Offensive to Trans Individuals? - Transamerica (2006) Discussion

[–] bliss_s 18 years ago

I've found that many gay men (which might include drag queens) and people that
self-identify as "transgender" (as opposed to folks that are driven to change
their sex) dislike the movie because a woman plays the part of a woman in
transition. They frequently seek a more profound political statement at the
expense of both good movie making and the people that suffer from transsexualism.
I've also noticed that people who have transitioned at a very young age may
have little empathy for a mid-life transitioner like Bree.

You might ask your friend what it is specifically that they found
"very offensive"? As a point of reference, most of the post-transition women
I've talked to liked the movie.

I ride the tempest, tame the waves...I will not resign myself to the usual lot of women

reply

[–] hollyvolley 18 years ago

"genderqueer"? Never heard that one- kinda caters to the revival of the term "queer" doesn't it? I find this offensive- Blacks can call themselves that derogatory word and laugh about it because, they have a support and peer group- transgendered people are very very very fewer in number than most minorities. In fact that alone seems to incourage a lot of hatred,, from people who just seem to have a real need to hate, and can still get away with hating us, with very little social stigma- and unfortunately, in some circles, positive reinforcement

As an older change, I have noticed a little condecension from younger changes, who have no real grasp of the history and struggles before them, or much exposure yet to the ongoing juvenile nastiness. (The youngrer the better though, because the better one "passes", the less hassle one will see.)

Let's face it, breaking out of the supressed gender-cartoon mold can make one giddy- especially in this repressed condition- so I forgive them anyway. Try not to do anything stupid girls. We have a reputation to uphold!

God in heaven, God above, be a God of truth and love

reply

[–] Violet_Loves_Iliona 18 years ago

Here, here! :)

I am a woman of transsexual background (absolutely not a "genderqueer", as written above). I watched this film with my best friend, who I have been friends with since high school and who happens to be a cisgender woman, or "genetic woman", as some people put it. We both found the film to be very entertaining, and I found that it described much of my own experiences and feelings, albeit looking back on many of them. I had my genital reconstruction surgery in 1998 (when I was in second year at University) and transitioned (began living full-time as a woman) in my last year of high school, so there were some significant differences between my experience and the story of Bree, and indeed I went through hell and back dealing with the heavily lesbian-feminist dominated University academia, who treated me so unbelievably disrespectfully and said things that would have had them censured if they had said it about any other minority group. I also am bisexual and have experienced such intense narrow-mindedness from the gay & lesbian community, which are two things that were not dealt with in this film.

At the same time I have encountered amazing acceptance and support from people, and have friendships and romantic relationships with people who have been able to accept my past, and then look beyond it, so the scene with the Native American character really spoke to me.

In Australia the minimum age to have the surgery is 21, and I had to meet with psychologists and psychiatrists who have to sign off that one is indeed suffering from transsexualism before one can have the surgery, and because I was so young (comparatively - I started seeing them when I was 19 and had the surgery around six or seven months after turning 21) so they really challenged me to be absolutely sure about me before writing their letters, so the scene with Bree talking to the psychiatrist really resonated with me - though I never would have spoken to any of the psychiatrists or psychologists so forcefully! :)

In any case, basically what I am saying is that, far from finding the film offensive in any way, shape or form, I found it to be honest, educative and, you know what? I also found it really quite empowering, too.

I am very grateful that this film was made, and I feel that, after watching it, many people will be more likely to understand what life is like for women of transsexual background like me and for women still going through transition like Bree's character. This film really spoke to me. :)

Siobhan

Watching TV shows doesn't create psycho killers... CANCELLING TV shows creates psycho killers!

reply

[–] bayphatt 16 years ago

"dislike the movie because a woman plays the part of a woman in
transition."

Yeah I heard that one before, it's stupid. Transsexual women are women and transsexual men are men - so who cares who plays the part. I'm Trans* myself and I'm sick and tired of the Trans* community always wanting to make a profound political statement, I call them the T PC police. Also I'm a mid-life transitioner (FtM) and in my expereince most people who have transitioned at a very young age (both FtM and MtF) DO have little empathy for mid-life transitioners.

reply

[–] elizabethveldon 16 years ago

Yeah I heard that one before, it's stupid. Transsexual women are women and transsexual men are men - so who cares who plays the part.

but I think it' safe to say that we as a group have a back story all our own which isn't represented by Non-'trans' people playing us.

