week 5 critical analysis
Cooper2021
Meyerowitz1.pdf
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
This article was downloaded by: [CDL Journals Account] On: 24 May 2011 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 922973516] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37- 41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Studies in Gender and Sexuality Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t783567629
Transforming Sex: An Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz, Ph.D. Author of How Sex Changed: A History of Transsexuality in the United States Vernon A. Rosarioab; Joanne Meyerowitzc a University of California, b Neuropsychiatric Institute, c Yale University,
To cite this Article Rosario, Vernon A. and Meyerowitz, Joanne(2004) 'Transforming Sex: An Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz, Ph.D. Author of How Sex Changed: A History of Transsexuality in the United States', Studies in Gender and Sexuality, 5: 4, 473 — 483 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/15240650509349260 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15240650509349260
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
473 © 2004 The Analytic Press
Joanne Meyerowitz, Ph.D. is Professor of History and American Studies at
Yale University. Vernon A. Rosario, M.D., Ph.D. is a Clinical Assistant Professor at the
University of California, Los Angeles, Neuropsychiatric Institute and a child psychiatrist in private practice.
Studies in Gender and Sexuality 5(4):473–483, 2004
Transforming Sex An Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz, Ph.D.
Author of How Sex Changed: A History of Transsexuality in the United States
Vernon A. Rosario, M.D., Ph.D., Interviewer
Christine Jorgensen’s widely publicized sex reassignment surger y in 1952 brought tr anssexua lism to worldwide attention and fostered medical interest in transsexualism. Joanne Meyerowitz has traced the history of Jorgensen’s personal odyssey, the medical history of transsexualism, and the broader impact of transsexualism on United States culture. In this interview, Meyerowitz discusses how she came to this project and some of its theoretical and methodological challenges. Finally, she sets her historical work in the context of contemporar y gender and transgender politics.
Transsexualism has become a hot topic in gender and queer theory, especially from the perspective of literary and cultural studies. Yet there is a dearth of historical studies on the topic. Joanne Meyerowitz’s comprehensive and balanced monograph
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
474 Vernon A. Rosario
f ills a huge gap by covering the medical, cultural, and social histor y of tr anssexua l ism. T he breadt h of her ana lysis demonstr ates t he profound impact of tr anssexua lism on American popular culture and social constructions of gender.
Meyerowitz’s medical histor y of transsexualism begins in the early 20th century when the Victorian notion of “sexual inversion” tended to conf late same-sex eroticism, cross-gendered identification and behavior, cross-dressing, and hermaphroditism (both anatomical and psychosexual). She examines how the organic and psychological aspects of sex and gender were seen a s inextricably intert wined in t he research of such early sexologists as Magnus Hirschfeld. Therefore, the f irst surgical and hormonal interventions to alter sex in the early 20th century were performed as treatments for inversion. While there were a small number of medical and popular descriptions of such people in the f irst half of the century, it was the Christine Jorgensen case that brought transsexualism to worldwide public attention in 1952.
Jorgensen is the heart of Meyerowitz’s historical narrative. Jorgensen became the ur-transsexual for doctors, the public, and other gender-variant people. She was the spur for the reif ication of a distinct transsexual phenomenology that was immediately surrounded by outrage in the medical profession. The legitimacy of the diagnosis and its tripartite treatment (psychotherapy, hormones, and “sex change” surgery) remains controversial. Jorgensen’s life story and transformation became the material for tabloids, movies, songs, and cabaret routines. Meyerowitz extensively documents Jorgensen’s huge cultural impact and explores its subtle destabilization of gender norms in the 1950s. Finally, Jorgensen became the role model for countless other gender-variant people who finally found a name for their state. Meyerowitz’s archival sleuthing brings to light poig nant letters from a variety of transsexuals who found tremendous comfort and hope in Jorgensen’s saga. Jorgensen and the emerging transsexual-treatment professionals shaped a particular model of transsexualism, often forcing transgender people to lie in order to gain access to care.
