Bad Language

Gwendolyn Ann Smith

(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.)

Da Vinci Code author Dan Brown has released his latest "Oh my God there's a secret conspiracy and you can find the clues all over the place" book. In this one, The Lost Symbol, his Harvard expert of symbology takes on Masons, Washington, D.C.D.C., and presumably anything else that he can spin into a story.

What struck me and several other transgender identified people is the following paragraph from The Lost Symbol.

The act of tattooing one's skin was a transformative declaration of power, an announcement to the world: I am in control of my own flesh. The intoxicating feeling of control derived from physical transformation had addicted millions to flesh-altering practices ... cosmetic surgery, body piercing, bodybuilding and steroids ... even bulimia and transgendering."

Transgendering? I understand what he's trying to say here, but, really? In that short paragraph, Dan Brown has reduced the entire experience of being a transgender person to the level of steroid abuse, piercing and bulimia. I dare say that Brown's entire knowledge of being transgender stems from using the name "Danielle Brown" on a book he co-wrote with his wife, and titled "187 Men To Avoid: A Guide for the Romantically Frustrated Women".

Allow me to get a little lexical for a moment.

The word "transgender" was initially believed to be coined by Virginia Prince as early as the 1950s, specifically to refer to someone who adopted the gender opposite the one he or she was assigned at birth, up to but not including undergoing genital reconstructive surgery.

Another problem with "cisgender" ... is that it is rarely used without a sneer. It is a term that tends to get used to point out that someone is transphobic ...

Over the ensuing years, the term underwent a change, being used as an umbrella term to cover a wide variety of individuals: anyone who transgresses or transcends gender norms has been considered to be a part of such a group. In some recent years, the term has also started to be viewed as somewhat dated, with many adopting the term "genderqueer".

"Transgender" still does not appear in all dictionaries, and my spell checker will stumble over it as I proof this very article. Many use it as a noun, some as an adjective, and some as a verb, but Brown is the first to use it as he has.

This leads to a bigger debate, however. When you have a term like transgender, how do you describe those who are not transgender? Some, for example, feel that not having such a term is to doom transgender people to being somehow "singled out" as something different: The very nature of not having a polar opposite term sets up those who are not transgender as being "the standard logic in that, I suppose, though I don't think having the term "right-handed" has ever made a sinister southpaw feel any different. Nevertheless, a term has been invented to fill this gap: cisgender. "Cis" is a Latin prefix referring to being "on the same side", and comes to us from the vocabulary of chemistry. In this usage, it refers to gender identity and physical sex being "in alignment" it is a sort of opposite for "transgender".

It initially came out of the Usenet before making it into texts in the middle part of this decade. Likewise, it has led to the birth of "cissexual" as an opposing term to "transsexual", and even "cissexism" as a means of declaring the state of belief that transsexuals are inferior to "cissexuals".

Now here is where I become a stick in the mud. You see, while I do see the point of such terms, and can see the value in same, it also seems that they're not so often used in the somewhat clinical way described above. Ironically, they end up being used as yet another tool to divide rather than simply classify.

I mentioned above about transgender being an umbrella term, and one that is often used somewhat broadly, One of its strengths is that it can include a wide variety of gender presentations, identities and expressions. You can presumably save yourself from having left out someone, unless they wish to be left out of said term.

But cisgender, used in the same way, shuts out our allies, our friends, our partners. Rather than levelling the field, it further sets transgender apart from the whole, and creates a dichotomy that honestly is not needed.

This is something that the transgender community, and frankly many other communities, does on a regular basis. At one time it was "cross-dressers" versus "transsexuals", then it was "transsexuals" versus "transgender". There have been some who have adopted even more baroque terms such as "women born transsexual" or "Harry Benjamin Syndrome" to further distance ourselves from each other.

Another problem with "cisgender", as pointed out by activist Helen Boyd, is that it is rarely used without a sneer. It is a term that tends to get used to point out that someone is transphobic or, at the least, clueless about things transgender. Perhaps like Dan Brown at the top of this article.

Yet by using it this way, and reinforcing its use as a snarky, snide term for those who don't "get it", you make the term useless for neutral use. No one would want to be called "cisgender" if it automatically implies a certain oafishness upon the person wearing the term.

Many years ago: I learned a proverb: It's not what you call me, it's what I answer to. Those who are transgender, myself included, are all too familiar with being labelled with identities we ourselves do not accept. Why should we, therefore, feel we can so easily label others?

Gwendolyn Ann Smith is an activist who works tirelessly for our community worldwide. She writes regular columns syndicated in a number of publications. At this time of year it is also well worth remembering that it was Gwen who set up the first observance of the Transgender Day of Remembrance. For that, and for your constant work on our behalf we thank you, Gwen.

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.