Trans women are not women (Part 8)

[AmyStrange]

Difficult call. A lot depends on the novel's setting, and why you want a transgender character.

If it is set before the first half of the 20th century, then presumably the trans character has adopted the role of the opposite sex, but fears discovery of his/her actual sex. The characters would refer to he/she as the adopted sex, but how would the narrator refer to her?

I, personally, detest "they" in most situations, although "their" is not quite as bad, just because it's a fairly common usage anyway. My English teacher in high school hammered home that proper grammar is to say, "Everyone has his book.", but he had to hammer it home because frequent usage was "Everyone has their book.".

Basically, the inclusion of a transgender character will end up creating a political statement, whether or not you want it to, so you might have to decide which political statement you want to make, and be aware that someone is not going to like it.


I never read the Rowling book with the transgender character. Does anyone know how she handled it?


Oh.....and....since you're new to the thread, make sure that you understand that when we say "transgender" around here, we are not specifically referring to someone who has had hormone replacement therapy and/or surgical alteration. Unless we specifically mean to refer to those, "transgender" also includes people who simply declare that their gender is different than their biological sex. I know that an awful lot of people in the world don't realize that's the common usage these days, at least among the supporters of trans-inclusive policies. Around here, if we intend to refer to people who are undergoing or have undergone some aspect of medical transition, we'll generally make that explicit.

I assumed that's what you meant, although it can get confusing sometimes (as you can see in my answer about incarceration above.

I agree with most of what you said about putting a transgender person in a novel. I'm even reading about this very thing right now in a historical novel series about an FBI agent that somehow gets whisked back in time (to the 1800s) and has to solve a murder by a serial killer in the first book of the series (A Murder in Time by Julie McElwain). The book I'm referring to above is the second in the series (A Twist in Time - Kendra Donovan Series #2), although that one is about someone who isn't transgender, but secretly gay.

One thing about forums (like this one) is that since you really don't know the sex of many of the posters here, you are sometimes literally forced to use the he/she/it/they pronoun when referring to them.

That'll actually help if I do decide to create this character.

Sorry for the sidetrack mods

 

[AmyStrange]

I never read the Rowling book with the transgender character. Does anyone know how she handled it?

Which one is that?

I've read the ones she wrote under a male pseudonym:

Cormoran Strike Series by Robert Galbraith

but I don't remember any transgender character, and I've read them all so far.

She does have a new one coming out this fall. Is that the one you mean?

ETA: I have read one book (the Joe Grey series about talking cats that solve crimes) with a transgender character. She just pretends to be a man in order to keep her identity a secret from an old partner (she plans to kill) who screwed her over in an earlier crime and got sent to jail instead of him.

I'll have to look up the title and read it again, but you don't know about it until almost the very end of the book.

ETAA: I think the transgender one by Rowling is called "Troubled Blood" but it's about a cross-dresser, and I have read that one. It's another Cormoran Strike novel. I'll have to read it again, but it'll take me a while to get back to it, sorry.

FROM: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/15/ente...led-blood-book-trans-gbr-scli-intl/index.html

JK Rowling's new book sparks fresh transgender rights row
By Lianne Kolirin, CNN - Updated 2:20 PM ET, Tue September 15, 2020

London (CNN)JK Rowling has once again come under fire from transgender rights activists, this time for her new crime novel, which features a cross-dressing serial killer.

Published Tuesday, "Troubled Blood" by Robert Galbraith -- Rowling's crime writer pseudonym -- is the fifth installment in the Cormoran Strike series.

An (sic) review of the novel in Britain's Daily Telegraph on Sunday described the "meat of the book" as an investigation into the cold case of a missing doctor who is believed to have fallen victim to a murderous cross-dresser.

ETAA: The cross-dressing killer is in the Joe Grey series (book #4) called "Cat in the Dark" by Shirley Rousseau Murphy

http://www.joegrey.com/

 

[lionking]

Which one is that?

I've read the ones she wrote under a male pseudonym:

Cormoran Strike Series by Robert Galbraith

but I don't remember any transgender character, and I've read them all so far.