You state (and I see this on this board alot) that Young 'Trans' people have no respect for their 'Elders.' I find that Older 'Trans' people have no respect for younger ones.

reply

[–] BugisStreetAnnie 16 years ago

Actually, I think "bayphatt" is probably correct: that transsexuals that make the transition at a young age have little sympathy for those who made the transition later in life. I'm a M2F and started the transition in my late teens, and I've NEVER understood (or empathized) with M2F's who made the change after living for years as heterosexual males. Especially their constant badmouthing of their ex-wives!! I feel so bad for the ex-wives who didn't ask for their lives to be destroyed this way. Then these TS/ex-husbands telling me their ex only married them looking for a "cash cow". Uhmm... even if this is true, it isn't like they weren't also "using" her to cover their gender confusion, then the nerve of trying to make a convincing argument of what a bad choice she was.

reply

[–] elizabethveldon 16 years ago

I've NEVER understood (or empathized) with M2F's who made the change after living for years as heterosexual males. Especially their constant badmouthing of their ex-wives!!

a bit strong but I know what you mean.

There's alot of gender stereotyping amongst older MTF's which disturbs me immensely.

I hate the way that older MTF's see the only relevant issue for young 'Transpeople' being how good they'll look.

reply

[–] Xaria 18 years ago

im a ts and found bree annoying but not offensive because i know plenty of older transitioners like her. the ts party and the use of the term 'genuine girl' is another matter though

the true christian speaks: jec lives- 'giancarlo is an enormous turd '

reply

[–] justin1286 18 years ago

"'Genderqueer?' Never heard that one- kinda caters to the revival of the term 'queer' doesn't it? I find this offensive"

I can certainly see how people -- especially older-generation glbta individuals (I'm 20 years old, incidentally) -- might be offended by my use of the word "Queer." Maybe I should justify my use of that term.

I used the term "queer" for the purposes of assimilation. the truth is, a lot of my glbta friends use the term "Queer" because:

1. It's a great umbrella term that caters to anybody who breaks from sexual and gender norms (or their supporters)

2. It robs glbta detractors the opportunity to use the term in a derogatory sense.

3. It's simply a LOT easier than saying the Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Ally Community, GLBTA community, etc...

I know a lot of people who proudly refer to themselves as "queer" and, though I identify as "gay," I prefer to use "queer" for the aforemenitoned reasons.

reply

[–] Xaria 18 years ago

i know a couple of genderqueers, i look up to them

the true christian speaks: jec lives- 'giancarlo is an enormous turd '

reply

[–] jtyroler 16 years ago

I identify as gender queer and I'm in my late 40s. I didn't find this offensive - one of the many things that trans people and gender variant people have to do is education. If people watching this feel they know a little more about gender identity issues or want to learn more about gender identity, then this does a service.

reply

[–] cfrank431 18 years ago

Here's my final take on this flick and more. Transamerica pushes the Harry Benjamine conservative line that surgical intervention is the ONLY was to solve what is primarily a psychological and spiriual matter. No movement of sexual liberation and freedom can be based upon enriching plastic surgeons. Suppose a procedure is devoloped in which Transwomen can have ovaries implanted. The handful of T-women who could afford such an operation would than be "more real" than those with only a Neo-Vagina" The road to self-fullment through surgical intervntion is a bottomless pit. Also, I find it amusing that Post-Op women flaunt their surgery exactly the way GGs used to (and still do) flaunt the fact that they're married. "Mrs." meant that you were a more fullfilled,genuine female than simply being "Miss". The introduction of "Ms" was a way of dispensing with this nonsense. Now, sadly, we have Transgirls saying they're "post" as a way of pulling rank. The message of Transamerica is "I want society to accept me a real women, so I'll do everything I can to conform to Society's *beep* expectations of what a "real woman" (or man)is. Transmen are much more savy about all this, mainly because phalloplastic is very expensive, but also because the Testosterone makes them smarter (that's a joke, OK) I'm rather militant about this because I've know so many wonderful, beautiful souls who have destroyed themselved saving up for these procedures. Incidentally, the better therapists in NYC ar now writing recommendation notes calling SRS "Sexual Confirming Surgery" rather than "Reassigment".
I want to be clear. If surgery is the only option for you, fine. But making some ridiculous distinction between "Transgenderists" and "Trannsexuals" make people desperate for surgery and keeps the Tranny suicide rate at its current astronomical levels. This DOES relate to the film, Transamerica, of course, since it all leads up to the surgery, leading people to believe that this is the only acceptable route.

reply

[–] Xaria 18 years ago

unfortunately theres a lot of older transpeople (usually mtf) who do flaunt their postness, declare pre and none ops inferior or just 'men'

the true christian speaks: jec lives- 'giancarlo is an enormous turd '

reply

[–] hollyvolley 18 years ago

"Confirming surgery" huh? Does this make one automatically Catholic or something?

