Seriously not helping - Part Two

In a previous post I talked about some people whose behaviour is seriously not helping the cause of trans people. These are people whose antics and conduct are so unreasonable that they are creating a backlash of resentment which is making things worse for the rest of us.

Aaaaaand I've come across some others. The first person I've heard about lately is Jessica Yaniv, a 35-year old Canadian transwoman, described on her Wikipedia page as a "transgender activist". Yaniv has been causing all sorts of trouble in British Columbia.

Jessica: seriously??

The issue I first came across was hearing that Yaniv had brought a series of lawsuits against beauty salons in her district who had refused to perform waxing of her genitals.

The salons were all small businesses run by a single beautician, most of whom were immigrants to Canada. Yaniv sought damages of up to $15,000, alleging transphobic discrimination.

Yaniv hasn't had genital surgery, which is pertinent to this article in that the beauticians stated (very reasonably) that they didn't advertise waxing for male genitalia, that they hadn't been trained to perform it safely, and that they objected to working on male genitalia for personal or religious reasons. They all said they didn't refuse on account of Jessica's transgenderism.

So here's the thing. It's quite possible to find salons who will wax any part of you, no matter who you are. For a hilarious example from Scotland, you can read about Miss Twist's experiences here. It's just a matter of phoning around first, and asking politely. Speaking for myself, I get my legs and chest waxed regularly by a lovely woman called Lynne, and I've never had any trouble (mind you, I don't go for genital waxing).

Jessica Yaniv deliberately targeted small businesses (rather than the large beauty chains), run by women whom she knew would be uncomfortable with the request, and who would be unlikely to be in a strong position to mount a defence against legal action. In other words, her behaviour was predatory. The lawsuits were all dismissed, but the associated costs and inconvenience caused two of the beauticians to go out of business as a result, even though she was ordered to pay damages to them.

You might think that such a resounding legal defeat would deter Yaniv from further similar antics--but she's no quitter! The next thing which came to my attention was that she was protesting that a gynaecologist had refused to see her. Yaniv posts frequently on Twitter, and she wrote:

Yaniv: So a gynaecologist office that I got referred to literally told me today that 'we don't serve transgender patients', And me, being me, I'm shocked.. and confused... and hurt.

Gervais: twittering

But the thing is, any reasonable doctor looking after Yaniv would know not to refer her to a gynaecologist. A gynaecologist just isn't the right sort of specialist to be dealing with any potential problem with her equipment. She might as well complain that her electrician refused to fix her plumbing. The right doctor would have been a urologist, or maybe an endocrinologist. Although as I have written before, the Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists is demonstrating willingness to treat transwomen.

And my second comment is that she, being her, isn't shocked... or confused... or hurt, but delighted that she now has another excuse to play the despised victim, and kick up another ruckus.

But this time her comments came to the attention of comedian Ricky Gervais. I have never really enjoyed his comedy, although I came to view him in a new light as an actor. Like many comedians he can be quite vitriolic in his material, and lately he's been disappointingly transphobic very openly. In exactly the same vein, he lays into Jessica Yaniv via his Twitter account. Here's one example, but there are others.

It doesn't bother me if Jessica Yaniv annoys Ricky Gervais--but it does bother me when her antics are causing harm to the wider trans community, and they undoubtedly are. Canadian media say trans people have reported a sharp upturn in online hate toward them as a result of the publicity around Jessica Yaniv.

I find myself wondering what Jessica Yaniv gets out of all this controversy. I sense that she is using transgender rights as a shield, behind which she hides while lobbing rocks at everyone within reach. She craves attention, she craves publicity, and she enjoys exchanging Twitter insults with adversaries. I wonder what her next stunt will be--I'm sure we shall all hear about it in due course. But I'm prepared to predict that it seriously won't be helping.

Lemieux: seriously??

Still in Canada (!) we turn to the case of teacher Kayla Lemieux, who has been teaching woodwork in the Oakville Trafalgar High School near Toronto. The problem is Lemieux wears colossal prosthetic breasts (unfailingly reported as "Z-cup", although I don't know what that actually means), complete with very prominent artificial nipples, while teaching students. Understandably, this has provoked "months of debate" about her appearance.

Things seemed to develop when the New York Post reported it had followed Lemieux and discovered that she doesn't wear them all the time, and in fact usually presents as a man. Naturally, there is photographic evidence, and the testimony of a neighbour in further support.

I don't really think the New York Post represents the pinnacle of investigative reportage. Nonetheless, it seems pretty clear that Lemieux has been well and truly busted (geddit?). Lemieux has finally been suspended from her job (though without being sacked), and the New York Post is taking the credit.

"Oh, that's not me!"--seriously??

When you're discovered doing something you've been trying to keep secret, you have two options: you can come clean, or you can double down. With a weary sigh, I note that Lemieux has doubled down. She insists that the man in the New York Post's photos isn't her. You can judge for yourself here.

She insists those boobs aren't fake; that she is intersex, and has gigantomastia, although she admits she is "in transition" and has been on hormones. She also insists there's nothing wrong with the way she dresses, although there have been other complaints about her clothing, not just her boobs.

Lemieux: I don’t think there’s any problem with how I have dressed. It’s the personal opinion of other people. I don’t think I have dressed unprofessionally.

There's so much to discuss about Lemieux that I'm not quite sure where to begin!

First, let me state quite clearly that Lemieux's ginormous bazooms are plainly fake. Oversized breasts just don't have those prominent nipples. Second, large boobs are heavy, and women with very large boobs struggle with neck pain and back pain, and often have surgery to reduce their size. Only people who can take off their boobs at the end of a hard day can cope with boobs like those. (I'm also sure the man in the picture is Lemieux).

