With the exception of correcting someone's language, I don't like to talk about my trans status in the tofuspace. It's more of a matter of preserving the reputation of the trans community than one of personal relationship. Whenever people ask me questions like but not necessarily “Do you feel like this is the 'real' you?”my first reaction is to ball up my fists and scream “I CAST MAGIC MISSILE!” over and over until they explode or I get light-headed and need a soda. After years of pyschic training most mystic (see also: therapy) I have learned to play this scenario out in my head in the supermicrosecond it takes for me to shrug my shoulders and mutter an awkward “yeah, I guess”.
I feel dishonest suggesting that present me is somehow more “real” than me circa pre-transition. I don't know if I've ever felt “real”. All my life I've struggled with the pervading sensations of emptiness, impermanence. This is not to suggest I am free from the “taxation without representation” of emotions. I still feel. I love my partner and hate exposed stuffing on couch cushions or when you pull a corner of your sheets off and there's the bare mattress. I have favorite TV shows and can taste the difference between Pepsi and Coke. I am in every way as human as you, yet when I set eyes on loved ones I cannot help but curdle with envy at their wholeness, their solidity in their identities. I don't have a “style”, I have a series “personality changes”. I've gone through three or four first names and twice as many middle names. Two months ago I wanted to be the front woman for an art punk band. As of last week I want to do nerdcore-influenced hip hop and occasionally dabble in house music. I got a couple compliments on an LJ post about how I look good in a bandanna and I've never left the house without one since.
What I've described are classic symptoms of borderline personality disorder. Shifty identity, feelings of emptiness. There are other, scarier symptoms, but the less time those can be found in the same room as my queer identity the better. Reconciling my temporal identity with being trans provides me all the self-reflection and personal turmoil that I could never need. I'll pass out pamphlets and hold workshops and fight the patriarchy in the streets, just don't ask me what it means to be a woman. Because I don't know. I don't know what makes me a woman. I just know it's what I am. How do I know that it's not just a single flavor in my jelly belly jar of personality? I don't. Every shot day, as I hug the pillow and brace myself for the incoming needle, I ask myself about 35 times if this is what I really want for myself.
I never say it, but whenever someone tells me I kiss/talk/make love “like a girl”, I feel this overwhelming sense of relief, like “yay, a winner is me, I got the answer right”. There was a time when I dreamed of the day I could wear dresses and paint my toes and listen to Sarah McLachlan without being labeled a “pussy”. Now it's too much effort to shave my legs, I've instituted a “no change of polish until one nail goes completely bare” rule, and I found that Tegan and Sara are actually way better. I've begun to label myself “chaotic femme”-identified, which is great because it suggests that even I don't know what that means. I'm pretty sure that's not how you're supposed to do it. Isn't “know thyself” the most important tenant of human philosophy? Or was it “be kind, rewind”?
I integrate a lot of the media I consume into my everyday language and behavior. I think it is marginally more authentic to be a “mash up” instead of having nothing “original” to say. Though I haven't played any of the games in almost 10 years and watched maybe 10 episodes of the original television show, I use a lot of pokemon lingo, or poke-slang as I will call it, once, before your death glare convinces me never to say it again. It's nostalgic, cartoonish appeal aside, you have to admit that marketing live animal capture and dogfighting to kids is sickly hilarious.
I've always had a soft spot for Ditto, the little blobby pokemon that can mimic other pokemon. It totes has nothing to do with why Kirby is my favorite character in the Smash Brothers series. At all. I tried to build a team around Ditto to beat the Elite Four and win the little duel league my friends and I had set up for school recess. I switched to Magic Cards within three weeks. I was encouraged to try with real, more serious pokemon, but I found no gratification in that. Why confine yourself to just six pokemon when you could have like, all of them, at once? What if you got bored with the same attacks, same strategy? Why try to explain my female identity and what being a woman means to me if I'm going to change my mind on the details two weeks later? Isn't it enough that despite my fleeting sense of self I still remain convinced of my gender, and could not be convinced to de-transition for all the energon in Cybertron? Why must I always be moonwalking on eggshells, afraid that betraying this facade of “I know who I am and always have” will somehow hurt my credibility as a trans person and have my name put in the “not really trans/not serious about it” hat?
