New APPS

Art, Politics, Philosophy, Science. Mostly Philosophy.

about

Guardian guidelines on how to talk about transgender people

February 8, 2014

We've recently had a NewAPPS post where it became clear in comments that many (presumably well-meaning) people are at loss when it comes to the appropriate terminology to use when talking about transgender people. (Interestingly, there is a recent post over at Feminist Philosophers on this very topic.) Conveniently, the Guardian just published an informative piece with very sensible guidelines on how to go about it (at least, they seem sensible to me, but I'd like to hear more from people more knowledgeable than me on this matter). For example, I often asked myself which pronoun to use when talking about a transperson's past, prior to her/his transition, and here is the answer:

Whether discussing a person's past, present or future, only use the correct pronouns for their gender. A person's gender generally does not change. Public presentation may change in transition and secondary sex characteristics may change with the aid of hormones and/or surgery, but one's sense of being either male or female is, in most cases, constant throughout life.

There is much more sensible advice in the article, so go check it out!

Posted in Catarina Dutilh Novaes, Gender trouble

32 responses to “Guardian guidelines on how to talk about transgender people”

Rachel

February 8, 2014

Those two don’t speak for all trans people.

LikeLike

Reply
Jon Cogburn

February 8, 2014

Who is saying stuff inconsistent with Fox and Hancox, and what are the other people saying that might be less misleading about being trans? Or is it the way the trans/cis dichotomy is presented?
Sorry if I’m being dense. It would be really helpful if you wrote more or gave a link. A lot of us are reading Whipping Girl at your suggestion (there’s even a reading group in Saint Louis now), so any more suggestions on this would be really helpful.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 8, 2014

What Jon said. Cryptic comments are not very helpful in this context.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 8, 2014

Also, are there specific aspects in the recommendations presented in the article that you object to?

LikeLike

Reply
Rachel

February 8, 2014

You were both once on my FB feed where you would, or could have, heard about the stories objecting to parts of this article. I only have so much energy to deal with the intense ignorance, often to the level of offensiveness, I’ve encountered with many philosophers.
Yes, there are specific aspects that I object to. No, I’m not going to tell you what they are.

LikeLike

Reply
LC

February 8, 2014

The respectful thing to do is ask how the individual refers to their past IF it’s relevant to a conversation. But really, this article cannot speak for every individual experience.
WORSE it just feels like it’s making trans individuals as needing specific labels – creating a division that shouldn’t be there. This feels like it’s breeding exclusion.

LikeLike

Reply
Berit Brogaard

February 8, 2014

Obviously there are some problems with the article. There are problems with most articles about sensitive issues. But everyone needs a place to start. This is one place among many others. I am sure many readers know how to be critical of what they read.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 8, 2014

Actually, you unfriended me on FB a while back, so I must have missed that part.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 8, 2014

What about if you can’t ask the individual? I thought this was a good default rule: use the pronoun the person currently chooses for herself, but this is obviously something that can be revised if necessary.

LikeLike

Reply
Jon Cogburn

February 8, 2014

Rachel,
I’m sorry, but you’re confusing me with somebody else. I have much too addictive a personality to be on facebook and haven’t had an account for years. I lurk on my wife’s page to keep up with family and church goings on, but she’s not facebook friends with you (I think John Protevi and Mark Silcox are the only professional philosophers on her feed).
This blog has a decent sized readership that could probably benefit from what you have to say, but I understand if you’re too frustrated and/or just psychically exhausted from going over this stuff on with people on facebook.
Jon

LikeLike

Reply
LC

February 8, 2014

Okay, but did you really need a rule for that? Have we not seen this SO many times that we still need more and more articles about it? I see the fundamental problem is that all these “guidelines” and “rules” articles are making statements that cannot accurately represent a population of diverse individuals – we rail against stereotypes these days, so why is this still acceptable in the trans* discussion.
And a lot of people are scared to take a stance and correct it – with good reason for various consequences. Look at our history with other marginalized groups.
To say it’s a “rule” when dealing with trans* individuals appears as a way of labeling and continued oppressing as people as “less than”.
What is facilitating necessity to continue to promote “how to deal with a trans* person” — I don’t see this guides for other groups – and if there were, there would be outrage. What we learned is that there are correct and incorrect language when dealing with people – but adverting it as a “rule” or “guideline” is demeaning and dehumanizing … like “a guide to introducing yourself to a stray dog”.
Slight aside … the continued “curiosity” and focus on an individual’s past, just because they are open about being trans* is focus on the wrong issues. I present myself to you as a woman, why do you (or why don’t you) question my past depending on if “cis” or “trans” has labeled me with a further (lousy) identifier?

