One to One

With Cindy Martin
Transgender Forum Publisher

© 1996 Transgender Forum

Got a news tip? Seen a story with a TG angle to it?
Don't assume we know about it already.
Email Cindy and she'll spread the news!

September 30, 1996

B
y now you may have heard that San Francisco's Human Relations Council (HRC) has proposed that the city cover the cost of Sex Reassignment Surgery for city employees who require the operation. The city is self-insured and transgender employees are recognized as a distinct part of the workforce under a charter amendment that protects us from job discrimination.

The proposal hasn't reached the City Council yet, but once it does it is certain to get plenty of attention. Even here in the liberal Bay Area, the idea of providing such insurance coverage to public employees is going to be fairly well-publicized and controversial.

Will the city do it? I cannot tell yet which way the local wind is blowing, though if Mayor Willie Brown gets behind it you can bet it will go through. Here is what I think is likely to happen:

Prediction #1: The local print media will be generally respectful, but the rightwing talk shows (yep, we got 'em too) will go nuts. You can also expect someone in the national media to use this story to poke fun at the city, and by extension, at us.

The first example of this was an Associated Press story that went out mid-week. It was nasty and smirky, another San Francisco is the "Land of Loonies" piece that was similar, though shorter, to the ugly hit piece the Wall Street Journal did two years ago when the city's transgender rights law was originally before the county supervisors (SF is a city and a county...sometimes one, sometimes the other...start to make sense now?)

Anyway, the story was toned down after the publisher of a Web-based transgender magazine called the writer and wondered if she would have written a "freaky San Francisco" story if gays or lesbians where the central characters. She agreed she wouldn't have done that, but said her New York City bosses wanted a mocking tone.

The publisher was aghast (think Margaret Dumont and Groucho Marx, that kind of aghast). New Yorkers saying that that San Francisco is weird? That's up there with Ted "I keep extensive notes about my mail bombings" Kaczynski writing that transexuals are a symbol of social decadence. Prediction #2. Those favoring the new insurance coverage will argue that SRS is a necessary, medical matter. Those opposed will say it is an elective procedure, mere cosmetic surgery and the city shouldn't be responsible for that.

Prediction #3. Someone is going to use this to try and stop transgender civil rights elsewhere.

Depend on it.

S
everal weeks ago we published a brief story about Dr. Ray Blanchard's study of men who admire and want to date transgenders. Most of these men claim to be heterosexual. We are doing much more on this whole issue and you'll soon be seeing a fine package of stories by TGF reporter Leslee Anthony.

I sure don't want to scoop Leslee, but isn't it about time that this community accept male admirers as legitimate members of our part of the world?

I've talked to a number of guys and have found that the oft-heard stereotypes about them simply are not true. Do some need to grow up? Hell, yes, but then so do quite a few of us. Do some make promises they don't mean to keep? Ask some our vendors about experiences they have with paranoid transgenders who make appointments and promises they don't keep. Are some of them predatory sleazeballs? Yes, a very few are, but you'll find that in any group of men. Being a slimebucket is not a universal character trait nor is it at all unique to men who admire TGs.

I've also found that nearly every guy every I have ever talked to or e-mailed about this subject has one basic complaint about us: we send mixed signals.

As my smart-aleck friend Elizabeth says, "A guy on your arm is the ultimate accessory". That's a joke, but some of us are teasers who get off on sending out these "I'm available" signals. Then, when a man picks it up, we get all scared and huffy that a guy has approaches us. How dare he think I'm gay and come on to me? Well, switch roles for a minute (you're good at that aren't you?). Imagine how the fellow feels when all he has done is to react in a natural way.

Yes, I know what you may be thinking. I don't send out signals and men approach me anyway. Okay, this happens, but I've found that with maybe one or two exceptions, the gentleman will withdraw politely after you politely let him know you're already taken and not interested. When that hasn't worked, I've used stronger language, but this is extremely rare. Of course if you like to hang around in hooker joints, it may be a little harder to convince the guy that you're only there to soak up the ambiance and color...

The men are not going away, nor should they. We need to recognize them as part of our community. We also need to make it clear that the same rules that govern relationships outside our community are in play inside it. No one should act in a disrespectful manner. We TGs aren't sex objects and they aren't slobbering sex fiends (except for those interesting moments that have their own context and I better move on to the next topic 'cuz I'm getting into the soup...)

A
reader recently sent in a note from a 23-year-old transgender who was wondering why support groups and the online TG community seem to be dominated by us oldies over 35. This isn't a new question, except for the online part, but let me see if I can answer.

