'Subjective experiences fo gender non-conformity in Weimar and Nazi Germany.'

尽管包括变性人士在内的德国现代史--比如海克·鲍尔的《赫希菲尔德档案》--近年来蓬勃发展，但却没有一部完整地讲述这些人的经历，或者他们是如何受到他们所处政治体制的影响的。魏玛时代的德国提供了一个进步的环境，向那些自我认同的人发放了异装癖通行证，马格努斯·希希菲尔德的性科学研究所进行了第一次变性手术。与之形成鲜明对比的是，纳粹给变装者贴上了性变态和无性者的标签，并在1933年摧毁了赫希菲尔德学院作为第一个停靠港。因此，我的博士研究建议尝试挖掘生活在魏玛共和国和纳粹德国的不同性别个体的经历，以了解这些并列时期对那些不完全符合“男人”或“女人”类别的人产生的比较影响。跨性别主义作为一个概念、一种生活经历和一种身份认同，具有内在的现代性和历史特殊性。因此，我遵循劳拉·多恩的预防措施，避免不合时宜地将现代身份强加于过去。因此，性别不一致的历史不仅仅是指跨性别者的历史，而是包括男性女性、女性化的男性和双性人。所有形式的性别不一致都可以，也应该包括在这样的历史中。到目前为止，只关注魏玛和纳粹时期性别变异的人的研究很少。凯蒂·萨顿提出了解决性别不一致问题的替代方法。她探索了在魏玛共和国的统治下，异装癖社区是如何蓬勃发展的，尽管这些社区的融入受到中产阶级价值观和性别认同期望的控制和规范。然而，现有的大多数研究都是分析性方面的案件或法律案件。例如，在对第三帝国期间性别是如何管理的简要探索中，简·卡普兰表明，性别差异有时(出人意料地)被纳粹司法管辖区容忍。因此，从“外面”--从这一时期受到的科学和体制审查的角度--而不是从“内部”、从性别不同的人自己的观点出发，对性别不一致进行了短视的分析。虽然这反映了这两个时期之间和两个时期内这类人的政治、文化和医学方面的可能性和局限性，但我们仍然缺乏对生活经历的描述。目前学术界缺乏关于性别差异的主观观点是有充分理由的：自我来源通常比法律、医疗和政治来源记录得更少，而那些来自社会变异者的来源更是罕见。直到最近，玛丽·福尔布鲁克(Mary Foulbrook)和尼克·斯塔加德(Nick Stargardt)等其他德国历史学家才开始使用这种方法；这并不是一项轻松的历史努力。然而，在魏玛和纳粹统治下，对于性别不一致的人来说，从自由派到专制政权的转变肯定引起了情感上的反应，生活方式的改变，以及对自我的理解。为了理解这两种制度的并列影响，我的研究致力于挖掘不同性别个体独有的经历，并确定文化和政治霸权的变化对自我的影响程度，特别是性别自私。考虑到难以捉摸的来源基础，没有专门的缓存来进行这项研究。我从收集柏林的消息来源开始。这些文件包括来自地方档案馆的警方文件，德国国防军的性别不一致个人的回忆录(主要由丽丽·易北河档案馆提供)，一名从Magnus-Hirschfeld-Gesellschaft转到Hirschfeld研究所的患者的描述，以及插入了“异装癖媒体”的魏玛时代杂志，该杂志出版了Schwules博物馆读者的信件。这些途径

While modern German histories that include 'trans*' figures - such as Heike Bauer's The Hirschfeld Archives - have boomed in recent years, none have fully addressed the experiences of such individuals, or how they were impacted by the political regime they lived under.Weimar-era Germany provided a progressive milieu, with 'transvestite passes' issued to those who self-identified as such, and Magnus Hirschfeld's Institute for Sexual Science performing the first sex-change surgeries. Contrastingly, the Nazis labelled crossdressers as sexual deviants and asozials, and destroyed Hirschfeld's Institute as a first port of call in 1933. My doctoral research therefore proposes to try and unearth the experiences of gender-variant individuals who lived through Weimar and Nazi Germany, in order to understand the comparative impact these juxtaposed periods had on those who did not fit neatly into the categories of 'man' or 'woman'.Trans*(gender)ism as a concept, a lived experience, and an identity is inherently modern andhistorically specific. I therefore follow Laura Doan's precaution in avoiding anachronistic impositions of modern identities on the past. A history of gender non-conformity, then, does not simply refer to trans* history, but rather includes masculine women, effeminate men, and intersex people. All forms of gender non-conformity can, and should, be included in such a history.To date, there are very few studies that focus solely on gender-variant peoples in the Weimar and Nazi periods. Katie Sutton has gestured towards alternative methods of approaching gender non-conformity. She explored how transvestite communities thrived under the Weimar Republic, even while inclusion in these communities was controlled and regulated by middle-class values and gender-conforming expectations. However, most existing studies analyse sexological or legal cases. For example, in a brief exploration into how gender was administered during the Third Reich, Jane Caplan has shown that gender-variance was (unexpectedly) sometimes tolerated by Nazi jurisdiction. Gender non-conformity has consequently been analysed myopically from 'without' - from the perspectives of scientific and institutional scrutiny it received in this period - rather than from 'within', from gender-variant people's own viewpoints. While this reflects the political, cultural and medical possibilities and limitations for such people between and within both periods, we are left wanting in accounts of lived experience.There is good reason for the current lack of subjective perspectives on gender-variance in thescholarship: ego sources are typically less well documented than legal, medical, and political ones, and those from 'social deviants' are rarer still. Only recently have other historians of Germany such as Mary Foulbrook and Nick Stargardt begun to utilise such an approach; it is no easy historical endeavour. However, the transition from a liberal to a repressive regime for gender non-conforming people under Weimar then Nazi rule must have elicited emotional responses, changes in lifestyle, and understandings of selfhood. To understand the juxtaposed effects of both regimes, my research tackles the task of unearthing experiences that are unique to the gender-variant individual, as well as determining the extent to which shifts in cultural and political hegemony affected selfhood, specifically gendered-selfhood.Given the elusive source base, there is no singular cache to conduct this research from. I have begun by harvesting sources in Berlin. These include police files from the Landesarchiv, memoirs of gender non-conforming individuals who were in the Wehrmacht (mostly supplied from the Lili Elbe Archive), an account from a patient who transitioned at Hirschfeld's Institute from the Magnus-Hirschfeld-Gesellschaft, and Weimar-era magazines with 'transvestite media' inserts, which published correspondence from readers from the Schwules Museum.These avenues for