Oh wait--that's an airship!

You would wonder why a teacher in a woodworking class would be wearing huge boobs, which must surely get in the way and present a genuine hazard when using tools and other equipment.

Second, nobody (not even the New York Post) has reported that any of the complaints about Lemieux were because people objected to a transgender teacher; in the middle of all this, I think that's a positive thing to remark upon. If Lemieux just wanted to be a woman, and work as a teacher, she already had that: all she needed was to just wear what ordinary teachers wear, and buy a reasonable pair of boobs.

The fact that all that wasn't enough makes me think that there is something else going on with Kayla Lemieux. If she only presents as a woman when working at a high school, then there must be something about that which tickles her pickle, so to speak. And the parents (and staff, and school board) of the Oakville Trafalgar High School must really think so too. How did she get the job in the first place? If she was already employed, and then transitioned, it would be obvious that the boobs didn't grow gradually. If she wasn't already employed, whose idea was it to give her a job?

And if Kayla Lemieux is the only trans teacher in her locale, how much harder is she making it for the next trans teacher who comes along? If Lemieux is the only example of a trans teacher they have come across, who is going to want another?

Like Lemieux, I only present as a woman sometimes. But the difference between me and Kayla Lemieux is that I'm always very conscious of the scrutiny that I receive from other people, and I'm aware that I may be the first trans person they've encountered close up, which makes me a sort of ambassador for trans people in the cis world. And my goals are to look fabulous, feel wonderful, and enjoy the company of friends. It definitely seems that Lemieux has some other goals. I don't know what they are, but they are seriously not helping.

It will be interesting to see how things unfold with Kayla Lemieux, although I don't see those colossal melons appearing in a woodworking classroom again any time soon.

If you come across any other people out there whose antics are seriously not helping, please drop me a comment below!

If I Was Your Girl

I was browsing in an airport bookshop lately, and noticed the cover of this book, If I Was Your Girl, by Meredith Russo. The book was displayed reasonably prominently, and was featured as part of the Zoella book club, as a work of fiction for young adults (which is what they are calling teenagers these days, apparently).

If I were your girl: subjunctive, people!

Normally I wouldn't be too interested in fiction for young adults. When I was a young adult myself, I just read fiction for adults. My sister used to read books by Judy Blume, and she would usually show me the juicy parts. These astonished me in two ways. They astonished me because these were books marketed at teenagers, containing detailed descriptions of sexual activity that would likely cause many parents (including ours) to have conniptions. Second, they astonished me because they were depicting a world where teenagers seemed to have no trouble having sex; lots of sex. This seemed like a glimpse into some alien world. As a teenager who was having real trouble finding someone willing even to snog me, reading the books made me feel envious and uncomfortable.

Now that I am an adult, I don't see any reason to read young adult fiction at all. Unless it seems to feature the transgender flag on the cover, which is what drew my eye.

Naturally I bought it, and read it on the flight, all the way through. And now I thought I would write a review of it.

The book centres around the life of Amanda, an 18-yr old girl in her final year of high school. She joins a new school, and falls in love with Grant, a football player. The hook (at least from a transgender point of view) is that Amanda used to be Andrew. Their relationship goes through some ups and downs, before the big reveal, and the aftermath.

I read to the end of the book before I realised that the author herself, Meredith Russo, is a transwoman. She even includes a page of comments for cisgendered readers, as well as another page of comments for transgendered readers. She explains some of the fictional devices she required to use to make the story work. One obvious one is that nobody ever doubts or guesses Amanda's trans nature, because she is already "fully formed": post-surgery, post-hormones, and with a completely realistic face and body. Russo admits this is pretty unrealistic, and I am pleased that she did; for me it was one of the most difficult parts of the story to accept.

Meredith Russo

Russo was raised in Tennessee, and sets the story in a district she is familiar with. I can't help associating that region of the southern United States with God-fearin', gun-totin', Republican-votin' good-ole-boys. To be a transgender child growing up in that environment would be, no doubt, exceptionally difficult, lonely and painful. Amanda, our protagonist, is exposed to a series of very unpleasant events: parental rejection, violent beatings at school (where she is considered to be gay by the other students), and a failed suicide attempt. These events are described starkly (in a series of flashbacks), and the writing is powerful. I dare say they will resonate with young adults who feel different (for any reason), isolated and desperate. Even I got a few pangs.

I brought my wrist up to my chest and looked down. The identification bracelet said my name was Andrew Hardy. If I died, I realized, Andrew would be the name they would put on my tombstone. I thought of the words I wrote down for the counsellor: I should have been a girl.

Amanda begins to settle into her new school, and begins to make friends. She is pleased and gratified to find that she is accepted, though this pleasure is tempered with the knowledge that, if the truth of her background were known, she would surely be rejected.

The cicadas buzzed persistently in the growing dusk. I had read once that they lived underground for most of their lives, only emerging as adults to live out their final days. Was that going to be me? Was I going to live underground for the better part of my life, never coming out into the world? (...) I wondered if joy could ever be felt by itself without being tainted with fear and confusion, or if some level of misery was a universal constant, like the speed of light.

Trans model Kira Conley on the US cover

The parts of the story with which I found most resonance are where Amanda discovers her trans identity, and meets other trans people for the first time. She is mentored in her early journey by Virginia, who introduces her to members of her local transgender support group.

A woman with broad shoulders and a faint shadow of a beard under her make-up entered next. She looked strong and stout, but the longer I looked, the more I saw the beauty in her--here a light step, here a brief touch of the hair, here a wide, open smile. Boone said, "Evening, Rhonda," to greet her.

