TALKABOUTSEX
AMultidisciplinaryDiscussion
Editedby
RobertScottStewart
CAPE BRETON UNIVERSITy PRESS SYDNEY,NOVASCOTIA
evolving
Since
a
porary
with
from
replacing
lodge
and
and
from
core
Speaking
and
porary
the
rejection
become
culture
are woman?
about
are
questions,
identity? person
p
The
Authenticity
the gender.
non-philosophers
gender
Lauren term
rigid
substrate
so
proper
While social
the
literature. 3
mirrored
how
hilosophers
through
predictably critical
concept
enlightened
them and
I
common
oppressive “essentialism”
categorical of
of
If
was
we
factors
and, How
and
Thanks
to
claims
belonging approaches
identity
identity
upbringing
Bialystok
that
with
know
yesterday
oneself,
theory
in
personal
gender.
of
Authenticity
to
can
tends
a
is
have
in
that authenticity
a summoned
more
and
view to
binaries
set
that often
markers
assignments. 2
lesser as
I
all
alike.
are
feminist
to how
that
know seem
though
What of
long
to
the
to
on
and
a
Trans fluid
of
corners
what
cashed so
person raise
feminist,
extent,
these
these
same
are
“few
This sex/gender
that
to
persistently debated
cultural
such
is
if
concepts
does
as is
1122
we it
and suspicion hinge
a seems
I
Identity
other
is
questions
as
called
dictate out
facets
were
of condition
remains
a
am
as sex
to
never
the
it term
queer
poststructuralist
academia.
sexual
as
what
account
relationships,
on
mean
being
are
at words
fixed,
person
that identity
of
“the the
the
essentialism.
if of
maligned,
first
truer
now
identity? the
theory,
not
differ,
makes
philosophy
of orientation
liberate
infallible to
real
authentic?
meaning
in
predetermined
same
for
I
fidelity blush
frequently say
scorn
than
Chief
that am
the
self”
the
we
some
that
someone
today?
vocabulary
person
the bodies
so
when dominates
to
among
obvious
have
critique” and
or
to
of
among Diana
little
of
and
one
be These suggestion
one’s assumptions
an
sex
recognized
personal
Do
queer
discussing
over
begun and
incompatible
gender
“is”
inner
who philosophers
or interrogated, and
Fuss
I
influences “essence.”
them
metaphysical
of
identities
have (1989:
contem extricable
time. t
a
discourses
gender,
contem
she
truth,
man
to
notes
identity identity,
that
a
is
dis
as
have “true”
is sex
Is xi).
the or
of
and
the
of a
circles
excluded
sexual)
an
First,
violence
as
a
identities
criteria
philosophize
not
of
intuition
with
woman, to
ported
attempt person
and
embracement to
can
to
hard
belong
by
first-person
rather I
to
terms
By
interpret
“essentialism
addressed
epistemic, Furthermore,
on
authenticity trod
identity
steer people.
also
the
ally—with
oft-invoked
to
Before
what is
regressive, rival
the learn sex
essentialism,
The from
to
the concluding for to
“really”
sex/gender
experiences
writing
are
narratives by
to want then
than
In
trans or
fulfill.
and
to concept of
clear
accounts.
inclusion basis
trans paper
about
assess philosop1ers
The
single-sex
authoritative
gender
this
I any
in authenticity,
about
them
mostlyin she
feminist begin,
gender
authority, authority
to
persons.
of
a
a
of
that
apologies
if
about
narratives Second,
is people
paper
convincing
proceeds wars”
new
woman. 8
sex lightning
delimit
essentialism. whether,
is
applying
of
not
sometimes interpretations
the
charitably that
where
of
identity.
identity
a
and
in they
and
authenticity,
a
woman. 7 binaries. perspective,
most
gatherings dangerous.
categories
these
I
each,
few in principles. 6
There say
other we
argue
regarding
I and
self-conceptions
according
are
gender for
the
I
for the
feminist
demonstrate as
Trans
of
for
Authenticity
about
rod,
a
caveats trans
suggest can
might
I
themselves.
account,
not follows. issues,
contribute
but
trans
type
traditional the
and disciplines
are invoked
latter
instance,
will
Finally that
for
understand
“authentic”
from
of
people,
trans
such
apparently
themselves people’s at
and
that
faithfully. offering
of people
admit
theory focus
their
I
to authenticity
men,
are
I questions
least
is
that
First
follow
authenticity
take
and
this
which
I
and as in
understood
they
persons’
how
misrepresent,
to
an in
address
If
women’s
own
philosophical
may women particularly
we
two discussions on
put
of of
a Trans
experiences.
analysis I
and
MTF showing order.
as
a
five
fruitful enrich
outline these
men
judgements
Talia trans
much
trans the instrumental
as loosen
I trans
ways
my age-old
shed
identity. of
queer/gay
want
identity
well
some
components
avowals
may
or (male-to-female
identity and
As
sex
primary
components
festivals person
I
Mae
people
in an and
new
in people
of women. 9 what
conception
why
am
our
as
of a
in my
MTFs,
so
anticipated
and
which terms
pathologize
questions
area
sex/gender
cisgender/cissexual 5
with
Next
argue Thus,
lens
trans
light fact talking
123
on,
Bettcher’s
about
they I
dogmatic of
theory
avers
and
of
and gender
take
material
have
use and
that
authenticity disputing
of apply to
philosophical
this Moreover,
trans 4
that on
1
have identity
for
anyone
lesbian
are
seem
of
that
feminist
do
ask
of
their identity topics
to
has
about
about ethical,
the
to
a
occurs.
objections
this
authenticity.
trans
be
intuitively
ordinarily
compellingly
more
identity
my
qualified been or
what
notion
people—an resistance
she been
the
square
to
perennial
own
implied
do
studies.
as
can that personal group
the
so best
apply
is
traits
re
if
gener
sounds we
over-
are
in of
for
behaviour
logical
‘The
certain
thing
of
to
qualitatively
ticity
others
reducibly
myself
Although
tell,
accordance
are
be
Authenticity
completely
identifying Authenticity
be
self-description.
on
not
person
activity
not
If
description When
men
are
often
distinguished reassignment
stipulated
relations an
determine
“inauthentic”—to to
deserve
on embody
authenticity
gender implies
status—who
our
some
acts
a
and
intersubjective
are These
therefore
do
authentic,
relation alone
and
the
Second,
intuitions
internal.
is
denied
I
of
what
of
my
with
shaped people
speak authentic
better,
with
different
basis women.
because
none
thought
and
that
being
of
is the are
in
possibilities in
of
whether
inadequate.
others
the to
that
the
regarded personal
lauding
selfhood
all the can
some
sex/gender
there
it
of she from
of
of
refuse
There
other transsexual.
by
or
is
about
self
misappropriations
has DSM-IV.
authenticity
the
my
person’s
of
reasons,
be
is and transitional
authentic truer,
is.
external
opinion
see
be
metaphysical
a
are such
to an
ascribed
a
people.
respect
behaviour
is
to
become
However,
question
the
deliberation,
authenticity untrue
of
identity
candidate
as those
that
for others.’ 3
always
insistence
different
Two
treat
than
me.
conditions
that
condition
neither
behaviour, and
being
or
Because
forces,
takes
“True”
if
and I
people
who
to
trans
However, to
I others.
therapies
social
it “born”
hope diagnostic
by of
a
is
am
judging
oneself—we
If individuals
alone,
matches
self
ways privilege
and his!her!hir’ 2
for
truth
hypothesis a
authentic as
are that
I
and
the
people
referring of
for
relation
of
to
psychiatrists may
am
its
as
categories.
that
If
sex
the
understood
men
the
not authenticity.
investigate
of
condition whether authenticity
by
sincerity a
referent
about it
the being
and
authenticity
undertake
trans being reassignment
up
vocabulary
were
authenticity
exceeds
practice
doing associated
deemed according
and
very
transsexuals, at
of
with
procedures
to
would
one
myself.
relation
all, authentic,
the
person
not
women
an
myself,
only
I
Hence,
possibility
justice and
are
are
could
of
it
broadly this
am
what the
inherently
self
among
the “true”
somehow
is
not must
authenticity
the
with
the to
insincerity, on
identified
I
a
being
person’s No
relationship
question to
cannot
same
use to
be
way is
some enjoy their
I to
make
gatekeepers
the whether
they
I
self his/her/hir
have am nor
itself.
a transsexuals one
them.’° authentic to
trans
am
to psychiatrists
of
“true,”
of
basis
activity
authentic.
in
identified
include given
possible
of
as
first-person and
seek.”
authen
describe
a
living
authentically
else some
onto
being.
as
point
question, by
It persons’ them
authentic
which
is
a
of I
therefore
based is
can
criteria
that by
ir
see
trans
self, to
in
‘They
to
are
sex it.
sex!
is, to
tions
political
without
all
does
of
cism
This
truth
ing
this
term
between
that
structure.
will
ficient
“criteria”
authenticity.
of
the circumstances, are
metaphysical
is
or
who
any
concept,
to
Sartre
truth,
is
true inauthentic.
disposed
undertakes
component
with it
tegrity
with person’s
trans
regarded
person’s
but The
instantiate man.
