What's All This Transgender Stuff, Anyway?

There is a need in the human psyche to attach labels.

Think about the power of labels. Were I to describe somebody as a conservative Christian, you probably might form an impression of this person's political views, economic standing, style of clothing, musical preferences, etc. By attaching a label to this person, you have placed her in a mental cubbyhole. You have achieved a certain level of control. You have affixed a mental handle onto this person and will be prepared to deal with her in the future.

Now, what if I was to tell you that the person I described is myself?

I can hear somebody crying, "Wait a minute! I thought you are a crossdresser? How can you be a crossdresser and a conservative Christian at the same time?" I won't get into that subject here. My purpose is simply to illustrate the power of language, and of labels.

The term "Transgendered" is one label. It describes a person who does not quite fit into society's bipolar paradigm of gender identity. In my own case, it describes a genetic male who has a definite female component within her psychic gestalt, and expresses this feminine aspect by means of dress and cosmetics. In short, a crossdresser.

The societal paradigm of gender identity is bipolar; one is either male or female, and this fact is established by one's genitalia. Think for a minute; what is the first question one asks about a newborn baby? I refer to this as the "Blue Card/Pink Card Paradigm". Individuals possessing a penis and testes shall be issued a Blue Card at birth, while those born with vaginas shall be issued a pink card. This card describes the social expectations and behavior required of one's sex. For example, boys are expected to wear pants, be aggressive, play competitive games, and excel at math and science. Girls, on the other hand, are expected to wear dresses, be passive, play non-aggressively, and excel at social studies and literature. And despite the so-called enlightenment of our current society, this paradigm is still alive and well.

Consider this example; when we encounter a girl who has a natural affinity for athletics, how is she treated? Thanks to the feminist movement this girl is no longer a social embarrassment, but she will still encounter a great deal of resentment. We call her a Tomboy. (Well, what do you know? Another label!)

Now let us reverse the situation. Suppose we encounter a boy with a sensitive, artistic nature, who prefers the world of arts and literature to that of sports and video games. We have a label for such a boy. We call him a faggot.

Here we see the power of a label, not only to control, but also to devastate. We know nothing of this boy's sexual preferences; indeed, we have not even divulged his age. Yet we are fully prepared to consign him to the homosexual community simply because of a label.

I have expounded on the subject of labels because I am about to use some in order to explain this concept of transgender. Language is unfortunately an imprecise instrument; people do not always agree on just what a word means. Moreover, they tend to apply labels to new concepts in order to understand them in terms of their old frame of reference. I must ask my readers to suspend judgement for a brief time. Try to grasp the entire concept before breaking it into bite-size chunks.

In order to understand the concept of transgender, one must first understand three of the many components of one's identity. These are; sex, sexuality, and gender.

Sex is a biological fact. One is usually born either male or female. A quick check of the individual's genitalia at birth normally establishes this. There are exceptions. As science has discovered, a fetus will develop naturally into a female without the intervention of testosterone at key points. Without testosterone, undifferentiated sexual tissue will not develop into male genitals. There are also key differences in the brain structure; a developing brain that is not influenced by testosterone will develop as a female brain. (Please understand, this structural difference gives neither sex an intellectual advantage.) There have been cases where the intervention of testosterone was incomplete or totally missing, and other cases where a genetically female fetus has been exposed to excessive testosterone levels. This has resulted in the birth of Intersexed individuals (there's another label!) possessing indeterminate sexual characteristics. This is a separate issue and will not be discussed here.

A second component of identity is sexuality, and describes the sexual attraction an individual feels. Again, this normally follows the biological model; males are sexually attracted to females, and vice versa. But as I noted above in examining sex, there are exceptions. It is possible for a man to be sexually attracted to another man, or for a woman to be sexually attracted to another woman. The body signals we use to attract a member of the opposite sex result in attracting one of the same sex. This is known as homosexuality. (Another label, folks. Collect them all and trade them for valuable prizes!) Female homosexuals have their own unique label, that of lesbians. We also note the presence of individuals who are sexually attracted to both sexes; these folks are known as bisexuals.

I doubt that I have imparted any new knowledge just yet. So far I have been explaining commonly known concepts. But we shall now deal with a third component of individual identity, that of gender. And it is here where I hope to challenge some commonly held beliefs.

Here's what the American Heritage dictionary has to say about gender.

