Men who just wear women's clothes for whatever personal reasons, who are identified as crossdressers, transvestites, etc., are not transgender women. They're men who wear women's clothes. It's not an identified medical or psyhological condition anymore, it's just what some men like to do.
These men should not be recognized in the same definition as the whole array of women who identify as transitioning women, androgynous women, gender-queer or variant women, or however they identify as. Women are women by their own gender identity.
Men who just wear women's clothes identify as men, live as men, aren't required to get psychological or psychiatric therapy for gender identity diagnosis, aren't required to be under medical care for their transition, don't go through the process to change their legal documents to be recognized as women.
Men who just wear women's clothes are just men who like to wear women's clothes, nothing more. And they certainly are not transgender women! Let's drop the pretense for the bullshit line they want to believe they're something they're not.
They don't want to be or live as women, they just like the clothes. They should not be included in the definition of transgender women, should not be protected under laws for transgender women, and should not be treated by society as women.
The transgender community is doing themselves and all transgender women a disservice by including them under the umbrella as "gender presentation" because they are exactly what conservatives use as examples of "men in dresses" to discriminate against all transgender women.
Transgender women have it hard enough to get through their life, they don't need to be lumped into an identification with crossdresser, transvetites, drag queens, female impersonators, etal. Transgender women need to be separate from them for their own identity as women.
The best thing the transgender community can do is jettison them from the community. This has happened in some cities and states where they're treated separate, as legally recognized women, and achieved these laws and rights they would not have gotten otherwise.
I don't see men who just like to wear women's clothes as women in any manner. Whatever their "feminine side" they want to express is irrelevant, it doesn't make them women by any measure when they take the clothes off and they are physically men, identify as men, and live as men.
Clothes don't make men women. The person's gender identity does.
Showing posts with label Opinion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Opinion. Show all posts
Friday, March 25, 2016
Friday, August 21, 2015
Really
Caitlyn Jenner failed to stop while driving on the Pacific Coast Highway and her Cadillac Escalade hit a Lexus pushing it into on coming traffic hitting a Hummer, killing the woman driving the Lexus, and hitting a Toyota Prius. She’s never admitted fault for her actions, said she prayed for the dead woman’s family, and now faces possible vehicular manslauter charges.
Yet she was awarded an Arthur Ashe ESPY award for courage and character for coming out as a transgender woman, even though millions of women have come out, and many transitioned, before her to face hate, discrimination, joblessness, poverty, violence and even death. What courage and character has she shown outside of what of her wealth and privilege has provided her to be insulated from realtiy the rest of us live?
The transgender community has embraced her despite her statements saying transgender women should get jobs and not depend on the government to help them in live and their transition. This from a woman who earned her wealth as Bruce Jenner, Olympic champion, and member of the Kardashian family with the reality TV show.
Caitlyn has admitted to being a staunch republican, flaunting her wealth and privilege on her own TV show, all the while the transgender community thinks she deserves respect for coming out with the help of her money, her family, Vanity Fair magazine and a television network, while she questions ordinary transgender women needing help to survive, live and hopefully transition.
And that's worth an ESPY award. Really?
Yet she was awarded an Arthur Ashe ESPY award for courage and character for coming out as a transgender woman, even though millions of women have come out, and many transitioned, before her to face hate, discrimination, joblessness, poverty, violence and even death. What courage and character has she shown outside of what of her wealth and privilege has provided her to be insulated from realtiy the rest of us live?
The transgender community has embraced her despite her statements saying transgender women should get jobs and not depend on the government to help them in live and their transition. This from a woman who earned her wealth as Bruce Jenner, Olympic champion, and member of the Kardashian family with the reality TV show.
Caitlyn has admitted to being a staunch republican, flaunting her wealth and privilege on her own TV show, all the while the transgender community thinks she deserves respect for coming out with the help of her money, her family, Vanity Fair magazine and a television network, while she questions ordinary transgender women needing help to survive, live and hopefully transition.
And that's worth an ESPY award. Really?
Thursday, July 16, 2015
Really
Caitlyn Jenner did what every woman who has transitioned has done before her, is doing now and will do in the future, but very, very few of those women had the family support, money and resources to transition what then Bruce Jenner decided to do, become themself, Caitlyn in this case.
And the vast majority of those women, then, now and to be, have had to deal with the whole array of life's issues with a transition, from coming out to family and friends, and then to come out their employer and co-workers if they had a job, and then become public.
Many of those women faced the whole array of adversity, problems, even hate and violence, and often losing their job or their careers. They had to find the medical resources to go through the transition, facing humiliation and often discrimination, just to get into see doctors or therapists.
Many of those women had to find ways to transition with the money they had, and often with almost no money, to have to resort to work they find dehumanizing. Many had to extend their transition for years for the lack of funds.
Many of those women didn't have the ability to pass in public without looks, stares, or ridicule. Many women didn't have the funds and access to medical resources to get surgery to become passable, and those that do were strapped with significant debt just to get by in life without public humiliation or embarrassment.
And through all that very few got recognition for their courage. Yet Caitlyn gets an ESPY award for courage? Really for what? Doing what hundreds of thousands of woman have done before her, including some professional or amateur athletes.
I don't see she deserves anything more than what many women have already done, but then it only goes to show you what lengths celebrities will go to for publicity and fame. If anything Caitlyn shows, it's not courage, but selfishness for publicity.
And for that ESPN gave her the Arthur Ashe award for courage.
And the vast majority of those women, then, now and to be, have had to deal with the whole array of life's issues with a transition, from coming out to family and friends, and then to come out their employer and co-workers if they had a job, and then become public.
Many of those women faced the whole array of adversity, problems, even hate and violence, and often losing their job or their careers. They had to find the medical resources to go through the transition, facing humiliation and often discrimination, just to get into see doctors or therapists.
Many of those women had to find ways to transition with the money they had, and often with almost no money, to have to resort to work they find dehumanizing. Many had to extend their transition for years for the lack of funds.
Many of those women didn't have the ability to pass in public without looks, stares, or ridicule. Many women didn't have the funds and access to medical resources to get surgery to become passable, and those that do were strapped with significant debt just to get by in life without public humiliation or embarrassment.
And through all that very few got recognition for their courage. Yet Caitlyn gets an ESPY award for courage? Really for what? Doing what hundreds of thousands of woman have done before her, including some professional or amateur athletes.
I don't see she deserves anything more than what many women have already done, but then it only goes to show you what lengths celebrities will go to for publicity and fame. If anything Caitlyn shows, it's not courage, but selfishness for publicity.
And for that ESPN gave her the Arthur Ashe award for courage.
Sunday, June 7, 2015
Elinor Burkett
I read Elinor Burkett's article, "What's makes a woman", in the New York Times opinion section of Sunday's (June 7, 2015) newspaper. It was more confusing than anything as she seemed to say what doesn't make a woman than what does.
