It's a question of context. If someone transitions and earnings stalemate or decrease post-transition at the same job, there's a good possibility that the difference is attributable to transphobia more than anything else. If someone transitions to a new job where they're stealth (i.e. not out as trans) and earns less or raises / promotions don't happen at the pace they did before, that might be a little more persuasive (albeit with its own set of variables).

I do strongly believe that there is (and have seen) wage disparity. I just don't think that this study was contextually specific enough to demonstrate it.

It's odd that the study (or at least the article's representation of it) doesn't discuss any attempt to account for transphobia. Perhaps they are making the (false) assumption that the impact on men and women would be identical and thus cancel each other out (thus appearing to explain the slight increase in trans men's pay in comparison to the more significant decrease in trans women's pay).

But the biggest problem with this is the assumption that trans people are the perfect sample to see "man" and "woman" in the same person. It goes along with a frustrating assumption that trans people are one gender every day until they suddenly become the other.

In reality, there are many things about trans people's pre-transition experience that is radically different from cis people of the same assigned sex. A pre-transition trans person might still be identified as gender variant, or even trans, and receive very different treatment because of it. I've discussed with several of my friends who are also trans women the ways in which we were treated as women (subject to sexism, etc) even when we were being identified as male.

I'm also wondering about this quotation from the article:

Schilt, who is currently expanding the research into a book slated for release in 2010, also did an analysis of U.S. legal cases involving transgender discrimination. Nine out of 10 cases involved biological males who transitioned to female, she said.

I get the feeling from the trans people I know and this site that there simply are more transwomen than transmen, and that might be part of this. Is that true?

I also read the study. If you read in the beginning, you will see that she had to eliminate some of the 64 people for not fitting into the parameters she set for the study. This made the sample amount even smaller.

Prof. Schilt was the person who analyzed the Transgender Veterans Survey, but we had 827 people to provide her with a good crossection. Like her, we also had a filter, but the 827 number is after the filter was put in place. We had two questions that related somewhat to her study.

One asked: "Are you currently working at a job that you trained for or have a degree in?" - Yes: 331, No: 491

Other: "Are you currently working for more than minimum wage?" - Yes: 509, No: 305

Like Alex, I would have liked to see the sample amount to be a couple of hundred to get a number that we can work from.

Well, I am making less now than I was before, but then that is partly due to the fact that I went through a career change, about the third or so in my life, so it is to be expected that I would start out at a lower wage.

Now I pass for the most part, but I am open about who and what I am, so it would be hard to determine where a disparity might lie. I can however make the claim that, due to being trans and open about it, job discrimination is alive and well, even in a city like Austin, which has an ordinance to cover such things. Of course no one ever came out an said anything that was actionable in a court of law, but it is pretty easy to tell after an interview when someone has moved you from the head of the list to the no way catagory. When some one is just dying to meet you and is so excited about your qualifications, then suddenly decide that you just are not a fit, well it doesn't take advanced calculus to add it up.

The real kicker is, the firm that finally hired me was moving operations from the bay area to Austin, and of course didn't bat an eyelash at my being trans or lesbian.

Part of my problem getting a job could be attributed to my being a female applicant applying for a male dominated position, Help Desk and technical support. Some of the positions I applied for may have screened me out for that reason, again, it is hard to prove. They could also have screened me out for being over 50. I will never know, since many positions never went to interview stage. I was certtainly well qualified, over 13 years in all phases of technical support counting my time at Apple and at Dell.

Oh well. I just know it took me almost a year to find another job, and that there were a few positions that I didn't get because I was trans.

Hi Alex,

In another post on bilerico, you commend Bil for admitting the need to learn about transgender issues.

If the administrator of a blog dedicated to daily experiments in lgbtq doesn't know enough, why would you expect parents at Foxboro Elementary School to have the level of understanding required to accept with equanimity the arrival of a transgendered teacher.

I believe the language of 'phobia' needs to be used carefully and with reflection. Society is still in the process of receiving the new social movements related to sexuality and gender. A half-century is not a long time. Some of the people opposed to these movements are "phobic," some are uninformed and many are uncertain.

I can understand a parent's hesitation to have their child learn about a conception of gender and the body they may not understand themselves or still be in the process of figuring out. It would be phobic for the parents to call for the teacher's dismissal. But I don't believe they are being transphobic if they hesitate to give their children tacit approval of a concept of gender about which they themselves are uncertain or uneducated.

I'm a psychotherapist, I'm still reading and thinking and I haven't yet arrived at a theoretical framework for understanding gender dysphoria. I used to think of gender dysphoria as a psychological disorder often medically treated with varying levels of medication and surgery. I'm not sure about the term 'gender dysphoria' itself any more. I'm not sure what I believe or think. Does not knowing make me transphobic or merely wearisome in a world in which folks like me should simply get out of your way?

Reading all the debates in the comments section among transgendered people, it seems like the meaning and content of being transgendered/transsexual/genderqueer is still very much in process. Is my own confusion transphobic? I guess it could be, if transphobia is understood as the inability to understand something one is still in the process of learning to understand.

While I'm learning to understand, I don't know if I'll end up agreeing. Is that transphobic? If I'm learning with my mind made up ahead of time, then I'm not really learning, I'm just propagandizing myself. Sometimes that feels like what's demanded of me. "Go ahead and learn, but with the understanding that you'll agree with us in the end."

I don't know if what I've said will now bring a barrage of criticism about how ignorant I am and how frustrating it is to have to deal with people who are learning. I'm sure it is frustrating and I'm offering my thoughts in all humility.

-Nico

I must disagree with your analysis of the implications. The study shows that both sexism and transphobia exist, and that their impacts are similar.

Let's assume that only sexism exists - and that it causes a 15% pay loss for women, all other things being equal.

Then someone earning $100 who does an f-to-m transition would get $115, and if they did an m- to-f transition they'd get $85.

Now let's assume that only transphobia exists, also worth a 15% pay loss. Then both m-to-f and f-to-m transitioners would get $85.

Neither of these scenarios matches the figures. But combine them....

Say sexism accounts for 16.5% and transphobia 15%.

Then the f-to-m would get +16.5% for the "promotion" to male privilege, but lose 15% for being TS. A total gain of 1.5% (vs the measured 1.5% gain).

And an m-to-f would get -16.5% for the "demotion" to female underclass, and lose another 15% for being TS. A total loss of 31.5%, again close to the measured figure.

The surprising thing to me is that sexism is even more pernicious than transphobia, by about 10%.