Clothing and culture

The real question is whether or not it can survive a court challenge under the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Which are you talking about Charles the gym part or the toilet part?

The bill (for the latter) is available at http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/bill/2007/20071121_23-07.pdf. Looks like the rest room related parts have already been removed by amendment so the whole thing is a bit of a non issue.

Larry: Make fun of the People's Republic of Montgomery County all you want, Rod -- and having lived there, lovely place though it is, it's usually richly deserved -- but transgendered people are here to stay and deserve respect, even if you want to make them the Charlie Brown to your Lucy.

Larry, I admit that it's a personal fantasy of mine to see you in a gingham jumper, because I'm sure you'd be a peach. But if I catch you in the ladies room with my wife, I'll go all Ruth Buzzi on you with yer purse.

As an employee of a prison system that specializes in sex offenders, all I can say is the pedophiles and others with perverted sexual tastes will be salivating with this law. I've even overheard offenders talking about with the change in public morals the sexual age of consent will continue to go down. After all their desires are normal natural God-driven urges. As much as I disagree with Harvard allowing the Muslim female only gym times I might encourage a daughter of mine to take advantage of it.

Any decent university would not have class on Friday nights out of respect for binge drinkers. I have every confidence that my alma mater, LSU, will always keep Friday night sacred.

The reality is that religious accommodations are not created equal. While people are concerned about closing a swimming pool for the modesty of religious believers, they would have no problem with a pharmacist refusing to dispense medication because of religious belief. Arguably, accessing a prescription is more important than accessing a swimming pool, yet it is the pool and the beliefs of minority believers that are dismissed and called ridiculous.

If the accommodation at the swimming pool was occuring because of Orthodox Jewish women or Amish women, would it be as much of a problem?

I guess the university figures it beats having their athletic facilities blown up, or having some guy in a balaclava burst in and kill a bunch of innocent exercising people with an assault weapon.

I don't see why having separate workout times for women whose religious orthodoxy prevents them from working out with men is so inflammatory. These policies are often used at gyms and pools in areas that have a heavy orthodox Jewish population too. Women who are constrained by their faith to practice modesty in dress, demeanor and behavior don't feel comfortable participating in activities that require abbreviated costumes if men are going to be present. Call me medieval, but I view this as a welcome change from the ethos of most gyms, and it would probably have a positive effect on our culture if these policies were extended to women who are not practitioners of fundamentalist Islam or Judaism, but simply believers in modesty.

Alright, I go to a co-ed gym. I take great pleasure in whaling on my pecs a couple of times a week. I also ogle the perspiring, healthy women in tight clothing. Not proud of that or anything. Frequently I try to avert my eyes. But there's some biology going on there. That's just life.

Said gym has a women's workout room, and my county has several popular women-only gyms -- and given our Muslim population (four or five Pakistani doctors and their families), I think the market for gender-separated workouts is pretty large and ecumenical.

I understand that at Harvard both the Women's Center and the Muslim students requested the women-only time. They probably have little else in common, but they're in favor of a little modesty. This is suddenly a problem for our kind host because . . .

Well, Dragyn, that depends. Some courts have ruled that even after a gender change the person's gender must legally remain what it was at birth. This isn't a settled question, and not even courts agree that a transgendered person "is to be identified" by the gender they choose; there are circumstances where to do so is actually illegal.

"Larry, I admit that it's a personal fantasy of mine to see you in a gingham jumper, because I'm sure you'd be a peach. But if I catch you in the ladies room with my wife, I'll go all Ruth Buzzi on you with yer purse." - Rod "Basher" Dreher, Moe to Larry's Larry

"CRUNCHY 'MARY QUANT' CONTRARIAN CHARGED IN SUDDEN-DEATH-BI-(LOVE-)TRIANGULATION OF 'DAMSEL' IN THIS DRESS; EX-'POST'-MAN-FACTO, CAUGHT IN POLICE BELIEF(ME)NET(LET ME) GOES POSTAL, BLEEDING-HEART JURY SPARES ROD: THE REST(-ROOM) IS HIS(S)TORY" - NY POST headline(s)

As usual, my late spiritual mentor with the light-hearted saber, Obi-Won to my Luke, (He Shall Be)Levon to my Elton, Benny Hill, got there first:

from "Wild Women":

Now I was in a Chelsea bar one day,
And there was a chap stood about five feet away,
And we was both admiring a girl about twenty-one,
I said, "You just can't help but stare
At that cute little chick with the long blonde hair,"
He said, "That chick just happens to be my son."