She does have a new one coming out this fall. Is that the one you mean?

I’ve read all the books too, and the reference everyone got upset about was utterly insignificant.

 

[AmyStrange]

I’ve read all the books too, and the reference everyone got upset about was utterly insignificant.

I love them, especially since my Dad lost his leg in a mill accident.

ETA: It helped me to understand my dad a little better, especially some of the problems he had with his artificial leg.

Again, sorry for the sidetrack mods

 

[AmyStrange]

I don't think you'll find anyone against the "whole idea" here. Most people have expressed a live-and-let-live approach, in nearly all everyday situations.

Welcome to the thread, by the way. Should we use pronouns which match your birth sex or username?
Here are some of the general questions we've talked about, boiled down:
I'd be interested in hearing your take on at least the first one.

I forgot to answer the one above.

Call me whatever you want or whatever is easier or whatever makes you feel more comfortable.

ETA: I'll pretend you're talking to my character, and sometimes, I'll even answer in kind.

Making up something a cat would say was one of the things that made writing my novels so much fun.

 

[The Atheist]

That's true, but since then, it seems to have moved in different directions and not totally focused on just sports.

Since I've been participating in it since post #2, I'm fully aware of what it discusses.

Pretending to be a woman can be a bad thing sometimes, and I'll agree with you on that, but it isn't ALWAYS a bad thing, and that was the point of my first post here.

Not relevant to what I posted.

I'm not trying to attack you. I'm just trying to understand all of it and not just the sports part, but I'd also like to know why you picked on my post specifically to reply to.

Ok, third try.

You specifically said you had no problem as long as nobody was getting hurt. In your own words:

I don't care what folks do as long as they're not hurting me or anyone else

I gave you an example - which was coincidentally about sports, because women are being harmed, financially and physically, by self-identified trans women.

Help me out here, and please don't take my comments out of context and ignore the rest of my post and questions.

It's clearly not out of context, and I didn't answer anything else in your posts because I didn't see a need to.

 

[AmyStrange]

Since I've been participating in it since post #2, I'm fully aware of what it discusses.

Not relevant to what I posted.

Ok, third try.

You specifically said you had no problem as long as nobody was getting hurt. In your own words:

I gave you an example - which was coincidentally about sports, because women are being harmed, financially and physically, by self-identified trans women.

It's clearly not out of context, and I didn't answer anything else in your posts because I didn't see a need to.

Thank you for being such an awesomely nice person. You are obviously loved by everyone in this forum.

 

[Meadmaker]

ETAA: The cross-dressing killer is in the Joe Grey series (book #4) called "Cat in the Dark" by Shirley Rousseau Murphy

Ok. Not the same thing. I was confused.

 

[LondonJohn]

LOL. Ex-UK-Prime-Minister Tony Blair embarrasses himself (once again) by claiming, in an interview in today's Times, that:

“Of course, we shouldn’t be transphobic and we should have equal rights for trans people. But equal rights doesn’t mean you can’t use the phrase ‘pregnant woman’”

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1492451340471181312


(Frankly, anyone in this thread who can't spot Blair's ignorance and dearth-of-understanding here... probably needs to do some more learning. Just like Blair himself.)


PS: linking to the Times twitter thread, because the interview itself is behind the Times paywall.

 

[JihadJane]

LOL. Ex-UK-Prime-Minister Tony Blair embarrasses himself (once again) by claiming, in an interview in today's Times, that:

“Of course, we shouldn’t be transphobic and we should have equal rights for trans people. But equal rights doesn’t mean you can’t use the phrase ‘pregnant woman’”

https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1492451340471181312


(Frankly, anyone in this thread who can't spot Blair's ignorance and dearth-of-understanding here... probably needs to do some more learning. Just like Blair himself.)


PS: linking to the Times twitter thread, because the interview itself is behind the Times paywall.

What's embarrassing about that?

 

[lionking]

What's embarrassing about that?

Nothing.

 

[Meadmaker]

What's embarrassing about that?