“authentic” access allow
may
men,
while
in
usually authentic; complexity
oneself.’ 5
I
mean
ceasing convictions
ethical
one
want
conditions
to
question
Authenticity in
one’s
one
first which
which
therefore
not
persons
The
in
but Without
when us
the
really
wherein the
to
because
to
“essence”
“true
to
very
to
another. order
as
to
I
conform
men-only
authentic
component one
principles to
evidence
relationship
other
designation
choose is another
propose Unlike
identify
but
the
Inauthenticity
does one
investigate valuable
to
essentialist it
of
she
be is.’ 6
notoriously
is
difficult
self.”
may
seem, of
for is
a
imagines
is
to
selfhood “true
the
actually
being
oneself.
the
type
person,
is
is
possible
them not
It
it
has
One
authenticity.
the is. avoid
not.’ 4
feel to lying being
speaks will
of not
internal five
something
self
spaces
consistency
but
exceptionally, necessarily
almost
self,” In
normative often
of
term
authenticity
of Authenticity
able
to
between might
that that who
specific
possible
components
be
claims and
For other
it suggesting
“bad
For constitutive
to
thorny, conduct
between
that
“true
in authenticity meet.
will
to
is
it
called while
“components”
to
others,
is
been acting
advocates and
principle
without
instance, one’s example,
is
the a
feel
deployed
it faith”
point
words,
have
disregard to
applications
This
nonsensical
as are
to I the
seems manifest
not external
rules.’ 7 at
assumption
the
imagined she
will
a
but and
herself,”
way
one’s
“essential”
imagine
in is
quite
however,
hypocrite; greeted, issue
action
to
that
(his
only
of is
to
not
exception.
other
accordance is of
Trans
to
what undertakes
two
a a
then
has
be
of
to
merely
authenticity
with
donning
an
behaviour
certain
person
Nonetheless,
the
imagine
in term
because
is for, these
congruent itself
being. aspects
rather
treat obvious
and
biological
Identity
and
to
entity might
that
the
to
as
exactly
not
more argue
but
person’s
ethical
of
authenticity
or
to
for
do
one
speak
a a
as some
so action
how
are
with
true
person type
Hence between than
in
violation
working
state a
with specifically
oneself?
of
inconsistency
that of
inauthenticity)
productively.
with
feel
or
in
reductively.
costume another
that
who
and
125
order
necessary
is
and
intent.
the
oneself identity,
do will
further
some
of
females
strong
set of
the
“real”
that of
those the authenticity
that element
having
the
authenticity
a
its
we
is
some
conduct usual
show
of alignment
more
all
convergence
to
behaviour
account
is internally In
of,
person
was
sense
she will
essentialist
in
know
experiences
properties
are
lifelong
identity? convic apply
fact not
because
aspects
which
could
almost
skepti some
order
fact and
why
What
been
familiar
is, undertaken away
to
consistent
be
what
and
a about
as
in
be the
others.
the
that
about
suf moral
they itself
dress called
lying
to inner
may
or
is
fact,
most
and
of
then
gain
a
in
the
as a
facto
to
choose
set
ferent
of
inauthenticity
still be
For
ity.”
should
content
permanent),
its
the
new call
into
event
political
change.
reduce
ally
does
ments
being
we actions.
If
which of the
to
time.
able,
ficient
introspection.
central properties
identity
“inessential,”
criteria
identity,
authenticity.
convictions?
raised
the
being
authentic.
Third,
‘This
it
duration possibilities. 18
isolated
authentic—the
person
would
question?
perspective?
inauthentic.
re-identification
as
not
weren’t
Second,
be could
by
same
(Dasein),
We
of
we
the
authentic Paul
endurance
task
convictions. Consider
some However,
in
the
prove
to,
authenticity. some
for
is
as
choose
have that
do
altogether concept
not
a
events
alter
not
are
individual ought
of
is
Ricoeur
our
same
There a
slightly
for
consistently
the
not If
different
At not
other
that
logical
all a
we
So even
the
different
no
distinguished
that
Second,
identity;
If
There character
her personal
by
identity
use
what
or
enduring
to to
the
just
individual. would
while
to
one
even
of basis
must
we
kind
this
virtue
from
behaviour, of
actions.
Is
characterize
were
defines perspective
different
but
subsume be
authenticity,
First,
authenticity
outcome
example
who
semantic
is
are
that a
content
it
point
behaviour
character
of
contrasted
be on
we
human
modes
a by
even cease
separating
not
revealed
and a
characteristic
to
temptation
(or
of ambivalent
thing
properties
some the
first-person
lasted
which
can
the
expect
as
Authenticity
happen,
would
the possible
As
political
not
some yet
if
under
to
“the
that fact just
to
choices
of
of
be
but
individual
habit
enough
that
way the
Heidegger
be
fact
by
is
be
to we longer, can
or
being
in
to
the
designated
with
that
the
we
set
we also
mentioned understanding
true
what
ourselves?
triviality: the
at
individual
designated
judge the
the which can
to
of
that
find are
that
is
be
about
milieu,
first
least
a
can of
perspective. say,
true
we
does identify
understanding
challenging
possibilities
available
assumed
things
person to to
first
be
necessarily
or
misleading moniker
tracks
distinctive
is
we
as
no
some
act
understand
a
the
call
two
stripping
set
do neatly the
suggests, “essential”
self
this
real being
not
component
chose
such
having
as
we
habitually
It
not authenticity over
of
of
that
some
makes whatever
as
something
one
components,
profound
to
is
“authentic”
overlap self;
scenario,
to
to
would
convictions
a
“inauthentic,” pinned
“authenticity,”
use
the
of difficult
clear
be
Just
a it.
the
that be
are
authentic. person
available
and
marks
as
away
developed
protracted
of
we
authenticity
enduring
within
But
enduring same” it
as
possibilities
to
authentic,
a
same
a
as
the
always
in robustly,
division
incorporated should
metaphysical.
we perfectly
may
“inauthentic
basis
part down.
us
life-changing
elements
critics it
like
this
which
a to
of
with
do convictions
must
certain
from
(1992:
is
her
to
instance be whatever would
imagine
individual
of,
character,
for
in
is
because identity),
be
alternative
period
have
a
while
(if
Essential
habitu
own
through there surmise,
strong
just
fact
to
habits
dif permit
but
and
also with
what
judg
de
as
not
119).
of
way
refer
we
suf
a
not
any
our
of is
convince
than
with
find
banker
difficult,
villain.)
or
no
the
obvious
glean
how
even
decline
person
tions
desire
conviction
despite
or
seen
one that
ideal
a nate
the
of
but
that it
propriate to
the herself,
true the
to
priori
it
expectations can
we’ve
Finally,
most
ity
authentic
what authenticity
more
though actualize
who the
whose is various say
usually
are
to
in
material
from
him
presupposes
Moreover,
motive
converges
even to
in than
is Fourth,
self,
to riot
be
coincidence.
costly
an
that
value,
reason
immune people,
a
others
truly
question. be
comfortable
conform
hates
irrespective
interpreted
of
real
fully instance
that
sources
uncomfortable,
to
rather
life as
it
different. it
requires influences
authenticity
the
or
for his
may
do. amenities
consequences
violated
I
need authenticity
possibility,
for
his
to
has are
of
so.
forms inauthentic
applies
there
indicated with
higher
potential
for the
to
think Hence
than her
to
the
job
It
seem.
this
both doing.
where
more
forces
The
not
is
some
social
an authentic
to
as
the
of
are peers.
possibility
Still,
part and
something
on often
person,
convergence
to
that value
interpretive
and
persist internal
somehow
what
authentic
refer
is Authenticity
Because
if
value.
very
behaviour
In
authenticity such
our
we
for earlier, a
harbours synonymous not
people,
should
an
norms.
of
prior
distinguishing
being
for The
particular
social practice,
hard
of
must authenticity.
behaviour
to the
few
authentic
her
to
person’s
as
in
of
(Consider doing
his
and
authentic
of
to
further
mention
peer
authenticity
his
to
essential
majority
inhabiting
authenticity be
authentic person
situations consistent connections
identity—not
being
be
at
our
more
leap, of
and
with
private
know
juxtaposed
external.
of
“inauthentic”
least
so. pressure.
pits capable
person others,
choosing
behaviour course, with
Trans
person
and
virtues,
even
authentic “does
authentic
a
But
socially
the
person
for an It
aspiring in
to
between
set
artistic
makes
in
choices, non-conformity,
may with
Identity
this
individual
her ourselves.
certain
we
implies
example
she this
However, of
from
that
carries
which of
it
her
This happens
with
between
out
is going
indeed
environment
and
should
sticks
moral condition,
costly.
who
should
sticks
is
for
very
own
existence, alternative. come
aspirations
to
may
the
would these
not which
of
127
why conformity.
it
a
convergence autonomous
by
normative
of we
against
“better”
difficult
is standpoint
to
thing,”
contrariness
Almost
against
norms,
The to
be be authenticity
out
due
along
simultaneously
understanding issue
the possible them.
we
subtle her
really
be behave
difficult
no profoundly
This
of
successful
to
complete
but conform
authentic
most
guns,
ourselves.
may
with
doubt consider
from
irrespective
a
conformity
the
person,
to there
every If
are,
rather motiva
genuine
import This
is
to
separate
authentic—
in
choices
with
of
clearly
yet
habits
to
it,
less
often
within
say
or as
ema even
a
the
is
action
is
or
way
that
an
ap
a
that
not
For if
am
afraid
assigned
core
models
loosely
have
diverse
cement
essentialism
part
as
man,
to
4)
as
as
mination
among
with
(1997
503).22
am
known
for
firmly
(or
true
language
surgery
motivated
transition
the
“a transition,
may
suggest
still
a
On
gender
“simply”
as
layered,
application I
sex/gender
through
“transsexual
used
Importantly,
a
have of
many
other) guy
but
the
such
On
recognition
self
man,
of define as
be
a knew all
[1974])
tiullienuclly
being
at
trans
believe
From
male-female
all
I
they
attribute
sex
who
essentialist able been
or
identity
to
a expressed five
birth.
the
never
declarations.
years” too
found
men
workable
that
and
of
my
to
a
aesthetics,
to
make
clearly
she
or people
called
as
are
bilateral
to
to
to
the
sex/gender is one’s
components
identity,
first
fluid
arguing
express
that
life
I
gender,
or
felt
“trans” the tell
Jamison
lesbian”
wrote,
contemporary
half-lesbian”
most
this
authentic. in
am
(qtd.
of
may
“authentic”
it
opening
women.
