“Transgenders” versus “Transgender people”
I was reading an article recently – well written and respectful – about transgender issues, and couldn’t help but notice the use of transgender as “transgenders” (as a noun) rather than “transgender people” (as an adjective).
Many identity labels can be used as nouns or adjectives, but others can’t. A hypothetical article that said, “Lesbians polled at the Health Center said XYZ,” wouldn’t raise my eyebrows, nor would “Lesbian women polled at the Health Center said XYZ.” (Other than being a little awkward, since ‘lesbian’ implies ‘woman.’) (But lets not get into that again!)
At the same time, saying, “Blacks polled at the Health Center said XYZ” seems awkward and dated. Using “Jews” or “Italians,” though, doesn’t seem problematic. (I’m picking examples pretty much at random, here.)
What about “transgenders” versus “transgender people”?
My default is to use “transgender” as an adjective: “Transgender individuals polled at the Health Center…” My retroactive justification for this is because I think of being trans as huge part of my identity, but using “transgender” as an adjective conveys that it is only one part of a larger individual. At the same time, that concept could be expanded to any identity that can function as a noun and an adjective, but I don’t have the same emotional reaction to hearing some identities as nouns (Jews, gays and lesbians, etc) as I do to others (transgenders, blacks).
Making things more complicated, I’m realizing that I’m more OK with “transsexual” as a noun than “transgender.” I’m not thrilled with either, but saying , “Transsexuals polled (etc)” doesn’t bother me as much as using “transgenders.”
I’m just not sure why, or what (if anything) to do about it. Is it the type of issue that’s worth bringing up? I feel hesitant correcting people when there is no reason I can identify beyond my own linguistic discomfort, and I’m not even sure if anyone else feels the same way.
Themocracy
I really like this post. I think you brilliantly and simply, illustrate the variances in the interpretation of not only the ‘transgender’ label, but any label at all. As you also point out, the personal choice of labels we use to define ourselves is not only unique to ourselves but difficult to describe the reasons why.
I like and appreciate that you did not choose any ‘right’ answer for anyone else nor dismiss anyone else’s as ‘wrong’. Ultimately, this is where I think we all are in life: we can only know the labels that apply to ourselves.
So, thanks for this.
-arvan
Thanks for stopping by, Arvan!
I’m curious what others think – and hope some other readers will weigh in – because there doesn’t seem to be a general consensus on whether these words should be adjectives or nouns. A Google search found some interesting articles on race, but (shockingly) not a lot of discussion has happened around gender identity.
From one link:
I think this is sort of the opposite of what I was saying: I want “transgender” to be seen as a part of my identity, superseded by “woman.” But the author makes a valid point about how that can easily be spun around to erase adjectives-as-identities.
From a Google book result:
That’s more in line with what I feel about the noun-ing of identity, although I obviously can’t speak to the black identity, and am not trying to make a comparison between the experiences of trans people and black people.
Meanwhile, here’s an article on using “Jew” versus “Jewish”:
Just food for thought.
My girlfriend tells a story about how, when learning something or other about Jews in elementary school, she raised her hand to say, “Maybe they would prefer to be called ‘Jewish people.’” I always found the story both sweet and slightly troubling: what else but the use of “Jew” as a pejorative could cause even eight-year-olds to hear the word as disrespectful? In a world without antisemitism, “Jews” would probably the sound the same as “Jewish people.” “Jewish” to me almost sounds like de-emphasis. They’re not Jews, they’re Jewish. Interestingly, no use sounds more antisemitic (at least to me) than “Jew” as adjective (“Her Jew ways…”).
I think “transgenders” is weird mostly because it’s… Not actually a noun. My dictionary lists “transsexual” as both adjective and noun, but “transgender” only as an adjective. The other words sound weird because they’re not considered PC, but AFAIK “transgender” has never been noun, exceptions like this aside. Is it ever used as a noun by transgender people themselves (ourselves)? I’ve never seen that.
The weirdest one to me is the use of “transgender” to refer to the phenomenon of people being transgender, meaning something like “transgenderism”: “A recent discussion about transgender.” What’s the deal with that? It’s not like “transgenders” where similar words function that way; one also wouldn’t say “a discussion about lesbian” or “a discussion about Jew.”
