If you think that trans women are the only ones who wind up with shitty, misgendering media coverage, you're wrong. When reports come in about transgender murders, I often don't know whether the person being referred to is a trans man or a trans woman (or something else), so until now I had assumed this was another trans woman.
Although this occurred an hour away from me, I don't feel that I would do this story as much justice as this perspective from a friend of his. More interesting (and not interesting in a good way) is that this story basically got put on the backburner as far as the media was concerned until the fact that he was transgender went public. The media tends to pick up murder stories based primarily on whether they will entertain us or tug our heartstrings, and the brutal murder of a black male rapper is apparently not news unless they can play the "tranny angle."
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Evon Young's Murder
If you think that trans women are the only ones who wind up with shitty, misgendering media coverage, you're wrong. When reports come in about transgender murders, I often don't know whether the person being referred to is a trans man or a trans woman (or something else), so until now I had assumed this was another trans woman.
Although this occurred an hour away from me, I don't feel that I would do this story as much justice as this perspective from a friend of his. More interesting (and not interesting in a good way) is that this story basically got put on the backburner as far as the media was concerned until the fact that he was transgender went public. The media tends to pick up murder stories based primarily on whether they will entertain us or tug our heartstrings, and the brutal murder of a black male rapper is apparently not news unless they can play the "tranny angle."
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Taboo: Changing Gender
I haven't had much in the line of "news" here lately (or much of anything, for that matter), but my latest news is this: I finally got to see that damned Taboo: Changing Gender episode that aired a little while ago but which I didn't see yet.
And it wasn't terrible, as transgender-related documentary shows go, but it was definitely a mixed bag. Here are my feelings about it.
The people featured most prominently include a transgender MTF/FTM couple named Ashley and Tony, Balian Buschbaum (FTM German pole vaulting champion), and Chris Tina Bruce (nonbinary AMAB woman who identifies as a "hybrid"). I remember they had a clip of Loren Cameron, too, that was from a different episode (Taboo has at least three episodes that have some sort of transgender or gender variant story).
I'm going to start with the bad parts because... well, I like the show Taboo and I'd rather leave this writing feeling OK about watching it. I don't know. Anyway, here we go:
First, there is a really heavy emphasis on surgery, as with most documentaries. Both of the trans men have had bottom surgery, and while this is much more common than I think most FTMs (at least newer ones) recognize, it still paints a very genital-centered portrait of transgender life. Ashley and Tony's story is hinged on helping each other get through hormones and surgery. Then there's Balian, gushing over his new penis. All love to Balian, but really?
Now, it's not like this isn't an important part of transgender lives, but it's such a documentary trope at this point that putting most of your effort into talking about surgery and genitals is just a let-down.
Then there is the focus on appearance. In particular, Balian's section involved a talking head that was talking about so-called "genetically gifted" transgender men whose transitions give them "great beauty." The first thing I thought about after seeing this was that loathsome "Obesity Research Institute" and the commercials proclaiming that body fat is "unattractive." Normative statements being presented by experts and "experts."
The worse part is that seriously, this is most of what I can remember about the episode. Talking about surgery and looks. Which is I guess what most cis people are looking for, but can't a guy hope there will be at least one popular portrayal that isn't like that?
Finally, and this is pretty much a universal concern that deals with the several shows dealing with transgenderism on Taboo, not enough racial diversity. People of color who would qualify as transgender or gender variant are usually selected from non-Western cultures for the exotic appeal... so yeah, we get hijras and kathoeys and what-not, but we forget that there are trans people of color here, too.
Still, a pretty standard transgender documentary, but there was one thing about it I liked a lot, which was the inclusion of a nonbinary person from a Western culture... most of the time it's like they seek out third gender or alternative gender categories from other cultures, again, for the exotic appeal, but sort of imply that in the West you're going to stick to male or female. It also interests me that this person is AMAB (assigned male at birth), but I guess that could be a cultural bias on my part: Maybe because I am FTM or maybe because there is more tolerance of AFAB androgyny, most genderqueer/nonbinary people I meet are AFAB, and often to the exclusion of AMAB nonbinary persons. Then again, though, I haven't seen AFAB nonbinary persons in a large, cis-targeted documentary series, either.
I actually just really liked Chris Tina Bruce's section altogether because she does break some of the established tropes of cis-targeted documentary filmmaking... she isn't gung-ho about surgery, she isn't trying to be a stereotype, and she at least seems to be very happy with who she is.
