In(ter)dependence

On this, our 9th wedding anniversary, I’d love to hear from couples about a question I’ve been pondering: what do you do when you have an interest/love/hobby that your partner doens’t share?

I love live music, for instance, & public gatherings, & Rachel likes neither. She likes football & Rush. I’ve generally found people to go see music with, & to attend parades, pride events, &c., although I’m starting from scratch with making friends out here in Wisconsin, which is why it’s come up.

So do you:

  1. tend to not do the thing you like
  2. tend to drag the person who doesn’t like it along
  3. or do you just do your own things, & then come together to do the things you do both like together?

As maybe everyone knows at this point, I feel “dragged along” – even if I haven’t gone anywhere – when she watches football at home. In the small apartments we’ve lived in, I don’t have much escape unless I want to go somewhere else for a few hours.

So I’m curious, & waiting to hear what kinds of solutions all you creative, coupled types have come up with.

Federal DOMA Section Declared Unconstitutional

Good news, in a states’ rights kind of way:

BOSTON (AP) — A U.S. judge in Boston has ruled that a federal gay marriage ban is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define marriage.

U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro on Thursday ruled in favor of gay couples’ rights in two separate challenges to the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, known as DOMA…. Tauro agreed, and said the act forces Massachusetts to discriminate against its own citizens.

“The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state, and in doing so, offends the Tenth Amendment. For that reason, the statute is invalid,” Tauro wrote in a ruling in a lawsuit filed by Attorney General Martha Coakley.

Wife of Trans Blog

Here’s another trans couple, but this one a trans woman and her wife of 41 years. The wife, Jonni, keeps a blog on what it’s like to be married to a trans female spouse (who was her husband for many years before transition).

I’m always so pleased when I see new spouses’ experiences.

Trans Couple Profiled by SF Gate

Wow. A trans-trans couple profiled by SF Gate, and they’re both hotties.

During the next five years, the two developed a “conscious relationship” where they truly got to know each other. Sean, who was recently lauded by Dance magazine as “one to watch,” says that as working artists they gave a lot of thought to the possible ramifications of moving in together. Five years in, they joined households. A “no drama, no trauma” philosophy keeps their relationship fresh and their work lives productive.

“We are constantly working on ourselves,” Shawna says, “and we have developed good relationship tools.”

Both transgender, they say sharing that experience makes their bond tighter. “We understand where each of us is coming from,” Sean says.

In addition to their individual artistic pursuits, both run nonprofits. Sean is artistic director of Fresh Meat Productions, a grassroots arts organization for transgender artists, while Shawna presents Trannyfest, the nation’s first transgender film festival.

“The numerical odds were against us,” Shawna says. “I just didn’t think I would find a partner, let alone one that shares my passion for art and activism and spirituality.”

Congrats to them both. Stories like theirs make me happy.

Guest Author: Kelzi

Kelzi, one of the regulars on our MHB message boards, wrote a piece about what it’s like to be a couple going through transition that resounded pretty strongly for me (& for others):

Lately, I haven’t had much to say, and when I do, I just journal it. However, when I stop by to catch up here and there, I often find that I should have posted. My recent M.O. What’s different about tonight is that I find the warm and fuzzy stories about couples who stay together way too inflated, heart warmed and fuzzed that they become unrecognizable as a point of reference. Except, every once and a while someone cleans the pig. MG wrote:

….And Jenn and I didn’t survive anything. Everyday we make a decision to continue to stay together. That in no way means we survived anything. It only means that, for today, we still want to be together. Hopefully tomorrow we’ll both make the same decision.

Two nights ago, D and I just celebrated (and I use the word figuratively, it certainly was not a celebration. miss O was genuinely upset we didn’t go out and celebrate. Upon querying us as to the reason, D quickly replied ‘what’s to celebrate?’ to which miss O responded ‘Oh yeah, that man and wife thing.’) our 14th year as husband and wife. It was also our 8th year since my transition.

MG is painfully right, couples that choose to stay together, after the transition of a spouse, are not survivors, we have just found a couple of compelling reasons to stick it out together for one more day. A couple of reasons to let ourselves think that the cultural and social stigmata that tattoo our lives will disappear in the morning. That in the frighteningly few moments where we get to forget the realities of our lives together and embrace as lovers, only to have the moments shattered when we remember that we no longer make love as we once did, we both agree to stick it out for one more day.

