Social Science

9 Beyond Borders Lived Experiences of Atypically Gendered Transsexual People

Sara Davidmann

ARE YOU A GUY OR A GIRL?

I’ve heard the question all my life. The answer is not so simple, since there are no pronouns in the English language as complex as I am, and I do not want to simplify myself in order to neatly fi t one or the other . . . We have a history fi lled with militant hero/ines. Yet therein lies the rub! How can I tell you about their battles when the words woman and man, feminine and masculine, are almost the only words that exist in the English lan- guage to describe all the vicissitudes of bodies and styles of expression?

(Feinberg 1996: ix)

QUEERING THE TERRITORY

Building upon the work of Judith Butler (1990) and Michel Foucault (1984) and emerging in the early 1990s from the fi elds of lesbian, gay and femi- nist studies, queer theory constitutes a collection of foci on the relations between sex, gender and desire in relation to stereotypical heterosexual norms. Central to queer theory is a concern with the ways in which atypical confi gurations of gender, sex and desire challenge the concept of the ‘natu- ral’ (Butler 1990, 1991, 1993; Spargo 1999; Sullivan 2003). Since queer theory’s inception, the use of the term ‘queer’ has spread beyond academia into lesbian, gay and transgender communities where it is now commonly used as an umbrella term for sexual and gender identities beyond the norm (Jagose 1996; Wilchins 2004; Halberstam 2005).

Concurrently with the popularity of queer theory, the Western world has seen an increased social acceptance of lesbian and gay sexuality and a greater integration of openly lesbian and gay people into mainstream society as well as increased legal recognition. Following this, the mixing of gender characteristics that have long been a part of the experiences of some lesbian and gay people, for example, a woman displaying masculine characteris- tics, or a man appearing effeminate, would appear to have become more widely accepted in Western urban society (Shaw and Ardener 2005). In line with this, in the broad social sphere, the acknowledged gender boundaries appear to have expanded to accommodate a degree of female masculinity and male femininity. Judith Halberstam argues that it is because gender boundaries are fl exible that this mixing of gender attributes can take place while maintaining the status quo of the binary sexes (1998: 20).

Beyond Borders 187

Further, gender is an interactive process (Garfi nkel 1967; Kessler and McK- enna 1978). While a person may identify beyond the categories of ‘female’ or ‘male’, and project this in the public domain, if the widely held belief in society is that there are only ‘females’ and ‘males’, and ’women’ and ‘men’, then in practice an observer is likely to ‘read’ the person’s gender as falling within one or other of the binary categories (Kessler and McKenna 2000).

Indeed, the assumption that there are two genders and that these are aligned with the polarities of biological sex is widely taken as a given in the Western world and believed to be a fact of life. Darwinian theories of evolu- tion, and in particular, the concept that sexual behaviour serves reproduc- tion, provide the foundation for the belief in the binary sex system (Herdt 1993: 24). This premise forms the basis for the ‘natural attitude’ towards gender (Garfi nkel 1967). Building upon empirical research carried out in the 1970s, Suzanne Kessler and Wendy McKenna summarise the general perception of the ‘natural attitude’ as follows:

1. There are two and only two genders . . . 2. Gender exists as biological ‘fact’ independently of anyone’s ideas

about gender. 3. A person’s gender never changes. 4. Genitals are the essential defi ning feature of gender.

(2000: n.p.)

In a more recent study, with material generated through questionnaires completed by 83 students in a human sexuality class, Kessler and McKenna argue that there is now a greater sense that gender is complex. However, they conclude:

Twenty-fi ve years of our and others’ theorizing about gender has in many ways unsettled the meaning of gender, but it has done no damage to the gender dichotomy . . . genitals are the essential defi ning feature of what it means to be a gender . . . just because more people acknowledge that gen- der features can be mixed together or that a person can move more easily between categories, this has not led to an expansion of or transcendence of the gender categories. There are still two and only two genders.

(2000: n.p.)

