A Dahl’s House

Those darn kids… They make me want to cry (in a good way).

It wasn’t a spur-of-the-moment decision that drove Brewster High School student Michael Loscalzo to go to school dressed as a girl.

“Years of taking judgment made me decide to stick up for myself,” said Loscalzo, 17. “All my life, people either said I was weird or that I was gay.”

The Brewster High School sophomore recently revealed his secret about his desire to become a woman by going to class wearing makeup and feminine attire. His choice has reverberated through the halls.

Loscalzo said school officials warned him Friday that he could be suspended if he continued to cross-dress, a claim that administrators denied yesterday.

In a show of support, several students have organized an “Equality Protest” this week, by showing up to school dressed in garments of the opposite sex.

Yesterday, about a dozen teens gathered at a local deli with boys wearing skirts, wigs and dresses and girls donning caps, cargo pants and T-shirts. They said about 60 students cross-dressed yesterday, though school officials said the number was far less.

“We want Mike to feel more comfortable in his surroundings,” said senior Shannon Dodd, 18, one of the organizers. “We’re letting the student body know that it’s OK to dress this way.”...

A recent article about the Thai army’s decision to stop branding transsexual conscripts as mentally disturbed, reminded me that Thailand’s national draft lottery is one of the more interesting measures about the prevalence of trans-ness. It’s pretty close to a random sample of the country’s entire population of 20-year-old males. In the latest article, an Army spokesman said transsexuals make up less than 1 percent of conscript, although a different spokesman in a 2006 article said that 1% to 2% of those who show up for the draft lottery are either transvestites or transsexuals.

(Guess Eddie Izzard will be getting his 1st Battalion, Transvestite Brigade, Airborne Wing…)

It’s interesting that that 1-2% figure roughly tracks with the 2.8% of men and 0.4% of women, ages 18 to 60, who reported at least one episode of transvestic fetishism in a Swedish study that’s the only one I know of that posed the question to a random sample of the general population. (The question was actually part of a larger survey on a variety of health issues, which is why the Swedes surveyed the entire country.)

It’s seems reasonable to assume the Thai statistics represent a minimum estimate because despite Thailand’s reputation for trans tolerance, being dismissed from the Army for being trans has serious life-long consequences. (Because men are required to prove if they have completed their national service when they apply for jobs or bank loans ,and those with a “mental disorder” discharge are automatically disqualified from many jobs and mortgages.) So it’s reasonable to assume that only the most gender variant trans people are being spotted by the Army and that those who can closet themselves do so.

I’d treat the Swedish study as a rough estimate, since on the one hand, even though the survey promised anonymity, it’s not unreasonable to suspect some people probably didn’t admit to trans behavior. Especially since (according to those who’ve seen the full study—I’ve only seen the abstract myself) the question posed was “Have you ever dressed in clothes pertaining to the opposite sex and become sexually aroused by this?”. So besides people who weren’t willing to admit to this, there were probably trans people who answered “no” because they didn’t see their crossdressing as sexual motivated. On the other hand, since reportedly anyone who did so at least once was counted, it’s likely they may have counted some people who crossdressed as an experiment, but who probably wouldn’t be considered—nor see themselves—as trans.

I’ve heard rumors of a UK study that looked at what percentage of male patients brought to the emergency room were underdressed—i.e. wearing or more article of women’s clothing under their men’s clothing—but so far I’ve not found any evidence that the study exists. Since not all trans people underdress, the statistic (if it exists) would drastically under-report the actual numbers of trans people. But one might be able to combine it with some survey work looking at the prevalance of underdressing. Obviously once again you run into issues of properly sampling a closeted population. So any result number would be an extrapolation of uncertain data based on other uncertain data, and would be at best a rough estimate.

Trying to estimate the size of a closeted population is inherently imprecise. But my take on it is that it’s a bit like on-GPS navigation in sailing, in which compass/celestial sightings are inherently imprecise (due to the motion of the boat and other reasons). Nonetheless you can triangulate among enough of them to calculate your position in a useful way—albeit within what’s referred to as the “area of uncertainty.” So we’ll never have exact numbers, but if different methods end up with results in the same neighborhood, it may be possible to develop some estimates that have a greater reliability than the individual surveys.

Well worth a read.

The writer, Maia, tackles head-on the various arguments for trans-exclusion and comes to the conclusion that even trans woman who do fit the stereotype of reeking of entitlement/privilege should be included in women’s spaces.

