Life, Law, Gender

Role models and TransParenting

In an uncharacteristic intrusion upon my study time (j/k, Kristine), a faithful reader sent me an email asking an interesting question.  She wanted to know if I thought the transition of a (natally) same-sex parent had a more or less significant impact on a child.  She noted that daughters have mothers as chief role-models whereas sons have their fathers.

Obviously, I cannot speak from direct experience as I have only daughters.  As everyone who reads this blog knows, I am estranged from my eldest daughter as a consequence of my transition.  Despite my hopes, prayers, and best efforts, we passed two years apart this past Christmas.  It continues to be the hole in my heart that clouds my otherwise happy existence (not a week passes that I don't shed tears over her).  But, would it have been different (better or worse) had she been a boy?

Honestly, I think the sex of the child does not matter.  I also think the whole "role model" paradigm is over-stated.

I think that many things affect the perception of a child vis-à-vis a parent's transition:

• In two parent households, the other parent's acceptance or rejection
• The child's age at the time of transition
• The original relationship between the parent and child
• Religion
• Friends and other relationships

I'm sure I'm missing one or more (perhaps the budding psychologist in our family has insight to others), but this illustrates the complexity of the situation. 

Reducing it to sex gives a lot of power to sexual stereotypes.  Unfortunately, I have to admit that such stereotypes have a lot of power.   Still, are those the only things that a boy learns from his father?  What is the important relationship between father and son (or daughter, for that matter)?  What is a father supposed to provide to a child?  In a 1979 California Supreme Court case In re Marriage of Carney, 24 Cal. 3d 725 (a case discussing a father's ability to be a good father despite his physical handicap and confinement to a wheelchair) the court noted:

"[A] boy need not prove his masculinity on the playing fields of Eton, nor must a man compete with his son in athletics in order to be a good father; their relationship is no less "normal" if it is built on shared experiences in such fields of interest as science, music, arts and crafts, history or travel, or in pursuing such classic hobbies as stamp or coin collecting. ... On a deeper level, the stereotype is false because it fails to reach the heart of the parent-child relationship. ... [I]t's essence lies in the ethical, emotional, and intellectual guidance the parent gives to the child throughout his formative years and beyond. The source of this guidance is the adult's own experience of life; its motive power is parental love and concern for the child's well-being; and its teachings deal with such fundamental matters as the child's feelings about himself, his relationships with others, his system of values, his standards of conduct and his goals and priorities in life."

So, I reject the role-model norm.  I know that I provided all the important things to my children that I could have provided (all motivated, I assure you, from a deep abiding parental love), that any father could have provided.  I did my best. I'm sure my children would regale you with stories of "Daddy lectures", my attempts to both give credit to them for their maturity and intellect and to pass along my own strong system of values.  That Jennifer felt it necessary to pull away from me is not a function of my failure as a father; rather, it is asserting her own independence and value system.  I honor that in her, I truly do.  I think she is misguided and that she is hurt by her choice, but I completely respect her right and ability to make such a choice.

Anecdotally, I also note that my best friend had three sons before she transitioned.  They are all still on excellent terms.  There is much more I could write, but I have to run off to class.  I would be interested in other opinions and certainly in hearing about other experiences!

The Movies

I love movies.  I own literally hundreds and enjoy watching them on the cool plasma television screen that I bought myself for my 50th birthday.  But, I especially love going to the movie theater.  However, in the past 6 months, I've only been one time, when Amanda was up to visit (we saw Must Love Dogs). The Girl and I just don't have the time to go very often.

However, as I reported earlier, we did go see TransAmerica last week.  And, this past Saturday night we also went to see Brokeback Mountain.  I really loved both movies.  I'm not a movie critic - by any measure - but this is my report on those movies (and a quick commentary on last night's L Word on Showtime).