A lthough the medical model encouraged transsexuals to disappear into the fabric of “normal” society, some transgendered
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz 475
people fought for g reater public and medica l awareness. Transgendered health care professionals coaxed the Har r y B e n j a m i n I nt e r n a t i o n a l G e n d e r D y s p h o r i a A s s o c i a t i o n ( H B I G D A ) to l i b e r a l i z e i t s t re a t m e nt p roto c o l s . O t h e r transsexuals have fought to protect transsexual sex workers and get transsexual civil rights under the greater umbrella of lesbian, gay, and feminist political causes.
Meyerowitz a lso examines the contentious relationship between transsexuals and the gay male and lesbian feminist communities, where they have been v iewed with suspicion if not outright hostility. Transsexua ls have been seen a s an embar rassment for a mainstream g ay image or as gender poachers usur ping or demean ing femin in it y. A lt hough Meyerowitz’s analysis ends with Jorgensen’s death in 1989, her complex analysis sets the stage for understanding the meteoric rise of transgenderism in popular culture and United States academe in the 1990s.
This inter v iew with Meyerowitz was conducted by way of electronic mail during June 2003.
Vernon Rosario: How Sex Changed represents something of a departure from your earlier work in social and labor history in that it tackles a complex and controversial topic in medical history, yet seamlessly interweaves the social and cultural factors. Why did you choose transsexualism, and how would you tie this project to your previous work?
Joanne Meyerowitz: I had been working for several years on various projects on the history of gender and sexuality in the 1950s United States, and I kept encountering the name of Christine Jorgensen. She seemed to pop up in virtually every primary source I consulted, but she was not mentioned at all in any of the history books on the postwar era. I was immediately intrigued because her story brought together some key issues of the 20th century, especially concerning science, medicine, gender, sexuality, and mass media. As I followed the history of her celebrity, I eventually became obsessed enough to write a broader history of transsexuality.
How Sex Changed builds, in a sense, on my f irst monograph, Women Adrift (1988), which also focused on seemingly marginal
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
476 Vernon A. Rosario
subcultural people and attempted to show how they themselves and the cultur a l representations of them transformed the mainstream. How Sex Changed also ref lects my more recent work on the postwar United States. In my edited collection, Not June Cleaver (1994), I presented a revisionist interpretation, which challenged the one-sided stereotype of a monolithic, conformist, white bread, conservative post–World War II culture. In How Sex Changed, I again try to restore some complexity to the history of the postwar era.
VR: It is ironic that Jorgensen in many ways chose to adopt and even overplay the June Cleaver gender stereotypes you have analyzed.
JM: Like all of us, Jorgensen was a creature of her times. But she also felt obliged, as she explained later, to present herself as wholly feminine. She felt the press would skewer her for any appearance of masculinity. And, as with many other people, her understanding of gender roles changed in the 1960s and 1970s. But even in the 1950s, Jorgensen never quite adopted the June Cleaver stereotype. In the 1950s, as today, there were many versions of socially acceptable femininity. Jorgensen usua lly avoided domest ic femininit y and chose instead a glamorous var iant. She presented herself a s an urbane, sophisticated career woman, along the lines of Eve Arden or Lauren Bacall.
VR: You dr aw on a ter rif ic variety of pr imar y sources, particularly medical archival material from the Kinsey Institute, the University of California, Los Angeles, and California State University, Northridge. Are there some sources that you missed? I specif ically wonder about Stanford, UCSF, and Hopkins. How might your story have been different with these?
JM: I used whatever sources I could f ind. But I restricted most of my primary research to the era before the 1970s. (I treat the more recent years only in the epilogue of the book.) For that reason, I did not pursue the records at Stanford, which did not become a major center for sex reassignment surgery until the 1970s. (I hope someone else will write that history.) Also, I could not use the small collection at Johns Hopkins because John Money, who donated the records to the archive, denied me
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz 477
access. (Some of the scientists, including, it seems, Money, worried about how I would present them in my book.) As it turns out, I did use some of the John Money papers at the Kinsey Institute. Since I completed my book, though, Money has donated more of his collections to the Kinsey Institute, which means there are now records at the Kinsey Institute that were not available to me.