Most people in their 20s and early 30s are busy getting their lives and careers figured out. This is not a time when people tend to be joiners. People traditionally become "joiners" in mid-life, after they've sorted out the big questions of marriage, family and job. For our community, young adulthood also tends to be a time when many people go through a lot of soul searching. They aren't sure what is going on inside them and often are afraid of exposing their true selves to others, including to those who may be the most sympathetic.

Also, to be frank, typical support groups don't offer a lot of activities for those young people who may have resolved some of their paranoia. ETVC here in San Francisco is one of the very best in the world, but it isn't exactly a party group. During the recent California Dreamin' event many of the visitors were totally perplexed that most of the ETVC people they met had no clue where the dance spots were in San Francisco, which is loaded with them. Happy feet are not what a support group tends to be about.

I'm not so sure that the young person is right about the online world, except that the typical online person is older than one might think. Every reputable survey shows that the average age of today's cybernaut is about 35-37. This makes sense if you think about it. While a lot of college students have temporary access, the heaviest users are people with their own machines or who have access through a machine at work.

Still, I find that the diversity of readers here at Transgender Forum is much greater than in any support group. Our readers are smarter and cuter too...

D
rag has always been a part of theatre, but certain playwrights have a real problem with it.

According to a recent New York Times story, Edward Albee forbids cross-gender casting in his works and the estate of Tennessee Williams specifically bans it. The story didn't explain why, but apparently it is to prevent the works from being turned into parodies. Hmmm, wonder what Williams' heirs thought of that great parody of "Streetcar Named Desire" in Woody Allen's "Sleeper" when he briefly does Blanche du Bois and Diane Keaton does Stanley?

The article was generated out of the objections by Robert Harling, author of "Steel Magnolias," to the casting by a Memphis, Tennessee theatre company of a man to play the role Dolly Parton played in the film of the same name.

Whether the actor, Mark Chambers, will be pulled from the role is not clear. The show's director, Jackie Nichols, wants to keep him in and has defended the choice saying that Chambers was not hired to do a campy job, but to play role as written. Interestingly, Chambers has previously played female parts for audiences in Memphis without incident and he played them straight...well, not campy anyway.

T
he CIA thinks we're OK! Yep, the spooks think that transexuals and transvestites are not security risks - unless we are closeted. Three years ago an internal report written by a Richard J. Heuer, Jr. discussed and assessed the risks of blackmail for CIA employees who had "nonconforming" sexual practices. The bulk of the report, interestingly, was about us. A copy of this remarkable report is available at the TOPS website. TOPS, or Transgendered Officers Protect and Serve, is a group of TG public safety officers.

Many thanks to Joanie Sheldon for the tip on this report. Joanie, by the way, is also the source of many of the "Gallery of Greats" photos we've published the last few months. Keep 'em flyin', Joanie!

I
've heard all the arguments about the Defense of Marriage Act, ad nauseum. We covered the issue and the reaction. Now I have just one question: doesn't anyone understand that this was simply a political trap? Gay marriage was, as Alfred Hitchcock used to put it, a "McGuffin." It was peripheral, like the "industrial diamonds" in Notorious. Yes, I know about the Christian Coalition and their power, but there was only one real goal: make Clinton look bad.

It turned out to be a pretty weak shot at Clinton, who is a master at this game. Politically there wasn't much to lose by signing this bill and potentially a lot to lose by vetoing it. If you are angry at Clinton for signing, then also be angry at all the other Democrats who backed this ridiculous law. Where were their principles when it came down to crunch time?

It was also very interesting to watch the reaction to DOMA in this community and in the gay/lesbian community. Yes, there were some very heartfelt objections and concerns raised by DOMA, we published some of these a few weeks ago. But the fact is that the leadership of the gay and lesbian community knew long ago that this issue was a loser. Our own leadership had next to nothing to say about it. Except for some pro-forma objections and yelling at the end by the leaders of advocacy groups, it was clear that they were not going to huge amounts of energy and political capital fighting this stinker.

The bald, barefaced truth is that politically, this just wasn't the issue to go to the wall on. Give it about five years.


August 26, 1996 A
rather famous transgender activist in Texas is starting to get the cold shoulder from many of the community's leaders following her behavior at last year's Gender Lobbying Days. Word is that she and another well-known activist from NYC had a big hassle over who was the top dog at that event. To their credit both kept the spat private, but it was still noticed

Now things are getting a little weird. The 1997 Lobby Days in Washington are going to be in May, but the Texan has decided to run her own lobbying effort in February. She isn't calling it lobbying, but apparently wants people to meet with congress members and staffers to "educate" them about the transgender community. Hmmm, if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck...

I respect this particular person, but this is ridiculous. How is our cause helped by bombing Congress, twice in three months, by two different groups of transgenders? It makes us look divided and confused when we need most to look unified and organized.