TransAmerica is a very sweet movie about a middle-aged male-to-female (MTF) transsexual (Bree) who finds it necessary to come to terms (prior to her scheduled sexual reassignment surgery) with a son she never knew she had.  As you all know, Bree is played by Felicity Huffman and her portrayal is nothing short of amazing.  The movie is a little bit heavy-handed in its attempt to portray transsexualism in a positive light and some of the dialogue used to do so seems a trifle stilted and slightly out of context. But, it is so easy to forgive in the face of the otherwise excellent movie. 

Having said all that, I had my issues with some things.  For example, she claims to have had every surgery known to medical practice (facial feminization surgery, trachael shave, larnyx adjustment, etc.), except SRS, yet the movie protrays her as someone unable to complete a college degree and working as a bus-girl in a restaurant.  Those surgeries are damned expensive; where did the money come from?  Also, she links the surgery so closely with her becoming a woman.  Now, this is probably fairly accurate.  There are enough transwomen and certainly plenty of non-trans people who link genital configuration to sex.  However, I'm not one of them (and I'm not alone in my thinking) and I'd have enjoyed seeing a nod in that direction.  Still, these things are easily overlooked, as I said.

The most difficult part of the movie, for me, was when Toby (her son) finally learns who Bree is to him.  He hits her, hard, knocking her down and then storms out.  Although I've never been struck physically I know what it's like to be unexpectedly and quite harshly rejected by a child you love.  It is horrific and Felicity does a beautiful job expressing that.  She doesn't know if she'll ever see him again, and she goes on about her life, including getting her surgery, but there is this hole in her life.  It was all I could do to keep my crying to simple tears and not sobs during that part of the movie.

My hat is off to Duncan Tucker (the writer/director) and to Felicity Huffman, who, as I said definitely deserved her Golden Globe award.

Finally -- grades are in!

Just last night, after the Mr. Wolverine contest (I would write a post about this event, sponsored by the Latino Law Student Assoc as a fund-raiser, but there is NO WAY I could do it justice without photos and I have none.  Suffice it to say that it's a variety skit / beauty pagent where the men are the contestants.  It's pretty silly, but a lot of fun), I finally got my last grades.

This was my best semester ever.  I got the best grades this semester I've ever received. Now, that's not surprising.  Most people are supposed to get decent grades in their 3L year.  I think it's more reflective of the fact that I took courses last term (Family Law and Comparative Human Rights) that I really enjoyed.  I'm lazy.  I've never said otherwise.  And, I'm not as natively smart as these young people I'm in school with, which I've said many times (and is a notion I will never be disabused of).  That combination, for someone at middle-age who isn't overly concerned about what her law school grades will do to/for her, isn't likely to make the Dean's list.  I guess the good news for me is that I now fully get that they won't kick me out of law school.

Of course, there are people like Heidi who, despite claims to being lazy, actually do their work, make Law Review, AND are very smart, and their grades reflect that. If you're young and ambitious, then read her posts on how to do law school; they are really well done. For me, I'm just happy to be in the TOP half of the class for once.

My Friend, Jami

I had dinner tonight with one of my long-time friends, Jami Ward (she's the one on the right).  She was in town on a consulting job and we ate at one of my favorite restaurants in town, Seva's.  The food was good; the company was extraordinary.

She's recently started her own blog, not THAT different, and I've added her link to my blogroll.  Drop in on her and say hi.  She's good people.  No, really, she is.

It was great seeing you tonight, Jami.  I hope we don't have to wait another couple of years to do it again.

Womanless wedding

Ah, but those Texans know how to have fun.

Imagine a wedding in which the bride is none other than County Commissioner John Paul Ross. Well, the Blooming Grove Womanless Wedding fundraiser for the Blooming Grove Volunteer Fire Department, Communities in Action library and volunteer center and the empty stocking fund, which is a fund for the needy that is managed jointly by the community churches.

The wedding is planned for the Saturday after Valentine’s Day, Feb. 18, at the Blooming Grove elementary cafeteria.