I wish I could understand why we choose this way. It not a path that I’d wish on any couple. Its hard and it hurts and the longer we stay together, the more I’m convinced that the pain will never really go away. Its true that we still love each other. We cuddle on the sofa, sleep in the same bed (depending on the intensity of our hot flashes or the weather) and continue to revel in the joys of raising our daughter, together. But we have also become much more reclusive. We’re hurt by the simple slip of a pronoun. I being reminded of what I am, she remembering who she was. We look at the photo from that night 14 years ago and wonder what happened to that couple, where did they go? Why aren’t they here? Will they ever come back? Perhaps what hurts most of all, we miss our simple displays of affection, that kiss on the street, holding hands as we walk, a long embrace under a street lamp, that we so often freely gifted. Yeah, we miss the simplicity of man and woman, husband and wife, mother and father. We tire of the attitudes from the public and parents and friends and family. They, thinking their thoughts of us. We, conflicted by wanting to right the assumptions they make of us, wanting to correct, explain, share and then we remember the results of our previous disclosures. Who has that kind of time and energy? For the last 8 years, it has taken all the energy plus some that we borrowed, just to stay together just one more day.

There are days, too often it seems, where making the best of a trying situation, makes no sense. How I long for those days where my sweetie’s resting head gradually, gently drifts to my chest and there we drift into our world of pleasant dreams. Now a days her head comes to rest at my boob. She awakes and is reminded of the indignities she endures, the loss she has suffered, unfulfilled dreams that may never return. Could our lives be much better if we said enough is enough? We’d be free to experience our lives as we once dreamt they would be. In love. In public. Innocuous. Together, silently, without ever saying it to each other, we ask, ‘Really, is it really worth it? Can I do this for one more day?’

Usually I don’t know.

Its part of our unspoken agreement to each other. Oh, there have been times where I thought we wouldn’t be able to do it. We leave each other. We look for clarity. We seek advise and usually we wake up in the morning ready for one more day.

Next year, if we get that far, it’ll be our crystal anniversary. Maybe things will be clearer by then. Maybe we’ll be gifted a crystal ball that will show us were to go, how to get there. Maybe I’ll be able to clearly explain why we stay together. Except with our luck, Coyote would come along and want it for himself, steal it before we even got to peak into it. I bet that he would eat it, to illuminate his inner self, only to see that he was really full of shit. Maybe that’s the point, we have to see thru all the shit find what we really are looking for. When asked on how we’re doing, we’ve often say, ‘We’re taking it day by day’. It comforting to know that at least for now, that hasn’t changed. At the end of the day, we both are saying, ‘I think I can do this for another day.’

Guest Author: The Tyranny of “Happily Ever After”

Kimberly Kael, a regular poster to our forums, wrote this recently & I thought it really stood repeating:

Here’s a question that has been bothering me lately and that I’ve been trying to put into words: does the social emphasis on happily ever after as the canonical goal for relationships do more harm than good?

Sometimes the notion of true love feels like the platonic ideals of male and female – it serves as an interesting point of reference but taken too seriously it becomes a source of frustration because none of us can really live up to the implied expectations. That’s not to say there isn’t merit in aspiring to a durable relationship. I’m sure it’s been reinforced in many ways. There are relationships that look perfect and effortless from the outside. There are times in our lives when we’ve had that kind of connection and we want to hang onto it forever.

Of course there are also good economic and emotional reasons to encourage stability by giving people an incentive not to split at the first sign of trouble. Indeed, I’ve never been in a rewarding relationship that didn’t involve working through rough spots. On the other hand, how many people fall into the trap of expecting love to be free of these kinds of challenges? I guess that’s a notion most of us take with a grain of salt by the time we get a little experience in balancing the needs of a partnership.

What’s more insidious is that society encourages us to make a lot of explicit or implied promises about the distant future that we simply may not be able to keep without making ourselves and everyone around us miserable. That sets unrealistic expectations for everyone involved, which evolve into a sense of entitlement: “Where’s my happily ever after?” It seems fundamentally implausible that so many relationships end in divorce and yet when people wind up there it seems to come as a complete surprise. They have no backup plan and only an incomplete set of life skills beyond those specialized for the role they played in the relationship.

