Financing Insurance Workplace Legal issues Name choice Name change Driver’s license Birth certificate Passport Marriage Will Other documents
Hair removal Voice Facial feminization Hair loss Reproduction Hormones Orchiectomy Vaginoplasty Breast implants Injected silicone Breast forms Movement Tall clothing Skin care Makeup Handwriting
I am not a transsexual. I am transsexual. See the difference? Although it may seem subtle, there is a vast difference, with complex philosophical and social implications. Understanding this difference is essential to understanding ourselves and how we fit into society.
In the first instance, "transsexual" is used as a noun; in the second,
as an adjective. One significant problem with use of the noun form is that it
replaces gender completely. Instead of being referred to as men and women, or
even transsexual men and women, we are called simply transsexuals -- in effect,
invalidating our gender. The following exchange between two male characters
in a television program I watched recently illustrates this point:
"Who's that woman over there?"
"That's a transsexual."
Notice that his response was not "That's a transsexual woman," or
"She's transsexual." The implication is that a transsexual is not
a woman. Using "transsexual" as a noun divests people of their basic,
essential qualities -- man, woman, or even person. Thus, it dispossesses, and
often, dehumanizes. In many cases, that's the objective, the implicit goal.
The power of language to shape perceptions, opinions, and behavior has long
been recognized. Thought processes at a basic level are extremely susceptible
to manipulation by language. Advertising and political propaganda depend largely
on language's ability to influence, for questionable purposes. Likewise, perceptions
about those who have changed sex are forged by language. To our detriment, the
prevalent use of "transsexual" as a noun has not had a positive impact
on these perceptions.
Nouns are the primary components of speech, and they possess greater power
and more potential for abuse than any other element. Consider this example:
"a black man" versus "a black." The second construction
strips the individual of his status as a man, an insidious thing. However, when
the same word is used as an adjective modifier the problem disappears; "black"
then simply describes the noun "man," the most important component
of the sentence. Similarly, when "transsexual" is used as an adjective
the implicit meaning changes -- the emphasis is placed on person, man, or woman
first, transsexual second.
It's important to note that the adjective and noun forms of "transsexual"
have different connotations. The adjective's meaning and implications are, by
comparison, benign. The noun is easily co-opted as a slur; it lends itself all
too readily for use as an epithet. The phrase "That's a transsexual"
is easily infused with derogatory implication, and even when this is not the
intent an undesirable connotation remains. The adjective form, "That's
a transsexual person," has far less power to disparage than does "That's
a transsexual," even if that is the speaker's objective. Try saying both
phrases yourself, as contemptuously as possible, and compare the slur-quotient
Adding considerably to the problem is the word "transsexual" itself,
or more specifically, one of its components. Any noun that ends in "sexual"
is unavoidably imbued with a great many negative connotations. "Transsexual"
is tainted by this unfortunate characteristic, as are "homosexual"
and "bisexual." Somehow this trait ensnares and contaminates us even
more when the noun form is used. So that makes three strikes against it.
Popular abbreviations are also a cause for concern: "trannies," "transies,"
"T's" -- all these terms should make us cringe, for the same reasons
as the noun from which they are derived. While we're on the subject, we also
should not be enamored with "trans-men," "trans-women,"
and "trans-people." These labels are subtly denigrating; let's expunge
these rascals as well.
Intersexed people faced a similar problem with language when they were called
"hermaphrodites." After years of being saddled with this repellent,
sinister-sounding label, they finally decided they'd had enough. Letting it
be known that the use of "hermaphrodite" was unacceptable, they insisted
that "intersexed" should be used instead. (And another struggle may
lie ahead for them if the use of "intersexual" as a noun becomes prevelant.)
As a result, it has gradually come to be considered insensitive and politically
incorrect to use the old term. We should applaud them for recognizing the disservice
it caused them and then doing something about it. Furthermore, we need to take
a lesson from them; they have shown us it is possible to change the language.
It's crucial that we wake up and realize that language can do us tremendous
harm when misused. Sinister things can sometimes be very subtle, and cause great
damage before they are perceived as detrimental. For our own well-being we must
learn to be discriminating about the use of language as it applies to us. Whether
to use a word as a noun or an adjective may seem to be a subtle distinction,
and therein lies the danger. Make no mistake about it, the use of "transsexual"
as a noun injures us, as individuals and as a group. It is often employed as
a weapon by those who seek our destruction. Its use divests us of our identity
and personhood, dispossesses us, and vilifies us.
If we show the resolve demonstrated by intersexed people, we can look forward to the day when calling someone a transsexual is seen as politically incorrect. On that day we will have made a significant gain. In the meantime, we must make sure the language we ourselves use does not make us accessories to our own debasement. We are transsexual -- transsexual women, transsexual men, transsexual people. We are not transsexuals.
Would you like to make an anonymous contribution?
If you have any advice you'd like to share, please contact me , and I'll give it a permanent (and anonymous) home.