Thus, while in theory gender beyond the binaries may be recognised, nonetheless, in mainstream society, living openly beyond the two-sexes/ two-genders systems would still not appear to constitute a socially viable option (Whittle 1996; Namaste 2000; Green 2004; Cromwell 2006). The experiences of transsexual people demonstrate this point. Of particular signifi cance in this regard are the accounts of people who are unable to suffi ciently resemble biological women or men and transsexual people who identify beyond the binary genders (Hill and Willoughby 2005; Davidmann 2007; Valentine 2007; Whittle et al. 2007).

188 Sara Davidmann

In this chapter I shall discuss the experiences of two non-binary gendered transsexual people. Through their accounts, I shall explore the impact of everyday life on the transsexual person who openly transgresses the binary sex and gender borders. This chapter draws on photography and interview research carried out with 23 transsexual people over an eight-year period and specifi cally builds on the outcomes of a four-year doctoral photogra- phy and interview study carried out with eight transsexual people.1

‘WRONG’ BODIES OR ‘RIGHT’ BODIES

Underpinning the two-genders/two-sexes premise is the assumption that a person’s sex and gender are not only aligned but also in accord with the genitals (Kessler and McKenna 2000). Following this formula, genital sur- gery is believed to be a necessary requirement, and is frequently perceived as the ultimate act for ‘changing sex’. This idea can be traced back to the case of Christine Jorgensen, who underwent genital surgery in 1953 (Ben- jamin 1966; Stryker and Whittle 2006). Subsequent to the media attention surrounding the case, medical interest in transsexuality developed upon the principle that genital surgery is fundamental to transsexual identities.2 Building upon the gender/sex/genitals/surgery equation a narrative has emerged in accounts of transsexuality that a transsexual person is born in the ‘wrong body’.3 Indeed, this notion has come to symbolise the trans- sexual condition.

The transsexual author Sandy Stone argues that: ‘under the binary phal- locentric founding myth by which Western bodies and subjects are autho- rized, only one body per gendered subject is “right”. All other bodies are wrong’ (1991: 297). Moreover, the FTM author Jason Cromwell asserts that the term ‘wrong body’ refl ects the fact that transsexual discourses, aris- ing from medical and psychological perspectives, are fundamentally moral discourses based on the assumption that ‘trans behaviours of any kind are abnormal’ (1999: 19).4 Further, Cromwell suggests that it is through the ‘wrong body’ concept that: ‘Biological determinists thus join transsexual discourses and medico-psychological practitioners in attempting to eradi- cate gender diversity.’ (1999: 38)

While the medical and popular view is that the ‘cure’ for the trans- sexual condition is the ‘exchange’ of a male body for a female one, or vice versa, many transsexual people’s accounts indicate that the ways in which they experience their bodies, and in particular the sexed/gendered parts of the body, are intrinsically more complex than the notion of ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ bodies would allow (Nataf 1996; Cromwell 1999; Hines 2007). My research suggests that specifi c combinations of female and male phys- ical attributes may be signifi cant in allowing for the corporeal manifes- tation of atypical transsexual genders. Thus for transsexual people who self-identify beyond the binary gender categories, the genitalia at birth

Beyond Borders 189

can constitute an important part of their identity. In line with this, in the two brief case studies that follow, I aim to demonstrate that, contrary to the popular belief that a desire for genital surgery is an essential criteria of a transsexual identity, the focus of transsexual experiences does not always reside with the genitals. Consequently, some transsexual people do not wish to have the surgeries that have become widely known as ‘sex change’ operations. By offering a counter-narrative to the notion of ‘being born in the wrong body’, which confi gures around the genitalia as the signifi er of female-ness or male-ness (Stone 1991: 297), the case study material will bring to the surface the concern that while some trans- sexual people are creating what could be construed as new confi gura- tions of sex and gender, the link between transsexual well-being and the broader social domain is more signifi cant than is generally acknowledged. Further, despite the important social changes and shifts in theoretical perspectives that have taken place since the 1990s, everyday life for the transsexual person who openly transgresses the binary sex and gender borders remains highly problematic.

