Ellen Page announced new identity as Elliott Page

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's an impressive level of wilful, dogmatic denial about biology on here. It's sad. Especially as I thought the Democrats were supposed to be the party of science. This is the modern equivalent of the religious right and their rejection of evolution and insistence on creative or intelligent design as scientifically real. Only this time it's coming from the progressive left.

Very interesting perspective. I agree. It’s almost as if... “science matters - except when it’s not convenient.”

Asking genuinely (not being snarky) what you mean by this. What science is being ignored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ellen/Elliott is the actress who starred in Juno, The Umbrella Academy and Inception.

He looked so sad in this picture. Uncomfortable with sad eyes. Obviously in retrospect we can see what was going on. Hopefully there is joy and happiness in his current and future life.

Oh good grief. Her eyes did not look sad in this picture. You are projecting. And yes, I used “her” because at this time, Page was still identifying as female.

This is a gorgeous picture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand why the leap to changing pronouns is so important. There always used to be women who dressed and presented masculine. In the past it was frowned upon for men to dress in an effeminate way, and I think it’s a good thing that that perception has improved over time. But I don’t see why the big announcement about pronouns.

If you prefer to be referred to as she, would it bother you if people kept calling you he, or vice versa?

If you truly believe in equality across all people, why should it matter? Should there even be he/she?

Upthread someone brought up the changing thoughts biologists have about sex. (Although, I would add that insulting people for not being familiar with current research in this area is sh*tty and smug. I guarantee I can find plenty of areas of modern research that PP knows nothing about and they would not appreciate being denigrated for it.) If sex is fluid, what does this mean on so many levels? So much emphasis on including women in health in research? If sex is so fluid and influenced by so many factors, than is there really male and female? Does it matter on any level, for health or anything else? Is it really fluid or is our understanding of what we perceive as variation really just a reflection of inadequate study? What is the true percentage of variation? Who knows?

But if you are going to argue that sex is fluid and gender is fluid, then why even have someone designate as male or female? And who gets to decide what those things mean? Why get hung up on a pronoun? Why would you be insulted by being identified by one or the other?

+1
And I guarantee that the very people insisting gender/sex is fluid and that we shouldn’t have to “conform” to social constructs, etc. - are the very same people who obsess over the gender of our elected officials. So ironic.

[Anonymous]

Good for him. Life is too short to feel like you’re living a lie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I truly don’t understand why the leap to changing pronouns is so important. There always used to be women who dressed and presented masculine. In the past it was frowned upon for men to dress in an effeminate way, and I think it’s a good thing that that perception has improved over time. But I don’t see why the big announcement about pronouns.

If you prefer to be referred to as she, would it bother you if people kept calling you he, or vice versa?

If you truly believe in equality across all people, why should it matter? Should there even be he/she?

Upthread someone brought up the changing thoughts biologists have about sex. (Although, I would add that insulting people for not being familiar with current research in this area is sh*tty and smug. I guarantee I can find plenty of areas of modern research that PP knows nothing about and they would not appreciate being denigrated for it.) If sex is fluid, what does this mean on so many levels? So much emphasis on including women in health in research? If sex is so fluid and influenced by so many factors, than is there really male and female? Does it matter on any level, for health or anything else? Is it really fluid or is our understanding of what we perceive as variation really just a reflection of inadequate study? What is the true percentage of variation? Who knows?

But if you are going to argue that sex is fluid and gender is fluid, then why even have someone designate as male or female? And who gets to decide what those things mean? Why get hung up on a pronoun? Why would you be insulted by being identified by one or the other?

Let me preface this by saying that I’m not an academic or a particularly smart person who claims to have any of the answers, I just think about this topic a lot and find it super complex and interesting.

I pretty much agree with what you’re saying. That’s what I meant upthread when I said that gender is a social construct and isn’t “real.” But it creates real material effects on the world. One of those effects is that I am most comfortable being referred to as “she” and calling myself a woman, performing feminity, wearing dresses, etc. So who am I to begrudge someone else participating in the construct in similar or overlapping ways that I do just because their chromosomes are different than mine?

On the other hand, I feel defensive of my womanhood because the social construct of gender as well as some biological realities of being female have given women the short end of the stick since the dawn of time. So I have complicated feelings about people, especially adults, who have been socialized as male then deciding to participate and present in the world as a woman. Different but also complicated feelings about the opposite situation. It’s all really complicated and there’s no one good answer.