VR: Ethnicity does not get much coverage here, nor do low- income people. Is t his omission a result of t he sources, discriminatory factors of medical access, or other forces? Was t here an endur ing ef fect of Jorgensen’s markedly white, bourgeois model of transsexualism on professional and popular images of transsexualism?
JM: Like many historians, I f ind it troubling when I cannot locate the sources to address the kinds of questions I want to answer. I did find some records that prov ided bits and pieces of information on issues of race, ethnicity, and class, and I used them in the book. But some of my best sources on transsexuals were the letters they wrote to doctors and Jorgensen, and those letters focused intently on stories of cross-gender identif ication and only rarely mentioned race, ethnicity, or class.
Still, I have enough ev idence to know that the people I quoted were not all middle or upper class and white. Jorgensen’s celebrity did, as you say, place the popular cultural emphasis on white, glamorous, male-to-female transsexuals, but even in the popular press there were occasional references to people of color and to poor and working-class transsexuals. I wish I could have said more than I d id about cla ss, r ace, and et hn ic dif ferences among tr anssexua ls, but I am constr ained by the lack of sources. It would be easier, I think, to explore such differences in depth in a contemporary ethnographic or sociological study.
VR: You show that Jorgensen g reatly increased popular awareness of transsexualism in the 1950s and 60s. But my sense is that transsexualism was less evident in pop culture in the 1970s and 80s, and then made a resurgence again in the 1990s, when transgenders were regularly on daytime talk shows and in popular mov ies, and RuPaul made transgenderism glamorous.
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
478 Vernon A. Rosario
And my clinical experience is that transsexuals who came of age in the 70s and 80s felt more isolated than adolescent transgenders did in the 1990s and do today. Would you agree? How would you explain this phenomenon?
JM: Transsexuals in the 1970s and 1980s did have pop-culture icons, if not Jorgensen, then Renée Richards and a fair number of lesser known males-to-females (MTFs) and females-to-males (FTMs) who made it into the news. Stories in the popular culture could, and did, provoke a sense of self-recognition in some transgendered readers, but they could not end the ever yday isolation. I absolutely agree with you that adolescents in the 1990s and today are less isolated than in the past. The Internet, in particular, has prov ided an amazing forum for national and international information sharing, conversation, and transgender and transsexual activism. Virtually any transgendered teenager with access to a computer can meet, at least in cyberspace, with other transgendered people.
VR: Your stor y ends in t he 1990s, which is just when transgenderism became a hot topic in feminist and queer studies. How would you connect your work to postmodernist debates about sex and gender?
JM: That is a tough question. My own research is deeply informed by postmodern debates on sex and gender, and also by concept s of border c rossing and hybr id it y found in postmodern (especia lly postcolonia l) stud ies of r ace and ethnicity. I see my work as part of a larger project in which we ack n owledge t he soc ia l constr uct ions of t he seemingly biological. But I also f ind frustrating some of the postmodern emphasis on the performativity of gender and the f luidity of gender.
Some postmodern accounts seem to avoid taking subjectivity seriously, and, because transsexuality is based on a wish, a yearning, or a desire, it is hard to engage with it unless you can talk about an “inner” life and listen seriously to how self- identif ied transsexuals explain it. At one point in my research, I found it encouraging to discover Lynne Layton’s (1998) pointed defense of the concept of a persistent but subtly changing “core identity.” She asks us to attend to “the specif icity, construction,
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz 479
and experience of an individual’s inner world and relational negotiations” (p. 11).
VR: In the last decade there has certainly been an intense debate among transgender theorists who favor Judith Butler’s (1990) per formativ ity model and those postulating a “core identity.” In the period that you focused on, was there much debate about dif ferent varieties of tr anssexua lism, or did Jorgensen and the HBIGDA consolidate a monolithic model of “true” transsexualism, largely inclined toward biological etiology and treatment?
