Back to the post
Back to the post
Reader Asks “Dear Prudence” About Standing By Her Man As He Transitions
Back to the post
6 Comments
No. 3 ·
William
I admit this is my first comment post to Queerty as I normally don’t like to comment. However – I would like to point out that the writer was wise enough to start refering to her ‘husband’ as she, yet neither Yoeff nor Queerty were respectful enough to start referring to her as her proper gender. Yoeff’s point is well phrased, however the response lost something when she insisted on using the incorrect gender pronoun for someone who is transitioning.
Nov 22, 2012 at 5:33 pm · @Reply
·
·
No. 4 ·
Taliaferro
There are many facets to this problem. Technically. the individual in question, from the information I got from reading it, is still a biolgical male – this transition takes some time. Ergo, I do not feel Yoeff or Queerty deserve condemnation for referring to him as, “he.” I agree that the wife’s vow to remain married would have been better left unspoken – in the shock following her husband’a announcement, I do not think she had had time to really think through matters. As a heterosexual woman, of course she loves the male aspect of her husband and that aspect will be gone when the transition is complete. There is also the question of legality in their marriage when the man becomes a woman. Will their state still recognize the marriage? Marriage, or long term relationships, between two people are subject to constant change and the couple either adapts of breaks up due to these changes in circumstances. It is easy to cast blame here. Why did a man who has always felt he was a woman in a man’s body marry in the first place? Yes, the woman should have said she would think things over, but consider her shock at the news. When we receive a great shock, we do not think clearly at that time. She is of course grieving for her husband and her marriage. Although I understand that man is fragile at the moment, he made this decision which is going to have a profound effect on him and those close to him. The wife should not be held captive to a contract which that husband has already broken.
Nov 23, 2012 at 3:53 pm · @Reply ·
·
No. 5 ·
Thedrdonna
A note: I’m going to use “husband”, but also female pronouns, to keep the two parties straight, but also be respectful.
@Taliaferro: A few things: Firstly, the husband is transitioning to female, and from all the available clues wishes to be female. Thus, it’s a simple matter of respect to use proper pronouns when referring to her. If you pay any attention to transgender issues, you will see that the idea of someone still being “biologically” male or female is a pervasive argument used by anti-trans people to deny trans folk their gender identity. This is usually accompanied by some bar that has been set at an arbitrary level so as to demonstrate that they are not really yet their identified gender, from passing, to surgery, to genetics in the worst cases.
Yes, I think that it was ill-advised for the wife to promise something that she couldn’t be sure she would be able to provide. It’s a crappy situation all around, because in many ways there is just no reference frame for her to work in, no map that would be able to show her the path, or just where the path needs to be. As far as I have been able to determine, there are no states where transitioning invalidates a marriage. That may be less true for religious aspects of the union, but in most places where they would be against same-sex marriage, they would also tend to be of the view that the person who transitioned is of their original, assigned-at-birth gender, and so the marriage remains a cross-sex marriage. Bigotry can cause interesting loopholes sometimes.
Many trans folk get married because they do not feel like they are ever going to come out. It’s similar, in a way, to joining a crazy hardcore religion to try to fight being gay, or getting quack therapy. I know a few trans folk who joined the military for that express purpose, to try to squash their gender identity into a socially acceptable mold. insofar as it works, it’s a painful and self-destructive process, that involves shutting off sections of your own soul. For many, it doesn’t work, and they either transition, or start doing truly self-destructive things, like drug abuse. The point I’m trying to make is that one of the few ways to make being closeted possible in one’s own mind is to shut out the possibility of ever coming out and transitioning.
I would argue that the wife should not remain in a dying marriage. That cannot be good for her, and it cannot be good for her husband, regardless of the amount of support she is receiving. However, I don’t buy your argument that the husband already “broke” their marriage contract. If you’re going to hold that as some kind of legally binding agreement, as far as I understand it, the contract states that they shall remain together in sickness and in health, until death. As neither is dying, expect in a metaphorical way that I find to be of dubious applicability, the “contract” is still valid. Like I said, I don’t think they should remain together in a loveless marriage, but I don’t find that particular argument compelling either.
Nov 24, 2012 at 2:36 pm · @Reply ·
·
No. 6 ·
hyhybt
“Why did a man who has always felt he was a woman in a man’s body marry in the first place?”—Besides #5′s answer, I can think of at least two good ones: Contrary to the insistence in the article that she knew and deliberately hid this from her wife, it’s entirely possible she didn’t realize what it was that felt off until after the wedding. Or, perhaps more simply, she’s a lesbian.
Nov 25, 2012 at 3:16 pm · @Reply ·
·
Add your Comment
There’s no right answer here. The writer made her choice to stay in the marriage based out of the love she felt for her husband as the man she already knew. There was no way for her to be able to predict how her feelings would change during the transition. Yoffe’s correct, they are both emotionally fragile but they both need to be honest with each other. The writer does need to be given the space to grieve her husband, because Yoffe’s point is valid, that man is dying and a new person is being born in his place. She may share traits with the man she used to be, but she will be a different person. And, the reality is if that the writer has any hope of being a support through all of this she has to look to her own emotional well-being first.