Some highlights and more thoughts after the break. (more…)

A friend of mine, who’s the wife of a crossdresser, recently commented that she thought it’s a fantasy of many trans people to change gender, knowing they never would. From what I’ve seen in a variety of online forums I think there’s an element of truth to that.

I think the flip-side of the “joke” that the difference between a crossdresser and a transsexual is a couple of years is the notion that transsexuals are just who can’t handle ambiguity. I don’t mean that literally, but riding the kiddie roller-coaster¹ for eternity can be exhausting and so I think a number of crossdressers dream about being “normal.” And since they know their trans-ness isn’t going away, transitioning and going stealth is the only way they can dream of doing so.

Combine that the with the fact that the vast majority of crossdressers don’t get a chance to be en femme as much as they want to—so unlike me, they’ve never gotten the chance to find out what their satiation point is (i.e. when they’ve been en femme enough that the urge gets satisfied for some period of time). So they’re never quite sure if they’re not transsexual.

¹ “Riding the kiddie coaster” was a phrase coined by a good friend of mine, back when she thought she was a crossdresser. The ups-and-downs of being a crossdresser may not be as dramatic compared to the potential sturm und drang of transitioning, but it’s one we have to ride endlessly for the rest of our lives. Unlike transsexuals who take a ride on the full-size roller-coaster, but who have the possibility of getting off at the end of the ride.

I’ve been reading a book of essays about the supposed decline and fall of gay culture, and there was an interesting discussion about how retailers like International Male “de-gayed” their catalogs as they attempted to broaden their market to adventurous hetro men.For example, the language used to describe their thong underwear was no longer about being sexy—something women’s retailers like Victoria’s Secret never have been shy about—instead the new language played up how sensuous the clothing was supposed to be for the wearer. The author argues (rightly) that these retailers were trying to remove the specter of admiring male gazes. But (being a gay man) I think he missed that there’s still an overall societal discomfort with “pretty men.” As someone who perused International Male because I wanted to be able to wear sexy underwear too (back when I was actually young enough and in shape enough to look decent in it)—I sadly knew that it wasn’t likely I’d find a woman who’d appreciate it.As I said at the last outreach panel I did, I grew up in an era where male beauty wasn’t discussed let alone valued. (Which is good in some ways, because I didn’t end up with the body issues that most women have.) But it does hurt to have something you care about not being valued—a bit like women who want to be valued for their intellect and find people only care about their beauty. Sabara Star put it nicely, folks like me feel we were starved of something many women feel they were force-fed an overdose of. So it’s not surprising that MTF trans people and feminists are often on totally different wave-lengths when it comes to the issue of “looking pretty.”Admittedly, the issue of appreciation of male beauty is changing these days, but still there’s the whole “look handsome, but don’t look too pretty” dynamic that men face. (At least those who care about their appearance.)

Over at My Husband Betty, we’ve been having a discussion about the “down low” phenomenon, and how men on the down low generally do not consider themselves gay—and potential similarities to the “Harry Benjamin Syndrome” crowd—a small but extremely vocal groups of transsexual separatists who vehemently deny any link the trans communities (who they see as icky men in dresses), and who seem to think that they’re somehow oppressed by people saying that many transsexuals do consider themselves part of that community.

Anyway, I’ve been reading up on LGBT history and it turns out that folks in earlier decades had far more subtler approaches to sexuality than we give them credit for—and arguably more subtle attitudes than today.

For example, from the late 1800s through the 1920s in certain working class cultures in New York City it was acceptable for men to sleep with (and be in relationships) with “fairies” (effeminate gay men, who cross-dressed to a greater or lesser degree) and these men weren’t considered homosexuals. In part it’s because gender trumped sexual orientation, in other words, if you were “womanish” it was assumed you’d be attracted to men, and conversely as long as you assumed the “masculine” role, you weren’t perceived as homosexual, even if you were “trade,” i.e. masculine “straight” men who were willing to have sex with “fairies.” (“Trade” contrasted with “queers,” who were the “straight-acting” homosexuals of the day, and who were more apt to seek out other “queers” as partners.) While today we’d consider “trade” to be gay, the author notes that “trade” weren’t interested in having sex with men, rather they were interesting in sleeping with “women” who happened to be female bodied. (The overall shortage of women and strict segregation of the sexes in these communities contributed to “fairies” being an acceptable substitute for females.) So modern-day concepts seeing them as “closeted gays” or bisexuals, don’t really fit with how they saw themselves.

