Transgender widow put on trial for being born male...

[Ben]

Transgender widow put on trial

The family of Nikki Araguz's dead husband is suing to invalidate the "same-sex" marriage

By Tracy Clark-Flory (http://www.salon.com/author/tracy_clarkflory/index.html)
http://www.salon.com/life/broadsheet/2010/07/23/transgender_marriage/md_horiz.jpg AP/Pat Sullivan
Nikki Araguz, transgender wife of a firefighter killed in the line of duty July 4, 2010, during a press conference at her attorneys' office Thursday, July 22, 2010 in Houston.

The day after her husband's funeral, Nikki Araguz was sued -- for being born male. The family of Thomas Araguz III, a 37-year-old firefighter who died in the line of duty, claim that his marriage to Nikki was a fraud because she allegedly concealed her biological sex from her husband. They say he found out just months ago -- after nearly two years of marriage -- and decided to separate from his wife and eventually divorce. The suit also argues that the union is invalid because same-sex marriage is illegal in their home state of Texas.
The details in this case are sparse, even as it goes to trial today, but here's what we do know: She changed her name from Justin to Nikki in 1996. In the request for a name-change, she wrote: "I, Justin Purdue, am a woman with male anatomy, working toward a sex change. I have been living and working as a woman for over one year and seek to make my new name legal and permanent."
Beyond that, very little is clear about Nikki's transition, and she's declined to comment on the matter. It does seem safe to assume that she had her sex legally changed, since the pair were allowed to marry in Texas. Even presuming she underwent sex reassignment surgery, the claim that her husband didn't know that she was born male seems dubious -- male-to-female transitions are notoriously hard to pull off, especially with an intimate live-in partner. She also vehemently denies the accusation of dishonesty: "We had a completely honest marriage, a 100 percent loving, honest marriage," she told the Houston Chronicle.
Ultimately, there are two key issues at play here: 1.) Whether Thomas was induced to marry through fraud, which is grounds for an annulment in Texas, and 2.) Whether the state considers Nikki to be female and capable of legally marrying a man. Without more background, it's hard to speculate on the first issue, but there is some legal precedent on the second matter -- and it certainly isn't good news for Nikki. In the 1999 ruling in Littleton v. Prange, a Texas court invalidated a post-op transgender woman's marriage to a biological woman on the grounds that chromosomal sex reigns supreme. That said, Texas has flip flopped on the issue and shown itself to be majorly gender-confused. (http://www.queerty.com/texas-doesnt-know-whether-trans-folk-are-male-or-female-so-it-allowed-2-dykes-to-marry-20100506/)
There is no telling how this case will turn out. But I'll tell you one thing: There's nothing like an estate battle to make death seem even darker.

[Trans-Promo]

I feel sorry for her loss but like I said many times before - HONESTY - is the basis to any relationship. How can you love someone and not tell them? I find it preposterous, sorry.

[Nicole Dupre]

Whoa. I must've missed something. Was it ever proven that she lied to him, or that he didn't know? I find that hard to believe. Maybe he lied to his family, and she went along with it. That, I can see. Personally, I couldn't live like that. I've seen it come back to haunt people. And maybe she lied to the state, to somehow get her gender status changed for the marriage.

But if she had SRS AFTER the marriage, how could she dilate without him knowing? I just think that's a bit far fetched, unless SRS is a one-operation process with quicker recovery time than I'm aware of.

Danielle, I don't know anyone who's had SRS more recently that 6 or 7 years ago. Do you think she could live with this guy, get her surgery, dilate, heal, and keep it all a secret? If so, I'm shocked that things have changed so much in less than a decade. Even castration often leaves girls emotionally distraught. But I don't know if she was castrated before the marriage either. But I thought she wasn't complete until a month or two into the marriage. How do you hide that, even if you didn't consummate the marriage?

Personally, I think his family is just pissed that he never told them, and now they're taking it out on her because she went along with it.

When Tula's marriage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Cossey#Later_years) was annulled, it was because her husband's family was pissed and pushed him to do it.