The bridal party also consists of several local Blooming Grove celebrities that have volunteered for the event such as County Judge Alan Bristol, Blooming Grove Head Football Coach Ronnie Wilson, Elementary Principal David Brewer, Band Director Terry Lovett, Technology Director David Haden, Phil Golden and Mark Plyer to name a few.

Ends v. Means, or "Why I'll never be a politician"

I've often said (and I'm sure I've said so here, more than once) that I don't believe that the ends justify the means.  I would really (really!) be interested in other people's views on that subject.  Do they, sometimes?  Is there some end out there that is so wonderful that otherwise repulsive means justify it?  Consider, for example, the poll on Ambivalent Imbroglio's blog: "If you could save a million lives by torturing one person, would you do it?"  The results suggest that 61% of people would answer in the affirmative (out of 178 people at the time of this writing).  I was, incidentally, one of the 4% that answered 'no'.

Or, what about the Maryland democrats?  Although arguing that they favor same-sex marriage, they are seeking a delay of any order from the MD Court of Appeals on a Circuit Judge's order making the current ban on same-sex marriage invalid on constitutional grounds.

Maryland Democrats concerned about the political fallout from last week's court ruling on same-sex marriage are considering a plan to block any final court ruling from taking effect until after the November elections.

The proposal would be offered in legislation by Del. Luiz R.S. Simmons (D-Montgomery) that would freeze any decision from the state's highest court until the General Assembly has time to evaluate it.

What we're trying to do is see if we can craft a bill allowing the legislature to seek an injunction, at least until 2007, when we'll have the opportunity to consider a constitutional amendment" banning same-sex marriage, Simmons said.

Later, in that same article:

Although many Democrats, including Simmons, said they support the rights of gays and lesbians to marry, they also said they recognize that the ruling could hurt the party during key elections this year -- the governor's office and a U.S. Senate seat are at stake.

So, they support the right to marry, but just not now. Not when it could potentially affect them. Don't get me wrong, I want Democrats in control in that state as much as the next liberal.  Indeed, if they were, the odds of a Constitutional Amendment banning such marriages actually making it out of the legislature might be greatly reduced.  Does this political reality, potentially dictated by that state's voter composition, justify these means?  Or, is it better in the long-run (or, even the short-run) to stand up for your beliefs now and risk losing?

I would always opt for the latter.  I think.

Covering

I just read an amazing article in the New York Times by a Yale law professor, Kenji Yoshino   I urge you all to read this 9 page article.  The link is here, or you may download a PDF copy of it: Download Covering.pdf. Interestingly, I had the opportunity to listen to Kenji two years ago and was impressed with the man from many perspectives, including his intelligence and really nice looks.  He lectured at a conference I attended which was sponsored by GenderPac. I also had lunch with him as I saw him wandering the halls aimlessly one day and invited him to join me for lunch. He did and we had a nice chat.  I think I'll have to buy his book when it comes out. :)

This post, however, is not about Kenji or his article per se.  It's about the topic he wrote about, covering.  From Kenji's article:

Then I found my word, in the sociologist Erving Goffman's book "Stigma." Written in 1963, the book describes how various groups - including the disabled, the elderly and the obese - manage their "spoiled" identities. After discussing passing, Goffman observes that "persons who are ready to admit possession of a stigma. . .may nonetheless make a great effort to keep the stigma from looming large." He calls this behavior covering. He distinguishes passing from covering by noting that passing pertains to the visibility of a characteristic, while covering pertains to its obtrusiveness.

Naturally, this got me to thinking about covering for myself and for other transsexual people.  I imagine that we all have very different covering mechanisms.  Certainly, in an ideal world, we would not feel the need to cover, to assimilate.  But, I suspect that most of us do, nonetheless. 

Using Goffman's definition is my appearance (long hair, breasts, etc.) a form of passing or covering?  What about my political activism?  Does that obviate my passing?  My covering?  When I put on a dress and makeup, yet introduce Jamison Green on National Coming Out Day am I passing but not covering?  Neither?  Both? 