No one ask when I started feeling like a woman (lucky me, and it shouldn’t matter but FYI I am cis)…
No one asks when I figured out I was bisexual — because we’ve come to understand that they are not relevant to my identity. So why do we persist with trans* “issues” like this.
No one includes in an interview “LC, who weighed over 250lbs until she was in her late 20s” – it’s just not relevant to my current identity – WORSE, it’s labeling me in such a way that says “HERE based on this, pass a judgement on the rest of what I have to say”…

LikeLike

Reply
LC

February 8, 2014

Possibly another way to look at it…and this is a personal opinion I want to share – not an attack on any one.
Calling it “a rule” has an implication that it’s something to be enforced and followed, not necessarily what is right.
((Trigger warning, I’m about to say some bad things as an example here…))
Do we say “as a rule I don’t use the N word when speaking to a black individual”, or, “as a rule I don’t call my ethnic friend by a derogatory slur as her nick name”, or “as a rule, I don’t call my brother a ‘flaming homo’ because it’s offensive” … these aren’t rules, they’re ethic and moral issues about social behaviour and acceptance of fellow human beings!
So, for me, every time it gets labeled as a “rule” or “guideline” it just translates into “crap, I have to be nice to these people and follow the rules”. Dehumanizing.

LikeLike

Reply
Jon Cogburn

February 8, 2014

This is a lot to think about. Thanks for sharing.
I have had in my life found myself saying things like that about the N word to people. I think this kind of thing is just unavoidable sometimes. Importantly, people of good will can just be disastrously mistaken about how hurtful their behavior is. Catarina linked to the article because the way some of us have been talking about trans people was a little bit boneheaded and she thought it would help.
But you’re absolutely right that all the rules in the world won’t get people to treat each other like human beings. . . and that thinking they could might cause more harm.

LikeLike

Reply
bzfgt

February 8, 2014

Actually, the word ‘rule’ doesn’t appear anywhere in the article. These are guidelines for writing about transgender people. Such guidelines are common in journalism in order to avoid writing offensive things.

LikeLike

Reply
LC

February 8, 2014

“Rule” has been used several times in the comments, here, there, and many other places, and it’s too common a language when discussing the topic. I LOVE Jon’s comment “all the rules in the world won’t get people to treat each other like human beings. . . and that thinking they could might cause more harm” – it’s about understanding, not rules, and that needs to be stressed. I offer that as “rant” about rules as food-for-thought if one is really interested in modifying how they approach the situation.
And, for the article itself, as a journalistic “guideline” (and my background is as someone who works in areas of marketing and deals with accessibility) it fails. This is a reflection essay.
I understand the purpose of it being linked here, given some recent issues and comment discussions that have come up, and efforts are appreciated – but I believe that all efforts should be expanded and corrected wherever possible (this is the first time I’ve been able to jump in). It’s not the responsibility of the marginalized group to constantly correct “us”, but we should open up dialog with an understanding that the “loudest”, “newest”, “most linked” piece of advice isn’t always the best resource.

LikeLike

Reply
currants

February 8, 2014

I found the two articles linked in this post helpful. http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/01/24/how-to-talk-about-transgender-people/

LikeLike

Reply
Alex Clark

February 9, 2014

This post is sensible on the “they don’t speak for all of us” point.
http://transblog.grieve-smith.com/2014/01/22/we-dont-hold-elections/
The guardian article was quite unclear about the meaning of trans*, too, which is often confusing.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 9, 2014