KITTY

Kitty was assigned ‘male’ at birth and raised as a boy. She now self-identifi es as a ‘she-male woman’. In other words, she sees herself as both a she-male and a woman. A she-male is a term used to describe someone born ana- tomically male, who undergoes physical changes in order to appear more female, usually taking female hormones and having breast augmentation, while retaining male genitalia. In talking about her gender identifi cation Kitty claims:

I know there are some natural born women who would say that I’m not the same as them. I say, well, I’m not the same as you . . . why can’t there be two variations? . . . To me, at the end of the day, I guess I’m both. Ultimately I am a woman . . . you could also look on me as a she- male . . . She-male woman. One may seem on the surface to cancel out the other, but it makes sense to me.

The term ‘she-male woman’ is Kitty’s own hybrid invention created in order to try to describe as closely as possible how she experiences her gender. Kitty continues to take female hormones, though she has had no surgery. Originally she had intended to have genital surgery but she decided against this. Kitty explains:

My intention was to go for the full thing . . . I did want it but I guess I also felt that I needed it to be a full woman and I came to the conclusion I didn’t need it—and I guess the interest in wanting it went away . . .

190 Sara Davidmann

I’ve decided now that I don’t want the operation. If that changes later on in life then fair enough . . . but at the moment I’m happy enough.

Kitty’s description articulates a potential fl uidity of gender. She is comfort- able with her body in its present form but she does not rule out the pos- sibility of a future change. In discussing her male genitalia Kitty asserts: ‘I don’t particularly like them but I don’t particularly dislike them either.’ In terms of her sexuality, Kitty identifi es as a lesbian and her male genitalia play a part in sexual relations. However, she asserts: ‘I didn’t really think it was supposed to be done.’ Kitty sought guidance by contacting gender sup- port organisations and she recalls that she was given pamphlets discussing, among other issues, sexual relationships. Nevertheless, they were written for people transitioning from one to the other of the binary sex/gender polarities. The advice was unhelpful to Kitty and she had to resolve on her own the concerns she had with regard to having sexual relations.

Kitty is now at ease with her body, both in physical relationships with oth- ers and as a refl ection of her gender. Nonetheless, in the public domain she is unable to blend with expected gender appearances. Kitty has strong mas- culine features and she has not been able to afford the costly facial and cra- nial surgery or electrolysis to remove her facial hair that some trans women undergo in order to appear more stereotypically feminine. In the UK the National Health system covers the cost of genital surgeries, hormone treat- ment and chest surgery for people assigned female at birth. Other treatments are not available under the system. Thus the medicalisation of transsexuality emphasises the primacy of the sexed body over and above social integra- tion. Additionally, because these aspects of trans embodiment are not state- funded, the person’s fi nancial status and social class are an issue.

Kitty has strong features that are generally associated with masculinity and in public spaces others frequently ‘read’ her as either a transvestite or a transsexual person. The reactions of others to Kitty’s appearance make interacting in the public domain a continuous strain and cause her consid- erable emotional distress. She has been spat at on the street, shouted at, pointed at, accosted by drunks, and is frequently stared at. When I have been out with Kitty I have been aware of the measures she takes so as to go unnoticed by others. On the street she is highly sensitive to the positions of others’ bodies in relation to her own and she will navigate her route when walking in an attempt to avoid face-to-face contact whenever possible. In cafés and bars she will sit opposite a wall so that her back faces outwards towards other people. I have been shocked by the reactions of others when Kitty has been unable to hide from view. One evening when we met for a drink in a crowded bar in London’s Soho district I suggested that we fi nish our drinks outside, even though it was raining, because of the amount of unwelcome attention Kitty was receiving.5 Another time, in a café near her home in Kilburn, London, we walked out because of the comments and jeers from three men at the table next to us. Unfortunately, Kitty is not

Beyond Borders 191

alone in her experiences. Almost all the transsexual people who took part in my research have specifi cally highlighted incidents in public spaces that have been distressing because of how other people have reacted to them.6

The consistent abuse that Kitty receives in public spaces is because she is not able to ‘pass’ as a biological female. The term ‘passing’ is used to describe projecting and being accepted in a gender that is at odds with the person’s assigned birth sex. For many transsexual people this involves using highly visualised, visualising and visible means in order to become ‘invis- ible’ in the social domain. The term ‘passing’ implies an act of secrecy and dishonesty, of playing a part that one has no right to play.

