Queer Issue 2012
Transgender Marriage
She Used to Be a Man and He Used to Be a Woman—and That's Just Fine, According to the Law
Tools
Queer Issue 2012
- Queer Writers on Traditional Marriage
- Open Marriage
- A Complete List of All This Weekend's Pride Parties!
- Lecherous Marriage
- Transgender Marriage
- Arranged Marriage
- Femdom Marriage
- Polygamous Marriage
- Interracial Marriage
- Sexless Marriage
- Marriage for the Purpose of Getting a Green Card
- Boring, Traditional, Religious Marriage
- Vi and Me
- Gay-Married and Wary
- Love Is the Ultimate Radical Act
Brad Anderson married his wife in a big church wedding while his conservative family looked on from the pews. By age 33, he was living in the suburbs of Seattle and had three children of his own—ages 6 to 9. Then his wife announced she was a lesbian. She was sure that it would cause a huge rift between them, but Brad extended his understanding: "I said, 'I totally get that. Wow. Let me tell you something I've never told you. I've always thought of myself as—and wanted to be—a woman.'"
Specifically, Brad always wanted to be a lesbian, too.
Stranger Personals
But without the surgery. "At the age of 33, I thought it was past the time," Brad recalls. "I also can't be a transsexual because I am attracted to women. I was a proud person, and I didn't want to be an object of derision." But at his wife's encouragement, Brad eventually decided to transition to womanhood, and they vowed to make their marriage work. "It was 1991 when we said, 'Let's do this.' So I shaved off my beard, figuratively and literally, and I finished my transition by the middle of 1993."
Even though they were both women—Brad was now Breanna, with blond locks and a wardrobe of dresses—they were still legally married in Washington State. They had become one of thousands of same-sex couples in the United States to achieve full marriage equality due to this unusual loophole that involves switching genders.
Then Breanna's mother-in-law filed a lawsuit asking the state to mandate grandparent visitation rights to the children and to nullify their marriage. After all, they couldn't have gotten married as two women, so how could they stay married as two women? A judge threw out the lawsuit, thankfully, so their matrimony was still legal. But for various reasons, their marriage fell apart within a couple years, and they divorced.
In 1995, while surfing a chatroom called "lesbos," Breanna met a woman named Ryan Blackhawke. "It was all lesbians," remembers Ryan, who was on the other end of the chat channel in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. "We started talking more and more." They made plans for Ryan to meet Breanna on a visit to Seattle. "It wasn't going to be serious. Well, that lasted for about a week before Breanna asked me to move in."
Breanna and Ryan dated for a dozen years. They couldn't marry, of course, since they were both women, but they had a life that looked a lot like marriage. They shared a split-level house in Kirkland. Ryan worked at Starbucks, and Breanna worked in tech. They acquired a cat, a Ford Explorer, and a Prius. They would welcome Breanna's three kids from the previous marriage to dinner like any other family. "We are very middle class," Breanna says. "We have a mortgage and three kids," Ryan says.
This domestic normalcy made them the ideal candidates to register as domestic partners in 2007, taking advantage of the new state law that extended many of the same rights as marriage (such as hospital visitation, sharing health insurance, rights to make funeral arrangements, and other romantic stuff). On the first day that couples were allowed to file their paperwork in Olympia, Breanna and Ryan stood in line to make history.
Breanna being a transgender woman, they were also active in the transgender community, and they were planning to attend a trans conference in town called Gender Odyssey. (It's an annual conference; the next one is August 2–5.) But Ryan was protesting going. Her objections grew irrationally, Ryan admits, until Breanna confronted her. Ryan remembers Breanna saying, "'Is there something else going on—do you think you might be trans?' I just lost it and said, 'I really think I am.' We talked about it every day for two weeks. Then we retreated into our corners to discuss what this meant for our relationship. It wasn't until 2008 that I said, 'Cowabunga, let's do this.' Even my boss was all excited and explained that Starbucks has a policy for this and began looking it up."
Once on testosterone, Ryan presented very much as a man, with a masculine swagger and a coarse black beard. Even before undergoing surgery, he says, "Emotionally, I felt accepted as a male in society."
He also retained the name Ryan—because why not?
In a strange inversion of Breanna's previous marriage to a lesbian, Breanna and Ryan were still registered with the state as domestic partners, as two women. They felt no particular need to change that status by signing a marriage certificate. However, they were eyeing the IRS's Flexible Spending Account program, which allows workers to set aside certain funds, tax-free, and essentially borrow from themselves. Specifically, they wanted to use the program to pay for Ryan's medical expenses. But due to the Defense of Marriage Act, which is federal law, same-sex couples in states that have domestic partnership laws or even same-sex-marriage laws still can't receive those federal benefits.
