My life in six words: a six-word memoir

It All Changed in an Instant: More Six-Word Memoirs by Writers Famous & Obscure, the new six-word memoir book, is out from Smith Magazine, and I'm in it--which sounds special, but there are almost 1,000 six-word memoirs in this very compact paperback, including by Jennifer Finney Boylan and Quince Mountain. There may be some other trans people in there as well, but I haven't had time to read all the entries.

It All Changed in an Instant is a follow-up to Not Quite What I Was Planning: Six-Word Memoirs by Writers Famous & Obscure, which made the New York Times bestseller list when it came out. There are several other six-word memoir books with various themes, plus some in the works, and the Web site is always taking entries--so check it out.

It seems impossible, but you really can pack a lot of meaning into six words. Some of us (like me) who are ultra-prolific might do well to remember that.

The idea of the six-word memoir started, according to Smith Magazine, from a short story by Ernest Hemingway. Apparently, the writer was challenged to write a short story in exactly six words. The result--"For sale: baby shoes, never worn."

This little story will mean different things to different people, as all short stories do. But what it says to me is this: Someone had a baby who died before he or she was able to wear the shoes. The person or couple was anticipating the baby with love because they bought the shoes before the baby was born. Now they're selling them--not just because the baby died, but because they need the money. Otherwise, they would throw them out or give them away.

Basically, a poor person or couple bought shoes they couldn't afford for a baby they loved very much who died. That's a lot for six words.

Many trans people want and need to write their life story. It's necessary--not just for us, but for future generations of trans people who will read these things and take solace in the fact that they are not alone and haven't been for some time.

But there are a lot of reasons why we don't write these stories--I don't have time, I can't write, it's too emotional, it's too painful, I don't want to relive it. But with a six-word memoir, a lot of these excuses disappear.

Try reading some at the Smith Magazine Web site linked to above. Try writing your own. If you like it, publish it on their Web site--they might use it in a future book. Or if that's a little overwhelming, start here. Publish it in the comments section and share it with Tranifesto readers.

So what's my six-word memoir in It All Changed in an Instant? "Born female, now male: strange trip."

What's yours?

Read more...

Sex and the insurance company

My insurance company doesn't know what I am. It seems to decide my sex based on what it doesn't want to pay for.

If I make a claim for something male-related, like testosterone or Finasteride (okay, it's for prostate cancer, but it's supposed to prevent male-pattern baldness), my insurance company says I'm female and denies the claim. If I make a claim for something female-related, like a PAP test or pelvic exam, the company says I'm male and denies the claim.

I'm usually able to get a reversal (except on the Finasteride--they don't think male-pattern baldness is medical, not realizing the number of people who would be sickened if they saw what I looked like with no hair). But I'm hoping that the new U.S. Tax Court decision on transition surgery as a medical necessity will eventually affect insurance-company attitudes toward all medical care for trans people.

Initially, the finding, which says that transition surgery is an allowable medical expense for tax purposes, will help some trans people at tax time. Hopefully, it will have implications for insurance companies, who will no longer be able to argue that transition surgery is cosmetic in nature and therefore not eligible for insurance coverage.

But what I'd eventually like to see is insurance companies forced to abandon male/female delineations when it comes to paying for various medications or treatments. I realize that they are trying to protect against fraud, but I question how serious or widespread any fraud involving male and female sex categories might be.

If a doctor diagnoses prostate cancer, it's likely that the person has a prostate. It doesn't really matter if the person is male or female. If a doctor diagnosis ovarian cysts, it's likely that the person has ovaries. It's like one of those logic problems you used to hate in school. My 10-year-old nephew could figure out as much.

With more trans people coming out and seeking care for medical transition, with the intersex movement arguing for the delay of medically unnecessary surgical interventions until a person is old enough to decide for him- or herself, and with the multitude of imperfections found in just about every human body in existence, it would seem to make sense to treat people on the basis of their need for a particular intervention rather than an "M" or "F" on an insurance application.

Stuff like this makes my hair fall out. Thank god for Finasteride.


(Note: Congratulations to GLAD and to Rhiannon O'Donnabhain on their victory with the U.S. Tax Court. O'Donnabhain put herself out there for years at great personal sacrifice to win this victory for the trans community. If you're not familiar with this case, go to the GLAD Web site linked to in the story and read about it.)
Read more...

