Until recently, you could deduct the entire cost of a $100,000 SUV on your taxes, but you couldn?t deduct the cost of a vaginoplasty or other genital reconstruction surgery if you were transgender. Deirdre McCloskey, in her memoir Crossings, talks about writing checks for $10,000 or $12,000 knowing that her treatment ?was going to be paid out of her own pocket and was not tax deductible. Blue Cross and the IRS take a dim view of gender reassignment surgery.?

The reason for this was simple: the IRS viewed GRS as cosmetic, and the tax code, at 26 USC Section 213, states that cosmetic procedures aren?t deductible, unless they?re ?necessary to ameliorate a deformity arising from, or directly related to, a congenital abnormality, a personal injury resulting from an accident or trauma, or disfiguring disease.?

Transgender advocates had been fighting to change the IRS? stance on GRS for years, and now they?ve finally succeeded. The Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders announced that the IRS had reversed its position. Rhiannon O’Donnabhain can indeed deduct the costs of her 2001 surgery from her taxes because it was part of a legitimate treatment for her gender dysphoria. This doesn?t just open the door for other trans people to deduct necessary surgeries on their taxes (possibly including top surgery for transmen). It also means private insurers will have a harder time turning down coverage for GRS as well.

On the one hand, this is wonderful news. The government should be funding GRS for everyone who needs it. Many transwomen view GRS as a life-saving operation that enables them to feel free to live fully as women, without a body that retains such a crucial male signifier in our culture and without the fear of being exposed.

But at the same time, it would be nice if we could have achieved this victory without reinforcing the idea that all transgender people suffer from a ?deformity? or ?congenital abnormality.?