This resonates with me because of my preoccupation with how people see Vivienne. Since I started my journey, I have come out to a couple of dozen people, and they have all been complimentary about my appearance, even the ones who met Vivienne face to face. But did they have to make an effort to see past the man in the dress to really see Vivienne? And how much of an effort did they make?

I looked Virginia up and down and saw two separate people. One was the beautiful, statuesque angel who had been there to guide me through some of the hardest steps of my transition. The other was a woman with a jaw just a little too strong, forehead just a little too high, shoulders just a little too wide, and hands just a little too big.

Without giving the story away, Amanda begins to find fulfilment and happiness in her new life. Her relationship with her parents improves. She realises other students have their secrets too: one girl takes drugs; another is a lesbian. For me, Amanda's parents and schoolmates are somewhat simple and one-dimensional. Grant, the love interest, is more interesting, though again he is cast as someone who is all goodness: good-looking, pleasant, sensitive, humble, hard-working, popular, kind to his family. The most interestingly subtle character (Amanda aside) is the villain, Parker, another student, whose complex feelings and motives are explored.

His shadow stretched out past mine. I remembered Mom telling me how frightening men were, all men really, how helpless it often felt to be a woman among men, and for the first time I understood what she meant.

The romantic aspects of the plot are well-drawn: the breathless first kiss, and other faltering steps as the relationship between Grant and Amanda begins to play out. I am relieved beyond measure to report that Judy Blume's intimate depictions are largely absent. Though the book doesn't insult its readers by pretending everyone is a virgin when they leave high school, the sexual content is handled deftly and with subtlety, just as (in my opinion) it ought to be.

So in summary, what can I say about the book? I cannot judge it as a piece of young adult fiction, since I have so little knowledge of that genre with which to compare it. I have a friend who writes romantic fiction for a living, and she tells me there is a remarkably strict pattern that her books are expected to follow. I hope the same is not true of young adult fiction, but I wouldn't be surprised (only disappointed) to find that there is. Overall, I think the story is compelling enough, and readable enough (certainly I didn't get bored or struggle to finish it). I think some of the characters are a bit flat. I think that the story of Amanda's life is told with enough sympathy and emotional resonance that transgendered readers (like me) will find much to resonate with, and there is a reasonably positive ending to look forward to.

Blazing the trail: Luna in 2004

Russo clearly hopes that cisgendered young adults will also read the book and come away with more awareness and more sympathy towards transgendered people (of all ages). And it's this, I think, which holds the book back slightly for me. It just has a hint of being slightly contrived for this purpose; as if Amanda's relationship with Grant is shown to be completely pure and perfect to show just how much of a real girl Amanda actually is.

Nonetheless, Russo deserves encouragement. I think this book represents one more snowflake in the blizzard of transgender-related material in the popular media, to which we are now exposed, and it can only do us good to get more exposure, more sympathy and more conversations started. This is Russo's first book, and I hope she writes many more. I also hope that she isn't the "token trans writer" when young adult fiction is considered.

And there are very few other similar books out there. One which Russo mentions is Luna, by Julie Anne Peters. Another is a book which I have touched on before on this blog, Boy2Girl by Terence Blacker. To my knowledge, neither Peters nor Blacker are transgendered, and both have had success with many other books; therefore they are not as brave as Russo. They can afford to experiment with new themes, while Russo has put all her chips on this debut novel. Thankfully it seems to have gone down very well, and it has favourable reviews on GoodReads and Amazon, but the Guardian reviewer (like me) had some reservations.

I haven't read Luna, but I will order it and let you know my thoughts in due course. Meanwhile, I recommend that you get hold of If I Was Your Girl and give it a read. Or perhaps wave it under the nose of a nearby young adult for their comments. And yours, of course, are always welcome below.

Ja'mie: Private School Girl

A few months ago, I posted about Simon Carlyle, an actor who created a female character, Terri McIntyre, and then played her on screen in a comedy. It turns out Carlyle is not alone in doing this. Recently, the television series Ja'mie: Private School Girl, has been produced, and screened in the US, Australia (where it was made) and the UK.

Ja-may-zing: Chris Lilley

Created by Chris Lilley (with assistance from Ryan Shelton), the titular character is a teenager, living in a wealthy district in Sydney, and attending the fictional but prestigious Hillford Grammar School for girls.

Ja'mie: Hi. My name's Ja'mie. I used to be Jamie but I added the apostrophe in year 8. I'm 17 years old, I live in Sydney, Australia, and I'm a private school girl. This series is about my last few months of school, and the events which changed my life for ever.

Ja'mie King was created as a character for two previous shows, in which short comedy skits were seen. Now, she has been given a show all to herself, all six episodes. Before we go any further, a note on pronunciation. You say it "Ja-MAY", or at least, she does.

Lilley is highly skilled at creating characters, both male and female, of different ages and races, and he portrays them all himself with great subtlety. But nonetheless, portraying a teenager must have been extremely difficult, especially as this character is so monstrous!

Sydney Morning Herald: The show is firmly grounded in reality, which is why it works as mockumentary. Lilley went to great lengths to ensure his observations were accurate. He interviewed kids from rural towns, followed an Asian amateur theatre group and filmed conversations between girls from private schools. Although he went to a private school on Sydney's North Shore and knew Ja'mie's world, he wanted to make sure he had the speech patterns and references right. "I didn't want teenage girls to watch it and think that's such an older guy's view of teenagers," he says.

School captain, or whatever

And Lilley does it brilliantly. It's a stretch to imagine Ja'mie as supposedly gorgeous (especially as she isn't very pretty), but the setting is perfect: the costume, the surrounding cast members (who play it dead straight), and the well-observed parody dialogue (especially the gossip sequences, which look very much like the real thing). After a while, we get completely absorbed in the character. Every flounce, every flick, every put-down, every girly line is flawless.

