I could’ve answered “I’m a woman,” and perhaps added a invective epithet to the end of that line, but I didn’t.
I could’ve answered “I’m a woman, but I’m also a male-to-female transsexual,” but I didn’t.
Instead, I looked him straight in the eye and said without weakness or animosity, “Well, I’m transgender.” I chose to fully embrace my sociopolitical trans identity in my answer to that young man.
It’s clear what he expected from me to feel was humiliated at the asking of his question. It’s clear that he expected me to embrace internalized transphobia. He didn’t expect me to be matter of fact regarding my trans identity; the young man looked somewhat taken aback at my answer.Sandeen is not a woman, so the first would have been an outright lie, and given the fact that he had clearly been read, would have been sort of silly.
The second would have been two lies, again not a woman, and no, not remotely a transsexual.
No, Sandeen actually told the truth. He is not a woman, he is not a transsexual, he is simply a man with "sociopolitical trans identity." That is, he is a man who likes to play dress-up, pretend to be a woman, and make some sort of bizarre sociopolitical statement about rebelling against society's gender norms.
I doubt the young man was as taken aback, as he was just surprised that Sandeen, for a change, was actually honest.
But that is not the point of Sandeen's blog post. He wants "trans people" to be out, loud, and proud like he is. Of course, in his warped view, he includes transsexuals (after all, he falsely claims to be one). Now, if someone who is truly transsexual wants to be "out," that is, I suppose, their business, but Sandeen, as always, remains clueless.
You see, if you are "out, loud, and proud," you are effectively undoing whatever you have accomplished by transitioning. It has been the same story since Christine Jorgensen was outed back in the Fifties. She could never live a life as "just a woman." The same is true for ever other public transsexual. The more out you are, the less you are able to live as a woman, or a man in the case of an FTM.
Of course, for someone like Sandeen, this is not really an issue. He does not remotely want to be a woman. His desire is to be transgender. He enjoys parodying women, but he is not one himself, and makes no real attempt to be one, beyond engaging in some of a caricature that is more akin to drag, than to womanhood. Simply put, he is an insult to women, not one of us.
He talks about protections based on "gender identity." What that actually means, is protections based on a claim. You say that you have a "gender identity" at odds and poof, you get protections. You don't actually have to even be telling the truth. It is a totally subjective basis for protections, and in effect, makes little, if any, sense.
I think that transsexuals should be protected under the same laws that protect anyone from being discriminated against because of a medical condition. But people like Sandeen should take responsibility for their choices, and accept the consequences. Like someone who identifies as a Democrat, Republican, Socialist, Communist, or Nazi (other examples of sociopolitical identities) Sandeen should accept that he does not have a right to protections based on how he sees himself.