I'm going to offer a little advice to my Texan friend: back off. You are too important to the community to become irrelevant. Sometimes it's more fun - and more effective - to be part of cheering crowd than the one with the bullhorn.

T

o the woman in the UK who for 17 years believed her FTM husband when he told her he couldn't have an erection because of a vasectomy: lady, ask a couple of questions once in a while.

T

he hottest book in the community last month was unquestionably "Gender Shock" by Phyllis Burke. The book received enormous amounts of coverage after she disclosed that the government helped sponsor what appears to be quite questionable behavior modification of children who behaved in ways viewed as inappropriate for their sex.

And what was the diagnosis that led some rather well-known psychiatrists to try and break the kids of their feminine (if male) and masculine (if female) ways? Gender Identity Disorder.

If you are reading this, you probably have GID too.

I am not going to argue whether we are loonies or not. Obviously I'm biased and don't think that's the case. No more then I think that gays, lesbians and bi-sexuals are insane, though they too were classed that way by psychiatrists until the early 1970s.

This is not a small issue for us. I am convinced that unless we get GID out of the manual that shrinks use as their primary manual, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), we will never be more than another "fringe" group.

But there is a catch. Some transexuals in this community want GID retained in the DSM. The classification, they argue, makes it possible to get insurance to cover the costs of their transition. I don't really blame them. The diagnosis has enabled some transexuals to obtain insurance reimbursement for the $10-40,000 cost of SRS, without which they could never have afforded it.

But this money, which few actually qualify for, comes at a very high cost: millions of the rest of us are classified as being mentally ill.

There may be a way to fix this that makes everyone happy. In a recent article published in TGF, activist Riki Wilchins said that a compromise could entail classifying transexuality worthy of medical reimbursement in much the same way that maternity costs are covered. Giving birth to a child is neither a sign of disease nor of disorder, yet it is covered by insurance. So too is surgery for "intersexed" people, those who have sex organs of both sexes.

What this would mean is that the medical establishment would have to accept transexuality as an unusual medical, not pathological, condition that can be treated with surgery and hormones. But for that to happen the shrinks have to get on board first...and so do we.

I
liked the Olympics, but I would have loved them if we could have seen that transgender volleyball team from Thailand. This was by far the best sports story in the community this year. They beat the best mens team in Thailand, which should have been enough to send them to Atlanta, but they were kept home.

It would have been totally cool to watch six cute transgenders in tiny shorts and tanktops playing - and maybe beating - a bunch of 7-foot goons, but in their absence there was some small consolation. US television did show synchronized swimming, a sport that gives real meaning to the term "waterproof" makeup. I love the Esther Williams routines they do. And where do they get those cosmetics anyway?

A
nd speaking of things Asian, the fastest growing group of readers at TG are from Japan. Someday one or two of these gals will get over their shyness and say Hi!. The Japanese are easily the most shy of the folks here, who are the most outgoing? That's easy: the Australians and Italians. Ciao bella, mate!

A
leisha Michelle Emerson's takeout this week on Transgender Rock from the 1970s really brought back the memories. I was a mere child when David Bowie's "Hunky Dory" came out and was working at a college radio station (okay I wasn't so I wasn't a child). The cover said it all: hair pulled back, obvious makeup. This was a transgender person.

I'll never forget how excited and scared I was when I put "Queen Bitch" on for the first time at 3 in the morning. The switchboard went nuts. My fellow students, the night owls anyway, wanted even more.

I've loved Bowie ever since and I KNEW, even then, that he was transgender, not gay.

It's funny how pop culture can be so important in a person's life. Bowie's music inspired me to find out more about why I wanted so desperately to wear women's clothes. I knew there was nothing wrong with me, well nothing a nice pair of panties wouldn't cure anyway, but like most of us I was confused and unsettled. Then I heard David's music, saw him in concert, watched the impact he had on millions of others and I was sure everything was okay. Which it was and is. I knew Bowie's Ziggy persona wouldn't go on forever. No one could expend the kind of energy he was using in those days and lived long. But it was great while it lasted.

Many of us owe a true debt of gratitude to David Bowie and Lou Reed and a few others from those days. By popularizing drag through something so hip as Rock 'n Roll they helped foster acceptance for us, particularly among Baby Boomers and younger people.

Someday this community needs to formally thank these wonderful artists.

A
favorite of mine asked me the other day about some of the cartoons and humorous stories we've run in the last 6 months because she was worried that some politically correct sourpuss would be offended. Actually, one of the things I LOVE about our community is, despite everything, that it retains a wonderful sense of humor. Most of us can handle a little ribbing. Those who can't hey, there's always Usenet.


Back to our home page!