For now, I'm going to adopt Goffman's analogy to President Roosevelt:

He relates how F.D.R. stationed himself behind a desk before his advisers came in for meetings. Roosevelt was not passing, since everyone knew he used a wheelchair. He was covering, playing down his disability so people would focus on his more conventionally presidential qualities.

Even so, I am not convinced I fully comprehend the distinction in my own case.  For example, it seems to me that my appearance is passing.  Yet, everyone I know knows that I'm transsexual.  So, maybe I'm just covering, making my transsexuality less obtrusive.  Yet, on the other hand, I'm an agitator.  I don't let people long forget that I'm not part of the mainstream, that my rights were abrogated with my transition.

Is there a distinction between my long hair and my voice?  I get annoyed with a bad hair day, but I never worry that my hair is going to cause me to not pass in public.  But, if I've a cold, or a frog in my throat, or I've just not used my voicebox recently, my voice can come out in pretty low registers.  That does nag at my consciousness.  (Is that the distinction?  Conscious awareness of acts?  But, didn't I consciously grow out my hair?)  What would happen if I suddenly started speaking in baritone?  Where would my acceptance be?  I even said a few words to the Girl once and she shrank away, imploring me to "not do that again; it sounds like an alien has hijacked your body."

So, I think all of it is cover.  My appearance and my voice.  But, I especially think my voice is.  I look how I look because I like how I look.  But, I talk how I talk because I think it's easier for other people.

Do you cover?  How?

Bits

I finally saw TransAmerica Saturday night.  I loved it; Felicity Huffman deserved the Golden Globe for Best Actress in a drama.  I may write more later.

My Wife is out of town for two weeks in a trial (but will be back for the weekend). Here's another wedding photo to tide you over.

I still  don't have all my grades from last semester (deadline is Wednesday).

I'm applying for a Graduate Student Instructor (GSI) position in Women Studies next semester; I think I have a good shot at getting it (pays tuition, health insurance and a stipend -- but it's a ton o' work).

I'm enjoying school -- but it gets crazy in another week when 14th Amendment finally starts (meets 3 hours per day, twice a week).

After two years on the Outlaws board and involved in everything that I could get involved in (from an LGBT perspective) I am no longer involved in anything.  I resigned from the board and someone else has been elected (but I still have to do the formal turn over of stuff). 

That's all for now.  Hope you're all well.  Write sometime.

Felicity wins

"I know as actors our job is usually to shed our skins, but I think as people our job is to become who we really are, and so I would like to salute the men and women who brave ostracism, alienation and a life lived on the margins to become who they really are."

Felicity Huffman, as she accepted the Golden Globe Award for Best Actress, in TransAmerica.  Thank you, Felicity.

Last semester is - Finally - Over!

Last night, at about 10:30 PM, I finally completed my last paper from the previous term.  It took me so long because, I hope obviously, I got married and had a honeymoon in between the time it was assigned and its due date.  I simply refused to work on it while on the beach in Key West with my bride!  It is not a great paper; it is likely not even a good paper for the simple reason that it was for a class that I did not enjoy and working on the paper bored me.  I am not one of those people who can set aside such things and deliver her best work, regardless.  Still, it's done and turned in.

Because of the time spent on that paper, I am completely behind on my reading for this semester.  Today is the first day of my 14th Amendment class and my Church and State class.  I've not even cracked the book for either class.  I am so screwed.

Speaking of law school, I actually received my first (out of 5) final grade yesterday. Surprisingly, it was not from my Comparative Human Rights, which ended a couple of months ago, but was instead from Family Law.  I got a grade that tied for the best grade I've yet received in law school, but still not the grade I had hoped for.  I do not write great law school exams, either.  Still, I'm very happy with the grade.