“Antisemitism” is a totally quaint notion to me personally: I’ve never experienced anything I would possibly call antisemitism, and the idea that people consider “The Jews” the source of any problems seems totally ridiculous to me. But, after quite a bit of thought, I realized you’re right – ‘noun’-ing the Jews makes it easier for them to be an other. It’s, yet again, a situation of ‘us v them,’ “Good, upstanding Christians,” versus “The Jews!”
I agree, but I guess my question is, “Why?” If Jew, lesbian, Italian, can all be acceptable nouns, why isn’t transgender? I’m not arguing it should be, but I do think language inconsistencies like that are interesting. (And maybe there isn’t a reason, or simply because there aren’t enough transgender people for it to be normalized in regular conversation.)
Yeah, that’s just weird. No excuse.
Uh, wow. Well. Consider yourself really, really lucky.
I’ve witnessed, experiences, or been subjected to antisemitism way more times than I can count, from countless stupid questions to babbling gibberish mocking Yiddish to being told that I’m not allowed to have any opinion about Israel because I’m “clearly biased” (I was trying to criticize the IDF, not that he cared to let me finish) to once having a college professor announce, to me and the entire class, that I was the only Jew in the room, which sent adrenaline through my entire body like a bucket of ice water. I’m also the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors. My family is still palpably damaged by the Holocaust. When I was eight years old, my grandmother sat me down to tell me, it detail, exactly what it means to be a Jew.
I’m glad you’ve never encountered that particular brand of hate and ignorance, but (and I’d say this to any who said they thought the idea of antisemitism was “quaint”), you might want to check out some blogs about it to see what you’ve been missing. Have you ever looked at The Debate Link or ignoblus?
Eh, I’m sorry if the above came off as harsh. I know you weren’t trying to say that antisemitism isn’t experience by other people. It’s a major button of mine.
No need for apology – I’m sorry I wasn’t more clear in my original post, and I should have used a better word than “quaint.”
By “quaint” I meant that, in my immediate sphere of experience – school, friends, family, work – I cannot think of an experience I would consider antisemitic. (Or even just mind-numbingly ignorant of Judaism.) I completely agree that this is a result of luck: luck of geography, of the communities in which I exist, luck of the culture in which I grew up and by which I’m surrounded.
I shouldn’t have used “quaint” because it’s dismissive, and that was not my intent. (I tried to narrow my scope by talking about antisemitism as it applies to me, personally, but that wasn’t clear enough.)
I am aware of antisemitism existing in the larger world. I was not trying to dismiss the existence of antisemitism in the modern world and, again, I am sorry that I did so. But it does feel like something that happens to other people, that couldn’t happen to me. Undoubtedly, that’s not true; someone who is antisemitic isn’t going to be interested in hearing about my nuanced relationship with Judaism or whether I “really” identify as Jewish. And I think I understand, intellectually, how antisemitism – other-ing in general – can work. I understand it on an emotional level when it comes to trans issues. But I’m dissociated enough from Judaism, secular enough, and lucky enough, that antisemitism doesn’t hit me in the gut.
I know you weren’t asking for an apology but, again, I don’t think your post came off as harsh. I spoke without thinking through the weight of my words (or lack thereof) and that made me dismissive. I’m sorry, and thank you for calling me out on it.
Ahh, English nerds. I am one and I love that you are discussing the language!
I can’t say whether I feel “transgenders” is awkward with regards to experience, but it does sound syntactically awkward to me.
Do you think that “gays” sounds weird? As in, “gays polled at…”
I think that most of these types of phrasings depend on context, or tone. I agree with Bond in that there is almost nothing that is more offensive to me than using “Jew” as an adjective, but that’s because I’ve only ever heard it used as an adjective when it’s meant to be derogatory. If it was used as an adjective with a positive tone, that would be different, obviously.
I’ve had a similar discussion with a friend of mine who is black: I want to know why I, as a white person, would be called a racist if I were to say “What’s up, n***as” to a group of friends who are black. Since I am addressing a group of friends in this hypothetical situation, I would be using the word with a friendly tone, yet I still am unable (socially) to use that word in ANY context simply because I am white. Just because my friend is black, he should get a free pass to use a derogatory word and explain it away by saying, “Well, I’m black so I can say that?”
I disagree with this mentality and, in fact, him using the word simply perpetuates the word’s usage in our society. If black people want the word to be removed from our language, why do they keep using it, regardless of tone or context? You can’t have your cake and eat it, too; either the word falls out of usage because it’s “wrong” and offensive, or it doesn’t.
