Middle Sexes: Redefining He and She

Plot synopsis:
The documentary explores the issue of gender and sex, beginning with transgender women dancing at a nightclub. The murder of Gwen Araujo, a teenage transwoman is described in detail by the narrator. Several acquaintances had killed her after finding out that Gwen was born male because two of them had had sexual relations with her.
Two transwomen, Calpernia Addams and Andrea James, speak about the members of their community being brutally murdered for being transgender. Addams then tells the audience about her boyfriend, Barry Winchell, who was harassed and eventually murdered by a fellow soldier for dating a transsexual woman. James talks about her life as a lesbian transgender woman.
How sex is developed in the womb is explained by the narrator and James Pfaus, a professor at Concordia University. More about how sex develops is discussed between each of the stories.
Max Beck, an Intersex person, tells the story of how he was born with ambiguous genitalia and then assigned female at birth. He was raised with many operations for which he did not know the reason until he found out that he was classified as a male pseudohermaphrodite at birth. He eventually transitioned to using the name Max and male pronouns, but still identifies as more an intersex person then a man. Max now is married with a daughter.
The next story told is about the intersex condition of Maria José Martínez-Patiño, a former Olympic hurdler, who was banned from competition after a test showed her to have XY (male) chromosomes. She eventually won her medals back and was allowed to compete as a woman after a long legal battle. There are no more chromosome tests in the Olympic Games, however, gender verification in sports remains contentious.
Next, eight-year-old Noah is introduced. Noah is biologically male and living as boy, but prefers things that are typically for girls. His father, mother, and step-father all share their concerns for Noah's future in their small midwestern town.
In a Dutch institute of brain research, they are trying to learn about the differences between sex and gender. They found differences in the brains of transsexuals from cisgender people of their birth sex.
The documentary then looks at different treatment of gender-variant and people of different sexualities across cultures and history.
In India, older teenage boys dance at weddings in a way that might get them labelled as homosexuals, and sometimes have sex, at other times. An Indian man, Vijay, and his wife are introduced. The fact that Vijay lives a double life with a male partner of twelve years is revealed. Vijay's wife doesn't know about this, and he feels guilty because he was forced into an arranged marriage. But in the Hindu religion, it was once consider natural to have a different sexuality until British colonization. India still have Hijra (South Asia), a group of people who are a type of third gender. They go through a now-illegal operation to remove their male genitalia.
In Bangkok, Thailand the audience meets a transsexual model who will be getting married soon. In Buddhism, it is believed everyone will be a transgender person at one point because they believe in reincarnation. More Thai transgender woman, called Kathoey, are introduced. One is in a relationship with a Texan man who was married and had children. The girl in her early twenties must support her mother and grandmother because her father is dead.
A story is told of heterosexual college men who were shown gay pornography. Their physical response was measured. Men who were considered homophobes were more aroused, but claimed they had no reaction. This then goes back to Gwen Araujo, who was killed by two men who were insecure about their sexualities because they had sexual relations with her. All of this supports the theory that people are more likely to get angry at sex, gender, and sexuality differences because they are insecure about their own sexuality or gender identity.