However, social interaction involves both a performance and a read- ing of the performance (Goffman 1959: 32). Judith Butler develops this theme with regard to gender and claims that the performance of gender de-stabilises the notion of a fi xed gender identity (1990: 179). Building on Butler’s hypothesis that gender expressions are not derived from an essen- tial gender identity and Goffman’s argument that social exchange involves the performance of the self, it follows that in everyday social interaction non-transgender people are also ‘passing’. In other words, female and male gender presentations are not natural or neutral facts of life that emerge from an essentially gendered self. Individual presentations of the self are perfor- mative expressions that are developed in relation to culturally created and socially sustained models. In line with this, the trans writer and performer Kate Bornstein suggests: ‘Everyone is passing; some have an easier job of it than others.’ (1994: 127)

Further, Bornstein asserts that she fi rst believed that the gender dichot- omy was the only possibility. Consequently, she saw herself as: ‘a mistake: something that needed to be fi xed and then placed neatly into one of the cat- egories.’ (1994: 65) Bornstein claims that this is how most transsexual peo- ple feel (Ibid). The trans activist and legal expert Stephen Whittle expresses a rather different understanding of the relationship between transsexual people, the binary gender system, and the broad social domain. Building on the understanding of gender as: ‘an idea, an invention, a means of oppres- sion and a means of expression’, Whittle argues: ‘Many in the community would see themselves as existing outside of gender, of being oppressed by it but using its icons and signifi ers to say who they are.’ Further, Whittle suggests that many transsexual people decide not to declare their trans status because: ‘they are seeking a form of sanctuary in the gender-roles they adopt’ (1996: 212). Nonetheless, assuming a female or male gender, if one does not identify within either binary category exclusively, does not necessarily offer a satisfactory solution. In the semi-autobiographical novel Stone Butch Blues Leslie Feinberg characterises his experiences of ‘pass- ing’. Feinberg’s main character Jess claims:

At fi rst everything was fun. The world stopped feeling like a gauntlet I had to run through. But very quickly I discovered that passing didn’t

192 Sara Davidmann

just mean slipping below the surface, it meant being buried alive. I was still me on the inside . . . But I was no longer me on the outside.

(1993: 173)

One can conjecture that, because of the continuous efforts that Kitty makes to ‘pass’ and to become ‘invisible’ in the public domain, she may also feel that she is being ‘buried alive’. Further, this concern may shed light on why Kitty contacted me in the hope that I might agree to work with her. Kitty had seen a published photograph of mine, taken of Frances who identifi es as a ‘pre-op transsexual’.7

The photograph, a naked full-frontal torso, clearly shows that Frances has breasts and male genitalia. I later realised that the picture presents a body image with which Kitty is able to identify. While images of she-males and pre- operative transsexual people are accessible through the Internet and in some pornographic publications, they are not generally available in the broad public domain. Kitty has expressed feeling the need for validation and self-visibility. On discussing the photograph in Figure 9.2 Kitty asserts:

As I understand it, the work we’re doing . . . is very much a refl ection of me, which I’ve wanted for a long time. An opportunity for me to tell

Figure 9.1 Frances, 2002. Photograph by Sara Davidmann. C-type print, 60” x 40”. Exhibited in nu-gender, APT gallery, London, 2003.

Beyond Borders 193

myself as I am and show myself as I am . . . People basically see what they want to a lot of the time so I’m trying to leave something behind . . . that people can look at . . . and whether they believe it or not . . . I know that is Kitty up there.

Thus, while Kitty is unable to openly express her gender identity in main- stream social spaces, she suggests that photography may allow self-visibility without the danger inherent in being physically present. The signifi cance of photographs in transsexual experiences has repeatedly come to the surface in my research. I would suggest that the reasons for this are three-fold.