It's all part of LondonJohn's schtick. You take something that someone has said, make a bizarre interpretation of it, and declare that it's stupid. And of course you don't even explain the bizarre interpretation, just put on a condescending attitude that anyone who needs an explanation is just as big of an idiot as whoever LJ is ridiculing.

It's really not much different from what he did here,

_

and here,

_

and here,

_

and here,

_

and here.

_

For those not wanting to follow the links, they are his five most recent posts to this thread. They're all dripping with condescension and insulting to people, and they are all varying degrees of wrong.

The only difference in the post about Blair is that his primary focus is a public figure instead of a forum member, although he does make sure to insult everyone here with the "anyone in this thread" reference. It's just what he does.

In every post he makes.

As for the content, I'm guessing that LondonJohn would say that this is in no way at all in any sense related to the controversy of Rowling making a reference to "people who menstruate" in a tweet. No, no. Blair is ignorant, because, I'm guessing, no one has ever proposed legislation making it a crime to say "pregnant women", therefore Blair is an ignorant fool, and so is anyone who can't see why he is an ignorant fool.

 

[TomB]

I think TomB probably had in mind situations where females are put in one space or league and males are put in another space or league, for the first question.

How would you approach the problem of incarceration?

For clarification on those questions:
Whenever we segregate people into groups for any reason, be it activities, access to space, statistical demographics, medical care, etc. we should look at the reason we do so.

If there is no good reason, we should stop doing it.
If it's a reason that has to do with sex, we should do it by sex.
If it's a reason that has to do with gender, then we should do it by gender.
If it's for some entirely different reason we should do so on the basis of whatever that reason is.

So:
What things should we segregate by sex?
What things should we segregate by gender?
What things should we not segregate at all?
and (new one) What things should we segregate on an entirely different basis?

 

[TomB]

I'm also a writer, and I want to introduce a transgender character in my novels, but I'm beginning to see some problems in easily referring to them. After a while, too many "she/he/it/they said" could get annoying to the reader.

What do you think (or anyone else for that matter)?

Use the character's preferred pronouns (she for a trans-woman, he for a trans-man). Other than that, write them the same as any other character. The fact that they are trans is only relevant in situations where it comes up or is an issue for some reason. If you introduce the character as trans, you don't need to constantly remind the reader any more than you need to remind readers of the gender/sex of other characters. You are referring to the character, not their gender identity.

Unless, of course, your whole story is about this person being trans. But my impression is that this is a character in a story that just happens to be trans. Perfectly normal. Not a big deal unless the character encounters a harasser. Or wants to join a sports league or something that brings trans-ness to the fore.

 

[AmyStrange]

Use the character's preferred pronouns (she for a trans-woman, he for a trans-man). Other than that, write them the same as any other character. The fact that they are trans is only relevant in situations where it comes up or is an issue for some reason. If you introduce the character as trans, you don't need to constantly remind the reader any more than you need to remind readers of the gender/sex of other characters. You are referring to the character, not their gender identity.

Unless, of course, your whole story is about this person being trans. But my impression is that this is a character in a story that just happens to be trans. Perfectly normal. Not a big deal unless the character encounters a harasser. Or wants to join a sports league or something that brings trans-ness to the fore.

Thank you, and I agree with most of what you wrote, but I also think the other important thing to consider is how they are referred to by other characters that are uncomfortable with transgender folks, but they don't want to sound or act in a callous way in front of them or even behind their back.

This approach could lead to much soul searching by this same character and maybe bring up some interesting discussions, but of course, all this depends on the plot I make up (like you also mentioned).

Otherwise, I think everything you wrote makes sense and thank you again.

ETA (hopefully this isn't off topic): I think being transphobic is something I'd like to bring out and discuss in my novels.

Since one of my main characters is a cat who can not only talk but can also sniff out missing persons, there are a lot of issues that will be new to her that I've already discussed in my novels, like religion, racism, and sexuality.

Two of my characters are gay, and one of them looks like Desi Arnaz, and loves to dress up like Ricky (along with her girlfriend/wife) in I Love Lucy skits.

