ABC Q&A - Transwoman Julia's Best Comeback Ever

[EchelonHunt]

Q&A is an Australian show where a board of people will be questioned by the audience, on this particular night, it was about the queer community. Between a Frock and a Hard Place was what the episode was called.

There was a transgender woman called Julia (I forget her last name but she had written a book, "Becoming Julia...")

A person in the audience asked about gender reassignment surgery or SRS, saying the process involves mutilating otherwise perfectly functional body parts, how can this be called medicine?

Julia responded, "I would rather have mutilated genitalia than a bullet in my skull."

The entire audience just about erupted into loud cheering and clapping.

She continued to say that at the end of the day, she is happy with her body, since having the surgery, she has achieved a level of peace and happiness within herself that she never experienced before. She doesn't go to nudist beaches or anything but what her body looks like, it's nobody else's business.

Interestingly enough, a young queer activist was questioned by a person in the audience, I believe the person was trying to implicate that the majority of Australians are against gay marriage. She responded to them that, "80% of Australians are in favour of same-sex marriage, we are the majority. You guys are the minority." This got some cheering and clapping from the audience as well.

[Deleted]

One tack I take when people start talking about "mutilating your body" is to mention gynecomastia. Ask some guy, "If you had breasts, do you think you might have them removed? They might be lovely, perfectly healthy breasts that would look absolutely delightful in a lace bra. You wouldn't go and mutilate yourself would you?"

[Ativan Prescribed]

People think nothing at all about surgeries to make a nose a little better looking, to fix drooping eyes from aging, the list goes on and on.

I have a few scars that would probably look a little better if fixed up some, but the tissue is perfectly healthy.
I have a scar that looks like hell, all the skin and much more was ground off on asphalt in an accident, I had to have it treated in a burn unit.
I also have a long one from the same accident that is about a foot long and is like a 1/4" deep trench.
Perfectly healthy skin, the 'burn' was never supposed to have hair again and it's purplish when cold,  kinda looks like chicken skin.
People always have a wtf happened there question when they see either of them.
Most people would have them fixed, they would think they're ugly and I get that comment more often than not.
I think of them as the trophy for not dying from that one...

People don't think twice about what it would take to do that, it would be pretty much the same pain all over again.
And that's the thing, it's about the pain, the original was bad enough, I was pronounced dead at the scene at first.
The memories and occasional nightmare and PTSD from it on occasion, can be bad enough that when it happens, I want to have them fixed.
But I don't have the need to go through the pain it would take, and like I said, to me, they are trophies in life I earned, thank you for not liking them...

It isn't about having perfectly good tissue, it's about what you think about it, and for some, the mental anguish and pain makes it a medical necessity to remain a perfectly good body of tissue, a brain that is at peace far more with the world, a contributing member of society without the baggage of having the wrong body for the mind.

People who think you're destroying 'perfectly' good tissue don't think twice about the implants to make boobs bigger, the little (and they are not) surgeries to fix a crooked or bigger nose.

That argument just doesn't have a real justification in this world and is nothing more than an excuse to bitch about someone elses wants and needs, when they should be seriously thinking about just how fucked up their own thinking is to even make such a remark.

Their perfectly good brain tissue has a black scar running through it that they don't see when they look at themselves.

[Deleted]

Jul 25, 2015 8:19:13 GMT 8 Ativan Prescribed said:

People who think you're destroying 'perfectly' good tissue don't think twice about the implants to make boobs bigger, the little (and they are not) surgeries to fix a crooked or bigger nose.

That argument just doesn't have a real justification in this world and is nothing more than an excuse to bitch about someone elses wants and needs, when they should be seriously thinking about just how fucked up their own thinking is to even make such a remark.

Their perfectly good brain tissue has a black scar running through it that they don't see when they look at themselves.

Well said! I think about my dad allowing a surgeon to cut his chest open and do all sorts of stuff to his heart. I don't imagine it was very pretty to look at. But 10 years later my dad's still alive and kicking. I think perhaps it was worth it to him.

[Deleted]

Regarding this question of "mutilation", I recalled today what I consider to be a very good comeback to those who accuse us of "mutilating ourselves". You point out the inconsistency in the way society has traditionally treated trans and intersex people. In our case, they're horrified at the notion of our "mutilating ourselves", and they want to forbid it. In the case of intersex people, they've always demanded and enforced it.

Now if somebody wants to accuse us of similar inconsistency--on the grounds that we're demanding it for transpeople but forbidding it for intersex people--the answer to that is obvious enough. First of all, we don't demand surgery for transpeople. We demand the right for anyone who wants it. But we don't demand it for any transperson who doesn't want it--and that would be most transpeople. Secondly, we don't forbid it for intersex people. We would agree it should be forbidden for intersex infants because it denies the individual in question the right to make the decision for him/herself. In other words, we believe in "my body, my choice".

And we can also examine the difference between the motives behind society's policy and ours. Society is trying to enforce the rule, "Thou shalt be unambiguously male or female", regardless of how much unhappiness that might cause the individual in question. What we're looking for is each individual's freedom to do what they think might add to their happiness in life. We're looking for freedom and happiness; they're looking for obedience and couldn't care less about someone's happiness and well-being.