Deciding Which Box to Check: Understanding the Transgender Issue

When filling out official paperwork - whether it be an application for employment or a U.S. Census survey - whenever there is a need for identifying ethnicity, social status, employment, or other non-gender related statuses, there is always an "other" box for the options not available. So why is there not an "other" box for gender? In our modern times of political correctness and tolerance, why is it so hard for our society to grasp the idea that humans are sexually dimorphic? After all, it is now socially acceptable in our society to be ethnically, culturally, racially, and structurally dimorphic; so, when does gender get its turn?

Anne Fausto-Sterling helps to expand this idea by stating "...the two sex system embedded in our society is not adequate to encompass the full spectrum of human sexuality." Within today's society, those who do not fall under the bilateral confines of male or female gender roles are shunned. This is mostly due to religion's, popular culture's, and the media's negative portrayal of the transgender as being freakish, unstable, untrustworthy, immoral, evil, and so on. This paper is going to discuss and help understand the social constructs of bilateral gender roles and the way these constructs help to exclude and disenfranchise an ample amount of the population as a whole.

To start, it will be important to define and understand the categories that fall under the umbrella term "transgender." Transgender covers a multitude of variances within gender, including hermaphrodites, male pseudo hermaphrodites (includes a combination of testes and female genitals), and female pseudo hermaphrodites (includes a combination of ovaries and male genitalia). Also included under transgender are "transsexuals, cross dressers (usually heterosexual), and our seldom-acknowledged cousins of gay drag." Although these are not the only distinguishing characteristics of the transgender, they are enough to convey the points that will subsequently be covered throughout this paper. However, if society lacked in distinguishing any gender, there would have been no need to write this paper because gender would not even exist.

Considering that gender roles are socially constructed to begin with (unlike sex, which is biologically formulated), the identification of gender is a falsity unto itself. Society acts its gender in order to be identified as such. There is no "gender identifier" that runs around and checks everyone's genitals in order to portray which sex they biologically fall under; therefore, gender is the act of a particular sex that one adheres to. Judith Lorber backs this idea by claiming, "Gender signs and signals are so ubiquitous that we usually fail to note them - unless they are missing or ambiguous. Then we are uncomfortable until we have successfully placed the other person in a gender status; otherwise, we feel socially dislocated."

This idea might help to identify why we shun those who do not act their gender. Furthermore, if gender is considered the act of femininity or masculinity, then it should be recognized that nobody falls specifically under either category. Females tend to have some masculine qualities; while, males tend to have some feminine qualities; therefore, no one acts their gender fully. Gender becomes a role that is played out in society as an actor plays a role on stage. Robyn Ochs brings this point to light when she realizes that "...it is entirely clear to me that it was loving a woman that made me realize I had fallen outside my 'script,' which in turn forced me to realize there was a script." This idea helps to create quite a conundrum when trying to prescribe gender to the right sex. Och's revelation of her "script" is not a prevalent realization throughout our society as a whole, which helps to explain why it is not seen as such.

One of the main reasons gender is so important in this country is the fact that this country was founded on a Christian theology that recognizes monogamy and bilateral gender roles. With the idea of Adam and Eve being the first monogamous couple, and Eve being created from the rib of Adam, helps to identify the male and female roles and set the cultural norms within a Christian society. Jonathan Katz helps us to understand the creation of gender roles, through the creation of heterosexuality. Katz explains that, "By not studying the heterosexual idea in history, analysts of sex, gay and straight, have continued to privilege the 'normal' and 'natural' at the expense of the 'abnormal' and 'unnatural'." This privilege extends to gender in these modern times when comparing normal gender roles (however that is defined) to the socially defined abnormal transgender roles.

With advancement in medical technologies, people of this day and age can literally change their sex to match their gender, although this was not always the case. Transgender is not a new concept within the world; hermaphroditic manifestations have been around since the beginning of existence and in some cultures were and are well respected. Holly Boswell, a well educated transgender sociologist, explains that "Various cultures in the past have honored our [the transgender] unique ability to make special contributions to society as shamans, spiritual leaders, visionaries, healers, mediators, counselors, teachers, and in other specific ways." This idea helps to portray the ignorance in other societies that shun and ridicule the transgender. By not accepting the transgender as a societal norm, not only disenfranchises the transgender; but also, shows the ignorance imbedded in any religiously based society.

Just as gay and lesbians are pushing hard for equal rights within this country, the transgender should be pushing for the same. And just because the transgender and homosexual communities are forming alliances for the same cause, does not mean that they should all be lumped into the same category. The main reason for this is the fact that not all homosexuals want to be transgender, and not all transgender are homosexual. This popular misconception, pushed hard by the media, is another wrench thrown into the machine used to help the cause of gender and sexually oriented equality.

Furthermore, with gay and lesbian parenting becoming more "mainstream" within our culture, the plausibility of the same happening with the transgender community is lacking. On the other hand, there is still a push for gay marriage in the United States; and this push seems to be promising for the overall cause, if it is ever carried out successfully. This is mostly due to the fact that the acceptance of gay marriage could help to create a snowball effect that could trickle down and help with the acceptance of the transgender community. Judith Stacy supports gay marriage because she believes that it would "...promote a democratic, pluralistic expansion of the meaning, practice, and politics of family life in the United States. This could help to supplant the destructive sanctity of the family with respect for diverse and vibrant families." A varied definition of family could help to create a varied definition of gender, much to the chagrin of the religious right within our society.