Yes, I’m the PP you are responding to and I agree with your last paragraph. I’ve always considered myself to be a compassionate person. I’ve always supported gay rights without question. I don’t want to cause someone pain or treat them unkindly, yet inside my own head I’ve always had some complicated feelings regarding transexualism and I think you’ve articulated part of it. But a big part for me was articulated by another PP:

Anonymous wrote:I guess overall to me it seems that frequently it actually pigeonholes gender stereotypes more when people feel that because they don’t represent a mainstream expression of gender they must somehow be transgender. I’m not trying to be trans exclusionary. I don’t actually GAF what anyone wants to identify as, I’ll call you what you want, but I just can’t get past the irony of how much of this actually perpetuates harmful gender stereotypes while trying to be free of them.

I think some of it kicks up some resistance from me because I’m left thinking, WTF do people think being a woman means exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ellen/Elliott is the actress who starred in Juno, The Umbrella Academy and Inception.

He looked so sad in this picture. Uncomfortable with sad eyes. Obviously in retrospect we can see what was going on. Hopefully there is joy and happiness in his current and future life.

Oh good grief. Her eyes did not look sad in this picture. You are projecting. And yes, I used “her” because at this time, Page was still identifying as female.

This is a gorgeous picture.

I’m LOL’ing too. People are over the top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Excellent and informative post, thank you. May I ask another question? It's going to sound stupid, but this is one of the things I am having trouble wrapping my mind around. The question involves the present trans identity versus the person we knew in the past as a non-trans person. If an adult declares himself/herself/theirself as transgender, whether that is the traditional or non-traditional presentation, does that have any uniform meaning in terms of their life up until that point? In reading about "deadnaming" and thinking about the traditional understanding of a Caitlyn Jenner model of a trans person, prior to transitioning, the trans person was living a life in pain, constrained by a gender assignment that did not match their true selves. But is that always true? Using Elliot as an example, was Elliot always Elliot? Did Elliot star in Juno because that is who Ellen really was?

It is easy for any normal, decent person to treat a trans person respectfully in the present. My struggle is processing a transgender identity in connection with past associations with the person before transition. I hope this isn't offensive, because it is not meant to be.

You quoted me so I want to reply so you don't feel ignored, but I'm a cis hetero woman so I don't think I'm the right one to answer your question. From my understanding on the outside though, I'd say that yes Elliot starred in Juno because essentially who Elliot is now is who he always was, just with a different name/outward identity. Remember there is the added nuance that the actor in Juno was, well, acting. I don't think the concept of a name being dead means the person wants their past life to be dead too? That said, I'd imagine there are some people who do want a concrete separation though? Particularly if their former identity was associated with trauma? I think like most things in this discussion, there isn't a black and white answer.

I think the reconciliation of a past vs. present person is a really interesting conversation, not a stupid question at all. I think about myself; let's say my older sister transitioned to a male, would I feel like I lost my childhood sister or would I think of him the same way I'd think of my sister if she was blonde for 30 years and then went brunette? I consider myself pretty liberal and accepting, but it's easier to accept a theoretical situation than to deal with the reality when it happens in your life. I'm sure there are lots of books written by siblings in that exact situation. Or parents.

I hope someone with direct experience can chime in to answer your question.

Thank you so much for responding. Yes, you nailed my question in terms of how one would process the reality. While typing my question, the attorney in me was was thinking that my actual question was what, if any retroactive, effect does a transition have?

I have friends who have dealt with some of these issues with their children, and it is challenging. I love my children fiercely and always will. If my daughter were to transition, I would love him/them no less than I do today. That is a given. Still, there would be a part of me that would have to reconcile my current relationship with him/them post-transition with the reality that I gave birth to and raised a person I believed to be a daughter by virtue of the gender assigned at birth. We could be mother and son, but it would take some work on my part to process what came before, given that our relationship was established and cultivated through a gender lens, with us as mother and daughter sharing our common experiences as women. We all need to examine our biases, misunderstandings, and selfish interests or concerns in order to truly accept and support our loved ones. That's why I ask questions.

Life is complicated. My partner, and other parent to our children, is trans. I love them dearly. If our children came out as trans, I would mourn for some time (and maybe forever) the history we had, the idea of who I thought they were, the picture of their future in my mind, the utter perfection of them at birth. But, I would realize that what I was mourning was the distance between my perception of reality and their experience of it. And that, ultimately, it is their life to live and their being within which to exist. But, yeah, I think this is an honest and fairly common way to feel. I would not share this with them until far after they would reach comfortable footing and psychological safety. And then only if ever they asked. And I would do it very thoughtfully and carefully because I have seen the vulnerability that always exists for queer and trans people vis a vis family. I've experienced it. Sometimes, it is ok to feel something and, you know, keep it to yourself or a trusted friend/shrink. LOL.

