Dear Antioch Review,
When I entered Antioch College as an undergraduate student in September of 2006, I was already branded with the requirement that I now, “be ashamed to die until [I] have won some victory for humanity,” as the first president, abolitionist and visionary, Horace Mann dictated. This threatening mantra hung over even the most frivolous of activities at Antioch, requiring themed parties, dorm hangouts, and casual cafeteria debates to consider social justice and aim for radical inclusivity.
When the school was threatened with closure a year later, talk of student’s “toxic culture” undergirded excuses of financial difficulty, yet we did not heed the insult. We continued to take action against racial microaggressions, everyday manifestations of white privilege and rape culture, and to celebrate queer culture and destruction of the gender binary. We continued to live the personal as the political and carried Antioch’s activist legacy both into a fight with its own administration and into the wider world, planting Antiochian seeds of justice in our wake.
As a writer, one would think Harris would be more aware of the power of precise words to shape our reality
Ten years after the first fall when I rolled in the leaves on Antioch’s main lawn, and following the closure and eventual reopening of the college, I know that people with the same heart for humanity, yearning to create victories for us all, are still working in corners near and far. This extended network gives me a sense of assurance that although all is not right in the world, the fight is not yet over. Although I do not agree with all Antiochians, and indeed it is standard for each class to hearken to their own golden era of Antioch as the most authentic, there is an urgency for justice that ties us together. I expect this sense of purpose and integrity to manifest within all entities related to the school, including its literary journal The Antioch Review, which itself claims to “serve our readers and our authors and to encourage others to publish the ‘best words in the best order.’”
I fail to understand how Daniel Harris’ piece, “The Sacred Androgen,” published in The Antioch Review’s Winter 2016 edition, met these requirements. In the piece, Harris claims to respect transgender people and their choices while referring to them throughout the piece as “TG” or “TG’s” meaning “Transgenders,” as well as using demeaning terms such as “shemale,” and eventually likening sex reassignment surgery to female genital mutilation. For any media maker, a brief internet search for “transgender media guidelines” will lead you to resources such as GLAAD’s media reference guide for transgender issues that helpfully lets all media makers know to use “transgender” as an adjective, and instructs journalists to avoid the exact language aforementioned from the Harris piece.
Harris’ misunderstanding of the terms gender and sex detracts from his intended intellectual query.
Despite stating otherwise, Harris demonstrates his transphobia by stating he considers the term “cisgender” being used to describe non-trans people, as a pejorative, and criticizes trans people for asking that their preferred gender pronouns be honored. As a writer, one would think Harris would be particularly aware of the power of precise words to shape our reality.
Harris uses the terms ‘gender’ and ‘sex’ interchangeably. Gender is an individual’s sense of self as male, female, both or neither, which is shaped in part by a given culture’s expectations of behavior, attitudes and presentation of male or female, while sex is a biological status assigned at birth typically based on the appearance of external genitalia, and refers to additional features that include internal reproductive organs, and sex chromosomes. Were Harris to have considered these definitions, he may no longer believe “that the whole phenomenon of switching one’s gender is a mass delusion.” Harris also conflates gender and sexuality, suggesting that children who demonstrate a trans identity are instead gay or lesbian, and actually suffering from homophobia limiting their expression of sexual identity. His ignorance of these essential definitions detracts from his intended intellectual query.
In addition to the lack of attention to media resource guides, incorrect word use, and blatant transphobia strung throughout the piece, what disappoints me is Harris’ inability to fairly handle the intriguing and nuanced issues he does raise. The article falls short in fairly exploring his more interesting questions, such as what life will be like for young people who get the support to transition at an early age, as this becomes more accepted in our society. Certainly, as he notes, we can guess that there will be individuals who later feel they made the wrong choice, or were coerced by their parents, as humans (including parents) are imperfect and sometimes change their minds. However, there are other outcomes we can’t yet see that speak to new possibilities. Perhaps youth who have families and access to resources that support their gender transitions now will experience less internal and external struggle as they are able to be themselves in the world from nearly the moment they can identify it for themselves. Success for these individuals and support of their open exploration of selves bodes well for our society’s future understanding of gender. Should the understanding that gender is not limited to two categories and is not immediately predictable from appearance permeate our culture, we may see a welcome decline in the limitations that masculinity and femininity still impart.
Many people do not identify with this “trapped in the wrong body” trope
Harris expresses frustration that trans people seem to identify with a narrative of being trapped in the wrong body, and with experiencing gender dysphoria. However, those are stories being written by medical professionals and media makers that oversimplify the discussion of trans people, and they are a far cry from the diverse experiences of the community. In fact, many people do not identify with this “trapped in the wrong body” trope, and gender dysphoria is a frustrating if not offensive diagnosis that indeed does pathologize transgender people. However, receiving a gender dysphoria diagnosis can be medically necessary for those who do seek to transition by means of hormone therapy and or surgery.