[yodajazz]

I think you are right Nicole. Also I heard from a YouTube blogger in Texas, that people knew them as a couple before marriage, and said that he knew. I also heard that she got her srs after the marriage, so that would mean he had to know to consumate the marriage. No maybe the marriage would not be legal under those grounds, but in most states when two people agree that a legal arrangement exists, then there are grounds that they have an unwritten contract. The way I see it, it does not matter if they were legally married, it mostly matters if they aquired joint resources during the relationship, or there were expectations of shared resources and duties.

So to me, her attorney needs to frame the case, in terms of the rights of individuals to make legal agreements, whether they are written or implied. So even if the marriage is not legal, then they still had a legal agreement of some sort of business partnership, or whatever it's called in Texas.

[Nicole Dupre]

It just goes to show what a slippery slope these TX legislators dwell on, and what a lofty concept marriage is in legal terms. TX allows marriages to take place, but then let outside parties challenge them. Maybe she should sue TX for putting her in this bind in the first place. I mean, wtf? You present them with unfalsified documents, and they just accidentally allow you to get married?

[Jericho]

They say he found out just months ago -- after nearly two years of marriage -- and decided to separate from his wife and eventually divorce.He knew from the get go (good on him)!

If you just found out something like that, would you wait months before deciding to get out (given the kind of headfuck it would come as)?

The family are either a greedy bunch of cunts or trying to misguidedly protect his rep...People being people, i'm going with greedy bunch of cunts!

[Nicole Dupre]

He knew from the get go (good on him)!

If you just found out something like that, would you wait months before deciding to get out (given the kind of headfuck it would come as)?

The family are either a greedy bunch of cunts or trying to misguidedly protect his rep...People being people, i'm going with greedy bunch of cunts!
I assume if he learned after they were married, and if it was some kind of emotional deal-breaker for him, he would have had the state and his family backing him up just as they are now.

C'mon. He was a firefighter. Municipalities like those are extensions of local government. He knew how his co-workers would have reacted. We don't need to watch A Soldier's Girl to know how potentially volatile the transphobic mentality of men in uniforms can be.

It looks like doing whatever's convenient is a family trait. She obviously picked a guy who could not hold his high, and be proud of either himself or her. I'm assuming that's the dishonesty Danielle is referring to. And, as I said, I couldn't live like that as someone's wife. If he had been open about it, and faced any kind of backlash, he could've been the one suing the fire department and/or the state.

It sounds like a bumfuck area in the first place, if there wasn't even a fire hydrant within miles of a burning building.

[rameses2]

This is the same Texas that is re-writing the History books to cleanse the word "slavery" and to negate the slaughter of Native Americans, so THIS doesn't surprise me, in the least.

[giovanni_hotel]

Is it even known that she had SRS surgery?? Apparently from a cursory read, she applied to have her name changed as a preop.

This case in many ways IMO hinges on whether the court upholds he decision to change her gender, otherwise she's gonna be screwed.

As a couple, I would have to believe she could bring in a line of witnesses to vouch that the deceased knew that his wife was transgendered.

In a strange way, I'm glad this case is still in the media, although I wish it was under different circumstances.
For the general public, it's a step that needs to be made, seeing transgendered women as more than overglorified drag queens, homicide victims, or vice busts.

Men and TG women do fall in love and have LTRs. If this case functions as another inevitable step towards moving the public dialogue and changing people's perceptions on gender and identity, all to the good, IMO.

The more his widow is seen on camera and speaks before the judge, it becomes clear ( I hope!) to the general public that to call her a 'man' strictly because of her chromosomal allotment is an inadequate marker for one's gender identity.

Again, this case is being adjudicated in the Lone Star state, which appears to be in some kind of Bible Belt contest to see which red state can be the most regressive this century, so I don't have high hopes for Ms.Araguz.

I only hope the added media attention will bring more powerful advocates to her side, but somehow I don't see the heavy hitters in the LGB community turning this into a civil rights defense.

[fred41]

He knew from the get go (good on him)!

If you just found out something like that, would you wait months before deciding to get out (given the kind of headfuck it would come as)?

The family are either a greedy bunch of cunts or trying to misguidedly protect his rep...People being people, i'm going with greedy bunch of cunts!

I agree..seeing the way people are nowadays (and a lawyer within spitting distance everywhere here in the states)...I'm guessing his vampire relatives want the pension money and are using the woman's gender history to both rationalize the theft to themselves and to the outside world.

