come to think of it, I do often write my answers in the second person accusatory form. Is that too anti-social?
(also, I want to be upfront and say that I am a nihilist. Not all anarchists are nihilists, and because my nihilism is apparent in this response I feel like I should explain it. Nihilists do not believe it is possible to envision liberation from our position. We are saturated by our oppression and if we tried to build a new world now, we would only reproduce the form of this one. Nihilist say that we must thoroughly destroy this world before anything new can be built. We can't say what liberation is, but we can say what it's not.)(to me, nihilism is a philosophical position within anarchism.)
People FIXATE on transsexuality because it is a breach in the symbolic order. Trannsexuality demonstrates that what is thought of as an essential, natural, and unassailable truth is in fact a complete lie. Gender is the deep foundation, a starting point from which our lives are ordered and controlled, channeled and managed. The creation of the gender binary required a genocide of all that didn't fit within it, and a heavy-handed disciplining of everything else to make it match this social fiction. This symbolic order is the boundary of what we are allowed to think is "real" or "possible." Gender is such an important matter because it contains within it codified roles for the genders to play which reinforce and naturalize capitalism and the state. These roles dictate the ordering of genders into families, the managing/disciplining/indoctrination of children, the task of 'reproduction, reproduction of labor, and the reproduction of daily life. Gender (and the symbolic order) makes capitalism possible.
Now, to answer you questions:
"1) How does this position relate to anarchist principles, or to what anarchy is about?"
Anarchist oppose and fight against all forms of coercive power. Transgender people are constantly struggling against the coercive power being leveraged against them from multiple facets of society, the state, and capitalism. Anarchists should support trans people in their struggle against oppression.
2) Yes. Anarchists are opposed to the gender binary. Anarchists recognize gender to be social as opposed to biological and enforced as opposed to natural. Anarchists oppose not just the oppression of women, but the historic project of constraining and disciplining all human experience into the acceptable channel of man or woman.
Transgender anarchists have long said that while the gender binary exists, HRT and SRS must be free and available to all.
Feminist are split on this issue, some agreeing, and some calling for a genocide against trans people. (and some fence sitting in between)
The specific problem I see with the second wave feminist approach is that it hold trans people to a higher standard of needing to "abandon" the gender binary than it does cis people. This is a common dynamic of oppression where the oppressed is highly scrutinized while the oppressor is unnoticed. Cis people reinforce the gender binary more than trans people.
The second dynamic that is largely overlooked here is transmisogyny. Transmisogyny is the specific iteration of misogyny that is leveraged against trans women. The claim that trans women reinforce the gender binary often centers on trans women wearing make-up, dresses, or doing anything feminine. If this sort of critique were leverage at cis women it might be more easily seen as blatant misogyny. This approach posits the destruction of femininity as the end of the gender binary. (similar to saying that killing all people of color will end racism) Why is it that in our vision of a world post gender binary, everyone is a man? We are constrained by our position, by the misogyny and transmisogyny that surrounds us, and we are thoroughly incapable of imagining a world without gender. We must question why masculinity is see as a blank, or cultural neutral, and femininity is seen as an active performance. They are both active performances. They are both nonsense.
While the gender binary exists, people should be free to position themselves within it or outside it however makes the most sense to them. Everyone knows the consequences of going against the ruling order, and most trans people have no other option (as a life in the closet often leads to suicide).
If we listen to trans people we hear scathing and insightful critiques of the gender binary system. Trans people are aware of the nuances of the gender system in ways that cis people are not. They understand the violence that uphold the gender system, and they are aware of the barriers to self expression.
An anarchist critique of the gender binary and the cis/trans division might look like this:
How could transgender exist in a world without a gender binary?
The parallel question of course being:
How could Cisgender exist in a world without a gender binary?
The obvious conclusion is that the gender binary (an imposed social construct) created and defined cis and trans. Without the gender binary neither could exist.
3) The boarder between cis and trans is like the boarder between the united states and mexico. There is no difference in the land, just a big fence with barbed wire, and armed patrols enforcing the division.
Even though the division is a social construction passing itself of as TRUTH, it is built into structures of power and comes to have consequence in our lives. I am upset about cis people theorizing about trans people the same way I would be upset about white people talking about 'the immigration problem.'
But maybe I am wrong here,maybe we should allow more "thinking critically and deeply about [the immigration problem] - which pretty much always necessitates asking awkward and potentially scary/destructive questions."
(sorry Dot, I had to be a bitch about this. That neutral approach to critical thinking is liberal, not anarchist)
The definition of what "trans" is will always come from cis people, because cis is the "normal" and trans is the other. The line can constantly be drawn and redrawn to keep certain people in and certain people out. In order to see this, you need to stop looking at trans people, and start looking at cis people. Instead of looking at how trans people modify themselves, look at how cis people modify themselves. Try to see cis people "sex-change." Cis people and trans people are the same, (they are people) the "difference" is a social boundary which trans people cross (or transgress) and cis people do not. The boundary is around what you are supposed to wear, how you are supposed to act, what you are allowed to do with your own body, how you are allowed to present yourself, how you are supposed to feel, how you are supposed to fuck, and many more things. How can this be seen as anything other than social and arbitrary?