While I agree with her assessment of the "mainstream" view of transgender activists and celebrities, using Caitlyn Jenner's recent photo shoot and interview (which I disliked for it's obvious self aggrandizement by Ms. Jenner than anything) she makes the mistake to assume that view is shared by the many women who have transitioned or are transitioning.
And in reality, nothing could be farther from the truth, which shows either she knows very little about the transgender people, except from the mainstream media and community, or didn't readily show her knowledge of it beyond the mainstream media and community.
In short, she made false assumptions to make a case, and that's the issue I have beside the other issue where she makes women a very complex construct of physicality, mental characteristics, experience and cultural/society events, she puts men in a large box, including male to female (MTF) transgender people.
Many MTF people don't transition because they're men wanting to be or live as women, and most recognize and acknowledge they can't have what female women have with their body. They transition because of an innate sense of who they are and put themselves into the limits society gives them.
She makes the case that you can't tell a male from a female brain. Not entirely true as neurobiologist have researched and published there are some general physical difference but insufficient to distinguish with any great accuracy.
What she doesn't addressed is that neurobiologist have researched and published that MTF people have brains more similar to female brains than males brains, something she either failed to mentioned or doesn't know. It's not the body that matters, it's the individual's brain that does.
The view of binary gender norms are changing as younger generations reject the male-female binary to be who they want over the whole spectrum, and while some older people also live in that mode, most assume a role they're comfortable with that also fits into what society expects and allows them to live.
As she noted, the majority of transgender people, especially children and young adults, face discrimination and often violence, more than women face in many aspects of society, especially in work and acceptance in public. This is something she neglects to acknowledge.
In addition, many women don't accept the standards of what society expects as women, but often live by it to get through life and work with the least hassles and problems. This is no different that MTF people who transition into a similar role, but women don't have the obviousness of transitioning in public.
She also assumes that all men have male privilege by some gift of society forgetting many men don't have it and don't live with it, and some don't want it. Some of the last find themselves recognizing more as women than men, not in the way Caitlyn expressed but simply as themselves by their personality, character, temperament and identity.
In the end, she has a point about the transgender community as expressed in the mainstream media and many transgender activists and celebrities, but she mistakenly assumes it respresents the whole of the community and all transgender people.
On that note she should talk to more women who have transitioned or are transitioning outside the mainstream media. She will find acceptance of her view about women because they're equally women, just with a different histories and experiences.
While I agree with her assessment of the "mainstream" view of transgender activists and celebrities, using Caitlyn Jenner's recent photo shoot and interview (which I disliked for it's obvious self aggrandizement by Ms. Jenner than anything) she makes the mistake to assume that view is shared by the many women who have transitioned or are transitioning.
And in reality, nothing could be farther from the truth, which shows either she knows very little about the transgender people, except from the mainstream media and community, or didn't readily show her knowledge of it beyond the mainstream media and community.
In short, she made false assumptions to make a case, and that's the issue I have beside the other issue where she makes women a very complex construct of physicality, mental characteristics, experience and cultural/society events, she puts men in a large box, including male to female (MTF) transgender people.
Many MTF people don't transition because they're men wanting to be or live as women, and most recognize and acknowledge they can't have what female women have with their body. They transition because of an innate sense of who they are and put themselves into the limits society gives them.
She makes the case that you can't tell a male from a female brain. Not entirely true as neurobiologist have researched and published there are some general physical difference but insufficient to distinguish with any great accuracy.
What she doesn't addressed is that neurobiologist have researched and published that MTF people have brains more similar to female brains than males brains, something she either failed to mentioned or doesn't know. It's not the body that matters, it's the individual's brain that does.
The view of binary gender norms are changing as younger generations reject the male-female binary to be who they want over the whole spectrum, and while some older people also live in that mode, most assume a role they're comfortable with that also fits into what society expects and allows them to live.
As she noted, the majority of transgender people, especially children and young adults, face discrimination and often violence, more than women face in many aspects of society, especially in work and acceptance in public. This is something she neglects to acknowledge.
In addition, many women don't accept the standards of what society expects as women, but often live by it to get through life and work with the least hassles and problems. This is no different that MTF people who transition into a similar role, but women don't have the obviousness of transitioning in public.
She also assumes that all men have male privilege by some gift of society forgetting many men don't have it and don't live with it, and some don't want it. Some of the last find themselves recognizing more as women than men, not in the way Caitlyn expressed but simply as themselves by their personality, character, temperament and identity.
In the end, she has a point about the transgender community as expressed in the mainstream media and many transgender activists and celebrities, but she mistakenly assumes it respresents the whole of the community and all transgender people.
On that note she should talk to more women who have transitioned or are transitioning outside the mainstream media. She will find acceptance of her view about women because they're equally women, just with a different histories and experiences.
Saturday, June 6, 2015
Talk is cheap
The truth is most tranwomen of privilege talk a lot about the conditions and circumstances of transwomen in general and those less privileged or less economically off than them, but in the end, they don't really care enough about them.
They give speeches, even get awards for their experience and lives, but every night go home to their privileged lifestyle and enjoy a good life while all the rest of the transwomen in this country struggle to live, fight to exist, and try to get through each day.
There's a big divide in the transcommunity, very much like the rest of the country, between the haves and have nots, the 99% of transpeople just getting through life finding ways to get through their transition and get on with their life, and the 1% who talk about it and nothing else.
Talk is cheap when it comes to transpeople, especially transwomen, notwithstanding their race, ethnicity or heritage. Talk is what the transwomen of privilege find easy, because they don't live the reality of the rest once they've attained privilege, if they even had to attain because it was given to them.
Talk is cheap. As we've seen some come out to sell books, some for the spotlight, some to be celebrities, and some because it's the goal to be at the forefront of an issue without investing themselves in it beyond talking about it.
Talk is cheap. Just hear all the transwomen talk about it, but ask them what have they done other than talk, other than be in the spotlight, write books, give speeches, meet with the media, give interviews, etc., in other words, just talk.
Talk is cheap to the transwomen trying to have a life, but talk is what transwomen of privilege use to make a living on all the lives of the rest of the transwomen. Words pay the bills of the 1% but does nothing for the 99%.
They give speeches, even get awards for their experience and lives, but every night go home to their privileged lifestyle and enjoy a good life while all the rest of the transwomen in this country struggle to live, fight to exist, and try to get through each day.
There's a big divide in the transcommunity, very much like the rest of the country, between the haves and have nots, the 99% of transpeople just getting through life finding ways to get through their transition and get on with their life, and the 1% who talk about it and nothing else.
Talk is cheap when it comes to transpeople, especially transwomen, notwithstanding their race, ethnicity or heritage. Talk is what the transwomen of privilege find easy, because they don't live the reality of the rest once they've attained privilege, if they even had to attain because it was given to them.