One of the most fascinating aspects of human languages is the combination of extreme variability with a dimension of normativity. Naturally, these two aspects are somewhat in tension with one another, and yet it seems that they are both equally essential to human languages. This means that any attempt at codifying uses like dictionaries, grammars, guidelines etc. is bound not to ‘speak for all of us’, speakers of the language. Does this mean we should give up completely on such codifications? There are a number of reasons why this doesn’t seem to be the way to go, in particular if it would entail denying the normative component in language use. (Btw, when using the term ‘rules’ above, I was not presupposing anything more than the meaning of ‘rules’ the usual debates in philosophy of language on rule-following.)
Obviously, when at is at stake is language use that pertains to a particular marginalized group of people, the whole discussion becomes more delicate, both in the dimension of variability and in the dimension of normativity. In the last 5 years or so I’ve been working on getting out of my little corner of privilege and on learning how to take other perspectives into account (with different degrees of success). Although I am a woman, it took me a while to realize how badly feminism is still needed, and how things like using the generic ‘he’ throughout have bad consequences. I’ve also learned for example that speaking of ‘blind refereeing’ is a form of ableism that should be avoided, especially because there is a perfectly suitable alternative, ‘anonymous refereeing’. All this seems so obvious to me now, but there was a time when it wasn’t, simply because the generic ‘he’ and ‘blind refereeing’, among many other such expressions, are so entrenched in our language use.
And I’ve only come to realize what is problematic about such entrenched language uses because some people have been patient enough to explain what the problem was (I’m especially thankful to the Feminist Philosophers for all their good work). These considerations then give rise to new ‘rules’, guidelines, like using ‘they’ as a better option than the generic ‘he’, or alternating ‘he’ and ‘she’ as generic pronouns. It is not the adoption of these rules that make me sensitive to the linguistic injustice contained in the older, entrenched counterparts, it’s the other way round. It’s because I want from the start to be more sensitive to different perspectives that I am prepared to revise certain aspects of my language usage until now, namely those that are problematic in ways that I was unaware of. (And I don’t think this makes me a particularly ‘noble’ person; this is really the bare minimum everyone should be doing.)
So I suppose any codification of terminology to talk, for example, of transgender people will necessarily fall short of capturing all the variations within the community (though of course some codifications will be better than others, presumably — see comment 16 above for two alternative codifications). However, for people like me, outsiders, guidelines (with the accompanying rationale) can be extremely useful in teaching us how to talk about transgender people in a more appropriate way. I’m more than happy to be told that the guidelines offered by the Guardian article are not the best ones, and more than happy to educate myself further on matters on which I am not an expert. But I want to insist on the importance of these codifications as such, as a way to help well-meaning outsiders to improve their ways of talking about groups of people they do not belong to, and thus become a little less clueless.

LikeLike

Reply
Ed Kazarian

February 9, 2014

I’m glad the materials for people to consider and think about are multiplying here. I want to speak for a moment to what, I suspect, frustrated Rachel and what I found less than great about some of the responses to her.
I’m doing this by analogy to a frustration my partner experiences all the time when, for instance, white folks who take themselves to be well meaning and want to get things right ask her to explain to them how to avoid saying things that are offensive to her. The problem with this is that it is burden-shifting. It shifts the burden of avoiding offensive speech away from the people who are speaking and onto the people who are being spoken to. It sets the latter people up to take the blame for any offense given because, somehow, ‘the rules’ must not have been clear, etc. My partner regularly refuses to engage in or perpetuate these discussions in much the same way that Rachel did here.
Rachel pointed out that the Guardian guidelines did not speak for (and likely, though she did not say this, would not be acceptable to) everyone. When people started asking (somewhat forcefully) that she elaborate, clarify, with the strong implication that if she wanted to say that, she should justify her position, etc. I’m not even a little bit surprised that she didn’t choose to continue the conversation.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 9, 2014

These are excellent points, Ed. The issue of burden-shifting was already brought up in the original post where these issues first arose, I think by Audrey, and this seems like something we should talk about a lot more. However, while on the individual level it makes perfect sense that a person belonging to a marginalized group should not be the one educating others, on the collective level I don’t quite see how those not belonging to the group in question can really understand what it’s like to be in their position, if not through testimonies and other means. I am not demanding of anyone that they should explain all this to me; I am hoping that they will have the patience to do so, as others have done before much to my advantage. But of course, Rachel is perfectly in her right not to pursue the conversation here.
Also, I think this is a slightly different situation in that I am taking as my starting point a codification proposed by members of the group in question, transgender people, and asking whether other transgender people agree with it. I think this is slightly different from demanding that trans people explain to me how not to be offensive from scratch. But maybe the difference is less significant than I think.

LikeLike

Reply
Elisa Freschi

February 11, 2014

Rachel, I am sure you have good reasons for not wanting to explain, but could you point to a link to the discussion for readers interested in the issue and not having participated to it already?

