Orville Taylor | Transgendered reasoning

Membership in the world, in a group, in a society or anything larger than oneself, is never determined by the individual itself. In a series of conversations that I have been conducting, regarding sexual harassment, over the last few months, the very issue of the individual’s perception versus that of others has been a central point.

As we navigate the way that we relate to each other, what is clear is that inasmuch as we may have certain conceptions and ideas or even attitudes about what reality is, there is a recognition that certain norms and values outside of the mind of the individual actor hold greater sway.

Thus, we recognise that in Jamaica, being called by a descriptor such as ‘Blacks’, ‘Big’, or ‘Brown Man’ is simply that. There is no offence behind it. Indeed, my Korean friend had to be disabused of his notion of being discriminated against, because everyone called him ‘Mr Chin’.

The truth is, Sang Woo eventually came to understand that in Jamaica, he was a ‘Chiney man’, and whatever he considered himself to be meant little, because in Jamaica his being Korean was up a little consequence.

Our intergalactic glory hound, LA Lewis, has great delusions of grandeur that he is royalty, or the legitimate chief of one of the maroon communities in Jamaica.

Bedecked in symbols understood perhaps only by him, he is regularly brought back down to reality, often by law enforcement or other group within which he claims membership.

In the discourse regarding sexual harassment, there are three essential elements; first it must be unwelcome, second it must offensive, and third it humiliates the individual against whom the action is directed. It is also important to note that other individuals in the environment, being repulsed by the behaviour, can also find themselves to be sexually harassed. It really does not matter what the alleged offender thinks he is doing, all that counts is whether or not the recipient of the behaviour thinks that it is.

Nevertheless, it is important to note that it is not simply what the individual who receives or perceives the action thinks. Importantly, there is something in sociology we call ‘inter subjectivity’.

INTER SUBJECTIVITY

In a nutshell, what inter subjectivity does is prevents society from descending into anarchy and chaos, simply because every single person has his or her own opinion as to what is appropriate or inappropriate for him or herself. Thus, the fact that an individual may consider him or herself sexually harassed does not mean that she or he is. In fact, there is an expression in law about an individual’s discretion being ‘at large’. There is no such thing as an individual forming an opinion about his or her or her own action or self without it being mediated by something larger than him or herself.

This is the price we pay for membership in a society, as opposed to the citadel in our minds.

For this reason, the United Nations has not yet got to that point where fundamental human rights include elements such as gender identity or sexual orientation. While important within activist and interest groups, there is still not enough international consensus or science regarding this.

Our own Jamaican Constitution is very clear as to what the bases are when one is establishing fundamental human rights. At this point, what a person considers him or herself to be is not a fundamental human right, and our Constitution simply makes reference to being male or female. Beyond all of this, there is a grey space of identity and gender confusion.

Dave Chappelle, super intelligent comedian, with far more sense that most of my PhD colleagues, asks a simple question as regards persons who may be transgender or have an identity different from what biology or what God assigned to them ‘in error’.

While it is accepted that every single human has a right to consider her or himself to be anything that she or he wishes; what obligation does that place on the next person or society to accept this self-perception?

BEMUSED

My Jamaican Chinese friend, who speaks no Mandarin or Cantonese, is still bemused by his being called black during a martial tournament in Asia.

In the United states, one of the main countries where there is general acceptance of gender self-identity, it is ironic that one may have a choice about one’s sex, which is really immutable; yet, one cannot change his or her race, whatever that might be.

Thus, it is justifiably ridiculous that someone who looks like me, despite having European and Indian ancestry, would seek to identify herself as either. And using the same standard of having the freedom to choose one’s identity, why should not a Caucasian, because he has a strong penchant for Jamaican culture, smokes endless joints of sensimilla, wears dreadlocks and ‘sight up’ Rastafari, not have the right to self-declare His Negritude?

On the surface of this, delusion as some people may call it, may be innocuous or simply curious. And as with gender identity, one should be free to consider him or herself whatever she or he wants to be.

However, if what the individual is seeking not only the recognition of this perception, but more importantly other tangible benefits or treatment as a consequence, then the argument is not that simple.

So, is it been argued that a white person, with a black identity, but who looks white to everybody else even with the tan, is entitled to minority benefits like a natural-born African?

You see, while ‘UC’ is seeking to cross or split new frontiers, there are some people who are not yet comfortable with a ‘tough back’ man, with a functioning penis, sharing a public bathroom with our 10-year-old daughter.

 

- Dr Orville Taylor is senior lecturer at the Department of Sociology at The University of the West Indies, a radio talk-show host, and author of ‘Broken Promises, Hearts and Pockets’. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and tayloronblackline@hotmail.com.