Caroline (Tula was her modeling name) fought very hard for women born with a transsexual medical condition to be recognized as women, and have the same rights as any other woman. She never sought to be “othered and misgendered” or marginalized in a 3rd gender/Transgender box, yet that is precisely what many cross dressing males and gender queer activists, backed by Gay Inc, and some in the religious far right, are trying to do in the newer transgender/transgenderist movement.
From Wikipedia: “Caroline "Tula" Cossey (born 31 August 1954) is an English model. She is one of the world's most well-known transsexual women, having appeared in a James Bond film and been the first to pose for Playboy. Since being outed by British tabloid News of the World, Cossey has fought for her right to legally marry and to be recognized by the law as a woman.”
Caroline left the spotlight because she just wanted to live her life in peace, as a woman, not a spectacle. Today we have a couple noted transgenderist individuals who enjoy being spectacles, even at the cost of stigmatizing and misgendering the people with transsexualism that they are (mis)speaking for.I’m curious how people think Caroline feels about her community being co-opted onto some “3rd gender, or fetishist, or gay male drag queen” reservation against their will?
Why is it that the gender deconstructionist communities (of whcih those with a TS/IS condition are not a part of, for TS/IS people have a physical birth challenge, not a "gender identity issue") are quick to exploit and use high profile feminine and assimilated women with a transsexual condition to garner mainstream acceptance, legitimacy and visibility, but then turn around and compromise, belittle and jeopardize the different needs of people with a transsexual and/or intersex condition?
Gay Inc and TG Inc can try to censor and devalue the crisis of TS/IS people being alienated, ridiculed, offended, missgendered, misrepresented and objectified, yet I don't see the transsexual uprising backing down today, or tomorrow
Caroline now lives in America. I feel Caroline is happy that American women and men with transsexualism are speaking out against the current miseducation that is harming them, because just like Caroline’s title of her book said, “I Am A Woman” [not a 3rd gender, not a transvestite, not a gay male drag queen, not a gender queer activist, not transgender]
.
I originally emailed Ashley with comments...it was requested by email that I repost them here. In an email response to Ashley, I agreed to do so, albeit with some editing on matters that I choose not to have public at this particular time. I've also deliberately elected to keep this anonymous since, well, I don't subscribe to most of the available social media. I am accepting at face value that Ashley will be willing to respect my desire not to have certain other components of the post made public...
ReplyDelete~~~
I'm not one to generally post comments online. So instead, peeps like you who
put up posts that echo my sentiments tend to get little emails like this one ;)
This particular entry hit home in a couple of directions, most notably that I
can remember having a copy of My Story when it was first released. It helped to
reinforce the notion that it was quite possible to go through all of this crap
and not be a freak of nature. It also helped those few people I came out to in
that small west Texas town nearly 20 years ago realize that not every
transsexual was a walking stereotype.
I realize that the blog entries like what you posted rankle a significant number
of people, but in the present era of reporting, they become even more critical.
I was not a fan of the syntax changes when they hit the conversations twenty
years ago and it was only by happenstance that I got dragged back into the whole
realm of gender-related crap after having basically just been living life for
all these years. And sadly, what I find when I have raised the issue on a
couple of forums is that I am accused basically of making much ado about
nothing. It seems that those who believe in the binary classifications are the
ones who get left in the cold as the 'transgender' parade marches by.
Being in a profession where words have meaning and labels take on added
significance, I get a little upset when certain persons/entities have
essentially co-opted or otherwise usurped the language that would potentially
have described my history. I was NEVER "transgendered." I also do not presently
stake any real claim to the "transsexual" label, having essentially shed it when
I became post-operative in the mid-90's. But in those rare instances that I *do*
choose to discuss my background with people who might previously have just known
me as a lesbian, it is the past treatment for a transsexual condition that would
be discussed. And for those that don't grasp the differences in terminology,
the continued current media insistence on attaching the 'transgender' label to
everyone in my situation is, to say the least, frustrating.
