source:Wikipedia |
He was the teacher's pet. I was the teacher and he was my
pet. Why did I favor him? He had a sixth finger on each hand. That made him
stand out. But he was my pet because he was dyslexic. I didn't praise him more
than I praised other students, I didn't give him presents, I just took extra
time to teach him to read. I did this because I myself am dyslexic. One day he
gave me a marble. That was astounding – we were in Nepal, one of the poorest
countries on earth. He probably owned just the clothes on his back, canvas
sneakers, and this marble, and he gave it to me.
I still have that marble. For years I carried it in my
backpack. When that backpack died, I placed the marble in a clear glass
container I keep on top of my refrigerator. I never want to forget that
student, though I don't even remember his name.
He died in spring of diarrhea. The monsoon starts in
spring. People have been defecating in out-of-the-way places all winter. The
rains wash a mass of fecal matter into water supplies, and people always die in
spring with the onset of the rains.
"Globally, an estimated 2,000 children under the age
of five die every day from diarrheal diseases," UNICEF reported in 2013.
I left Nepal decades ago but it's with me today. I think
of Nepal and the recent earthquakes. I think of some of the kindest and most
beautiful, inside and out, people I've ever met. I think of victims crushed and
helpless and very far from help.
When I was a Peace Corps teacher in the Central African
Republic, I used to buy my peanut butter in an open-air market. African women
made the peanut butter by crushing their harvest of peanuts on smooth rocks
with old cans.
I bought my peanut butter from one lady who was about my
age – 21 – and who always had a baby tied to her hip with a piece of cloth.
I tried to converse with her in French and Sango, the
lingua franca. Her native tongue was a tribal language, neither French nor
Sango.
I learned through these stop-and-go conversations that
this woman had lost two previous children to scabies. Scabies are mites that
burrow under the skin. The scabies themselves don't cause death. The children
have dirty fingernails. They scratch at the scabies bites. The scratches become
infected. The children die.
This new child also had scabies.
I had no medication. I jumped on trucks; I traveled to a
couple of distant towns. I talked to snotty American aid workers who didn't want
to help because they thought I was asking for myself. I made it clear that I
was asking for an African woman and finally I got my hands on my some
medication, brought it back, gave it to my peanut butter lady, and demonstrated
through sign language, French and Sango how to use it.
She was so grateful she gave me a chicken and never
allowed me to pay for peanut butter again.
I think of the Central African Republic, where two years
ago Muslims began a genocide of Christians, and Christians retaliated with a
genocide against Muslims, and the world looked on and watched.
I think that this is a beautiful ideal: "From each
according to his ability; to each according to his need."
I think about the unequal distribution of resources every
day. Once you've watched a child starve, I can't imagine that you wouldn't
think about these things as I do.
I don't say anything, but when someone tells me that he
or she just spent some ridiculous sum on some ridiculous toy, I scream inside.
I once had a boyfriend who thought it made sense to spend
a thousand dollars on a pool cue. We fought over this. That relationship died.
I'm thinking about all this this morning because the
other day Dr. Anne G Myles, who teaches at the University of Northern Iowa, and
who received her own degrees from Bryn Mawr and the University of Chicago –
very elite schools – called me an "utterly selfish and mean-spirited asshole
on the wrong side of history and justice."
She and I have never met. We were not engaged in a
conversation. She read something I wrote about Caitlyn Jenner. You can read
that essay here.
What I said was that switching pronouns for transgender people is not a good
idea. And the good professor, rather than address me with any respect, rather
than discuss the ideas at hand, snapped at me as if I were her cleaning woman.
I googled "transgender pronouns" and on the
first page of results I found a page saying that "cis gender" people
should "shut the fuck up." See that page here.
So, no, we aren't supposed to discuss the fact that we
are being asked to change how we use language to accommodate less than one
percent of the population that identifies as transgender. We must go along. If
we do not, if we think and speak, in however courteous and responsible a way
about this societal development, people in power will immediately label us "assholes,"
and tell us to "shut the fuck up."
We have a right to think and speak. If we redefine "woman"
to mean "someone who has cleavage and wears spike-heeled shoes" and
appears on the cover of Vanity Fair,
non-traditional females like me, who have never owned spike-heeled shoes, or
who have had breasts, wombs, and other feminine body parts removed because of
cancer, or who are not Vanity Fair
cover model material, will be defined as not female – which of course is the
fate we suffered under the Feminine
Mystique. We worked for decades to say that a woman in a flannel shirt is
still a woman, that a woman engineer or mathematician is still a woman, that a
woman who isn't pretty is still a woman. The Anne G Myleses of the world want
us to change that, and not talk about it before we change it. We have a right
to talk about this because it is our language, and our jobs if speech codes
come to apply in the workplace, and our money. Obamacare pays for sex change
surgery.
People are demanding that I change what pronoun I use, and
that is why I am suddenly aware of Bruce Jenner / Caitlyn Jenner, someone I otherwise
never thought about. I do not have a TV and I have not watched "Keeping up
with the Kardashians" and I just now required both Google and Wikipedia to
discover the name of the show.