Just call me ma'am

I give up. I have finally accepted reality. I will be ma'amed on the phone at least 60 percent of the time until I die. And if I keep getting angry and frustrated about it, that time will come sooner than I expect. So call me ma'am. It's okay with me.

I have been on testosterone for over 12 years, and my voice is as low as it's going to get. It's not as low as I originally hoped it would be (I wanted Barry White, not Betty White). But it's not high, either. It's not the pitch that's the problem--it's the expressiveness.

I-don't-talk-like-this. I ta-aalk like thiii-iss.

I enunciate my words. I sound my "esses" and my "tees." I draw out words and move my voice all over the place. It's habit. It's a lifetime of talking like I really mean it, like I take every word seriously, like every sound is fraught with emotion and deep, dark hidden meaning. And it reflects a "feminine" speech pattern.

I don't call and say, "I'd-like-to-make-a-reservation." I call and say, "I'd like to make a reservaaaationnn." And the person who answers the phone says, "For how many, ma'am?"

When I first started transition, I was livid every time it happened. And the poor person on the other end of the line, who was just trying to follow the "sir-or-ma'am" script that's mandatory for everyone in the service industry, would be the target of my wrath.

During one call, the man I was talking to asked me my name. I said, "Matt."

He said, "I've never heard of a woman named Matt before."

Neither have I, you idiot--doesn't that tell you something? I wanted to say it, but I didn't. Instead, I said, "It's Matt, short for Matthew--M-A-T-T-H-E-W!"

Then I hung up.

In another instance, I called an agency, identified myself at Matt Kailey, and asked who I needed to speak to about a particular issue. The woman said, "I don't know, ma'am. I'll have to check for you, ma'am."

I said, "My name is Matt."

She said, "Hold on a second, ma'am. I'm checking for you."

I said, "My name is Matt! Short for Matthew!"

She said, "The person you need to speak to isn't in, ma'am."

I said, "WOULD YOU PLEASE STOP CALLING ME MA'AM! MY NAME IS MATTHEW KAILEY! MATTHEW!"

She said, "I'm sorry, ma'am."

Then I hung up.

When I call to ask about one of my bills--a bill for Matthew Kailey--the person who answers sometimes says, "And is this Mrs. Kailey?"

Umm, no--that's my mom. And if she was still alive, I'd have her come over there and beat you up.

Even the guy at the Subway drive-thru called me ma'am over the speaker, then fell all over himself apologizing when I pulled up to the window.

Almost 13 years later, it still happens. It happened last week. And that's when I gave up. That's when I didn't get mad. That's when I finally decided that I was going to pick my battles and this wasn't going to be one of them.

I know who I am. That's all that matters. So go ahead--call me ma'am. Everyone else does.
Read more...

Women in dresses--reinforcing sexual stereotypes?

Why is a photo of trans man Lucas Silveira on a post about women in dresses and reinforcing sexual stereotypes? Because the lead singer for The Cliks was recently named Canada's sexiest man in the 15th Annual Year End Readers' Poll by Canadian music magazine Chart Attack.

I think it's great, and a lot of people will probably think it's great, that a trans man was voted sexiest man. And although Silveira doesn't always conform to traditional Western gender stereotypes, he is often photographed, as he is here, in a suit and tie (although a much more stylish ensemble than most stuffy businessmen). He is reinforcing a "traditional" gender stereotype for men, and it's sexy. But as I discussed in my last post, trans women often take more heat than trans men do when they conform to such stereotypes.

If a trans woman in a low-cut, form-fitting dress were to win a "sexiest woman" poll, she might take some flak, for two reasons--reinforcing the stereotypes surrounding women as sex objects, and reinforcing the stereotypes surrounding trans women as sex objects.

No one likes to be objectified. But the reality is that human beings are sexual beings (whether we're getting any or not), and human beings are going to look at other human beings and be sexually attracted to them, for a variety of reasons.

Different people are going to have different reasons, but there is a certain type of Western female sexual ideal--a "sex symbol" ideal--that involves cleavage, short skirts, high heels, makeup, and other accoutrement, and those who want to adopt this image, even for a special night out, are sometimes frowned upon for reinforcing the concept of women as sex objects. Trans women often take particular grief for this because some people (usually men) objectify a particular body type that they think trans women have.

But I have always felt that it was unfair to restrict women's clothing choices because of the significance that other people might ascribe to them. It has always made me angry that women aren't free to wear what they want to wear or be who they want to be because men might get the wrong idea, or men might not take them seriously, or men might fail to recognize the intelligence, skill, or ability behind the makeup or short skirt (or because other women might judge them in the same way).

