Transgender

Forum















Semantics and Fear, Fantasies and Soul Mates: Part I

By Veronica Smith
Subscribers can read Part II

I enjoyed hearing from folks who liked my last article comparing Southern Comfort to a pilgrimage. I personally had a great time there, but I've enjoyed reading other perspectives as well. I especially liked George Wilkerson's Me and Bobbi, Southern Discomfort: Part 1 and Part 2. I particularly sympathized with George's unease at the semantic abuses of which we transgendered folk are guilty. While scanning all the newsletters that come to our club, I come across many pronoun peculiarities particular to our persuasion. One common source of semantic sins, I've observed, comes from the fear many TGs have about being considered gay.

For example, I just finished reading an article in which a person relates how she is feminizing herself: electrolysis, facial surgery, hormones, etc. For the most part I really liked the candid, personal narrative of self-discovery. Only I got confused when she said that her sexual identity was bisexual but that her sexual orientation was heterosexual. I understood that while her psyche was a mixture of both masculine and feminine, she was only sexually attracted to females. But I could not see how that made her heterosexual, since being heterosexual means being sexually attracted to the opposite sex. This person, I suppose, firmly believes that gender is in the soul and sex is in the genitals. But it seems somewhat grammatically convoluted to write she is a heterosexual who is only attracted to women. So why not pleasantly think of her femme self as lesbian? Or is being considered heterosexual so important to her that if she were to continue her feminization to completion, she would then no longer be attracted to women and become attracted to men?

As unlikely as that sounds, I have another example of how homophobia colors transgenderistic writing. An intelligent and sensitive person (whom I admire and personally like) once wrote that becoming attracted to men after her sexual reassignment surgery was natural. Natural seems like such an innocent word, but it is actually loaded with meaning. Its use reveals what the writer sees as inherently right and wrong, and displays personal beliefs and prejudices. To state that it is natural to desire a man after becoming a woman implies that it is unnatural for a woman to desire another woman. In other words, this person believes that for a man to take massive doses of hormones, have various invasive surgeries, restructure the face and body and only then have sex with a man is natural, but for a guy just to have sex with another guy is not natural.

For the two above-referenced individuals, it is paramount to be considered straight at all times. They would only have sex with women when they had male genitalia and they will only have sex with men when they have female genitalia. Less than 10% of their body determines who they can be attracted to because they buy into their culture's homophobia. At various levels, they've accepted that being gay is wrong; at some level they supported Trent Lott when he was on the floor of the Senate quoting Leviticus and shouting something to the effect of "The Lord sayeth only innies can do it with outies!" They accept what certain people have gleaned from the Bible. But the Bible is many things to many people. You can use it to validate any of your prejudices. Slave owners before the Civil War used the story of Noah's children to validate slavery, and I personally remember hearing Bob Jones Jr. validate segregation with the story of the Tower of Babel. (I'm sure there are nuts out there who use the story of Lot to validate incest.) The magnetic desire of possible societal acceptance for their unusual state has them hopping, skipping and jumping around any hint that they might be considered homosexual,which they have firmly accepted as socially unacceptable. But are they being completely honest with themselves? Am I the only one who finds it hard to believe that an individual who takes years to achieve complete feminization has never considered the possibility of sex with a man until the day after his/her penis has been inverted?

What must be promoted at all times is that it is just as okay to be gay as to be straight so that any conclusions are not loaded with implicit judgment. Neither homosexual nor heterosexual is more natural than the other, just as it is no more natural for some people to want to wear clothes of the opposite gender and some not; just as it is no more natural that some people are born with the wrong genitalia and some not. Not fitting within our culturally proscribed gender roles places homosexual and transgendered folks in the same family. If we don't listen to our gay brothers and sisters, our family discourse is missing essential perspectives. Vanna, in November's issue of Ask Rachael, seems to be missing just such an essential perspective. She wrote: "I married because I thought it was the proper thing to do in society, and so people wouldn't think I was gay... m I gay, because I've married and dated women and only thought about going with a man? Would I be normal if I dated men?" Vanna is now contemplating surgery to get her body "in line" with her mind. Rachel rightly promotes psychotherapy and suggests that Vanna may find that she is not necessarily "TS, but TG or even TV and that is okay." But I'd like to add that Vanna might very well be gay and that being gay is as okay as being TS, TG or TV and that all of the above are as okay as the other and she is welcomed, accepted and appreciated for who she is.

On the old Hollywood Squares, Peter Marshall asked Paul Lynde at what age do most American boys have their first sexual experience, and Paul Lynde responded, "About nine or ten." And then reacting to the stunned silence, Paul Lynde quickly added in his own inimitable style, "Oh! You mean their first sexual experience with another person! Oh well then, uh, twenty-one or twenty-two, I guess." I have no way of knowing, but I suspect that the average man's longest-term and most intimate sexual partner is himself. Doesn't this make most men at least partly homosexual? Because, I mean, you can't get much more same sex than that. But, of course, most guys would respond that it's what's in the mind that determines sexuality. But, whoa! Do we even want to go there? Because while a man's body is otherwise engaged, nearly anything can float through his head: from Sophia Loren's almond and overly made-up eyes — to Demi Moore's flaunting posture and moist lips — to the shine of a new ratchet set — to Kathy Lee Gifford's plucky wholesomeness — to a rifle's stock smooth and freshly-oiled wood — to Arnold's grimace as he grips Conan's sword — to Phyllis Diller's crazy cackle — to Ursula Andress coming out of the sea holding a shell — to the girl you remember in long, choir robes — to the first time you slowly draped a chamois across a car in cherry condition — to a matador as he twisted his body away from the horns — to winning the race — to Delta Burke's matronly and benedictional smile — to Kate Moss' fragile and accepting body — to the space shuttle blasting off — to Cary Grant and Eva Marie Saint appraising each other to the first time feeling good on the dance floor to the happy sound of champagne popping — to the taste of a new lover's lips. A guy can have anything float through his head; he doesn't really have much control about that, and he can be humming The Green Berets at the same time. But, while men are able to eroticize anything from stiletto heels to teacups (the Victorians got worked up over piano legs), men can physically have sex with any of a multitude of things, including pillows, socks, washcloths, various fruits, even animals — Portnoy does it with the family meatloaf. So, this dread some people have of even considering sex with another living human being who just happens to be the same sex puzzles me.

Frankly, I think it's crude to have genitals determine attraction. I tend to go along with writer and director David Cronenberg's ideas on the subject. "We've long ago separated ourselves from whatever biological imperative there was," he said while making M. Butterfly. "Sexuality is an invention, it's a creative thing." What's important, I think, is to rid ourselves of the stupid prejudices and propaganda that we've all had drummed into our heads and create a sexuality with someone we trust and love regardless of gender.

Next month, I would like to describe how my wife and I approached the idea of me taking hormones and feminizing.

TGF's Home Page