Talk is cheap. As we've seen some come out to sell books, some for the spotlight, some to be celebrities, and some because it's the goal to be at the forefront of an issue without investing themselves in it beyond talking about it.
Talk is cheap. Just hear all the transwomen talk about it, but ask them what have they done other than talk, other than be in the spotlight, write books, give speeches, meet with the media, give interviews, etc., in other words, just talk.
Talk is cheap to the transwomen trying to have a life, but talk is what transwomen of privilege use to make a living on all the lives of the rest of the transwomen. Words pay the bills of the 1% but does nothing for the 99%.
Friday, January 2, 2015
A Lot Said
A lot has been said about the suicide of Leelah Alcorn, and from what I've read, which isn't much because I get tired reading the same arguments repeated ad naseum by people thinking they're smart but really just espousing their opinion.
I can't add much to it except to say she's not around anymore, less by her choice as by her life, and it's clear the circumstances of young transgender people totally depends on one's support group, starting with their parents and family, and then everyone else.
We can all think we have some experience with people in similar situations, as I might losing a nephew at 19 to suicide with deeply religious parents, but I can't really, as all of us can't say much because we don't really know beyond what the news and information which has been released.
I can only say there are common signs of people not just thinking about suicide, but on the edge of commiting suicide, because of what I've read over the years and what I've experienced in my life, being there twice and didn't for reasons I don't fully know even now.
What I do know is what she wrote, "Fix society.", is really at the heart of the issue, because transgender children and youths need understanding and love above all else to be themselves, and failing that, it's very easy to slowly implode into oneself and pretend to everyone else.
It's one of the common signs of children and youths for a variety of circumstances, but it's hard to discern them from their personality, character and temperament which is dynamic all the time. It's why those close to them don't see it, but most don't even care to look for it.
And this I know throughout my childhood being mentally abandoned by my parents and left to live within my own world. And what clues they saw only lead to more denial and ignorance on their part, and more isolation on mine.
The criticism against blaming Leelah's parents is somewhat, but not entirely, unfair because parents reacting badly and worse to transgender children and youths runs the gamut of families as do the parents of those accepting and supporting of their transgender children and youths.
What we must think about is that Leelah's life, like those of all children and youths is bound by their own sense of themselves and their world, a significantly smaller and limited version adults live in under the psychological framework of bounded rationality.
Except their world isn't all that rational (many adults' world aren't either) but one thing overrides all other thoughts about her life and death and all children and youths almost all adults don't want to accept let alone try to understand.
Children know themselves with respect to their gender and gender identity better than everything else about themselves. This is established in the research about being a transgender person that it is discovered between 3-6 years and pretty much fixed by age 10-12.
It's a given in them they know and express, and it's only the adults who don't get it, or worse react to dismiss it and worse argue and even fight against it and their own children. Leelah was no different and there lies the heart of the issue.
A child and young adult didn't have the chance to live as she knew who and what she was. Who failed is left to those who live with her death, if they actually do rethink their own views or just decide denial, whether in faith or something else are the answers.
For everyone else, all we have is what could have been, which we don't even know that, so it's best to keep our thoughts and feelings in silence. We don't need more voices about it or the issue. We need resources for them no matter their circumstance and situation.
We need resources where transgender children and more so youth can get help to live when they can be free of the physical and mental chains of their youth imposed by their families and loved ones. Leelah seemed to see it but didn't find it.
I can't add much to it except to say she's not around anymore, less by her choice as by her life, and it's clear the circumstances of young transgender people totally depends on one's support group, starting with their parents and family, and then everyone else.
We can all think we have some experience with people in similar situations, as I might losing a nephew at 19 to suicide with deeply religious parents, but I can't really, as all of us can't say much because we don't really know beyond what the news and information which has been released.
I can only say there are common signs of people not just thinking about suicide, but on the edge of commiting suicide, because of what I've read over the years and what I've experienced in my life, being there twice and didn't for reasons I don't fully know even now.
What I do know is what she wrote, "Fix society.", is really at the heart of the issue, because transgender children and youths need understanding and love above all else to be themselves, and failing that, it's very easy to slowly implode into oneself and pretend to everyone else.
It's one of the common signs of children and youths for a variety of circumstances, but it's hard to discern them from their personality, character and temperament which is dynamic all the time. It's why those close to them don't see it, but most don't even care to look for it.
And this I know throughout my childhood being mentally abandoned by my parents and left to live within my own world. And what clues they saw only lead to more denial and ignorance on their part, and more isolation on mine.
The criticism against blaming Leelah's parents is somewhat, but not entirely, unfair because parents reacting badly and worse to transgender children and youths runs the gamut of families as do the parents of those accepting and supporting of their transgender children and youths.
What we must think about is that Leelah's life, like those of all children and youths is bound by their own sense of themselves and their world, a significantly smaller and limited version adults live in under the psychological framework of bounded rationality.
Except their world isn't all that rational (many adults' world aren't either) but one thing overrides all other thoughts about her life and death and all children and youths almost all adults don't want to accept let alone try to understand.
Children know themselves with respect to their gender and gender identity better than everything else about themselves. This is established in the research about being a transgender person that it is discovered between 3-6 years and pretty much fixed by age 10-12.
It's a given in them they know and express, and it's only the adults who don't get it, or worse react to dismiss it and worse argue and even fight against it and their own children. Leelah was no different and there lies the heart of the issue.
A child and young adult didn't have the chance to live as she knew who and what she was. Who failed is left to those who live with her death, if they actually do rethink their own views or just decide denial, whether in faith or something else are the answers.
For everyone else, all we have is what could have been, which we don't even know that, so it's best to keep our thoughts and feelings in silence. We don't need more voices about it or the issue. We need resources for them no matter their circumstance and situation.
We need resources where transgender children and more so youth can get help to live when they can be free of the physical and mental chains of their youth imposed by their families and loved ones. Leelah seemed to see it but didn't find it.
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Huffington Post
Why does the Huffington Post Live always have two men talking about issue involving transgender women? Neither one of them are transgender and obviously not women, so why in the hell should we listen to their opinion?
This has to be the worst thing Huffington Post can to do to insult women, especially transgender women, and it has to be the dumbest thing two men can do is to talk like they know all about the story, the issue and the people.
Get a clue Huffington Post, drop men talking about women and drop cisgendermen talking about transgender people, especially transgender women.
This has to be the worst thing Huffington Post can to do to insult women, especially transgender women, and it has to be the dumbest thing two men can do is to talk like they know all about the story, the issue and the people.
Get a clue Huffington Post, drop men talking about women and drop cisgendermen talking about transgender people, especially transgender women.
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Manning
It seems the Bradley/Chelsea Manning issue doesn't seem to go away as the military has stated they're considering transferring Manning to a civilian prison so the he/she can get the medical care for his/her transition since the military is prohibited from such care.