Ja'mie is the school captain, and is always surrounded by six fawning, sycophantic prefects, all attractive young girls. She is vain, shallow, self-centred, racist, homophobic, manipulative and bitchy. She is obsessed with all the things one expects teenage girls to be obsessed with: image, boys, brands, social media.

I found it all horrifying at first. From my own schooling, I remember that type of girl quite well: the queen bee. As an unattractive boy, struggling with his own identity and his self-esteem, I was helpless in the company of pretty girls-- and they knew it. Seeing all these girls with their self-importance and their casual contempt of outsiders almost made me want to hide behind the sofa.

It's all like, so totally, OMG!

Part of the reason the parody works so well is that it is so well-observed. It has its roots deep in truth, which is exaggerated enough to be funny, but without getting to the point where we think it's impossible or ludicrous. Like all the best parodies, it works on several levels. One of the most obvious levels is that the statements made about Ja'mie by herself and her parents are constantly contradicted by the behaviour we see on the screen.

But you don't need me to dissect it for you. What you should clearly do is go and watch it for yourself!

Reviews of the show have been generally favourable. Jake Flanigin of The Atlantic wondered whether the show was mocking teenage girls themselves-- or mocking the society which enables "monstrosities" like Ja'mie to exist. Madeleine Ryan of the Sydney Morning Herald, herself a graduate of a private school, draws comparisons between Ja'mie King and Frankenstein's monster:

Ryan: The question then raised by Lilley is: are young women, in order to make sense of their place in the world, becoming monsters? These motivations may seem laughable, but they are the parody of a devastating truth - in order to be loved and approved of, young women today believe that they need to master it all.

Flanigin: It’s a question better posed as “Why are young women turning into monsters?” The answer, of course, is the gauntlet of ludicrously high expectations society demands they run through—perhaps the only facet of modern culture Lilley effectively lampoons in Private School Girl. Ja’mie has quite a lot of plates to keep spinning: She must be hot (or “quiche”); she must be thin; she must be charitable, dateable, and creative. She’s the head prefect and the soi-disant “smartest non-Asian” at Hillford Girls’ Grammar, and she’s banked her entire self-worth on receiving an all-school award before shipping off to Africa for a gap-year of aid work. This on top of maintaining her record for “the most Facebook friends” in school. So maybe we have an inkling as to why Ja’mie and the young women she supposedly represents are turning into monsters.

Talking non-stop: Ja'mie

On the other hand, Tim Goodman of the Hollywood Reporter thought it was all a bit too much:

Goodman: You'd have to be the biggest of Ja'mie fans to want to watch her talking nonstop for 30 minutes. While Ja'mie skewers the predictable targets in this new series, it's just too, too much to endure her without a break.

It seems clear so far that none of the reviewers considers Ja'mie to be anything other than loathsome. Nobody is applauding her as a person. But so much for what the reviewers think. What about me?

While Terri McIntyre was a likeable character, a "bitch with a heart of gold", Ja'mie King is not likeable in the least. Therefore it's a lot harder for me to find this programme funny. As I've mentioned before, crossdressing as a comedy device doesn't really work for me. On the other hand, the crossdressing is so clever and played so straight that it is almost incidental to this show.

But crossdressing there is. I was envious of Simon Carlyle getting made up as Terri and being able to become that other person. I remain in two minds about Chris Lilley. First, looking back, I was desperate for popularity and acceptance among girls in school. So for me to put myself in Lilley's shoes might allow me a glimpse of what that might have been like. On the other hand, the reality of it, at least as we see in the show, is cruel and lonely and uncertain and shallow. These are not things I aspire to! And I am sure I would tire of that reality very quickly.

And what did the other actors (particularly the prefects) think of it all? Was it easy to get into character? Was it easy to forget Chris Lilley isn't a teenage girl but a grown man in a pinafore? Or was it all a bit weird?

And what about Lilley himself? For him, Ja'mie is just a job. Ja'mie is one of the most memorable (but by no means the only one) of the different characters in his arsenal. Which parts of himself did he bring to the role? Did he enjoy playing Ja'mie? Was he fascinated by the glimpse into her life that the character must surely have brought him? Did he learn anything? Did he come away from the role with sympathy? With reluctance? We don't know.

Lilley: Strangely, I do find her slightly attractive sometimes. I think it's that thing when it looks like you; it's kind of like why people like their children.

As Ja'mie herself might say: yeah, whatever.

Laws of Gender Bending in Fiction

I came across this website by accident. TV Tropes is a website which celebrates the tropes which we all encounter in fiction. It started off discussing television (hence the title) and from there branched into many other aspects of popular media: film, comics, books and music.

Before we go any further, what exactly is a trope? To quote the website:

Tropes are devices and conventions that a writer can reasonably rely on as being present in the audience members' minds and expectations. On the whole, tropes are not clichés. The word clichéd means "stereotyped and trite." In other words, dull and uninteresting. We are not looking for dull and uninteresting entries. We are here to recognize tropes and play with them, not to make fun of them.

The wiki is called "TV Tropes" because TV is where we started. Over the course of a few years, our scope has crept out to include other media. Tropes transcend television. They reflect life. Since a lot of art, especially the popular arts, do their best to reflect life, tropes are likely to show up everywhere.

Catwoman in Combat Stilettos

Well, that all sounds great, but what does it mean? Well, the sort of thing they mean is that the good guy drives the cool car, defeats all the bad guy's henchmen, confronts the villain, almost fails, but eventually succeeds in defeating him, rescues the girl, and drives off into the sunset. Sound familiar? Of course it does. We expect those things to happen.