As one of those post op mtf's, I don't feel I'm pulling rank discussing my status- It's all like a number of experiences- one really doesn't know until one actually has the experience- Whether one considers our vagina merely just a piece of plastic surgery, the combined effects of this new physiologolgy and hormonal treatment produces a profound change- personally I believe much more than hormonal therapy alone

Much of these semantics are often out there because of those constantly trying to diss the whole phenomena- Even at gender support groups, there often appear to be people there- and they usually come and go much quicker- who seem more bent on disrupting things and diverting people- More than a few hostile spouses, but one can understand their position. Our other detractors are sometimes an extremely morose lot, and it's difficult to speculate on those who hide behind a facade or play games.

I'm not talking about most of the serious people involved, and a lot of trans people are young and have some pasionate slant already in their minds- but it's pretty universally understood- if you are seeking surgery, it's a different thing than being at the other end end of the spectrum- which is someone who identifies as a transvestite and only wants to crossdress- There are drag queens in the middle, and I've met some people who only take hormones for years and years as part of their lifestyle, and they usually still identify themselves as gay men- and they've seldom ever had relations with women.

I think they are missing something, but I'm not criticising their choices. I, and others I've known, have felt particularly uncomfortable with the interim, pre-surgical period where Bree is. In a drag club environment, it's not unusual- but in everyday living, it is difficult.

Surgical fullfillment is not a "bottomless pit"- For me, and many others it's a real road of discovery- both physical and spiritual (which is ALWAYS a personal experience that defies the belief of others) If I said that I was positive I was going to be reborn now in other lives as a woman, others would probably not believe me, or even have a host of ulterior reasons for not wanting to believe me- (My God, they'd be beating down the operating room doors, wouldn't they? because men make their own gender so miserable!)

"Conform to societies expectations" of what being a woman is? This may appaer to be the initial resposnse at Bree's stage of experience- but I don't think so in general- because trans people, male and female, already have a great deal of experience with the gender cartoon of their births, so in the long run I think personally are less apt to follow the one of their new gender.

God in heaven, God above, be a God of truth and love

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bliss_s 17 years ago

As a lesbian, I'd say if I were to have an intimate relationship with a woman
with a transsexual history, she'd have to have had SRS. If I want a penis in
bed with me it's got to be capable of being removed and sterilized after use.

"SRS is a necessary step IMO to have a functional sexual relationship with the opposite sex."

I ride the tempest, tame the waves...I will not resign myself to the usual lot of women

reply

[–] elizabethveldon 16 years ago

Incidentally, the better therapists in NYC ar now writing recommendation notes calling SRS "Sexual Confirming Surgery" rather than "Reassigment".

may i say, with the greatest respect, that the above and indeed the whole post is so much rubbish.

If a man or woman chooses to be conformist it is not used to damn all men or women but if a 'Transwoman' or 'Transman' does this then all 'Transpeople' are like this. Guff.

And then there's the idea that some political movement can change your body: it can't and it never will. You say 'If surgery is the only option for you, fine' and then trash the line you've just drawn by dismissing surgery and those who opt for it.

Surgery is necessary for some and not for others. Saving up for surgery? Surgery should be available for all. 'I've know so many wonderful, beautiful souls who have destroyed themselves saving up for these procedures' - and I've known people ground into the dirt by their inability to live in their own skin, people driven to suicide, people wrecked almost beyond repair and YOU are among those guilty of this, you're the Gender Fascist serving up ready made solutions straight out of The Transexual Empire.

Way to go. You going to punch a baby next?

reply

[–] MrFunktastic 18 years ago

i thought it was a great movie, for what it was - just a nicely acted story - but yeah, i kinda got into an argument with someone last night over it - she(tgirl) thought it was wrong having a female playing the role - i can kinda understand her point of view but then again, how many transexual actors/actresses are there who could have played the role as well, and anyway, it's just a movie, ...we all knew rocky wasnt really a boxer, but we still cheered him on.

i dunno, i thought Bree was nice, kinda clumsy and akward, but warm hearted, just a flawed human like the rest of us - and anyway, no disrespect to the actress who played the role - but yeah, i thought she was a very convincing looking tgirl.

i guess it's just one of those things - i dont think people really minded that the two main actors in brokeback mountain were straight....or maybe they did, maybe i missed that post...

anyway, i loved this movie! and no, i wasnt offended one little bit!

reply

[–] fontainemoore 18 years ago

Are thrilled that the characters were played by the actors who played them because they both did such a wonderful job. That seems to be the predominant sentiment from male/female, trans/non-trans, straight/gay--fans of the movie, in general. (I'm writing my dissertation on people's reactions to film and this is one that seems to have had major impacts on many people. Why quest is discovering why. Not just Brokeback but films in general.)