01
that
component,
and
felt that
‘essentialists,’ trans
I
us
like
is
in
trans
a
one’s
a
application
binary,
language is
ex/(1ender
was
material
evident
people,
mastectomy
man
be something
authentic
both
to
even
in thus
which
sex/gender, 2 °
Moreover,
“I
too
but I
is
I
she
(1994:
narratives
Green
be
an
was” identity
am
born
trans
didn’t Overall person
joined,
For
who
of line
contingent
Even
true
by
far
had
the
because
exception
the
would
a
in
most
and happens
authenticity,
reality. 23
(1994:
to discourse,
a
their
example,
girl” that
3)
identity
of
core
lived
of
pinnacle
feel for the
Transition
their
behaviour
to
helpfully
woman
intersexed
is
but more
who
describe
for
the
2009:
not
arrived
Jan but
authenticity
change
of
fulfill trans
on
the
suggest.
like
through
(2006: the
recurring
first-person
and
I trans
41). for
desperate,
power the
no
to
by
to
is
to
Morris’s
general
am
the
concept
as
identities
I
Kate
people
but
“neither
40
14).
this
admit
of
bottom
essence trans
differ
Bobby the
time.
their
was
summarizes: at
the
not her
their
is
persons
inside.
the
people 24
122). years the
of
I
lived
his
any
clear:
Alaina
need trend,
Bornstein,
want
a
locus
assigned
about afraid
formulations
autobiographies the to
ofjudgements
Our
who from adherence authentic experiences
pathbreaking of
man.
sometime
identities.
Noble
current
insistence
combination
surgery
Jarnison
male
of
human
in
of
in
Lesley
authenticity
to
felt
it
does
to
at
a
my
do
of
identities and
trans
sex
uncomfortable
Hardie
isolate
of
is the
female
Ever.
now
least
sex/gender nor
authenticity
not
describes
the
“Academics
sex/gender.
being-ness saying
and
not
cross-dressers 25
who
embodiment
lives
(2006:
one
behaviour. 21
Carter
persons Green
reckless,
female”
to see
suggest
The
on man
I
for
of a
gender. 19
reinforce
body” of
was intones:
they
true
particular sees which
as
of are
themselves
Conundrum
having
trans
that
is trans
are
essentialist
group
98).
or essentialist,
hormones,
writes:
himself
resistant
being states:
simply
identity
self.
herself are
were
(1994:
replete
woman
that
and (2006:
deter
and
Prior
...
denial
are
The in people.
people
I
“I’ve
as or
I
in
a
The
I
turn take
a
sex!
the
“I
“I
too to
of
people
in
authenticity,
ing
as
ogy
standard
existence.
inauthentic,
be
among
as
being
one
their are
can
Not
the
they
masculine will
an vironments
Trans
Jan
and
“gender
less
to possible
hormones
a disabuse
it.
among we
trans
assigned
condition
periences
precedes
susceptible “corporeal
a
The
unchosen determined overwhelming,
between
has
also
(2006:
often desired I
it.
only
Trans sex/gender
Morris
experienced emerge,
no
certain
trans
can will
other
other
If
of In
people
people. no
preceding
In be
true
living is
trans
inauthenticity
use
identity
there think
terms
then
stand
them
so
spaces 506).
fact,
choice
is people distinguished
sex/gender at
sex/gender
degrading
and to
possibilities.
where
of of
concurs:
internal
it
the sex/gender
transsexual
but fact,
not
birth interiority,”
also eventually
strengthen
identifving
trans
people
is
all
must
in fact, This
prior
of. on
of
of
survives
All by
language
important
this
in
to
susceptible
forms ...
but one’s
their
comments
have
there the oppressive
sometimes
they
the
For
the
appears
people
of an
be has
is
no not
to
“It and
but
as
identity second to
practices
third these
count attested
while
attempt
identities, for truth some
self-identified
transition.
been
expect
avail.
of
are
identity,
external
a foreign proven
to
I
Authenticity
is
has from
heed
also
the
with
a of
external
have possibility
denial,
trans
also
not
some
a
to first-person
always
component
statements
inauthenticity
way
ever
subjected insistence
as of
passionate,
suggest the
to
presentation
component
subject
by
In
almost for be
a
or
it. to
to
seem
to
argued
forms
(Rubin people—perhaps my
sex/gender
resistant
authenticity and
the
form
designations
identity one
define in
involuntary trans
hope ‘This
been
lifelong
hiding
trans
not
For destroy
on
different
experience which
and
abject
failed
to
themselves
of
that
study,
all sex/gender
only
of example, of
which
suggestion
to
from
that
people
disabused confirm
that
people follow
Trans I
2006). conviction
inauthentic
being
lifelong,
influence. 26
or
other
inauthenticity.
described, of
to
as
psychiatric
and
their
of
trans
to the
failure
by
in
identity
simply
a authenticity,
in
trans
any
two
possible
the
Identity
their at
describe
treatment
cissexual/cisgender
(2006: authenticity it”
the the
same
that
remarkably enduring,
retain
aspects
order
But and
Jan
private
all
the
identity
outside
intervention”
to
MTFs (McLachlan
is clearer
of
ineradicable
conceptual
of may
assigned reports
raises
being
of
because
other
can
the
Morris gender-normative trans
the
all—important as
there
individual
it”
all
271). ways for
129
what
coercion
their
identity
of
Scott—Dixon be
feminine
with
ultimate
be
logic (1997 attempts
world
Indeed, than
unable authenticity
“worked is
the
therefore, endurance,
identity than
identity,
is
“discovered”
of
resilient
of
depends.
chosen
experience
claims
Jay so
sex
also it
“homosexual”
its
worry
of
structure.
respond
any
what
that [1974]:
fixed
functions
2010:
that conviction,
(2006: could
intended
and Prosser
to
persistence
my
a
act
self, trans
to
out
anal identity
distinction
in
clear
which she
live
from
they
but
in
one (usually)
disrupt
count
that
that
analysis”
of notes,
the
Despite
very be
34).
of
to
but
15). en
most
18).
it
was
The
calls
have
ex to
not
capture
authenticity
surgical
persistent
rates
in
and
2012).28
among
Scientific person
One
living
(McLachlan
their
logical
and
Inauthenticity conformity
not people,
ridicule,
virtually spite
people, yet behaviour
I
a
trans
actualized
possibilities
an
people.
and
of
leading
authenticity
on
people
uncomfortably
previously culture
and
transition
“was
for
piece
Finally,
at fuelled
achieved
anatomical
inauthentic
its
surgery
a
The
is
of
outcomes trans
them.
worst social The
discomfort
pretense,
people
In
pretending
the post-operative
intuitive not
regret
studies
the
living
especially
of
alienation
inconceivable with
Many
fourth
I designating
one’s
in
behaviour to
high
by
is
people
to
evidence
2010:
hope
significant
is
Not
the
support, in
torturous.
which
authentic thus one
based
authenticity,
noted
typically for
mention
often a
exists, may
respect a
across
many
or
life
rate
lacking
pressing
body
life. trans
value,
falsehood”
value component
only
it
them in
44), of
of
informative
lack are to
be those
will
on
in a
of
and genitalia
their
the “ambiguity
for
Here,
living
be jurisdictions,
keep
that
matter it
North
...
people
the is frequently
materially
suicide
to
transsexuals one’s
without as
the
obstacles the existence.
of of
that stand Pre-transition
entails
genuine
be
is
the
between
inauthenticity
[are]
need general
sometimes sex/gender
inauthentic
feeling seeking
assigned
familial I this
authenticity
often identity
considerable
transition understood
authenticity
out
intolerability (1997
one have
felt America
is
of
agree
out
are
and
like
for
about
an line non-conformity,
maligning chance.
of
peers would or
that sex/gender—tends
attributed invoked
or
of
difficulty
described thought
as reconciliation
16
attempted
existence
joint:
[1974]: foreign
sex
support. 29
of
sex/gender,
is as
disguise”
that
being
socially
are
who violence
among
identity per
precede
intuitively
tragically
have
the
well
all and
trans
reassignment
that
in choose
pain and for
this
vanishingly
the cent
of
trans in
true
of
unrecognized,
18)
those
this to
other objects
found
as
of
to I
that trans
impossible. as being
inauthenticity trans
people the
suicide
and the
scenario
feeling
be
(137).