[Trans-Promo]

If he knew and lied to his family it still falls under HONESTY WITH THOSE YOU LOVE AND CARE ABOUT.

I would never be part of a cold hearted and thoughtless family through marriage. I would want to be in love with his family as well as his with mine.

The human race is going DOWN!

[yodajazz]

Is it even known that she had SRS surgery?? Apparently from a cursory read, she applied to have her name changed as a preop.

This case in many ways IMO hinges on whether the court upholds he decision to change her gender, otherwise she's gonna be screwed.

As a couple, I would have to believe she could bring in a line of witnesses to vouch that the deceased knew that his wife was transgendered.

In a strange way, I'm glad this case is still in the media, although I wish it was under different circumstances.
For the general public, it's a step that needs to be made, seeing transgendered women as more than overglorified drag queens, homicide victims, or vice busts.

Men and TG women do fall in love and have LTRs. If this case functions as another inevitable step towards moving the public dialogue and changing people's perceptions on gender and identity, all to the good, IMO.

The more his widow is seen on camera and speaks before the judge, it becomes clear ( I hope!) to the general public that to call her a 'man' strictly because of her chromosomal allotment is an inadequate marker for one's gender identity.

Again, this case is being adjudicated in the Lone Star state, which appears to be in some kind of Bible Belt contest to see which red state can be the most regressive this century, so I don't have high hopes for Ms.Araguz.

I only hope the added media attention will bring more powerful advocates to her side, but somehow I don't see the heavy hitters in the LGB community turning this into a civil rights defense.

Good post GH. A far as her op status, I heard she had it after they were married. I think the family claims that she had it before the marriage, and thus he did not know. I think you are right about it doing some good. The Littleton case needs to be re-evaluated it set a terrible precedent.

[Trans-Promo]

The Precedent Case the prosecution is using would be irrelevant if the defense can provide witnesses as to her claims of his knowledge.

But this still leaves the window open to annulment of the marriage if the court decides to take the state law in consideration.

Texas state law says she is male - but her federal papers say she is female.

This is gonna last for quite a while. This is going to be hard on her, however if she is strong and has great lawyers it will def. set a new precedent and move us in a good direction.

Let this also be an example to post-op women who think concealing your birth gender is a good idea - nothing good can come from it ( Sorry Peggy =) Love ya )

[Nicole Dupre]

D,

I agree. I have no time for closet cases. If you marry someone, and they want you to be their dirty little secret, they're not worth it.

And if we are going down... Well, as long as they don't use their teeth, it's all good. lol

Gio,

You're right. I'm glad this is getting the attention it is too. It goes to show, the people you expect to give their lives for you in a fire are HUMAN BEINGS WITH HUMAN DESIRES. I've had so many men from a wide variety of professions come to see me as a provider. But by all means, if this has to be their little secret and they expect discretion, let them pay. My family & friends love me for who I am. I know that's not always the case, but why would any man expect anyone to carry such a burden? It's not like we walk around with signs on our backs that say "Oh, by the way, I was born with a cock". But by the same token, so what if I was? I didn't ask to be. So I'm not apologizing. If people don't like it, they can mind their own business.

[fred41]

None of this would be a problem if the guy had left a will.

[peggygee]

Loving ya right back Danielle. :)

In the case at hand, my chief concern is that she receives any life insurance,
pension, death benifits, etc. to which she is entitled as a spouse.

As to his telling his Mom, Dad, Aunts, Uncles, extended family, I will maintain
my postion that I would prefer that my mate not divulge that information.

[Nicole Dupre]

Updates

http://www.examiner.com/x-60154-Houston-Libertarian-Examiner~y2010m8d3-Transgender-widow-case-boils-down-to-gay-marriage-ban

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/7136503.html

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/08/nikki_araguz_e-mails.php

[Nicole Dupre]

As to his telling his Mom, Dad, Aunts, Uncles, extended family, I will maintain
my postion that I would prefer that my mate not divulge that information.Why not? Why are you so ashamed of who you were and where you came from? Did you do things you weren't proud of before you transitioned? And after everything you've seen this woman go through, you're not capable of seeing why it's a bad idea?

