How such terms arise and are negotiated in lgbtq communities is worthy of investigation. I am already in the middle of a project that examines social negotiation of the transgender category in an lgbtq community, but I feel prompted to examine new language that arises in queer communities in general as well. I plan on doing some research into this phenomenon in the coming weeks, drawing largely on linguistic studies of language and sexuality and language and gender. I want to examine the functionality of newly crafted terms like transgender and transmasculine among people who use those terms, as the terms are intimately connected to the formation of identity.
Here are some terms I have encountered, in no particular order, boi, grrl, transman, transwoman, womyn, drag king, drag queen, flaming queen, queer, genderqueer, androgyne, third gender, polygender, cisgendered, pansexual, omnisexual, polysexual, multisexual, butch, femme, dyke, diesal dyke, fairy, boy-chick, no-ho tranny boy, faggot-identified dyke, andro, tryke, bio-femme (these last six courtesy of Riki Wilchins's book Queer Theory, Gender Theory), and of course, lesbian, gay and straight, man or woman. What does it all mean? I'll leave it up to you, the reader, to google any terms that leap off the page for whatever reason, captivating your curiosity.
The term that set me off on this post was "transmasculine." I first encountered this term on the Sugarbutch Chronicles and it enticed me with its apparent newness and possible meanings. Sinclair Sexsmith, Sugarbutch's author, is using a definition pulled from TransMasculine Community Network*:
Transmasculine refers to any person who was assigned female at birth but feels this is an incomplete or incorrect description of their gender.
This, of course, is a rather wide-open definition, similar to many I have seen for transgender (here, here, and here, for example). I am inclined to believe that new words are not crafted on a whim, that the people who invent them are usually trying to address a perceived inadequacy in the existing language. What precisely were transmasculine and transgender meant to cover when they were coined? Were they intended to be so inclusive, or has that characteristic arisen in a struggle for meaning that occurred as people began using them?
Ferdinand Saussure notes that language, once used by those other than its creator, is no longer under the control of that creator, and indeed, Susan Stryker, in Transgender History, states that the meaning of transgender “is still under construction.”
For example, under a broad definition, tom boys and sissies can be transgender right alongside postoperative transexuals. However, actual usage of transgender, in my own experience, is not always so generous, tending to invoke someone who exists close to the realm of transexuals or who may take up that label at a later date. Descriptions of transgender I have heard use words like "opposite gender," implying transpeople simply have a body opposite to their gender - the same notion historically used to describe transexuals. Transgender, then, simply expands outward from transexual to include those who have not yet or will never adjust their genitalia and/or hormones to coincide with their gender, but who are nevertheless somehow in the "wrong body."
I find this all rather upsetting. Why would transgender, so open to the "spectrum of gender" definitionally, ever be locked into binary conceptions in application? Why must one be living (or feeling) "opposite" to assigned gender? Could one be "half way" or less to being that "opposite?" And what is that opposite? Whose definition of man or woman is being used when we measure whether or not someone qualifies as trans? The thinkers behind official definitions may have had all this in mind when they decided to be so incredibly inclusive, however, on the street, old conceptions of what gender is to begin with still seem to hold powerful sway. The struggle over meaning continues for transgender. Is that the case for other terms like transmasculine? If not, how is a consensus ever reached? Why was such a term needed in the first place? These questions will be driving my upcoming research. Stay tuned to see if these mysteries can be solved!
*I keep seeing links to this organization that take me to a tech site. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find the correct site on the web. For a post about S. Leigh Thompson, who founded TransMasculine Community Network, click here.
Hello, S. Leigh Thompson here. I saw this post during an ego-rich Google search of my name. Kudos to you for continuing the dialogue around the language that is used to describe and define communities of transgender and gender-nonconforming folk.
ReplyDeleteTrue, the TransMasculine Community Network is currently on extended hiatus, and may not be reinstated. But the language that we used we still feel is helpful to developing a more inclusive community of folk who do not fit into the construct of the gender binary.
Transmasculine was a word we had heard in community vernacular, but we had never located a definition for it. We decided to attempt a working definition, one that would encompass all the folk we knew who were connecting under the 'trasnmasculine' header. These weren't people who were necessarily identifying with the term, but who were using 'transmasculine' community space such as support groups, events and resources.
