transgender at BYU

[Portia]

The quote from Elder Ballard made me swear a little under my breath. I really wish we could reserve our moral outrage for the things in that list that damage people, like rape, family abandonment, and attempted murder (!).

BYU can do what it wants, and I chose the campus environment for many reasons, but guilt-tripping those with gender dysphoria wasn't one of them. :-| I'll admit, I have a natural adverse reaction to the idea of being trans, but maybe that's because I'm personally comfortable with my gender?

People who have studied this (TBS, Divya, other cool folks), is the Proclamation simply mistaken on this point?

[Violet]

I'm not going to comment on the board, but I know someone who was called into the honor code office for dressing feminine (I cant comment on identity, but as far as I know, he prefers male pronouns) and the officials cited the dignity portion of the honor code. Because apparently being a woman is a step down. I think female-bodied people who identify as trans or genderqueer in any way (not-cis) might have it easier in that regard. I'd kind of forgotten about that incident. And now I feel angry about it again.

[mic0]

and the officials cited the dignity portion of the honor code. Because apparently being a woman is a step down. ... And now I feel angry about it again.

>:(

I took an intro to sociology class my freshman year and after learning about transgender people in class (and having done some research on my own, including asking a Board question), I felt really conflicted about the Proclamation. It says right in there that gender is "an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose." But in sociology class I learned that gender is a cultural construct. If gender is an essential characteristic, does that mean it is possible for someone's true gender to be different from their biological sex? If it is essential across time and space, then it wouldn't change even if you had different genitalia. So confusing! Anyway. Whatever. Too tired for this, just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents.

[Portia]

Just because it's essential doesn't mean it will match your genitals. Maybe in a generation, transgender people (who identify as straight, I guess) will be accepted.

[mic0]

Exactly. The Proclamation can (not so) amazingly be interpreted two ways, which I guess is my point. I was kind of half-asleep when I wrote that last night. Now, where are our resident experts?

[TheBlackSheep]

At work, but I had thoughts about this. I'll get back to it.

[Integrating Editor]

I stumbled across this, and I found the perspective in the piece and in the comments fascinating. Given that I wear boy's clothes fairly frequently on BYU campus and get compliments on them, being FTM might fly under the radar. I've worn button-down shirts paired with pants to church without any negative comments, too. What bothered me the most about the question and answer was the conflation of sex with gender. I have no problems identifying as female, but I've never identified as feminine. Gender roles and social constructs about sex have always rung false to me. In fact, I just took a bunch of masculinity/femininity tests on the Internet, which seem to reflect traditional gender stereotypes, and they all defined me as masculine. Interesting.

[Portia]

This is complicated by the fact that being a man in the LDS Chuch is a more privileged position than being a woman.

[Whistler]

Given that I wear boy's clothes fairly frequently on BYU campus and get compliments on them, being FTM might fly under the radar. I've worn button-down shirts paired with pants to church without any negative comments, too.

For some reason it's much more common for men's fashions to be incorporated into women's fashions (like how heels were first worn by men). I used to dress a lot more masculinely, and for a while I often confused children with my gender. Part of it was that I resented "dressing up" for work, so I looked for ways to technically dress up while subverting expectations (maybe this is why I wear crazy socks to church sometimes?). And another part of it was that I don't feel traditionally feminine--I've only put a few pink things into my wardrobe recently.

Back to the OT, I think a transgender person at BYU would probably do best to frame their inclinations as wanting to dress/appear more like the opposite sex. It seems like it would be easier for others to accept a bit of cross-dressing at first, and then as they learn more about the individual, to accept that they're trans (and yes, it would be much more difficult for a transwoman than a transman).

[TheBlackSheep]

The quote from Elder Ballard made me swear a little under my breath. I really wish we could reserve our moral outrage for the things in that list that damage people, like rape, family abandonment, and attempted murder (!). . . . People who have studied this (TBS, Divya, other cool folks), is the Proclamation simply mistaken on this point?

Well, here's the thing: nobody knows, do they? Trans* people all have different perspectives on how much of gender is a cultural construct, but I believe that most cisgender and trans* people agree that they simply have the gender they have, just as they have the sex that they have. That's not to say that the characteristics of one's gender are absolutely never going to evolve or that their behavior cannot change to better reflect their gender, but it is to say that people simply are who they are. As for whether gender is an "essential characteristic," well, some trans* people, including some genderqueer people, would take issue with that, as they find the whole construct of gender to be meaningless or at least unhelpful. I don't know what my beliefs are on any type of a premortal existence, but I don't actively believe in one, so personally I don't think that gender is/was any part of a premortal or eternal characteristic.