One of the things which I had seen in fiction which really bugged me, is the way the speed of light is variable in fiction. The character turns the switch (or cuts the cable!), but instead of all the lights going off at once, they turn off gradually one at a time in a dramatic or menacing manner. Or the character turns on the lights in the abandoned space station, and they flicker to life in the most dramatic order (near to far, or far to near, as the plot requires). And is this one explored? You bet.

The TV Tropes website succeeds on several levels. First, it is amazingly comprehensive. I recommend typing in the name of your favourite arthouse film or your favourite 80's TV show, and you will find a list of tropes a mile long. Second, it is affectionate, even loving. It's not about criticising the ham acting or the special effects of the work; it's about pointing out how just about every piece of fiction relies on us expecting things to happen in certain patterns. (But special respect is given to works which play with our expectations and violate tropes in clever ways to make things interesting). Finally (and my favourite thing) is that it is always light-hearted and often hilarious, with tropes given quirky and amusing names, and the writing is articulate, well-observed, and wry.

I have spent hours browsing it since I came across it. And I am not ashamed to admit, I discovered quite a few tropes which I was unconscious of, but now see everywhere. Tropes don't "reflect life", I think. They reflect a fictional world we would like life to be. In real life, villains don't have one fatal flaw for the good guy to find at the last minute. Nor do they carelessly let the good guy escape a number of times so that he can show up in the final act to save the day. But, in general, we don't especially enjoy stories where the bad guys win in the end. So I think tropes tell us something very powerful about how people perceive the world.

What's all that got to do with a blog about crossdressing? Well, of course, crossdressing is a popular device in fiction, including film and television. And, I was delighted to find, TV Tropes contains dozens of pages dealing with the subject. If tropes reflect how people perceive the world, I think this reflects the fact that people are fascinated by the fictional representation of people who cross gender boundaries.

Wholesome: Jimmy Olsen

Let's start with one example, the Wholesome Crossdresser. I like to think I belong to this trope myself, as it happens. TV Tropes says this:

Crossdressing characters who are presented in a positive (or at least neutral) way. Frequently presented as attractive (or at least not unattractive), relatively "normal" people as opposed to perverts or sexual deviants.

The Wholesome Crossdresser may have any type of sexual orientation, but in settings where being straight is considered part of being "normal," one can expect to see the character's heterosexuality explicitly highlighted.

Some permutations of the trope are more or less unique to Japanese works. The Japanese Wholesome Crossdresser is usually well-groomed, compassionate, nice, and above all, so convincing that their "true" gender is only mentioned on occasion, as a reminder to newer members of the audience. There's a fair chance someone will get a crush on them, although this is usually resolved after The Reveal.

The opposite of Creepy Crossdresser. May overlap with Disguised in Drag or its Distaff Counterpart, Sweet Polly Oliver. (If the character wears crossdressing disguises more often than seems strictly necessary, this trope may apply.) Wholesome Crossdressers tend to enjoy dressing, even if only reluctantly, secretly, or subconsciously.

Generally does not overlap with Drag Queen (which is more about "performance" and theatricality) or Transsexual (usually a much deeper and more complicated subject), though there are exceptions.

You can see that the authors of TV Tropes have really thought this through. The article presents a huge list of wholesome crossdressers, including some classics such as Mrs Doubtfire, (Robin Williams crossdressing to get near his kids) but also some I had never known of or considered before. It turns out, for example, that Superman's journalist friend Jimmy Olsen was uncommonly fond of crossdressing as a means of fooling the bad guys. Who knew?

Anime crossdresser Ruka Urushibara

I could go on all day; there is so much to talk about. However, on browsing through TV Tropes, I discovered they had postulated Three Laws of Gender Bending, and I couldn't resist taking some time to debate the issues. (Remember that these laws apply to fictional circumstances! Phlebotinum is the TV Tropes name for some sort of scientific device or substance which furthers the plot in any way, and an Aesop is a life-lesson taught by a story; these neologisms soon become very clear).

First Law of Gender Bending: Once a girl has been created, circumstances will conspire to keep her a girl.

Not only are male-to-female Gender Benders a lot more common than their female-to-male counterparts, they are also a lot more permanent. One might think that the same Applied Phlebotinum that can change a male into a female should just as easily be able to do the opposite, but that's rarely the case in practice — most characters who try to reverse a male-to-female Gender Bender will learn that Failure Is the Only Option.

There are many reasons for this; even if the phlebotinum is ordinarily reversible, there will be an unexpected Phlebotinum Breakdown, or something else will prevent the character from simply switching the gender-bender into reverse. Perhaps the character inadvertently falls in love with his/her best friend after Jumping the Gender Barrier (the mind is a plaything of the hormones, after all). If there's Time Travel involved, maybe a Kid from the Future turned up to save their life, and the only way to keep the kid from going Ret Gone is to remain a lady (the possibility that they could just have been the kid's father all along is never even considered). Maybe the Gender Bender bestows them with actual superpowers (and no, not those powers) that the character needs in order to protect the earth.

Or to put the above another way, if the work is a webcomic called The Amazing Girl-Boy's Adventures in Femininity, expect the First Law to be enforced. If one episode of a Kid Com called Homeroom Genie involves the Jackass Genie turning Zach into Zoe to teach him a lesson? Not so much.

Other reasons for enforcing First Law stem from Unfortunate Implications and the Double Standard regarding men and women: Women Are Wiser makes for a good gender-equality Aesop. There's also the stereotype that a man being turned into a woman is somehow a demotion, punishment, or loss of status — what better way to start (or finish) a man's Humiliation Conga than by requiring him to wear skirts and a bra while losing that ancient symbol of power under his pants? This is an attitude that even the most feminist Take That against men may support, consciously or unconsciously.