By the same token, I think it is unfair to restrict trans women's clothing choices for the same reasons, while adding on the additional burden of being responsible for some men's sexualized idea of who and what trans women are.

I have been on testosterone for over 12 years. Testosterone makes you think about sex. Testosterone makes you look at other people in a sexualized way--not always, but often. But that's my problem. And for straight men, that's their problem.

Women should not have to bear the responsibility for what some men (or some other women) might think. Women--trans and non-trans--should not have to constantly monitor their clothing, appearance, mannerisms, and actions to avoid reinforcing sexual stereotypes--and to avoid looking "sexy."

Look at Canada's sexiest woman, Avril Lavigne. Even though she presents it in a very modern way, she stays close to "feminine" tradition--she even has her own fragrance. And she certainly meets many of the traditional expectations for her gender with regard to being "sexy."




I've not heard any criticism so far about Silveira's "sexy" male gender presentation. I don't know if Lavigne gets criticized for her "feminine" or "sexy" gender presentation.

But in my opinion, it's okay for everyone to be sexy--Lucas Silveira in a suit and tie, Avril Lavigne in a strapless, low-cut gown, a guy in a muscle shirt, a woman in jeans and a T-shirt, and a woman in a low-cut dress. People should be allowed to be sexual, and people should be allowed to be sexy, and the burden should not fall on women to control what someone else is thinking. They can't, anyway.

When we rejoice in who we are, whoever and whatever that is, and we rejoice in who other people are, without judgment, we might not be able to eliminate gender or sexual stereotypes--but they might not matter so much to us anymore. We might realize that everyone has the right to present their gender--and their acceptance of the fact they are sexual beings--in whatever way is most comfortable for them.

(Photo: publicity photo of Lucas Silveira by David Hawe)
Read more...

Women in dresses--reinforcing gender stereotypes?

At First Event last week, and at many other conferences I've been to, the Saturday night banquet is the highlight of the conference and the culmination of all the hard work on the part of the planners and all the fun on the part of the attendees, so many choose to get completely decked out for the event.

For some of the women, this means high heels, high hemlines, and low-cut necklines--and, as I said in my First Event post, I don't think there's anything wrong with this. And, as I also said, I would write more about this later, and it's later.

I've always thought that if you've got it, you should flaunt it, whatever that is--brains, talent, a sense of humor, muscles, great legs, a special skill. Whatever it is that makes you feel good about yourself or that you know is special, let the world know. If you don't put it out there, nobody else will, that's for sure. You're all you've got, baby.

But I think trans women get the raw end of the deal when it comes to complaints about either reinforcing gender stereotypes, reinforcing the sexual stereotypes that some people have about trans people, or both. So let's break it down.

Reinforcing gender stereotypes:

Almost all of the women who attended the First Event banquet (and most conference banquets that I've been to) wore a dress or gown of some type. Dresses and gowns, in our culture, are considered to be "women's wear," and they are also considered to be appropriate for a formal banquet. Most of the women fixed their hair, wore their makeup, and turned the evening into a special occasion where they could get dressed up.

So my question is this: Is it reinforcing a gender stereotype to wear a dress or gown or to wear special makeup or a special hairstyle for an evening out? Or is it simply being yourself? If you've waited 30, 40, or 50 years to be yourself, and yourself is a person who likes to put on a dress, heels, and makeup, should you be denied that pleasure and that right--the pleasure and the right to express your gender as choose--because it reinforces traditional gender stereotypes?

As I've said before, freedom of gender expression means freedom for everyone, not just for a select group who wants to defy gender stereotypes. And although my hope is that trans people can be a force in relaxing or eliminating traditional gender stereotypes, we are in no way required to do so.

The few guys who were at the banquet wore a suit, a shirt and tie, or, in my case, just a shirt and jeans. I gave up ties a long time ago--not because they were a gender stereotype, but because they make me look like a turtle with no neck. (Note: it's not unusual to see fewer guys than women at these events or at conferences in general, but First Event's TransMasculine Track brought in over 50 trans guys for a day of programming, thanks to planner Anderson Clark.)

Traditionally masculine trans men sometimes take heat for being excessively "macho," and I've met a few who might earn the slightly outdated label of "male chauvinist pig," but trans men rarely take as much flak for putting on a suit and tie--traditional "men's attire"--as trans women do for putting on a dress, heels, and makeup.