So Ryan and Breanna did what millions of committed, opposite-sex couples do: They got married.
"All it took was going into the Department of Licensing to change one letter on my driver's license," says Ryan. "Then all of a sudden, we can have all these rights that we didn't have before, while our friends are still locked out."
All this goes to point out the arbitrary nature of legal marriage, filled with so many loopholes that Breanna describes the law as "Swiss cheese." Transgender marriage, she points out, "underscores the completely subjective, irrational structures around marriage. The fact is, some people do change their gender in their lives, making us fall in and out of these legal classifications that have been fabricated."
At this point, Ryan and Breanna had been together for 15 years—first as girlfriends, then as legally partnered women, and now as man and wife. Their love even has the federal government's blessing.
Still, they aren't exactly embraced by everyone.
"We don't have real chummy relationships with our neighbors," Breanna says. "But then again, we haven't been firebombed, either."
The only obvious giveaway that their chromosomes don't reflect their gender is that Breanna is taller than most women and much taller than her husband.
"I don't think I normally have any problems," Breanna says. "I don't have some kind of illusion that my gender change is undetectable. And I didn't have facial feminization surgery." But sometimes people think Breanna is a man when she talks to them on the phone, she says. "And when people see me, they say, 'Sorry, ma'am.'"
They continue to live an intensely suburban life. "I know the cadence of life as a straight person because I was one," says Breanna. "We complete each other's sentences, he drops me off at work every morning, he ruins my lingerie."
That's right: Ryan, the man of the house, has a track record of destroying Breanna's bras in the dryer, even though Ryan used to be a woman. "I don't get to touch those anymore," he says. ![]()
8
9
I don't care who you screw.
I don't care who you marry.
I don't care what body parts you cut off.
But don't mutilate yourself and expect me to call you a woman if you were born male (or vice-versa.)
Your chromosomes and your role in reproduction determine your gender. A knife and some hormones does not a female make.
Gender is way more complicated than that--gender roles (societally sanctioned, not 'natural'), expression and identity are all separate components. Not to mention several biological conditions that discredit your argument. It's none of your business what chromosomes or body parts someone does or doesn't have.
It is extremely shitty not to respect someone's identity.
F*** you sir.
Sincerely,
Science and Decency
For example, "The only obvious giveaway that their chromosomes don't reflect their gender is that Breanna is taller than most women and much taller than her husband." is unnecessary. Who gets to decide which chromosomes "reflect" which gender? Also, you're showcasing how normal they are, using their ability to pass as cisgender. A lot of us do not pass as cisgender. We are no less authentically our genders.
It's othering to call a marriage between trans people "transgender marriage." The marriage is just a marriage. The people are trans.
I am not going to commit the time to tell you every hurtful thing in this article. Delete most of what you have written here. Try again.
14
Yes, it's "othering" to call it "transgender marriage", just as it's "othering" to use the term "gay marriage" -- but that's the moment we're in. It's in that context that the term "transgender marriage" is being used.
Wouldn't you (and the rest of the world) be better off if you put your energy towards grappling with your enemies, rather than your allies?
17
Chromosomes don't infallibly indicate gender or sex. Life is complicated and crazy, and the labels that people create are, well, created by people! They don't have any meaning beyond what we assert.
Also I'm kind of curious what you get by your refusal to call transwomen women or transmen men. The soft glow of a job well done? What are you trying to accomplish, here?
Sometimes even the biological is a lot less binary than you'd seem to wish. I don't want to blow your schmucky little brain, but you should really go read this article. Chromosomes are not always the determinant factor in gender. Sexual development is complicated and depends on a bunch of genes besides those X and Y things.
20
Also, my wife and I were happy with the positive coverage. We are also happy to be able to use our story to highlight the arbitrary and inconsistent marriage laws in the hopes that it will get everyone closer to marriage equality.
But what about states like Texas? Had I been born there it wouldn't matter. I could have all the surgeries and shoot all of the testosterone and wear nothing but plaid and denim and be a lumberjack cowboy with the World's Most Glorious Beard and I would still legally be a woman. I would not be able to marry my partner. I couldn't be legally recognized as the person I am.
All because I could have been born a thousand miles to the east. How stupid is that?
I'm grateful that we'll be able to marry, but it pisses me off that the only reason we can is because your gender identity and my legal gender are considered legally appropriate. What a petty thing for the law to use to decide people's rights.