In contrast, female-to-male gender benders are not only less common, but are typically resolved quickly and easily, ultimately reinforcing the woman's original femininity. And since Beauty Is Never Tarnished, the very same forces aiding the restoration of her gender will work against him restoring his.

And of course, since Most Writers Are Male and All Men Are Perverts there's just that much more pulchritude to go around if she gets restored and he doesn't. And if the gender-bent man refuses to act in gender-appropriate ways, then who cares? Everyone loves a good Tomboy! (Nobody likes a good Sissy.)

Scott Bakula in Quantum Leap

First of all, I hadn't really recognised that this law was a phenomenon at all. The law was originally observed about Anime, which, I have to say, I have very little knowledge or experience of. On the other hand, assuming that it's true for Western fiction too, the reasons postulated above are (I think) very telling. There are some narrative justifications for why it might be true, but this removes the question only one step further back: why should we like narrative justifications for keeping men as women (in the same way we prefer it when the good guys win)?

I think the article does a good job of explaining the reasons, such as gender ranking (men are "better" than women, but women are prettier to look at). Let's move on to the Second Law.

Second Law: Any character, after being gender bent, will come to enjoy their new gender more than their old gender.

A fictional character that gets his or her gender bent often becomes gradually accustomed to life as a new man or woman. Eventually they likely will experience an epiphany: that they are better off in their new gender than they ever were in their old one. This is the Second Law of Gender Bending, where a gender bent person would, if offered a chance to revert to their former gender, turn it down because they have come to enjoy the benefits of the change.

The epiphany typically takes one of two forms:
-A reluctant admission, either because they've changed too much to return to the way things were or are loath to admit the enjoyment they get from their new lifestyle.
-A jovial acceptance, where they quickly discover how much fun life is after the gender flip, and they never want to go back.

Forced to be a schoolgirl

Now this is a law I can relate to, having observed it myself. It tends to overlap with a trope which is present in transgender fiction. In general, I think TG fiction is shallow, wish-fulfilment stuff, and I speak as someone who has written some of it! Characters are invited, coaxed, blackmailed or otherwise coerced to cross-dress for the flimsiest of pretexts. And they resist and protest strenuously. But once they are all dolled up (and TG fiction often goes into exquisite and loving detail over this process), they find that actually they really enjoy the sensual feeling of those soft fabrics, and the emotional freedom to act in a different way, as well as how gorgeous they look (and in fiction, at least, this is nigh-universally a male-to-female process, but see here).

I think this trope is so popular in TG fiction because it removes one of the main obstacles to crossdressing: personal responsibility. We choose to crossdress, but it might be nice to have some sort of "excuse", because some people might consider our motivations to be unpalatable or questionable. A fictional scenario which coerces us to do what we most want to anyway is a powerful one indeed.

As you can see, I think most TG fiction is contrived and unreal. It serves only one purpose. The best sort of TG fiction is where the crossdressing is enveloped within an actual plot. When this happens successfully (and it's rare), you get an absolute knockout story, such as The Crying Game, which is popular with mainstream as well as transgender audiences.

Third Law: Any gender bent character will either embrace or be subject to all of the stereotypes associated with their new gender.

Characters who change gender will adopt "gender appropriate" dress and behavior. Most of the time, this means dresses and makeup for a man turned woman and aggressive and macho behavior for a woman turned man. Frequently rationalized as being due to the characters having stereotypical views of gender roles, particularly when the character in question is depicted as being in need of a gender equality lesson.

Like the second law, this trope typically manifests in one of two forms:
-A masquerade wherein the character is forced by circumstances to adopt stereotypically masculine or feminine attire or behavior, sometimes under duress. (This is especially the case in "Freaky Friday" Flip or similar plots where the character becomes a preexisting person of the opposite gender and must maintain the pretence.)
-The Mind Is a Plaything of the Body, wherein the character simply cannot resist adopting stereotypical attire or behavior due to irresistible compulsion, latent desires, Mind Control, biological imperatives, or all of the above.

More sophisticated applications of this trope will often try to find common ground somewhere between these two extremes. It may be as simple as characters wanting or needing to be treated "like a normal person" and thus adopting stereotypically "gender appropriate" attire and/or behavior to conform with their perception of the new roles they've been forced to adopt.

Since most gender benders are male-to-female this frequently results in scenes where the newly minted "girl" is confronted with all of the "requirements" of his new gender, which can include skirts, hose, makeup, high heels and other trappings of femininity which, while common, are by no means mandatory in real life.

We can see an example of this above in the Jimmy Olsen image, where not only is he a girl, but a knockout, who is immediately the subject of vocal male attention. We can also see examples of it in Quantum Leap, where Scott Bakula's character sometimes "leaps" into the bodies of "real" female characters and has to act as if he were actually that woman.

Curiously attractive: Patrick Swayze

What is interesting to me is that these "laws" seem to have been created or written by people who love fiction, not people who love transgender themes, or by crossdressers. In a sense, then, these laws suggest that this is how fictional crossdressing is seen from the outside, rather than how it seems to me from the inside.

So I challenge you to come up with a law of your own! For it to be a law, you need examples.

To get the ball rolling, I propose Vivienne's First Law: A crossdressed male will be forced to use his fists in a sticky situation, to prove that, no matter how feminine he looks or acts, he is still a man underneath.

Examples include Patrick Swayze's character in To Wong Foo, as well as similar scenes in Priscilla, and Sorority Boys. And at least one episode of Quantum Leap. All the best laws have exceptions, of course, and Sean Bean evades his obnoxious male aggressors with his wits in the wonderful Tracie's Story.

