This is the seventh installment in my series reviewing Preston Sprinkle's book Embodied: Transgender Identities, the Church, & What the Bible has to Say. Click HERE for the Intro to this series where I discuss my thematic concerns with the book and for an index for the full series.
Preston Sprinkle is worries about stereotypes. This ought to be a refreshing point of agreement between us and for the first half or so of the chapter, it is. Unfortunately by now, these moments of agreement are starting to be overshadowed by an nagging concern over what Dr. Sprinkle might be about to do with the point of agreement. Even more unfortunately, in this chapter that worry turned out to have been well founded.
With that said, I don't want to move forward without highlighting our points of agreement. Sprinkle opens the chapter with a charming recounting of the story of King David (whom he "masks" as K.D. in order to make his point) whom he reasonably portrays as flouting many patriarchal gender expectations. Throughout the section Sprinkle uses David and Jesus (as well as several others) as his primary examples of people in the Bible who are both presented as role models and who often violated stereotypical gender expectations. Sprinkle makes a brief but compelling case that, in fact, the vast majority of our gendered expectations of men and women are based not in the Bible but in our own cultural biases. As he puts it:
Many of our beliefs about masculinity and femininity come from culture rather from the Bible, even though we sometimes rubber stamp these cultural norms with the label "biblical"
I am right with him there.
I am not a particularly culturally gender-conforming woman. Rather I lean a lot closer to Dr. Sprinkle's various examples in this chapter of Biblical women who violate cultural gender expectations of their day and of our own. My own style of dress and personal presentation has variously been called "tomboy", "low femme", and "just kinda punk-ish". There are days, particularly when it is a special occasion, when I enjoy putting on a dress and getting done up but my standard wardrobe is jeans or shorts and a t-shirt with the occasional skirt thrown in (at least if I can find one with pockets) for good measure. I like beer or bourbon over wine, and I still have a great time hanging out in groups of guys. At the same time, I also enjoy a number of feminine-coded interests and past times. What I am trying to say is only that I will always appreciate people who take the time to thoughtfully consider and deconstruct gender stereotypes and cultural gender prescriptions. So when Preston Sprinkle says
The Bible is much more concerned that we be godly, not stereotypically masculine or feminine. While our culture reinforces narrow stereotypes of masculinity and femininity, the Bible doesn't give us narrow mandates for how all men and women must behave.
I am cheering him on.
STEREOTYPES AND TRANS* EXPERIENCES
passing as nontrans (and hence running the risk of exposure as a deceiver) or else being openly trans (and consequently being relegated to a mere pretender)
so that gender stereotypes can operated as both a shield for us and as a sword against us. Like I mentioned above, most of the time I do not conform to the more well known stereotypes. If I chose to conform more to those cultural stereotypes more by dressing, and speaking in a more "feminine"(1) way or cultivating more typically feminine mannerisms, then I would likely "pass" far more often. "Passing" (the common term for when a trans person is experienced as a cisgender member of our gender category) is a complicated and difficult discussion in the trans community. A lot of binary trans people (trans men and trans women) want to pass, but not all of us do. For decades, "passing" has been held up to us (sometimes by members of our own community but primarily by members of the psychological gatekeepers who got to decide whether or not we would be given access to medical transition) as a the ultimate goal for a trans person, and our community has only had the ability to challenge that and to start talking about what we really want in the last few decades at most. And of course, some trans people just do pass simply because their own authentic expression of who they are, together with their own physical traits happen to "read" as their gender to the general public. Additionally we have to account for the simple safety concern that we are (usually) safer when we pass. Transphobes will leave you alone so long as they don't realize that you are trans. Regardless of whether or not passing is the goal, conforming to gender stereotypes makes passing easier.
But Bettcher calls this a double bind because, when those of us who pass are "found out" to be trans and not cis, the backlash from people who decide that they have been "deceived" by us (though in fact we are only trying to communicate who we really are) ranges from disgust at best to violent anger at worst.
On the other side of the double bind are those of us who don't pass; either because we aren't particularly interested in doing so or because passing simply isn't an option for us. Very noticeably, when we don't pass we will inevitably also be violating some gender stereotypes simply because those stereotypes are built from cisgender people's expressions of gender. Existing on this side of the double bind means being regularly recognized as trans and having our gender identities routinely treated as invalid. This can take the form of pity at best (Serano talks about the "pathetic trans" archetype) or violent aggression at worst. And again, that entire set of considerations all exists prior to any question of what relationship to existing cultural gender stereotypes is actually the most authentic to who we are and to how we experience ourselves in the world.
And all of that only scratches the surface of how trans-ness interacts with gender stereotypes. Further important questions and areas of consideration could include the existence of certain (limited) sub-stereotypes—I violate "typical" femininity but I conform pretty well to quite a few tomboy and lesbian stereotypes—; the way that the existence of gender stereotypes shape trans people's expectation of what a "successful" transition should look like; or the way cis and trans people are harmed by our failure to "measure up" to certain gender stereotypes. And of course none of that takes non-binary trans people into account and they have a lot to contribute to this conversations.