JM: In the 1950s and 1960s, there was widespread debate, which is still unresolved, between scientists and doctors who preferred biological explanations and those who preferred psychogenic explanations. On the “nature” side of the debate, scientists looked for hormonal, chromosomal, genetic, and other physical markers of transsexuality, and on the “nurture” side, they turned to early childhood experience and various forms of social learning. The doctors and scientists on the biological side of the debate were more likely to endorse sex-change surgery, whi le t heir most voca l opponent s —psychoana lyst s — c a st tr anssexua lit y a s a menta l illness, a ssociated wit h sexua l “per version,” and ca lled for psychotherapeutic treatment. Although it is impossible to take a poll, the evidence strongly suggests that most self-identif ied transsexuals preferred the biological explanations. They could choose to side with doctors who sympathized with their condition and advocated the surgical treatment they requested, or they could choose to side with doctors who saw them as mentally ill and refused to endorse surgery. It wasn’t much of a choice.
VR: How would you bring your analysis up to the present? What has been the legacy—and perhaps the burden—of 1950s transsexualism to current feminist, transgender, and queer politics?
JM: There’s so much I could say here. Let me focus on just a few lessons I learned while studying the history of transsexuality. First, feminists need to remember that we (feminists) did not invent the concept of gender. We were not the f irst to separate gender and biological sex. In fact, we inherited and reworked a
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
480 Vernon A. Rosario
version of gender that was pioneered by scientists who worked on intersexuality and transsexuality. This history should remind us that the concept of gender is not inherently feminist.
Second, transsexuals need a history, which I hope my book begins to supply. Transsexuality is not just a psychological or medical phenomenon. It emerged as a category at a particular historical moment, and it was def ined and redef ined in a social context through complicated interactions among transsexuals, doctors, reporters, and others.
Third, queer theorists need to recognize the multiplicity on the sexual margins. We now agree that our current concepts of “gay” and “lesbian” are not transhistoric. They do not explain same-sex desire in other cultures and other centuries. We should also acknowledge that same-sex desire alone does not adequately cover the historical turf of “queerness.” What was “queer” changed over time, and we can trace multiple genealogies, not all of which end up at “gay” and “lesbian.”
VR: Tr a n s ge n d e r i d e nt i t y h a s c e r t a i n ly d i ve r s i f i e d tremendously in the past decade under the stimulus of feminist t h e o r y, qu e e r p o l i t i c s , a n d t h e b r o a d e r aw a re n e s s o f transsexualism. Did you f ind much of a debate from the 1950s through the 1980s about the varieties of transsexual identity that would pref igure the current diversif ication?
JM: I didn’t f ind varieties of transsexual identity per se, but I did f ind a different language for expressing gender variance. Before t he word tr anssexua l made it s popular debut (in 1949), people who hoped to change sex called themselves hermaphrodites, morphadites, transvestites, eonists, homosexuals, and inverts. In the 1960s, in the street culture, male-to-female transgendered people drew distinctions among hair fairies, drag queens, cross-dressers, hormone queens, and transsexuals. So we have a histor y of multiple terms—both medical and vernacular— for gender variance but without the elaborate (and theorized) diversity seen today.
VR: Although you focused on the United States, other areas are signif icantly implicated (Denmark, Morocco, Mexico, the Netherlands, etc.). What could you add about the impact of other cultures’ constructions of transsexualism, and the globalization of American models of treatment and of transsexual identity?
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz 481
JM: In the book, I try to trace out the transnational circulations that informed the history of transsexuality in the United States. These circulations involved European science, third-world medical markets, and transsexuals themselves who crossed national borders in search of medical help. But cross-gender identification and transsexuality have different histories in India, Thailand, Brazil, England, Germany, and elsewhere, and I don’t want to make the imperialist claim that my understanding of United States histor y can explain it all. There are some excellent contemporary studies of the hijra in India, for example, that suggest a substantially different histor y, which has not been erased by the global spread of Western medical models (Nanda, 1990; Cohen, 1995).