27
Keep on keepin' on, you two!
28
It affects me, as a woman (sorry, cis woman), and as someone who belongs to a distinct class, that the only language I have ever had to describe me and my class (girl/woman/female) and in the struggle to liberate my class is being broadened (without my consent) to include a group who don't share this same experience.
I understand how being called a trans-woman as opposed to just a woman places a feeling of otherness on transwomen, but that doesn't change the fact that annexing girl/woman/female doesn't affect myself and other women (sorry, cis women) who are feminists who want to talk about our experience, and advocate for ourselves.
A trans-woman who is born with the exact chromosomes as me, who feels as female (or even more female) than me is still different if she is born with a penis and raised as a penis having citizen. She may experience misogyny, but it is not the same as a girl with a vagina experiencing misogyny. Her persectution may be greater or lesser than mine, but we are still different, whether you let me say it or not.
On one hand, I don't want to hurt the feelings of the trans-women, but on the other hand, I don't want me, and women like me erased from the english language either.
30
On top of this, for me, I sometimes hang out in the burn community where cross-dressing is fairly common. Most of the burner guys in skirts class themselves as male, so transgendered women who suck at acting female then get sensitive about your use of the wrong pronoun are giant social land mines. Some transgendered folk are easy going about making mistakes like this, but others have a giant chip on their shoulder and want to pick a fight about it. Fun!
I bet that, in my life, I've met at least a couple male-to-female transgendered people that I had no clue about, and I've also met some others who I had a clue about but did a great job at coming off as a female and didn't tweak me in any the above-mentioned ways. But I also know that a significant portion of M-to-F people whom I've met may have taken hormones and had operations, but have not put in the time to learn to move properly.
It's also entirely true, you ignorant twatwaffle.
Call the statement whatever you want, it's not going to make you any less wrong or stupid.
34
Thank you for deconstructing it with this article, Dominic. Nice job!
@31 Personally, I am of the opinion that there is no right or wrong way for women to move or behave. You can't fail at your gender, however you happen to perform it. I'm cis and pretty straight-up fem--how I move is probably pretty close to what you think transwomen should be trying to emulate. That doesn't make me any more or less of a woman than a woman who looks or acts in ways that are more commonly associated with men, one who might be misgendered by strangers on the street.
Physical features and muscle mass do play a role in this, but dissonance often also comes from clothing and movement choices that cys females wouldn't make. One example I've observed several times is when a trans woman wears a short skirt then sits and stands like they're in jeans. Cis women almost never do that - they are either fem and wear a skirt and stand 'right', or they're more of a tomboy and don't wear short skirts. That leads to my gut instinct of "that's a guy in a dress".
37
@28: I'd like to believe that we could enter in to some kind of interesting and respectful dialog but based on my interactions with other 2nd wave feminists spouting such Raymondesque clichés, I rather doubt it. Most of all I want to challenge the idea that all women share the same essential experience of oppression or discrimination in the world; that a white heiress from New York has more in common in social experience with a poor black girl raised in New Orleans than she has with me, based on the shape of her genitals at birth. I think we can both get behind the proposition that the current systems of gender enforcement are tremendously oppressive and irrational. However, to assume that gender oppression trumps all other systems of privilege and oppression is absurd on its face.
Further, it strikes me that the essentialist claim you make to the label “woman” is directly equivalent to the claim and supporting argument made by hetro marriage essentialists: that there is some mysterious law of conservation of legitimacy that will take away the quality of your access to a symbol or concept if I am allowed the reality of my experience.
Your line of reasoning would legislate Me out of existence and banish me to some nether world of ungenderedness that I never wished to inhabit. I have always and only wanted to be and be recognized as a woman. The good news is that is now my reality.
39
I also want to see a respectful dialogue between trans activist and trans critical activists (those who are often described by trans-activists as transphobic). I’m not familiar with Raymond. I haven’t read her, but I’ve witnessed a lot of heated, disrespectful, at times pig headed, and sadly at times hateful mud slinging on both sides. I am not saying that there aren’t differences between non-trans women, but we non-trans women share something in common, that we were born with vaginas and raised as girls, and often go on to get pregnant (or fear becoming pregnant) and this is no small trifle. We have a word for us, as a group, and it’s female/ girl/ woman.
Just as black civil rights groups have banded together on one commonality (being of African American descent), there were no doubt people of different socio economic backgrounds, but they organised together because they had that one commonality, that one common oppression that they were committed to overthrowing together. And there’s nothing wrong with that. There’s nothing wrong with saying that one commonality is important.