Hence,
am and
for the
that
and
and self,
attributing authentic—transitioning
dissatisfaction
case
people to or
out
within
and
least trans drawn
forms destiny. 27
is
risks
attempted trans trans
not
need
narratives.
who
accompany face
an people
attached calls
47
are but at
describe of
to
Such
among not
it
that
“inauthentic” small,
surgery passing
in
best conformist
per
people results
of really
the reach
come
should whether of
visited
people, are for
people
in
the her
‘The
a
understanding
miscategorized,
SRS,
dissatisfaction.
metaphors “some cent
the is
moral
uncomfortable
However,
discrimination,
medical
are non-conformist not
trans self.
existence to suicide
exorbitant
are.
and for
as the self-evident. who
in
any it.
case
with
(SRS).
be metaphysical
upon
the
if
who
“out” (Ramsay
we
a
they
The
their
many Regret
people.
parts one failing,
psycho
people clear
judgement
when
relief, have
of
body” also
trans
rates
approval
the
still
can as
non trans
were
while
of
trans
prior
It
living
trans
of that
costs
trans
lying
is
in
he but
live to
sex/gender
pathologization
not
assertion
cis sex/gender
sex being
different
person” (major)
characteristic
standardly
with flatly
react
and
conformity
als
tialism
particular,
sex/gender
narratives
people to
ences always
confronted engagement
essentialism
is
of
without binary,
ism
in
concept.
ing
conclusion
paradigmatic
admits
also
sex/gender My
some
Essentialism assert
interesting
which
essentially
One buying
if
deny
is
according one essentialism?
Although
asked
beyond (1997: of
in
in
not analysis have
as
changing assignment,
that
possibility polar
parts
the
authenticity
hold
many
our that ofjudgements
living
changing
would
they with
that of
It
identity, the
into
with
morphology
a to
of
realm
we with
mean
different),
78). should
at
identities.
many
powerful
identity
they
my and
it
imagine
of
but
are
Reconsidered
seem
primitive transsexuality ways
suggests social
stake in case
and to “essentialism”
were
open
produce
life
in
myself,
That choosing,
the
a
already
rigid.
of which
could
for not
is
something and trans to
different some
without indeed
be
in
to
about
sex
that in
goes expectations,
assigned
to
question,
be
contemporary is
him/herself
sense
crystallize
the detrimental we is,
Consider of clear what
my
Authenticity
of that
The
someone
and
one
gender
exist
abnormal,
someone
people that ways,
all
the
comfortable.
authenticity.
although
could their
unnoticed, “wrong”
sex
analysisof
lending is
of gender behaviour
being fact sex/gender women
of by
is
makes
experiences
authentically
I raises
it
at
essential
and
sex/gender
it
“Who and
sex
very
have
now
essentialism
not
ever
confirm
that
birth,
how
about
to this
other
a we
as
with
and gender
when
sex/gender
to
that
identity great
we out
red imagine whole
believe critical
“are” few
a
possible that a some
however,
the
are experience am
authenticity
my
Anthony What
Trans
different
“true” of
then,
the
could
trans might
flags about
I than a
in
elements
of
this
rarely support
am (facsimile)
average I?” trans
the
identity,
argument. a
more
new
other experiences trans
fact theory overall.
that trans Identity
certain
ourselves
to
might can
or
In people,
themselves, subjected
to
identity?
is
imagine essentialism be
ourselves.
as
person
because
many, people if
all Appiah sex/gender.
light radical so.
generally? the
say,
people
we
trans for
than
of
people ever
man to,
is and of
peonle
but
Perhaps be
authenticity?
way
But
131
learn trans
of replacement
at an rather
such of
Rather, human
it being
forced in
people
as (that
because with
or
that
its ourselves
of
to
I
least
feminist
have
cis
the always-individual
argues is
vindicate
what
Living
and
the
submit
authentic
woman a
people. countless trans from suspicion
mcrht
not
an
I What
new
people
than of
Most
cis fact is,
respect a
with
sex/gender am
to been
the
existence
are.
essentialism different
the the
a
is
without
individu
we
that this
examine
people monolithic
ethical that as
their
interested
that
it essential
being
of
sexes would
would This
other The
does
respect essen kind
accused
are
are
the
for about
perhaps
“we
regard influ
the
to
I
the
in
am
in
their
are
this that of
concept
sense
the
or identity
is biological
identity
of
it
the
core we
tion possibilities
thing
variation
if
with
one
really cross-dressing
expression ner
to
does that is
or
an what
essential
the
is
or authenticity
although
of sex/gender bodies
Essentialism
or can
try same
ment
some
felt being
the of the
just
gender
Sex/gender
internal characterized
of
of
associated
poststructuralist
embodiment.
femininity
respect
movement
to something
manhood
on But of
mean
can
make
a were feels
identity. 3 °
our same
these This
individual
“fun.” 32
way
which
man—bring
male people to
masculinity different
within
expressed
in
we
be
about
identity
core
varying
being sex/gender
most available
repressed.
thesis
that
non-permanent way sense
sense had
to
urges,
essential identity
need
who
of
we
with
that
(such
or
may deny identity,
In
while
sex/gender
we is a
we if essential
his/her/hir
“right.”
one’s
in
without sex/gender
of womanhood. particular of can
by
To needs
itself
feels
they
all
not
does
it when very
degrees been
would
his any
be
experimentation,
identity
to
this the
as
would
or for
development
is
account these
Those still be
without
may
abandon behaviour
salvageable, us were
she Miqqi
sex
essential,
a
flexibility. not
way
femininity.
then, to
Playing
others. born existence
either
experience
the
reflection
is
consent.
in
identifying
still
be
be
is
identities some
cases, with
mean
be
who silenced
ways
self.
identity.
and our assigned
confined.
attributes;
behaviour
really
into for
nuanced,
essentialist is
Alicia
the
appropriate
authentic
respond It
essentialism
something cultural
with
feel
exemplify their
of
such
it is
that
something
is to
of
a
possibilities If
Even
and
of
a
therefore,
not admits
different the
judged
into Some
they
temporarily
if
a
a woman,
Gilbert in
Experimentation a
transition as
gender
what we
phenomena, gender ‘The
discomfiting
stable
the sex/gender
they a
to
time
however, is
to
our
men a
stark
test or landscape.
were
would
for
freely person
some
our people’s
behaviour
inner
to of the
inauthentic the
attached
depends
just flout particular
culture
but sex/gender to essential
most
or can
or
call or infinite
in
roles
focus.
denied
for
environment
classic
live
individual
women;
and
RuPaul)
dress chosen,
a
yet.
this
degree
identity
feels experience
conventions
also to who
them
biological
sex/gender
that
people,
it
up
sex/gender
and
misalignment
It
account
ambiguity.
(or
For
regard: to
only
is
variation, or
is trans
be
or
equally
is
about
to
dresses
was
environment can
depending tempting
time
our
inauthentic.
presentation. 3 ’
forced
failed even
behave identity they
as
and
political, some
even
can against
holds
on it
at
the
narrative—a
be selves,
on female
the for is different
period),
sex/gender we
may
be
categories odds
performance, of
comfortable
one’s in
to if imposed
existentialist
a
actualiza
or identity
Having the
precisely including
the
masculinity
would to individual
sex/gender
authentic
actualize and
search
the
which
to
imputed
if
alter
strategic
with on
be some
basis who
felt say
fact
that
Even
that man
but
experi
the
forms most
their
They
say
that a
their
for that
acknowledges,
freedom which
sake
ment
for gender
the
als”
15). concern
her
require
a
analogous
offers
(2009:
ally
transitioning”
under
“gender
of
feminists,
enon.
and
found
my
Before
Anticipating
thorough
reclaimed
of
gender
would
liberation
more some
muted,
the
for
announces
historical
what
of analysis
and
Overall’s
As
involving
this,
is
one
The
argument
especially
protecting
an
felt
most
is
that
a
of
24). Flouting
more
in
a
that
that
inventive people,
concluding
within
determined be
mask Christine
alternative
person’s
identity
first sex/gender
feminist
another
identity
the or
to
my
response
it and
Overall
hard—pressed
trans
from from
“gender
this
animosity
may
space
other
Some
first “the
seeks
two
literature.
concern
itself
(2009:
of
application
of
the
that
show
theory,”
that
the
might
is
experience
oppressive
the terms
person
the
people,
require
separate
reaction the and
fact
I
Objections
“life-changing Overall
than
simple
not
forcefully
to
articulates
account
I
respect
is to have identity
anti-essentialism
and
of
clutches
why
14). wrong
want
sex/gender
regards
undermine
the
that
permanent
a
between Overall’s
others.
have
and Authenticity
I
matter
to
according
to
immutable,
a
probably
Elsewhere
have
either assigned
designation
my
people,
of
to
experience variety
has
the
to
find
fluid
of
norms? 33
of this
“frightening”
admits
sex
and
authenticity
account of
the
the
pre-emptively
Feminists
a
sex/gender
sex/gender
here,
idea
called
essential
a
binary
feminist
number
been
insightful
and
concern,
categories
transition,
picture
person,
some
“gender
unmistakably;
and a
aspirations”
of
and
one.
because
to
kind
of
of
she
I
The
what
hence
experiences
still the “man”
sex/gender that
put
want which
reified,
Trans
authenticity,
gender
thinking.
people’s For
characterizes to
of of
should
I
and
problem
trans
transition, “masquerade
need
which
within”
holds. to
implications to
have
options his/her/hir
has
nested
and
concerns
of
others,
are
Identity
is
to
as
address or
trans
“the
me
trans
at
the
underlying (Overall revealed
address
a
become
not or
“woman”
necessary.
stimulating
presented
work
lived
least
fairly
this
is
differently.
explicitly
in
otherwise,
“person
with
painful
‘true’
theory
the
1133
negate
do
identity
advocacy.
and
the
order
which with
several
toward
appears
experience
for
this
sense
most
simplistic
identity
the
this
hypothesis”
2009: via for
de
crux
essentialism
person
suffices;
some
of
inside
this But
or
this is
theory contrast
to
key
rigueur
others
the
describes
or
line
article
is
of
people
concerns
trans
the
As
imperil
a
for
of
come
For
to
24).