If anything, from what I've read on that and other Brokeback boards, most of the gay men are glad the actors are straight because it enabled the story to transcend sexual orientation and be about human beings caught in the struggle between what their hearts tell them and what society tells them. The story is much more universal than "two gay cowboys" and was, therefore, better served by straight actors. Gay men, like everyone else in my experience (as a straight, female-born person--is that the accepted/common way to say it?) wants to be accepted for who they are as a human being without a bunch of labels slapped on them. No one wants to be slapped into a little box like that.

Good acting is good acting. I thought Felicity Hoffman did a masterful job One of my good friends is a transexual woman and Bree reminded me a lot of her in many ways--her awkwardness, shyness, sense of humor, and intelligence. I can't imagine anyone doing a better job than she did with the role. She seemed to have so much compassion for and empathy with her character. I suspect that feeling for a character helps an actor fully inhabit the role.

The job of filmmakers is to tell the story as well as possible. It is not to serve a political agenda that some viewers may have. Viewers who think otherwise, IMO, don't have much understanding of storytelling if they don't understand that. Good stories generally have a more universal quality to them--struggles of all humanity told from the viewpoint of a particular person and group in a particular time and place and in a unique way to maintain viewer attention.

reply

[–] rpcatherwood 18 years ago

A lot has come up in this thread... I just wanted to chime in on a couple of things.

Before I saw the movie, I initially thought to myself that it would have made more sense to cast a male actor as the transexual. The argument for doing so would kind of speak for itself. I can also see the reasoning behind casting a woman in the role, though. The film makers may have felt like hammering in the point that any MtF will want understood - the MtF IS a woman, plain and simple. I think casting a female actress as the transexual makes sense for this reason; I don't find that troubling.

After I saw the movie, part of me did find it somewhat offensive, but that's passed. I'd be curious if you (jago0021) could maybe explain why your transgender friend found the movie "very offensive"? I'm transgender, male to female. I think what I initially found offensive, what many transgender people may find offensive, is the purely imagined insinuation that Bree is iconic or representative of all transexuals. Frankly, there's a lot about Bree I don't like. There are things she's going through with which I can identify, of course, but as a personality, there's a lot there that is irritating, immoral, or otherwise pathetic. I am a transgender person who happens to be confident, have a large friend group, enjoy sex, live up to my responsibilities, care about others aside from myself, etc. If the film makers meant to make the statement: "This character is representative of what a transsexual is", then yes, it is very offensive. I think, though, that this is a faulty premise to judge them on.

We're tempted to think that they're making that statement because of the timing of the movie. It's a trap that the film has fallen into in that there haven't been many movies centering around the subject of transsexuality yet. The only other ones I can think of that dealt with the issue heavily were Soldier's Girl and Boys Don't Cry. Now, these two movies were different from Transamerica in that whether or not you LIKE the portrayal of the transgender person, you can't really argue with it because these films were based on true stories. Transamerica, though, was fictional, and since it was the first fictional film (at least that I know of, and certainly the first to get this level of publc attention) on the subject of transexuality, we EXPECT to see an iconic character, the platonic form of the transexual, as it were, something for the mundanes to look at and say, "OK, so THAT'S what a trannie is." We didn't get that; or at least, most of us understand that we didn't get that.

This is just a guess, I suppose, but I think that the film makers considered this and decided that they just didn't want to make a movie about the "typical" transexual (if there even is such a thing). If you take your expectation of a representative out of the equation, if you just take the movie as a movie about people, people not meant to represent others, just people, then it's not offensive at all; personally, I thought it was very well done.

reply

[–] fontainemoore 18 years ago

While I'm not one, I do have two of them from one of the leading screenwriting schools in the world, on my dissertation panel. They have both emphasized strongly, that characterization is absolutely critical to writing a good story (screenplay in this instance). And a good character is unique and 3-dimensional. Therefore, I don't think the screenwriter/s of this movie made any effort, whatsoever, to imply any generalizations about transexuals. This movie was about one human being who was struggling to accept herself and be accepted and to deal with different identities--first, as a transexual woman, and then a parent.

We (the audience) gets a glimpse of the world and ourselves through the trials and tribulations one a protagonist who is always different from us in some ways, and always like us in others--regardless of the particular niche (rich/poor, black/white, young/old, etc.) There are facets of the human condition that transcend these differences. That's the ground that good screenwriters find in their very specific stories. Otherwise, we wouldn't be able to relate to them at all since we're all unique beings.