The activist and wallflower in me are arguing in the kitchen in my head. Again. This always happens at breakfast. The activisit says that I have a duty, as a queer, as a trans woman, to spread awareness and visibility and speak truth even if it is contradicting and inconvenient, while the wallflower says it's not my job to be a spokesperson for the community and it's better if others who are more secure in their identities do the talking. I wish they'd kiss and make up already. I've been waiting to try out these morningstar sausage patties forever.
Is it okay not to know? Is it better to embrace your shapeshifting abilities or find a form you like and stick to it? Can you be proud and unsure of your identity at the same time? Does it hurt the movement if I don't know who I am? Is it even worth it to collect all 151 (original) pokemon if everyone ends up using the same four or five in every duel?
You'd think being as active as I am in community-centric blogging would give me the answers to these questions. But really, it just gives me permission to be honest about my ignorance. I could write you a song about the three waves of feminism and make up drinking games based around finding the blatantly homoerotic subtext in old movies. That's what brought me here. But I don't know what any of this means to me, personally, and wonder if perhaps by observing what it means to others and giving people a space to express it, I could learn how to know. And that's what will keep me here, I guess.
TheyCallMeVroom uses “awkward heartfelt closing thought”!
It's super effective!
(...to the full post)
There was a huge push this year from the staff of the forum to make everyone feel welcome, including those of all gender identities. In the packet of information that was available before the forum began, it had a section describing the steps that the forum was taking to be inclusive of queer issues, such as the entire forum having gender-neutral bathrooms and the workshops being aware of people’s different preferred gender pronouns. It stated in the packet that everyone was expected to be respectful and accepting of all gender identities and that prejudice and bigotry would not be tolerated. To echo transfeminist’s feelings, I too feel like I no longer understand how different gender or LGBTQ identities could be a problem to anyone, and I was a little shocked that people needed to be reminded to respect other people’s identities. If there is a place where this should be a no-brainer, shouldn’t it be at a liberal, progressive, activist conference? Yet with 15,000 people, you’re bound to get some dissent, thus the reason for the disclaimer.
However, by the time the forum rolled around, most bathrooms were not gender neutral, and there were definitely issues of gender-nonconforming peeps not being accepted and made to feel uncomfortable for visiting the “wrong” bathroom. Similar responses were made in workshops when presenters would ask participants to include in their introductions their preferred gender pronoun. There were a lot of confused looks around as to what that meant or why that addition to the intros was necessary. There was even one very pushy lady in a workshop I went to that cut the introductions short by saying that “no one really needs to know who everyone is or cares what pronoun they use, can we just get on with the workshop? We’re running out of time.” Yes, because nothing says building community and trust amongst a movement like ignoring everyone else in the room.
And to give the forum staff credit, they did make announcements at large assemblies regarding the lack of understanding towards the gender neutral bathrooms and tried to address other concerns as they arose. Yet if the desire of all attendants aren't there to make the forum a safe space for everyone, no amount of announcements will cause the change needed.
It got me thinking a lot about the progressive movement in general, and how if we can’t even find agreement and acceptance here about these issues, how are we ever going to find it in the greater population? And of course I recognize that people came to the forum for all sorts of reasons, with all kinds of interests and agendas, and with many individual perspectives. And while I was super impressed by the queer workshops that were put on, especially the Queer/Trans People’s Movement Assembly, I was still surprised by the lack of knowledge a lot of the attendants had regarding LGBTQ issues. Yet to be fair, I’m sure if I had talked to a lot of climate justice folks (an issue I know embarrassingly little about), they would be appalled at my lack of understanding about their concerns.
