Crossing Every “T”
To The Editors:
I was directed to the article, “Right Sex, Wrong Body” (by Sam Boykin, March 13) through a post-op transsexual group (actually itself a misnomer which they use among themselves for “practical” purposes, since a post-op person is publicly the gender they are after the operation). There were complaints about the “insensitivity” of Boykin’s article by using the masculine article with reference to Ms. McLaren.
Holding a Masters in Clinical and Counseling Psychology and having been a managing and executive editor for a professional (ethics) journal, I am aware of the difficulties of using appropriate gender references when speaking of transgender and “transsexual” people.
In your article, Boykin used masculine articles when describing her until he reached the point where she “found” herself to be female. This is entirely logical from a historical perspective, but it does not reflect the current understanding, and literary treatment, of post-OP transsexuals. More accurate contemporary definitions of transgender and transsexual would be: transgender (a person who lives a role other than their birth sex); transsexuals (a person who is a sex other than what was physically apparent at birth and which condition is being medically corrected, as well as a description of the etiological process of someone’s currently apparent gender)
Major news and journal publications now use the convention of referring to these people as the gender they apparently are currently. If you had consciously chosen a historical life perspective and wished to emphasize the distinction of genders in the time-line of her life, a note to that effect should have preceded the article and also a statement that no disrespect was intended thereby.
I am not advising you to be politically correct, I am offering you information to increase your accuracy in communicating with others about the phenomena of transgenderism and transsexualism. Also, I would ask that in other than specific articles of journalism, that you consider that these persons finally are able to live as the gender they “are” and that to “out” or “emphasize” their past is a disservice and unwarranted invasion of their privacy so please tell your friends — and enemies.
Dr. Dee Ann Mrovka
Dallas, Texas
Respect Chosen Gender
To The Editors:
In “Right Sex, Wrong Body,” Sam Boykin referred to Elizabeth as he or him throughout the description of her. The second girl was referred to as she. In the last description, you referred to Hollis as he and him. You seem to have respected their chosen gender while you did not show Elizabeth the same respect.
I too am transgendered and I don’t think you should be treating someone like that. Why not show each of them the same respect? I think you owe Elizabeth an apology for your disrespect. She took the time to give you an interview and you just treated her like crap. Personally, I think Boykin should be taken out back and horse-whipped.
Terri Cook
Rock Hill, SC
Leggo The Prounouns
To The Editors:
I thought “Right Sex, Wrong Body” was very good. Although the cover art was a bit tasteless, I’m sure it got people’s attention (which is all it was designed to do). After being in marketing and PR most of my career, I know all about the good, the bad and the ugly of journalism. Elizabeth, please try and let the pronoun stuff go. The interviewer said you were all woman, and he thought no one would know unless you outed yourself (which, let’s face it … you did). But it is a literary “standard” in gender issues for pre-ops to be referred to as “him.” You have to look at the article as a whole. . .three cases, two women and a man. Not DQ’s, not Jerry Springerisms, but real people suffering from this condition. The interviewer actually did pretty well, especially for being in the Deep South!
A great woman once reminded me that the world changes in very small increments, much like that of a glacier moving. When you believe in something so strongly that you are willing to out yourself publicly, then you have to accept whatever stones and arrows are flung at you. Hang in there, Elizabeth. . .ya done good.
Name withheld by request
Lucy Wins “Most Offensive” Award
To The Editors:
With amusement I read Lucy Perkins’ latest hate speech in which she resorts to name calling of the State of South Carolina, the South, Southerners and the Confederate battle flag (“Rebel Without A Cause,” March 27). Liberals like Lucy always demand that people treat them with courtesy and respect, but they feel free to go on the attack and resort to lies, insults and slander. Lucy is typical of most liberals; she’s all opinions and feelings and has not facts and no truths. She says she supports the NAACP, which has become the nation’s largest hate group. She preaches false history when the very facts of the matter prove her to be wrong. Lucy says that half of the state of South Carolina needs brain transplants. That sounds rather hateful to me. I’d suggest that Lucy try to be a little more honest, a little more educated, a little more objective and a little more polite.
She says that we Southerners should put away our battle flags in an effort to be polite, because as she said, “it is simply good manners to take down something that offensive to so many people.” She says those of us who honor our culture and heritage “may not be tasteful.” I’d like for Lucy and the liberals to be polite for a change. Lucy Perkins is the most offensive media type in this city today (thank goodness we’ve already gotten rid of Jerry Klein, Michael Graham and Mike Church). Since she is so “in your face” offensive, I suggest that she do the polite thing and just go away and cease to bore us with her self-righteous ranting.