If I were to give a grade to this, I'd say it's better than a lot of cis-targeted transgender films out there, but it still plays in to a lot of the "standards."
And it wasn't terrible, as transgender-related documentary shows go, but it was definitely a mixed bag. Here are my feelings about it.
The people featured most prominently include a transgender MTF/FTM couple named Ashley and Tony, Balian Buschbaum (FTM German pole vaulting champion), and Chris Tina Bruce (nonbinary AMAB woman who identifies as a "hybrid"). I remember they had a clip of Loren Cameron, too, that was from a different episode (Taboo has at least three episodes that have some sort of transgender or gender variant story).
I'm going to start with the bad parts because... well, I like the show Taboo and I'd rather leave this writing feeling OK about watching it. I don't know. Anyway, here we go:
First, there is a really heavy emphasis on surgery, as with most documentaries. Both of the trans men have had bottom surgery, and while this is much more common than I think most FTMs (at least newer ones) recognize, it still paints a very genital-centered portrait of transgender life. Ashley and Tony's story is hinged on helping each other get through hormones and surgery. Then there's Balian, gushing over his new penis. All love to Balian, but really?
Now, it's not like this isn't an important part of transgender lives, but it's such a documentary trope at this point that putting most of your effort into talking about surgery and genitals is just a let-down.
Then there is the focus on appearance. In particular, Balian's section involved a talking head that was talking about so-called "genetically gifted" transgender men whose transitions give them "great beauty." The first thing I thought about after seeing this was that loathsome "Obesity Research Institute" and the commercials proclaiming that body fat is "unattractive." Normative statements being presented by experts and "experts."
The worse part is that seriously, this is most of what I can remember about the episode. Talking about surgery and looks. Which is I guess what most cis people are looking for, but can't a guy hope there will be at least one popular portrayal that isn't like that?
Finally, and this is pretty much a universal concern that deals with the several shows dealing with transgenderism on Taboo, not enough racial diversity. People of color who would qualify as transgender or gender variant are usually selected from non-Western cultures for the exotic appeal... so yeah, we get hijras and kathoeys and what-not, but we forget that there are trans people of color here, too.
Still, a pretty standard transgender documentary, but there was one thing about it I liked a lot, which was the inclusion of a nonbinary person from a Western culture... most of the time it's like they seek out third gender or alternative gender categories from other cultures, again, for the exotic appeal, but sort of imply that in the West you're going to stick to male or female. It also interests me that this person is AMAB (assigned male at birth), but I guess that could be a cultural bias on my part: Maybe because I am FTM or maybe because there is more tolerance of AFAB androgyny, most genderqueer/nonbinary people I meet are AFAB, and often to the exclusion of AMAB nonbinary persons. Then again, though, I haven't seen AFAB nonbinary persons in a large, cis-targeted documentary series, either.
I actually just really liked Chris Tina Bruce's section altogether because she does break some of the established tropes of cis-targeted documentary filmmaking... she isn't gung-ho about surgery, she isn't trying to be a stereotype, and she at least seems to be very happy with who she is.
If I were to give a grade to this, I'd say it's better than a lot of cis-targeted transgender films out there, but it still plays in to a lot of the "standards."
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
"I know trans people don't want to hear it, but..."
I deleted somebody from one of my online social networks recently. I didn't want to delete this guy. Generally speaking I actually like him quite a bit. However, there is only so much cisplaining I am willing to let trigger me before you go in my block bin. Whatever the case, I would like to explain exactly what was so offputting, because it's damn relevant.
It's because one of the most obnoxious things to ever come out of a cis person's mouth is any statement beginning with this: "I know trans people don't want to hear it, but..." The last straw was this statement followed by a couple paragraphs explaining that FTMs are different from cis men and MTFs are different from cis women... putting us in four distinct gender categories.
So there are really two annoyances at play: First, actually having the gall to say something about trans people that you know is considered offensive by many of us ("I know you don't want to hear it, but...") and having that controversial opinion be that trans people and cis people are in separate gender categories. Although actually, I'm going to deal with them backwards.
So what's so bad about considering trans men and cis men, or trans women and cis women, to be two distinct genders?
This is, as far as I can tell, based on something about us that actually is true: Trans people are different from cis people. We are likely to express gender a little differently. We are likely to act differently. We do this because trans people and cis people are trained differently, we grow up in a different environment most of the time, and unlike most cis people we have to deal with constant doubt of our gender identity by other people. It's partially because of that doubt that many trans men learn to be men from other trans men rather than cis men, so we pass around some cultural quirks.