Overall, it gets back to the point that has been discussed before on this blog about language and accessibility. Sometimes you need to be patient and meet people where they are, and tone down your language when speaking with a newbie. For instance, I had a wonderful conversation with an older woman from the South who knew very little about queer issues, and was absolutely shocked when she found out I was bi/pan. She had met my partner at the forum as well and said, “You mean your boyfriend doesn’t mind that you…sleep with girls?!” She shuddered when I said no. “But, he doesn’t get jealous that you date them too?” Now, this got interesting because my partner and I are poly, so for a second I continued with the conversation as normal, but then remembered that I had never revealed our poly status to her and that she was just assuming that all bisexuals were, in her mind, promiscuous. It was a weird moment, because all through college I had read articles in my queer studies courses about how this was a stereotype about bisexuals, yet I personally had never encountered it. Yet now I can check that one of my list – fun! While she was surprised at first once I explained to her that being bisexual does not mean that you always have a relationship with both a man and a woman at the same time, we ended up having a really great and open conversation about the different stereotypes and what all the terminology means. She was so happy afterward that someone had taken the time to explain it to her, because usually people just get offended and stop talking to her about it.
On one hand I know people in an oppressed position should not be the ones solely responsible for educating others on these issues, yet in some ways I feel like if we’re not going to do it, who is? It’s not that we can’t get offended or speak passionately and urgently when we’re explaining these issues, or show our frustration in people not understanding or always being put in the position of explaining, but in reality, there was someone who sat down with all of us at some point in our queer journey. Whether it’s that we already knew that this is the life we wanted but we didn’t yet have the words for it, that we didn’t even know this was a possibility, or even just did a google search and stumbled upon a queer blog and a whole new world opened up, at one point or another, someone took the time to teach us about queer issues. And here we are today. So we can’t expect everyone to be up to speed in an instant. We can expect and demand respect and acknowledgement, but if someone gives me a double take when I go into the men’s bathroom, I try to smile and not get scared away from going into the men’s room again when I feel more like that gender that day.
So what are some ways that the US Social Forum could improve its queer and gender identity inclusion, as well as inclusion regarding other issues that people may not be knowledgeable about? One thing I felt the forum was lacking was a labeling what type of audience the workshops were looking for. Some workshops I went to were clearly geared to veteran activists in a particular field, and the conversations went way above my head because I didn’t have basic knowledge of that issue. Other times, I was hoping to have a really in-depth discussion about a topic I am heavily involved in, yet the workshop skimmed the surface to try to be accessible to everyone. If there were different types of workshops created, such as ones marked as entry-level courses on certain issues to give people an intro to a topic, it could be an unintimidating way for people to educate themselves about new topics. And on the other side there could be advanced courses for people that are already working within that movement (I learned later that this was the intention of the People’s Movement Assemblies, however from what it seemed like to me, most people who were new to the Forum were not aware of this distinction).
Yet this would still not solve the problem completely because there may not be enough time to go to intro workshops, or people may feel they don’t need to learn about certain issues and won’t attend anyway. In that case, perhaps there could be more education done beforehand by the forum by sending out emails or educational articles to try to get people up to speed on the basics of the different issues that will be discussed so that people will have a better idea of what to expect when they get there. This may have been the intent of the original packet sent out with info about the gender identity inclusion, yet that was obviously not enough this year. I know this is a lot to ask, that the forum crew may have been understaffed, underfunded, and unable to take the time to do all this beforehand. And when it comes down to it, you can’t force anyone to understand these issues – that will come with their own self-education and exploration. But maybe if there was a little more materials available and a little more time for personal discussions amongst people of different views, the next US Social Forum could be even more successful and positive than this latest one was.
**Note: This post describes solely my experience at the forum, and if others attended I would love to hear your opinions and if you felt the forum dealt with these issues in a different way then I described.
(...to the full post)
So what’s a genderqueer, then?
Well, let’s start with a bit of a correction here…genderqueer isn’t really a noun. It’s an adjective. You wouldn’t ask what a transgender was, would you? Oh, wait…some people actually do that. Well, stop right now.
The correct usage would be "genderqueer person." See, "person" is the noun, and "genderqueer" is the adjective. The more you know.