LikeLike

Reply
Noble Savage

February 11, 2014

I am cis. I recently explained to a friend why “transgender” is offensive ALL BY MYSELF. How, you might wonder, is that possible? By using my imagination, I came up with a counterexample! Huh, imagine that! It’s interesting to see how uncreative philosophers can become when feeling defensive. Now, I’m not saying that I can figure out everything about transindividuals this way, but I can sure try to supplement my understanding with some good old-fashioned philosophical thinking, can’t I? I mean, we do it in philosophy of mind, ethics, personal identity, philosophy of language, but now all of a sudden we’re incapable of it?

LikeLike

Reply
BLS Nelson

February 11, 2014

If a person is interested in honoring the principles of equity and dignity, then that requires them to engage in a minimum of reasonable deference to the aggrieved party, which may include simply asking them what’s what. (And, of course, the other party may decline to share — but that is a separate matter.)
In and of itself, the ability to “imagine” does not give a person the right to think they speak on behalf of others, or give them licence to believe they are in a position to articulate the other party’s concerns. That intervention risks being viewed as paternalistic, even if it the product of good intentions.

LikeLike

Reply
Noble Savage

February 11, 2014

I repeat: Now, I’m not saying that I can figure out everything about transindividuals this way, but I can sure try to supplement my understanding with some good old-fashioned philosophical thinking, can’t I?
I am trying to learn stuff without constantly burdening my friends with questions that maybe I could find out the answer to myself. THAT was my point. I mean transpeople do do stuff besides think about being trans.

LikeLike

Reply
BLS Nelson

February 11, 2014

One ought to use their sociological imagination, so to speak, along with all their powers of empathy and reasoning (and Google!) in order to give others due consideration. As a general point, it is a good one, and amounts to a respect for dignity.
Your post concerns me insofar as it is a specific intervention in this thread. Given that the initial poster was explicitly concerned with issues about ‘speaking for’, you seem to be deviating from the principle of dignity so long as you do anything other than to engage in reasoned deference. The imagination is not a substitute for listening.
You seem to think someone is blameworthy due to a lack of imagination in this context, chiding posters for being unable to use their imagination (@09:20). But in this context, much of the problem is that people are using their own reasoning and imagination to speak for others. This is why it seems to me that you have misapplied the principle of dignity, and you ought not to have done that.

LikeLike

Reply
Noble Savage

February 11, 2014

Seriously, there MUST be a balance. I mean if I had to explain what it was like to be a woman every single day, all the time, I think I just might jump off of a building. Why isn’t the same burden put on others to learn about transphobia as to learn about how to not be a sexist?

LikeLike

Reply
BLS Nelson

February 11, 2014

You’re speaking in generalities. I am critiquing your application of general principles to the present case.
An appreciation for dignity means giving due consideration, and expecting it in turn. That means having enough humility to see that you haven’t got access to all the answers, even after you have dispatched all your powers of empathy and prior knowledge. In those circumstances, it is appropriate to ask what’s what. And if no answer is forthcoming from your conversation partner, that does not necessarily mean you have not done your part by asking.
You seem to be worried that this implies that the burden has been shifted to the other side for not providing answers. But I do not think this is so, since candor about one’s own level of engagement in the conversation is also consistent with dignity (since that involves effectively giving oneself due consideration). So if the level of your commitment to the conversation is low, then that’s fine. Sometimes everyone exhausts their burdens and the conversation ends.