The point is that I'm thinking of bringing in another transgender person (possibly a friend of theirs) who will go missing in a Matthew Shepard's type scenario in order to discuss one of the many problems with being transgender--the threat to males who have a BIG problem with finding out the women they like is really gay and a man.

 

[Aber]

LOL. Ex-UK-Prime-Minister Tony Blair embarrasses himself (once again) by claiming, in an interview in today's Times, that:

“Of course, we shouldn’t be transphobic and we should have equal rights for trans people. But equal rights doesn’t mean you can’t use the phrase ‘pregnant woman’”

More interesting is the quote:

"Leo always says to me, 'Don't go there Dad. There are feelings, and there are facts, but right now feelings are more important.'"

ETA:
Leo is his 21 year old son.

 

[lomiller]

Wait a minute, are you saying that women (not trans gender women) who are bigger and stronger than other women shouldn't be allowed to play sports with the smaller and weaker ones?

Weight classes are a thing in many sports, and every sport that I can think of segregates participants by age. You don't see 16 year olds playing football against 12 year olds specifically because the 16 year olds are bigger stronger and faster so it wouldn't be fair or safe to have them play against 12 year olds. Having separate divisions like this opens up sport to a much wider range or people, most people male or female can only participate because these types of groups exist.

At the highest level of sport the point of weight class, age groups etc isn't to make everyone equal, it's to remove systematic advantages. Biologically male athletes have just such a systematic advantage over competitors who are biologically female. Having a separate division for biologically female competitors gives them the opportunity to compete against their peers in much the same way male athletes do.

 

[AmyStrange]

Weight classes are a thing in many sports, and every sport that I can think of segregates participants by age. You don't see 16 year olds playing football against 12 year olds specifically because the 16 year olds are bigger stronger and faster so it wouldn't be fair or safe to have them play against 12 year olds. Having separate divisions like this opens up sport to a much wider range or people, most people male or female can only participate because these types of groups exist.

At the highest level of sport the point of weight class, age groups etc isn't to make everyone equal, it's to remove systematic advantages. Biologically male athletes have just such a systematic advantage over competitors who are biologically female. Having a separate division for biologically female competitors gives them the opportunity to compete against their peers in much the same way male athletes do.

I tried to correct myself in later posts but thank you for the added insight.

ETA: Of course, this (the highlighted section) doesn't seem to apply in professional sports, like basketball, football, or soccer... or maybe it does?

BTW, I've brought this subject up in another thread on baseball, but everyone seems to agree with your second paragraph.

 

[Paul2]

At the highest level of sport the point of weight class, age groups etc isn't to make everyone equal, it's to remove systematic advantages. Biologically male athletes have just such a systematic advantage over competitors who are biologically female. Having a separate division for biologically female competitors gives them the opportunity to compete against their peers in much the same way male athletes do.

This word frames the issue nicely. Systemic advantages should be mitigated systemically.

 

[lomiller]

Use the character's preferred pronouns (she for a trans-woman, he for a trans-man). Other than that, write them the same as any other character. The fact that they are trans is only relevant in situations where it comes up or is an issue for some reason. If you introduce the character as trans, you don't need to constantly remind the reader any more than you need to remind readers of the gender/sex of other characters. You are referring to the character, not their gender identity.

Unless, of course, your whole story is about this person being trans. But my impression is that this is a character in a story that just happens to be trans. Perfectly normal. Not a big deal unless the character encounters a harasser. Or wants to join a sports league or something that brings trans-ness to the fore.

That's ok when we are seeing the characters own thoughts or when the character is referring to themselves, but when it's other characters you should probably stick to the norms of the settings and possibly the knowledge level of the character speaking. In some settings it may even be possible to forgo gender specific pronouns altogether. Eg the equivalent of the he\she are not used much in Japanese. Even if the story is being told in English it may not be a bad thing to use use language in a way that is specific or unique to the setting, but that would be a stylistic choice and could fail spectacularly if not well executed.