|
|
|
Financing Insurance Workplace Legal issues Name choice Name change Driver’s license Birth certificate Passport Marriage Will Other documents
|
The Bailey Flap Ruth sent me the following note on 23 April 2003.
I have just finished going through THE BOOK. I had to grit my teeeth, laugh,
cry, pound the table, shake my head (both ways) and generally ward off the temptation
to stop reading. To give him his due, Bailey has a tremendous amount of valid information in
his book. It's unfortunate that 99% of it does not relate to us as trans people,
it relates to homosexual people. What he is trying to say to the world at large
is that transsexualism is a subset of homosexuality. Like many researchers, he abhors too many PigeonHoles (PHs), the fewer the
simpler. So he agrees with Blanchard and arbitrarily puts us into two PHs...
homosexual and autogynephile. If we're not one we must be the other. And if
we disagree obviously we are lying about our feelings. The fundamental mistake
he makes at the outset is his failure to differentiate clearly between sexual
orientation and gender identity. Occasionally he waffles about orientation and
maleness/femaleness possibly being innate. But like many others before him he
discounts the basic feelings exhibited by children. (Notice they are all boys?
Never girls...) He falls into the trap of assuming that children can be manipulated
by therapy to prevent them from "becoming transsexual". (This is a
favourite ploy used by Zucker, who, according to Bailey, is the world's foremost
authority on gender identity disorders in children.) Notice he doesn't apply
the same reasoning to "becoming homosexual". I wonder who else he used as advisors besides the Clarke people? Blanchard,
Zucker, Petersen, Freund, he mentions them all. "Ace gender therapist"...
give me a break! (For the uninitiated he's referring to Maxine Petersen.) Blanchard
had a grandstand seat for Maxine's slow and laborious transition (as did I to
a lesser extent). Maxine is your classic autogynephile. Before transition she
would deny vehemently that she had any wish to "become a woman". Lately
she has voiced regrets, although I have to say that comes to me from other sources....
I digress. So from the outset Bailey tries to prove that sexual behaviour signatures given
out by young boys are precursors to sexual orientation. Gender identity is ignored.
An overtly feminine boy will most likely turn out to be homosexual.... And Horrors!
If left undisciplined or therapeutically uncorrected may even wish to become
a girl! One of the major problems here of course is the inability of children
(particularly boys) to adequately explain their feelings. By the age of 6 they
already are keenly aware of the dangers of expressing anything but "boy"
behaviour. I know. When I was that age I was already very good at saying the
"right" thing and avoiding anything that could be construed as "girl"
behaviour. I had been caught a couple of times "dressing up" and strongly
reprimanded for crying too much.... It is the adult male who causes most of
the trauma. He cannot stand anything but stereotypical behaviour in his boy
child. The slightest suspicion of his boy acting like a girl is a direct attack
on his manhood! It's a pity we don't have more women in this field of research bringing the
feminine perspective to bear to counter the masculine "head-in-the-sand"
approach to sex differences. The examples Bailey uses to "prove" his theories are all true of
course. Transpeople come in all shapes, sizes, orientations and identities.
We are a mosaic people. We cannot be placed in just two PHs. We resent being
pathologized into just two classifications as if we were lab rats being used
for experiments. He tries to explain away anomalies by inferring that we are
simply not telling the truth. I can understand the reluctance of CDs to verify
whether they are sexually aroused by CDing. They are not transsexual though.
They ARE another point within the gender mosaic however. When I first went to
the Clarke in 1977, contrary to what Blanchard stated, if you showed any tendency
towards being heterosexual (i.e. married), you couldn't possibly be transsexual.
Yes, I was labelled a transvestite, and told bluntly to learn to live with it,
with psychotherapeutic help of course. (OK, that was before Blanchard's time
there...) I am one of those "others" who do not fit the mold. I am asexual
and therefore a liar. Bailey doesn't believe anybody could live without sex.
Well... Hello!!! Yes I had sex as a married man through duty and a helluva lot
of anxiety, guilt and stress. It produced one son after much effort, none of
which I enjoyed. So, because of that I had to be heterosexual. The assumptions both Bailey and Blanchard make are based on gender identity
being fluid. The thought of a conflict between one's gender identity and anatomical
sex is not discussed, other than a passing reference to the feeling of "being
a woman in a man's body". We all know what Blanchard's famous comment about
that was, and I quote: "What's that? Like a cat locked in a closet?" Blanchard's reaction to the current criticism is all too predictable. I quote...
Well Mr. Blanchard, your views are not my views, and I don't fit into the convenient
pigeonholes you have so carefully crafted for us and now reinforced by Mr. Bailey.
We are human beings with feelings. We know who we are. Despite your best efforts,
we still pursue our dreams and goals to effect the changes necessary to be at
peace within ourselves. Sex is hardly ever the primary reason for wanting to
change our bodies. Our orientation before and after SRS is indeed fluid as we
experiment with our feelings towards others.... or it might just stay as it
was, is, and always will be. We are all different. We come from different molds.
We are each unique, to be treated uniquely. Is that too much to ask? Oh and
by the way, Mr. Bailey, young children who later identify as TS in their teens
come from all sorts of backgrounds, not just the poor, uneducated, disadvantaged
families you allude to. Come talk to us, not just those apparent TS people who inhabit gay bars in
Chicago. Did you know you might actually find some of us in church? We'll soon
put you "straight". Yes, some of my close friends are gay, really.
And they know who I am.... and who they are... OK, that's enough for now.... Boy oh boy! When I get going, look out....!!
One day, I might even do a chapter-by-chapter critique... but that's in the
future... I've got more important things on my mind right now. Climbs down off soap box, time for another cuppa tea.... Blessings all |
|
|
|
||