VR: Do you think that the “Jorgensen” model of transsexualism has nonetheless come to predominate in developed countries, both through its medicalization and widespread adoption by transsexuals themselves?
JM: Western medical models of “sex reassignment surgery” have def initely spread beyond their origins in Europe and North America. I am not sure they predominate everywhere, but they are clearly ev ident in Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America. (Just last week, I read a newspaper article on a South Korean doctor who specializes in sex reassignment surgery.) Beyond that, I hesitate to say. I study United States history, and I do not want to claim any special expertise on the rest of the world.
VR: You touch on the different community politics of FTMs and MTFs. Recently with the work of Henry Rubin (2003), Judith Halberstam (1998), and Jay Prosser (1998), we have seen a much more developed ethnography and theorization of FTM’s, butch lesbians, and masculine women. Would you care to comment on the different ways in which FTMs and MTFs have had a cultural and social impact on the United States?
JM: In the recent f lowering of transgender and queer studies, there may be less emphasis on femininity than on masculinity. But in the popular culture, MTFs (and their femininity) have gotten considerably more attention than F TMs (and their masculinity), at least in the last half century. This was not always the case. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the popular press was greatly interested in “passing women,” that is, people
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
482 Vernon A. Rosario
who were born and reared as girls but who lived in adulthood as men. And in the 1930s popular culture there was substantial attention to a handful of female athletes (mostly in Europe) who underwent unspecif ied surgery and then went on to live as men. After World War II and especially after the Christine Jorgensen media frenzy, MTFs predominated in the popular culture. It was only at the end of the 20th century that substantial numbers of FTMs began to appear more frequently in the press and in transsexual activist circles. I can offer a dozen or so possible explanations for these shifts, but I am still not conv inced that I can explain them adequately.
VR: What are your connections to the transgender community, and d id you have any g r a ssroot s polit ica l commitment s underlying the work?
JM: I owe a huge debt to the many transgendered people, especially activists, who went out of their way to talk to me, to encourage me in my work, and to share sources and suggest research leads. I see myself as an a lly and friend of the tr ansgender movement, and I have a not so underlying commitment to the civil rights of transsexuals (and everyone else). Those who medicalize (and often pathologize) transsexuals tend to miss what is for me the heart of the political issue: no one should be stigmatized, f ired from a job, evicted from a home, assaulted on the streets, mistreated by police, prevented from marrying, denied custody of children, or refused medical treatment because of his or her expression of gender variance. These are basic issues of civil rights.
REFERENCES
Butler, J. (1990), Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
Cohen, L. (1995), The pleasure of castration: The postoperative status of hijras, jankhas, and academics. In: Sexual Nature, Sexual Culture, ed. P. Abramson & S. Pinkerton. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 276–304.
Feinberg, L. (1996), Transgender Warriors: Making Histor y from Joan of Arc to RuPaul. Boston: Beacon Press.
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
Interview with Joanne Meyerowitz 483
Halberstam, J. (1998), Female Masculinity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Hausman, B. (1995), Changing Sex: Transsexualism, Technology, and the Idea of Gender. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Layton, L. (1998), Who’s That Girl? Who’s That Boy? Clinical Practice Meets Postmodern Gender Theor y. Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press, 2004.
Meyerowitz, J. (1988), Women Adrift: Independent Wage Ear ners in Chicago, 1880–1930. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
(1994), Not June Cleaver: Women and Gender in Postwar America. 1945–1960. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Nanda, S. (1990), Neither Man nor Woman: The Hijras of India. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Prosser, J. (1998), Second Skins: The Body Narratives of Transsexuality. New York: Columbia University Press.
Rubin, H. (2003), Self-Made Men: Identity and Embodiment Among Transsexual Men. Nashv ille, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
1812 Butter Avenue, #3 Los Angeles, CA 90025 [email protected] vard.edu
D o w n l o a d e d B y : [ C D L J o u r n a l s A c c o u n t ] A t : 1 9 : 0 0 2 4 M a y 2 0 1 1
