Trans as Bodily Becoming: Rethinking the Biological as Diversity, Not Dichotomy

Abstract

The current study used grounded theory methods to analyze trans men's positive emotions. The sample included 11 participants who were assigned a female sex at birth and currently identify with a binary male identity. Results yielded eight positive emotion themes emerging for trans men, which included the following: confidence, comfort, connection, feeling alive, amazement, pride, happiness, and interpersonal reactionary emotions. Participants reported specific gender experiences within these themes, including a sense of brotherhood, excitement related to taking testosterone, authentic pride in identifying as a man, and happiness connected to others using correct gender language (e.g., pronouns, family labels, greetings). A theoretical model from the eight themes and 39 higher order categories emerged, indicating the importance of initial internal emotions, confidence related to trans men's identity processes, and the ways in which positive interpersonal interactions affect positive emotions. Implications include using emotion-focused therapy and including more positivity into trans individuals' experiences and emotions.

“Just Go In Looking Good”: The Resilience, Resistance, and Kinship-Building of Trans* College Students

“…This question has prompted a wealth of studies from a wide range of disciplines (Serano, 2007), illuminates deep personal insecurities (e.g., Ablow, 2011), and exposes rifts within the trans* community regardless of the answer. However, Whittle's assessment of the debate between the biological essentialism and social construction of gender presents the issue as a false dichotomy (Lane, 2009). In addition to these two perspectives, a third exists, which posits biology as diversity.…”

“…In addition to these two perspectives, a third exists, which posits biology as diversity. Lane (2009) posited, "While arguments for a biological role in gender development need careful scrutiny, they should not be rejected out of hand, especially when they stress nonlinearity, contingency, self-organization, open-endedness, and becoming" (p. 137). I explore these three perspectives-gender as social construction, gender as biological determinism, and biology as diversity-and the influential role they have in shaping the ways trans* individuals understand their gender identities.…”

Transgender and gender expansive education research, policy and practice: reflecting on epistemological and ontological possibilities of bodily becoming

“…While we do not believe that it is productive to pit transgender studies against queer or feminist studies, we believe that it is important to be cognizant of the epistemological bases for grounding and fostering an understanding of gender democratization associated with these differing theoretical accounts of gender embodiment, gender becoming and gender fluidity (see Elliot 2016). Such a critical engagement necessitates attending to questions of gender embodiment, visibility and recognition that are cognizant of the ontological and phenomenological integrity of the diversity of trans and non-binary people's experiences and own understandings of 'bodily becoming' as they pertain to the realization of their personhood (Doan 2010;Lane 2009;Nordmarken 2014). In this ethical and political regard, it also requires attending to the erasure of intersex individuals with its implications for addressing and furthering our understanding of gender complexity and sexed embodiment with respect to the conduct of education research, policy-making and curricular practices in education institutions such as schools.…”

Toward Trans-gendering International Relations?

“…For example, while many feminists have a more complicated understanding of “gender” than biological sex, sometimes feminist politics is reducible to the representation of people and interests identified with “women.” Often, feminist theorists have trouble understanding what (if any) “other” to the masculine/feminine dichotomy exists. Trans‐theorists tend to talk about gender not in terms of masculinities and femininities but in terms of “gender diversity,” which might enhance feminism's (and IR's) understandings of diversity in global politics (Moreno ; Lane ).…”

“…Such an approach urges scholars to critically interrogate the comfort we have with social‐constructionist approaches to gender as our only alternative to biological essentialism. As Lane warns, “social‐constructionist methodology tends to invite ontological belief that gender is produced by socialization” (2009:144). Lane's concern is that feminist IR's constructivist and poststructuralist epistemological choices reflect (and produce) an understanding of gender as social construct or as performed that does not resonate with trans‐people's experiences.…”