********************************
Hi,
John Henry ~
Tampa (as always) has given you a superb and compassionate and wise response. BrooklynRider, MikeYank, and Spartans 987 have all given you heartfelt and genuine responses about their reaction to losing the cute Bruce Jenner, from days of yore. I absolutely get how they feel - we had a lovely and incredibly beautiful model here, called "
Dimitri Thomas", who was so masculine and sexy - and eventually came out on this board as someone who had always felt herself to be a woman - in her heart and mind - and embarked upon that transition, as Anya. All of us LOVE Dimitri, and while I am sure (not to sugar-coat this) a lot of us (having become emotionally close to Anya) were a little shocked and surprised that one of the cutest guys we had ever seen on the site, was a transgendered person. . . I think we all supported (and still love and support) Anya, in her making the momentous choice to live happily in her own skin, and be the woman she was meant to be. (And, I hope she is doing WELL!)
John Henry, I suppose (at this point) the science regarding the nature of transgendered people, is nascent. (Just as the science regarding what makes people "gay", once was - and to a certain extent, still IS.) However, though the science is new, it seems there is gradually increasing evidence that the origins of a transgendered nature go beyond simple psychological trauma or pathology (this used to be thought of gay people, also): and do have some sort of biological origin.
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/the-science-of-transgender-20140730
At any rate,
John Henry, I am fully in support of people living as they feel they ought, and must - despite social disapproval or stigma - with the proviso that their doing so (following John Stuart Mill): does not harm OTHERS. It may be decades before we discover all the reasons that Caitlyn Jenner feels herself to be a woman (and I believe there are genuine ones), but. . . so long as she harms no one else in her realization of this deeply-felt gender identity, I believe there is no reason she ought not pursue it.
And - - - I think all transgendered people ought to be treated with respect, care, and love. Just as we ought to treat all our neighbours. The sorts of hostile comments you reported on,
John Henry, that some people have issued about Caitlyn Jenner, are vile, and absolutely uncivilized. It is a credit to you, that you oppose the people who make such comments.
I will say, as a final little caveat, though - that as the movement to recognize and assist transgendered people in their (exceptionally difficult) journey gathers momentum: there are a few things we have to be cautious about. (Or perhaps, to put it more accurately, I WISH we would be cautious about.)
At this juncture, in my country (Canada) there are some activists in the movement to recognize and assist transgendered people who are advocating that gender should not be named, on an infant's birth certificate. Some of them maintain that to name an infant's gender on a birth certificate, is an act of child-abuse. There is a lawsuit presently launched in British Columbia, to this effect.
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/c...ng-gender-designation-from-birth-certificates
Second, there is a great movement abroad in North America, to replace the common pronouns, "he" and "she", and "his" and "her", with "ze" and "zir", or "ey" or "em" - or some such thing - on the grounds that any pronoun indicative of gender, is inherently discriminatory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-specific_and_gender-neutral_pronouns
John Henry, I will tell you frankly - I think the first proposition is ridiculous and anarchic ~ as one of the greatest and hardest working experts in Canadian law, relating to justice for LGBT people, concedes, in the article above. . . and that the second proposition is unworkable, and would make all our letters to one another, unintelligible.
John Henry, in EVERY revolution - from the French Revolution, forward - there is always a MOMENT when those who have been sorely oppressed by the majority, having seized the high ground, cry, "KILL the OPPRESSORS!" A cry that ALL people shall identify with the standards of the formerly oppressed, and even acknowledge them as masters, and governors. I think this is just what is happening at the fringes of the movement to help transgendered people, now. And it is very rarely a good thing,
John Henry. I think this is a tendency we ought to resist.
YES - we must love and care for our transgendered sisters and brothers. YES - we must fight, vigorously, for their human and legal rights. So that they can be happy, and comforted, and the burdens of a conflicted gender-identity can be lifted, from their shoulders.
But NO - I do not think that infants should be described as gender-neutral, from birth - because, in fact, 99 per cent of them, are NOT. (Including little gay boys like me, who loved to play with DOLLS ;-) NEITHER, I think, should we alter the whole structure of the English language, and start calling each other "ze" and "zir", simply to placate a vocal minority. Of course there must be justice and kindness to those who have been misunderstood - but, to my mind, that entails REFORM of our social practices, not wholesale
revolution.
As far as Ms. Jenner looks in a skirt - that's her business, and I could care less - LOL! Ms. Jenner has won both praise and condemnation for her aesthetic - the choice to present herself (as a woman) in such a glamorous fashion, on the cover of
Vanity Fair.
Naturally,
John Henry, I think Ms. Jenner ought to be able to dress as she pleases. But. . . some of her statements and ideas about "what it means to be a woman" have proven to be quite troubling to women who were born as women, and feminists in general. While I hope that these differences can be resolved. . . I think there are some significant issues, there. Caitlyn Jenner told Diane Sawyer that what she was most looking forward to (as a woman): was the chance to wear nail polish, until it chips off. In this regard, I sort of agree with Professor Elinor Burkett, who said, "Nail polish does not a woman make."
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/opinion/sunday/what-makes-a-woman.html
In short,
John Henry, this is a very, very, complicated issue - fraught with difficulties, and social significance. (And, I might saucily add - a site populated mostly by old gay men, like me, is not necessarily the greatest place to get real answers about what does or doesn't, constitute womanhood.) Of course, I hope that everyone gets through it, all right! And lest you think that this is a critique of your post, JH, it is
not. . . it is simply a reflection upon some of the complexities, involved. In fact, I admire you greatly, for your courage (and good heart) in raising this just the way you did!
"A" XOXOXOXOXOXOXO