Another author raised the interesting point that intense prejudice against gays and lesbians during what he called the “closeted era”—the 1950s through 1980s, which were far more intense than earlier in the century—led those who came of age in those years, and particularly those who came out, to often see their homosexuality as their central defining identity. In contrast to both those who grew up earlier and later, for many of whom being gay or lesbian is part of their identities, but the not their core identity. (Albeit there’s a big generational difference—those who grew up before the “closeted era” usually compartmentalized their identities, a la those on the down low, while those coming of age in the 1990s and later, usually don’t compartmentalize.)

Anyway I thought there were interesting parallels on both counts to issues of identity with trans folks. For example, I see “crossdresser” and “drag queen” as parts of my identity, but while important identities, neither is the defining part of my personality—any more than my chosen career is.

Likewise, when I spent time at Crossdressers.com there were several lengthy discussion about the “attracted to men only when dressed” orientation that some folks there professed to. While I think there’s something to be said about being en femme allowing folks to acknowledge same-sex attraction, I also always felt it was a little simplistic to just chalk it up to “closeted bisexuality.” Since it it’s way, it seemed a bit parallel to the trans admirers (male and female) who explain their attraction in terms of finding the mix of masculine/feminine looks/energies appealing. (Again, I don’t deny that for some admirers there’s an apparent “plausible deniability” aspect, I’m just saying that attributing it to everyone seems simplistic.)

One other interesting historical tidbit—a number of New York’s drag balls were widely popular with the general public in the 1920s and 1930s. The largest drew thousands of spectators, including the socialites (the Rockefellers, the Astors, etc.)

There’s an interesting question—how many of the “fairies” might’ve been folks who today might see themselves a hetro-ish/bisexual sexual crossdressers? (Given the conceptions of the time presumed that if one was interested in presenting oneself/behaving as a woman, then one would “naturally” be attracted to men (and vice versa for women).) One of the books quoted extensively from the writings of one “fairy” who uses language strikingly similar to the common memes among crossdressers, i.e. having a female self, etc. It’might have been similar to how today some FTMs go through a period assuming they must be butches because they’re masculine female-bodied people who are are attracted to women, and how some FTMs who are attracted to men can have even more trouble realizing that they’re trans because they don’t have way to conceptualize what they feel.

I guess the difference I’d see is that those of the down-low may not see themselves as gay because there are other identities trumping that. (I’m presuming that they take the insertive role—which ties into older concepts of only being homosexual is you’re the “feminine”/receptive partner—which is also pretty common in other cultures.) Whereas the HBS crowd seems to be outright rejecting an identity they aren’t comfortable with—as the HBS crowd puts it: they were “always women,” they just had a birth defect.

Sayth a new study:

Middle age is truly miserable, according to a study using data from 80 countries showing that depression is most common among men and women in their forties.

The British and U.S. researchers found that happiness for people ranging from Albania to Zimbabwe follows a U-shaped curve where life begins cheerful before turning tough during middle age and then returning to the joys of youth in the golden years….

“It happens to men and women, to single and married people, to rich and poor, and to those with and without children,” Oswald said. “Nobody knows why we see this consistency.”

One possibility may be that people realize they won’t achieve many of their aspirations at middle age, the researchers said.

For me, it was a time of realizing that—for better or worse—certain doors had closed and—for better or worse—certain life directions (like being single) weren’t likely to change. Plus what I do for a living went from a calling to a career to a job. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy what I do, for which I’m really thankful. But I went from being obsessively interested in a new field to having reached master-level a decade later—and realizing that all those 60-80 hour weeks meant I missed out on a lot of living. Consequently, even though I had very good odds to get a book contract (which would be great if I ever go back into consulting), I’ve haven’t been able to muster the interest to put in the effort to land the contract.

OTOH… approaching 44 I’m happier in a lot of ways than I was in my 30s. If I’m no longer the name I used to be in my industry, I no longer define myself by my job. I’m rediscovering interests that I’d put on hold in earlier years. I’m out of the closet and having a great time going out en femme and doing drag. I’m in great a relationship—albeit a long distance one—with lovely woman. I’ve developed a lot more friendships.