At the root of it all is that unlike the male/female dichotomy there’s no spectrum implied by a single point. Where are the other archetypal relationships? Okay, so there’s the affair. The one-night stand. But is there anything else that doesn’t have a strong negative connotation?

I’ve personally been talking to an old friend about this idea a lot as she’s been unhappy recently & wondering if the source of her frustration was her relationship or the compromises it implies. That is, she wasn’t necessarily unhappy with her partner himself, but unhappy at the kind of compromises she’s made due to being in a relationship at all, with anyone. Her “pattern” – if she has one – is one of serial monogamy: relationships of several years that end when the compromise:satifaction ratio starts to fall short.

As someone who once was poly – although initially somewhat unwillingly & eventually quite happily – I’m not sure why we persist in believing that one person can be all that we need emotionally, sexually, romantically. We often expect someone (1) we have good sex with, (2) get all tingly around, (3) whose conversation & company we enjoy, and (4) with whom we can build a life, a home, a family. It’s kind of a lot, no? I remember many years ago, before meeting Betty, at feeling astonished I could manage even two of those with the same person in a short period of time — but over a lifetime? In speaking with more & more poly people, and perusing Tristan Taormino’s Opening Up, the way that people “use” poly in their lives seems endlessly variable & creative. Still, though, it generally means to people “having sex with whoever you want.” Which I know, poly folks, is not what it means at all – but that’s still the popular perception.

I know, for someone like me, no one really bats an eyebrow if I mention missing having a male husband. Betty & everyone else knows I intended to be in a relationship with a man. So while Betty & I are still happy as two peas in a pod, there are days when what I’ve lost, and what I miss, is pretty acute. I don’t suspect I will ever stop missing having a male husband, even if the missing grows less acute and less chronic over time. As someone who has always had strong emotional relationships with men – the adoptive “older brothers” I talked about in She’s Not the Man – I miss some kind of masculine energy in my life (and not just sexually, you big perverts). This stuff is gendered because I’m the partner of a person who transitioned from within our marriage, but it strikes me that there are about a million things that a person might miss, or need, over time.

Continue reading “Guest Author: The Tyranny of “Happily Ever After””

Fordham Gets Hip

I went to Fordham for a split second, and it’s cool to see the university is finally giving health benefits to same-sex partners:

Faculty members fought for four years to extend equal benefits for every member of the faculty, regardless of sexual orientation. Previously, legally domiciled adults (LDAs) were not recognized in the faculty’s benefits package. This means that same-sex marriages and partnerships, including relationships between two men, two women, or between an unmarried man and woman, were not afforded the same benefits as marriages between heterosexual individuals.

What’s more interesting to me, & more precedent-setting, is the final sentence of the same paragraph:

LDA benefits also extend to faculty members who may be responsible for caring for an elderly parent or another dependent adult in their household.

Which is how it should be: anyone should be able to name their own dependent.

Trans Answers and Surveys in the NYT

Dr. Laura Erickson-Schroth recently answered a bunch of questions about transgender issues in The New York Times. It’s in three sections: one, two, and three. She’s working on a book called Trans Bodies, Trans Selves, and people like Jennifer Boylan and Jamison Green and Pat Califia (on sexuality!) have already signed on to write for it.

She is also currently conducting surveys, and yes, there’s one for partners:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=exaD1ewtMleNRnDAkKTkqPKWKAYSBdKPW8BsiUBKy3I%3d&

I am pleased as punch to see that they’re going with a qualitative survey for partners’ issues. If you’re a partner, and especially if you’re the kind of partner who isn’t “typical” or in the majority most of the time (boyfriends/husbands of trans women, male partners of FTMs, women who intentionally sought out trans partners) make sure you fill it out.

There are other surveys for the book for trans people, of course, too, and one for parents, as well.

However:

What happened to Harold and Clay is one of the many reasons same sex couples need more than visitation rights and ALL the same legal rights as anyone who is civilly married:

Three months after he was hospitalized, Harold died in the nursing home. Because of the county’s actions, Clay missed the final months he should have had with his partner of 20 years. Compounding this tragedy, Clay has literally nothing left of the home he had shared with Harold or the life he was living up until the day that Harold fell, because he has been unable to recover any of his property. The only memento Clay has is a photo album that Harold painstakingly put together for Clay during the last three months of his life.

Read the whole brutal story, if you can stand it, at Bilerico.