Lesbian Couple "Looks into Transgender" as a Loophole to Get Married

[vagina]

Personally, my feeling is that this perfectly describes the transgender community or movement.

[Linus]

Originally Posted by vagina

Personally, my feeling is that this perfectly describes the transgender community or movement.

How does this describe the transgender community?

[*Anya*]

Originally Posted by dykeumentary

Just a friendly reminder, because I know that we all want to be good people here-

Please lets not use expressions like "having a screw loose" or "ordering a psych consult" when we mean to say that we don't agree/understand someone's decision.
The mental health industrial complex has been used as a weapon against GLBT and gender-noncomforming people for years. The stigma of "being crazy" also keeps people who need mental health care from getting it.

Thanks! Now back to lively debate!

Just checking, are you moderating?

[Corkey]

I'm wondering if folks are gate keeping. Personally I will never make the transition, the physical for me does not make the person (gender) I am. I am Transgender, not Transexual. I do think it was expedient for Jacki to further their relationship. That isn't a judgement on if Jacki is TG or not. Carpe Diem may be at play here. Love is all that matters and it is time we stop making people jump through hoops just so they can marry the person they love. Then everyone would be able just to be themselves without society getting say in their lives.

.10.

[dykeumentary]

Originally Posted by *Anya*

Just checking, are you moderating?

I'm speaking as a person who had an involuntary inpatient hospitalization to treat what the doctors saw as gender issues, I'm speaking as a niece of a man who was forced to undergo shock therapy treatments to "cure" his homosexuality, I'm speaking as a friend of a 25 year-old lesbian who killed herself when she need needed help, but was too embarassed to get it.

Maybe I should have just saiid "holy shit- that's offensive!" but I tried to be nice.
Is the better response to flag a post? I don't know.

.

[Words]

Originally Posted by vagina

Personally, my feeling is that this perfectly describes the transgender community or movement.

I think you made your views on the transgendered community perfectly clear when you first joined. I find it sad that they haven't changed, sadder still that, in spite of having been around for some time now, you still can't see - don't care? - just how offensive the way in which you express those views actually is.

[aishah]

i can see all sides of this - i think the arguments for why this may be deeper than it initially appears are pretty compelling.

that said, i know of transfolks who've faced charges of fraud in certain areas of the country for legitimately having gender identity disorder, transitioning, and then marrying someone under the law, without any discussion of doing it for the "loophole," just straight up fraud even though their gender was changed on their identity documents.

as much drama has been caused for people who definitely identify as trans and who medically transition and then choose to get married, it makes me wonder if this couple aren't opening themselves up even moreso to potential charges of fraud? the state has no problem getting into folks' marriages where this is concerned. people get charged with marriage fraud for this, for marrying for immigration reasons, etc. i'm afraid i find the legal implications of this more disturbing than the relational ones.

i also agree with words and dykeumentary who've pointed out that regardless of whether one agrees with the actions, what's really at fault here is a state and a social system that defines marriage in such a fucked up, narrow way as to even make this situation possible.

(also thanks dykeumentary for putting words to the ableism of casual comments about people's mental health states. it upset me too.)

[Kelt]

Originally Posted by Words

I'm reminded here of how in defending the sanctity of marriage as a union between a man and woman, the straights would make such outrageous statements as next folks will be wanting to marry their dogs/goats/whatever and we'd all be up in arms about it. This is ONE couple. Regardless of their motives, regardless of how far along the butch/transgender/whatever spectrum Jackie was at the time of the surgery, regardless of whether or not she/he now considers herself/himself a woman or a man, regardless of anything, who the hell are we to say they their marriage is a sham and, better still, that they're mentally unstable because of x, y, or z? Do we really want to be the new oppressors? I know I don't.

I am by no means wanting to trivialize the journey of anyone who is transgendered. I know what that journey looks like. I do think, however, that we need to think of the kind of precedent that we're setting here in not displaying acceptance of what, for all we know, is a healthy, loving, relationship.

Words

For the most part I agree with your post and a lot of what several others have expressed, I posted in another thread earlier and am still thinking about and learning from differing opinions. I bolded a bit above because I would love to agree but can't.

Yes, this is one couple and it's nobodies business but theirs. BUT this one couple is on Oprah. I've been away from popular culture for a long time but a decade or so ago Oprah held enormous clout in forming popular opinion. Obscure authors becoming bestsellers overnight, creating product sensations, and lots of water cooler conversations. This is why I think it has the precedent setting power of a thousand couples and that is the part I think could be detrimental to the trans community.