Well, what are genderqueer people like? Fuck if I know. Unique, like everyone else? Genderqueer people just usually don't identify within the binary gender system of male and female. We may identify as both genders, neither gender, or a gender completely separate from the generally accepted gender spectrum. Baby boys wear blue, baby girls wear pink. Pants for boys, dresses for girls. Period. I wish people would get up and off those stereotypes. You know the "gay rainbow"? Well, I'd say I'm Yellow Green in that crayon box. So I suppose that's what a baby me should have worn. If I could only protest to the pink as an infant. Well, actually, my parents were more of the modern type that dressed all their children in various clothes, pants on baby girls, too...and like I said in my last post weren't adamant I keep my hair long like a good girl. Ha! Good girl! I'm neither of those, and I think my parents got that a long time ago.
Most genderqueer people--people such as myself--tend to identify as a “gender” (I put that in quotes to denote that gender is not always fixed) somewhere in the middle of the fancy gender spectrum. At one end I suppose you would have the “manly-men” (which could include both cisgendered and FTM trans people, if they identified as being ultra-manly) and on the other extreme the “feminine-women” (again, cisgendered or MTF trans people who identify as female female FEMALE). “Genderqueer” is pretty much just an umbrella term that is used to cover bi-gendered, androgynous, third-gender, or gender-fluid people. Again, the people in the middle of the spectrum. I just go with “genderqueer” for myself because, well, it works. If I had to choose a subcategory, I suppose I would be androgynous. But "genderqueer" is a more inclusive word. So let’s just keep with that one. Then we don’t leave anyone out. We don’t want to do that now, do we?
Now we'll go to definitions. Something like a Cliff's Notes for gender identities. If you pay attention, you'll know more when you read other posts of this nature. The kids will give you credit for being down with it, just like they do to Craig Finn. Sorry, you probably have no idea who that is. Forgive me. I just needed to do that to fulfill my little sidetracked mind.
There are two basic and important acronyms that will be important for you to know, for genderqueer and binary-identified trans people alike: FAAB and MAAB. People usually have no idea what those acronyms mean, but that's okay, because you'll know now. The acronym FAAB means “female-assigned at birth.” It is important to use this acronym if you want to denote to other people what your, well, gender assigned at birth was. Did you wear the pink or the blue onesies? It is important to stress the "assigned" part because, well, a lot of genderqueer people don’t identify as either gender or they identify as both at the same time. So saying that a person is a “genderqueer woman” would be grossly inaccurate. And it is also kind of rude, insensitive, and taboo to say something like "She was born a woman," because NO ONE is born a certain gender. A person may be born a certain sex, and gender and sex are different things. Gender is mind based, sex is chromosome based. They're not interchangeable, even though a lot of people think so. Again, the more you know.
By what I said above, you can probably infer that MAAB means "male-assigned at birth." AWESOME. Now we can go on.
I said before that FAAB and MAAB are important acronyms to know. Well, we should probably also define bi-gendered, androgynous, third-gendered, and gender-fluid, just to be good and inclusive. We'll do this quickly. A bi-gendered person typically feels that they are both genders at the same time, or sometimes at different times, and often (without thinking about it) construct two personas to represent their male and female sides and different personalities. This is NOT the same thing as "Multiple Personality Disorder," which, I'm sorry, but I must say it because it grinds on me, has been called "Dissociative Identity Disorder" for over a decade. Well, it's not that, whatever you want to call it. It's just a person who feels they have two separate sets of characteristics--one male, one female--that can't be resolved by constructing one "gender."
Androgynous people are, well, androgynous. People who are androgynous often feel as if they are right in the middle, and they want to stay there. Oftentimes we will wear clothes and cut our hair to deliberately look neutral in gender. Androgynous people such as me tend to think of themselves as both male and female at the same time, but unlike bi-gendered people, the two genders are neutral and can be resolved into one consistent gender identity. Androgynous people may also view themselves as neither gender, or both AND neither at the same time, like I do.
Third-gendered philosophy is pretty straightforward. A person who identifies as third-gendered basically feels as if they do not fit into either binary gender in any way, and are completely separate from the male/female gender dynamic.
