2016: Gender Reassignment, and the Transgender Phenomenon

‘’—“”
Since the question of how to deal with the needs of transgender citizens in our midst is becoming a major policy issue, I think we ordinary folks should take a look at the entire phenomenon.  Psychologists, obviously, have been looking at it for decades, but I tend to be just a little doubtful about their thoughts on anything; the psychologists who have affected public policy have been as often wrong as they have been right.  The entire pain management industry, though helpful to some people, indirectly contribute to the heavy use of narcotics across the country.  That might be considered an entirely medical subject, but I think psychologists have had their hands in it.

Gender is a complex thing.  It is both something that characterizes how an individual sees him- or herself, but almost, even more, how an individual wants society to see him or her.  I’m willing to bet that the attitude of anyone withing the group of people who are sensitive to the question of their gender identity, and to the gender identities of those whom they are interested in relating to, could change depending on the cultural environment of the moment.

Fifty years ago, gender stereotypes were so oppressively strong that only the bravest and most determined people even considered what was called back then a “sex change”.  In some present-day cultures, it is usual for males to take on aggressively masculine personas, and (possibly in response) for females to take on —what other sub-cultures may consider—  excessively feminine personas.  In such a social and cultural environment, life would be difficult for an individual who finds it unpleasant to fit into either the ultra-feminine or the ultra-masculine role that is considered appropriate.  On the other hand in those times, for some people the desire to change gender could be almost desperately strong, because so much is at stake.

Western society is gradually evolving into one in which extreme roles are not expected.  But, of course, because of the great cultural tolerance in American Society (though significantly less than that of certain European societies), there are innumerable cultural pockets in every population center, where the norms are different.  So one could easily find in a big city such as New York, Los Angeles or San Francisco, where gender roles are subtle and nuanced, certain neighborhoods in which a male is expected to be excessively masculine as a matter of course.

So, I am beginning to think that a child’s decision to stop being a boy and become a girl, or stop being a girl and become a boy, could be strongly influenced by the microculture in which it finds itself.  Some boys just love to wear dresses.  But what if that boy were in a local culture where dresses do not exist?  Dresses, after all, are an artifact of the culture; a way the culture chooses to express itself at a given moment.  There is very little intrinsically feminine in a dress; most of it is by association and usage.  If a boy in an entirely pants-wearing culture were to suddenly become enamored of dresses upon seeing one in a catalog, for instance, that would be interesting.  One wonders whether gender reassignment would be warranted in such cases, where in my opinion the child is much too young to make a decision of such great import.

More interestingly, because of the gradual drift of gender roles towards a more neutral middle-ground, and because of the tendency of fashions for young people to become more unisex, a trend we can expect to see increasing, it might not be something a young person actually needs, to be surgically altered.  These phenomena of unisex fashions and androgynous presentation of self are more often seen in big cities, and (interestingly enough) among more middle-class populations, whereas less-affluent sectors of society seem to favor the more strongly differentiated gender roles.  A couple of decades from now, we could hope to see a decline in gender-reassignment surgery, simply because it would gradually become easier, some day in the future, for anyone to express him- or herself comfortably at any point in the spectrum of gender identity without gender re-assignment.  We must hope that gender roles of any sort become possible without surgical intervention.  But by then, people might be more interested in becoming whales, or sharks, or something more interesting!  To my conservative eyes, it seems a better choice for an individual to work within the gender he or she has been born with, and use any avenues of costume or other means to create an environment in which he or she can interact in the way he or she desires with the companions he or she desires, than to go the route of surgery.  We hear from those who are happy with their gender transformation, but we ought to hear from those whose gender transformation paths have not been smooth.  Just as things such as surgical body enhancement have been a nightmare for some, so one cannot doubt that desire and attitude alone cannot guarantee success for everyone wanting to change gender surgically.  There have to be a significant number of failures out there which we have not learned about.  But my main thrust is that it may not be long before gender becomes more of a matter of attitude, behavior and choice than a matter of anatomy.

Arch
‘’—“”