It’s the same reason I get furious with my friends who tell jokes about Jews and they say, “I can tell that joke because I’m Jewish, so that makes it okay.” No, it doesn’t; if anything, it makes other non-Jews think it’s okay to tell those jokes, thereby perpetuating stereotypes, racism, hate, etc.
Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s that simple.
On the one hand, I do agree that repeating certain things – whether words that are socially acceptable only to certain racial minorities, or jokes about one’s religion – has negative consequences, intentional or not. If I, as a Jewish woman (I definitely wrote “as a Jew…” and erased it), say a joke about Jews, it communicates that there are some circumstances where such jokes are OK. (Even if I’m only making said joke among other other Jews.)
At the same time, I do think there is a substantial difference between someone of a group saying something about that group, and when someone outside it does. I’ve also had some really interesting conversations about the n-word with friends of mine (black and white) and the ultimate lesson I came away with is that, for better or worse, there is a difference in the power relationship and connotation when a white person says it and a black person says it.
I’d much rather live in a world where that wasn’t true, but I do honestly think your friend should get a free pass to use the n-word. In a perfect world, I wish it didn’t have such charged and loaded power. But groups – be it a familial group, a work environment, a religion, a sexuality, a gender, a gender identity, or a race – are allowed to be self-derogatory, or engage in self-reflexive behavior, in a way no one else is. Because it (whatever “it” is) is theirs.
Ultimately, I think it goes hand-in-hand with the privilege (of the male privilege or white privilege variety) of holding the upper hand in a system with power relationships. My being white, for example, comes with certain privileges inherent to the society in which I live. (American, specifically.) The flip side of that is, because I would like to be conscious and respectful of that white privilege, I try to tread very carefully around taking advantage of it by making certain racial comments (the n-word top among them).
Which isn’t to say I think you’re wrong. I think that black people should be allowed to use the n-word and that their usage perpetuates the word’s usage in our society as a whole. (And that such perpetuation is not a good thing.) But I think the right of a group to define its own acceptable language and behavior is more important than “society” determining what is appropriate. (I want to limit this to behavior and language that doesn’t effect others outside the group. The idea of racism or antisemitism directed at others being an “important” part of culture is bullshit, and doesn’t get a free pass. I know this isn’t what you’re saying, I just want to clarify my point.)
I don’t know… it’s a sticky situation. I respect that different races/religions/genders/sexes/etc. interact with the world differently and I’m well aware that the way in which I interact with the world is unique to my own labels, but I don’t necessarily agree that people should get a free pass to say whatever they want.
Unfortunately, the n-word has taken on two different meanings (ending in “-er” as the derogatory version and ending in “-a” as the friendly synonym for “buddy”) and that has created confusion along the way. I just don’t believe that it is okay for either to be acceptable for black people to say and then turn around and say that it’s not okay for white people to say. Yes, a black person using the n-word is their perogative and if they think it’s okay to use then I certainly am not going to convince them otherwise. My main point, though, is that I don’t think people can have it both ways. I think that this is a black and white (no pun intended!) situation: either using the n-word (as a friendly greeting!) is acceptable or it isn’t.
I only have my own experiences interacting with the world/society as a white, Jewish woman so obviously that gives me a set perspective. But that doesn’t make it okay for me to abuse that status by making derogatory jokes about being white, Jewish or a woman.
With respect, I think you might be overlooking the importance/power for a group to reclaim a word used as part of oppresive language. In this situation who says it gives it fundamentally different connotations to the group doing the reclaiming. So yes, it can go both ways, because the politics of langauge change not only on who is doing the hearing, but who is doing the saying.
I think there’s something in human nature that prompts us to stick up for our own, whatever group that might be (family, friends, home town, work, etc), even while encouraging us to be dismissive toward it ourselves. For example, I’m “allowed” to talk about how frustrating my parents can be, but if you (or anyone outside my family) said the exact same things about them I would be rather pissed off.
Likewise, while I agree that it’s not logical or consistent, I think it makes sense – emotionally and socially – that a black man or woman could be offended if a white person says the n-word, and not if another black person does. I’m not saying this is a good thing, but do think it’s an understandable and human thing.
I do agree that’s different, however, from anything remotely logical…
To Mattie’s point, I’m not overlooking the desire to reclaim a word… I get that. I don’t think that’s the case here, but I understand what you mean.
Rebecca – agreed 100% about sticking up for our own. But would that mean, then, that I – in theory! – would be “allowed” to use the word “kike” simply because I can say that I’m Jewish so it’s in reference to my own people?
