Editorial

by Katherine Cummings

(The Gender Centre advise that this article may not be current and as such certain content, including but not limited to persons, contact details and dates may not apply. Where legal authority or medical related matters are cited, responsibility lies with the reader to obtain the most current relevant legal authority and/or medical publication.)

I shall lead off with the good news. Not only has the Gender Recognition Bill been passed by the British Government but the Gender Recognition Panel is already accepting applications from British-born transgenders for change of documentation. Until April they are accepting only "Fast Track" applications from those who are post-operative and have been living in their affirmed gender roles for at least six years. The details can be found on the web page of Press For Change. My application is on its way and soon I can start looking for an incredibly wealthy but terribly feeble (or possibly asexual) man to marry. Any volunteers? Even more pleasing, in some ways, is the news that Stephen Whittle and Christine Burns, who have worked tirelessly for the legal and human rights of transgenders in Britain, have been recognised in the New Year Honours List, Stephen with an O.B.E., Christine with an M.B.E., for services to the gender community. The fact that the Government has not only reformed its hard line against legal recognition of transgenders but has also recognised the worth of those who have striven for so many years, not with Molotov cocktails or mindless chanting in the streets, but with reasoned argument and co-operation with Parliamentary working parties and elected representatives of a liberal (very definitely a small "l" there, thank you) bent, is gratifying indeed.

Closer to home, let me draw your attention to the cover image of Caroline Layt, who plays Rugby with a women's team, and would like eventually to represent her nation. If determination and the will to excel mean anything, Caroline will achieve her ambition. We remember with pride the tally of gold, silver and bronze medals won by Caroline at the last Gay Games.

Recently I came across an article on non-gender specific pronouns and have reprinted it with the kind permission of the author, Cezary Podkul, who writes a weekly column for the independent student newspaper at the University of Pennsylvania. It has always seemed odd to me to willfully remove information from a statement by ignoring gender. To call someone an actress does not demean them, it simply tells you she is more likely to be playing Cleopatra than King Lear (although Sarah Bernhardt probably played both). If there is an implied superiority in the male-associated word then it is that hierarchy which should be attacked, rather than being swept under the carpet by avoiding the gender-related word.

Another matter I find odd is the passion with which some of our community lobby to have transsexualism removed from the D.S.M. IV. "How dare people say that gender dysphoria is a disease," they cry. Homosexuality was formerly in the D.S.M. IV and has recently been removed, but homosexuality does not depend on specialist treatment from psychiatrists, endocrinologists and surgeons, among others. I would happily dispense with the contribution made by psychiatrists but I have no desire to self-medicate my hormones and even less to carry out my own bi-lateral orchidectomy and create my own neo-vagina and clitoris. To suffer from gender dysphoria may or may not be a disease. It is certainly a medical condition. And if it were a disease, wouldn't we be silly not to seek a cure? If the problem is a lack of congruence between mind and body, is it not reasonable to alter the body to match the mind? My mind is far more "me" than my body is. And again, if it is a disease, why is this seen as an insult? We are, or should be, long past the primitive attitude of seeing something shameful in disease. On the contrary, diseases should prompt compassion and support and a determination to throw our mental and financial resources into the struggle to eliminate diseases of all kinds. The D.S.M. IV is only a fallible guide to diagnosis and our energies are better spent improving quality of life and providing legal and human rights for our community rather than arguing among ourselves about the rights and wrongs of a pseudo-science like psychiatry. than fighting against the silly definitions of a pseudo-profession like psychiatry.

Polare is published in Australia by The Gender Centre Inc. which is funded by the Department of Community Services under the S.A.A.P. Program and supported by the N.S.W. Health Department through the AIDS and Infectious Diseases Branch. Polare provides a forum for discussion and debate on gender issues. Advertisers are advised that all advertising is their responsibility under the Trade Practices Act. Unsolicited contributions are welcome, though no guarantee is made by the Editor that they will be published, nor any discussion entered into. The editor reserves the right to edit such contributions without notification. Any submission which appears in Polare may be published on our internet site. Opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Editor, The Gender Centre Inc.I, the Department of Community Services or the N.S.W. Department of Health.