Finally, the great people of Outlaws have been working hard to throw my sweet girl and me a congratulatory party.  But, we have been unable to find a date that works.  First, everyone had selected this Wednesday night, but then she got called unexpectedly out of town.  Then, the alternative date we selected got blown when a mediation she had been working on fell apart and the judge moved the trial date up on her.  Now, she will be out of town in trial for two weeks, beginning next Monday.  I don't know about this whole being married to a lawyer thing. ;)  Still, with her out of town, I've nothing to do but catch up on my school work.

Intelligence frustrated

I have high hopes for this semester.  Although it's going to be another difficult one for the first 6 weeks because of 14th Amendment (similar to last semester's Comparative Human Rights class), I am really (really!) excited about all my classes.  Everyone is a class that I wanted to take.

Having said that, I am constantly reminded how smart the people are around me and how I wish I had had a background in ... I don't know, philosophy, or psychology, or something that would have trained my brain better than sleeping through my accounting and business classes did. 

Right now, I am reading an excerpt from Judith Butler's "Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity" for my Sexual Orientation and the Law course.  I think I like it.  I think I agree with what she's saying so far.  But, I have to be honest here.  This is difficult reading.  Take the following sentence for example:

As a result, gender is not to culture as sex is to nature; gender is also the discursive/cultural means by which "sexed nature" or "a natural sex" is produced and established as "prediscursive," prior to culture, a politically neutral surface on which culture acts.

What the hell does prediscursive mean? I think I agree with this sentence.  But, I had to read it 5 times!  This excerpt is 20 single-spaced pages long; and, that is but one of 5 assignments for tomorrow's class!  If I have to read everything multiple times to understand it, I'll never keep up.  I want to learn this stuff.  I really do.  I don't want to just skim it and wing my way through class as I have most of my life (and most of law school to this point).  But, I'm really frustrated right now. 

Honeymoon pics

I've added a photo album with a sample of the photos we took on our honeymoon in the Keys.  Believe it or not, I still have a paper due from last semester and today is the first day of classes for the new semester, so I won't be writing much about the honeymoon for a bit.

Enjoy the photos, we sure as heck enjoyed taking them!!

I Do

The Girl (I'm going to call her Mary) decided early in our planning that we should not see each other on our wedding day, until we met in front of the minister.  In retrospect, I think that was a bad choice, but it is what we did.  Note that the pictures here are NOT from the professional photographer.  I will put some of them into a photo album on the sidebar when we get them (probably in a week or so).

My best friend, Michelle, her partner, and two youngest sons arrived at the house at 10:00 in the morning to whisk my daughters and me away to Canada.  I had appointments to have my nails done, my hair done and my makeup done. I was really happy with the makeup (very subtle) and the nails (very short).  I have never been more disappointed in my hair in my life.  I let the stylist talk me into putting it into an updo.  Had Mary been there, she would have insisted that we not do that.  I blame her. ;-)

We had rooms reserved for the wedding party at the Hilton in Windsor.  It's a very nice hotel with a rooms that provide a panoramic view of the Detroit River (that separates the US and Canada here) and Detroit.  It was cold (ice floes in the river), but not snowing and not raining.  We had no trouble crossing the border this time. 

After all of my appointments at the salon (where they fed me a horrible salad for lunch -- all in all, not my best salon experience), Michelle and I returned to the hotel to wait and then to get dressed.  I dressed in my daughters' room as Mary used our room.  We had arranged that she would leave at a particular time, then I would leave about 5-10 minutes later so that we could arrive at the Manor without seeing each other.  About 15 minutes after she was to have left, her attendant came to our room to say that they were having some minor difficulties and that I was to leave first.  To say that stressed me is a bit of an understatement. 

We got to the manor and they put me into a private room to wait.  Can you imagine how stressed I was sitting in there all by myself waiting?  It was brutal.  Finally (probably only a couple of minutes later) Michelle arrived to wait with me.  She brought me my bouquet of flowers.  I thought they were spectacular!  She also told me that Mary had arrived and that things should be starting in a few minutes.