I said, "I didn't mean to offend,
You must let me make a mend,
I mean at least let me buy you another rum.
I said, "You must think me an awful cad,
I didn't know you was his dad."
He said, "I'm not, you twit, I'm his mum."

monologues.co.uk/Comic_Songs/Wild_Women.htm

"It's so hard to be progressive, and to keep the correct position straight in one's mind. Men can't be around women, except when they pretend that they're women and need to go potty? Vinnie Barbarino-like, I'm so confused. Seems to me that the best thing to do is to ask Is this going to piss off Southern Baptists? If the answer is yes, you can rest easy that the policy, however bizarre or retrograde, is progressive. And if not, not."

That quote is gold, Rod. It just made my facebook page:)

This issue doesn't really lend itself to a common sense approach. Are people who hate the idea of men dressed as women going into the ladies really going to love the idea of women dressed as men going in?

First of all, single-sex gym time exists all over the place. I point to Curves, a women-only fitness center with 10,000 locations.

Oddly enough, Rod (and Andrew Sullivan) only seems to be upset because it's Muslims who decided that working out in front of men wasn't something they wanted to do, but not say a word about a world-wide four million member gym that does the same thing for exactly the same reason. What's next...Muslims that cheat on their taxes? Muslims that put mayonnaise on their hamburgers?

But that, and the transgendered thing, demonstrates one oddity in our supposedly non-gender-discriminatory society: modesty. For some reason we've decided to make an exception to gender equality on the basis of modesty, where we allow separate but equal.

I know it's not going to be a popular suggestion here, but maybe that was a mistake to start with. It not only causes, as was pointed out, chaos with transgendered people, it causes strange issues with gay people too, in that many straight men would be less comfortable showering in front of them then in front of women. (And remember Sen. Craig 'peeping' in the men's restroom through the edges of the stall.)

And it results in parents being unable to watch their children.

The solution is, possibly, just to drop the whole gender-based thing. Coed everything, stop assuming people have less modesty towards their own gender.

And then separate everyone out better...actually build stalls that can't be seen through, build individual showers and changing areas, etc etc.

Who was it that said, "Men don't like to take showers with men who like to take showers with men"?

By the way, the word is 'sex' not 'gender.' Nouns have gender, persons have sex (no pun intended.) Don't fall for the free-range sexual equalizers' destruction of trad language, ye conservatives!

"Here's a more 'progressive' solution: make all washrooms unisex. Everything truly private happens inside a stall or behind a divider anyway. This would be safer for children, most of all, because parents of either sex could supervise their children rather than sending them in by themselves."

This would also solve what is still a problem in many older buildings, the numerical imbalance between men's rooms and ladies' rooms.

You're right, of course, Scott Walker. Most men--or at least, a majority--wouldn't harm women. The problem for us is that we can't tell the difference. Unfortunately, y'all don't have tattoos or something to let us know which ones are all right. Thus, the behavior of the bad ones among you forces us to regard you all warily. Your problem really is with each other, not with me--or Andrea Dworkin. If men expected and required other men to respect women, instead of shrugging their shoulders and going "it's not me, it's him," or "what can you do--it's original sin" or "some women are just asking for it," it would be a different world and no woman would ever have occasion to be suspicious of men in ways that you find offensive.

The way to end this instantly? Record a Pat Robertson endorsement saying "Praise Jesus! The moment I have been praying for, and it has come to pass! Amen, Amen and AAAAmen!"

