Tuesday, November 07, 2006

Gender and Genitalia

What defines male and female?

The New York Times reports today that New York City is likely to adopt a proposal to allow transgender people to change the gender on their birth certificate even if they have not had reassignment surgery.

First, a primer on what is meant by “transgender.” Let us make a clear distinction – even as we acknowledge that these are blurry boundaries – between drag performers, or gender illusionists, who take on an alternate persona for the purpose of entertainment, transvestites or crossdressers, who enjoy dressing up as the opposite gender as a form of recreation, and people who suffer from gender identity disorder. One is an act, one is a hobby and the last is a psychological condition where a person’s self-perception of their gender does not match their genitalia.

This is a new and shocking social frontier for many of us, and let me be the first to admit I don’t fully understand it, myself – and to that end, I apologize in advance to any transfolks who might read this and infer insensitivity where really there is only ignorance.

Are men and women really only defined by their genitalia? Of course not. If that were the case, we wouldn’t have books like Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus trying to explain what the differences are, we’d have books called Men Have Penises and Women Have Vaginas, and it would be a very short book. A pamphlet, even. We wouldn’t have academic studies about why boys and girls tend to perform differently in school and we wouldn’t have had a big to-do when Larry Summers tried to explain why there aren’t as many women scientists. He could have said, “Because they have vaginas,” and, if that were truly what determined gender, he might have been right and that would have been the end of it.

In this year’s New York Court of Appeals ruling on same-sex marriage, Judge R.S. Smith argued that marriage should be limited to opposite-sex couples because “a child benefits from having before his or her eyes, every day, living models of what both a man and a woman are like.” I don’t think he meant that children need to be shown a penis and a vagina every day to avoid confusion.

We can debate whether gender stereotyping is right or wrong, but however we feel about it we must admit it exists, and it starts at birth: babies with vaginas are dressed in pink, and babies with penises in blue. Some children get Barbies as presents, and some get fire trucks, and what they have between their legs determines how we talk to them, how we encourage them to behave, and what we expect of them. Yet when we say to children, “You need to behave like a big boy now” or “Act like a man,” that doesn’t really have anything to do with their penis. We usually perceive who is a man and who is a woman without needing to check below the belt. Quite simply put, one’s gender identity consists of a lot more than a reproductive organ.

[On a side note, we should really examine our ambivalence about our sexual organs, and why it is that we call people dicks, pussies and cunts.]

Gender is defined by more than genital status, and since hormone therapy and reassignment surgery are not covered by insurance (not to mention this country has 45 million uninsured people anyway), many transgender people cannot afford medical treatment. Also, given our larger social gender prejudices, it’s often difficult for transfolks to find meaningful work, because they are perceived to be mentally ill, or at a minimum, very weird, and somewhat threatening. Some transgender people do not feel a need for therapy or surgery. The new policy would allow birth certificates to be changed with recommendations from a doctor and a therapist and evidence that the applicant has lived with their current gender expression for two years.

Kudos to New York City for having the courage to confront this controversial issue and to come up with positive recommendations.

11 comments:

Jade said...

and it starts at birth: babies with vaginas are dressed in pink, and babies with penises in blue. Some children get Barbies as presents, and some get fire trucks, and what they have between their legs determines how we talk to them, how we encourage them to behave, and what we expect of them.

This is an interesting topic, and one that comes up a lot in my Suburban Circle of moms. Many neighbors who have had girls first, then a boy, gave the hand-me-down toys to the new baby. The baby boy was happy to play with whatever was in front of him, but then if they went to a neighbor's house he'd go wild for the toy trucks and other "boy toys" he didn't have at home. In those cases, the boys weren't being handed gender specific toys, but when given the opportunity that's what they wanted to play with.

We started out pretty gender neutral with Gayle, but ended up with Strawberry Shortcake (I think more because I wanted to play with the dolls from my childhood again!) And yet... we took Gayle to see "Superman" last summer and she's so very into comic book characters now that we're having a Superman themed birthday party for her.

I agree though, that society in general puts gender specific behaviors out there at a very early age... just look at Sesame Street, where the little girl monster is dressed in a tu-tu and Elmo runs around with a drum riding a tricycle... or any commercials for toys... girls are always getting themselves pretty and dressing baby dolls, boys are running around racing cars, screaming and crashing things.

At Gayle's dance studio, the class before her has one little boy in it. One of the moms from Gayle's class said "I don't think my husband would approve of putting our son in dance! We have him in gymnastics, it's more masculine" Although I'm still not sure how rolling around on a mat in tights is really "masculine" in the way they think it is.

Anonymous said...

fluid sexuality huh? I won't flame your comment field, but what exactly does all this really mean? Isn't this telling God, "no!" You did not create me male & you did not create me female? I think the whole issue, for me at least, would come down to authority (Biblcal) & submission(to God's Word)...

I know I am setting myself up to get blasted; but hey, that is how you learn, right-?

Andy said...

Hey Gary, welcome back.

Honestly, I don't know what the moral/theological implications of this are.