Gender-fluid people are people who tend to identify as relatively neutral with regards to gender but will vacillate between "male" and "female" presentation. This is usually quite limited, and gender-fluid people tend not to view themselves as two separate gender identities--gender-fluid people pretty much slide back and forth on the spectrum but stay pretty near the center. It depends on the person how far they move from center, but gender-fluidity could probably be described with a comparison to a grandfather clock, which has a swinging weight that goes left and right of the neutral position. I myself am pretty gender-fluid, but I tend to stay closer to the center of androgyny.
Yeah, you could probably get all of that information off Wikipedia.
I’m not speaking for all genderqueer people by any means. That would be impossible due to the variety of people included within the “gender,” if you can even call it that. This is all me. This is the world according to my experiences with my own gender and how my other genderqueer friends describe their own identities. This is meant to be helpful, but don't go around assuming that you know everything about this now. You're more well-informed, but you won't completely understand unless you live it yourself.
Kirk out.
(...to the full post)
Personally, I think it boils down to two things... and maybe they are not the most pressing matters, but they make her wedding relevant. To me, at least.
1. Unlike many of her peers, Chelsea used the advantages that were handed to her in positive ways. Can you say that about every kid of famous parents? She is a role model to a generation lacking many quality role models.
2. The former ugling duckling is now a beautiful, happy, successful woman, leaving those who mocked her 15 years ago in our far, distant memories.
Our generation is inundated with images of kids who are famous for no other reason than their parents. First came Paris Hilton. Then the Kardashians - who have not one, but two shows, and now the media has given us even more vapid and worthless celebutants - the girls of Pretty Wild.
These kids (mostly women it seems ...) were raised with wealth, and I assume excellent educations and every opportunity imaginable. What did they do? They parlayed their privilege into the ultimate I'm-So-Privileged move possible these days - they starred in reality TV shows. That seems to be the only job available to the daughters of celebrities.
Why get a college education, or a real job, or contribute to society in a positive way for that matter, when they can just have their useless lives documented and edited into neat half-hour episodes of partying, yelling, whining, and generally mocking normal everyday people who have to work for a living. Why have real, meaningful romantic relationships when they can just latch onto to another reality TV star or athlete for roller coaster relationships and quickie marriages leading to quicker divorces? And, the cherry on top ... why not release a strategically timed sex tape! That of course shocks the "star" who claims she (always she!) never thought would be made public.
So it's refreshing that Chelsea Clinton took advantage of the fact that the best education in the world was available to her, and she received an Ivy league undergraduate education, and two masters degrees - one from Oxford, and one from Columbia University. Not too shabby. And, in addition to working, she volunteers and supported her mother's political campaigns.
Furthermore, when Chelsea was first daughter, she was mocked as the "ugly duckling." The teenage years are hard enough without having to live them in the public eye. Probably 2 percent of the population didn't feel awkward and ugly during the those years. In my mind, anyone who mocks a teenager for being awkward is insensitive and has a short memory.
Regardless, that may lead to some of the fascination that Chelsea turned into a gorgeous, confident young women. (As most young women do ... I mean, no offense, but with all the products available these days, it's hard not to "clean up well," especially when you have the confidence to carry it off, which is not hard to come by during your 20s and early 30s.) Remember one of those stupid reality make-over shows on Fox a few years ago? The Swan? Clearly there is a market out there for the formerly ugly, now a knock-out. There are entire episodes of talk shows dedicated to this very topic.
In addition, it's probably empowering for anyone (everyone) who was made fun of as a child and has overcome that awkwardness (everyone) to see someone who did it in the public eye get married. Because as we all know, [tongue planted firmly in cheek] marriage is only for pretty people.
In the end, I think it's not so much that Chelsea shed her "ugly duckling" but that she never seemed to care in the first place (well, anymore than the average teenager). Chelsea's always been mature for her age, and while yes, she does look great, that's not all she is. Unlike another reality TV stars (yes, I really do hate [most of] them!) Heidi Montag, who reportedly has had extreme amounts of plastic surgery to overcome self esteem issues, Chelsea just dealt with awkwardness like the rest of us until she grew out of it and came out the other side smart, driven and ultimately a success in her own right.
(...to the full post)
College stands by its ethics code re: queer students,
and transphobia at an Indiana hospital for the week.
