EDITORIAL

Should receive a gold medal for openness?

Posted 6/11/15

Former Olympic hero Bruce Jenner has proclaimed himself a woman newly named Caitlyn Jenner. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, through his press secretary Josh Earnest, has expressed …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
EDITORIAL

Should receive a gold medal for openness?

Posted

Former Olympic hero Bruce Jenner has proclaimed himself a woman newly named Caitlyn Jenner. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, through his press secretary Josh Earnest, has expressed his support of the gender “transition.”

Earnest stated: “The president does believe Caitlyn Jenner has shown a tremendous courage, as she has undergone this transition in a very public way, and that’s worthy of our respect.” Or is it?

In the last six decades, gender reassignment surgery has progressed in prevalence from a few procedures performed in northern Europe to a relatively common surgery performed in several countries around the world.

What was once considered an oddity and perhaps a manner of maiming and self-mutilation has now become an alternative state of normality to many.

Prior to Jenner’s revelation, the names Christine Jorgensen in the 1950s and Renee Richards in the 1970s stirred the pot of controversy and unease. During the past 60-plus years, the psychological community has changed from treating transgender paradigms as maladies to accepting gender reassignment as a legitimate threshold to mental solvency.

The question is whether a person can feel that they are trapped within a physical body contrary to the gender they believe they are in their minds.

Further, if this condition is a mistake of nature, then should our society fully embrace those tortured souls who wish to transition to live as the opposite physical sex? Is the president correct? Should Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner be applauded, or perceived with pity and compassion as someone contending with a mental instability?

In 1976 at the Summer Olympics in Montreal, Canada, an American college football player named Bruce Jenner won the gold medal in the Decathlon. Sports magazines all over the world dubbed him the “World’s Greatest Athlete.” He was an American hero who went to the White House to meet President Ford and adorned Wheaties cereal boxes for years to come. During that decade, Jenner was married to Chrystie Crownover. In the ’80s, he was married to Linda Thompson, and in the ’90s to this year he was married to Kris Kardashian-Jenner. Bruce fathered six children with his three wives and was the very picture of a male jock and sportsman.

Yet apparently, between his second and third marriage, he had thoughts that he may have been the wrong gender. These thoughts arose again in recent years, which was the catalyst for seeking gender reassignment.

According to the sixth edition of the Manual of the American Psychological Association, someone who is transgender believes “one’s gender identity or gender expression does not match one’s assigned sex.” Furthermore, they assert that being transgender is independent of sexual orientation. However, in previous editions of the APA manual, they presented that those who expressed a wish to be the opposite gender should be treated as afflicted with a mental malady. In the past, people who thought they were transsexual were treated for delusion and depression.

However, now the common psychological wisdom is that gender reassignment can be the portal to resolving mental distress – in other words, the transition may be the gateway to happiness and mental solvency.

Gender reassignment from a man to a woman involves hormone replacement with estrogen, an orchiectomy, a penectomy and vaginoplasty. Often other cosmetic surgery is required to soften male characteristics.

Originally, these procedures were deemed illogical, horrific and heinous, and akin to a sort of self-maiming to most people. Today, these operations are considered reasonable medical steps to resolve a perceived mistake of nature.

The first significant publicized American transformation was former World War II veteran George William Jorgensen. He became Christine Jorgensen in 1951 after a series of operations in Denmark. The New York Daily News had the headline “Ex-GI Becomes Blonde Beauty.” Also, under the headline they showed before and after pictures of Jorgensen.

The story became a national sensation.

Rather than be subdued and private about the struggle endured, Jorgensen became a nightclub singer and actor. Outspoken and witty, Jorgensen became a popular talk show guest, driving high television and radio ratings. Jorgensen is often cited as the founder of the LBGT movement before it was officially organized. In the ’50s, prior to the sexual revolution of the ’60s, Jorgensen was considered by most to be a side show anomaly.

In the ’70s, the highest-profile case of transsexual transformation was the case of Dr. Richard Raskind, an eye surgeon. In 1975, Raskind underwent gender reassignment surgery and proclaimed himself Renee Richards. An avid tennis player, Richards attempted entry into Women’s Professional Tennis as a competitor. The United States Tennis Association denied Richards an opportunity, and Richards filed in court to force the association’s hand. The case reached the New York State Supreme Court, and Richards prevailed. In 1977, Richards qualified and then competed as a woman in professional matches.

Unlike Jorgensen, Richards became the spokesperson for an active transgender community. As a result, her efforts made great strides toward normalization and acceptance of the gender reassignment process in American society. The national exposure of a well-known transgender sportsperson gave credence to new, progressive thinking. Richards’ reception was unlike Jorgensen’s notoriety. The sideshow aspect was replaced by a more reflective attempt at understanding a new concept of sexual identity.

Before anyone knew what gender reassignment was, someone’s sex was determined by a biological definition. As any high school biology student can tell you, in human cells there are 23 pairs of chromosomes – 22 pairs are “autosomes,” and one pair are “sex chromosomes.” Males have an XY pair, while females have an XX pair. Despite that irrefutable scientific fact, gender has now been redefined as “psychological sex” rather than “biological sex.”

Unquestionably, transgender issues are indeed sociologically important to discuss beyond the personal decisions of a former Olympian. Transgender schoolchildren are imploring school districts to give them restroom access to their proclaimed gender’s restroom. LBGT concerns are part of every general election’s political debates. Also, society’s evolution of acceptance has transformed from the novelty of oddity in the 1950s, to the sparking of discourse in the 1970s, to the general acceptance currently.

Whether or not someone should endure such a drastic change in their physicality, so significant a change in their lifestyle, and cause upheaval in their families to correct what they heartedly believe is a mistake of nature is not for anyone but that individual to say.

However, the acceptance of these individual’s new chosen gender is a collective decision of our society. Should Caitlyn Jenner be heralded for galvanizing this discussion? If her objective is the cultivation of positive social discourse then the answer is yes, but if her objective is the rekindling of fame, then the answer is a resounding no.

All of us will have to wrestle with our willingness to accept those who have made this extraordinary decision.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here