I
an
theory society
self.
theory that
aspects
may
individu
process
suspect
of
Overall
is
whom
some
a
be
familiar
phenom
for
for
as example
person”
if
(2009:
identity,
While
argu
would
hidden
among
Because
out. between
have can
or
be
the
sex!
actu
the
others,
can the
it
and
in
with
is
of
the
more
of
as
sex!
of
case
one
be
For be
tensibly
aspiration
notes
(material)
rial? we
how
implausibility
who
identity
feel woman
philosophically
we
within
an
of
mysterious
16).
material
a
expect
material
Overall
as
disparate
dualism,”
hypothesis
‘The I we
material
we herself—precisely
aspire, incoherency
herself that
unproblematic,
herself
one a extensive
protect.
individual
essentialism standing
“I
submit as
that
by
1
reads,
implications,
calling
trightening
must
come
‘The
think
theory,” imagery
am
that (2009: the
is body to
“many
anyone
to
men Moreover,
or
subject asks
such
male
be
“a
be as
a
second essentialism
female
extend
aetiology substances.
it or
that
indeed,
that
should to of
man
these
to member
of
work
of
able a
a derives
and
concerns
23).
the
sex/gender
“how
trans as
palatable
have Overall sex/gender body,
woman
implies
of
other
woman
a become what
is
is
this
being that
for person
trapped
view women to
a body....
category does
to
are
frightening transparent
virtually
be in
(nonmaterial) I
But a I
persons
explain
a the
or trans
some
is of
than
is of from
am
take fails sense
feminist materially?
the nonmaterial
likens that
a a
that
while
unique not These
how
of or
an
trans
the
a than
kind how
of musician physiological
identity
have not
There
in
wrong essentialism.
musician?
authenticity, people.
to the Overall a
people,
irrelevant
show another of persons philosophical
of
social other
our
lifelong,” a
may
man, a
is sex/gender
of the
cohere
suggesting
identity
claiming
nonmaterial concerns
critiques identity
to unique
woman’s self
process. and
philosophy
it positive
appears having
that
some
questions notion
indeed
any
is
person
or
aspects grouping
in
in
to woman immutable and
are
sex
something
a
with
Is it
question.
difference
defiance less
be
and
thus parent; as
change,
that
divided people
which is Instead
a
For Overall is the the
depend
that
body”
control
to
transition
of
harbour biological
corroborating that
sense of
only
false” critiques of
obscure
their immutable
be man
and a
giving
to entity is
if right ‘women’” stumbling
one
identity
it
man
no
this
nonmaterial, sex/gender we
be
is
consults
about
quite metaphorical. 35 of
of into a
could
that
Gender
entity over of
(2009: sex
raises on explanation sex
on merely
way
“nonmaterial”
asking.
what
identity
are to
how being
is
{could] why
to
endorsing due
of or
mind
could
which
taking we trapped
supposed
sex/gender
literally.
define her.
other come that
qualities, unable
(2009: have
could
with
metaphysical
so-called
block
their
15).
some recognition
I a
this
are
essentialism, further
trapped
suggest
The person’s Focusing
can
and
a
that
develop” develop
roles
to
why willing to
dangerous
gendered assertions
the
womanhood
fact develop
inside
that body
15). to individuals
with
the
For
fact be body
hang to us
is Overall
is identity
masquerade sense explain
evidence
to
should
be
“Cartesian through inside
“determined” mate
through not is
“gender She
she own example,
that
which inside
os
trans
on
or to the
(2009:
more to an
proof the
inside
the
non- the
other of asserts
fiercely
counts
such
the
political
gender
under
a
that same
that
view
for a her
•
hypothesis
way
heard
cal gender
insurmountable
who
thenticity. 38
experiences.
of
identity unclear
identity
that
of
it
are
“aspiration”
one
turning women
people
cluded
but
make,
into
her
(1997
to
them
definitions
are
series a
tions.
a
assertions
retort
there longstanding
the
affects
some
literal
series
identity—it
sense
the
read
that
Like
hand, to
the
transition,
the
wants
prevalent
Overall’s
alignment
about
to
is
modify
[19741:
but
confines
of seems
She
desired
don’t
that
whether
or
kind.
or men,
does
into,
celebrates felt
as
as
a
inhabit.
of person-within-a-person
everything
interpretations”
me,
it
person
rather
men
is
merely
that
to
competing
human
describes
choices)”
seem
Yet
identity
is
on
trans
She
more
not even
but
women to
‘The
theorize
113).
much
a
or
alternative
metaphor Overall
-
sex/gender
is
we “I
par
they
biological
that
with
philosophical
whereas
be
Just
Overall
as
feel
change,
even
also
an
a
to of
was
explanation
want,
people’s
gender
consistent
are
directed
beings.
change
with
a Carol
more
feminists
may a
gloss
have
adjustment
about
it
necessity”
sex/gender
itself
as or
(2009:
Authenticity
speaks
different
already
accounts.
mending lifelong
trans
is
is
the
otherwise
a
(2009:
ceteris
she
be
inevitable. 37
is
one’s
to
people
diversity
a
Riddell
than
anomaly,
over
(21).
a
is
career
in
At
self-understanding,
rather
the
core
considering
concept
at
represented
the
identity
cis-identified,
with
views
often
18)36
lifestyle.
about
is
have
problems,
a
of
the
aspiration
paribus,
ability the
person
the
sex/gender
(McLachlan
On
24).
possible” a
straw
sex/gender
Moreover, “masquerade”
to
transition
authenticity
do
without and
change
discrepancy,
explains:
than
their
same
and
other
identified
and
described
crucial
spent
the
so
that
sex/gender
of
my
not
But
Trans
in
Speaking
to
man.
that
I
authenticity
and
makes
sex/gender
as
“masquerade”
self-described to
a
agree,
sex/gender
reading
more
time,
life
which
see
live
she
I
strikes for
(2006:
decades
way
dismissing
a
Identity
be
genuine
think
inside
point
based
can
as
“we
identity.
We
feminist,
change
changes
transitioning
2010:
in
transition
people continues:
in
functions
the
at
coherently.
involving it
that
of
account
smoothing
conformity
of
I signifies
transition even
do
can
least terms
is
155).
me
of
course,
it
that
believe the
on
1135
dismantling
men
such
not,
64)
identity
respects not
human
suggests,
can
transition
trans
of
that
reject
as
what
most
change
trans
as individual”
female
trans
account One
experiences.
and of
self.
or
inaccurate. an
raises
seek
does
properly,
because,
be
“The
much
“choice
that
identity,
transition
bringing
the
Admittedly,
women
narratives,
experience
as
in people
I
the
an
that
existence
people’s
researcher
explained
with
as
Morris
have
people
trans
to
not
a the
the
it
terms
further
existence
masquerade
incongruity”
philosopher
philosophi
a
caricature
based
and
as
choice
change
is
some
change
it
imply
while
(or
transition
way
read
a
a
undergo:
(24).
reviving
persons’
in
they
does.
change
On
change
posing
the
enables
already
earnest
of
says
rather,
as
order
on
trans ques
as
these
in
they
con
and
they
it
This
au
sex,
the
that
the
self
of
the
are
an
of
is of
a
“a
of a
in
they
accounts presumptuous.
self-descriptions
of
reluctant
herself?
been
know
authenticity.
for
with
of
those
like,
out?
many
courses.
and trans
stand
the
such
represent
and
trans
cast
pressing
second,
that
for
Essentialist ing”
identity, sex
the
authority
cal
identities philosophers
tive
are which
fair The
read
female, mainstream
growing This
the
but achieving
To
that otherwise
trans
doubt as
reassignment
narratives
diagnosis
variant
assumptions
trans outside
less
narratives
and
to Arguably, are
of
But
second
broadly
to
myself
What
address
metaphysics
it
reinforces
conclude
that might
a most
instrumental
likely
conclude we the
strategically
people
“persistent” would
what
to
on
trans
experiences
and
is
I
trans attention
trans
narratives
still
enable
would
those diversity
concern
am to recognition the
at reporting
of gives
about
and trans
do
indicate to
the mythology.
is experiences
expose if
anything woman, whose no
Gender
have
not not
authenticity
that be
and experiences therefore communities,
not
surgery,
essentialist my
from a
first
trans voice
speech sex
it people.
different
of
persuasive
true.
entitled
vitiate
only
useful is
to mean
tailored evidence a experience the
reason in
defy
of
ourselves
narratives
reassignment.
authenticity,
that valid
issue,
more
her this
Identity trans
for
from
to
this stories the
other Moreover,
prevailing
dictate
emerge This
act valid.
for
are the
trans
This
in
my
my experience
instance,
that
example to
trans assumptions,
epistemologically type
are
(in
for
it group,
issues
the
to
is
my
our
explanation
is
frequently
but components
can than
is suppose
hypothesis
to
main
that
Disorder,
the less
reinforce
immune following meet suspicion Indeed, of only persons’
that flawed?