Another future flash point, which is coming sooner than you think--Muslims pushing creationism, which will result in educational bureaucrats going fetal.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/science/17book.html

That said, the idea of sex-segregated gym times is unobjectionable. My biggest problem is that it is (once again) the more retrograde elements of Islam demanding accommodation.

I defend the LGBT community, you immediately accuse me of being LGBT (or at least "T").

So pre-Stonewall of you, Rod ... more like Stone Age.

Anyone who is in the process of changing their biological sex to their identified sex is to be identified using the pronoun of their identification.

Welllll – "biology" also includes one’s DNA, one’s chromosomal makeup. Surgery can’t change that. Nor can a person who has had that surgery conceive or father children. It just doesn't quite totally work.

But if I catch you in the ladies room with my wife, I'll go all Ruth Buzzi on you with yer purse."

Too, too funny! Long live Laugh-In!

I should add, Dale, that surely a Byzantinologist should comprehend the complexities of these permutations!

Oh, for the good old days when a man who was convinced he was a woman was simply declared mentally ill...

I have thoughts of being a dolphin, but since there are no dolphin only restrooms I gave up the dream.

Larry Parker, I'm leaving you for a transgendered dolphin. I hope you're happy now.

Astonished:

First of all, as I've said twice now, I support this measure.

Well, yes, modesty is a factor. Speaking for our family, we encourage it in our kids, boys and girls. Which, given the childrens' fashion lines these days, is more difficult than it should be.

But it is a mistake to think "modesty" is the only thing veiling represents in all Islamic cultures. There is a repressive motive to it in many places. Hence the "quote marks" around value.

Let me throw it back at you: do you support the refusal of Muslim women to remove their veils for identification purposes? Or to bear their arms for washing purposes in a medical setting? These are real life cases, sadly--and it isn't modesty at work, either, but something sinister.

And another couple of things: a Muslim woman in a metro Detroit lawsuit refused to remove her veil while testifying. Again, not modesty, and more importantly--there's no way to accommodate that. Nor should we try.

Finally--I'm an amateur (perhaps -ish) fan/student of all things Byzantium. I'm not a Byzantinist, nor do I play one on TV. Plus, understood on their own terms, the Byzantines weren't all that "byzantine." Nothing like America's Internal Revenue Code, for example, which would have driven the most scheming Angeloi to horrified madness. But that's a story for another time.

Oh, for the good old days when a man who was convinced he was a woman was simply declared mentally ill...

I have thoughts of being a dolphin, but since there are no dolphin only restrooms I gave up the dream.

Actually, transgenderism is considered a mental illness. Being transgendered is a very stigmatizing thing to admit to oneself due to this fact. Admitting that one has a "mental illness" is the only way that they can at least get psychiatric treatment for it to establish the true life test to even see if they would be capable to go through with the surgery.

And for everyone here on this board, transgendered people know that the surgery will not make them fully one sex or the other, they understand that completely. They understand that they are walking through a very, very lonely road even if they can make themselves look like their identified gender. They understand that it is only meant to make them look like how their gender roles are.

"So transgenderism is a mental illness, but unlike every other mental illness, we encourage people to conform to that internal picture of themselves, even though it's mentally ill?"

Which is precisely the reason Johns Hopkins stopped performing sex change surgery in 1979. A survey of the patients who had undergone the surgery indicated that the surgery cooperated with the illness, as opposed to treating it.

"bear their arms" -- couldn't resist!

To the punitentiary with you!

Of course, in Byzantium it would have ended in some folks getting their noses cut off or overthrowing the regime, depending on the era.

Or both. And don't forget a good old fashioned blinding. Very popular, that. Old anti-Byzantine historians (Lecky stands out) ranted about the "monotonous" conspiracies, intrigues, and violence in the Byzantine aristocracy. I've always liked Viscount Norwich's rejoinder: "Far from being monotonous, it actually sounds rather exciting."