So anyway… I guess the moral of the tale is that while there may be some lows, there can be even greater highs, and FWIW, it’s also worth dwelling on the doors that have opened. This definitely isn’t the life I imagined at 20—back when I was going to be a high-powered, world-traveling journalist. But to be honest, I think while I regret missing a lot of stuff in my 30s, I’m ultimately more happy than the path I originally imagined.

Friday night was the company holiday party (since we’re an internet retailer and December is crazed we hold it a month later).

Turns out that—after winning this year’s Halloween costume contest in drag (for those who didn’t see it here’s a pic from Halloween)—there were a bunch of people who were hoping I’d come in heels. (I’ve been open about the fact that I do drag and there’s been several co-workers who want to come out see me perform some time.) One of our Sr. VPs had a great time telling his wife all about the Halloween contest, as did several others.

‘Tis a pity, since I had a dress that would’ve been perfect.

The only reservations I had about going to the holiday party in drag were first that it would inappropriate, as in drawing attention away from the festivities, which I think has been resolved. (Probably over-sensitivity on my part. But my thinking was kind along the lines that of not overshadowing a bride at a wedding, if that makes any sense. As in using the occasion to be the center of attention.) And second there’s a lot of people from our manufacturing plant, who might not be as accepting. So we’ll see…

I was planning to go to a New Year’s Eve show up at Marlena’s, but got a last-minute case of the blahs. Just a bit wiped out after a week spent: hosting my Mom, then flying back East to visit my brother and his three small kids, then flying back Sunday. And it was a bit bittersweet to be without my East Coast galpal, who I met last New Year’s. Plus seemed like I may have another low-level sinus infection. Yeech….

So I stayed home, put on the “holiday fireplace” DVD, poured myself a drink or two and sat down with the “Pro Digital Photographer’s Handbook,” which I’d been looking forward to reading and which I picked up at the library that morning. Galpal beat me at dialing at midnight her time, and we had a nice conversation catching up. By quarter of midnight, I was nodding off, so I called it a night. Getting boring in my old age, I know…

Right now, I’m down my traditional half-watching the Rose Parade as I wake up. (One of the things I miss as an ex-Angelo is going down to the Rose Bowl on the afternoon of New Year’s Eve to watch the final preparations of the float and seeing them cranked up to perform for the judges.)

I guess this is the point where I’m supposed to reflect on 2007 and look ahead to 2008—but that’s gonna have to wait for more coffee and then breakfast.

Over at My Husband Betty, someone posed the question of whether trans people ought to be offended by contests that involve crossdressing.

Having read Marjorie Garber’s “Vested Interests: Cross-dressing and Cultural Anxiety” as well as Vern and Bonnie Bulloughs’ “Cross Dressing, Sex and Gender”—both pretty exhaustive histories of cross-dressing and cross-gendered behavior—I think much of the interest in it by “straight society” is just the fun of social inversion. It’s notable that many of the festival occasions where cross-dressing was historically sanctioned also featured other forms of “the world turned upside down”—for example, the servants being able to lord over their masters for day, etc. Today maybe it’s not strictly about inverting the social hierarchy, but it is usually about setting outside the “normal social order” and/or incongruentity and/or transgressiveness.

Plus, as my friend Erica, points out (to borrow her words), in the context of required behavior for contests, it’s part of the ever-popular sport of public humiliation and degradation. I’m not thrilled that trans behavior is sufficiently stigmatized in our society that it is considered per se a route to humiliation. But the intention here is not to further marginalize trans-ness (though that is an indirect outcome), but rather to denigrate and humiliate an individual for mass-market consumption.

A non-trans guy in a dress for Halloween usually gives pretty clear signals that he’s engaged in burlesque—and the costumes are usually packaged this way. (For example, I remember a French Maid’s outfit whose packaging had a male model with almost comedically exaggerated beard shadow.) Similarly in my experience, the same signals are sent by gay guys who aren’t drag queens who do drag for Pride Parades or other events.

That said, as far as the Halloween crossdressing, it’s no secret that choice in costumes can be indicative of deeper issues that someone is wrestling with, or at least (consciously or not) interested in exploring. I’d say it’s not that different from how some folks use role-playing games to explore. Interestingly, a friend of mine who was RPG designer, said his experience was that most players tended to engage in two types of roles initially: an idealized version of themselves before tiring of that and reinventing themselves as their reverse evil anti-twin (or doing it vice versa). Later on, they tended to play more nuanced characters, but he said that the first two roles were sort of a phase they had to go through.