Harris speaks generally about “TGs” yet almost exclusively makes examples of trans women, and raises multiple concerns about sex reassignment surgeries and other forms of trans women’s gender expression. While he is off-base in his assumption that all trans people (even those who have the resources to do so) embark on hormone therapy and sex reassignment surgery in order to express their gender, he also fails to understand the complex interplays of sexism and transphobia that trans women face in seeking to express their gender.
He criticizes trans women who do participate in sex reassignment surgeries, and asks why cosmetic surgeries to enhance features perceived as feminine seem to fall so far outside the femininity of the average cis woman, calling attention to the seemingly ‘outdated’ beauty standards that some trans women aspire to embody. The missing consideration here is the continued pervasive effect of ‘outdated’ beauty standards on all women. As cis women continue to face pressure to alter themselves through dieting, temporary and permanent cosmetic treatments to preserve or create images of youth, whiteness, thinness, and other attributes appealing to the male gaze, why would trans women be met with any different expectation?
A person’s gender transition is not an all-inclusive pass for healing internalized oppression
Harris also mentions what he considers to be discrimination by trans women toward cross dressers and trans women who do not “pass.” This policing of behaviors and expression typifies internalized oppression, an insidious consequence of living with a targeted identity. Even as one comes into their own, tendency toward low self-esteem, disempowerment, and reiteration of actions and attitudes against those who share your identity can persist. A person’s gender transition is not an all-inclusive pass for healing internalized oppression.
Despite the pressure to conform, there are many trans women who defy beauty standards expected for women, presenting as male, androgynous, or less than hyper-feminine. It is true that women like Janet Mock, Laverne Cox, and Caitlyn Jenner, whose stories have brought trans issues into America’s living room, express femininity that closely replicates societal expectations of women, which can reify the gender binary and drive unrealistic expectations of femininity. However, I would argue that it is not their individual responsibility to shift this. Rather, additional amplification of stories and images of those who embody non-normative gender expressions would serve to diversify the image of trans people in our society’s imagination, and invite further questioning of the gender binary. The current lack of gender non-conforming people in the public sphere continues to reinforce adherence to strict definitions of male and female for everyone.
Overall, Harris repeatedly fails to notice how the answers to his questions lie in the effects of structural oppression on individuals with intersectional identities, and furthermore with the internalized –isms that affect them. He asks trans women to stop trying to meet the outdated societal beauty standards on women, without acknowledging that these standards still rule. The policing of women’s bodies, cis and trans is rampant in a society that still sees maleness as neutral. In addition to sexism and transphobia, many trans people may face discrimination based on ability, race, class, and sexual identity.
The Antioch Review has a responsibility to dedicate itself to these values
Harris reports that 41% of trans people attempt suicide, and believes this must be in part due to disillusionment that arises when gender transition fails to resolve their problems, despite the social stigmas trans people face. Aside from stigmatization, perhaps attempted suicide among trans people has something to do with the fact that 47% of trans people interviewed in the 2011 National Trans Discrimination Survey reported a negative job outcome; be it firing, not hiring, or not being promoted based on their gender identity. Or maybe it’s that 32 states don’t protect people from being fired for being trans, or that “one in five transgender people in the United States has been discriminated [against] when seeking a home, while one in ten have been evicted due to gender identity,” that contribute to poor mental and emotional wellbeing. Then again, there’s also the fact that social stigmatization of transgender people is so severe that of those 41% who reported attempted suicide, 61% were victims of physical assault, 64% reported sexual assault, and 51% were harassed or bullied at school. If these numbers don’t affect your mental health, consider that 72% of the victims of hate violence homicides in 2013 were transgender women.
That Harris lacks the imagination and the compassion to fairly address the context in which trans people, and in particular trans women, are making their way in the world is an insult to the trans community, the LGBTQ movement, Antioch College, and the literary world.
As a noted literary journal associated with a college renowned for its commitment to furthering social justice and driving cultural innovation, The Antioch Review has a responsibility to dedicate itself to these values. The Antioch Review is poised to be a powerful culture shifter, as a platform to raise questions and further issues affecting our world. I invite you to amplify the voices of those that would best speak to the nuanced issues at hand.
As Antioch College entrusts the journal to carry out their value of “the free expression of ideas and opinions, even when they run counter to [their own],” perhaps you would look beyond the misinformed opinion of individuals from more privileged identities, and elevate the raw, challenging, truthful ideas and opinions of individuals who face transphobia and sexism daily.
Who can answer these questions about the impact of internalized oppression, the effect of early transitions for youth, unrealistic beauty standards, the cosmetic surgery industry, and the continued failure of the gender binary? I can think of no one better prepared than the individuals living at the intersections of these identities to provide answers and thought provoking questions to stir a true transgender debate. As a 75 year old journal basking in the legacy of Horace Mann, each story you elevate to the public eye has the possibility to contribute to a victory for humanity. I’d hate for you to die, ashamed.
Sincerely,
Molly Thornton
Image: Barta IV