where medical
incumbent
account
I
texts persons’
current
it
be
“identification in
have
narrative offering
usual the
and likely The
face
is
form
of
the who
argument. a
difficult,
the academic being
and truthfully
hyper-skeptical
from
strong lived
access
requirements
as
described it
Although
value
stories trans
which to stereotyped community. 39
ifit an sense)
medical
is
to expectations
the claims of
experiences,
arises
is
a
is
media
a
for in
this
an
essentialist made
on
certain be
the
not
cis unearthed
colloquial experience
were, incumbent
intractable. to
essentialist
apparent
would fact
person
especially authenticity
heard important
everyone
and of
remains
to
person,
For
fact
from
type
SRS as
that that
to
establishment
easier with
their
actively are
accurate
in
I
general
non-academic
format,
others—or by
that have
fact,
be
according
or and
of
have of may
she
the
the it
interpretation ihis
of
assessments
understanding
in
accounts 4 ° another
that majority
to learning by
a
the
other
indefensibly
on worry. is
who
for
essentialist
prerequisite
tendencies How validated
those
these
the endeavoured
gold
has diverge
perspective fact
take seek
the
not a
1 or
as
means,
DSM-IV
researchers
conforms which
those
“longstand
have
case
representa publishes
forms I
Internet always
necessarily
that do
standard
out
trans
I would with
to
gender.” accounts,
that even
have
from
am
from
we that who
laid
dis
medi
first,
of may
and and,
trans
the
for
for
a to
asked
about
that
interaction
and
to
that is
be
culture?
signs
such
how
to something
and backdrop
But
adults. and portant
are
inborn
essentialism—the widely
dent,
male
taught
individuals’ to
“natural”
to ‘This
appears
I
trend.
other
identity,
any
of
qualitative
have
“essentially”
her
in
speak
explicable
contact
medical
I
not
accoutrements While
holding
is
It
authenticity,
the
a
“woman” distortion
will
an
what
does
a
morphology
have immutable
one’s
that person
types
culturally
It
presented.
may
about
accepted
One
lifetime.
sex/gender
When
to
speaking
at
assumption
sense
of
does,
nor
end
against
concept
acknowledge
a
not
results,
does
gives
individual.
come
with
I
identity,
it
support
be studies
relationships
of
very
firm
does
am
boyhood
purely does
responds
by
as
a
of
(or however,
texts
I guarantee
objected
or
not
woman,
“essential,”
considering
say
(among
me
Otherwise,
associated
others.
categories
not
young
which
from
views
being who
in
not
pressure
could
view
via
it
even of
identity,
used
disprove
conducted
are
the
that
in
is
reproduce
would
a
deny
certain
Authenticity
sex/gender
processes
emerge
There
and
by
vacuum.
to one
terms
if
about
at
authority
that
a
sex/gender
age
“transman”
lend
that
to
that,
actually
it
progressive
On
therefore,
to
the
there
that
definition
relation
the
stake.
is
girlhood
express
to
that
with
is
which
invite
their
or
and
a
that
coherent
that “male”
everything
must
when
the
considerable
myriad
of
within
the
even
more
conform
existence
from
everyone’s
the
“brain
by
were
can
still one’s I
proves
and
womanhood.
Theoretical
be
own
that
we contrary,
there
to
length
do
a
implies
between
be
same
trans-positive
the I
trans
if
identities
philosophical
be
a
regress:
reprises
and
the
declare
Trans
inscrutable
and scholars)
unknown,
mean
ought
influences
no
such not
exposure a
girl
a
for
anatomy.
is
sex,”
accessed
identity
is
kernel
to
extremely
trans
of
womb
broad
about
coded
“female”
people
felt
of
“transwoman”)
a
a
identity
experiences
deny
irrespective
credibility
the
a
that
male-bodied
outliers
true a
gender
with
to
skirt
how
that
general
for one
discussions,
paradigm
sex/gender
are
person’s
as
possibility
regard
of
The
pattern
sex/gender
to
identifying
in To
that
there in
he/she/sie
are
identity
without
where
to
describe
constructs
another
of
articulated,
one
such
it
identity
objection.
137
researchers 4 ’
resilient,
cultural
are
her
the
others.
assert
and
fact
whose
is
the
products
labels
construction
to
is
lives appropriate the
somehow
having of are
suspicion, sex/gender
human
could
in
maligned
something
that
the
must
even
person
at
mediation.
what
identity
person, of
themselves,
that
are
possibility
autobiographies,
that
trans
will
relayed
stories
It
stake.
identity
signs.
and
such
it
a
as that overall
I
the
of
especially
may
pre-cultural,
have
our
sex is
the
derive
the
a
be a
determines
the
brain
some to
child
and
narratives.
inaccurate
a
language condition
transcen
“woman”
as
let
Further,
it
forms
exposed are
cultural prior to
defy
cultural
identity
cultural
well
feel
of
without
identity
child
argued
proper
picture
would
“man”
is
alone
wear.
of
many
from
trans
prior
with
they
fact now
im
she
the
be
by
an
to
of is
condense term.
gender “cissexual”
5.
people
in
to
discuss to
as wise. dividuals or
or 4.Throughout gender”
of changes
feel happily
are
between characteristics
3. 2. Butler
(1976), Notes
1.
come of
ences. challenges
candidate ated
depends correct, ity.
not
a
“Cisgender”
refer
order “genderqueer.”
identify “simply”
who
transition
I For
For
whole
easily
personal
they
will
Many
The
belong)
and
access.
is
similarities the
specifically
to
(1993, a
aspires
to
to take Listening Parfit
to
the
on
who
use few
ought “sex”
to blurred. characterize
of presumptive group
cross-dressers include
as
most
on their
“men”
obtain
of the
whole
for
parallel
of
on
identity the and
they
influential
almost have
However,
this
1999).
is
(1984)
is
these
and
metaphysical
and
to
personal
to
“same authenticity
influential
sex
the
authentic.
However, a
of term or
undergo identity
Some
between paper
medical
have,
all to
see
designation
undergone “gender.”
“gender”
synonym
to
andlor people
“women,” people gender
my
those
possibilities.
everybody—with and
and
fit, trans
side”
“sexJgender”
feminist
while
trans authenticity
contributions I use
will
the
identity
will
this Ricoeur
in
I challenge
a
recent
gender.
who
approval
a
I
(the identify (let
attributes
also to
of
While
people
sex/gender
because variety
also sex/gender for
facts reply
the
people
use
other
a
more
to
not
social
“sex/gender”
sex/gender
alone
seek
want
term
and
“non-trans,”
“cis,”
be
trans
formulation
“trans”
while
(1992).
Since
as
unequivocally
to
“sex”
throughout
trans
expansive themselves
for of can
mentioned feel
a ones,
critical
the
of
trans to
is it
normally
of which
a
the
diagnosis
people.
community,
borrowed transition, seems
whole sex
include, ringing
trans
to
there
that respect
is
enrich
the identity
dogmatic
people
way
in
refer
usually
transition
at
throughout
reassignment
last
discourse.
the
they
we
meaning of
all. is
use 1
1
people—and,
to
group
in
as associated
the use
to
use
so
with
of
feminist philosophers’
true
seek
several
case
to While
of may negotiate
from the are
“transgender,”
that
of
anyone
whether
taken
much
Gender “trans”
anti-essentialism I
paper
“transsexual”
their
trans “trans”
and all
use
various to
in of
discussion of
I never
someone
chemistry).
(see
due
the
decades,
people’s trans
have
I people
diversity
to anti-essentialism,
the
now
surgery
who
instead
with
sex/gender
as people
respect
Identity surgical
refer
“wrong”
will
respect, the
note
an
combinations
if shorthand
have
people
no
see
has
understanding
the
independent
my
philosophical to
“transsexual”
to
allow
on see whose
lived to
4)
such
in
of
themselves is
Intersexed
their
undergone
which
follow. I
body
unadulter
Disorder
or
biological
analysis
occasion those
but
body
the a
Williams
choosing
include
the
that
striking
identity
other
me
experi
author
right types
also
sex! “sex!
lines they
and in
I
to
has
see
of
do is
from acter
16. consciousness. The as
we
vast
15.
14.1 nouns.
scribe 13.
12. chapter.
what me
narratives pectations
11. thenticity”
selves
attempt “basic
in
10.
9. See
others legal
self-reflexive
thenticity” ity
8. 7. people.
(indeed, the principles,
a
their
Scott-Dixon
6.
distinguish
in
“We
For The homophobia
caveat “HI? lie Krista
and See majority Complicating
being-for-itself Talia
or
do
Feminism
...
Sreedhar
advocacy
Sartre’s they
individuals or
to Some,
off
core
andlor an
denial differences.
not
controversy
sometimes
shall
Bettcher
attempt
to
oneself
medical is
Mae “on
argument
as
Scott-Dixon
that
require)
tell
of
that assume
“pass”
essence
the
(2006:
I
of
willingly
something
but
psychiatrists
case,
the condition” one!
of
mean
a
and
themselves,
2Q06),
of
trans
Bettcher
action
and
possessive
is
set
or
to by
(2009). becomes
authenticity”
women’s lie
authenticity
being
who are
for
Hand
the regard
that When even
advocacy
address of
but
19). over
no
am
trans
to
to that
people
and
regarded
is
grant my
legal
identity
means
this
oneself
are
notes
interested
all rather
“punished” This
probably Authenticity
fear [they]
argues
ends
the
(2006).
I
their
activism
in
based
account
strictly
rights I
of action
I
want
effect, not
the and
tell
that
say
thank
attempting
of
Michigan
for
is that
a
all,
up the
from
of is
self-identified are
third gender revealed
as
that comfbrtable concern
an others
that
on
regulatory
bad
my
the as
performing
merely trans
is
neither. trans
“Trans see impossible
in. “deceivers,”
state is
not” Rachel
have
appropriate in either
a
such,
lying
and
violence
account
That faith gender
rights the I fiction
Bialystok
transphobic people
about non-conformity
want
Wornyn’s
people
of (2006:
Trans
to
in
more
a
a
fact and
people
in
authentic
trans
is radical
McKinnon tortured
marker reconcile
authenticity
documents
of
of general”
a with
pronoun my
of their against
a
within
for
that Identity
at
sex/gender,
as
lie
fully
a differently
lot
204).