First, the social expectation of photography is that it reproduces real- ity (Burgin 1982). Roland Barthes describes photographs as constituting ‘a certifi cate of presence’ (2000: 87). This, he argues, is because of the power of photographs to authenticate ‘the existence of a certain being’ (2000: 107). Hence, for people who have been unable to identify with their body and, as a consequence, have undergone extreme physical changes, the pho- tograph provides a form of ‘proof’ of their new physical reality. Second, photographs constitute a form of evidence that the person ‘is’ who they believed themselves to be all along. This is because the photograph ‘blocks memory, quickly becomes a counter-memory’ (Barthes 2000: 91). Third, the indexical trace (the photograph can be understood as a trace that is left behind by the referent) additionally allows the subject to regard an image of themselves in their new form from an external position, which is aligned with that from which they view images of other people. Thus a photograph has the potential to contribute towards enabling the person to assume a new position in relation to other people through the act of inserting their own ‘certifi ed’ image alongside representations of others.

Kitty asserts that she has wanted for a long time to: ‘show myself as I am.’ The widely held beliefs associated with photography allow Kitty to produce ‘evidence’, and thus to verify, that she is indeed as she sees herself in her mind. Further, seeing the photograph, the trace of the person that was there, that is in accord with the internal self-image, is an affi rmative act. Thus, while in the public domain Kitty is the recipient of considerable verbal abuse because, as Kitty claims: ‘People . . . see what they want to a lot of the time’, photography allows for a different version of ‘reality’ that emerges from her self-perceptions.

Figure 9.2 is a photograph of Kitty taken in her fl at during the course of our collaborative photographic work. Kitty was entirely responsible for constructing the image, creating an exotic background by arrang- ing scarves and saris from her collection on the sofa. She specifi cally wanted to be photographed in her boots and feather boa and initiated the pose, making adjustments using a mirror until she was satisfi ed with her appearance.

A few weeks earlier, prior to our fi rst meeting I had sent Kitty an email asking if she was able to name anyone with whom she identifi ed. She

194 Sara Davidmann

promptly replied and included pictures of Mata Hari, Marilyn Monroe, Constance Bennett and Hedy Lamarr, all of whom are popular female fi lm stars. In an accompanying text Kitty described characteristics of herself that she recognised in the images. Of the Mata Hari picture (Figure 9.3) Kitty wrote: ‘This shot of Mata Hari for me represents so much.’ In an interview she later explained: ‘Mata Hari, to me, tends to sum up very much myself.’

When I took the photograph in Figure 9.2 I did not make a connec- tion between the image that Kitty was creating and the Mata Hari picture. However, having studied the pictures at a later date I now believe that there is a resemblance between them. The similarity resides in the fact that both images depict generalised orientalist fantasies that are highly sexualised and consistent with the idea of the glamorous Orient. While Mata Hari is draped in lengths of fabrics, Kitty uses saris and scarves from her collection to create an exotic backdrop. Both Kitty and Mata Hari are transformed in these pictures into orientalised odalisques.8 I would suggest that, for Kitty, the photograph in Figure 9.2 provides a record of the ‘becoming’ or ‘being’ that which she would like to be. When she saw the photograph for the fi rst time she exclaimed: ‘This is me . . . It’s everything that I am.’

When I asked Kitty how she felt about her genitalia being visible in the photographs that we were taking she responded: ‘it’s part of me . . . I wish the emphasis was more on my face, or my breasts or something, but it’s part of me . . . It’s pictures of my body . . . and I’m proud of it.’

Figure 9.2 Kitty, 2003. Photograph by Sara Davidmann. C-type print, 30” x 40”. Exhibited in Somatechnics, Macquarie University Gallery, Sydney, Australia, 2005.

Beyond Borders 195

ROBERT

Kitty’s assertion, that she is proud of her body, is echoed in the account given by another of the research participants, Robert. Robert also identi- fi es beyond the gender dichotomy. Similar to Kitty, Robert has undergone some physical changes and also claims that he has no desire to alter his genitalia. While Kitty was assigned male at birth, Robert was assigned female.

Robert has had a bilateral mastectomy in order to remove his breasts and create a masculine chest, and he has testosterone injections every two weeks. The testosterone maintains the male aspects of Robert’s appear- ance, such as facial and body hair, muscle strength and re-distribution of fat towards a more masculine body shape. Robert’s physical appearance is now predominantly male. Nevertheless, in discussing his genitalia he claims: ‘I don’t ever see myself in my mind as having a penis and I never have done.’ Robert has said that when he fi rst came across the term ‘trans- sexual’ he knew that he ‘fi tted in there somewhere’, while at the same time

Figure 9.3 Mata Hari, photograph c. 1910. Picture from Kitty’s collection. Digital inkjet print, 10” x 8”.