Why? Because of the whole "sex and sexuality" thing that surrounds women in general and trans women in particular--and that we will talk about next time.

(Photo--me decked out for prom. Give me a break--it was 1971.)
Read more...

Trans conferences: where are the men?

(Note: This post has been updated with some additional information from Anderson Clark and the First Event committee.)

Trans guys and trans conferences are not mutually exclusive--but sometimes it seems that way.

I wrote earlier this week about the First Event conference. I had a really great time, and I think conferences can be an incredible way to get back to our "trans roots," if you will, and to connect with people who have shared similar experiences. The TransMasculine Track at First Event, organized by Anderson Clark, brought in approximately 50 trans men, which is impressive for a new program--especially a program aimed at the guys.

Low to nonexistent conference-and-activity attendance by trans guys is a familiar complaint. I hear it here in Colorado, and I hear it pretty much wherever I go. At First Event, Anderson and I were asked why trans men don't attend trans conferences and what to do to get us there.

The reality is that trans men do attend trans conferences--but we tend to be scarce at many of them, for a variety of reasons:

1. Money: In the current economy, money is a problem for almost everyone, but historically, trans men tend to have less of it than trans women. This is a generalization, of course, and some trans men have a great deal of money, while many trans women do not. But examining this phenomenon overall, there are some more generalizations to be made:

• Trans men tend to transition at a younger age (although trans women are catching up), and young people, as a rule, don't have money.
• Trans men who transition later in life often have worked at "traditionally female" occupations, which pay less overall, have fewer benefits, and have less retirement and pension options.
• Trans men are more likely to be raising children as single parents, which is a major expense and leaves less money for "luxuries."
• FTM genital surgery is more expensive, and trans guys saving for surgery have a longer haul in saving up (although there are many expenses associated with MTF transition as well that can really add up).
• Because most people, men and women, attend maybe one specific conference a year or every so often, trans men who want to attend a conference and can swing it will generally choose one that caters specifically to us, or that has a wide variety of workshop options for us.
  

2. Time: For the same reason that money is short, time is short. People in certain occupations, particularly "traditionally female" occupations, don't get a lot of time off work, and sometimes lose money when taking days off. The combination of spending money to get to a conference and losing money by taking time off work doesn't allow for a lot of freedom and flexibility when choosing whether or not to attend a conference.

3. Programming: It's the age-old chicken-egg dilemma--men don't attend conferences that don't have programming for them, and women conference planners don't want to add programming if the guys don't show up. So it's a circular complaint--"There's no programming for us." "Why should we program for you if you don't come?" Both sides are right.

There are other reasons as well, but these are three primary ones. So for women conference planners who are hoping to expand their particular conference to include more men, here are a few suggestions from Anderson and myself:

1. Start small. If you have a week-long conference, don't try to plan an entire week for the guys. Start with the idea that Anderson had for First Event and schedule the programming for the men on Saturday. Men are more likely to have Saturdays free and are more likely to come for a day of special programming, where there are no lodging or related expenses. Once they start coming and enjoying the conference, you can gradually expand to two or three days with additional programming and see how it goes. Surgeons can do double-duty by having a women's surgery workshop during the week and a men's surgery workshop as part of the men's track.

2. Recruit trans men to plan the men's track. Women don't necessarily know what workshops and speakers trans guys would want, just like men would have difficulty planning a track for women. And trans men are more likely to respond when they see other men involved.

3. One big-name speaker will not necessarily get the men there. If you can get a recognizable trans man to speak, so much the better, but you need other programming to support that. Men will not always show up just for an expensive banquet, even if the speaker is someone they know of and admire. But if the speaker is part of an all-day program--say a Saturday program with a Saturday lunch speaker--he will be an additional draw. Anderson recruited several well-known trans men to present workshops at First Event, and your lunch speaker could also do a workshop if he so desired, allowing you to utilize his name even more.

4. Let the men have their space, especially when starting out. Anderson did a good job of this at First Event by recruiting a sponsor for a lunch just for the guys, so they could go to their workshops and have their own lunch together. Dr. Peter Raphael, a surgeon from Plano, Texas, who presented a workshop at the conference, also sponsored the First Event trans man lunch. Don't be offended by what might appear to be isolationism. It's not. It's just trans guys needing to be in their own space, for a variety of reasons. You've got them at the conference. That's the point in the beginning. Once they see that they like it, they'll come back.