Maybe her cultural persuasion powers have diminished, but unless they have, it is the amount of publicity with so little content I find disturbing.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Originally Posted by Corkey

I'm wondering if folks are gate keeping. Personally I will never make the transition, the physical for me does not make the person (gender) I am. I am Transgender, not Transexual.

Thanks. I was reading this thinking... Hang on... Everyone is talking about Transexual transition, not being transgendered.... Transgender... You can be female and just not a woman. And I knew plenty of trans*gender* in the UK who still ID'd as dyke as a secondary ID.

It actually makes my left eye twitch when people conflate the two as being the same.

[BrutalDaddy]

Originally Posted by vagina

Personally, my feeling is that this perfectly describes the transgender community or movement.

I know Linus already asked but this post really has me confused so could you please clarify on this statement? I'd greatly appreciate it.


Thanks,
Brute.

[imperfect_cupcake]

Originally Posted by Kelt

For the most part I agree with your post and a lot of what several others have expressed, I posted in another thread earlier and am still thinking about and learning from differing opinions. I bolded a bit above because I would love to agree but can't.

Yes, this is one couple and it's nobodies business but theirs. BUT this one couple is on Oprah. I've been away from popular culture for a long time but a decade or so ago Oprah held enormous clout in forming popular opinion. Obscure authors becoming bestsellers overnight, creating product sensations, and lots of water cooler conversations. This is why I think it has the precedent setting power of a thousand couples and that is the part I think could be detrimental to the trans community.

Maybe her cultural persuasion powers have diminished, but unless they have, it is the amount of publicity with so little content I find disturbing.

It's a good point. Then I blame Oprah and the media for purposefully manipulating a gap in mainstream understanding of gender, sex and sexual desire. They are all different things and frankly this is the media having a Funtime shit stirring again.

I'm not falling for it.

[Kobi]

aishah raises an important point. The issues are deeper and more complex.

But it behooves us to look at the larger picture as well.

I checked various news sources on this story. The majority did not affix a label to this couple. They were simply referred to as a couple....not a lesbian couple, not a same sex couple, just a couple.

This is huge.

We have been trained to understand the word "loophole" as meaning something bad, something nefarious, something exploitative.

Using something that exists in a way different from what was originally intended is not a bad thing.

Remember, it was a "loophole" in the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that spurred gay marriage to a reality in this country.

Some might even say it was a "loophole" for people with the breast cancer gene to have their top surgery covered by insurance under the guise of preventative health.

Looking at something with a fresh set of eyes has led to many positive changes.

It also is imperative for us to remember that even tho we use an umbrella to describe ourselves, the rain doesnt effect us all equally.

Like it or not, the reality is, in a predominately hetero appearing society, regardless of how we get there, male-female couplings lead to instantaneous rights and privileges.

Same sex couples have made inroads but we do not have the same rights and privileges across the board. We still face an uphill battle for equity on local, state, and federal levels.

Equity will come when marriage is just marriage. As long as a distinction is made for same sex or gay marriage, there will be inequality. On the most basic of levels, do bakeries refuse to make wedding cakes for couples they perceive to be hetero?

Because of our differences we might have the need to pull this apart, and to analyze it based on our own political leanings and interests. Perfectly understandable cuz it does mean something different to different groups overall.

Yet, I havent seen anything in these stories about this couple that says they were disingenuous to their authentic selves. That says a lot to me.

[dykeumentary]

Originally Posted by honeybarbara

Thanks. I was reading this thinking... Hang on... Everyone is talking about Transexual transition, not being transgendered.... Transgender... You can female and just not a woman. And I knew plenty of trans*gender* in the UK who still. IDd as a dyke as a secondary ID.

It actually makes my left eye twitch when people conflate the two as being the same.

Did you come across how the person on Oprah identifies themselves? We should use the term they use.
If we are talking about interrupting the oppression of gender non-conforming people, does it help to separate support for transgender people from transsexual people?

[imperfect_cupcake]

That's not what I am referring to, that is a strawman argument in regards to my post.

[dykeumentary]

What are you referring to? I'd love to know what you're thinking!
If it's the Oprah show producers who don't know the difference, I'm not surprised.

[imperfect_cupcake]

That it's irritating when people in general and the media confuse transgender with Transexual and confuse that again with sexual desire. It makes life more difficult for people when people think sex and gender are the same.

[BrutalDaddy]

I don't know if this couple chose to go this route strictly based off "loophole" or if there were past thoughts/desires to transition and so this "loophole" provided the perfect opportunity to do so. I don't know if this couple intentionally realized the back lash that could/would stem from their decision to use the "loophole" to their advantage. I don't even know exactly how I feel about this yet.