196 Sara Davidmann

he thought that he was not transsexual because he did not want male geni- talia. Robert identifi es as gay and his genitalia play a part in sexual rela- tionships.9 Robert describes his body as it is now, with a masculine chest and female genitalia, as ‘complete’. He argues:

For some having a penis is a sign of completion, completeness with breasts and everything else, and for other people not having a penis and having a fl at chest is absolutely fi ne. It’s just where you put your boundaries, where you put your borders.

Robert’s assertion here, that the placement of borders is signifi cant in rela- tion to atypically sexed embodiment, is refl ected in the way in which he describes his gender. Robert claims:

I’m not really a man, but I’m not a woman . . . I’m trans. So in some ways I’m not really transsexual either . . . I’m male, but I’m not a man. I’m neither a man nor a woman, but I’m male rather than female.

While ‘trans’ is widely used as an abbreviation for the term ‘transgender’, Robert’s use of the term is rather different. For Robert, the term describes a position beyond the binary genders. Robert explains:

There’s a lovely saying that one door closes and another door opens but it’s hell in the hallway . . . that’s something I think a lot about. Being trans, you’re in the hallway. A trans life is the one in the hallway . . . These doors open and shut but at the end of the day you can only open a door into the male world on one side and the female world on the other side and you have to join society on either side. But if you stay in the hallway, which I believe is much more freeing because you’re not bound by either side, it’s infi nitely harder because you’re not bound by either side but you’re not belonging to either side. The hallway is a wonderful place. Hallways can have windows and they can have won- derful views.

Despite the perspective that Robert’s trans status allows, he lives as a male in society. In his everyday life Robert is able to blend with expected gender appearances. In other words, he is ‘seen’ by others as male. How people are seen is fundamental to being able to function in society.10 The FTM author Zachary Nataf asserts that: ‘Very few people can cross-live, get employment successfully and be safe in the streets without hormones and some surgery.’ (1996: 43) While the binary sexes and genders continue to be the only socially recognised positions, people who identify as trans but blend with female or male appearances will inevitably be perceived by oth- ers as belonging within the binary categories. Cromwell argues that in this context being seen as male does not constitute ‘passing’ as it is generally

Beyond Borders 197

understood. In other words, it is not an act of falsehood or of living a lie (1999: 39). Rather, what occurs here is the result of a process of negotiation between the individual’s gender identity and the limitations of the socially sanctioned binary sexes and genders. Because Robert is perceived to be a biological male he is able to interact with ease with others in social spaces. However, whenever he feels it is necessary, for example on job applications, Robert has no hesitation in being open about his assigned birth sex and subsequent transition.

In contrast to the diffi culties Kitty experiences in the public domain since taking oestrogen and living as a female, Robert encountered problems before undergoing any changes. In explaining people’s reactions, Robert claims that before taking testosterone neither his appearance nor his body language conformed to stereotypically feminine principles. For example, on leaving school Robert was given a place at a prestigious music college and trained as a viola player. However, he was once fi red from an orchestra and the reason he was given for this was that he looked: ‘ridiculous in a skirt’. This issue, of the pre-transitional appearance being construed by others as

Figure 9.4 Robert and the Mirror, 2003. Photograph by Sara Davidmann. C-type print, 30” x 40”. Exhibited in Somatechnics, Macquarie University Gal- lery, Sydney, Australia, 2005.

198 Sara Davidmann

androgynous and subsequently encountering diffi culties in social interac- tions, was highlighted in the accounts of female-assigned participants.