Compounding matters is watching the manner in which the media refuses to let go
of the term. Coverage of the Araguz cases (both the civil and the criminal case)
has been especially frustrating due to the refusal of so many outlets to even
respect her wishes on terminology. Ironically enough, though, had it not been
for Nikki's cases, I doubt that I would really have been paying much attention to any of
the current war of words, but that is another subject altogether [parenthetical reference from the original email has been edited].
My guess is that you will probably see a flurry of negative comments precisely
because you have drawn even more attention to the fact that a divide exists.
But the reality of the varying issues is that they necessarily have lines that
can be drawn between them. And for that, I appreciate entries such as yours
that continue to shine light on the voices that shout about the distinction.
~~~
If Ashley has additional questions, she has been given contact information on how to reach me...
This particular entry hit home in a couple of directions, most notably that I can remember having had a copy of My Story when it was first released.
ReplyDeleteIt helped to reinforce the notion that it was quite possible to go through all of this crap and not be a freak of nature. It also helped those few people I came out to in that small west Texas town nearly 20 years ago realize that not every transsexual was a walking stereotype.
I realize that the blog entries like what you posted rankle a significant number of people, but in the present era of reporting, they become even more critical. I was not a fan of the syntax changes when they hit the conversations twenty years ago and it was only by happenstance that I got dragged back into the whole realm of gender-related crap after having basically just been living life for all these years. And sadly, what I find when I have raised the issue on a couple of forums is that I am accused basically of making much ado about nothing. It seems that those who believe in the binary classifications are the ones who get left in the cold as the 'transgender' parade marches by.
Being in a profession where words have meaning and labels take on added significance, I get a little upset when certain persons/entities have essentially co-opted or otherwise usurped the language that would potentially have described my history. I was NEVER "transgendered." I also do not presently stake any real claim to the "transsexual" label, having essentially shed it when I became post-operative in the mid-90's. But in those rare instances that I *do* choose to discuss my background with people who might previously have just known me as a lesbian, it is the past treatment for a transsexual condition that would be discussed. And for those that don't grasp the differences in terminology, the continued current media insistence on attaching the 'transgender' label to everyone in my situation is, to say the least, frustrating.
Compounding matters is watching the manner in which the media refuses to let go of the term. Coverage of the Araguz cases (both the civil and the criminal case) has been especially frustrating due to the refusal of so many outlets to even respect her wishes on terminology. Ironically enough, though, had it not been for Nikki's cases, I doubt that I would really have been paying much attention to any of the current war of words, but that is another subject altogether.
My guess is that you will probably see a flurry of negative comments precisely because you have drawn even more attention to the fact that a divide exists. But the reality of the varying issues is that they necessarily have lines that can be drawn between them. And for that, I appreciate entries such as yours that continue to shine light on the voices that shout about the distinction.
I found this website today and here is my comment and question. I identify (happily) as a gay man but growing up I had um "gender issues" so I've spent a lot of my life soul searching and thinking and learning about who and what I am. I totally understand the difference between TS/IS and TV/TG, as I think many GLB people do, more so than the TS/IS community is giving us credit for. As a member of "gay inc" I don't want to conscript anyone into our ranks who doesn't want to be here, but I do think we share many issues and we will all benefit from being in a "big tent." My question is this, how can we all be together without the TS/IS folks feel they are being misrepresented? What do I do or say as a gay man that will make TS/IS feel included and not conscripted???
ReplyDeleteQuay,
ReplyDeleteI do appreciate your thoughts and considerations, but . . .
. . . speaking as a former transsexual, I don't want to feel included, and I won't allow you to conscript me.
I'm just not part of your big tent. I do not believe in the 'spectrum' or the 'umbrella', and I don't think there's any benefit in TS being part of the T in the LGBT. Transgendered folk, maybe, but obviously transgender is NOT transsexual, is it?
Best wishes, anyway.