Number 42

What Makes a Woman a Woman?

Martina Navratilova recently made the news by concluding that trans women should not be allowed to participate alongside 'cis' women in athletic competitions. I don't have the article in front of me, but the gist of it was that; while she has no hostility towards trans women, supports their individual journeys, and is willing to use their chosen pronouns/names, she believes they have an inherent physical advantage because they were 'assigned male at birth'. A few posts ago (#40), I talked about the connection between social conservatives and groups of radical feminists regarding their shared believe that trans women are not "real" women. (For the record, they don't consider trans men "real" men, either). Well! At this moment in time, I am fully caffeinated, and my dander is up, so I'm in the mood to (metaphorically) pick a fight. I've got my earbuds turned up to a dangerous level while  Ozzy is going up the rails on a crazy train. So let's go.

Their first argument (and, well, their last), is the primacy of genetics and biology. While they probably accept the fact that certain people are born 'intersex' (having both feminine and masculine sex organs), they are firmly in favor of the gender binary. There are two sexes - male and female - and each person is assigned to one group or the other at birth based on their external genitalia. From the chromosomal standpoint, each person is either 'XY' (male) or 'XX' (female). (Again allowing for the genetic abnormalities that happen occasionally). I suppose their believes can be summed up by stating that an individual's DNA in the conclusive proof of sex. What you're born with, is what you are.

OK. Let's pick this apart, by considering some of the natural conclusions one must come to, if one is to believe that biology is the only way to determine gender.

1. Only a 'real' women menstruate and give birth. OK, I'm willing to concede this point. It doesn't matter how many procedures I have done during my transition, I will never have a period, and I will never become pregnant. However, aren't there 'women born women' who will never menstruate, or be able to become pregnant? Are these women considered lesser women because of their body's physical idiosyncracies? I certainly hope not.

I understand that menstruation and pregnancy are significant aspects of being female. I also understand that there are extensive and life long hardships associated with these events. If someone were to say to me: "You'll never understand how central these things are to being a woman" I can't argue that they're wrong. And after witnessing my sister, female friends, my wife, and my daughters be challenged by the many side effects related to these events, it probably seems like lip service to hear me say "I'm jealous for missing out", but it's true. When I reflect back on the times that Rebecca was pregnant, I now understand that part of what I felt was jealousy that I didn't get to have that experience (yes, I'm aware of the kicks, the indigestion, the hemorrhoids, the stretch marks, the constant peeing, etc.) But let me make one point. A single 'cis' woman can no more speak to the universal experiences of women, than a trans woman can. And again, the attitude that there is only one, 'true' female experience can also be directed at certain 'biological' women. I don't know any feminists, radical or otherwise, who would suggest that.

If you want to be mad at trans women for missing 40 years of PMS, tampon taxes, ruined sheets, and cramps on their way to becoming women, I can accept that. But remember: nobody's journey is the same as anyone else's, fairness is an elusive concept, and jealousy about some one else's experiences is rarely a productive venture.

2. The biology argument can basically be reduced to what you looked like on the day you were born. I have a few questions about that though. What about a child born with a cleft palate? Or a 'crack' baby? Or some other sickness or birth defect? I'm going to assume that most of us would agree that these children deserve every bit of medical treatment and expertise that is available, right? I'm also going to assume that we want these children to reach their optimum medical outcome. No one wants an infant with a cleft palate to be left untreated, and in our world we have the ability and know-how to treat these children. Sure there are problems with our health care system, but for the most part, these children receive the required medical interventions

Let's extrapolate this attitude towards the treatment of mental illness. Our culture's growing awareness of mental health struggles suggests that it believes that it is equally important to treat these issues (as well as physical health issues). Because science is real, I think it is a fair point that the vast majority of mental health professionals identify 'gender dysphoria' as a legitimate condition that deserves to be treated. If depression, anxiety and schizophrenia are real things and deserve to be treated, why balk at the treatment (or acceptance) of dysphoria? I can only speak for myself, of course, but my road to where I am today (a place where my gender identity, female, leaves me feeling calm and tranquil), has been strewn with challenges. I have worked very hard to get here, along with significant assistance from a variety of medical professionals. It has not been a whim. I don't understand the need of outsiders to suggest that it's all 'pretend' or 'inauthentic' or that I'm mentally ill.

3. Finally, I need to address Martina's assertion that trans women have 'biological' advantage over 'cis' women. First, it is interesting to remember that when Martina first came on the tennis scene, she was most often compared with Chris Evert, with whom she had many epic matches. Chris was the 'pretty' one, who dressed in the cute outfits. Martina, who was open about her identity as a lesbian, was considered 'mannish'. When she began to consistently get the better of Evert, people began to wonder if she had been using male hormones. It was all bullshit, of course, and she was ultimately acknowledged as one of history's greatest tennis players. I think she would be very careful around this issue, based on past perceptions.

Her comments also reminded me of Jimmy the Greek. Remember him? He used to be on the CBS football pregame show (in the 70's and early 80's) His schtick was offering odds on the games. He met his demise when he suggested that 'black' athletes were better than 'white' athletes because they had been bred that way during slavery. Or Al Campanis. He was an executive for the LA Dodgers when he suggested that 'blacks' didn't swim as well as 'whites' because they were less buoyant. You know what I'm talking about here: ignorant shit.

Look, I admit it, I don't know a lot about muscles and physiology, and what differences there might be between male bodies and female bodies. But at my last doctor's appointment, I was told that my estrogen and testosterone levels were at an 'average' level for an adult female. I'm less aggressive, and I get exhausted much faster than I used to (with a similar level of activity, including regular workouts at the gym). Could I, with proper training, get to a point where I had an advantage over 'cis' women because I was assigned male at birth? I don't know, but it sure feels like a slippery slope. If we start dividing up people using this criteria, what's to stop us from using ethnicity or sexuality or some other arbitrary difference to divide us.

Perhaps the fear is that 'cis' men who can't cut it in the male sport's leagues will become women in order to compete against the 'lesser' competition they would face in women's sports. Yuck! That felt as offensive to write as it probably felt to read (and it should). It's preposterous on many levels. The point is, no 'cis' male could ever get through the screenings and protocols that have been established for the treatment of gender dysphoria, just to play in the WNBA or to drive the ball from the women's tees. That's what Martina (and others), fail to understand.  Gender dysphoria involves coming to terms with who you are at your most central core of being. Athletic success is just not a consideration in coming to terms with who we are as people.