I suspect that, like many other "mental illnesses," transgender will one day be recognized as a result of atypical brain function. Schizophrenia, autism, Down's syndrome, and other conditions were once thought to be the result of some moral failing either by the person or their parents. "Treatment" consisted of moral exhortation, punishment, or social ostracism. It was thought that if the person with the problem just made more of an effort, exercised more will power, he/she could become "normal." Now we know that isn't true.

Some people seem to feel and express the kind of disgust and aversion to transgenderism that was once common in response to "mongoloids". They haven't realized yet that it's equally wrong--perhaps because some people, men particularly, feel a high degree of status anxiety about their social position, which they identify with their sex, and the exisitence of the transgendered is seen as a potential threat to that position. Alas, this seems to be another form of mental illness that is often treated by encouraging it. ; )

"So transgenderism is a mental illness, but unlike every other mental illness, we encourage people to conform to that internal picture of themselves, even though it's mentally ill?"

Which is precisely the reason Johns Hopkins stopped performing sex change surgery in 1979. A survey of the patients who had undergone the surgery indicated that the surgery cooperated with the illness, as opposed to treating it.

I didn't say transgenderism is a mental illness, I said people consider it a mental illness, just as people once considered homosexuality a mental illness. Remember, transgenderism has existed through a great deal of human history, it is only recently that we have the medical capabilities that we do now. Many cultures once considered them to be a third gender and were given many respected roles within their societies, such as medicinemen and women, spiritual figures.

Regarding the comparison of surgery of conforming the sex to match gender (as much as possible), the viewing of oneself as the other gender will always be there, it is not something (most of the time) which goes away. The discrepancy between biological sex and identified gender will always remain. The nearest analogy that I can come up with at the spur of the moment is glasses. The vision problem will always be there, and the glasses don't cure it, they conform to it so the person who is suffering visually can continue to participate in society. Transgenderism when ignored or denied can have an incredibly damaging effect on the persno who is transgender.

"They haven't realized yet that it's equally wrong--perhaps because some people, men particularly, feel a high degree of status anxiety about their social position, which they identify with their sex, and the exisitence of the transgendered is seen as a potential threat to that position."

When in doubt, blame it on testosterone. Why read Andrea Dworkin, et al., when we can get it here every day in condensed form?

"I didn't say transgenderism is a mental illness, I said people consider it a mental illness, just as people once considered homosexuality a mental illness."

And after transsexualism gets the big thumbs-up, what's the next psychosexual dysfunction to be declared 'normal?'

Explain to me again why it's bad for a man to consider himself a deceased French general when he really isn't, but it's okay for a man to consider himself a woman when he really isn't? I must've missed that part.

Rob G, if you want to think of yourself as a French general, be assured it will not bother me. I'm equally indifferent to your presenting yourself as a woman, though I do hope you'll behave appropriately in the unisex bathroom. What I wonder is, why are you so steamed up about a very small number of men who feel they should have been women? Why is this a problem for you? How does it affect you? You seem to be giving a demonstration of the statement you objected to.

Explain to me again why it's bad for a man to consider himself a deceased French general when he really isn't, but it's okay for a man to consider himself a woman when he really isn't? I must've missed that part.

Napolean was a French General from history. He is a spefific individual whose existence can be traced to a specific time and place. We know the dates of birth and death of this individual.

Some men and some women have immutable personality characteristics that put them at odds with the socially accepted gender roles and identities of a society. In some cases, this involves low levels of sex-gender disagreement, in which case, intolerant people simply call them tomboys, sissies, and faggots. In rare instances, however, the characteristics and self identity are so at odds with their birth sex and so much in line with what is viewed at acceptable for the opposite gender that they feel that they should be that opposite sex. In even rarer circumstances, this sex-gender disagreement can only be alleviated if they go through reassignment surgery so that they can feel "normal" even if it is only by appearance.

Do you still not see the difference?

It just hit me on the head ...

"MR. 2.1" honestly thinks the only reason a 39-year-old semi-healthy male wouldn't want kids would be because he's gay.