But that's only half the problem and maybe something he/she may not want to ask to the military to do. Consider Manning has been sentenced to 35 years eligible for parole in 7 years. If Manning chose to stay in Leavenworth (military) prison, he will be released and then discharged in 7 years, after which he/she could pursue his/her transition.
If he accepts a transfer, the military could just as easily sustain the full prison sentence and Manning would be there the full 35 years, without the possibility of parole since Manning would be out of sight and mind of the military, but he/she could pursue some of her transition while in prison.
I won't argue about what Manning should do, but I will argue we shouldn't forget what he was convicted for while in a military uniform, which is something that seems to be lost on the transgender community, as they seem to think Manning's transition is more important than the crimes he/she committed.
And I disagree that not allowing someone to transition is cruel and unusual punishment as Manning won't die from not transitioning, although some transgender people have committed suicide over not being able to transition, there is no evidence Manning is such a person.
That said, does Manning deserves therapy and hormones? Probably, but that violates military regulations which anyone diagnosed with Gender Identity Condition is mentally ill and can't serve in the military. Hence the thought of the discharge and transfer for treatment.
And that's the conundrum with Manning. They can't discharge him (official status) until all legal avenues have been exhausted to transfer him, and they can't treat him. So he has the choice, maybe, to withdraw any appeal, get discharged and transferred in hopes of treatment but risk a longer sentence.
Or accept the reality and get through the 7 years, get paroled, discharged and released. And for anyone going through a transition, it's maybe a no brainer between freedom to be who they want to be, albeit paying for it is another issue, or risk being in prison, and all that entails, the full term for some treatment at government expense.
While I think it's time the military accept transgender people as the science and economics shows it's better for both the transgender people who are serving or want to serve and the military. The cost of a transition is far less than what the DOD and VA spend treating a disable soldier or veteran.
But until then, Manning is stuck in the laws and regulations governing transgender people in the military, and the choices they and Manning has within those laws and regulations. So yelling at the military about Manning's rights doesn't change anything.
The decision, and gamble, is Manning's. He's in prison for a reason, we shouldn't forget. And he/she deserves some measure of treatment for his/her condition, but not available where he/she current is incarcerated. The military is offering him what he demands, with caveats, and as they say, nothing comes without a price, as Manning has discovered.
But that's only half the problem and maybe something he/she may not want to ask to the military to do. Consider Manning has been sentenced to 35 years eligible for parole in 7 years. If Manning chose to stay in Leavenworth (military) prison, he will be released and then discharged in 7 years, after which he/she could pursue his/her transition.
If he accepts a transfer, the military could just as easily sustain the full prison sentence and Manning would be there the full 35 years, without the possibility of parole since Manning would be out of sight and mind of the military, but he/she could pursue some of her transition while in prison.
I won't argue about what Manning should do, but I will argue we shouldn't forget what he was convicted for while in a military uniform, which is something that seems to be lost on the transgender community, as they seem to think Manning's transition is more important than the crimes he/she committed.
And I disagree that not allowing someone to transition is cruel and unusual punishment as Manning won't die from not transitioning, although some transgender people have committed suicide over not being able to transition, there is no evidence Manning is such a person.
That said, does Manning deserves therapy and hormones? Probably, but that violates military regulations which anyone diagnosed with Gender Identity Condition is mentally ill and can't serve in the military. Hence the thought of the discharge and transfer for treatment.
And that's the conundrum with Manning. They can't discharge him (official status) until all legal avenues have been exhausted to transfer him, and they can't treat him. So he has the choice, maybe, to withdraw any appeal, get discharged and transferred in hopes of treatment but risk a longer sentence.
Or accept the reality and get through the 7 years, get paroled, discharged and released. And for anyone going through a transition, it's maybe a no brainer between freedom to be who they want to be, albeit paying for it is another issue, or risk being in prison, and all that entails, the full term for some treatment at government expense.
While I think it's time the military accept transgender people as the science and economics shows it's better for both the transgender people who are serving or want to serve and the military. The cost of a transition is far less than what the DOD and VA spend treating a disable soldier or veteran.
But until then, Manning is stuck in the laws and regulations governing transgender people in the military, and the choices they and Manning has within those laws and regulations. So yelling at the military about Manning's rights doesn't change anything.
The decision, and gamble, is Manning's. He's in prison for a reason, we shouldn't forget. And he/she deserves some measure of treatment for his/her condition, but not available where he/she current is incarcerated. The military is offering him what he demands, with caveats, and as they say, nothing comes without a price, as Manning has discovered.
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Myopia
The one condition the transgender community suffers from is myopia. If you read all the news, the editorials, blogs, forums, etc. (I only access very few but enough through links) you come away with the sense they're either singing to the choir of like-minded transpeople or shouting at the crowd of opposing transpeople.
They very rarely write for the larger world and media outside the transgender umbrella, so you come away feeling like it's a large gender enclosed arena and unless you're "one of them" you're ignored, dismissed or hated, unless of course you agree with them.
The problem with that myopia is that the transgender community is not uniformily defined by the members and not universally agreed on the use of words for identifying people or classes of people, so words become swords and views become false wars.
As Shakespeare would say, "Much ado about nothing." or more any one of a number of saying about tempests in teapots, molehills and mountains, etc. You get the point. A good example is all the noise about the use of the word "tranny" and who defines and gets to use it.
This pitted the gay-drag community and the transwomen who came through to transition against those who felt the word, commonly used by RuPaul and other drag queens and often applied to transitioning, even post-transition, women, was derogatory and demeaning.
The former accused the latter of not understanding the history of the word and the latter accused the former of being dismissive. And then there were some transwomen who tried to arbitrate but only succeeded in stating the case for each and not solving anything.
In short, it's a lot of voices and noise at each other all the while the gay-drag community issued a half-hearted apology and promise, not RuPaul but the producers of the RuPaul show, that won't change anything.
The truth is, as many wrote, the public view of transwomen is taken from other groups under the transgender umbrella, such as the drag-queens, cross-dressers, she-males, etal. and some of the public post-transition women while helping transgender women are actually hurting post-transition women.
And that's something only a few of the public (post-transition) women do successively to represent women because they don't the use the stupid little adjective while most of them use it to promote themselves and transgender women not distinguishing between those in transition and those post-transition.
They're in effect talking to themselves thinking they're talking to the public. Transcommunity myopia in a nutshell.
They very rarely write for the larger world and media outside the transgender umbrella, so you come away feeling like it's a large gender enclosed arena and unless you're "one of them" you're ignored, dismissed or hated, unless of course you agree with them.
The problem with that myopia is that the transgender community is not uniformily defined by the members and not universally agreed on the use of words for identifying people or classes of people, so words become swords and views become false wars.
As Shakespeare would say, "Much ado about nothing." or more any one of a number of saying about tempests in teapots, molehills and mountains, etc. You get the point. A good example is all the noise about the use of the word "tranny" and who defines and gets to use it.