Also, just a quick thought, I truly value data-driven policy and really wish that solid research could carry a heavy social weight, but do you really think the existence of lgbt-supportive data will solve all problems?
A new guest starts this week, and potentially a new regular!
Sincerely,
ts
(...to the full post)
I believe it goes far beyond simply giving gay people the opportunity to participate in a broken heteronormative system. Gay politics in the US advocates for same-sex marriage (first and foremost!), but also hate crimes legislation, the Uniting American Families Act, and repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell[1]. Queer politics – in my humble opinion – should question these tactics, and the structures they uphold. Now, this is where queer politics often gets attacked. You may be thinking that if I disapprove of fighting for marriage laws, or allowing same-sex partner sponsorship, or welcoming gay folks into the military, then I'm not-so-secretly advancing a right-wing agenda. Not so fast! It's not that I don't think folks should be allowed to do these things if they want to. Rather, I believe that none of the proposed reforms address the real problems of an unequal society.
For me, a queer agenda is a radical agenda. I like the word queerbecause it allows for difference. More than that, it is about difference. As an identity, queerness encompasses those who recognize that they lie outside society's norms: butches, femmes, fags, dykes, single folks, asexual folks, folks in several polyamorous relationships, parents, youth, same-gender-loving folks, pansexual folks, cisgender folks, transgender folks, genderqueer and gender-non-conforming folks. As a political agenda, then, it must be inclusive, flexible, sex-positive, and anti-hierarchical.
We know that when there are hierarchies based on merit or disgust, queer folks end up at the bottom. So in the search for a queer politics we cannot continue to reinforce these hierarchies and simply climb up the ladder. This upwardly-mobile vision of politics is why gay champions of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act have been so quick to drop trans folks, why partnered marriage-equality defenders have been so quick to criticize polygamy or promiscuous singlehood, why so many gay activists have emphasized 'family' values at the expense of sex-workers, kinky folks, and other non-conformists. In order to climb up the ladder, you need to shove someone below you.
So what, you ask? Maybe you think there are always winners and losers. Perhaps you're making the argument that winning rights for some of 'us' – the more acceptable ones, of course – is a stepping stone to winning rights for all. I'll give you that. But do you really think that once those picture-perfect suburban lesbian moms have won the right to get married they'll work to secure affordable health care for their polyamorous sister who couldn't share her partners' health insurance even if their low-wage offered any? Or that the gay man who lobbied hard for hate crimes laws that expand the criminal justice system will stand up when that same system abuses the homeless teenager who's gotten into drugs and survival sex work? Maybe I'm just too cynical.
So when I claim queer as a political identity and not just a sexual one, I am adopting a vision of society in which difference does not justify discrimination. To bring it back around to immigration, I believe in an immigration policy that trusts that people who choose to migrate have good reasons for doing so, that does not criminalize them for following either economic necessity or personal desire, and that does not value the lives of married (straight), educated, well-off, and white immigrants over those of poor immigrants, immigrants of color, immigrants who are estranged from their family, or immigrants whose skills are not classed as 'desirable'.
How do we get there? I don't know. But I do think that making the goal explicit is the first step.
-----
[1] Apologies for the heavily US-centric post. It is not meant to be exclusionary, but I can only write what I know. For those of you in other parts of the world, I'd love to hear if your experiences mirror mine, or not. Please share!
(...to the full post)
Right. So I went out on this date with this girl. And I've been upfront about being trans--it's in my personal, for sheesh's sake--mostly because I've decided at this stage of my life to just not put up with anyone who can't deal with the rather disorderly sack of idiosyncrasies, quirks, habits, and occasionally questionable grooming habits (I don't always do eyebrow maintenance--wait, what were you thinking about?) that is C.L. Minou. But that's me, and my life, and believe you me if I didn't think that being upfront was less stressful--for me--than dealing with it later (or never), I would.
But I'm not out at work, and have no plans to be. And I think, for me and for many (not most, by any stretch of the imagination) trans folks: out to our intimates, and mind your own beeswax everyone else. Most people would probably (assuming they didn't want to kill trans folks with sticks) that this is perfectly reasonable.