I was curious, what is the church's opinion on transgendered/sexual people? What would BYU do if there was a student who was in the process of switching genders?

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but no one can switch genders. Gender is what you feel and experience within yourself; sex is what your chromosomes and genitalia say about you. Also, most trans* people do not undergo surgery to completely change their external sex characteristics. Many may have some surgery and/or undergo hormone therapy, but many do not even choose to do that. Many trans* people do not even feel the need to do that.

As for the subject matter of the question and the answer, I am not the least bit surprised. I was aware of that part of the handbook of instructions. However, while I have been aware of many gay/bisexual/lesbian/queer BYU students, I have not been aware of any trans* ones. There is much more trans* discrimination in our society than there is gay, etc. discrimination, and this population appears to still be completely underground, while I am 100% sure it exists.

I'm not going to comment on the board, but I know someone who was called into the honor code office for dressing feminine (I cant comment on identity, but as far as I know, he prefers male pronouns) and the officials cited the dignity portion of the honor code. Because apparently being a woman is a step down.

Angst angst angst angst angst. And I agree with all of you that it would be much harder to be a transwoman than a transman on campus (or in society) because of this same mindset, which leads to masculine gender norms being so much more strict than feminine ones.

I took an intro to sociology class my freshman year and after learning about transgender people in class (and having done some research on my own, including asking a Board question), I felt really conflicted about the Proclamation.

While I have respect for the LDS church and the brethren and I foster no ill will, I am not conflicted. I'm not sure about how "eternal" gender is, but I absolutely think the Proclamation is wrong about gender at large.

Just because it's essential doesn't mean it will match your genitals. Maybe in a generation, transgender people (who identify as straight, I guess) will be accepted.

Some identify as straight and others don't. Being trans* has nothing to do with sexual preference. Trans* folks can be straight, gay, bisexual, queer, pans, or none of the above.

I stumbled across this, and I found the perspective in the piece and in the comments fascinating. Given that I wear boy's clothes fairly frequently on BYU campus and get compliments on them, being FTM might fly under the radar. I've worn button-down shirts paired with pants to church without any negative comments, too. What bothered me the most about the question and answer was the conflation of sex with gender. I have no problems identifying as female, but I've never identified as feminine. Gender roles and social constructs about sex have always rung false to me. In fact, I just took a bunch of masculinity/femininity tests on the Internet, which seem to reflect traditional gender stereotypes, and they all defined me as masculine. Interesting.

Agreed with all. However, I just want to be careful and say that if someone wanted to transition from a feminine presentation to a masculine one, it couldn't be simplified to cross dressing.

Back to the OT, I think a transgender person at BYU would probably do best to frame their inclinations as wanting to dress/appear more like the opposite sex. It seems like it would be easier for others to accept a bit of cross-dressing at first, and then as they learn more about the individual, to accept that they're trans (and yes, it would be much more difficult for a transwoman than a transman).

I hate this frame though. I find it degrading to have to make who you are, WHO YOU ARE down in your core, more palatable by breaking it into bite-size pieces because society/whoever may react badly.

[TheBlackSheep]

And as for some of the comments on the FMH article about how you can tell about people or their level of "effeminate" presentation... Well here. Story time.

Girlfriend A, who turned out to be a tremendous jerk (not really relevant but apparently I still have feelings about that), had long hair and maintained a stereotypically attractive feminine shape. However, she told me that, despite my short hair and more masculine dress at the time, I would always be the more feminine one. Everything about her from the way she walked to the way she dated to the way she dressed were more stereotypically masculine. She preferred stereotypically female pronouns, so I used them.

Girlfriend B, who was not a tremendous jerk, was trans-questioning and was often identified by strangers using male pronouns. She had short hair, wore a binder to flatten her chest, and wore traditionally masculine clothes. She often said that maybe someday she would like to further explore the possibility of her being trans* but for the time being she was happy as she was. She preferred stereotypically female pronouns, so I used them.

Just, GAH, trust people to be the expert on themselves and then treat them with an appropriate level of respect. Trust them to know their gender pronouns and their name. Trust them to know if that is static or if it changes. Nobody on earth knows everything about everything, but just trust people to know more about themselves than you do. That's it.

[Whistler]

Back to the OT, I think a transgender person at BYU would probably do best to frame their inclinations as wanting to dress/appear more like the opposite sex. It seems like it would be easier for others to accept a bit of cross-dressing at first, and then as they learn more about the individual, to accept that they're trans (and yes, it would be much more difficult for a transwoman than a transman).