(2006:
use
(2011),
people
trans
some
“true”
often
“people theory
my
to Music freedom
either of violence,
identities
this of
of
relationship in
or
oneself,
them
feminism the
(Sartre It
work
trans
1139
the
identity
point
that require 204).
inauthentic.
transsexual—shapes
for the authenticity
require very
is
per
..
is
to
Festival
total
trying
male
to
suspicion
this
bodied I
not
pointing
in final
people
that
can
square
se,
am
prefer
on situation—the vouch
1984 Trans
and
Sartre’s
people
translucency
perceived
a but to
evidence
to or
not condition be
is
section
to
unique
(Whittle
is
possibly
leave
leave inseparable [1943):
and female
is
these
rather with
used
pass
In people
for glossing an
but
with
this
rooted
analysis, in
fact,
example.
gendered
their
room
room
of
feminist
labels. to [them] char not
author of
out “inau
which
in
that pro
87), even who
the
2006;
this their
de the
of
ex
not
the over
au the
to
for for
lence
conforming,
“passing”)
28.
a
not
and
tic)
[1979]),
ing
stereotypical
27.
Bradley
identity
avoid
by
dent
different
26.
25.
name 24.
alize
23.
Warnke
22.
authenticity.
when sex/gender
name
Presumably
scope
21.
single people
to
20.
was
women
(2010:
act psychologists as
MOglichkeit,
19.
Even
and
18.
The and
convergence
See
For
Forexamples
Jennifer
undergo
on
It
well.
transsexualism
their Transition
out
for Sex/gender
Heidegger
a
this
persecution,
(1995).
Guignon
and
Gilbert
likelihood the
is of
is the
through example,
event
sex/gender.
form
if
never
(2009). 49).
me.
the important
possible.
even
(as transition
felt
See,
does
trans
preferred
age trans
caricatures
than
life-changing
I
Boylan
sex/gender
these
charged
but
of
sex/gender,
complete.
1996
prior know
(2006).
at
between
e.g.,
such
not
is,
appropriate (2008).
conformity.
Gigi
people,
describes
person
of
transition
what evolves,
which
of
Of
of
which
suicide
the
show
to [1927]:
to
made.
and
sex/gender
Heyes
who
pronoun
as
and
course,
course,
by
Raven
of
note
transition,
he/she/sie
lengths
Ken
one’s
intervention The
one
asks
autnenucity
after
some come
that their
and stepwise,
see
could Raymond
authenticity
I
procedures
attempts
has
(2009: 287).
that
What
know was
Zucker
Wilbur
implication
intervention
a
for
Meyerowitz
self
the
what
upon
their
transitioning,
process,
feminists—see
been
new
to
that
identity
also
my
anyone
assigned
and
there world
identify
previously
of
along
136);
is
I
transition
transitioning.
trans
sex/gender,
contribute
described
argument
mostly Thompson
and
am”
says,
begins.
deny
external
one
conformist
to
as
often
is
being
recognized
to
John
is
conform with
(2006:
Meyerowitz
people
Dasein’s
an
(2006).
MTF “I
at
at
with
this,
that
identify
occur
birth am
The exceptionally
seem
years
a
was,
itself
norms
Garber
sex/gender
influenced in
Money
is
to
young
locating authenticity
even
70).
use
who
his/her
who
have
not
terms
controversial
in
As
suicide
to before “ownmost
regardless
there
in
to
(their
as
him/her/hir our
very
See
or
one’s
long
contingent
to I
the
changed
gone
conform
[1992]
trans
(2006: holds
age.
am,
of
virtues.
the
society
assigned
authenticity
is
also
flll becoming
attempts.
seems making,
transition.
authenticity similar
as
high
associations
to
an
even
See
or
is point
there
of possibility”
that
Chase
transition
and
in
363);
gender view not
opportunity
nothing
See
felt
risk
to
is
to
Zucker
a on
if
as
a
phrases.
sex/gender
Raymond
bid
and
is
achieved
to of
be there the
Taylor
identity,
child
authen espoused the
of
a
McLachlan
(2006).
a
instead
accept
mock
depen
non
to
different
elsewhere
moment
vio
for
with
most
but
kind
(or
(eigenste
is
actu
and
can
(1991)
some
See
no
for her
in
in or
a a
race
(2006: 50).
35.
tives
held
transition
How
skeptic
34.
compares
overlook
assumptions.
are
to
from 33.
32.
people. penis.
bivalent
women,
tiofls
31.
to
natural
fort
nostic
30.
Goldberg and
both
cluded
ies of
29.
and
74 the
Trans
them
no
male-to-females
She
so
Ironically, See,
This
follow-up
published
This
change
Spade
“Persistent
aspirations”
to
or
early
surgical
oppressive
can
1991
of
MTFs
gender
315).
A
offended
criteria
claims
might ambivalence
seems
that
gender
e.g.,
femininity
type
for
about
is
desire
writers
the
at
they
are
sex/gender
jokes
1960s.
2006:4).
not
(1000-1600
(Heyes
Analogies
birth
in
example,
hugely
Bornstein
and
not
care
of
trouble
of
trans
since
persist:
to studies
he
this
for
having to
in
for
regret
by
sex/gender
movement
have (Overall
about being
take
explained?
The
necessarily
FTMs
which
on
suggest
fcr
GID
a
the 30
2009;
people
such
1991
subversive
(MTFs)
about
different
or
the
made
and
transition it
Where individuals
among
year
most
have
might
a
a
“a
apparent Authenticity
(1994).
for
MTF
exploration”
vagina [Gender
thin
normal,
as
that
2009:
Appiah
have
small-nosed
basis
that
8
their
period,
are
granted
also
norms:
occurs
other
reviews
make-up comprehensive
Again,
different
experienced
woman be
post-operative
is
do
sexual
cis
and
step reported
at
of
been
23).
and
sex/gender
likely
ambivalent
are
reinforcement
non-transsexual
the
the
bodily
undergoing
Identity
1997). people
<1%
genitalia.
less
they
400-550
and
trans
my of
that
philosophically
feel
(2006:
morphology
drawn
trapped
forefront
aspirations
and
in
due
outcome
woman
frequently
of
Trans
point
vehemently
a
the
analogies.
kind
as
people
never
persistent
decrease
female—to-males
high
to
Disorder]
identity
though
ineta-review
321).
between
“lifelong
about
transsexuals
Some
FTM
Identity
improved
is
inside
from
sex
trapped
of
experience
heels,
studies
of
that
take
of
people
vis-à-vis
is
trying reassignment”
the
in
Hale
embracing
other
feminists
regret
they patients).
As
reject
trans characteristic
a
aspirations
unproblematic:
1141
sex/gender
in
the
produces
very
aspirations”
fat
gender
published
in
Spade
challenging
quality
compares
grow
really
to
done
woman’s
incidence
has
deeply
persons
the
a following
few
uncertaint)
sex.
(FTMs)
liberate
large-nosed
been
The
and
identity
notes,
binary
up
various
to
women
ought
Although
of
[sic]
for
transition
felt
(Bowman
with
between
date
to
psychological
only
body
come
other
trans
authors
studied
of
sex/gender
sex/gender themselves
and
a
SRS.
which
“The
and
“Still,
that
to
fiction
regret
assigned
expecta
minimal
analyzed
discom
are
of
(2009:
narra
1-1.5%
have
body”
from?
critics
long—
many
Stud
trans diag
they
and
since
1961
am
con
she
the
and
for
of a
Yoric
Bornstein,
Phi
Bialystok,
Oxford Sex
Bettcher, ual 10.
Appiah,
ness, References
(2006). ducted
41. e.g., (Mason-Schrock
this to
servation 40.
gender (Johnson
mize
als ties
adhere 39.
38. woman”
fIhada a
is
37.
masquerade den
entirely than
36.
losophical
find man,
Ed. Violence.
busy
Reassignment
For
desiring
Overall
Dflèrence,
“What
Similarly, information Routledge.
Morris they
McLachlan
She
their and choice:
University
Krista
by
theoretical biographical 2009.
Anthony. transitions
to
he
transitioning
Talia Lauren.
hope a (2010:
Kate.
that
explicitly
choice”
trans-positive and
imposed”
narrow
matter
claims
transition
Papers
the
is
(1997
In surgery
Scott-Dixon.
Trans hypothesis
“That
Mae.
very it
Repta
trans
and
to 1994.
trans
TrandForming
has 39). (McLachlan
says, into
and
2011.
achieve
1996:
Press. 1997.
that
of
40
discussions,
sex
Interplay,
[1974]) that
influenced
2006.
acknowledges
Identities
does evidence
(Overall
people
also
conform
choice, The
2012:
individual
Gender
(2):
physically
...
Personal a
regarding
and
he
Ref story
But
176-77,
the
do
researchers,
rather
been
participant not
207-31.
through
has
Understanding
gender
Toronto:
iting
not
33). and
“learn, medical
Would
for
75-82.
Outlaw:
mean, that
of
2009:
2010: not
to and
see, by noted
Identity,
Feminisms:
produce
the
than
cares to
Bornstein
qtd.
a
one
strict
Polonius:
this
chosen
differently
leads
binaries
surgery:
e.g.,
being
that
First-Person
from
That
aspiration however,
Ed. 21).