But not the family of recently-deceased firefighter Thomas Araguz III!
You see, the firefighter--who tragically died in a July 4 fire--was married to a woman, a rather attractive woman named Nikki. Who, if you read Gina's fabulous article at Skip the Makeup, was initially praised for being the beautiful and stoic widow. Until, that is, firefighter Araguz's ex-wife (locked in a custody battle with him over custody of their children) leaked information that Nikki was trans.
Immediately, people got the vapors, poor dears. And then Araguz's family sued to have Nikki's marriage annulled because she was a man.
Excuse me. I have to go kick my couch for a half an hour in frustration.
You know what? I'm not even going to focus on the Texas aspect of this, because there are a lot of cool folks in Texas. And hell, I'm not even going to cover the disclosure/deception BS (Araguz's family are claiming that he didn't know Nikki was trans and separated from her when he did find out; Nikki says she told him early in their dating), because Lisa at Questioning Transphobia has done it so well already. Hell, I'm not even going to get into the money issue--in addition to the approximately $600,000 she can expect to collect in death benefits, as the surviving next of kin Nikki would be entitled to sue for wrongful death, something that could result in millions of dollars; the family is trying to get Thomas's children declared next of kin.
Nah. Eff that. Like I said, other folks have done it better.
Let's talk about...homophobia.
Seriously.
Cause that's what this is, right?
Now, I don't get that, but then again I'm one of those weird bisexuals who go straight (ahem) down the middle; I like what I like, and gender is only one piece of that. In fact, on a deep and personal level I seem to have lost the ability to understand how it could be a big deal to anyone. I get that it is, for some folks, and I'm cool with that--but I just don't understand why it is a big deal.
Sadly, a lot of people don't feel that way.
And that explains this whole thing. All the narratives are built around homophobia. Nikki and Thomas couldn't be married because Nikki "is a man" and teh gay marriage is eeeevil and God hates it. Also, she was a lying deceiver not just because--obviously--she didn't tell him, but because a "man" can't become a "woman." And no real human being--er, straight person--would ever want to sleep with another man. (Relax, my lesbian sisters, I didn't include "woman" in there because I said person and we all know that means man in this formulation.) And since Nikki was a man, sleeping with her would mean you were gay. Just like sleeping with me, C.L. Minou.
Because my pussy will make you gay.
That's a pretty powerful pussy, come to think of it. And not a sentence you normally hear. At least not when one of the people involved is male.
People sometimes tell me that homophobia is a poor word, because the bashers don't fear gay people, they hate them. And that's true. But I think you can't get away from the fact that they hate gay people, queer people, trans people, because we threaten them. We prove that we exist, and that we can look like anyone. Even them. Why, your best friend might! Fetch me my stick, son!
If people weren't so afraid of gayness, of transness, of queerness, then they might not do the kind of things that fear motivates you to do.
Like attempt to destroy the reputation of a grieving widow. Whom, Lisa Harney reports, has had her assets frozen, so she doesn't have any money to buy food with. And who to all appearances was loved by her husband.
Yes. This is definitely the kind of person we need to stop, right?
Yanno, maybe there is some deception here.
Folks are deceiving themselves into thinking they're decent human beings.
(...to the full post)
Sexuality is traditionally glorified in the context of hetero-normativity: girl meets boy, they marry, contribute to the over population of the planet, blah blah and blah. We all know this is a short sided and antiquated formula, but it still persists as a societal default. Over sexualized archetypes of men and women flood our television sets: men who are all torso with stuffed underwear and large breasted women are revered as the epitome of fertile sexual beings. While these caricatures exemplify the best of the species, those of us that do not fit into this picture perfect hetero fantasy are often categorized as inherently nonsexual or undesirable. I cannot speak for all androgynes/gender queers but my peeps are neither nonsexual nor undesirable.
In any case, it’s not too difficult to see how androgyny could be associated with a lack of sexuality. There is some degree of androgyny associated with many religious figures: deities who are venerated as chaste, abstinent, or virgin. Religious figures in many western traditions possess a certain fusion of gender traits, which takes them outside the realm of the carnal and human. Between you and me, I’m no saint.