I don't know what's more breathtaking -- the arrogance or the prejudice.

I think it's a tie for now.

At first upon hearing this story I thought the decisions by Harvard was ridiculous. After reading the comments I've actually decided that a "women only" time in a college gym isn't that ridiculous. I'm a big fan of voluntary modesty after all. While I think women would get a lot fewer stares from men in the gym if they didn't wear such skimpy clothing, I can understand a woman's desire to not have men around when she works out. My wife joined curves for that reason. Now, if it were a "Muslim women only" time that would be ridiculous, but it's not.

But I think the thing that really sticks in Rod's (and Andrew's too, maybe) craw on this one is that Harvard wouldn't go the same lengths today to do anything for a Christian group. If this were a Christian group that had asked for a "women only" time at the gym I'm guessing Harvard would have laughed them off as a bunch of prudes. Maybe not, but that's my guess.

Muslims have to compromise as well on some of these things. Women refusing to take their veils off for drivers' license photos, as an example. If you want to drive a car in our country you have to get your picture taken. End of story.

"What do you do with the guy who wants a penis in the front and a vagina in the back? Is that 'normal' too?" - Rob G

That is actually pretty hilarious. I'm going to quote that from now on, if you doesn't mind.

Rob, the answer to that will be..."Who gave you white, heterosexual, males the power to decide what is normal and what is not. You do it to just perpetuate your status in society. Generations of white males used to say that black people were inferior so you must be wrong about this isssue too."

Larry: Particularly because (and maybe here's your confusion) I'M NOT GAY.

I'm not talking to you anymore about this, Larry. We had joy, we had fun, we had seasons in the sun -- and might I say you were a peach in that Lilly Pulitzer sun dress -- but all that's over now. You can't hold a candle to my transgendered dolphin amour. I had hoped we could still be friends, but I guess not, and no, I'm not going to return your pumps. There is a certain je ne sais quoi about an E-width Manolo Blahnik.

"If certain people feel strongly that they'll be more comfortable with themselves by making such changes, I don't know why that has to bother other people who feel no such need. Why not live and let live?"

Because if by "live and let live" you mean give men access to the women's room so long as they dress like women (or dolphins, or Napoleon Bonaparte--I've lost track) then you really mean that the burden of all this accommodation is on the huge majority of society who doesn't suffer from these disorders--and that the safety of the women and children who might be attacked by a man merely pretending to have one of these disorders must take a back seat to the demand for accommodation.

Similarly, I don't have a problem with single-sex gym times--it seems like a good idea from a common sense and safety perspective. But the precedent is to grant such privileges only to those groups for whom such accommodation is politically correct.

I_Like_Dragyn, Gender Reassignment Surgery is a myth. Surgeons can give a man a clabbered-together vagina, but they won't give him ovaries or a womb. He won't menstruate and can never get pregnant. Every cell of his body will still have Y chromosomes. Therapy and hormones can make him think and feel and act like a woman, but he is in truth still male.

Again, reread the statements I stated above.

Transgendered people know it will not make them their identified gender, I have acknowledged that in this discussion, and so have all people who are undergoing therapy in preparation for Gender Reassignment Surgery. The point is not to recreate a person into a new biological sex, the point is to allow such a person to interract withini society without fearing that they will not be able to react to society's standards of gender identification.

Your statement about a "clabbered-together vagina" serves no purpose in discourse. It's only purpose is to inflame individuals. If you wish to discuss this in a mature manner, then go ahead, but you need to learn to be much more civil in public discourse.

I_Like_Dragyn,
So if a sex change operation will not make a "transgender" person their identified gender, why do they want people to refer to them with the pronoun of their identified gender? If being transgender doesn't refer to either changing gender or changing sex (as in chomosomes), why change a pronoun? A man is still a man and a woman is still a women after the surgery, they just have had a operation that made them look more like the other sex. Why insist on being called he instead of she?