This pitted the gay-drag community and the transwomen who came through to transition against those who felt the word, commonly used by RuPaul and other drag queens and often applied to transitioning, even post-transition, women, was derogatory and demeaning.
The former accused the latter of not understanding the history of the word and the latter accused the former of being dismissive. And then there were some transwomen who tried to arbitrate but only succeeded in stating the case for each and not solving anything.
In short, it's a lot of voices and noise at each other all the while the gay-drag community issued a half-hearted apology and promise, not RuPaul but the producers of the RuPaul show, that won't change anything.
The truth is, as many wrote, the public view of transwomen is taken from other groups under the transgender umbrella, such as the drag-queens, cross-dressers, she-males, etal. and some of the public post-transition women while helping transgender women are actually hurting post-transition women.
And that's something only a few of the public (post-transition) women do successively to represent women because they don't the use the stupid little adjective while most of them use it to promote themselves and transgender women not distinguishing between those in transition and those post-transition.
They're in effect talking to themselves thinking they're talking to the public. Transcommunity myopia in a nutshell.
War of Words
What I take away from the argument over RuPaul's use of language and the subsequent criticism about that, and the war of words over this issue is that some in the community seem to have lost the idea that you can hold and express a view that isn't inclusive while understanding the views of others that is inclusive, and that is unfair to be dismissive of the younger generation for their non-inclusive view simply because they are seen as younger and less experienced in the community.
The younger generation has the right to their view, the right to express it, and they should be heard and considered, and even embraced because it can and will produce change, change often needed over the pushback from some of the "established" folks. The only thing older folks get when they don't just listen and adapt to the younger generation is left and forgotten as a vestige of the community's past, written into history and not in the present.
The reality is that the vast majority of transpeople could not care less about RuPaul and the war of words. He's seen as what he is, an older icon of the gay-drag community and not a transgender person let alone representative of the transgender community, but is still seen by the media as one and invited to on shows to speak for them, who then turns around and denigrates and dismisses transwomen.
And for that Parker Molloy was, in my view, right to hold him and his show accountable for the transphobic use of the words and his frequent comments for transwomen to become more like drag queens and less like real women. That is not positive for the transgender community, some of whom praise him in spite of the use of slurs.
Despite what RuPaul says and does in public or on his show probably doesn't change what he does and says in private, so much of this war on words is only for ourselves and considered meaningless outside our community. That has been lost in the noise. To me we don't need to descalate the arugment but take a step back and take a breath to recognize we all have voices and we will have differences, and whether you agree or not with the different views.
The younger generation has the right to their view, the right to express it, and they should be heard and considered, and even embraced because it can and will produce change, change often needed over the pushback from some of the "established" folks. The only thing older folks get when they don't just listen and adapt to the younger generation is left and forgotten as a vestige of the community's past, written into history and not in the present.
The reality is that the vast majority of transpeople could not care less about RuPaul and the war of words. He's seen as what he is, an older icon of the gay-drag community and not a transgender person let alone representative of the transgender community, but is still seen by the media as one and invited to on shows to speak for them, who then turns around and denigrates and dismisses transwomen.
And for that Parker Molloy was, in my view, right to hold him and his show accountable for the transphobic use of the words and his frequent comments for transwomen to become more like drag queens and less like real women. That is not positive for the transgender community, some of whom praise him in spite of the use of slurs.
Despite what RuPaul says and does in public or on his show probably doesn't change what he does and says in private, so much of this war on words is only for ourselves and considered meaningless outside our community. That has been lost in the noise. To me we don't need to descalate the arugment but take a step back and take a breath to recognize we all have voices and we will have differences, and whether you agree or not with the different views.
Monday, April 28, 2014
Slurs
There's been a huge ruckus over the uses of slurs on RuPaul's show when those slurs have been used outside the context of the show with respect to transwomen, meaning those women in transition or even post-transition. The drag community got up in arms over the attack from the transcommunity.
And many in the drag and gay (men) community have expressed their dislike for the attacks and have defended the term as it to them only applies to the drag community. Except the word escapes that narrow confines by the audience, including the majority of gay men and used to describe, even define,
transwomen.
And now some in the drag and gay community, even using comedy, to defend the use of the term invoking their right to use it for themselves, but not noting to their audience that's their intent with the words.
So here's the deal, if the drag and gay community want to continue the use of the words, ok, then I'll start to use the slurs, just words really, which are derogatory and even demeaning terms, words long fought out of use by the gay (men) community to describe them.
Yeah, you know those terms you were angry about and fought to get them dropped in public and even in private by many people. And if you're wondering, please consider it's my right to use them to describe drag queens and gay men because it applies to you and no one else.
Seems fair to me, a word, or rather a slur, for a word. So it's a slur, but then so are the words you use. But you already know those words are still used in private by many people, you just ignore the reality of it as you do the effect of your words on transwomen.
And if you're really wondering, I'm only joking of course. Really. As much as you're joking. What's the adage about what goes around?
And many in the drag and gay (men) community have expressed their dislike for the attacks and have defended the term as it to them only applies to the drag community. Except the word escapes that narrow confines by the audience, including the majority of gay men and used to describe, even define,
transwomen.
And now some in the drag and gay community, even using comedy, to defend the use of the term invoking their right to use it for themselves, but not noting to their audience that's their intent with the words.
So here's the deal, if the drag and gay community want to continue the use of the words, ok, then I'll start to use the slurs, just words really, which are derogatory and even demeaning terms, words long fought out of use by the gay (men) community to describe them.
Yeah, you know those terms you were angry about and fought to get them dropped in public and even in private by many people. And if you're wondering, please consider it's my right to use them to describe drag queens and gay men because it applies to you and no one else.
Seems fair to me, a word, or rather a slur, for a word. So it's a slur, but then so are the words you use. But you already know those words are still used in private by many people, you just ignore the reality of it as you do the effect of your words on transwomen.
And if you're really wondering, I'm only joking of course. Really. As much as you're joking. What's the adage about what goes around?
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
More Missing the Point
While the Huffington Post likes to present the diversity of views of the transgender community, and often provide a platform for some in the larger drag, cross-dressing, transsexual and transgender community, they also provide people with the opportunity to attack others in the community.
But what is lost in all the voices is the over-riding fact that the vast majority of in-transition and especially post-transition women don't identify with the transgender community and don't care to be involved let alone be identified with it.
In short, the transgender community is a small group of people shouting at themselves, but what is interesting is that while some do want to distinguish themselves from others, and rightly so in my view, others not only don't want to tolerate it but keep wanting to include them under the umbrella term transgender.
The truth is that in-transition and again post-transition women have almost nothing in common with the drag (whatever term you use) and cross-dressing community. They have little in common with the gender queer community but don't seem argue against them.