What I do know is this. My first thought had to do how the same "scenario" has been played out for the argument against gay marriage. By this I'm speaking of the argument that gay people should not be allowed to legally marry because god had ordained marriage between a bio male and bio female so that they may procreate. This argument/scenario has been played out in front of judges all over this nation. First time I ever heard it all I could think about were all the heterosexual couples out there who, for whatever reason, could not have children.

I guess where I'm going with this is, whether intentional or unintentional, the couples' actions could/can undermine the struggles of others (transgenders and transsexuals) within that same umbrella. Just as the hard core religious organizations actions to ban gay marriage could/can undermine the struggles of those within their umbrella (heterosexual couples unable to give birth "the way god intended").

Amazing to me how two "groups", so vastly different in beliefs, could possibly parallel each other in their mission(s), not realizing (or maybe they do but don't care), how much it could affect those around them. Granted, the couple isn't a "group" but merely two people looking for a way to be considered legally married in the eyes of the law but who's to say others won't follow suit? If it worked for them, it could work for others.

It can be viewed as follows....if masculine person of that couple transitioned only to be able to legally get married yet has no desire to be a man then that can undermine the serious struggle, grief, confusion, pain that a person who transitions goes through and also the way society views transgender/transsexual. Basically that transgender/transsexual really isn't that serious of an issue so dismiss it. Same for the organized religion argument that undermines heterosexual couples who can not procreate because their argument essentially says they can't marry either or shouldn't be married.

Anyway, this ramble may have gotten off topic but the thought kept bugging me and I knew if I didn't get it out of my head, it'd stay there. So figured I'd make y'all suffer with my musings.



That's All,
Brute.

[dykeumentary]

Originally Posted by honeybarbara

That it's irritating when people in general and the media confuse transgender with Transexual and confuse that again with sexual desire. It makes life more difficult for people when people think sex and gender are the same.

I like your brain.
Dammit though- I was kinda hoping we'd fight, so then we could make up...

[BullDog]

People have fought long and hard for legal recognition of same sex marriage. People have fought long and hard for legal sex changes. Neither group (with overlaps of course) are the ones holding institutional power.

The "loophole" to me is "heterosexual" marriage. In many places you still must have one person with male legal status and one person with female legal status to enjoy the full benefits of marriage. This could include couples where one or both of them is transsexed but queer identified. So there are times when some queers could get married under this "loophole" where a lesbian couple could not. I don't see those who do marry trying to exploit same sex couples.

I watched the video again. They look quite happy. Christine refers to Jacki as she. So yeah looks to me like Jacki did it to marry the woman she loves. I wonder what life is like for Jacki because to me s/he doesn't seem like s/he would pass for male most of the time despite her male legal status and lack of breasts. I don't see her as somehow taking advantage of a loophole and now living on easy street. Far from it.

If I had a partner who really needed health insurance or needed to emigrate or there was some real need for the woman I loved, and the only way to achieve it was to get my sex legally changed to male, I would do it. To me that's having to fight the system where the deck is stacked against you, not trying to take advantage of another disenfranchised group.

Their situation didn't seem that dire as far as legal issues in California, so yes it is puzzling. They seemed to just be in love and really want to get married, so that's why they did it.

If you put a lot of conditions on who can transition or have a legal sex change, isn't that going to hurt transsexed/transgender people? Jacki could very well end up with some unintended issues that s/he is not prepared for. I don't see the road being unproblematic for anyone who legally changes their sex- no matter what their reason is. Shouldn't it be the person's right to make the choice to transition/change their legal status rather than try to gate keep who can legally change their sex and for what reason? Some people may not make good decisions with this or based on what you agree with, very true. Many people get married for poor reason as well.

[SirenManda]

Originally Posted by vagina

Personally, my feeling is that this perfectly describes the transgender community or movement.

Where I agree with many points listed, I can't understand how one persons actions speak for a entire community. People have their own thoughts and opinions, two people can walk the same path but have different experiences.


The problem is this couple was on Oprah, therefor has some pop culture impressions that can be long lasting on those who blindly listen/watch tv shows without question (remember when Oprah went off about beef and got sued?) which happens more than we'd like to think. Does Chaz Bono speak for every transgender individual? Of coarse not. But many will view one famous persons journey as a format for many others. Being transgender isn't a choice, I don't know anyone who ever felt like transitioning wasn't saving their life.