Since taking testosterone and having chest surgery, Robert’s life has changed dramatically for the better and he is now able to interact with con- fi dence in public spaces.11 However, in order to do so Robert has had to comply with expected appearances for males. Thus he has become ‘invisible’ as a trans person in the public domain. Stone argues that transsexual people are ‘programmed to disappear’, claiming: ‘The highest purpose of the trans- sexual is to erase him/herself, to fade into the ‘normal’ population as soon as possible.’ (1991: 295) In order to gain equality, transsexual people need to be visible in society. Yet, as I have demonstrated, when a person is recognisable as being transsexual—when they do not ‘pass’—they run the risk of verbal or physical abuse in the public domain. The trans activist and author Jamison Green highlights the complexity of this issue when he asserts:

Visibility remains a confl icted aspect of transsexual lives. How do we manage visibility? If we are visible then we risk being mistreated; if we

Figure 9.5 Robert in Dublin, 2006. Photograph by Sara Davidmann. C-type print, 12” x 10”.

Beyond Borders 199

are invisible, no one will understand what our social or medical needs are. If we are visible, we risk being judged inferior or unreal, inauthen- tic; if we are invisible, we risk being discovered and cast out.

(2004: 180)

Stemming from his own experiences, which include being seen by others as being different, Robert was politically active for many years with the aim of bringing about positive changes for transgender people. For several years he was involved with Press for Change, an organisation that campaigns for equal rights for UK trans people, and for four years of that time he was a Vice President. He was on the Parliamentary Forum for Transsexuality, worked as a helpline volunteer for the FTM network and has been on the FTM Lon- don Committee. Robert also set up a London-based hospital visiting service in order to provide support for transsexual people having surgery.

Robert’s political awareness underpinned his interest in taking part in my study. While Robert is able to interact with ease in mainstream society because he is seen as male, photography provides a way for him to be able to stand up and assert his trans identity. Kitty’s need for validation and self- visibility surfaced strongly in her desire to work with me. For Robert, the photographs constitute both a personal affi rmation and a political state- ment. Robert explains:

The only way you’re going to know I’m trans is if I stand up and say so—and that’s why I do it—because I can appear to blend in. If I don’t stand up then what about those people who don’t have the choice to blend. You’re implying there’s something wrong with being trans if you hide . . . I’m enjoying the opportunity to stand up and celebrate the body and celebrate the differences in the body . . . I’m trying to show an alternative way . . . I think the photos are very important.

Thus Robert suggests that photography may offer a way of enabling social vis- ibility for non-binary identifi ed transsexual people. Robert’s argument builds on the trans photographer Loren Cameron’s (1996) use of photography as a vehicle for FTM and self-visibility. Further, as previously discussed, photogra- phy has the potential to allow visibility without directly endangering the indi- vidual through their embodied presence. The accounts of Robert, Kitty, and the other participants who contributed to my research, demonstrate that this constitutes a crucial factor for people who do not appear, in the eyes of others, to belong within one or other of the polarised sex or gender categories.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter I have foregrounded the lived experiences of two self-identifi ed non-binary transsexual people. Their accounts demonstrate that, contrary

200 Sara Davidmann

to the medical and popular view of transsexuality that construes a desire for genital surgery as an essential criterion of a transsexual identity, some transsexual people do not wish to have ‘sex change’ operations. Further, their experiences offer an alternative perspective to the medical and popular view that the ‘cure’ for transsexuality is the exchange of a male body for a female one, or vice versa. Through their accounts, I have aimed to present a counter-narrative to the notion of ‘being born in the wrong body’, which has come to symbolise the transsexual condition and confi gures around the genitalia as the signifi er of female-ness or male-ness (Stone 1991: 297). The two case studies presented here reveal that the ways in which transsexual people experience their bodies, and in particular the sexed/gendered parts of the body, can be intrinsically more complex. Further, for transsexual people identifying beyond the binary gender categories, the genitalia at birth may constitute an important part of their gender identities.

Concerns of visibility and invisibility in the broad social domain, and the difference between private and public gender presentations, have formed an important part of this discussion. This is because these issues surfaced in the research as being highly signifi cant in the lives of non-binary identifi ed transsexual people. While some people do represent direct challenges to the sex and gender dichotomies, everyday life re-enforces the binary model. Thus few images explore beyond the polarised categories. Consequently the visual articulation of the categories defi nes and perpetuates the binary model, controlling and reproducing gender ‘norms’ to the exclusion of non- binary defi nitions. For many people who identify beyond the gender dichot- omy this can result in a considerable difference between private and public gender presentations. In other words, the changes that are made to the body to bring it into alignment with the person’s gender are at odds with the expected appearances of the two socially sanctioned sexes. Neverthe- less, in order to lead a satisfactory social existence, it is often still necessary to ‘pass’ as a biological female or male.