You know what? That's just offensive to ALL of us. It says, "I'm a freak, and I don't want anyone to know". How dare you disavow knowledge of your transsexual sisters for a few relatives of a man you've hooked up with? Shame on you and him, and the little bubble you think you deserve to live in.

[african1]

Can someone answer this question for me please:

Why are they suing her? Did the "Fire Fighter" leave a fortune for her in his will that they are trying to cut her off from? Or is she a Millionaire and they are trying to fleece her?
Or is this just another dopey act from the Bible belt?

[fred41]

One of the articles says recovered money could be worth about $600,000...and apparently there's an ex-wife and children invloved too.

[Nowhere]

Yes, they're trying to take the money from her. That's entirely what it's about. It's about as cold and dirty as it gets. I feel incredibly sorry for her. Here, she was living a fantastic life, as any person truly deserves, and not only does her husband get taken away, but she has to deal with her life being torn apart and put in the spotlight by a truly evil family.

Now, I don't mean to make this sound more positive that this is happening, but this might help out humanity, as a whole. Why?

Simply put, Nikki is about as 'ordinary' of a woman in appearance as it gets.

It's the best chance Texas has of putting a human face to trans rights (possibly in the country) I have EVER seen in my life. People are visual, and I don't think there's a person in Texas who can't see the woman Nikki is. That visual aspect makes the fundamentals of the issue real in a way that can get to people.

Now, given it is Texas, I still give low odds that she'll come through with what she deserves, but this might trigger something more in the future, probably in other states. Just wait and see.

[BrendaQG]

Nowhere I hope you are right. Trans marriage rights specifically need a human face. Enabling gay marriage is good. However unless the laws give us the go ahead then any transwoman who marries a man in the US is in danger of this happening.

[Nicole Dupre]

It's the best chance Texas has of putting a human face to trans rights (possibly in the country) I have EVER seen in my life. People are visual, and I don't think there's a person in Texas who can't see the woman Nikki is. That visual aspect makes the fundamentals of the issue real in a way that can get to people.I agree. It's nearly impossible to not see Nikki as anything but a WOMAN, who is also a grieving widow getting shafted by a family of transphobic assholes.

[SarahG]

Based on the stories I've been reading on this, I can understand why they went about their marriage the way they did.

The husband already had two children from another woman, and he wanted to continue to be apart of their lives.

The problem is, in a state like Texas, if he had been "out and proud" about being with a trans girl... he probably would have kissed his kids goodbye, literally. The kids' mom would have been able to get sole custody, and possibly even a court order barring him from contact.

The husband wanted to be able to get his kids' christmas gifts, see them on their birthdays, and be a normal divorced parent like any other family of this day and age. But to do that, he had to keep his relationship with his wife in total secrecy.

This works, but then the family somehow finds out. The mom of the husband's children wants to seek sole custody. What are they to do? Pretty simple... the guy and his wife make false depositions saying that he did not know when they got married that she was trans. Problem solved, they pretend to be estranged, he doesn't lose access to his kids, and things go happily ever after until he dies.

Meanwhile the firefighter's family are probably thinking this girl is the Antichrist for "tricking him," not telling him, and getting near the children. Even if the firefighter had lived to 120 they probably would have hated her for life.

So now this already pissed off family is thinking they should be able to get all the death benefits as pay back. Or they could genuinely want the money to go to the children so that they can use it to go to college or some such thing.

No will would have been able to avoid this mess. The life insurance money would go to whoever is stipulated by the will, that much is clear. If he had made a will saying "my life insurance money is to go to this specific person" then that's what would have happened. BUT without the marriage being legally recognized, the widow would NOT be able to receive the death benefits from the husband's job. Meaning the health care, pension, and other "perks" that widows get when their husbands die on the job. There was no way for a firefighter to "will" health insurance to someone. So even with a properly worded will, this widow would have much to loose if the courts find that her marriage is invalid.

Think of it this way, when a legally married soldier dies in combat, the widow gets certain things from the feds to try to make up for the loss. Like that flag. But if a soldier is not legally married, that doesn't go to the long-term live-in girlfriend or fiancee. It goes to the next of legal-kinship and the long-term live-in girlfriend has to fend for herself. The most important thing marriage does is establish kinship! This impacts all kinds of things that can NOT be done through other means.