Your Bnet bosses have been informed, Rod. Gay-bashing, last I checked, is against Bnet's rules even for its blogmeisters.

Oh for God's sake, Larry, you are impossible. There are times when I think about closing this blog down. This is one of them.

Eric,

if you honestly have these questions and are not simply trying to inflame, please simply go to the easiest website you can to explain transgender issues. Or better yet, you can even go to the GLBT part of this website. There really is a fountain of understanding out there.

But think of it this way: are you willing to go up to every woman on the street and ask them, "Were you born a man?" I don't think so. Or are you willing to go up to every man and ask him, "Were you born a woman?" I don't think so. Gender Reassignment surgery, for MTFs, consists of breast augmentation, hair removal, hormone treatment to lighten the voice, soften facial features, etc., in other words, it makes the MTFs appearance more in line with a person who was born a woman, therefore decreasing the likelihood of being asked that question. Again, Gender Reassignment Surgery is not about convincing the MTF she is a naturally born woman, or a FTM he is a naturally born man. Gender Reassignment Surgery is about how they present themselves to society.

Ostrea,

Gay bashing is an expression used to designate verbal confrontation with, denigration of, or physical violence against people thought to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgendered (LGBT) because of their apparent sexual orientation or gender identity. Similar terms such as "lesbian bashing" or "queer bashing" may also be formed. A "bashing" may be a specific incident, or one could also use the verb "to bash" e.g. "I was gay bashed." As there is no foolproof way to detect a person's sexual orientation, people sometimes fall victim even if they are not LGBT, should they be perceived to conform to the relevant stereotypes.

~wikipedia

Remember, Ostrea, just like the case of sexual harrassment, accusations of gay bashing are typically in the eyes of the perceived victim. Regardless of whether or not you, I, or Rod feel that the comments in this discussion board should be considered gay bashing, it is dependent upon how the receiver of the comments (Larry Parker) perceived them.

'As for your hypothetical case, I don't feel called upon to "do" anything about it. I don't care. Unless he develops a crush on me, which seems quite unlikely, what he does with his bits and pieces will have no significant impact on my life. Again, I wonder why you feel the need to care so much and to wax so indignant.'

So things of this nature have no connection with any other things of this nature except where they happen to coincide and result in an effect on you personally? You need to put down your feminist books and start reading Wendell Berry. Start with "Sex, Economy, Freedom & Community," then procede promptly to "Standing By Words."

Good Lord, what a bunch of psychobabble gobbledygook bullshit I'm hearing here. Don't words mean anything anymore? This is starting to sound like the Monty Python sketch in the pet shop where the man wants a cat but they don't have one, so they offer to do fish-to-cat Reassignment Surgery -- "fins off! whiskers on!" The response of the man is: "But it's not a proper cat, is it!"

And there's the rub -- a man who thinks he's a woman, even if he has all the right parts is not a "proper" woman, proper in this instance meaning "characteristically belonging to the being or thing in question."

There are two sexes, there are two genders, period. Each, by nature, is 'proper' only to itself. If you think you are a woman born in a man's body, you are mentally ill. My parents knew a man (I met him myself once or twice) who was fully convinced that he was half-man, half-woman; he had only male parts, but psychically and emotionally he believed he was a hermaphrodite. What surgery, pray tell, would you do on him?

'Napoleon Bonaparte' hit the nail on the head above; the transsexuals have a politically-and-academically-connected movement to support them. Would-be hermaphrodites do not. Maybe they will someday -- what business is of mine, right? Well, what do you do when the next group that claims such status are animal-lovers? Or pedophiles? Can't you see that this kind of thinking affects society as a whole, or have you drunk so much ACLU kool-aid that you really think that matters such as this impact only the individuals in question?

All 'gender roles' are not stereotypes -- a man cannot be a mother by definition.

And this, of course, is the problem. Definitions don't matter anymore.
Richard Weaver was right; we're a nation of moral idiots.