That said, I honestly don't really think it's a huge deal when somebody, say, prefers to date trans men over cis men, or vice versa. I think some people need to strongly consider why they feel that way, but there's nothing inherently wrong with it, and that's a subject for a different time maybe.
However, trans men and cis men are not two distinct genders. We are all men. Same goes for trans women... yes, trans women may act or relate to people differently from cis women, but they are no less women than cis women are. Rigidly sticking trans men in a different category than cis men, or trans women in a different category from cis women, is not only incorrect, it is offensive.
But what of those differences? If I can acknowledge that there are common (but not universal) behavioral, emotional, and cultural differences between trans people and cis people, why can I not just accept that I am a different gender than a cis man is, or whatever it is you are trying to get me to acknowledge?
Because the same thing can be said for every subculture. We all express gender differently both as individuals and as cultural groups.
Holiness Christian women and Feminist Pagan women express gender differently, and both express gender differently from Muslim women. Butches and femmes, whether male or female, also express their gender differently. White men express their gender differently from Asian men, Black men, Native American men, and other men of color. Goth men have different gender standards than preppy men. Race, ethnicity, subculture, income level, career, religion, sexual orientation, political beliefs, upbringing, and many other factors shape the way somebody expresses their gender.
But that doesn't put them in different gender categories. It just means they are men and women who express those two genders differently. But they are still men and women*.
You know what? I think that this sort of thing is, deep down, what most people think they mean when they make gender barriers between cis and trans people... because it's kind of obvious that we do express gender differently for the reasons I stated above. The problem is that those differences should not matter in the way people make them matter... which is the constant assertion that we must be placed in separate boxes. If you are going to place trans men in a different box than cis men, you may as well place Pagan men in a different box than Christian men, too. Which, when it comes to the quality of one's maleness, is absolutely ridiculous.
But you know, presenting this while knowing trans people in general don't like that distinction, well, that just takes the cake.
I don't really understand why people can say things like "I know [insert minority here] doesn't like to hear it, but..." and think that they are allies to that community. But I'm going to talk about it just because it bugged me just that much.
In the case above, it was like the pinnacle of cisplaining. "Cisplaining" is a way of describing a cisgender person dismissively telling us why an issue we find important either is false or really not as big a deal as we make it. It comes from "mansplaining," which is when men go to some convoluted length to explain to women why their issues aren't important. And cis people reading this, take note: If you know we are going to find something offensive, you know that it goes against the way we view ourselves, and you know the subject is something that people have constantly used to deny us our gender identities, then really, really consider why the fuck it is you think you should be saying it and no, having a trans friend or the fact that you like fucking us do not make it better. Something I've noticed, not just among cisgender people but among basically every oppressor party, is the idea that we as the majority have some special insight into what minority groups are doing or viewing wrong that they cannot understand. And then we treat these things like dark truths about the universe that people stubbornly refuse to hear rather than the largely-privilege-skewed opinions that they are.
And you know what? You're probably going to have opinions about us that we as a general rule don't like. But before you go on a crusade to tell us why we're so wrong about it, really consider why it is you feel that way, and more importantly, really understand why it is we feel that way.
* I am leaving out non-binary people because, since they usually do consider themselves a different category or a merger of categories, they aren't really relevant to what I'm saying here.
It's because one of the most obnoxious things to ever come out of a cis person's mouth is any statement beginning with this: "I know trans people don't want to hear it, but..." The last straw was this statement followed by a couple paragraphs explaining that FTMs are different from cis men and MTFs are different from cis women... putting us in four distinct gender categories.
So there are really two annoyances at play: First, actually having the gall to say something about trans people that you know is considered offensive by many of us ("I know you don't want to hear it, but...") and having that controversial opinion be that trans people and cis people are in separate gender categories. Although actually, I'm going to deal with them backwards.
So what's so bad about considering trans men and cis men, or trans women and cis women, to be two distinct genders?
This is, as far as I can tell, based on something about us that actually is true: Trans people are different from cis people. We are likely to express gender a little differently. We are likely to act differently. We do this because trans people and cis people are trained differently, we grow up in a different environment most of the time, and unlike most cis people we have to deal with constant doubt of our gender identity by other people. It's partially because of that doubt that many trans men learn to be men from other trans men rather than cis men, so we pass around some cultural quirks.
That said, I honestly don't really think it's a huge deal when somebody, say, prefers to date trans men over cis men, or vice versa. I think some people need to strongly consider why they feel that way, but there's nothing inherently wrong with it, and that's a subject for a different time maybe.