I agree that trans-women and non-trans women have much in common. I don’t dispute this. Of the trans-women I’ve met in the past, or read/watched in the online media, such as Kate Bernstein and Red Durkin, I’ve been surprised how smart, and often very supportive of the feminist struggle these women have been, and have seen them as allies, or potential allies, but that is all. We are different. We have many things in common, but I’m telling you as a woman who was born with a vagina, and raised as a girl, lived with a womb, and had pregnancy scares, that this is a massive difference, an important difference, and when trans-women try to say this difference is a triviality, it sets of my “colonization” alarm bells.
I can see why it would be tempting for you to try to draw a parallel with the defense of the words “female/girl/woman” with the “marriage is for a man and a woman” argument. I have already explained in my original post how the annexing of the words female/girl/woman by trans-women DO affect me directly. I know this doesn’t change the fact that by preserving the original definition for “female/girl/woman” that trans-women are left out in the cold, with nothing but “trans-woman/ trans-girl to define yourselves, and I feel bad about that. I don’t know what the solution is, but I’m just being honest here, because it does affect me. I don’t want trans-women to suffer, or be “legislated out of existence,” or “”banished to some nether world of ungenderedness.” But at the same time, I don’t want trans-women to find their place in society at my and other non-trans women’s expense.
The ferocity with which concerns such as mine are shot down is understandable, because I know transgenders are stuck between a rock and a hard place (male / female) but the emotion tends to dumb down the debate. As a feminist, I and other researchers and policy makers rely on statistics relating to income, workforce participation, education, violent crime, including domestic violence, numbers of female CEOs, women in politics, etc to do important work.
If trans-women who were raised as boys, and who transitioned in middle age (and most trans-women transition after the age of 30), then these are people that may have built their careers using male privilege (albeit that they were disadvantaged by not feeling male), and then they go and get a sex change, and the figures seem to indicate that the status of women is getting better, when really, it’s just that a portion of the women counted were raised as boys. It’s misleading, and has an impact on policies to change the status of women.
I would like to see a world where;
a) The census card has two boxes to tick, and asks for both born sex, and gender, (so a trans-woman can check male, then female)
b) ID cards also have the sex and gender details (not just one).
c) Transgenders are accepted in society, and don’t feel pressured to pass as being non-trans.
d) Trans-women are allies to non-trans women, but respect one another’s space/different experience and don’t try to colonise one another.
I’m still learning about this stuff, and I know you’ve thought about this (from the trans side of things) more than I have, so I’m open to having my view changed if you or anyone else has any compelling arguments. It does appear though, that you don’t care about the impact this has on women born women. You are advocating for trans-women, and I am advocating for women born women. There is a turf war going on, as far as I’m concerned. It is not women born women who polarized sex into a hierarchy, it is society. Trans-women have born the brunt of this polarization, and now they are asking, (or actually, more like, demanding) to take refuge with the women born women, because they have no where else to go. My heart goes out to trans-women, but I don’t’ think the onus is on me as a woman to let trans-women take shelter with me, just as I don’t consider myself obligated to let every homeless person live with me.
40
commonality that trumps any other. As a lesbian, pregnancy scares aren't a part of my life. By your reasoning, I lack a crucial component of womanhood. I suppose I can't call myself a lesbian anymore.
If being raised as a girl is such a defining factor of womanhood, am I less a woman because I was raised a tomboy? Does it skim a few girl-points off my score sheet? Would a girl who transitioned very young be a woman by your standards?
By commenting on the male privilege women receive pre-transition, you seem to think that taking the brunt of misogyny defines womanhood. I'd rather not be defined by what I've suffered. Womanhood is a beautiful thing. To carve it out of such a crude, blunt tool is demeaning.
Besides, many trans-women I've known have faced far more misogyny than I. Because their parents,
classmates, peers, and bosses balked at their femininity, thought they "should" be male, more misogynist insults were hurled upon them than I ever experienced. There's no more hateful a caricature of womanhood than the one described when a bigot sees femininity where they don't feel it belongs.
You don't get much male-privilege when you are perceived as being insufficiently male. Instead, everything that defines you as a woman is a target of criticism and ridicule.
It appears to me you're intellectualizing an emotional argument. You're understandably frustrated and angry that men receive benefits you don't. But by refusing trans-people their right to identify as who they are, your indignation is seeping into envy. You imagine (in some cases rightly, in others not) that some women are receiving male-benefits you were denied. And so you punish them by refusing to accept them as they are. In doing so, you're adding to the deafening chorus of anti-trans bigots. It's tragic that some branches of feminism managed to find common ground with religious zealots and woman-haters.