Gender is primarily a grammatical concept. I have heard many grammarians state authoritatively that gender is not a true property of individuals; a word has gender, a person has sex. Current usage, however, embraces the concept of gender as a person's sexual identity. It is the bipolar paradigm of sexual identity that I take issue with.

In the bipolar model of sexual identity, one is either male or female. The concept of sexuality as a separate component does not contradict this in any way; gay men do not dispute being men, they are simply attracted to members of their own sex. Likewise, gay women have no problem seeing themselves as women. But there are individuals who do not fit the bipolar model, myself among them.

Consider transsexuals. (Another label) We have all heard about Christine Jorgenson, the "man who got a sex change operation." Most of the world could not reconcile Ms. Jorgenson's situation with the bipolar gender model, so they tried to attach to her the homosexual label. This label does not adequately describe her situation, however. Homosexual men, for the most part, self-identify as men. They are not women, and have no desire to become women.

Ms. Jorgenson's problem was that her body form did not match her gender identity. Despite her birth sex, she self-identified as a woman. She was born male, but knew she was really female. The popular media has bastardized this into its trite sound bite; "a woman trapped in a man's body". (Label alert!) This really does not adequately describe the experience of a transsexual, but it does create a handy bin into which Ms. Jorgenson's plight might be deposited. But at least it admits the possibility of gender being a distinct identity component separate from sex.

So how does this explain my gender identity?

I was born male, and have no problem with this. I enjoy my male sex. I spend the majority of my time in male clothing. I am married, exclusively heterosexual, and have no desire to permanently alter my body parts in order to look more feminine. I am quite comfortable conforming to society's expectation of male behavior and clothing. I enjoy being a boy.

But I am a crossdresser. I enjoy wearing feminine clothing and cosmetics. When dressed as a woman, I often imagine myself to be a woman, to be perceived as and treated like a woman. I derive much satisfaction from looking in a mirror and seeing a girl look back at me. I enjoy being a girl. I don't expect you to understand just what motivates me to do this, as I scarcely understand it myself. One thing is certain; the bipolar model fails to explain me. And, given the high incidence of crossdressers in the world, it fails to explain a lot of people.

For this reason, I propose another model, that of the gender spectrum.

The gender spectrum is not a radically new concept. I have seen it referred to by others. Basically, gender is envisioned as a spectrum extending from exclusively female on one end to exclusively male on the other. Under this concept, most of the population would tend toward the extreme ends, being almost exclusively male or female. There is, however, a significant number of individuals who do not tend toward either extreme, but would gravitate closer to the center. One of these would be myself, an individual possessing both male and female gender characteristics.

So now that I have constructed a model which explains my own situation, and that of many others, have I adequately explained the transgender concept? No. Remember that gender is an independent constituent of one's identity. An individual might occupy a gender spectral position in the extreme male position and yet be genetically female. So how is the gender spectrum model useful?

This is how. A transgendered individual is one who possesses a significant divergence between their sex and their gender spectral position. This definition manages to include a wide range of individuals extending from the occasional gender bender to the fully realized transsexual and everything in between.

The main area of confusion within the general public regarding transgenderism has to do with the component of sexuality. Although a good segment of the mainstream has come to accept homosexuality, it has yet to come to terms with transgender. This is the direct result of confusing sex, gender, and sexuality. Mainstream America's conception of transgendered individuals is that we are gay. Why else would a man want to dress like a woman? As I have explained, sexuality and gender are separate components. A man may indeed wear feminine clothing, jewelry, even makeup, and still be heterosexual.

This new gender paradigm allows me to explain the difference between transsexuals and transvestites in a manner that can disregard sexuality. A transsexual exhibits a wide divergence between gender position and sex. A male-to-female transsexual, for instance, will occupy a gender spectral position in the extreme female region, but will be of the male sex. For a transvestite, that divergence is much less extreme and not sufficient to influence the individual to seek sexual reassignment.

I don't claim to have all of the answers. The gender spectral model I have proposed is the product of my own fertile imagination on overdrive. It represents a personal opinion and in no way should be considered a scientific study. My purpose here was to propose a structure that would foster an understanding of transgenders in the cisgendered world. We are not perverts or child molesters; rather, we are your neighbors and friends; we have similar values, desires, and needs. Our only difference is in the divergence I described above. As such, we pose no threat to you or to society. Rather, I believe that our unique gender perspective can only bring good to the family of mankind.