The argument is between the drag community, and historically the cross-dressing community, and transwomen, meaning the transmen often get lost in the shuffle and often don't care to get involved, over the use of labels often misused and even abused by the media and public.
And this is where I agree with transwomen who don't want the same labels, and especially hate the use of derogatory terms used by the drag community because those words don't apply to transwomen and they have the right to say no and argue their derogatory and demeaning words.
And this is where folks like RuPaul and Our Lady J seem to want to continue to use those words freely to all "transgender" women deliberately confusing drag performers with transwomen, even by some transwomen who came through the drag community.
I don't have issues if people use terms to describe themselves but they don't have the right to use them about others who don't want to be labelled with those words. Our Lady J wrote a piece saying she can use them however she likes and if you don't like it, tough.
She argues the words are commonly used by drag performers, or former drag performers, and the criticism leveled at RuPaul was unfair. It wasn't and Our Lady J, while having the right to defend RuPaul, is wrong to say transwomen not only should but have to accept the words.
They don't and don't want to accept them which is their right and should be respected, something the drag community, which is mostly gay men and a few transitioning transwomen, don't want to respect. Sorry, respect transwomen and their views, and if you don't like it, tough.
But what is lost in all the voices is the over-riding fact that the vast majority of in-transition and especially post-transition women don't identify with the transgender community and don't care to be involved let alone be identified with it.
In short, the transgender community is a small group of people shouting at themselves, but what is interesting is that while some do want to distinguish themselves from others, and rightly so in my view, others not only don't want to tolerate it but keep wanting to include them under the umbrella term transgender.
The truth is that in-transition and again post-transition women have almost nothing in common with the drag (whatever term you use) and cross-dressing community. They have little in common with the gender queer community but don't seem argue against them.
The argument is between the drag community, and historically the cross-dressing community, and transwomen, meaning the transmen often get lost in the shuffle and often don't care to get involved, over the use of labels often misused and even abused by the media and public.
And this is where I agree with transwomen who don't want the same labels, and especially hate the use of derogatory terms used by the drag community because those words don't apply to transwomen and they have the right to say no and argue their derogatory and demeaning words.
And this is where folks like RuPaul and Our Lady J seem to want to continue to use those words freely to all "transgender" women deliberately confusing drag performers with transwomen, even by some transwomen who came through the drag community.
I don't have issues if people use terms to describe themselves but they don't have the right to use them about others who don't want to be labelled with those words. Our Lady J wrote a piece saying she can use them however she likes and if you don't like it, tough.
She argues the words are commonly used by drag performers, or former drag performers, and the criticism leveled at RuPaul was unfair. It wasn't and Our Lady J, while having the right to defend RuPaul, is wrong to say transwomen not only should but have to accept the words.
They don't and don't want to accept them which is their right and should be respected, something the drag community, which is mostly gay men and a few transitioning transwomen, don't want to respect. Sorry, respect transwomen and their views, and if you don't like it, tough.
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Missing the point
Yeah again, I'm late to the argument but so are others who are reacting to the responses to RuPaul's use of the terms "tranny", "Shemale", and so on, common in the gay community, which I've noted it's time the transgender community jettison him back into the gay community which he has never left.
As has been stated elsewhere often enough, RuPaul is a gay man who earns his living as a female impersonator, like many who exaggerate the presentation of women found on his show on the Logo channel which sponors the show because gay men love it.
While some in the transgender community like the show, it's fair and reasonable to say many, even most, don't watch it and consider it for what it is, a gay and straight man's show, and while a few (reported at 4) of the contestants on the show have transitioned, they were either kicked off or left because of bias against transgender women.
My point here is one made by Critian Williams who argues both sides are wrong, making the case it's free speech and both RuPaul and only the Logo TV channel has the right to censor him for whatever reasons they feel necessary, which they won't more than a verbal slap on the wrist.
The Logo TV channel will keep sponsoring his show because it sells in the gay community. They love the hyper representation of women and they love calling transgender and even post-transition women trannies or whatever other term they have and still use.
I won't argue that point, everyone has the right to an opinion and the right to express it. But they don't have the right to use it to promote misrepresentations and discrimination against a class of people. No one uses derogatory words against racial groups in the public forum without being called out and pressured to issue a , usually half-hearted, apology.
No one uses derogatory words against gay and lesbian people without being called out and pressured to issue a half-hearted apology. And no one should use derogatory words against transgender people, which doesn't seem to include transgender men for reasons which defy common sense, just women.
The point is that RuPaul and Logo TV are promoting derogatory words toward the class of women who are in transition or have transitioned and while they're entitled to use those words in their private lives, they don't have the right to use them on TV or in public.
While they argue they're using them in the narrow context of the show, not unlike other shows, but that's not the point, which is that the represenation is misunderstood by many viewers to apply to transgender wormen and the RuPaul and the show knows this and does nothing to clarify the contestants from transgender women.
And that doesn't excuse RuPaul. The criticism of him is right and he would know it if some groups and people started resurrecting the old anti-gay words of decades past. You can bet the outrage if that happened, but then maybe some would just smile and tell RuPaul the adage about geese.
As has been stated elsewhere often enough, RuPaul is a gay man who earns his living as a female impersonator, like many who exaggerate the presentation of women found on his show on the Logo channel which sponors the show because gay men love it.
While some in the transgender community like the show, it's fair and reasonable to say many, even most, don't watch it and consider it for what it is, a gay and straight man's show, and while a few (reported at 4) of the contestants on the show have transitioned, they were either kicked off or left because of bias against transgender women.
My point here is one made by Critian Williams who argues both sides are wrong, making the case it's free speech and both RuPaul and only the Logo TV channel has the right to censor him for whatever reasons they feel necessary, which they won't more than a verbal slap on the wrist.
The Logo TV channel will keep sponsoring his show because it sells in the gay community. They love the hyper representation of women and they love calling transgender and even post-transition women trannies or whatever other term they have and still use.
I won't argue that point, everyone has the right to an opinion and the right to express it. But they don't have the right to use it to promote misrepresentations and discrimination against a class of people. No one uses derogatory words against racial groups in the public forum without being called out and pressured to issue a , usually half-hearted, apology.
No one uses derogatory words against gay and lesbian people without being called out and pressured to issue a half-hearted apology. And no one should use derogatory words against transgender people, which doesn't seem to include transgender men for reasons which defy common sense, just women.
The point is that RuPaul and Logo TV are promoting derogatory words toward the class of women who are in transition or have transitioned and while they're entitled to use those words in their private lives, they don't have the right to use them on TV or in public.
While they argue they're using them in the narrow context of the show, not unlike other shows, but that's not the point, which is that the represenation is misunderstood by many viewers to apply to transgender wormen and the RuPaul and the show knows this and does nothing to clarify the contestants from transgender women.