I’d also suggest the NAACP practice a little of that politeness Lucy was talking about and stop their cultural cleansing of the South. Their intolerance is exceeded only by their ignorance. Of course, that is just the sort of group that appeals to Lucy Perkins.
Terry Crayton
Charlotte
Don’t Blame Entire Church
To The Editors:
While not meaning to trivialize the pedophilia scandal involving Catholic priests, it’s overkill to blame the entire Roman Catholic Church — or all priests — for these sins. There are thousands of Catholic priests who serve the hundreds of millions of Catholics worldwide. Most of them are honorable, decent men who strive to live pure lives in serving God. The number who commit acts of pedophilia are few by comparison. Let’s not blame individuals who are innocent of any crimes for the horrible crimes committed by the relatively few criminals in the priesthood.
Stephen V. Gilmore
Charlotte
Boykin Does It Again
To The Editors:
“On The Way Home” (by Sam Boykin, March 20) was a wonderful piece! He poignantly displayed the successful efforts of those served by the Homeless Services Network while pointing out the serious need for more facilities that help people with the difficult path of moving from homelessness to permanent housing. I am hopeful that the Homeless Task Force, led by former County Manager Jerry Fox, which will be making recommendations in coming months, will ensure that the needs Mr. Boykin highlighted will be “front and center” of our community agenda for years to come.
Carol Hughes
Executive Director, Crisis Assistance Ministry
Charlotte
Servatius Unpatriotic
To The Editors:
Seldom have I read such juvenile political commentary as that of Tara Servatius in “Creative Loafing Exclusive: US President Must Be Smoking Crack” (March 20). The opening line in your political reporter’s screed: “The President of the United States can kiss my rear end.”
What is her main beef? President George Bush is asking Americans to donate up to two years of their lives to volunteer public service work, either with the Peace Corps or AmeriCorps or some variation thereof. Servatius’ rejoinder: “What will they ask for next — the blood right out of our veins?” Such a remark is typical of the “me, me, me” narcissistic generation. How dare a political leader call on citizens for sacrifice, even in wartime!
Poor Ms. Servatius: By her calculation of the taxes she’s paid, she has worked full-time for 2-3 years for federal, state, or local governments combined — and 5.6 years “for myself.” As a reporter, she says she is well aware that much of the money spent by governments over the years “held no direct benefit for you, me. . .”
Really? She mentions several instances of relatively small “pork barrel” projects in the domestic economy, but has nothing to say about the $70 billion spent for the war on terrorism since 9/11. Nor does she mention the $380 billion defense budget proposed for FY 2003. If she has a problem with these very large sums, she does not tell us — perhaps because her unpatriotic posture would be even more obvious.
I am not aware of any public service “one of the ambitious ones” has ever performed. Enlighten us, Tara. She goes on to criticize a Republican President for proposing spending a rather modest amount on textbooks and job-training programs for Third World countries trying to become self-sufficient. Does she know — I doubt it — that the US spends less on foreign aid than any other First World country?
I salute President Bush for ruining this bad citizen’s lunch hour and causing her to break her car radio. Way to go, George!
William E. Jackson, Jr.
Davidson
Volunteering Helps Everyone
To The Editors:
Regarding Tara Servatius’ March 20 column, individuals should not volunteer because the President tells them, instead they should volunteer to improve their community and help others.
Volunteers have made Charlotte a great place. Thousands of people are involved in community service on a regular basis. People continue to volunteer because it enriches their lives as well as the lives of the people they are helping. For example, I have been a “Big Brother” for over three years; I continue to spend several hours each week with my “little brother” because I have fun. I know he needs a positive role model. I look forward to spending time with him and do not see my time with him as something I’m being “told to do.”
Over 6,000 other people volunteer through Hands On Charlotte each year. You’d be surprised how many of those people thank us for the opportunity to give back through meaningful service.
Charlotte is blessed with dozens of effective nonprofit organizations that are improving our community. They cannot exist without the support of volunteers. The goal of the President’s Freedom Corps proposal is to challenge individuals not already involved in community service to experience the joy and fulfillment that is available to us when we volunteer. Community involvement and volunteering are not partisan issues, there is some way for everyone to get involved and enjoy their service.
We thank Creative Loafing for its continued support of Hands On Charlotte and the nonprofit community through the Happenings announcements. We have recruited hundreds if not thousands of volunteers because of Creative Loafing‘s support. I invite Ms. Servatius to volunteer with Hands On Charlotte and I’m sure she’ll change her mind; once she has a positive and meaningful volunteer experience.
Doug Macomb
Hands On Charlotte
Program Director
This article appears in Apr 3-9, 2002.
