Where a male and female colleague swapped names in all correspondence, and she (with a temporary male name) was astounded at how easy work was, while he (with a temporary female name) was perplexed by how much harder his job became.
"In 2006 American economists Kristen and Matthew Wiswall performed perhaps the ultimate test. They examined what happened to the pay of and status of employees who'd changed sex."
I hadn't seen that study before, and I have a lot of thoughts on it. Most of all I'd be interested to see how it changed. (For one thing, the term "transsexual" now is feels so dated it's borderline offensive)
To briefly sum up a very complex issue on which I have a lot of feelings, I find that it's more common for transfeminine people (vs. transmasculine ones) to wind up in a kind of "uncanny valley" of gender that some people struggle and are uncomfortable with. I think that with growing visibility and acceptance this is probably improving, but it's still very real.
I think a result of that is that comparing MTF vs. FTM people is that it's not a good comparison of women vs. men in the workplace. The fact that society has a much more negative view of transwomen confounds the entire thing.
There's also, very anecdotally, a pretty sharp divide in how more passable transwomen are treated vs. less passable transwomen. I think I'm in the former group, but it's all very complicated and not something I fully understand myself - how can I really know how others see me?
I am a middle aged guy in NZ with a fairly broad social range, that includes a few MTF transsexuals§ by association.
Within their social circles and far wider than that, everyone is aware that they are a transsexual, and I perceive that they often get lumped into a third category (that isn't male or female).
Strangers will be completely natural towards a non-obvious transsexual (where acquantances might not), but then a stranger that becomes a friend will struggle later when they find out they have been "deceived" (which subjectively can't be argued with?). Surely that must cause a lot of friction.
Also the acronym LGBT defines "different from X" where I don't know a good word for X either...
Hopefully you have a good bunch of friends and family that don't judge you or stereotype you.
As far as the study went, they would have to find a subgroup that worked as female (or v.v.) without anyone at work knowing or finding out (remaining cryptic at all times). Even then, there is a sampling bias for only those people that act on their feelings and have major surgery, and presumably a major emotional disruption to life for most of those.
> a pretty sharp divide in how more passable transwomen are treated vs. less passable transwomen
Is the divide wider than that between a "pretty" woman and an "ugly" one (sorry again, awful word choice, but I don't know how to rewrite that so the meaning stays clear).
§ sorry if transsexuals is an offensive term, I'm using what my peer group would use, and I have no idea how to safely use the words you use.
Oh, also, FYI, transgender is adjective, not a noun, so rather than say "MTF transsexuals" you should say "transgender women". "Transgenders" is also incorrect usage.
> I perceive that they often get lumped into a third category (that isn't male or female)
This is what I mean by the "uncanny valley of gender". Some people, btw, do identify as non-binary and intentionally wish to be seen as neither male nor female. For most people, even transgender ones such as myself, people pick a gender and then unconsciously roll with that in how they relate. When people can't figure out which way to relate, it can make them uncomfortable and cause friction.
> Strangers will be completely natural towards a non-obvious transsexual (where acquantances might not), but then a stranger that becomes a friend will struggle later when they find out they have been "deceived" (which subjectively can't be argued with?). Surely that must cause a lot of friction.
They haven't been deceived! I am a woman, and the type of woman I am is transgender. While it does surprise people, in my experience, it's just kind of an interesting point and then we move on. If it's not a sexual context it really has nothing to do with anything, and so people don't care - they just keep using script they initially picked. Similar to my age - most people think I'm in my 20s, but I'm in my late 30s. They're surprised, but it doesn't change anything so we go on.
> As far as the study went, they would have to find a subgroup that worked as female (or v.v.) without anyone at work knowing or finding out (remaining cryptic at all times). Even then, there is a sampling bias for only those people that act on their feelings and have major surgery, and presumably a major emotional disruption to life for most of those.
This is very true. Transgender people have to feel that they can transition, and a great many don't. I haven't seen any study (and I'm not sure how you'd even construct one) between transgender people who seek transition and those that don't. I definitely live in a much more acceptable environment (in San Francisco) and had the financial, social, and emotional means to do it. A lot of people lack in some of those areas and suffer, sometimes greatly as a result. Access to transgender medicine varies tremendously.
> Is the divide wider than that between a "pretty" woman and an "ugly" one (sorry again, awful word choice, but I don't know how to rewrite that so the meaning stays clear).
I would say yes. Again, it's (in my perception) that uncanny valley of gender. An unattractive woman is still seen as a woman (though her social value is often greatly diminished by it). Whereas non-passable transwomen people aren't clear how to relate to, and it makes them feel uncomfortable.
> sorry if transsexuals is an offensive term, I'm using what my peer group would use, and I have no idea how to safely use the words you use.
Transsexual is a term that's dated to the point where it comes off as ignorant. We use "Transgender" as a blanket, inclusive term (not everyone changes their genitals, which is what makes it preferable to "transsexual").
> The fact that society has a much more negative view of transwomen confounds the entire thing.
I think a lot of this is simply a combination of of not crediting gender identity (such that transmen are viewed as women, and transwomen as men) and viewing both as gender non-conforming and presumptively homosexual, combined with asymmetric views on homosexuality and gender non-conformity between men and women (which embed misogyny, since men are the superior gender, it is less acceptable for them to fall to conform, while women who are non-conforming are, while violating a norm, adopting features of the superior gender, which is less contemptible.)
https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/money/96443300/the-names-the-...
Where a male and female colleague swapped names in all correspondence, and she (with a temporary male name) was astounded at how easy work was, while he (with a temporary female name) was perplexed by how much harder his job became.
And I'm guessing you have seen:
http://www.econ.nyu.edu/user/wiswall/research/schilt_wiswall...
"In 2006 American economists Kristen and Matthew Wiswall performed perhaps the ultimate test. They examined what happened to the pay of and status of employees who'd changed sex."