I care about language because I speak. I care about what
society says about gender because I'm a woman who has always been given a hard
time because I am what used to be called a tomboy – I'm taller than average, I've
never been pretty, I don't wear makeup, I spend my free time in the woods, and
I unscrew my own jars. At the same time, I am bad with math, machinery and
computers and I really do need a man to rescue me at least once a month, and
men are generally kind enough to do so.
I like that feminism encouraged society to embrace and
support tomboys like me. I lived in Poland and while there I felt societal
pressure to be more feminine than I am and I hated it. So, yes, this all
matters to me. When people in power like Anne G Myles insist that we have to
define "woman" as "someone fluffy and feminine and
self-trivializing" I see society take giant leaps backward and I don't
want to go along.
So, yes, I have been reading about Caitlyn Jenner.
Here's a little Caitlyn Jenner fact that very few people
are talking about: cost.
Some say the new face cost $70,000. Some say the complete
transition cost four million dollars.
I have no idea if any of those numbers are correct.
In any case, Caitlyn's appearance is not cheap.
In a Facebook conversation, one poster said that Caitlyn
was a great role model for seven-year-old transgender children.
I'm not supposed to question that, because if I do
question that, the gender gestapo will descend.
I'm questioning it anyway.
Is a four million dollar transformation really a role
model for a seven-year-old child? Or an adult who identifies as transgender?
According to the Movement Advancement Project, transgender people are
disproportionately very poor. Is dangling an unattainable, multi-million-dollar
makeover in front of them a responsible thing to do? Even basic gender
reassignment surgeries, without all the refinements Jenner enjoys, can costs tens
of thousands of dollars.
Can we talk about this allotment of resources? Or if we
do will we be arrested and thrown into Politically Correct thought crime jail?
The Daily Beast published "Obamacare Now Pays for
Gender Reassignment" on August 25, 2014. You can read it here.
In it, forty-something Devin Payne said that he felt
uncomfortable in the role of husband to his wife and provider to his four
children. "I was just horrible at it because it wasn't who I was." "He
felt increasingly anxious, and in late 2012, a therapist helped him to realize
that he was meant to live as a woman. Payne said his entire outlook on life
changed when he started taking female hormones."
Taxpayers footed the bill.
It is not established science that gender reassignment
surgery is the only course to health for some people. On June 12, 2014, Johns
Hopkins psychiatrist-in-chief Paul McHugh argued that gender reassignment
surgery is so questionable that Johns Hopkins, "the first American medical
center to venture into 'sex-reassignment surgery'" "launched a study
in the 1970s comparing the outcomes of transgendered people who had the surgery
with the outcomes of those who did not." On the basis of that study, they
stopped doing gender reassignment surgery. You can read his account in the June
12, 2014 Wall Street Journal here.
On July 30, 2004, The
Guardian, a liberal publication, wrote "There is no conclusive
evidence that sex change operations improve the lives of transsexuals, with
many people remaining severely distressed and even suicidal after the
operation, according to a medical review conducted exclusively for Guardian
Weekend tomorrow."
On November 11, 2014, The
Federalist published "Trouble in Transtopia: Murmurs Of Sex Change
Regret: Transgender People Who Regret Their Sex Changes Typically Get Buried in
Venom Rather Than Loved."
The article contains sobering testimonies from those who
regret having had gender reassignment surgery, including this one, "What's
scary is you still feel like you have a penis when you're sexually aroused. It's
like phantom limb syndrome. It's all been a terrible misadventure. I've never
been a woman, just Alan . . . the analogy I use about giving surgery to someone
desperate to change sex is it's a bit like offering liposuction to an anorexic."
And this, "I get a lot of letters from people who
are considering having this operation…and I discourage them all."
The cost, way out of the range of what most can afford.
The reports of regret. The lack of established science. The demand to change
language, and to change the definition of woman back to the feminine mystique
version.
We need to talk about this. And we need to respectfully
overcome those who would shout us down.
I think that this is a beautiful ideal: "From each according to his ability; to each according to his need."
ReplyDeleteI do not agree, ma'am. That's a sinister ideal. Who will say what are his abilities, what are his needs? I'll tell you who, ma'am. The same people in position of power telling you what you can and cannot say about that glamorous Frankenstein with whom almost everybody is in rapturous love right now. The intellectual elite.
"[She] snapped at me as if I were her cleaning woman." That is an unfortunate analogy. We don't snap at the service. Is called mannerliness.
Cristina, "from each..." etc doesn't work if it is forced. It can be voluntary and often is. Someone dies; neighbors bring over a casserole. It's a beautiful thing.
DeleteI'm glad you don't snap at your workers. I have been a cleaning woman and it isn't always so nice.
The ideal we are talking about is the distributive principle of communism. What you described is charity.
ReplyDeleteThere is no voluntary giving to each according to his needs, etc. We give him, materially and otherwise, as a help not as a solution to his plight. We do not give him as much as he needs. We never do, or could do, it according to his needs. Much less so according to his capacities.
I have been in the receiving end of some snapping several times. No, it's not nice.