Beneath the sheets there is yet another dimension to the role that we gender non-conformists seem to fall into, fetishization. There’s no lack of exploitation of gender ambiguous individuals in the sex industry. Too often being androgynous, genderqueer, trans, etc. earns us a spot in the dark corner of some porn shop in rural USA. God forbid that it ever be considered normal or socially acceptable to fall for the androgyne next door!
In Bob’s words, “the times, they are a –changin,” and we are at the forefront of that change. It is our obligation to our community to represent ourselves as we want to be seen against the current of stereotypes that haunt our name. It is unlikely that any of this comes as a revelation to any of our readers but one’s gender identity does not denote any particular sexual identity. Some androgynes/ gender queers as well as some cis-gendered or transgendered beings may be naturally asexual. Many of us however, whether pansexual, gynosexual, androsexual, homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual or anything in between lead perfectly “sexual” lives as we so choose. I for one would like to see that on TV.
(...to the full post)
Serena joins us from Feminists For Choice:
The second season of MTV’s “Teen Mom” debuted last night. The show features pregnant teens, or young women who have just given birth, and it focuses on their struggles to raise the children while the mothers themselves are still growing into adulthood. The timing of the season premiere could not have been more fortuitous, because an op-ed in today’s Huffington Post seeks to blow the myth of a teen pregnancy epidemic right out of the water.
Choice USA Executive Director Kierra Johnson writes a scathing article, asking pro-choice advocates and policymakers alike to re-examine the way that teen pregnancy is discussed and demonized.
"People in every age bracket have sex, get pregnant, have abortions and have children. Sex and the outcomes of sex are not exclusively experienced by teens. Actually, according to the Guttmacher Institute, teens have a lower rate of sexual activity (46 percent) than other age groups, and teens make up the smallest percentage of pregnancies (seven percent, including 18 and 19-year-olds), abortions (six percent) and births (10 percent). The vast majority of pregnancies, abortions and births occur after the teenage years.
So, if people of all ages are having sex and facing the results, why are teen sex and teen pregnancy the problems?"
Johnson goes onto argue in the article that the US needs to shift its priorities. Instead of getting so hung up on sex, we need to focus on the lack of access to health care and education that keeps individuals locked in poverty. If people have more access to medically accurate sex education, they can make healthy decisions about their bodies. If people have access to birth control and condoms, teen pregnancy isn’t such a risk. And when all Americans have the option to go to college, they are in a better position to support their families, regardless of the age they are when they start their families.
On a conference call to pro-choice bloggers on Tuesday, Johnson brought up the example of The Netherlands, where discussions about sex are not taboo. Condom manufacturers in Holland have even gone so far as to make smaller sizes so that condoms fit teenage penises. Not surprisingly, the Netherlands has one of the lowest teen pregnancy rates in the world.
I don’t think it’s enough to attribute Holland’s teen pregnancy rate to the accessibility of condoms, and the permissive sexual attitude that exists in the country. Holland also has its priorities in order – priorities that Johnson herself argues the United States needs to copy. The Netherlands has the highest child welfare rate in the world, according to UNICEF. Everyone in Holland is required to have health insurance, and if families cannot afford to pay for health insurance themselves, it is provided by the government. Education is free in Holland, all the way through college. Is it any wonder, then, that the Netherlands has lower teen pregnancy rates than the US? When children are valued and given the educational tools they need to succeed, they thrive. Compare that to the United States, where children make up the largest percentage of the uninsured, and it’s no surprise to find that the US ranks 20th in the world for child welfare, which is lower than all of the European nations surveyed besides the United Kingdom.
I agree with Johnson. Teen sex and pregnancy is not the problem – American attitudes towards sex in general need to change, and so do our priorities. Let’s start advocating for comprehensive sex education for everyone, not just teens. And let’s start demanding comprehensive health care insurance for all Americans. It’s time to change the terms of the debate and start focusing on things that really matter.
(...to the full post)
regulars