What I find disappointing about this law is that a crossdressed male should not have to use masculine solutions to his problems! When it comes right down to it, he looks like a woman, walks and talks like a woman, and wishes everyone would treat him like a woman, or even believe he is a woman, but he is still prepared to use aggression and violence in a manly way. To me, this is a blatant example of gender ranking. A woman could never get out of that situation safely; only a man could. Is that really a message we agree with?

Please feel free to provide examples or counter-examples of anything in this article, or to suggest laws of your own. Who knows? Maybe TV Tropes will codify them into "law" on their website!

===

Addendum: 25th February 2014

Vivienne's Second Law: Any man who unknowingly kisses (or almost kisses) a transgender woman, will, when he finds out, have a meltdown or a bout of homophobic panic.

Horrified: Ace Ventura

Examples can be found in the first Ace Ventura movie (where it turns out that the villain, played by Sean Young, is a transsexual); the first Crocodile Dundee movie; The Crying Game (although he later relents), and even David Tennant's first transgender outing in Scottish comedy show Rab C. Nesbitt. But not doubt other examples abound.

What disappoints me about this law is that a man is initially attracted to someone, sometimes enough to get very intimate with them. When he finds out that the person is actually a genetic male, he becomes suddenly terrified that he might be gay. Unable to deal with the consequences to his self-esteem (because nothing could be worse than being gay!) his former attraction turns to revulsion, and sometimes aggressive revulsion. As the audience, we are supposed to sympathise with the poor fellow.

This law is about homophobia and transphobia, played for laughs. Let's hope examples become rarer in the future.

===

My thanks to Heather Colleen for sending me the Tammy front cover image.

Lyn Tornabene and the Red Queen

Some years ago I bought a copy of the wonderful book I Passed as a Teenager by Lyn Tornabene. You can find copies on the Internet still, and there is still some interest in it. The reviewer from Amazon.com is helpful and illuminating.

In brief, Tornabene, at the age of 33, enrolled as a 16-year old student in an undisclosed high school in the USA, with her friend posing as her aunt and guardian. She spent a full term as a student and writes forthrightly about teenage life as seen from the inside: the teachers and lessons of course, but much more interestingly the teenagers themselves; their social strata and very finely-honed hierarchies and boundaries.

Tornabene: I am a lucky woman. I like my days. I am a journalist by trade and a housewife by inclination. I have a husband called Frank who is too good to me. I have a pseudo-Tudor house in Long Island, New York, which warms my soul. I like to read and putter and talk to myself. Nevertheless, one fall morning-- precisely one month before my thirty-fourth birthday and two months before my tenth wedding anniversary-- I put on a size 9, pink cotton button-down shirt, a size 11 camel-coloured wool skirt which didn't reach my kneecaps, and enrolled as a junior in a high school somewhere in the United States...

As someone who remembers adolescence as basically agony for most of the time, I found the book very compelling and insightful. I abjectly failed to understand the behaviour and motivations of teenage girls even when I could study them, as it were, up close. Who wouldn't want another go at high school, with one's adult confidence and experience and maturity to draw upon? I know I would!

The only weakness in Tornabene's book is it's age. It was written in 1969, and a lot has changed since then: video games, drugs, taking weapons to school, social media and cyber-bullying are just some of them. These changes will be more pertinent in some places than in others, and some of the things which seemed edgy and daring at that time are now more or less quaint. Any takers for a modern update?

Anyway, why not get a copy of Tornabene's book and read it?

A few years ago my children and I were at a fete. It was a lovely sunny day, and there was candyfloss and hotdogs and stalls selling trinkets. Various performers wandered freely among the children, making balloon animals, painting faces, or wearing the costumes of characters from Alice in Wonderland. The White Rabbit scurried about looking late, and the Mad Hatter spilt his teapot everywhere. But the most interesting character, we all found, was the Red Queen. Instead of running around, she stood absolutely still for minutes at a time (indeed I thought at first she must be a mannequin herself), but from time to time she would deliberately make a tiny movement or gesture. You've seen, no doubt, performers who act in this way in the streets of many large cities.

My kids were entranced. The actress playing the Red Queen was very beautiful (of course) and was not only wearing a highly elaborate costume, but was also painted head to toe in deep red. She was surrounded by a circle of spectators, who were speaking only in whispers. Why? I don't know. My children likewise spoke in whispers. Who is that lady, daddy? "She is the Red Queen." Why doesn't she move? "Because thats's part of her act," I explained. And because by not moving she gets three times as much attention as all the other performers, I didn't add.

There was magic there, of course. There was a bubble of illusion, in which we willingly complied. Anyone could have stepped forward and just poked her in the arm: the illusion would have been completely ruined, of course, and therefore, no one did. The bubble was willingly maintained by all who were involved.

But it wasn't a queen from a children's story. It was an actress in a red dress. And I found myself wondering what pleasure she got out of it. It's fun, of course, to amuse the audience and get applause. Even I have trodden the boards at my local am-dram company once or twice. But perhaps there is more to it? Perhaps there is the pleasure of dressing up in costume and being someone different, just for a while, especially if that someone is beautiful and magical and interesting.

I did not poke her on the arm to ask her, but appreciated the moment and moved on.

Both Tornabene's book and the Red Queen have direct relevance to my view of crossdressing. Lyn had what surely must have been a bit of a spicy thrill (though she somewhat plays this down in the book), acting in the role of someone she is not. There must have been moments of almost discovery, and moments of exultation in successfully keeping her secret in front of everyone. Even better, she had plenty of time to enjoy it: a whole term, not a rushed afternoon or even a long weekend.

Likewise the Queen, I feel sure, was, at least partially, enjoying the pleasure of stepping out of her normal life and being someone special for a few hours. She was also fortunate to be beautiful enough for others to want to admire her while she did it.