Rob, again I feel that you may be missing the point--though, at this stage, it seems that may be deliberate. There is a clear distinction between the physical body you were born with, complete with XX or XY chromosomes, and the behavior and appearance that society associates with that physical body. That constellation of beliefs and practices is what the anthropological term "gender" describes. Sex is something you're born with. Gender is not. Gender is a set of beliefs about your role that you are taught as you grow up in a given society.

If I am a Saudi Arabian woman, and I believe I should not have to veil, that I should be free to drive a car, wear jeans and tank tops, work with men and hold my own passport, am I mentally ill? Many Saudi Arabian men would say so, but I don't think so. If I'm a boy growing up in a rural area of America, where I am expected to drive a truck, enjoy hunting and fishing, play and watch football, but I am a vegetarian and animal rights activist who prefers to spend Saturdays at the library studying art history, am I mentally ill? Again, my male relatives may think so, but I would disagree.

There are not "two genders, period." There is a broad continuum of gendered behaviors. Which ones are acceptable varies widely, depending on which society one lives in. If a man feels more comfortable living in a way that our culture defines as "feminine," does that make him mentally ill? It may appear so to critics like yourself. But I suggest that a Martian anthropologist, observing us, would find such definitions far from obvious. He might think that our whole, highly structured system, in which everything is assigned a gender, from what you drink in a bar to the color of your phone, appears far crazier than any transgressions against the system could ever be.

Your question about pedophiles is a red herring, as I think you must know by now. People who have sex with animals or children are doing things that affect others, and the consent and welfare of those others must be considered. People who choose to live like members of the opposite sex are not doing any harm to others that I am aware of. If you think there's harm involved, please try to be specific, that I may consider your points. Complaints that James Morris becoming Jan Morris has ruined society are just too general for me to evaluate.

Your comment that "a man cannot be a mother by definition" illustrates the misunderstanding. No, a man can't give birth. Check. And there's some post-natal biology involved, such as oxytocin release promoted by breast-feeding, which also requires female physiology. HIstorically speaking, though, many mothers never involved themselves in such behavior. They left that to the servants. Society's definition of "mother" involves far more than birth alone, and it's not all that simple or clear. Usually it involves concepts of nurturing and tenderness, and by those standards, many women who have given birth wouldn't qualify as mothers, either, whereas many men would fully meet the performance standards for "motherhood." The distinction between male and female parents is not factual and objective, but socially designed and somewhat arbitrary.

So, I'd say you're right--definitions may not matter so much, when they are arbitrary and designed to support a certain kind of social structure that is now in transition. I appreciate your willingness to engage with me on this, because you're helping me to clarify my own thinking. : )

"All three of my children called me "mommy" at some point."

Mr. Evans, of course there is nothing wrong with that. What creeps me out is when the Milk Man calls you mommy.

And I thought Larry had issues!

;-)

I can't help thinking of Monty Python on a Sunday morning. "There--poor Flopsy's dead. And never called me Mother!"

Another contingent of men in dresses who brought much joy into my life. I'd let Terry Jones into the ladies' room any time.

As to Microsoft Visa, I wouldn't know, since I avoid Microsoft with the diligence with which some eschew silky lingerie.

Back when I was in grad school, I belonged to the U of Chicago Karate Club, which had a coed locker room. We all managed to maintain perfect modesty because, being U of C geeks, we were all very nearsighted and took off our glasses when changing. Talk about the eye of the beholder!

But seriously, folks...

I have a couple of transgender friends. They don't come across as any more messed up than most people I know.

But from what I have heard and read on the subject, I'm pretty sure that most of the people who make that transition do it as a last-resort alternative to suicide. Does that mean that wanting to change one's gender is a mental illness? Dunno. It could also mean that not being the gender one believes one properly should be can CAUSE a mental illness.

And how much does all of this depend on the totally messed-up stereotypes of masculinity and femininity we all have? Read Jan Morris' discussion of how being a woman feels different from being a man because women are nicer. In another age, would St. Francis of Assisi have believed he was supposed to be a woman?