Lesbian Couple "Looks into Transgender" as a Loophole to Get Married

[Girl_On_Fire]

I'm not transgender but I identify as a queer femme and am attracted to male-identified butches and transgender guys.

That being said, somebody posted this article on Facebook and I was infuriated by what I saw and read. Apparently, this couple, who at one point at least, identified as lesbian, "looked into transgender" so they could get married.

One partner underwent gender reassignment for the sole purposes of being able to legally marry their significant other. That's it. This woman never identified as transgender or at least does not say so in the interview. The article made it clear that this decision was based only on "getting around the marriage laws".

I think this confuses and undermines the concept of transgender. I do not want people who know little-to-nothing about transgender people to start thinking that this is what we "do" just so we can legally tie the knot.

In my opinion, this article is an insult to transgender people and their partners.

How do you feel about it?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...&ir=Gay+Voices

[TexasCowboi]

It trivialized the transgender community. I am still at a loss for words really.

[AnAwkwardAccident]

....I don't even have words. I am infuriated. ....wow.

[*Anya*]

There is more than meets the eye here.

Let's see, in 2006, Christine told her (gay) husband that she was gay.

In 2008, she went back to dating men.

Then, sometime during that Oprah show in 2006 or 2008, Jacki saw Christine send said: "Wow, Christine is beautiful".

Then, sometime between 2008 and 2013, Christine and Jacki started dating.

I guess Christine came out again?

Then, they decided to get married but couldn't legally so Jacki changed her sex?

Not because Jacki identified as transgendered but just to be able to marry Christine?

I wonder about both of their mental statuses.

I am ordering up full psych consults times two.

Yes, it trivializes coming out for transfolk and trivializes coming out for lesbians.

It is insulting for all of us and for all of our struggles that any of us could so easily turn on and off who we are with a switch.

[Words]

I'm not seeing what everyone else seems to be seeing.

I'm seeing two queers who fell in love, one of whom wanted to ensure that they'd enjoy all the rights to which straight folks are entitled simply through being straight at a time when that wasn't possible without one of them changing their gender. Result? Two happy queers.

My partner, who has been on T for many years now and who has also had his breasts removed - but who identifies as third gendered, not male, and who has no issue whatsoever with still being classed as female from a legal point of view nor any desire to change that to male, - would have done exactly the same thing for me had we not found another way of being able to enjoy the same rights as straight folk (in this case, the right to live together in the same country). I know, because at one point, with no other viable solution in sight, we discussed it.

And?

[~ocean]

I had to watch this video twice to understand what you were seeing , I have to disagree ~ reasoning being , Jackie seemed very masculine on her own w/ out her marriage to Chris. The thought of transgender came after YES ! But it was from her love and devotion to take care of( her ) wife. It was Jackie that seeked an alternative way to change his sexual identity willingly ,to secure her (wife's ) well being after his demise. That is a selfless love. The timing of Jackie's decision may have came after the overwhelming love he had for his wife. The intension wasn't to undermine transgender lifestyle ... or was it taking matters into his own hands and saying I will provide for my wife as a legal man to do so , I see the POSITIVE in Jackie's actions. Not the negative. I think they make beautiful couple ~ and God Bless their union ~

[DapperButch]

I am not convinced that Jacki did a "selfless" act.

This is my take on it. Either Jacki consciously or unconsciously wanted to transition, or was already "in the middle", so it wasn't a big deal to her.

I think she is happy living as male and I think it is possible/probable that Jacki liked the opportunity to get her breasts removed. Until top surgery, I bound my breasts for 20 years. I know what a bound chest looks like. The picture of them on the motorcycle? I would put up $100 bet that her chest is bound. I don't think it was a big loss for her.

Here is the thing. In CA Jacki needed to get a top surgery (although they say mastectomy, which is different) in order to legally identify as male, in order to marry. Ok, so she did that. Did she need to take testosterone? Does she need to (clearly) work out? No. Jacki could easily still be presenting as a masculine female if that is what she wants. Lots of women have mastectomies (which means even less breast tissue left after surgery). Does it no longer make them women? Of course not!

I say Jacki seized an opportunity to transition. I think internalized transphobia is at work here, which is why she didn't transition prior to now. Again, conscious or unconscious.

So, that is my thoughts on that.

The question though was how it presents to the public. I am less concerned about it trivializing the trans* community and more concerned as to how it makes female loving females look. It feeds right into the myth that "women really want to be men".

Late for work or would go on a rant about the above!

[*Anya*]

Originally Posted by *Anya*

Then, they decided to get married but couldn't legally so Jacki changed her sex?

Not because Jacki identified as transgendered but just to be able to marry Christine?

I wonder about both of their mental statuses.

I am ordering up full psych consults times two.

Yes, it trivializes coming out for transfolk and trivializes coming out for lesbians.

It is insulting for all of us and for all of our struggles that any of us could so easily turn on and off who we are with a switch.

Yep, I was the other one that made what I saw as a light-hearted, if rather flip, comment about their possibly needing an evaluation if Jacki changed her sex solely for the purpose of marrying Christine.

Honestly, it is difficult to be genuine when one has to constantly re-evaluate every comment and observation in a forum so as to not offend someone, somewhere.

Do I not have empathy and compassion for the mentally ill and chemically dependent? Have I not shown that in the 3-years that I have posted here?

Do I sometimes make a comment that I think is humorous that others do not find funny at all? Clearly.

I am sorry if my comment, specifically about Christine and Jacki's behavior came off as heartless and stirred up pain for past or present history.

My feelings get hurt easily. I don't challenge every comment written that might bother me. I feel that my own past experiences are mine alone and if someone makes a comment that offends-they are not directing it at me personally.

Unless they are-in that case, I can either chose to let it go or address it. Since Gemme stood up and faced the comments directed at the two of us; I needed to do so, too.

I am sorry I may have caused hurt but still believe that as the story is written (which may not be true); I still question their judgement.

Perhaps questioning their judgement would have been less offensive than questioning their mental status.

I agree with that.

[Okiebug61]

Why does or how does one's own journey and the shoes they walk in be an overall deciding factor of another's journey?

Should we even be questioning their personal decisions? If so, does this not open the door for all to be scrutinized?

Last when does the things we do for love take on a true meaning?