However, trans men and cis men are not two distinct genders. We are all men. Same goes for trans women... yes, trans women may act or relate to people differently from cis women, but they are no less women than cis women are. Rigidly sticking trans men in a different category than cis men, or trans women in a different category from cis women, is not only incorrect, it is offensive.
But what of those differences? If I can acknowledge that there are common (but not universal) behavioral, emotional, and cultural differences between trans people and cis people, why can I not just accept that I am a different gender than a cis man is, or whatever it is you are trying to get me to acknowledge?
Because the same thing can be said for every subculture. We all express gender differently both as individuals and as cultural groups.
Holiness Christian women and Feminist Pagan women express gender differently, and both express gender differently from Muslim women. Butches and femmes, whether male or female, also express their gender differently. White men express their gender differently from Asian men, Black men, Native American men, and other men of color. Goth men have different gender standards than preppy men. Race, ethnicity, subculture, income level, career, religion, sexual orientation, political beliefs, upbringing, and many other factors shape the way somebody expresses their gender.
But that doesn't put them in different gender categories. It just means they are men and women who express those two genders differently. But they are still men and women*.
You know what? I think that this sort of thing is, deep down, what most people think they mean when they make gender barriers between cis and trans people... because it's kind of obvious that we do express gender differently for the reasons I stated above. The problem is that those differences should not matter in the way people make them matter... which is the constant assertion that we must be placed in separate boxes. If you are going to place trans men in a different box than cis men, you may as well place Pagan men in a different box than Christian men, too. Which, when it comes to the quality of one's maleness, is absolutely ridiculous.
But you know, presenting this while knowing trans people in general don't like that distinction, well, that just takes the cake.
I don't really understand why people can say things like "I know [insert minority here] doesn't like to hear it, but..." and think that they are allies to that community. But I'm going to talk about it just because it bugged me just that much.
In the case above, it was like the pinnacle of cisplaining. "Cisplaining" is a way of describing a cisgender person dismissively telling us why an issue we find important either is false or really not as big a deal as we make it. It comes from "mansplaining," which is when men go to some convoluted length to explain to women why their issues aren't important. And cis people reading this, take note: If you know we are going to find something offensive, you know that it goes against the way we view ourselves, and you know the subject is something that people have constantly used to deny us our gender identities, then really, really consider why the fuck it is you think you should be saying it and no, having a trans friend or the fact that you like fucking us do not make it better. Something I've noticed, not just among cisgender people but among basically every oppressor party, is the idea that we as the majority have some special insight into what minority groups are doing or viewing wrong that they cannot understand. And then we treat these things like dark truths about the universe that people stubbornly refuse to hear rather than the largely-privilege-skewed opinions that they are.
And you know what? You're probably going to have opinions about us that we as a general rule don't like. But before you go on a crusade to tell us why we're so wrong about it, really consider why it is you feel that way, and more importantly, really understand why it is we feel that way.
* I am leaving out non-binary people because, since they usually do consider themselves a different category or a merger of categories, they aren't really relevant to what I'm saying here.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
All I'm Saying About Transgender Day of Remembrance
I no longer talk about Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR) in my blog, except in passing. I do not "celebrate" it. I do not actively participate in it. I very nearly ignore its existence, a decision that I made sometime over a year ago. Similarly, this year somehow it morphed into "Transgender Awareness Week," which I am also forgoing. I do feel it's important for me to write this, and perhaps reference it each year or something, to explain why I display what probably looks like extreme apathy.
Here is the reason, in a nutshell: I have become grotesquely aware of how badly trans men have been appropriating this observance, both from the outside and, unfortunately, as a trans man who has recognized his prior bad behavior, and there has been a lot of it.
One of our major sins is consistently inflating the amount of risk the average trans man encounters. When I was actively involved in TDOR, I was definitely guilty of this, doing things like picking five men and five women from the master TDOR list to honor, and I see other trans men continue to do this to "equalize" the list. It greatly misrepresents the issue. Anti-transgender murders are significantly (understatement) weighted toward low-income transgender women of color, especially sex workers. The date is actually in remembrance of a specific trans woman of color who was murdered. If you strip this element away from the observance, you are appropriating it and not honoring it.