My point is just that there are boundaries that society tells us we shouldn’t cross – a white person using the n-word with a friendly meaning/tone/conotation/whatever – but those boundaries aren’t consistent. What is deemed okay in one circumstance is completely not okay in another, and I think that’s what you were getting at in the original post, yes? I suppose that none of what I’ve said here answers your question, though; I have no idea how to explain *why* one word is okay and another isn’t… sigh. Good times w/the rambling though, eh?
@R.A.
I think that the thing is, unless a word is aimed at you as a minority, you don’t get to decide if it is reclaimable, or not. That means that unless you are a person of colour, you don’t get to make a call on whether it is ok for it to be reclaimed. If “kike” is a word aimed at you then you could choose to try to reclaim it. For exactly the reason that you are the target of it.
Words are not fixed and immutable, they change with time, location and the specific context in which they are used. It is inevitable that this leads to inconsistent meaning and morality of their use, depending when, where and who. If this were not the case language would become stagnant and immutable.
Whether a word is “good” or “bad” is a reflection of the moral and political power we invest in them, is a reflection of the power struggles and imbalances we create as cultures. Words do not have uniform meaning, because we do not have perfect accord. As our thoughts and philosophies diverge and compete, so do our concepts and word meanings used within those structures.
This means there can be empowerment for a discriminated group in taking control of the language for and about them. Particularly in reclaiming a word. In reclaiming a word, a group can remove some of the sting, can start to gain some agency around how they are talked about, especially if that word is taboo when used by someone outside the group. Whether one word becomes reclaimed and another doesn’t is entirely down to the politics within the group itself.
Is it linguistically logical? No. It is politically and socially logical however.
I find it interesting that, just this morning, I said almost the same thing to a cisgender friend who had used “transgendered” in an email to me:
“Now, as for “transgendered,” I figured at some point I would talk to you about that. Although you see it used far too often, in my and the opinion of many others, it is grammatically incorrect. “Transgender” is an adjective, not a noun or a verb. Thus, “transgender woman (or man)” is correct; “transgendered woman (or man)” is not. Also, although it can make things cumbersome at times, most trans people feel that saying “a transgender” is incorrect because it implies that that is all we are, whereas “transgender woman (or man)” acknowledges the truth that we are first women and men, albeit also transgender, just as another woman might also be described as “young” or “black.” (Interestingly, presumably due to the older origins of the word “transsexual,” my saying I am “a transsexual” feels perfectly normal and correct. I think it was Benjamin Franklin who said that “consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” To expect anything, including language, to be consistent will surely only bring disappointment.)”
Well said, and I appreciate your acknowledgment of the same inconsistency that I found… (Bonus points for Franklin quote!)
most trans people feel that saying “a transgender” is incorrect because it implies that that is all we are, whereas “transgender woman (or man)” acknowledges the truth that we are first women and men, albeit also transgender, just as another woman might also be described as “young” or “black.”
Oh this, this, this. Also I hate the word transsexual. But as I have said elsewhere, I use it because everyone understands it. I much much prefer transgendered, but only as an adjective. I really dislike its use as a noun, I find it completely degendering.
This is the reasoning I’ve always heard for not using “transgender” as a noun, and it makes perfect sense to me.
An excellent point Rebecca, and a fine one (which isn’t the same thing).
I suspect that Abby and I would be in full agreement–that appropriateness is about a sense of (ever evolving) “natural feel” rather than linguistic exactitude. But as a clarification of her general point, I believe the best test is: Does the descriptor sound right 1.) without an article preceding. 2.) with THE definite article. 3.) with an indefinite article.
Less twatishly:
BLACKS/GAYS–Odd sounding, attention getting, not inherently objectionable.
THE BLACKS/THE GAYS–Dude, WTF!
A BLACK/A GAY–Zzzzt! Does not compute!
So I too am all why “a transsexual” feels okey-dokey but the much milder “transgenders” grates.
I’m inclined to excuse any offense I can’t define
I just wish there were a reason beyond “It feels right!” (Or wrong.) I don’t think I’m going to find a reason, but a girl can dream…
(And we’re totally on the same page about trying to excuse offense.)
[...] my privilege, makes me unable to and unworthy of finding a personal meaning in the TDOR. (See my comment to Bond about antisemitism, where I put my foot in my mouth due to a similar, privileged, [...]