a different universe than mine

[snugglekitty]

http://www.tgguide.com/Library/Family_Issues/wivesbill.html

This is a document called the "Wives' Bill of Rights," pertaining to the wives of crossdressers.

I found this item most interesting:

# We have the right to our husbands' masculine male bodies. Neither partner in a marriage or relationship has the right to alter body features without the full knowledge and consent of the other.

I don't think that I agree. I mean, I sympathize with these women very much. And OF COURSE you should not transition without telling your partner - that's kind of insane. But saying that consent is a requirement? That doesn't feel realistic to me. I think that most wives would just say "No, of course you can't XXX! Stay the same! Don't be trans!"
And anyhow, when it comes down to it, it's your life. Your marriage. Unless it's in your contract that you give up the right to change your body without spousal approval... um... I think it's up to you.

But overall - this is just SOOO different from my life. My husband cross-dresses, and neither of us requires a support group about it. We don't really think about it much, except when we're taking pictures or he's asking my opinion on his outfits.

Comments

[lyonesse.livejournal.com]

uhh, yeah. i wonder how those ladies would feel if their husbands objected to, say, their getting a haircut or putting on weight.

[lady-anemone.livejournal.com]

Excellent point.

[aillecat.livejournal.com]

This is 100% offensive to transpeople too. My partner has no right to any sort of body, they have a choice whether to accept who I am or not, and if they can't deal with the 'true me', then the marriage should not be either.

There are plenty of women who like me as a transwoman, one is my partner, and I am thankful for that, but if she didn't, I wouldn't be there.

period.

[lady-anemone.livejournal.com]

Yes, I agree. I thought that the offensiveness of it kind of went without saying.

I like you as a transwoman, too. :)

[woodwardiocom.livejournal.com]

-Hmm. I think that, when the marriage occurs, each spouse has, if not a right, at least a reasonable expectation that the person they married will remain "the person they married". Of course, many people don't get in touch with who they really are until after that point. When that time comes, when spouse A says, "Sorry, I have to change now, or I won't be happy," I think spouse B basically has the choice of accepting the change, or leaving. They can try to veto it, but I suspect that would lead to nothing good . . .

[jacflash.livejournal.com]

each spouse has, if not a right, at least a reasonable expectation that the person they married will remain "the person they married".

This doesn't sit well with me. People change in lots of ways over time. Even though those changes often end up pulling the life out of a relationship as the partners grow in different directions (whether the parters acknowledge it or not), I think that's just part of the human experience, one our existing social structures don't adequately address. I see changing and growing as a much higher imperative than conforming to a partner's expectations -- indeed, I think changing and growing is why we're here.

[fraterrisus]

you said that much better than i could have.

[catya.livejournal.com]

Indeed -well said, John.

I'm also not sure if i agree or disagree.

I think that the obligation in a marriage is that you will DO what you vowed to do - you're not promising to BE someone, you're promising various things as commitment to the marriage.

That said, there are some shifts i could make that might make it very hard for shayde to keep his commitments to me, even if i still could keep mine to him. I imagine gender transitioning would be one of those.

food for thought.