RANSVESTIA

for a baby at birth, 2) it is the way in for a penis in sexual intercourse, and 3) it is an anatomical validation of femaleness and the implicit legitimization of the femininity or that goes with it. Obviously No. 1 has no validity in the problem but Nos. 2 and 3 are of vital impor- tance. The vagina, as an orifice to receive a penis serves an entirely sexual function. A vagina as a legitimization of womanhood serves an entirely general function. This dichotomy clearly points up the mis- conception that sex and gender are essentially the same, and the cor- ollary inference that since sex is essently immutable and inescapable, the gender that goes with it is equally inevitable and inherent in the sex. Why else do we refer to "sex" reassignment and not "gender" reassignment? Part of the so-called "transexuals" see womanhood as a condition impossible to attain unless one has a vagina. Ergo, have the penis and testicles removed, an orifice constructed and PRESTO, one is now a "woman." Not so! Womanhood is a gender phenomenon not a sexual one and moreover it must be learned by living, whether by a natural born female or be someone newly assigned to that status. It does not come as a package deal . . . “1 Vagina, 1 Woman." Surgery can provide the genital alteration but no psychosurgery exists to con- struct a woman in the gender sense. The only possible route to such an attainment is personal experience and social acceptance, and that is a long, hard trip.

If a person is strongly oriented toward males as sex partners then acquisition of the necessary genital equipment has a degree of logic to it though it remains a cop-out procedure with high price tag both financially and psycho-socially. Thus there are clearly two basic motivations; the sexual one of being fuctional as a partner for a male and the genderal one of being able to live as a woman. This motivation is illogical and confused since surgery is not necessary to be a woman. It is only a painful, expensive, dangerous and misguided attempt to achieve between the legs what must eventually and inevitably be achieved between the ears.

Since I have been outspoken in my opposition to surgery on the scale it is being practiced today, many assume that I am against it completely. Not so! I have met individuals for whom I would give ap- proval for surgery if I had anything to say about it. Many of those ac- tive in this field have expressed the opinion that only perhaps 5 to 10 percent of those presenting themselves as candidates for surgery really warrant having it. I agree, but I think that these persons make up a special group.

74