Normally 3rd parties can't go and call for a marriage to be put under legal scrutiny. If my neighbor is married to a really butch looking GG, I can't go to the courts and say "look... you might wanna look into this couple to see if their marriage is valid, I think both of them are really guys." It doesn't work that way. You need a dispute under which to bring the matter before the courts. The death of the firefighter is what gave the family grounds to do this. This happens all the time in probate court. It's an entire section of the judicial system that exists just so families can go and fight over estates by arguing that each other aren't really related, or married, or whatever. We rarely hear about these cases, but they happen all the time.

Sure it's easy to go and say "the husband should have just said fuck you society and been out to everyone- his family... his coworkers, etc." But if that comes at the cost of him loosing all contact with his children, is it really reasonable to expect that of someone? Would it be fair to them to loose their father just because he is in a LTR with a trans girl?

[yodajazz]

Based on the stories I've been reading on this, I can understand why they went about their marriage the way they did.

The husband already had two children from another woman, and he wanted to continue to be apart of their lives.

The problem is, in a state like Texas, if he had been "out and proud" about being with a trans girl... he probably would have kissed his kids goodbye, literally. The kids' mom would have been able to get sole custody, and possibly even a court order barring him from contact.

The husband wanted to be able to get his kids' christmas gifts, see them on their birthdays, and be a normal divorced parent like any other family of this day and age. But to do that, he had to keep his relationship with his wife in total secrecy.

This works, but then the family somehow finds out. The mom of the husband's children wants to seek sole custody. What are they to do? Pretty simple... the guy and his wife make false depositions saying that he did not know when they got married that she was trans. Problem solved, they pretend to be estranged, he doesn't lose access to his kids, and things go happily ever after until he dies.

Meanwhile the firefighter's family are probably thinking this girl is the Antichrist for "tricking him," not telling him, and getting near the children. Even if the firefighter had lived to 120 they probably would have hated her for life.

So now this already pissed off family is thinking they should be able to get all the death benefits as pay back. Or they could genuinely want the money to go to the children so that they can use it to go to college or some such thing.

No will would have been able to avoid this mess. The life insurance money would go to whoever is stipulated by the will, that much is clear. If he had made a will saying "my life insurance money is to go to this specific person" then that's what would have happened. BUT without the marriage being legally recognized, the widow would NOT be able to receive the death benefits from the husband's job. Meaning the health care, pension, and other "perks" that widows get when their husbands die on the job. There was no way for a firefighter to "will" health insurance to someone. So even with a properly worded will, this widow would have much to loose if the courts find that her marriage is invalid.

Think of it this way, when a legally married soldier dies in combat, the widow gets certain things from the feds to try to make up for the loss. Like that flag. But if a soldier is not legally married, that doesn't go to the long-term live-in girlfriend or fiancee. It goes to the next of legal-kinship and the long-term live-in girlfriend has to fend for herself. The most important thing marriage does is establish kinship! This impacts all kinds of things that can NOT be done through other means.

Normally 3rd parties can't go and call for a marriage to be put under legal scrutiny. If my neighbor is married to a really butch looking GG, I can't go to the courts and say "look... you might wanna look into this couple to see if their marriage is valid, I think both of them are really guys." It doesn't work that way. You need a dispute under which to bring the matter before the courts. The death of the firefighter is what gave the family grounds to do this. This happens all the time in probate court. It's an entire section of the judicial system that exists just so families can go and fight over estates by arguing that each other aren't really related, or married, or whatever. We rarely hear about these cases, but they happen all the time.

Sure it's easy to go and say "the husband should have just said fuck you society and been out to everyone- his family... his coworkers, etc." But if that comes at the cost of him loosing all contact with his children, is it really reasonable to expect that of someone? Would it be fair to them to loose their father just because he is in a LTR with a trans girl?

Great post, everything sounds plausible and reasonable the way you state it. Child custody rights can be very difficult to negotiate. Too often divorced women take out their relationship frustrations by saying negative things about the father. He would have very vunerable, by being open about a relationship with w trans woman. Again great post Sarah.