetting they're mentally, emotionally and spiritually women, only their past is different. They get through life as women because they fall in the range of normal women we recognize.

And in return, those, like Autumn, who are out and I'm assuming proud, argue their view against stealth and closet. To all the (trans)women who don't want to listen because it's not their life and world, they say they're not true to the greater community of transwomen, except they don't see themselves as transwomen, just women. Something Autumn seems to intentionally be blind or ignorant with in her view.

And in the end, she only goes to confirm in those who are stealth, and many in the closet, why they are stealth and not like her. While Autumn stands on her soapbox to espouse her view to the world, they just walk quietly getting on with their life.