Transfixed on the Prefix, 'Trans-'

"For although the thinkers say that actuality is annihilated possibility, that is not entirely true; it is the fulfilled, the active possibility. Here, on the contrary, the actuality . . . which is thus also a negation, is the possibility annihilated, rendered impotent. Usually the relation of the actual to the possible is one of confirmation; here it is a denial."

– Søren Kierkegaard, The Sickness Unto Death

In my last post I discussed one writer's perspective on the debate over what to call “intersex” people, those in possession of bodies which are neither male nor female. I'd like to begin this one by instead thinking on what we should call those who display hatred or fear towards these people. “Transphobia,” says Kate Bornstein, “is one term in vogue with some transsexuals” (74). The intended meaning of this term seems obvious enough; fear of transgender = transphobia. But etymologically this word wants to take on a broader meaning than the one it was made for.

Collins English Dictionary contains the following entry for the prefix:

trans- or (sometimes before s-) tran-

— prefix
1. across, beyond, crossing, on the other side: transoceanic ; trans-Siberian ; transatlantic
2. changing thoroughly: transliterate
3. transcending: transubstantiation
4. transversely: transect
5. (often in italics) Compare cis- indicating that a chemical compound has a molecular structure in which two groups or atoms are on opposite sides of a double bond: trans-butadiene

[from Latin trāns across, through, beyond]

So, we can clearly see that although “transphobia” is intended and taken to mean something like “fear of transsexuality,” the word itself resists that circumscription. Bornstein briefly discusses this potential: “Fear of crossing? Fear of transgressing? If this term were allowed that sort of breadth—that is including the fear and hatred of any kind of border-dwellers—then it might have some possibilities” (74). As the dictionary entry shows us, the etymological possibilities for trans- far exceed the limited scope of transphobia's coinage and usage. Seen in this light, “transphobia” comes to bear a plurality of related meanings; fear of crossing, fear of change, fear of going beyond, fear of the other side, fear of being situated or extended across something, fear of being or going beyond, across, or above limits or boundaries of any kind—fear of surpassing, overcoming, rising above, or notable extension beyond ordinary limits. In Kierkegaardian terms, we might say that transphobia is a fear of possibility, that in the case of gender, we witness transphobia whenever we see the annihilation of possibility in protection of a gendered actuality, the binary of male and female.

Bornstein (79) poses a series of questions which I will transcribe here:

What's your gender?
When did you decide that?
How much say do you have in your gender?
Is there anything about your gender or gender role that you don't like, or that gets in your way?
Are there one or two qualities about another gender that are appealing to you, enough so that you'd like to incorporate those qualities into your daily life?
What would happen to your life if you did that?
What would your gender be then?
How do you think people would respond to you?
How would you feel if they did that?

I encourage anyone reading this post to seriously consider these questions, keeping in mind the above discussion of 'trans-'. I would add one more question to this list: Do you display qualities belonging to a gender other than your own? For instance, are you a man who considers himself sensitive? A woman who could be called competitive? Do you enjoy sex? Not enjoy sex? Have you ever been afraid? If we take this line of questioning to its logical extreme, it seems fair to say that there is no real person who displays only and all of the qualities assigned to his/her gender. I assert that everyone is transgender insofar as every person falls somewhere between the binary of man/woman, that no matter how we define “woman” or “man” there will be someone who identifies as such that will be left out by our definition. Also, I think it is fair to say that everyone is transphobic, that is, no matter what your views on gender, there is someone who exists in such a way that their very presence, the very possibility of their being what they are, will challenge those views and provoke in you an unavoidable feeling of fear.

Is this a productive way to think? It certainly deprives “transgender” as a category of any political salience, and likewise deprives “transphobia” of any kind of ad hominem function. The latter clause probably isn't a bad thing, and if nothing else allows us to recognize the fear of change and subscription to normality that is present in every single one of us, no matter how radical we think we are. Likewise, recognizing the ways in which each and every person resists characterization as their gender identity can do wonders for consciousness and solidarity within social justice movements surrounding topics of sex and gender. Ultimately, of course, people who identify with the T in LGBT are the ones who should decide what their trans identity means, and the kind of reasoning I'm presenting here can result in dangerous, homogenous social ontology; I call myself “transgender” if and only if such a term can rightly be applied to everyone, and not otherwise.

Works Cited:

Kierkegaard. The Sickness Unto Death. <http://bit.ly/1aSfOxa>

Bornstein, Kate. Gender Outlaw. <http://bit.ly/NzIKQz>

"trans-." Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. HarperCollins Publishers.        11 Feb. 2014. <Dictionary.com | http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/trans->.