Thursday, May 29, 2014

What Am I?

72


Now, on the very rare occasions when I decide to tell someone about my background, I've figured out a quick statement that both gives them the gist and puts them in my place at age thirteen: ''I thought I was a boy and when puberty came, I got a big surprise.'' I've found that one sentence very effective, without having to get into the physical details to explain things. Details that I had to admit I'm not terribly comfortable talking about and most people are even less comfortable hearing from me. But that one sentence took me almost twenty years to come up with and thirteen of those years I was trying to figure out the answer myself.
With the return to New England in Nineteen Eighty-Two, the living arrangements were much the same as the previous year. Father was living at his girl friend's house and would come to the family home for five evenings a week to share dinner with Pappy and evening television shows. By October, Pappy was again off to Florida to snowbird and with him gone, dad found little reason to visit the house except to pick up the accumulated mail once every now and then. This left me with the house to myself and also the monthly utility bills, the good news there was, with the greater income from the full time job, I could better afford them and used the heating for the full house this year, rather than just my single bedroom.
With my friends all off to College, I had plenty of time to reflect.
At first the loneliness was bone aching, but as I'd gone through similar patches during my first Summer at the apartment town and similar first Summer in Colorado, I now knew these periods would come to an end, eventually, and it didn't drown me like that first time at age ten. And so I spent more time thinking about my life and about my 'situation'.
Over the years I'd watch any television show that might shed some light, typically these were the daytime talk shows and before the nineteen nineties they were still pretty straight-laced in their approach and the audience members thoughtful in their reactions. Ultimately, none of them shed any light on my 'situation', but I did end up learning quite a bit about homosexuals, transvestites and transsexuals. One of the first things I learned, though, was that most people in society were dumbfounded by it all.
During the seventies when talk shows would come on to discuss being Gay, many American audience members would struggle to understand it as they only had the one box in their head, heterosexual, so they tried to find someway to get Gay people 'in the box' by asking them ''So which one is the man and which one is the woman?'' This sort of mind set made producers seek-out Gay couples where one was obviously masculine and the other feminine. This helped the audience grasp the concept more easily as it spoke to their own existing world view, even if it wasn't accurate to the full spectrum of homosexuality. With transsexuals, audience members seemed to grasp this more readily unless the person being interviewed expected to be homosexual after surgery, then the audience members would really be stunned as they tried to wrap their heads around it. When it came to transvestites, the common response was, ''What's the point?'
Eventually a second box was formed in the public mind, 'Straight' for heterosexuals, and 'Gay' for everything else. Let's call this a stage one understanding. Homosexuals, transvestites, transsexuals, pedophiles, anything other than heterosexual were all deemed 'Gay'.
Toward the late nineteen seventies and into the early eighties, when discussing these things through the talk shows, eventually the audience members reflected more sophistication on these issues as they were now able to understand that there was more than just a catch-all box of 'Gay' and they could now see that there was more than just heterosexual and homosexual, there was also the 'Other' category. The general public could now see that homosexuality was 'same sex' interest and everything else wasn't. This was a mixed blessing as they would now lump same sex pedophiles in with homosexuals, everything that was left over fell into the 'Other' box, even opposite sex pedophiles as common heterosexuals knew this had nothing to do with them. So 'Straight', 'Gay' and 'Others' gives us a stage two understanding of sexual variation.
By the mid-to-late nineteen eighties, things had evolved even further in the common mindset and there were now four boxes. 'Straight', 'Gay' (including same sex pedophiles), 'Transwhatever' and 'The Rest'. Clearly a stage three understanding.
By the cusp of the nineteen nineties the 'Transwhatever' tag was becoming subdivided as the rest of the 'Transwhatever' community would dub themselves 'Transgendered' to distinguish themselves from the 'Transsexuals'. But by the mid-nineteen nineties, the Transsexuals liked that term better as it got the 'sex' out of it and they felt that their condition was more about a gender recognition rather than a surgery goal. Sex changes were now 'just an option' for 'Transgendered' people.
By the turn of the century, the American public was finally starting to understand that there was a new category and that category meant re-evaluating the previous categories. It was becoming clear that there was a significant difference between same sex pedophiles and same sex adult interests. Finally, the categories provided a respectable separation for homosexuals and even a label subdivision: 'Straight', 'Gay/Lesbian', 'Transgendered', 'Pedophiles', and 'The Rest'. If this placed society at a stage four understanding for the first decade of the twenty-first century, where does that place your level of understanding?
In the Fall of Nineteen Eighty-Two I was still just as clueless about my 'situation' as I had ever been. Watching all these talk shows provided me insight into everything else, but not myself. I didn't have any sexual interests, so the whole heterosexual/homosexual/pedophile categories seemed to have nothing to do with me. When it came to 'Transsexualism' I didn't find I fit there either as it seemed to be about functional members of one sex wanting to be members of the opposite sex to some degree. I didn't find myself to be a function member of any sex. I wasn't a 'Transvestite', if anything I was the opposite of that as I felt most comfortable in whatever clothing was most common between men and women. As young men and women commonly wore jeans and tees in America, that was the clothing I felt most comfortable in as it wasn't sex specific. As clothing gets more formal it becomes more sex specific and I find myself increasingly uncomfortable in it.
The label of my father's 'What You Are' statement had haunted me since the previous year, not because he didn't know what to label me as, to my face, but simply because I didn't.



impatient? Paper, eBook
help me break even: Shop 

No comments:

Post a Comment