Tags: murder

Review:
No matter how much you know, you'll learn something. This short documentary packs a lot of exhaustive research and information on differing sexuality, tolerance and intolerance around the world. The documentarians literally went around the world and interviewed everyone from "ladieboys" in Thailand to gay boys and men in intolerant India. It explores the fascination the repressed, so-called "modern" West has with the acceptance of the transgendered in the socially more advanced Eastern cultures, and even interviews Dutch physicians who undertook a long, in-depth study of the differing brain structures of men, woman, transsexual men and women, and all the variations, proving an actual physical difference in the brain structures depending on the individual's sexual preference: a study our "advanced" Western culture never bothered to undertake. The documentary is fascinating and at times a very painful study, as it also shows how much people are made to suffer by their society (up to and including murder), because of a sexuality they were born with.No matter how much you think you understand human sexuality, you will learn something you didn't know before. You may even find yourself losing some of your prejudices and discomfort with others' sexual identities. A documentary that should have been made 30 years ago, if the American public could have handled it.. Trying to 'control' the uncontrollable. If there's one over-riding message to be had from this extremely decent documentary regarding sexual/gender diversity, it's this: a society cannot control what people feel without lethal ramifications. Nearly all the hatred, violence and negativity in the world stems from repression of one form or another, creating people who are so terrified of who they 'might be' if they actually were left in peace to explore themselves openly that sometimes they wind up taking out this overwhelming frustration on more evolved souls, the ones who are unable to stick within the soul-stifling confines of the roles they're supposed to be enacting in their lives. It's time to get rid of these boxes with their pathetic labels before they destroy us all.. An intellectually dishonest apologist diarrhoea. I was strongly pushed to watch this as an alternative perspective on the "toxicity" of conventional masculine identity, and to gain a wider understanding around scientific "advances" i allegedly may have missed. Wary of my own views and the degenerative nature of confirmation bias, i tried hard to retain an open mind. It's difficult to stay friendly to this film, because like a lot of LGBT material, it can be disingenuous, and bordering on potentially manipulative. Strong words, perhaps - but justified.First thing to know is that Gore Vidal was a) gay, and b) a very strong campaigner against gender "essentialism"; even going so far to advocate human pansexuality. It's also disappointing to see Indian-born Anthony Thomas being responsible for this kind of editorial guff. Those looking for an objective or circumspect - dare i say, critical - look at the fascinating subject of gender and human sexuality will feel cheated. There is a real bias at work, and it's the fact that the doc presents itself as an honestly naturalistic, rounded look at scientific issues such as foetal development and social determinism, is what makes it so distasteful. And speaking of science, you'll get steadily angrier if you work in a scientific profession as the minutes go on and on. Using science to make an argument is one thing; misrepresenting it is another. Add that to the "objective" sales tag, and you have a toxic combination. If, of course, you *want* to believe the suggestions because you already believe them anyway, and don't care whether its validated as reliable, it won't matter too much.For example: if you can watch pseudo-scientists explaining that all animals actually breed just because it "feels good" (like male black widow spiders who have a sexual "experience"), that sexual "rules" appeared subject of natural variance that the West somehow misinterprets, or how gender identity disorder apparently is a misunderstanding of Karma (because we all are ladyboys - no, seriously), you are a much more patient person than i am. There are unquestionably biological factors that come into play, but when you hear narration using politically charged terms like "intersex" (i.e. hermaphrodite) and "binary" genders, straining to use it a basis for disqualifying male/female normality, you can't take the interviewees seriously.You also can't make non-sequitur/straw-man arguments about the same lower hormonal activity producing "underdeveloped" genitalia as infant gender variance, when your next point confirms that the same subjects have... fully-developed genitalia.The simple fact is that this is apologism masquerading as legitimate scrutiny, pure and simple. And that's fine, if you just want to watch something that confirms the bad ideas you have that you'll never challenge anyway.The same old clichés and poor thinking are around every corner: Eastern religions are more accepting in their enlightened wisdoms (when they're not doing animal sacrifice, honor rape etc), humans are actually pansexual, sexuality is fluid (yawn), everyone's so judgemental, nobody is actually heterosexual, sexuality is about feeling and relationships, boys have nipples, anyone who has boundaried views on sexuality is actually afraid of their own confused feelings (homophobes are closet homosexuals), on and on. The loudest, most obnoxiously absent smoking gun in the whole rotten abyss of bad ideas is the abject lack of any conversation or examination of sexual *morality*, in any form: the existence or variance in moral sexual reasoning, or even the idea that humans subscribe to a moral framework around identity/gender, sexual behaviour, or any contemplation on the negative consequences of sexual choices (aggression, infidelity, disease, distress etc). Absolutely none, of any viewpoint. The filmmakers don't seem to hold any moral perspective, of any form - good or bad, left or right - there is no acknowledgement it is even linked.This film is trying to sell you something - and it's really, really trying. But it doesn't want you to think it's selling, so it's lacquered in a "compassionate" or "intellectual" guise. The most worrying aspect of films like these is that people who wouldn't describe themselves as scientifically or philosophically-minded watch them, and are fooled into concluding they've seen an insightful, "smart" or "deep" look at something, simply because it *appears* legitimate. This kind of defensive grade-school reasoning belongs in a tedious college philosophy class of short-sighted San Francisco backpackers, not on a DVD shelf.. More Misogyny than Diversity. The film begins with a sensitive treatment of trans-gendered issues in the West, but quickly digresses into a banal presentation about the diversity of male sexual desire. Eastern societies are presented as more accepting of gender difference and sexual orientation. The elephant in the living room is the Asians, all transitioning male to female, support themselves as sex workers and exotic dancers. Another escapes third world poverty to live with a much older married man who left his wife and children for a teenage Asian "lady boy" he met on the Internet. The bit about the African lesbians is so out of place that it seems thrown in as a cynical attempt to provide some sort of balance. Accepting the "rainbows within rainbows" of gender is a fine thing. Exploitation of a woman or child, whether born female or choosing it for herself, is appalling and uncomfortable to watch.