39; system
in Sumach
of her
see,
that said,
On
about
concern.
heteronormative
Prosser
Overall
her sex/gender
emphasis inexorably
98-120.
Naomi
normative
This
others
Still a
own Men,
e.g.,
this
Transphobia:
candidates
UI
Transfeminist
man “Often
in
(1994);
Sincerity,
study
restricts
is
think,
gendered
that
Press. Be
concession as describing
McLachlan alternative.
may
authenticity”
Women,
(2006);
She
and 2009:
in
Zack.
Authority.
he
Me?
Ed.
participants,
their
added). the
transgendered well
for to I
would transition sexed
experiences
cites
individuals’
wouldn’t
Authenticity,
for
Laurie
the 24). In
New
and
transgender
for
‘true qualitative
aspiration be
Authenticity
roles
Voices
Race/Sex:
sex
the
Mason-Schrock’s
seems
and
identity
autobiographies,
have
experienced
(2010);
the
In
Yoric
(Overall
self’
reassignment
bodies
Shrage. in
Rest gendered
may want
You’ve Speak
“Even
preferred himself
ability
to
order
and
Routledge.
[sic]
to
studies ‘transsexual”
Meyerowitz
Zheir
of and
communit) involve reinforce
to
andidenti
transition
Out,
2009:
to
Changed:
and
Us.
though
Oxford:
individu
to
be
as
to
Shtick.
fashion
as
bodies” Same New
203-
to legiti
unbid
Sex
a
make
con
being
must
19).
more
see,
man
ob—
be
the
he
is a Authenticity and Trans Identity 143
Bowman, Cameron and Joshua Goldberg. 2006. Care of the Patient Under going Sex Reassignment Surgery (SRS). VancouverCoastal 1-lea/tb,Transcend TransgenderSupport& Education Societyand the Canadian Rainbow Health Co alition. htp://transhea1th.vch.caJresources/1ibrary/tcpdocs/guidelines-surgery pdf (accessedJanuary 1,2012). Butler,Judith. 1993. BodiesThatMatter: On the DiscursiveLimits of uSex“New York:Routledge. 1999. Gender Trouble:Feminism and the Subversionof Identity. New York:Roudedge. Chase,Cheryl.2006.Hermaphrodites with Attitude: Mapping the Emergence of Intersex PoliticalActivism.In TheTransgenderStudiesReader, 300-14. Ed. Susan Stryker and StephenWhittle. New York:Routledge. Fuss, Diana. 1989. Essentially Speaking:Feminism,Nature and Difference.New York:Routledge. Garber, Marjorie. 1992. VestedInterests: Cross-Dressingand Cultural Anxiety. New York:Routledge. Gilbert, Miqqi Alicia. 2006. The Feminist Cross-Dresser. In Trans/For7ning Feminisms:TransfeministVoicesSpeakOut, 105-11. Ed. KristaScott-Dixon.To ronto: SumachPress. Green, Jarnison. 2006. Look! No, Don’t!The Visibility Dilemma for Trans sexualMen. In TheTransgenderStudiesReader,499-508. Ed. Susan Stryker and Stephen Whittle. New York:Routledge.
Guignon, Charles.2008.Authenticity PhilosophyCompass3 (2):277-90. Hale, C. Jacob. 2009. Tracing a Ghostly Memory in My Throat: Reflections on Ftm Feminist Voice and Agency. In You’veChanged:SexReassignmentand Persona/Identity,43-65. Ed. Laurie Shrage.Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Hardie, Alaina.2006. It’s a Long Way to the Top: Hierarchies of Legitimacy in Trans Communities. In Trans/FormingFeminisms:TransfeministVoicesSpeak Out, 122-30.Ed. Krista Scott-Dixon.Toronto: Sumach Press. Heidegger,Martin. 1996 [1927]. Beingand Time.Trans.Joan Stambaugh.Al bany:SUNY Press. Heyes, Cressida. 2009. Changing Race, Changing Sex:The Ethics of Self- Transformation. In You’veChanged: Sex Reassignment and Personal Identity, 135-54.Ed. Laurie Shrage.Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress. Johnson,Joy L. and Robin Repta.2012. Sexand Gender: Beyondthe Binaries. in Designingand ConductingGender,Sexand Health Research,17-37. Ed. John Oliffe and Lorraine Greaves.Los Angeles:Sage Publications. Mason-Schrock, Douglas. 1996.Transsexuals’Narrative Constructions of the “True Self” SocialPsychologyQuarterly59 (3): 176-92.
feminist
Sumach
nisms: and
Sreedhar,
32.
Press.
Spade,
New
Scott-Dixon,
482-98.
Sartre,
Rubin,
January
Susan mond’s
Riddell,
Ricoeur,
Boston:
Raymond,
formity
.caJ—ramsay/gender-nonconformity-gay-transgender-suicide.htm Ramsay,
Prosser,
Stryker substantiation
Parfit,
Laurie
rations.
Overall,
cialized
Morris,Jan.
mist Noble,
Routledge. Meyerowitz,
University
der
tive
McLachlan,
Ed.
Politics
Studies
York.
Experience
Transfeminist
Voices
Stryker
Dean.
Jean-Paul.
Henry.
Susan Derek.
Shrage.
Press.
The
Bobby.
Ed.
Beacon
Jay.
Voices and
1,2012).
and
In
Carol.
Paul.
Class
Richard.
Susanne
Christine.
Washington
Janice.
at Speak
Reader,
TranssexualEmpire.
You’ve
of
Susan
2006.
Stephen
2006. Transgender
1997
Krista.
Stryker
Joanne.
Christine.
the
2006.
1992.
and
Speak
1984.
KwaZulu-Natal.
Politics
2006.
of
2006.
Oxford:
Press.
Out,
Michigan
of
and
Judith
1984
2012.
Sex.
Changed:
1979.
Stephen
Stryker
[1974].
Mutilating
362-86.
Voices
The
Reasons
2009.
Oneself
the
2006.
Out,
Our
Whittle.
and
2006.
Divided
95-104.
Ivlichael
of
In
Square.
2010.
Oxford
[1943].
Logic
“Attempting
Development
Speak The
Embodiment.
Butler:
Bodies
Stephen
Issues.
11-33.
and
Conundrum.
The
Introduction. Sex/Gender
Whittle.
Ed.
as
A
Womyn’s
Sex
and
Transsexual
Another.
Queering
“Fierce
Gender.
New
Ed.
of
Transgender
Stephen
Sisterhood:
Out,
Hand.
In
Susan
Reassignment
University
Being
Persons.
Queer
Treatment.
Are
Ed.
University
Whittle.
Krista
The
York:
161-69.
New
Music Not
Suicide”
and
2006.
Stryker
Krista
Transgender
and
In Chicago:
of
London:
In
Transitions
Whittle.
Feminism,
Gender:
Oxford:
Empire:
In
Scott-Dixon.
Routledge.
York.
The
a
Ourselves:
Demanding”
Trans/Forming
Press.
Nothingness.
A
Studies
New
Transgender
Ed. ‘The
Trans/Forming
Festival.
In
of
Scott-Dixon.
Transgender
and
Critical and
as
Calgary.
The
Routledge.
University
Krista
Penguin.
Ethics
New
An
York:
Oxford
Related
The
Personal
Stephen
Studies
Reader, Transgender,
Transgender
and
Exploration
Tranny
In
Making
York.
Toronto:
Review
Scott-Dixon.
Routledge.
Drive.
of
Trans.
http://people.ucalgary
Trans/Forming
Life-Changing
University
1dentity
Feminisms:
Studies
to
Reader,
Excluion:
Identity,
257-80.
Whittle.
of
Toronto:
Feminisms:
Routledge.
Gender
Guys
Chicago
of
In
of
Hazel
Studies
Sumach
and
the
Reader,
of
The
Janice
144-58.
MSS
and
the
Ed. 11-27.
Press.
She-Male. New
Toronto:
Transfem
the
(accessed Noncon
Transgen
Sumach
Gender
Barnes.
Reader,
Press.
Trans
the
Femi
Subjec
Thesis,
Susan
Tran
315-
Aspi
Press.
Ray
York:
Ed.
Ra Ed.
Problems Zucker,
Wiffiams, sity
tuality Krista Wilbur,
Theory Whittle,
194-202.
Warnke, Oxford:
Changed: University Taylor,
Press.
Scott-Dixon.
In
Ken
—
Gigi
Charles.
in
Oxford
Ed.
Stephen.
Georgia.
Bernard. Two
Trans/Forming
Sex
Children
Press.
and
Raven.
Susan
Reassignment
Teams
Susan
University
1991.
2006.
1976. 2009.
Toronto:
and
Stryker
2006.
on Bradley. Authenticity
Adolescents.
The
Feminisms:
Problems
Where Transsexuality
the
Walking
Press. and
and Ethics
Sumach
Same
1995.
Stephen
Personal
Did
of
and
of
New
in
Transfeminist
the Side?
Gender
Authenticity.
Press.
Trans
We
the
Self
York:
and
Whittle.
Identity,
Shadows:
In
Go
Identity
Ident
Cambridge:
Contextual
The
Guilford
Wrong?
ity
Voices New
Transgender
28-42.
Cambridge,
Disorder
Third
145
York:
Speak
Press.
Feminism
Cambridge
Identities.
Ed.
Gender
and
Routledge.
Out,
Laurie
Studies
MA:
Psychosexual
65-71.
and
and
In
Univer
Harvard
Reader,
Shrage.
Spin
Trans
You’ve Ed.