And that doesn't excuse RuPaul. The criticism of him is right and he would know it if some groups and people started resurrecting the old anti-gay words of decades past. You can bet the outrage if that happened, but then maybe some would just smile and tell RuPaul the adage about geese.
Saturday, April 19, 2014
Jared Leto
Ok, a little late to the show with this, but sometimes thoughts take a long time to get from the mind to the consciousness, but here it is, more an after thought than anything.
Let me see if I understand it. Jared Leto gets the opportunity to play a drug addict, HIV-positive, pre-op transsexual in the movie Dallas Buyers Club. He is coached by a former draq queen who transitioned, and who was one of the characters in a movie about her boyfriend who was murdered.
After the movie he goes back to living as himself and his work as an actor/director and with his rock band. He wins an oscar for his performance for best supporting actor. He thanks the people who coached him and the transgender community for the opportunity to "represent" them.
And he wonders why many in the transgender community are not only not impressed, but don't like the role he played, which clearly was intended to be an exaggerated characterization of a transwoman, the fact he won the oscar, and then fakes being thankful.
For what? Really. He never was a transgender person. He studied them for a while, played a role and then forgot all about it, even made sure to tell people it was just a role. And he thinks the transgender community should be grateful to him?
The guy has balls, literally and figuratively. If he understood he could have asked for a more realistic role, found better coaches, talk to more real (trans)women, etc., but then it wouldn't even be enough because he just played a role.
He never really understood what transwomen think and feel and how they live, so why should they thank him for his character in the movie? But then he's not unlike many who like to pat themselves on the back not matter what they do, only because they did it, to thank everyone for appreciating his effort.
Sorry, I agree with the many in the view he set back transgender people more in the public mind than he helped them, and next time don't volunteer to help. You've done enough damage.
Let me see if I understand it. Jared Leto gets the opportunity to play a drug addict, HIV-positive, pre-op transsexual in the movie Dallas Buyers Club. He is coached by a former draq queen who transitioned, and who was one of the characters in a movie about her boyfriend who was murdered.
After the movie he goes back to living as himself and his work as an actor/director and with his rock band. He wins an oscar for his performance for best supporting actor. He thanks the people who coached him and the transgender community for the opportunity to "represent" them.
And he wonders why many in the transgender community are not only not impressed, but don't like the role he played, which clearly was intended to be an exaggerated characterization of a transwoman, the fact he won the oscar, and then fakes being thankful.
For what? Really. He never was a transgender person. He studied them for a while, played a role and then forgot all about it, even made sure to tell people it was just a role. And he thinks the transgender community should be grateful to him?
The guy has balls, literally and figuratively. If he understood he could have asked for a more realistic role, found better coaches, talk to more real (trans)women, etc., but then it wouldn't even be enough because he just played a role.
He never really understood what transwomen think and feel and how they live, so why should they thank him for his character in the movie? But then he's not unlike many who like to pat themselves on the back not matter what they do, only because they did it, to thank everyone for appreciating his effort.
Sorry, I agree with the many in the view he set back transgender people more in the public mind than he helped them, and next time don't volunteer to help. You've done enough damage.
Monday, April 14, 2014
Can We Stop
Can we stop putting RuPaul in the transgender catagory and stop letting him talk about transgender issues or transgender people? The guy is a gay female impersonator, who has never changed that perception and description of himself.
It's time the media but more importantly the transgender community stop catering to this guy as someone who "knows" transgender people or knows what it's like to be a transgender person. He's a gay man who like to dress up.
He has worked hard on that image and nothing more than that, especially not ever calling himself a transgender woman. And he's called in-transition and even post-transition women "trannies" and then defended it as just the normal word gay men and female impersonators use.
That's crap and nothing more or better. So drop him for what he is, someone who hates transgender women and lumps them into being just "trannies" like him. He deserved to be called out and the transgender community shouldn't give him a pass or allow him an apology.
He won't change, so leave him with the gay community like all the other gay men (I'd use a worse word but that would be stooping to RuPaul's level he calls transgender women).
It's time the media but more importantly the transgender community stop catering to this guy as someone who "knows" transgender people or knows what it's like to be a transgender person. He's a gay man who like to dress up.
He has worked hard on that image and nothing more than that, especially not ever calling himself a transgender woman. And he's called in-transition and even post-transition women "trannies" and then defended it as just the normal word gay men and female impersonators use.
That's crap and nothing more or better. So drop him for what he is, someone who hates transgender women and lumps them into being just "trannies" like him. He deserved to be called out and the transgender community shouldn't give him a pass or allow him an apology.
He won't change, so leave him with the gay community like all the other gay men (I'd use a worse word but that would be stooping to RuPaul's level he calls transgender women).
Friday, April 4, 2014
If You Notice
If you notice while the Gay, meaning mostly gay men but they occasionally include lesbian as a courtesy, are pushing for new rights through laws or challenging existing laws, they don't use the word "transgender" let alone include transgender people in their efforts.
Why is that? Wait, we already know, they don't like transpeople as we saw with the fight for ENDA and we've seen in the fight for marriage equality. There is no mention or explanation of what these efforts do for transpeople.
The transgender community is the one doing the work to advance laws and changes in regulations for transgender people. They've effectively left the gay, again meaning men, community out of the work and out of the conversation.
This is a position long advocating by some transgender people which I thought made sense being as gay, yes men again, only allowed transpeople if they sat quietly in the back of the bus and were invisible. And there are reasons for this.
First, they've always thought transgender women were just gay men who like to live as women and they hated that fact and reality that it wasn't true, that transwomen were women, that pesky proven issue of biology that the gay men cite as they're being gay.
Second, they've always looked at transwomen as "trannies" blatantly using the demeaning term in a degoratory way to dismiss transwomen. Gay men only consider drag queens to be the only reason men dress as women, something Ru Paul is keenly aware and defends.
Third, they've always asked the transgender community to fight for their cause and issues and promise to help them "later" but never do, as we saw over the fight in Congress with ENDA where the then HRC executive director promised inclusion until Representative Franks said no way there would be inclusion.
And now with the wins for marriage equality becoming the normal as federal judges rule against laws or state constitutional provision against same-sex marriage, the gay community is totally forgetting transgender people.
Even noted and respected journalists like Rachel Maddow ignore transgender people while talking about LGBT rights to simply use the word but never discuss the people. On MSNBC only Melissa Harris-Perry devoted a part of her weekend show to transgender people.
The point? Well, there isn't one except history is showing the transgender community do best by themselves and transgender people, and more so legally recognized women (post-transition) do even better without the transgender community.
It's about women. Where it should be. Sorry (trans)men, you're just another form of men.
Why is that? Wait, we already know, they don't like transpeople as we saw with the fight for ENDA and we've seen in the fight for marriage equality. There is no mention or explanation of what these efforts do for transpeople.
The transgender community is the one doing the work to advance laws and changes in regulations for transgender people. They've effectively left the gay, again meaning men, community out of the work and out of the conversation.