But let's consider this: there are babies who are born "intersex," meaning they have both male and female genitalia. How does that square with Genesis?

And I don't want to suggest that gender identity disorder is some kind of "defect," but if the question is the nature of God's perfection, why are some babies born with cleft palates? born blind? conjoined twins? heart defects? dwarfism? any number of defects?

If a baby can be born with spina bifida, why can't a baby be born with conflicting gender identities?

Anonymous said...

If a baby can be born with spina bifida, why can't a baby be born with conflicting gender identities?

Obviously there are babies born with spina bifida, and I am sure that there are children that exhibit a behavior that does not fit their gender. But do we embrace and encourage that behavior? Do we accept it as "who they are?" Tell them God made a mistake and you really aren't what you appear to be?

I think you would handle spina bifida and conflicting gender identities in two totally separate ways because they are two totally separate things.

I don't know Andy, I know this issue is much more complicated than I am making it out to be too...

DJRainDog said...

Gary, it sounds like you're saying that gender roles should be set in stone and "traditional", meaning fluffy-pink-parasol-carrying Barbie-playing little girls who grow up to be subservient women who wear conservative dresses (except to please the sexual whims of their husbands), stay at home, cook, clean, and raise whatever kids the husband begets upon them in the fashion he prescribes -- and dirt-clod-throwing, truck-playing, knee-scraping, arm-breaking, football-star-aspiring, overall-wearing boys who grow up to get married as soon as possible, work to support the wife and however many kids he gives her in whatever way he's able, and runs his house with an iron fist. Not unlike the family in which I grew up, at least from my grandparents' generation back. It's not telling God anything if we don't fit these old molds anymore, except that perhaps we're coming to better understand His purposes for us as individuals. An interesting sidenote: I was born by C-section after 12 hours of hard labour (the umbilical cord was wrapped twice around my neck, and I was a BIG baby -- more than 10 lbs. and 23 inches); there were no blue blankets in the operating room, so I was wrapped in a pink one. Naturally, everyone assumed I was a girl until told otherwise. I can't help but wonder if that might have had any impact on my development. I've always had a soft, sensitive aspect, and I've only within the last few years come to love traditional tough-guy things -- rough sports, cars, the family farm...Just thinking with my fingers on the keyboard here...

Law Fairy said...

"fluid sexuality huh? I won't flame your comment field, but what exactly does all this really mean? Isn't this telling God, "no!" You did not create me male & you did not create me female? I think the whole issue, for me at least, would come down to authority (Biblcal) & submission(to God's Word)..."

Gary, there's a major conceptual problem with this paragraph. You're equating gender with sex, which is what most people do and is a major source of latent sexism even where measures are taken to institutionalize formal equality. Indeed, it's quite possible fewer people would seek out major operations if society didn't judge persons who acted a different "gender" than their "sex." Who is to say that every male must be a "man"? I think I missed that part in the Bible.

There's a lot of gender theory out there that argues that people are not biologically men or women, but only male or female. "Man" and "woman" are socially constructed terms with social, and not biological, meaning. Humans make the mistake of conflating the two and this is what leads to transgendered persons' crises of identity.

In addition, Andy, I'd argue that gendering begins even before birth -- studies have shown, for instance, that playing Mozart while pregnant may have positive effects on the fetus' brain development. A child conceived and carried to term in a sexist society (i.e., any modern society) is going to be born, quite possibly, with vague preconceptions of gender. This doesn't have to be negative, but it arguably could explain some of the behaviors people like John Stossel are oh-so-fond of pointing out as though it proves their point, e.g., "my son had never even seen a gun and yet he took a banana and held it like a handgun, therefore boys are inherently psychologically different from girls." I don't know of any studies that have been done on this, but I suspect we could learn a lot about "men" and "women" if more people were at least open to the possibility that neither exists outside of a social context.

Anonymous said...

off of the top of my head...

sorry this is a drive by answer to a question about where in the Bible does God speak to gender...

Anonymous said...

Whatever in-utero development involves, gender and sex are certainly intertwined if not always twinned. Genes are related to hormones are related to neurological development is related to psychological makeup ... etc. ... . I think that a blanket rejection of the normal relation of gender and genital sex is a bit strong, even if exceptions exist.

I do think babies imprint in the womb on what is going on around them.

Andy said...

I don't think anyone's making a "blanket rejection." This is an extremely rare disorder.

And Gary, I have to point out, since you advocate Biblical literalism, what the Bible says is "God created them male and female," which is as much of an argument in favor of gender fluidity as anything I've ever heard. You're trying to tell us that and is really an or, that you could only be one or the other. But that is clearly not the only possible reading of that verse!

Law Fairy said...

"off of the top of my head...

sorry this is a drive by answer to a question about where in the Bible does God speak to gender..."

Gary, that verse says "male and female", which as I explained above (if you read the comment), is *different* from "man" and "woman." Do you have a citation from the Bible positing a necessary link between male and man and between female and woman?

Stephanie Woodling said...

Another brilliant post, Andy!