And all of that is why the title for this section was not necessarily a problem. But it is a problem.
STEREOTYPES AND TRANS* EXPERIENCES (TAKE 2)
Women have been particularly affected by these stereotypes. After all, most women know what it's like to be stuffed into narrow boxes of femininity. Sensual makeup, pink dresses, sexy high heels, and expecting to grow up to become a helpless princess at the top fo a tower waiting for her masculine hero to sweep her away. Images like these are often associated with being a woman. But what if you don't want to wear painful high heels so that your legs will look sexier for men? What if you're not helpless and don't need a man to rescue you? Are you still a woman?
Of course you are.
I was with him this far. I mean yes, there was the niggling suspicion that by "women" Sprinkle doesn't actually mean women who are both cis and trans so much as just cis women, and yes he spreads it on a little thick at the outset but charity can read past that. I get his point and so far it isn't a bad one. But here comes the turn. Sprinkle goes on:
And yet some people say that if you are drawn to these stereotypes—pink dresses, high heels, fantasies about being a princess—this means you might be a girl. We see this especially in how some experts advise parents to determine whether their kid is trans*
Oh Preston. He goes on to sketch out three stories of trans kids who cite these sorts of gender stereotypes as part of their explanations of their transness either themselves or they have their attraction to the stereotyped gender material cited by their parents as evidence that they are trans. My broad critique of what Sprinkle is doing here applies to all three.
How exactly does Sprinkle expect young children to express gender incongruence? When you are five, and you want to express to the world that you are not what the world keeps telling you you are, citing your preference for stereotypical expressions of the other gender is a pretty obvious way to go? Preston has, at this point in the chapter, already admirably pointed out how pervasive and even controlling our social gender stereotypes are; why would he expect a young trans child to somehow discern the line between stereotypes of the gender expression they are drawn to, and the more fundamental gender identity that affinity is likely a result of. Has Preston never asked a cis five year old boy how he knows he is a boy? If he tries it he is going to get an answer in the form of gender stereotypes. To treat it as suspicious or problematic for trans kids to use cultural stereotypes when explaining their gender without expressing the same skepticism if a cis child uses the same stereotypes to explain their gender is sloppy thinking at best and dishonest at worst.
Having established that transgender talk about their gender in the same way that cisgender children do but that he thinks it suspicious when trans kids do it, Dr. Sprinkle then shares a quote from a father who reported being relieved to find that his daughter is trans because it had been uncomfortable for him to think he had a feminine son. Certainly that father has some work to do and I hope that until he does it, he doesn't have a feminine son but rather than makin a point about bad parenting, Sprinkle uses this anecdote [check out the vimeo vid Sprinkle cites] as justification for his fear "that parents and medical professionals are only reinforcing these stereotypes when they use a preference for pink, disinterest in sports, or 'running like a girl' as the basis for determining whether that child is a boy or a girl". I find it odd for Dr. Sprinkle to be worried about this. Certainly, as a trans person myself I do not want people to misgender children regardless of whether those children are cis or trans, so I don't think it is odd for anyone to worry about misgendering Children. What is odd is for Dr. Sprinkle to worry that this is happening when the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) specifically listed rather stringent diagnostic criteria (2) for children in the edition that was current when Dr. Sprinkle wrote and published this book, and that I am sure Dr. Sprinkle knew that because he references WPATH in Chapter 10. In light of the fact that he further fails to provide even a single citation to support this worry, it is hard to think that this line of "worry" is anything other than scaremongering but it could be that the fear involved represents Dr. Sprinkle's own fear of transness as something to be avoided and is therefore more akin to the distortions of hypervigilance. He does acknowledge just prior that "For many children with dysphoria [as close as Dr. Sprinkle is prepared to come to saying that someone is "really" a gender other than the sex they were assigned at birth], latching onto stereotypically masculine or stereotypically feminine things can serve as a kind of coping mechanism" which, while rather ham-fisted ("coping mechanism is a rather crude way to talk about being drawn to things that help you feel less alienated from yourself) isn't too far from the point and the fact that, after stating it he never accounts for it in his analysis is disappointing.
From children, Sprinkle moves on to talk about trans women (he says "trans* adults" but doesn't discuss trans men at all in the section), claiming, rather provocatively, that "Some trans* adults also seem to reinforce gender stereotypes" before talking about two anonymous trans women and Caitlyn Jenner as his case studies. His counter example is Miranda Yardley and her criticism of Jenner. I...I had some feelings about this. Having processed them, here are my thoughts:
- The statement "Some trans* adults also seem to reinforce gender stereotypes" is a classic example of an obvious statement being presented so as to seem sinister. Of course some trans adults reinforce gender stereotypes; some cis adults reinforce gender stereotypes. Reinforcing gender stereotypes is a problematic thing that some people do. Preston gives us no reason to believe that trans people are any more responsible for it than cis people are. Only he doesn't include the fact that cis people also do it and thereby makes it seem as if trans-ness itself is somehow especially implicated in the perpetuation of gender stereotypes.