This is a position long advocating by some transgender people which I thought made sense being as gay, yes men again, only allowed transpeople if they sat quietly in the back of the bus and were invisible. And there are reasons for this.
First, they've always thought transgender women were just gay men who like to live as women and they hated that fact and reality that it wasn't true, that transwomen were women, that pesky proven issue of biology that the gay men cite as they're being gay.
Second, they've always looked at transwomen as "trannies" blatantly using the demeaning term in a degoratory way to dismiss transwomen. Gay men only consider drag queens to be the only reason men dress as women, something Ru Paul is keenly aware and defends.
Third, they've always asked the transgender community to fight for their cause and issues and promise to help them "later" but never do, as we saw over the fight in Congress with ENDA where the then HRC executive director promised inclusion until Representative Franks said no way there would be inclusion.
And now with the wins for marriage equality becoming the normal as federal judges rule against laws or state constitutional provision against same-sex marriage, the gay community is totally forgetting transgender people.
Even noted and respected journalists like Rachel Maddow ignore transgender people while talking about LGBT rights to simply use the word but never discuss the people. On MSNBC only Melissa Harris-Perry devoted a part of her weekend show to transgender people.
The point? Well, there isn't one except history is showing the transgender community do best by themselves and transgender people, and more so legally recognized women (post-transition) do even better without the transgender community.
It's about women. Where it should be. Sorry (trans)men, you're just another form of men.
Friday, March 28, 2014
Why
Transgender women of color have complained for years the issues and focus on the transgender community and movement was not just dominated but defined and controlled by white (trans)women. Now that Laverne Cox, Janet Mock, and others have celebrity status they decided they have the right to speak for all (trans)women.
If the vast majority of in-transition and post-transiton women (many of whom are stealth) don't accept the few out (trans)women, mostly white but not all, the right to define who they were or are as women (transgender optional), why should they accept women of color have the same right?
I don't see why any (trans)women would allow let alone accept another (trans)women to define them. They might agree on some of the issues facing transgender people, even I do most of the time, but I wouldn't accept any celebrity speaking for me.
It seems that some transgender women of color have chosen to do what they've long criticized white transwomen of doing. Demanding the right to speak for the many is color independent, it's all in the individual, and no one has the right or should take the right to stand up and say they speak for those they don't know.
I don't speak for you, so speak for yourself but not me.
If the vast majority of in-transition and post-transiton women (many of whom are stealth) don't accept the few out (trans)women, mostly white but not all, the right to define who they were or are as women (transgender optional), why should they accept women of color have the same right?
I don't see why any (trans)women would allow let alone accept another (trans)women to define them. They might agree on some of the issues facing transgender people, even I do most of the time, but I wouldn't accept any celebrity speaking for me.
It seems that some transgender women of color have chosen to do what they've long criticized white transwomen of doing. Demanding the right to speak for the many is color independent, it's all in the individual, and no one has the right or should take the right to stand up and say they speak for those they don't know.
I don't speak for you, so speak for yourself but not me.
Sunday, March 16, 2014
Why
Why is it that when male journalists on TV news shows talk about "gay" rights and marriage equality only show video or images of gay men and only interview gay men or couples? Female journalists seem to balance the issue and people with men and women in the story. Don't women count or aren't part of the story when it comes to men?
Why is that when any journalist on TV takes about "LGBT" issue, they only mention the word "transgender" when saying the words in the acronym (LGBT), but they never talk about the rights, lives and issues of transgender people? Don't they count or aren't effects by the same issues let alone those unique to them?
Yeah, statement of the obvious in the LGBT community, gay men discriminate against lesbians and both discriminate against transgender people. Not all, of course, just most.
Why is that when any journalist on TV takes about "LGBT" issue, they only mention the word "transgender" when saying the words in the acronym (LGBT), but they never talk about the rights, lives and issues of transgender people? Don't they count or aren't effects by the same issues let alone those unique to them?
Yeah, statement of the obvious in the LGBT community, gay men discriminate against lesbians and both discriminate against transgender people. Not all, of course, just most.
Monday, March 3, 2014
Yes and No
Yes and No. That's the answer to several questions and while congratulations is due to Jared Leto for winning the Oscar for best supporting actor. He deserves it, but that raises the questions and the answers on both sides.
Yes, the people who made the movie, "The Dallas Buyer's Club", did have the right to pick whomever they wanted to play the role of the transgender woman with HIV since it wasn't a depiction of any real person.
But no, they didn't have the right to ignore the opportunity it would have given the many transgender actresses who could have played the part and probably better than Mr. Leto. It's one thing to credit a non-transgender (male) actor for playing a transgender woman, but totally different when someone's know the role by experience and life.
Yes, the transgender community had the right to express criticism, even outrage, at the move producers for their failure to give audtions and opportunity to transgender actresses. The producers had every obligation to give audtions.
No, the transgender community had no right to demand a transgender actress play the part unless they're willing to be the producer and write the checks.
Ok, not a real answer, but in the end, the producers missed an opportunity to help the transgender community and the transgender community missed an opportunity to engage the producers to get audtions and even a part.
But in the end, it's clear the role they wanted in the movie and it wasn't so much about a transgender woman but a supporting role to the lead roles, and Jared Leto wanted the role. That said, my congratulations to him isn't whole-hearted, but I doubt he cares because it was just a role to play than it being a real opportunity for a transgender actress.
Yes, the people who made the movie, "The Dallas Buyer's Club", did have the right to pick whomever they wanted to play the role of the transgender woman with HIV since it wasn't a depiction of any real person.
But no, they didn't have the right to ignore the opportunity it would have given the many transgender actresses who could have played the part and probably better than Mr. Leto. It's one thing to credit a non-transgender (male) actor for playing a transgender woman, but totally different when someone's know the role by experience and life.
Yes, the transgender community had the right to express criticism, even outrage, at the move producers for their failure to give audtions and opportunity to transgender actresses. The producers had every obligation to give audtions.
No, the transgender community had no right to demand a transgender actress play the part unless they're willing to be the producer and write the checks.
Ok, not a real answer, but in the end, the producers missed an opportunity to help the transgender community and the transgender community missed an opportunity to engage the producers to get audtions and even a part.
But in the end, it's clear the role they wanted in the movie and it wasn't so much about a transgender woman but a supporting role to the lead roles, and Jared Leto wanted the role. That said, my congratulations to him isn't whole-hearted, but I doubt he cares because it was just a role to play than it being a real opportunity for a transgender actress.
Wednesday, February 19, 2014
Celebrities
Celebrity transgender women no more represent all transgender woman than actresses and models represent all women. They don't represent them in how they look or behave, what they say or with their experience. Transgender women are as diverse as all women in every aspect of being women, but more importantly they're all women and the word transgender is just a label the media uses to separate, even denigrate or demean them as women.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
