Can gay men stop talking about transgender issues? Really, I mean really, because they almost always screw it up to say that "transgender people need to learn...", "transgender people need time...", and so on down the shit list of subtle, covert transphobic comments.
I listened to Huffington Post's commentary on the case before the Maine Supreme Court brought by the parents of a transgender student to access the girls bathroom after she was using it but then the school administrators said no but offered her a bad alternative.
The commentary between the two men, assuming one or both were gay (ok, just observing and they were LGB advocate, activists, or journalists), was just full of the same talk straights told LGB people decades ago when they fought for their right, "It's just not the time, be patient."
Yeah, right. The same shit LGB people have been telling transgender people for over a decade now fighting for their rights but not getting support from LGB people but being held to support LGB issues and people.
It's why transpeople created their own groups and organizations to fight for their own rights and forget support from LGB organizations unless they want to help fight for transgender people's rights and protections, which includes bathroom issues.
LGB people don't have the same bathroom issues as transgender people and especially children and teens. Yes, both get bullied but for different reasons, but still being LGB means you don't have to get into the bathroom you want than the one they demand you use.
Anyway, that's my rant against these two men who wasted my time any journalist or activist could say, but from the gay part of the Huffington Post, it's absurb on their part to assume and talk like they know. They don't, so stop talking as if you do.
Get a transgender activist to talk.
Saturday, June 22, 2013
Thursday, June 20, 2013
Why
If, as the LGB community has been asserting to overturn anti-homosexual laws, that being gay or lesbian is who you are and not who you decide or choose to be, then why don't LGB people understand that being transgender, meaning those whose mind is a gender different than their birth sex, is who they are and not who they decide or choose to be?
What don't they want to recognize that transpeople are the same as gays and lesbians in the innate sense of who they are as a person, just like straight people and cisgender people. They're all just people of different flavors, so why do gays, lesbians and radical feminists hate transpeople for just being themselves?
Yeah, rhetorical question asked too often and never really answered, let alone resolved.
What don't they want to recognize that transpeople are the same as gays and lesbians in the innate sense of who they are as a person, just like straight people and cisgender people. They're all just people of different flavors, so why do gays, lesbians and radical feminists hate transpeople for just being themselves?
Yeah, rhetorical question asked too often and never really answered, let alone resolved.
Saturday, June 8, 2013
What I Hate
What I hate is the LGB community activists, journalists, bloggers, etal using LGBT acronym but then only mentioning transpeople in passing as part of the larger community, issue, policy, etc. but never addressing the transgender issue in their writing, talks, videos, etc.
This has long been the practice going back decades, even a generation, where it was easy to require their support for LGB issues but then deny support to them for their issues which don't necessarily relate to the larger LGB issues.
This ranges from legal rights, healthcare, employment protections and rights, etc., anything that is pretty much unique to transgender people. The LGB community simply has ignored or excluded them in the discussion but then keep adding the T to the LGBT label.
This is blatant discrimination and what I hate about LGB people when they do this. If you can't be fully inclusive then don't include the name. It's the old adage, use it or lose it, but don't patronize it. It hurts real people and it hurts the gains transpeople need.
Support them or be honest enough to say you don't, but don't lie. That's why you're not liked or trusted.
This has long been the practice going back decades, even a generation, where it was easy to require their support for LGB issues but then deny support to them for their issues which don't necessarily relate to the larger LGB issues.
This ranges from legal rights, healthcare, employment protections and rights, etc., anything that is pretty much unique to transgender people. The LGB community simply has ignored or excluded them in the discussion but then keep adding the T to the LGBT label.
This is blatant discrimination and what I hate about LGB people when they do this. If you can't be fully inclusive then don't include the name. It's the old adage, use it or lose it, but don't patronize it. It hurts real people and it hurts the gains transpeople need.
Support them or be honest enough to say you don't, but don't lie. That's why you're not liked or trusted.
MWMF II
I wrote some thoughts on the Michigan Women's Music Festival explicitly excluding transwomen, even legally recognized (post-transition) women, except they haven't said how they enforce that policy when "those" women have essentially female brains and a vagina, and that some of "those" women have actually attended the events, one even pre-surgery.