The problem I think you have is that for the average Joe/Josie who saw this movie and lacks exposre to transexuals, they may generalize from this film. But that's not the writer's job to dissuade them. What I recommend, instead, is that more people start learning about and then writing good screen stories that show the incredible diversity within humanity, including transexuals.

reply

[–] sandra-168 18 years ago

Mostly done good taste, but the 'humorous' line "I'm a transsexual, not a transvestite" may unintentionally offend some TVs.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Quad_Damage_Quaker 18 years ago

Actually, i really enjoyed TransAmerica, you don't see movies like this all the time and i liked the idea of giving Bree's character to Felicity Huffman as they didn't have to worry about the messy details too much, i personally feel, some film makers aren't gutsy enough to challenge norms, as they tend to pussyfoot around.

I'm also an MTF TS, i've not outed yet, well...not completely, i liked how they featured some terminology which gave me the impression research has been done.

I kind of relate to her character(like a lot of people), as it's quite difficult to overcome my lack of confidence, and shyness, i find trying to sound like a woman really tough to do when other people are around, but one thing i have had some experience with is when i'm in college, being Androgyne, i get called He she, it's a little like bree's encounter in the cafe, when the girl on the next table asks "are you a boy or a girl?", again i've been asked this, i just carried on walking away.

Oh...last example, i've gotten more confidence with going out dressed,
When Bree confronted her parents, her mother was embarrased and told her to come inside, this part angered me, because i've even said to my mother, people don't care, and i don't even care what people think of me, she seems to think all i want to do is dress up in my bedroom (i still live in her house), i personally can't wait until i move

reply

[–] fontainemoore 18 years ago

I had a nice long chat w/ a transgender friend (woman) at church shortly before coming home but although she's enlightened me about a lot, I have no idea what that terms means. Could someone please clarify?

reply

[–] bliss_s 18 years ago

Hi, I'll try to explain "gender queer", at least to the limits of my understanding.
First I think it's very important to distinguish between "transgender" "gender
queer" and "transsexual".

Someone who I would call "transgender" feels uncomfortable in the role and dress
expected of their assigned sex and therefore chooses to live either part time
or full time appearing as and in the role of someone with a different sex
assignment.

A "gender queer" person is uncomfortable with the roles and dress expected due to
sex assignment and moves fluidly between the expectations of masculinity and
femininity, thus queering gender.

A "transsexual" is uncomfortable with their sex assignment and seeks medical
intervention to change it.

My personal belief is that all three types of people are very different and
in fact have little to do with each other. Transgender folk reify social
roles and appearance, gender queer eschew them, and transsexuals just want to
change their bodies and live within the social expectations for their
reconstructed bodies.

I ride the tempest, tame the waves...I will not resign myself to the usual lot of women

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bliss_s 18 years ago

Hello Goodbye,
(now if your name had been farewell, we could be discussing Billy Pilgrim and
Slaughter House Five)

I think I understand where you're coming from... unfortunately you're suffering
from something that happens to nearly every person that transitions... a very
very narrow self focus that of necessity excludes other folks world view.

I suspect jago's friend identifiies as a "transman".

Jago doesn't tell us for sure but certainly if his friend is young and was
assigned female at birth and identifies as "transgender" they very likely
have a nearly opposite sense of self than the character Bree... a
mid-life transitioner that suffers from transsexualism.

All the best in your own transition.

I ride the tempest, tame the waves...I will not resign myself to the usual lot of women

reply

[–] shayna1980 17 years ago

The original poster didn't mention if their friend was a transman or a transwoman, so I think we've all (with the exception of yourself) are assuming that the friend is a transman, in which case, 'he' would be the correct pronoun. Sweetie, I think you are probably getting a little defensive for no reason :)

reply

[–] justin1286 17 years ago

Ummm....maybe you should reread my original post, (entitled "Offensive to Trans Individuals?" - note the "?" at the end) as it was in no way a tirade.

I said I enjoyed the film but a trans-identified friend did not. He found it to be offensive. I gave no opinion on the issue and I simply asked for other people's takes on the movie. I am sorry you were incapable of participating in this discussion.

And by the way, my trans friend in question prefers masculine pronouns, and takes no offense when I refer to him as "he." I am not yet perfect when it comes to understanding gender identity, but I am working on it, so cut me some slack.

Kindly chill out and do not put words in my mouth. And do not think I have no tact, because you just went a long way to insult my intelligence just now.

reply