[Anonymous]

People are conflating gender and sex. Sex is not fluid - it’s biological and unless you are a hermaphrodite, or have a chromosomal abnormality, you are either male or female.

Gender is a societal construct and is fluid. Gender norms reflect societal expectations about the way one sex behaves vs the way the other sex behaves. It suggests that men should do/think/act like X and women should act/think/do like this. It dictates clothing and attire and sexual behavior.

To those who say biology is biology and ultimately science, sure. But gender is not science and is a construct of biases and norms that have nothing to do with science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ellen/Elliott is the actress who starred in Juno, The Umbrella Academy and Inception.

He looked so sad in this picture. Uncomfortable with sad eyes. Obviously in retrospect we can see what was going on. Hopefully there is joy and happiness in his current and future life.

Oh good grief. Her eyes did not look sad in this picture. You are projecting. And yes, I used “her” because at this time, Page was still identifying as female.

This is a gorgeous picture.

I’m LOL’ing too. People are over the top.

WTF, guess I’m gay now. Crap!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's an impressive level of wilful, dogmatic denial about biology on here. It's sad. Especially as I thought the Democrats were supposed to be the party of science. This is the modern equivalent of the religious right and their rejection of evolution and insistence on creative or intelligent design as scientifically real. Only this time it's coming from the progressive left.

Very interesting perspective. I agree. It’s almost as if... “science matters - except when it’s not convenient.”

Asking genuinely (not being snarky) what you mean by this. What science is being ignored.

Its a strawman fake argument. No one is DENYING BIOLOGY, they are saying its not the sole determinant of what it feels like to be a certain gender. All of this mental gymnastics to say its the same as rejecting evolution? That stuff smacks of the same combo of stupid and smugness as people who say those who fight racists are "intolerant of those who are intolerant and no better" Doesn't work that way. You don't unring a bell, get on board or don't but don't yell at the wind that you are inconvenienced by having to learn new language as the world evolves, that's really a pity party of 1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There's an impressive level of wilful, dogmatic denial about biology on here. It's sad. Especially as I thought the Democrats were supposed to be the party of science. This is the modern equivalent of the religious right and their rejection of evolution and insistence on creative or intelligent design as scientifically real. Only this time it's coming from the progressive left.

Very interesting perspective. I agree. It’s almost as if... “science matters - except when it’s not convenient.”

Asking genuinely (not being snarky) what you mean by this. What science is being ignored.

Its a strawman fake argument. No one is DENYING BIOLOGY, they are saying its not the sole determinant of what it feels like to be a certain gender. All of this mental gymnastics to say its the same as rejecting evolution? That stuff smacks of the same combo of stupid and smugness as people who say those who fight racists are "intolerant of those who are intolerant and no better" Doesn't work that way. You don't unring a bell, get on board or don't but don't yell at the wind that you are inconvenienced by having to learn new language as the world evolves, that's really a pity party of 1

Nah. We’re not talking about feeling. We’re talking about being. I don’t doubt people can feel as one thing or another.

[Anonymous]

Good for them, I guess. I suspect in 10 years he will transition back, or adopt some new identity, when the longed-for mental peace never materializes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are conflating gender and sex. Sex is not fluid - it’s biological and unless you are a hermaphrodite, or have a chromosomal abnormality, you are either male or female.

Sex is not fluid, it's only A or B... well unless you're C or D or E. But still, only ever A or B.

See how even in your own sentence you're contradicting yourself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good for them, I guess. I suspect in 10 years he will transition back, or adopt some new identity, when the longed-for mental peace never materializes.

I hope she/he doesn't take hormones that will affect her ability to be pregnant in the meantime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Which is absurd. Using Page as an example, how would he ever refer to his entire prior life as Ellen? Are his parents simply instructed to forget Ellen ever existed? I have nothing against the trans community, but this sort of nonsense is exactly why they receive pushback and questions. It’s as if the previous person is to be erased. “Deadname” says it all.

Again for the people in the back...

Does Page refer to his own prior life in published articles he writes?

Are his parents journalists publishing articles discussing him?

The recommendations are about publishing. No different from setting standards as to if Charles' or Charles's is correct.

You can't say "I have nothing against the trans community" and then say something they feel is important is "nonsense" in the same sentence. You do in fact have something against the trans community if you think their feelings about something important to them is nonsense.

It's not erasing the previous person, it's correcting something that was wrong for a long time. The articles written in the past will still exist. No one is getting into a time machine and changing things. Dealing with something in a new way moving forward is not an erasure.