And you know what? As far as I've experienced, and I know others have made the same observation, trans men are really bad at observing TDOR. We don't often notice the intersectionality of trans status with gender, race, income, or sex worker status... we just boil everything down to "trans people" and assume we are at the same risk level of any other trans person because we can point to some high-profile hate incidents, or at least that we are at a high enough risk to call attention to ourselves. This is a lie we tell ourselves to facilitate our own victim mentality.
I am a trans man. Yes, I sometimes fear for my safety because of it. Yes, I have witnessed and experienced hate speech and bias incidents. I reject the absolutist comments by some trans people, usually women, that trans men never experience this-or-that type of discrimination*. And yes, trans men have the potential to be murdered for being trans men, it's happened before and will probably happen again.
But I have since recognized and more importantly chosen to acknowledge that Transgender Day of Remembrance is not about me. Trans men just don't have that high of a murder rate. I refuse to participate in observance of this day because I have yet to have the opportunity to be involved in an observance that wasn't run by trans men or cis people to the exclusion of the people that this issue actually affects on a daily basis, and I am no longer so arrogant that I believe that I am enlightened enough to honor them properly.
Furthermore, the increasing evolution of TDOR from a solemn day of remembrance to anything from a cis-people-oriented educational experience to a fucking dance party is driving me up the wall. And here's where we get to "Transgender Awareness Week," which is I think a way people are trying to expand TDOR to include issues other than just murder, which again usually includes things like cis-people-oriented educational experiences, parties, and drag shows.
You guys, this is like taking World AIDS Day and then extending it for a week to talk about crabs. TDOR is a very specific observance meant to call attention to a very specific and very damaging problem... and by deciding to cram everything trans into a week in November dilutes that very specific and very important problem, which is the murder of trans people and the abysmal way it is handled by the press and the law.
And if all this isn't taken into account, I do not feel it is appropriate for me to engage in it.
* I mention this because there are trans men who will point to the times that these things do happen to justify their involvement.
Here is the reason, in a nutshell: I have become grotesquely aware of how badly trans men have been appropriating this observance, both from the outside and, unfortunately, as a trans man who has recognized his prior bad behavior, and there has been a lot of it.
One of our major sins is consistently inflating the amount of risk the average trans man encounters. When I was actively involved in TDOR, I was definitely guilty of this, doing things like picking five men and five women from the master TDOR list to honor, and I see other trans men continue to do this to "equalize" the list. It greatly misrepresents the issue. Anti-transgender murders are significantly (understatement) weighted toward low-income transgender women of color, especially sex workers. The date is actually in remembrance of a specific trans woman of color who was murdered. If you strip this element away from the observance, you are appropriating it and not honoring it.
And you know what? As far as I've experienced, and I know others have made the same observation, trans men are really bad at observing TDOR. We don't often notice the intersectionality of trans status with gender, race, income, or sex worker status... we just boil everything down to "trans people" and assume we are at the same risk level of any other trans person because we can point to some high-profile hate incidents, or at least that we are at a high enough risk to call attention to ourselves. This is a lie we tell ourselves to facilitate our own victim mentality.
I am a trans man. Yes, I sometimes fear for my safety because of it. Yes, I have witnessed and experienced hate speech and bias incidents. I reject the absolutist comments by some trans people, usually women, that trans men never experience this-or-that type of discrimination*. And yes, trans men have the potential to be murdered for being trans men, it's happened before and will probably happen again.
But I have since recognized and more importantly chosen to acknowledge that Transgender Day of Remembrance is not about me. Trans men just don't have that high of a murder rate. I refuse to participate in observance of this day because I have yet to have the opportunity to be involved in an observance that wasn't run by trans men or cis people to the exclusion of the people that this issue actually affects on a daily basis, and I am no longer so arrogant that I believe that I am enlightened enough to honor them properly.
Furthermore, the increasing evolution of TDOR from a solemn day of remembrance to anything from a cis-people-oriented educational experience to a fucking dance party is driving me up the wall. And here's where we get to "Transgender Awareness Week," which is I think a way people are trying to expand TDOR to include issues other than just murder, which again usually includes things like cis-people-oriented educational experiences, parties, and drag shows.
You guys, this is like taking World AIDS Day and then extending it for a week to talk about crabs. TDOR is a very specific observance meant to call attention to a very specific and very damaging problem... and by deciding to cram everything trans into a week in November dilutes that very specific and very important problem, which is the murder of trans people and the abysmal way it is handled by the press and the law.
And if all this isn't taken into account, I do not feel it is appropriate for me to engage in it.
* I mention this because there are trans men who will point to the times that these things do happen to justify their involvement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)