LikeLike

Reply
anonymous trans guy

February 11, 2014

I’m posting anonymously for obvious reasons, despite my general feeling about anonymous blog comments. Just my perspective on the request for education from someone of trans experience.
It is true that there is a lot of information online and a lot of it is contradictory. Look on Tumblr for trans* people, and you’ll find 15 year olds talking about themselves as “transgendered” or “a transgender”, but read the Guardian and you’ll see that you should NEVER use that term. Language shifts and also some people get to use terms for themselves that outsiders shouldn’t. Read the biographies of women who underwent medical treatments to transition in the 1980s and you may find a different narrative than women today. Listen to white trans men and you’ll get a very different narrative than trans women who are POC.* Etc. So picking one link from a cursory Google search will not yield you helpful information, but simply a view from within one specific experience. This should not be surprising, really.
I also think that it’s important to distinguish between questions like, “Peer, how would you like me to do X?” and “How should I, as a journalist/philosopher/scholar etc., do X?” A lot of times those get conflated, in my experience. They shouldn’t necessarily be asked of the same person. For instance, my own area of expertise is not gender theory, queer studies, and so on. Only some people, but not most, know about my history. As a non-cisgender, but cisgender-“passing” person, have been educated by others about topics related to being transgender. On the one hand, it’s a bit funny, since I’m more aware than they think. On the other hand, it demonstrates pretty clearly that having a certain experience does not make one an expert on the topic in general! I can answer questions of the first variety easily, but defer to someone with more expertise on the second.
If I wanted to have a bullet-point list of how to talk to “black people”, and I requested of a black friend that she provide me with a link, and also some starting resources on race theory, my guess is she would be, at best, irritated and a bit tired, and at worst, angry. Especially in an academic context, where we’re supposed to be able to do a little heavy lifting in terms of research and sifting through sources, it’s annoying. Why not ask a librarian to provide me with some bibliographies? Or do some research on Google Scholar and see who tends to get cited a lot?
Further, even the most well-meaning of personal questions without a bit of background research can be off-putting. For instance, when I began my medical transition, I had someone ask whether they should switch pronouns before or after I got “the surgery.” Likely everyone here recognizes the presupposition failure in this question, but this person (who I still consider a friend and colleague despite this rocky start) did not.
It seems a bit unfair, right, that you have to go out and do some learning before you can ask questions in a way that isn’t jarring, or step into a terminological mine field? Well, maybe, but frankly, I think that, especially for academics, the bar isn’t all that high. Show some epistemic humility, recognize that you might make a mistake, and then be willing to defer to someone who is an expert. Continue to obstinately assert your understanding over someone else’s, and that’s where you’ll find push-back. You might also inadvertently be the 100th person to ask someone a question that seems innocuous to you, but is the straw on the proverbial camel’s back, and they decide enough is enough. You could be very well meaning, but they have to decide how to take care of themselves.
I’ll close by saying that were I, in my capacity as someone who has experienced medical and social transition**, but who is not an expert on some of the more philosophical issues, to be asked for help on researching these topics, here’s what I would suggest. Look for (1) personal stories in the form of autobiographies, such as Janet Mock’s “Redefining Realness” (which is also full of theoretical reflection, as I understand–haven’t read it yet), and try to read a variety (so Jamison Green, Kate Bornstein, and so on.) Combine that with (2) peer-reviewed work in journals or books/essay collections (Laurie Shrage’s “You’ve Changed: Sex Reassignment and Personal Identity” comes to mind). Keep an eye out as well for (3) personal online narratives in places like Tumblr, Twitter, and online forums (but do not join a forum for trans* people and ask those members to educate you, in case it needs to be said). You could also look for people who are writing in this area and see if they’ve taught courses, and look for their syllabi (like for instance, C. Jacob Hale and Sandy Stone, who by the way also have this: http://sandystone.com/hale.rules.html if you are looking for “rules.”)
I think that using one’s imaginative empathetic faculties can be helpful, but can also frequently misfire, so I’d be highly cautious there unless coupled with careful listening to personal narrative. It can yield the sort of “man trapped in a woman’s body” narrative that’s so damaging as we’ve seen recently.
*I am a white man of trans experience and I am frequently embarrassed by the misogyny, gender essentialism, and ignorance of intersectionality presented by white trans men, so I’ll put it out there that I think “we” are not the best guide for these matters, although given our culture, it isn’t surprising that (white) trans men get treated as experts on the bodies and experiences of women of color who are trans.
**There are lots of problems with the narrative of “transition”, so this is just a shorthand here for the fact that I’ve had documents changed, medical treatment, and what have you.