What we had attempted was to find a definition that didn't lock any member into an identity - which is how a person understands themselves in a particular moment - but rather respected an individual's history and experience. We noticed the community we interacted with talked about their difficulties breaking gender norms, fucking with the gender binary, challenges of having been raised female in a sexist society, and how being raised female impacted the way they navigated the world and their understanding of self. These conversations of experience and history seemed fairly constant as individuals' identities changed: from butch to genderqueer to FTM to transman to man to genderqueer to fag and so on. With an identity-specific community definition, as a person's identity shifts, they are often pressured to remove themselves from a community, even if they lent much to the community in the past or have experiences that continue to contribute to the richness of community experience. We sought to counter this by establishing a definition that included people across a wide range of identities, but could connect through a diverse community of people who were assigned female but felt that somehow that gender definition was wrong.
Transmasculine, to us, meant any person who was assigned female at birth but feels this is an incomplete or incorrect description of their gender.
Assigned female: Used to recognize that society does enforce a gender binary and that most of us are placed into a category. Notice we don't use "bio" or "natural-born" as all people are biological and natural and our bodies doesn't determine our gender, society does by making assignments based on our bodies.
Incomplete: To recognize that individuals may still partially identify as female, but within a different construct than supported by the gender binary. This often included community butches, fag femmes, genderqueers and gender fuckers and those who play with gender could still identify 'female' as an aspect of their gender.
Incorrect: For those that felt that there was nothing female about them.
I agree with your challenging the term 'opposite' as a reference to a binary system. It's also problematic because it implies that a gender was already given and is the one 'true' gender while the way the 'transgender' person chooses to identify or express is 'opposite' the 'truth'. While I still appreciate the term transgender (although I'm more partial to 'trans' myself), I believe we within communities need to continue to challenge how it is defined while working with those outside the community to pay respect by changing institutionalized definitions.
Thanks again for this post. If it's alright with you, I'm going to post a link to it on my soon-to-be up-and-running new site, www.sleighthompson.com.
I know this is an old post, but I only recently discovered the term "transmasculine"--and it really, seriously got to me because I suspected I would fall under the label according to the people who use it.
ReplyDeleteAnd apparently I do, according to the above definition. I don't have a problem with broad inclusivity--as long as you don't define the term is such a way that it forces people who don't identify as such to fall under it! Practical Androgyny has a nice post on crafting definitions here: http://practicalandrogyny.com/2011/04/28/transgender-organisation-inclusivity/
In their definition, they use the important words "can potentially cover" blahblahblah. It should be someone's own judgment whether a given label describes their gender.
Why on Earth would someone include all FTanythings under a label that has "masculine" in it? I'm not a genderqueer because I want to be in any way labeled with masculinity or femininity--or have my masculine side singled out and treated as different than my feminine side! I'm sure a lot of agendered and FtMtF and androgynous people feel similarly.
I finally fully understand why someone who's binary trans told me he wouldn't ever identify himself as "transgendered" when asked his gender once.
Now that I've vented (sorry, this is the top Google hit I get that defines the term), I'll be more on-topic to say that I think the proliferation of terms in the community is a good thing. I don't think words can adequately define our different gender identities, but they can start to hint at them. I think in throwing out old universal concepts of gender, we reject the need for universal terms. (And I also think many non-binary people use the term "transgender" to describe themselves and get the point across, even if their audience had a preconceived binary definition of transgender.)
Err, but you are the actual scholar, so my apologies for needing a soapbox, hope it wasn't too self-indulgent of me.
Hi!
ReplyDeleteAs a fellow anthropologist & gender studies student (now working on my PhD), I just wanted to touch base and see if you were interested in letting us (your readers, who as above, came upon your entry via Yahoo/Google) know what your thoughts are now on the term 'transmasculine', as it has been a couple of years since you posted the above. I am curious, as a femme (partnered to an FTM) and whose research focuses on butch lesbians, transmen, and genderqueer individuals (labeled female at birth), if you find any usefulness or resonance with the term now, or if you feel the same as you did 2+ years ago.
While I find this term a useful in an of itself - being an inclusive/umbrella/open term, I also find it problematic, specifically when considering it in a blanket sort of way [as I do with 'queer'] to describe a particular population.
(I'm pretty tired tonight, but did want to say 'hi' and ask if you'd mind sharing an 'update' with us about your perception of this term.)
Thanks!
-Michelle