5. Be aware of financial difficulties. Try to offer scholarships if possible. Try to offer lower-cost meal options or get a sponsor for a trans man lunch (see above). Offer a la carte workshops--in other words, have an option where people can pay for each workshop separately instead of paying for a whole day or a whole weekend. This helps everyone who is having financial problems but wants to attend workshops. Anderson and Jamie Haley, the chair of the First Event organizing committee, addressed this issue by reducing the single-day workshop registration fee by one-third for trans men who otherwise would not have been able to attend.

6. Try to find low-cost housing options off site, such as local trans men who are willing to share their apartment or house with visiting guys. Also, the conference Web site could offer ways for anybody to hook up to share transportation expenses. The first trans conference I ever attended--Forward Motion in L.A. many years ago--found three of us car-pooling from Colorado/New Mexico to L.A., taking turns driving through the entire night.

These are just some suggestions. Talk to your "local trans men" for others. And be sure to let them take the reins in planning their track, while you share your conference-planning experience with them.

It's hard to bring men into a conference that has historically been a women's conference. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. Don't be discouraged if it doesn't. Just start small and see what happens.

The TransMasculine Track at First Event was a success because of countless hours of work by planner Anderson Clark. Yes, it can be tiring and time consuming, but the results are worth it. The attendance was incredible, the workshops were great, and the men will surely be back next year, since Andy will be taking the reins again. If you missed it this year, mark your calendars now.

(Photo: me signing books at First Event--photo by Anderson Clark)
Read more...

My first time at First Event: the importance of gender conferences

I just got back (late last night) from the Tiffany Club of New England's annual First Event conference. I have to congratulate the planning committee, because I thought the event was excellent, and I had a great time.

I'm sure there were plenty of glitches--having been on the planning committee of the Colorado Gold Rush in its early stages, I'm aware that glitches abound at every conference. But the attendees rarely notice them--they are all having too much fun. What the planning committee agonizes over, the attendees party right through. Kudos to the First Event committee for making it seem effortless when it was the result of blood, sweat, and tears--these conferences always are.

This year was a special year for the guys, because the event featured a Saturday transmasculine track that drew in an estimated 50 trans men, and trans men are notorious for not attending most gender conferences (more on that later this week). So congrats to Anderson Clark for the programming and for getting the guys there, which made for a better event for all in attendance.

Although I've been to some of the biggies across the country--Colorado Gold Rush (I live here--that makes it easier), Southern Comfort, Gender Odyssey, Transcending Boundaries, Forward Motion, and now First Event--both lack of time and lack of money keep me (and many others) away from such conferences. And that's a real shame, because every time I go to one, I'm glad I went.

I think this type of conference is tremendously important for people in our community. Even if you don't spend time in the "trans community" or the "gender community" on a day-to-day basis, there is really nothing like walking into a place and getting a sense that you are with "your people."

Especially for the young people just starting out or questioning what they should do or wanting to get more information, these types of conferences bring them into the fold and give them a chance to learn from their "elders."

And all of us get a chance to see what's going on in communities across the United States, to make new friends, and to meet those well-known people whose name we might have heard, but who we now get to see in the flesh (and there's a lot of flesh at these events, especially at banquet night, when some of the women don their slinkiest, most revealing gowns--they look great, and I have no problem with this at all, which I have touched on in the past and will also write more about at a later date).

Regardless of the parties and pageantry, I think these conferences are an essential part of our history and our community. I would urge everyone to attend a gender conference at least once. If you think you're alone out there, you're not. If you think everyone else is just like you, they're not. If you think everyone else is different from you, they're not. If you think trans people are unhappy victims to be pitied or shunned, we're not. And these conference prove all of these things.

Even an old klunker like me, whose been around the block more than a few times, gets something out of attending--I met fantastic people at First Event, I got to interact with some people I have admired but only heard of online, I got to see some old friends and to make some new ones. I always come away from these things with a real sense of community, and that's really what it's all about.

I'll be writing more about First Event for Examiner.com and TGLife.com (I'll make these links live when there are actually stories to link to--I have to write them first), but for now, I encourage all of you to start saving your money (or looking into scholarships) to attend a gender conference this year.

There are plenty coming up (in the U.S.--I'm not sure what's going on elsewhere, and non-U.S. commenters can let us know), but if you haven't been for a while, or if you've never been, step out for a few days and reconnect with your community. Even the hangover is worth it.
Read more...