LikeLike

Reply
anonymous trans guy

February 11, 2014

I’m posting anonymously for obvious reasons, despite my general feeling about anonymous blog comments. Just my perspective on the request for education from someone of trans experience.
It is true that there is a lot of information online and a lot of it is contradictory. Look on Tumblr for trans* people, and you’ll find 15 year olds talking about themselves as “transgendered” or “a transgender”, but read the Guardian and you’ll see that you should NEVER use that term. Language shifts and also some people get to use terms for themselves that outsiders shouldn’t. Read the biographies of women who underwent medical treatments to transition in the 1980s and you may find a different narrative than women today. Listen to white trans men and you’ll get a very different narrative than trans women who are POC.* Etc. So picking one link from a cursory Google search will not yield you helpful information, but simply a view from within one specific experience. This should not be surprising, really.
I also think that it’s important to distinguish between questions like, “Peer, how would you like me to do X?” and “How should I, as a journalist/philosopher/scholar etc., do X?” A lot of times those get conflated, in my experience. They shouldn’t necessarily be asked of the same person. For instance, my own area of expertise is not gender theory, queer studies, and so on. Only some people, but not most, know about my history. As a non-cisgender, but cisgender-“passing” person, have been educated by others about topics related to being transgender. On the one hand, it’s a bit funny, since I’m more aware than they think. On the other hand, it demonstrates pretty clearly that having a certain experience does not make one an expert on the topic in general! I can answer questions of the first variety easily, but defer to someone with more expertise on the second.
If I wanted to have a bullet-point list of how to talk to “black people”, and I requested of a black friend that she provide me with a link, and also some starting resources on race theory, my guess is she would be, at best, irritated and a bit tired, and at worst, angry. Especially in an academic context, where we’re supposed to be able to do a little heavy lifting in terms of research and sifting through sources, it’s annoying. Why not ask a librarian to provide me with some bibliographies? Or do some research on Google Scholar and see who tends to get cited a lot?
Further, even the most well-meaning of personal questions without a bit of background research can be off-putting. For instance, when I began my medical transition, I had someone ask whether they should switch pronouns before or after I got “the surgery.” Likely everyone here recognizes the presupposition failure in this question, but this person (who I still consider a friend and colleague despite this rocky start) did not.
It seems a bit unfair, right, that you have to go out and do some learning before you can ask questions in a way that isn’t jarring, or step into a terminological mine field? Well, maybe, but frankly, I think that, especially for academics, the bar isn’t all that high. Show some epistemic humility, recognize that you might make a mistake, and then be willing to defer to someone who is an expert. Continue to obstinately assert your understanding over someone else’s, and that’s where you’ll find push-back. You might also inadvertently be the 100th person to ask someone a question that seems innocuous to you, but is the straw on the proverbial camel’s back, and they decide enough is enough. You could be very well meaning, but they have to decide how to take care of themselves.
I’ll close by saying that were I, in my capacity as someone who has experienced medical and social transition**, but who is not an expert on some of the more philosophical issues, to be asked for help on researching these topics, here’s what I would suggest. Look for (1) personal stories in the form of autobiographies, such as Janet Mock’s “Redefining Realness” (which is also full of theoretical reflection, as I understand–haven’t read it yet), and try to read a variety (so Jamison Green, Kate Bornstein, and so on.) Combine that with (2) peer-reviewed work in journals or books/essay collections (Laurie Shrage’s “You’ve Changed: Sex Reassignment and Personal Identity” comes to mind). Keep an eye out as well for (3) personal online narratives in places like Tumblr, Twitter, and online forums (but do not join a forum for trans* people and ask those members to educate you, in case it needs to be said). You could also look for people who are writing in this area and see if they’ve taught courses, and look for their syllabi (like for instance, C. Jacob Hale and Sandy Stone, who by the way also have this: http://sandystone.com/hale.rules.html if you are looking for “rules.”)
I think that using one’s imaginative empathetic faculties can be helpful, but can also frequently misfire, so I’d be highly cautious there unless coupled with careful listening to personal narrative. It can yield the sort of “man trapped in a woman’s body” narrative that’s so damaging as we’ve seen recently.
*I am a white man of trans experience and I am frequently embarrassed by the misogyny, gender essentialism, and ignorance of intersectionality presented by white trans men, so I’ll put it out there that I think “we” are not the best guide for these matters, although given our culture, it isn’t surprising that (white) trans men get treated as experts on the bodies and experiences of women of color who are trans.
**There are lots of problems with the narrative of “transition”, so this is just a shorthand here for the fact that I’ve had documents changed, medical treatment, and what have you.

LikeLike

Reply
Rachel

February 11, 2014

“I am a white man of trans experience and I am frequently embarrassed by the misogyny, gender essentialism, and ignorance of intersectionality presented by white trans men, so I’ll put it out there that I think “we” are not the best guide for these matters, although given our culture, it isn’t surprising that (white) trans men get treated as experts on the bodies and experiences of women of color who are trans.”
I’ll be honest: I saw your name and thought, oh great, *here we go again with the white trans guy saying crappy things…but…dude. Wow. hug Thank you.

LikeLike

Reply
anonymous trans guy

February 11, 2014

Rachel, that means a lot! I am glad to hear it.

LikeLike

Reply
Catarina Dutilh Novaes

February 12, 2014

Your comment is now published twice (it was caught in spam), and that is just as well with me; it’s so rich and important that people may well read it twice. So thanks a lot for this contribution.

LikeLike

Reply