The policing of gender in mainstream public spaces, that repeatedly featured in the accounts of my research participants, not only contributes towards maintaining and reinforcing polarised gender presentations in every- day life, but also demonstrates that crossing the sex and gender borders con- stitutes a threat to some people. Everyday life for the transsexual person, and in particular the non-binary identifi ed person, remains highly problematic.

Thus, despite the considerable theoretical advancements that have devel- oped in the past 20 years through queer theory and the popularisation of its concerns, with regard to the two-sexes/two-genders systems this appears to have had very little impact on mainstream society. Gender borders may have expanded to encompass a degree of ‘mixing’ of gender attributes, which results in female masculinity and male femininity becoming more prevalent in Western urban social spaces. Nevertheless, these factors do not appear to have succeeded in subverting the primacy of the binary categories of ‘female’ and ‘male’, ‘woman’ and ‘man’ in everyday life. Consequently,

Beyond Borders 201

as the material presented here demonstrates, some transsexual people who identify beyond the sex and gender binaries may act strategically in order to function in society, nonetheless, ultimately they are left out ‘in the hall- way’ between these positions. The hallway may have doors on either side through which a person might pass to enter the female or male worlds and thus join society. However, while these are the only doors, some people are unable to pass through either and are left with no other choice than to live in the hallway.

NOTES

1. See Davidmann (2006, 2007) for further details of the study. 2. There is evidence of 28 cases of transsexual operations prior to 1953 (King

1996: 85). Jorgensen was originally diagnosed as a homosexual man. Sur- gery and hormones were used to ‘treat’ Jorgensen’s ‘homosexuality’. After the incident had been reported in the press the medical team decreed the operation to be a ‘sex-change’ (King 1996: 92). The publicity surrounding Jorgensen’s case enabled other transsexual people to come forward. In 1953 Jorgensen’s psychiatrist, Dr Christian Hamburger, published a paper based on the letters of 465 men and women who wanted to ‘change sex’ (Ham- burger 1953). This, in turn, led to an increase in the number of medical pro- fessionals interested in the fi eld (Benjamin 1966: 148).

3. The use of the term ‘the wrong body’ has a history that extends beyond the recognition of transsexuality. In the late 1890s homosexuality was described as ‘a feminine soul confi ned by a masculine body’. In other words homosex- ual people were considered to inhabit the wrong body (Ulrichs 1975 [1898], cited in Kennedy 1981: 106).

4. FTM is an abbreviation of ‘female-to-male’. Both terms refer to transsexual people assigned female at birth. FTM is also used as an abbreviation for ‘female-towards-male’. This acknowledges the person’s history and socialisa- tion as a female and recognises that the person is not the same as a biologi- cal male. Female-towards-male is also used when the person identifi es as a ‘female man’. In this case the person may or may not take testosterone or have surgery (Cromwell 1999: 28).

5. Soho is London’s best known lesbian and gay area. 6. In a public talk in January of this year, hosted by the Wellcome Trust, Rikki

Arundel, Director of Gendershift, suggested that somewhere in the region of 60 per cent of trans women and 50 per cent of trans men experience hate crime on the street.

7. Time Out London 8–15, 2003 listing for nu-gender exhibition, APT Gallery, London.

8. The photograph of Kitty is also highly reminiscent of another well-known odalisque, Édouard Manet’s [1832–1883] painting ‘Olympia’.

9. The fact that Kitty and Robert both identify as gay is a coincidence. Other non-binary identifi ed transsexual people who have taken part in my research do not necessarily identify as gay.

10. This concern surfaced repeatedly in my research in different ways. 11. Robert’s experiences in this regard are not uncommon among FTMs and

trans men. The FTM research participants’ accounts highlight that testoster- one appears to readily override the effects of oestrogen on the body. Unfortu- nately, this process does not always work as effectively the other way around.