- Sprinkle's two anonymous examples are drawn from an infamously transphobic book built around a theory (AGP) which was already thoroughly debunked at the time that Sprinkle was writing Embodied(3). That doesn't necessarily make the quotes he uses inaccurate to the experience or beliefs of the women who first spoke them but it does make them rather suspect.
- Some people's authentic expression of the gender happens to fall pretty close to our cultural stereotypes. Sprinkle actually acknowledges this earlier in the chapter were he points out that he actually falls pretty close to our social stereotype for masculinity:
"I'm the stereotype. I love sports, ribs, large trucks, and road maps. [emphasis original]
so it is a shame that he doesn't recognize that the mirror image of him is entirely possible. It is possible that he is at least aware of this in the case of cis women whose gender expression runs the gamut from butch lesbian cis women to the frilliest and most glamorous of girly girls. At the same time, it is also simply the case that in our patriarchal culture, femininity is seen as artificial by default whereas masculinity is seen as authentic (even when problematic as in the case of toxic masculinities). A woman (cis or trans) who delights in frills, lace, makeup, heels, and "domesticity" is inevitably going to be treated as less authentic (and as more ridiculous) than a man who revels (notice that one delights while the other revels) in beer, trucks, flannel, and sports. One might have hoped that Sprinkle might have clued into the insights of 3rd wave feminism rather than embracing (and maybe exploiting) femmephobia. Instead this section rather perpetuates the misogyny that is already far too common in Christian literature.
- While there are some trans women who enjoy and do authentically embody a high-femme expression I find that most often the critiques on this front that are directed at trans women are usually based, not on experiences with trans women as such but on a misunderstanding of drag
Sprinkle ends this part of the section asking "Are stereotypes causing dysphoria, or is dysphoria causing people to feel drawn towards stereotypes, or are the two simply correlated?" —FWIW my answer would be that stereotypes are neither causing or caused by dysphoria and that, to my knowledge, stereotypes aren't correlated with dysphoria in any particular way either and it would be nice if he would have provided some citation for the suggestion that they are—but then he pivots in the same paragraph to a topic that seems distinct: the degree to which the existence of stereotypes exacerbates dysphoria. He tells the story of a friend of his (he uses they/them pronouns) who was sent into a near panic attack at the prospect of hosting a women's Bible study at their house and was anticipating "oodles of femininity to come pouring through their door. Just the thought of pink dresses, gabby women, and tiny little teacups was enough to make them want to scream". He resolves the story by assuring us that the Bible study was not as hyper-feminine as his friend had feared "Because you can be a woman without being a stereotypically feminine woman [emphasis original]" which is true and makes it strange that he doesn't seem to recognized the corollary that you also can be a woman while being a stereotypically feminine woman.
Ultimately though, it is true that, especially for those of us who are in the closet (know that we are trans but have not yet told the world at large about that fact) or who are still trying to deny our identities, exposure to what feels like extreme expressions of the gender we are not but are trying to act as can be particularly unpleasant and even fully triggering if only because it means spending extended time being confronted with what you are not while having to pretend to be it.
ARE THERE ANY SEX-SPECIFIC MORAL PRESCRIPTIONS?
- "The meaning of clothing is culturally bound" - I would agree.
- "[S]ome cultures have clearer distinctions than others when it comes to male-and-female specific clothing" - again, I agree.
- "[S]ome things even in the West are currently culturally reserved for one sex and not the other" - this, also descriptively accurate.
- "[P]resenting oneself as male or female isn't so much about the fabric or shape of clothing but about the purpose behind it."- yeah no problem here.
Footnotes
1. I very much am in favor of breaking down and re-thinking all of what is meant by the terms "feminine" and "masculine" but in the absence of a full trans-valuation of gender culture, I will be using those terms here to represent the dominant social construction of those concepts.
2. Specifically the WPATH 7 lays out:
1. Mental health professionals should not dismiss or express a negative attitude towards nonconforming gender identities or indications of gender dysphoria. Rather, they should acknowledge the presenting concerns of children, adolescents, and their families; offer a thorough assessment for gender dysphoria and any co-existing mental health concerns; and educate clients and their families about therapeutic options, if needed. Acceptance and removal of secrecy can bring considerable relief to gender dysphoric children/adolescents and their families.
2. Assessment of gender dysphoria and mental health should explore the nature and characteristics of a child’s or adolescent’s gender identity. A psychodiagnostic and psychiatric assessment – covering the areas of emotional functioning, peer and other social relationships, and intellectual functioning/school achievement – should be performed. Assessment should include an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of family functioning. Emotional and behavioral problems are relatively common, and unresolved issues in a child’s or youth’s environment may be present
It has been has been updated in the most recent version (WPATH 8) of the standards of care (published since Embodied) for children to be even more careful and comprehensive.
3. I have already written about Sprinkle's problematic embrace of AGP in this post in the series. But for a more thorough analysis check out this paper by Julia Serano.
No comments:
Post a Comment