If they live productive lives otherwise and don't tell people about their sexuality then they're fine by me, DADT should be applied to the rest of society
-gay women
Useless, since the only purpose of women is to be mothers and wives. Like gay men, they should remain closeted, but unlike gay men, they really can't be useful
-transexuals
Mentally ill individuals who should be cured if possible
Anecdotally, I've heard of at least one MTF lawyer who, after transitioning, found discrimination against women in the legal field to be so strong that they chose to practice as male and live as female.
This tends to lead me to believe that, while transwomen have a unique experience in how they got to womanhood, their interests are pretty strongly aligned with cis women. I don't deny that men generally tend to receive beneficial treatment in society; but the thing is, no one checks your penis at the door. You get that treatment by ACTING MALE, and most transwomen were bad at that from a very early age.
You seem to feel strongly that there should be some kind of "real woman" and "woman-with-an-asterisk" division, as a way of defending womanhood. I suppose that doesn't surprise me, because I see the same from men -- there's a strong cultural idea that we have to defend "real men" from "feminized men" that act in non-traditional ways. To me it just sounds like a defense of the status quo, however. I'm sure that sounds good if the status quo is working for you, but there's a lot of people it doesn't work for.
Full disclosure: I am a veteran of basically the same situation this article describes. I had a wonderful domestic partnership with a guy that eventually became a wonderful marriage to a woman. A lot of people seem to find this confusing, but to me it seems obvious; she's still the same person, except that she's much happier and more comfortable in her own skin.
43
I don't define myself as a woman due to my vagina, my experiences with misogyny, or any of your other utterly arbitrary requirements.
Also, it's "transgender people." Not "transgenders." It is an adjective, not a noun.
You have misidentified who is claiming that MTF people were raised in the cozy bosom of male privilege. It is not Breanna, it is doloresdaphne.
And as others have pointed out, transwomen are not only generally less well off after transition than they were before, they are also in general less well-off than ciswomen. If they have any detectable effect on whole population statistics at all, it's in the downward direction.
50
51
Like I said, I'm open to having my perspectives changed on all of this, and I'm still learning about it. I've read and heard more about this debate from the radical feminist side of things, (I'm not a radical feminist, but I find some of their arguments interesting), and now I'm trying to get a better understanding from the trans activist side of things. I'll address the above comments shortly, once I've had a chance to digest them all.
I'm sorry if some of my questions are offensive to some people, but if I can't ask these questions anonymously on the internet, where can I ask them?
Disclaimer: I live in a small city, with a small trans community. My only experience with transwomen has been in my travels to bigger cities such as Seattle.
@39: My identity is not up for negotiation. I don’t mean to come off as masculine/aggressive or anything but it’s just not. Would you consider yours to be? So here I wash up on your beach, having burnt my boat and broken my pots, at last dry foot in the Promised Land. But hapless, I’m round up by the boarder milita: “Ha we caught you, you scoundrel! I see you’ve come to colonize us. Well none of that. Off to the fenced enclosure with you…“
I am a Woman. That is my primary gender identity. Trans is how I got here. I have many identities as do we all. We are all intersectional. Being Trans can be hard and it is a choice to some degree whether to endure the unknowns and challenges of Becoming vs. the pain of staying “tight in the bud”. I am so very proud and happy to be a Woman and I am proud of my journey and of those who share it with me. And I am also so proud to be a citizen of this adopted place and to be so beautifully embraced, figuratively and literally by other women who acknowledge and affirm our common bond. But I have known all along that not everyone likes immigrants.
I am a Feminist! Kate Bornstein, a friend of mine, is not an ally; she is a full throated feminist and educates so eloquently and effectively about the many overlapping layers of oppression and subjugation that people face.
Transgender people are now believed to be about 1:300 of the population, so about 1 or 2 in 600 people will be openly trans feminine to some degree. Transgender people transition at all ages and all stages of career development. Very many that I know have had their professional careers crushed due to discrimination as a result of that transition. If you wish to be educated, please read the executive summary of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey here: http://www.thetaskforce.org/reports_and_…
It is a well design, implemented and vetted piece of research. Its conclusions align well with the local survey that I and others did in 2006-7 that show that Transgender Women and Men statistically suffer tremendous economic and social disadvantage, particularly compounded for people of color. Coming out as Trans is not a good career move. Trans Women are not budging the needle on the labor statistics except perhaps to drag it down a bit.
I was going to go on …. And on… but I think I’ll give it a rest.











RSS
Comments (53) RSS