I hate this frame though. I find it degrading to have to make who you are, WHO YOU ARE down in your core, more palatable by breaking it into bite-size pieces because society/whoever may react badly.

I totally agree with you in principle. We shouldn't have to spoonfeed others parts of our identity to make it more palatable to them. But sometimes it can help break assumptions in people who would otherwise be unwilling to listen.

Maybe part of my cisgender privilege is that I don't see my gender as who I am "down to my core." It's like, another aspect of who I am? I think we all keep parts of ourselves hidden. When I meet someone for the first time, I don't tell them about my nerdy hobbies, religious doubts, or sexual experiences unless I anticipate that they want to talk about those things. But at the same time, gender is something that isn't a nerdy hobby or sexual experience, and it shouldn't have to be hidden. I've basically gone nowhere with this. ugggh word vomit.

[Portia]

"Coming out" to my (agnostic, slacker) missionary brother about my permanent rupture with the LDS Church was both a lot more complicated, and a lot more detailed, than it would be with a casual acquaintance. If someone asks, I say that I was raised Mormon, but I don't feel the need to share it upfront. I think the tension makes sense ... It definitely does help people accept me more if I'm not aggressive about my disbelief. (For instance, professionally. Beyond my coffee habit, I don't see how anyone could guess one way or another. And I think it should be completely irrelevant to my work performance.)

[TheBlackSheep]

I totally agree with you in principle. We shouldn't have to spoonfeed others parts of our identity to make it more palatable to them. But sometimes it can help break assumptions in people who would otherwise be unwilling to listen.

I completely agree. I just don't think that on issues such as gender it should be necessary to survive. And hey, I have been involved in a lot of making myself palatable for others in order to help break down stereotypes and help others open up... Maybe I'm just tired and grouchy.

Maybe part of my cisgender privilege is that I don't see my gender as who I am "down to my core." It's like, another aspect of who I am? I think we all keep parts of ourselves hidden. When I meet someone for the first time, I don't tell them about my nerdy hobbies, religious doubts, or sexual experiences unless I anticipate that they want to talk about those things. But at the same time, gender is something that isn't a nerdy hobby or sexual experience, and it shouldn't have to be hidden. I've basically gone nowhere with this. ugggh word vomit.

No, I gotcha. But I also agree that gender is not a choice or an experience or a hobby, and most of us get to wear our gender, whatever it is, on our sleeve. I'm neither incredibly feminine nor masculine, but I get to express that without even thinking about it. Trans* people don't.

"Coming out" to my (agnostic, slacker) missionary brother about my permanent rupture with the LDS Church was both a lot more complicated, and a lot more detailed, than it would be with a casual acquaintance. If someone asks, I say that I was raised Mormon, but I don't feel the need to share it upfront. I think the tension makes sense ... It definitely does help people accept me more if I'm not aggressive about my disbelief. (For instance, professionally. Beyond my coffee habit, I don't see how anyone could guess one way or another. And I think it should be completely irrelevant to my work performance.)

Sure, I agree. There are a lot of things I don't wear on my sleeve, too (for example, my inactivity in the LDS church or the open state of my relationship or whatever). But you and I, Portia, get to wear our gender on our sleeve because we are cisgender, and I would argue that gender is more "central" to one's personality/identity/whatever than a lot of those things that we don't wear on our sleeves.

[SmurfBlueSnuggie]

Slightly off-topic story that made me think of this thread.

A lady came into work today. Didn't think anything was odd at first. Then I looked at her ID. Steven. I asked what she preferred to go by and she said "Anna! My body really doesn't match my legal gender any more. I mean, look at me!" At which point she pulled open her jacket to show me her sexy bodice top thing. I was all "Yeah, I totally see what you mean."

From there Anna proceeded to explain that she loved my work because I was willing to call her Anna when other places insisted on using the name on her ID. (This is my first interaction with anyone I've know is trans* and I'm just trying to be polite.) Nothing really bothered me, since nothing I was doing required a distinction on her gender or name. The system runs by legal ID, and she was ok with that, and our conversation was between two women.

What threw me was when I asked what she did for work and, without hesitation, she said "I'm a dominatrix."

Yup. And now I've met a transwoman dominatrix.

ETA: because of the area of town I work in, we get a lot of dancers and strippers and the like. But usually they are more reserved about announcing their occupation. Her boldness shocked me more than anything.

[Portia]

I miss the Left Coast sometimes.