I am aware that my crossdressing is about escaping for a while from my normal life, to an extent, and being someone who doesn't have my problems for a while. To actually pass in public for five minutes is something which I have barely done, let alone for longer, but I completely understand the compulsion among many crossdressers to actually achieve that.

School Days

As a child, I read voraciously. Naturally, I read girls' stories and comics as well as boys' ones. I was astonished to come across a story serial called Cuckoo in the Nest, in the girls' comic Tammy. In this serial, a boy is forced by his wide-boy uncle Fred to enrol at the prestigious Nesterfield Girls' School (known as "the Nest"). If he succeeds in passing as a girl, he will inherit a large bequest from his great aunt Hermione, who expects to visit her "niece" in the school at the end of term.

As a boy, I recognised that there was something very powerful about this story. The protagonist, Leslie, is naturally unwilling to begin with. He is embarrassed and angry, and struggles with his complete unfamiliarity with being a girl: how to dress, how to talk, how to behave. Naturally the school is a traditional English public school complete with all sorts of rules, and a very strict headmistress. However, after a while he begins to prosper, after a fashion.

Worth a read: Boy2Girl

I can find very little on the Internet about this obscure story from a comic book which went out of business years ago. However, there is an interesting critique here at Booksmonthly. On the face of it, the story is a comedy. (Though crossdressing and drag are often used as a vehicle for comedy, I just don't find crossdressing funny in itself). On a more intellectual level (which I totally missed as a child), there is a positive message about feminism: Leslie manages to shake up the school and its old-fashioned ways, and introduce some more modern ideas to the girls.

It's been thirty years since I read this story, yet I still remember it very clearly. Obviously what set it apart for me was its central theme of crossdressing; not merely crossdressing but forced crossdressing, with the spicy thrill of the consequences of discovery. As a child I was simultaneously appalled and enthralled by what might happen if Leslie were ever outed. (Unfortunately I don't ever remember reading a denouement to the story, so I never found out if he made it to the end of term safely!). I frequently thought about what I would do in his circumstances.

More recently, Terence Blacker wrote a novel called Boy2Girl. As you can tell by its textish title, this book is much more modern than Cuckoo in the Nest. However, some of its underlying principles are similar. Sam, a prepubescent 13 year old American boy (who conveniently has long blond hair) is enrolled as a girl at a London school by way of a dare. The book touches on many aspects of the emotional turbulence of adolescence, and allows both boys and girls a glimpse of what the "other side" is feeling. The underlying theme of the book appears to be that Sam gets on better as a girl: he is able to express his emotions more freely (including crying), and becomes popular at school (having never been so as a boy). The book also treats cross-gender behaviour with sympathy rather than ridicule.




Schoolgirls: archetypal

I find myself wondering what it is about schoolgirls which is attractive to crossdressers. I suspect that it's because so many of us become aware of our crossdressing feelings in school, and find those feelings mixed up amid crushes and enfatuations and powerful sexual awakenings. "We covet what we see every day". Like the maid, the bride, the nurse, and other female archetypes, the schoolgirl (with her irresistable mixture of innocence and powerful sexuality) is something some crossdressers aspire to.

Naturally girls themselves play on that same theme: an unforgettable example is Britney Spears's ...Baby One More Time video. This girl here is also having fun with the stereotype: you're not going to tell me that's her real school uniform!

The other fiction I read as a child (and adored) was the Famous Five series, by Enid Blyton. The Famous Five were Julian, Anne, Dick, Timmy the dog, and George. Except, of course, George was a girl whose real name was Georgina, and she liked to dress as a boy and wear her hair short, and she adopted boyish mannerisms and characteristics. It seemed perfectly acceptable, even laudable, for George to behave in this manner, and adults were often very indulging. (There is a school of thought that Blyton based the character of George on herself; certainly it seems pretty likely that she wasn't the warm cheery children's storyteller that we all expect her to be). I seem to remember identifying most with Anne, who was the most feminine of the group, although I also identified with Julian, who was always a sensible leader. But gender roles aside, I thought it was wonderful how free the children seemed from adult interference when they had their adventures.

Forced: Cuckoo in the Nest

How would it have been if Julian had insisted on dressing as a girl, and calling himself Julia? Why should that be any different? And yet it clearly is. I am certain that Blyton would never have dreamed of such a character back then, and even today it would be hard to pull off (both the authors of Cuckoo in the Nest and Boy2Girl seem to take pains to highlight the irrepressible boyish tendencies of both their lead characters. Enjoy it? Gosh no! They are forced to crossdress by circumstances, but they don't want to do it, let alone take any pleasure in it. How could you think otherwise?)

While tomboy carries certain positive connotations, its opposite, sissy, has none (I am not referring to sissy in its fetishistic sense here). And this is something I realised very early in life. It's fine, even praiseworthy, for girls to adopt certain aspects of male behaviour, but it still isn't fine for boys to adopt any aspects of female behaviour.

From a very early age I was schooled both implicitly and explicitly that boys were expected to behave in certain ways. That pattern of behaviour was considered so meritorious that even girls who chose to emulate it were praised. It was not considered acceptable for boys to behave in any remotely girly way. As a boy I recognised that I was very unlike other boys in lots of ways (and indeed as a man I am quite far removed from the "typical" man). Finding I had to suppress my feminine side caused me tremendous unhappiness, and those occasions when it unavoidably escaped caused me great stress and guilt, a guilt which still persists (and may be part of the reason for this blog).

So it is not really a surprise that Cuckoo in the Nest stays in my memory. There was a boy who was not only able to express his femininity, he was required to. A lucky boy indeed.

Further Reading

Georgia at BroadBlogs has a couple of relevant posts here and here and even here, which touch on these themes. In essence, her point of view (and I agree) is that gender ranking makes male attributes more desirable than female ones.