That said, I was struck by the thought the organizers use for the exclusion and about women's life experience being from birth, and obvious with a vagina, like children really think about it. They argue one point which anyone, especially women, would disagree, when Cristian Williams wrote:
At its core, Thompson’s argument — and Vogel’s — is essentially based on gender identity and socialization. It contends that being assigned female at birth is a life experience that differs from that of being assigned male. “The internal struggles and social pressures are different,” says Thompson. “We live in a patriarchy. That is still true. And that has real, cultural effects.”
This assumes women have a universal, maybe even generic, life experience being born female. Are Ms. Thompson and Vogel are arguing the fact of a certain physicality creates the exact same life experience that is a unique cultural experience to these people, meaning women?
That, to me, is the underlying fallacy to her decision and the discrimination - let's call it what it is which is a policy of discrimination they wouldn't tolerate if it applied to them with excluding women from anything because they were born female.
The diversity of women's life experience is as diverse and men's life experience, or really anyone's life experience regardless of the sex or gender. I won't argue boys and girls are treated differently through their childhood and youth, but that doesn't take away each boy and girl has their own take on that and their experience.
I also won't argue puberty is a different experience for boys and girls, both personally and socially, but let's not forget transgender children are equally different for having the identity of a gender different than their sex. They don't have the female reproductive system of girls but they have everything else.
And just having a female reproductive system doesn't make all girls the same or give all girls the same life experience. We know this in part because some girls grow up hating being female and some of those transition to become legally male.
These transmen deny their own female body and life experience. And we know that many women simply take being female as something to live with and engage in a life they want regardless and even in spite of being female. Being female is just something they life with and don't have the life experience Ms. Thompson and Vogel suggests.
But what also bothers me about their argument based on female anatomy is that they're applying the same logic the feminist movement used to gain freedom for women which they're applying it to discriminate against the freedom of women.
They can't have it both ways, or else men could equally use their own logic against them to exclude women from what the feminist movement gained which is equal rights regardless of one's sex or gender.
The MWMF seems to have forgotten their own history and using it to do what has been done to them.
That said, I was struck by the thought the organizers use for the exclusion and about women's life experience being from birth, and obvious with a vagina, like children really think about it. They argue one point which anyone, especially women, would disagree, when Cristian Williams wrote:
At its core, Thompson’s argument — and Vogel’s — is essentially based on gender identity and socialization. It contends that being assigned female at birth is a life experience that differs from that of being assigned male. “The internal struggles and social pressures are different,” says Thompson. “We live in a patriarchy. That is still true. And that has real, cultural effects.”
This assumes women have a universal, maybe even generic, life experience being born female. Are Ms. Thompson and Vogel are arguing the fact of a certain physicality creates the exact same life experience that is a unique cultural experience to these people, meaning women?
That, to me, is the underlying fallacy to her decision and the discrimination - let's call it what it is which is a policy of discrimination they wouldn't tolerate if it applied to them with excluding women from anything because they were born female.
The diversity of women's life experience is as diverse and men's life experience, or really anyone's life experience regardless of the sex or gender. I won't argue boys and girls are treated differently through their childhood and youth, but that doesn't take away each boy and girl has their own take on that and their experience.
I also won't argue puberty is a different experience for boys and girls, both personally and socially, but let's not forget transgender children are equally different for having the identity of a gender different than their sex. They don't have the female reproductive system of girls but they have everything else.
And just having a female reproductive system doesn't make all girls the same or give all girls the same life experience. We know this in part because some girls grow up hating being female and some of those transition to become legally male.
These transmen deny their own female body and life experience. And we know that many women simply take being female as something to live with and engage in a life they want regardless and even in spite of being female. Being female is just something they life with and don't have the life experience Ms. Thompson and Vogel suggests.
But what also bothers me about their argument based on female anatomy is that they're applying the same logic the feminist movement used to gain freedom for women which they're applying it to discriminate against the freedom of women.
They can't have it both ways, or else men could equally use their own logic against them to exclude women from what the feminist movement gained which is equal rights regardless of one's sex or gender.
The MWMF seems to have forgotten their own history and using it to do what has been done to them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