Modern popular culture also helps to identify bilateral gender roles and rarely leaves room for the transgender to fit within society. If they are not made to be a spectacle on popular television talk shows (such as The Jerry Springer Show), then they are showed to be a grotesque taboo within popular television sit-coms. Peter Nardi helps to explain the reasoning behind these negative portrayals by saying, "As profit making business corporations, media organizations reflect the economic market place and political climate of the culture; that is, content is often dictated by what prevents the least erosion of potential customers." Although this conflict theory perspective was initially used by Nardi to describe the negative portrayal of gays and lesbians in the media, it is just as pertinent when referring to the transgender. The hegemonic structure of corporations that serve up these popular forms of entertainment profit by advertising to those within their demographics; therefore, these are the people in which these corporations need to keep appeased. One way that these corporations do this is by either not showing, or showing in a negative light, both gays and transgender. This negative portrayal helps to reinforce stereotypes and negativity; all the while, preventing certain groups from being accepted into the cultural norm.

The internet and the pornography industry, which are constantly under fire for the exploitation of women, also help to fuel the fire of making the transgender a taboo and unacceptable gender. The genre of he/she pornography seems to be rather popular (after receiving over five hundred thousand hits when searching the term "transgender" and over four million when searching the word "she-male" on Google), which helps to convey the abundance of people consuming such smut. The "she-male pornography" business only helps to perpetuate the already skewed bilateral gender roles; all the while, victimizing and undermining those who are pushing to change these stereotypical and demeaning views of the transgender. Moreover, this form of popular culture is one of the few avenues that our society allows transgender to travel down, due to the sexually promiscuous stereotype of the transgender.

The media also helps to negatively affect our culture's perception of the transgender community. How often does one see a news story that attempts to quell society's skewed view of the transgender? How often do you see a news story about the transgender at all? After searching The Augusta Chronicle's, CNN's, and Fox News' websites for stories on transgender or transsexuals, there was none to be found. It seemed that the results of each search contained stories dealing with homosexuals. With this in mind, it seems that the media constantly portrays homosexuals and the transgender under the same connotation, with no difference between the two. This misconception not only weakens the cause of the homosexuals, but also, weakens the overall cause of gender equality. If society cannot distinguish between a homosexual and a transgender, then how will they ever be able to understand or accept either?

There also seems to be stratification within the culture of the transgender. The act of "passing" among the transgender refers to not being detected as such. Passing becomes very important to the transgender, mainly due to the fact that if you pass in your gender role, then you will not be seen as an oddity. As Katrina Roen points out in her study, "...those who are successful at passing are seen as 'real transsexuals,' while anyone else may be excluded on the basis of being 'just a cross-dresser' who is still 'in the closet' and may be embarrassing to the group." A transgender that is able to pass is seen in a positive light amongst the transgender community; however, this idea does not help with the acceptance of the sub-culture as a whole. Those who are transgender should let it be known that they are as such, if only to help it become a part of the norm, instead of a stigma that perpetuates a cultural ostracism.

To conclude, the egalitarian constructs this country was supposedly created on are in no way directed toward everyone. The natural rights of all citizens to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness should come with an extension that reads something like "...as long as it doesn't go against the cultural norms of our society." The mob rules mentality of our society, which is perpetuated by religion, popular culture, and the media, becomes a domineering ideology that oppresses and dehumanizes anyone who fails to fall under acceptable norms. Therefore, those who defy bilateral gender roles become the main target of oppression and are never truthfully portrayed within our society. "Since race and class are intertwined with gender in the social arrangements that reproduce inequality, it is highly unlikely that gender inequality alone could (or should) be redressed without considering racial and economic exploitation."

What Judith Lorber is referring to is the idea that there is not only one issue that is responsible for any discrimination; therefore, the entire system needs to be changed. This is not a push for reform, but a push for revolution. So where do we start? Lorber goes on to give a simple, yet hardly plausible suggestion by saying, "Human beings have constructed and used gender - human beings can deconstruct and stop using gender. The most obvious way would be to deliberately and self-consciously not use gender to organize social life." This idea in theory is sensible; however, the chances of deprogramming our entire society of something that has been programmed into each of us since birth, is unimaginable.

^* Special thanks to Jaime Counsell, Dean Ozanne, and Alicia Tucker for their help in proofreading this paper.

Fausto-Sterling, Anne. "The Five Sexes Revisited." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p.120.

Fausto-Sterling, Anne. "The Five Sexes Revisited." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p.120.

Boswell, Holly. "The Transgender Paradigm Shift Toward Free Expression." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p.128.

Lorber, Judith. "The Social Construction of Gender." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, passim.

Ibid, passim.

Ibid, p.113.

Ochs, Robyn. "Bisexuality, Feminism, Men and Me." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p. 627.

Katz, Jonathan Ned. "The Invention of Heterosexuality." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p. 151.

Boswell, Holly. "The Transgender Paradigm Shift Toward Free Expression." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p. 130.

Stacey, Judith. "Gay and Lesbian Families Are Here." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p. 285.

Nardi, Peter M. "Changing Gay and Lesbian Images in the Media." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p. 448.

Roen, Katrina. "'Either/Or' and 'Both/Neither': Discursive Tensions in Transgender Politics." Signs, Vol. 27, No. 2. (Winter, 2002), p. 505.

Lorber, Judith. "Dismantling Noah's Ark: Gender and Equality." The Social Construction of Difference and Inequality: Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006, p. 704.

Ibid, p. 707.