thesavagesalad:
PSA post to my fellow feminists
trans*women can’t appropriate a woman’s identity
why?
because they are women.
Maybe this needs repeating- but being a woman transcends your genitalia or your chromosomes. Being a woman is how you identify. That’s it. That’s all it takes to identify as a woman. If you know in your heart of hearts that you are a woman- that’s all it is.
So don’t be that douche bag that has the audacity to degrade a trans woman or demand her to prove her womanhood. She owes you no explanation.
Now if you really are a feminist, you will defend her existence to the death and ensure that she always has a safe space and voice with in the movement.
^^^
Reblogged from queerbrownxx January 31, 2012
amydentata:
Expanded from a comment I wrote on an article by Megan Evans (Huffington Post):
Not all queer women are invisible because of femme presentation. The issue is more complicated among trans women. Some trans women are singled out for violence by the straight world and the cis world because of femme presentation. For some trans women, being femme is what makes them visible. There is another group of trans women who are occasionally read as cis, and other times read as trans. Their invisibility is temporary and random. And some trans women are regularly read as cisgender.
When femme trans women are read as cis, they are doubly invisible until bureaucratic paper trails or honest talks about personal history are used against them. When their queerness is revealed, the outcome is different than when just revealing trans status.
If I am read as trans among queer people, not only is my queerness questioned, but my femme-ness is questioned as well. My body is coded as “male”. I’m written off as “androgynous” unless I go over-the-top in my femininity. Even then, I am granted a segregated version of “femme”, banned from the hallowed halls of cis presentation, written off as a cheap imitation or an amusing oddity.
When I’m read as cis, none of this happens. My experience becomes that of the cis “femme invisibility” narrative. But I mentally start the countdown clock to when something comes up in conversation revealing my trans status. At which point cis people immediately change how they react to my presence. I’m invisible no longer, and in their eyes, femme no longer.
My dating issues aren’t just about being invisible to other queer women. I am also denied my womanhood. Instead of being overlooked like I don’t belong, some lesbians make the case that I literally don’t belong at all. I’m not just an outlier, I’m an impostor.
This varies from person to person, and trans status isn’t the only thing that affects how femmes are read by others. I’m disabled, and this changes how others perceive my femme-ness as well.
What intersections have you encountered between femme identity and trans status? What else affects how you, as a femme, are read by others?
anotherhookerblog:
funkyfest:
On Trans Men and the Word “Tranny,” or: Cut Your Entitled Bullshit Out
“Tranny” is a word that a lot of people think is subversive, cool, and theirs to use. Interestingly, many of those who most ardently defend their right to use it are those least connected to its violent history as a slur used against transgender women. The word is deeply bound to regulating and insulting femininity and womanhood, and has historically been used as a slur against people who were assigned male at birth or are read as men, but who present in ways that are read as female or feminine. In popular culture, it is often used by gay cis men and cis women via terms like “hottrannymess,” a descriptor of disheveled and failing femininity. Plug the T word into an image search engine. Call me when the results are overwhelmingly masculine presenting individuals. I will be sitting in a corner holding my breath and counting the seconds….
It’s like all the gaymous trans guys are emailing each other all over the world “YO BRO, I ACTED LIKE A TOTAL MISOGYNISTIC FUCKWIT, PUBLICLY AND WAS REALLY DEFENSIVE AND IGNORANT ABOUT IT. MAN I REALLY FELT PUMPED AFTER THAT. I’M PASSING THE PHALLIC TORCH OF ENTITLEMENT TO YOU NOW BRAH. IF YOU DON’T DROP THE T-BOMB PUBLICLY IN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS EVERYONE WILL REALISE HOW IRRELEVANT YOU AND YOUR BAND/ARTWORK/WRITING/PHOTOGRAPHY IS. FORWARD THIS ON TO ALL YOUR T-BROTHERS ********************”
whatever I’m not good at joke but srsly. h8 men, all men.
January 27, 2012
The loathsome Maggie Alderson (Australian-based author of chick-lit, prior editor of several fashion magazines and a self-proclaimed feminist) has written a misogynistic and grotesque column where she polices exaggerated-feminine fashion styles, is whorephobic and transphobic, and reduces Dita Von Teese’s worth as a human being to the type of shoes she occasionally wears.
Several of my friends and I posted comments critiquing her and in an act of prejudice, she is moderating them - while allowing comments that praise her and engage in similar woman-hating rhetoric - to go through.
SO.
I’m reposting mine and my friends’ comments here. I encourage you ALL to go and add your critiques, and reblog this post with them included. There’s a twitter hashtag going - #maggiealderson - where I urge everyone to expose her prejudice.
This kind of woman-hating crap being passed off as feminism is insulting to everyone.
THE COMMENTS:
There is so much in this article that I find incredibly offensive but I wanted to start by addressing a major fallacy that I constantly see perpetuated everywhere. Flat shoes are just as bad for your feet, and often WORSE than heels. About 6 years ago, I suffered from plantar fasciitus every couple of months. It’s an incredibly painful inflammation of the soft fleshy outer part of your foot which makes it very difficult to walk. Surprise, surprise, it was caused by wearing ballet flats on a daily basis, particularly wearing them on hard surfaces like concrete and bitumen (which comprises most walking surfaces!). After my 3rd visit to my Dr with it in as many months, he laid down the law to me and said absolutely no ballet flats, and advised me to wear nothing less than a 1.5 inch heel.
It’s an incredible struggle these days to find a cute pair of decently priced shoes that isn’t a ballet flat or a stiletto heel! I have no doubt that this is in part due to this stupid belief that flat shoes are more comfortable and better for you. I feel the same way about heels as I do about corsets; if they’re fitted well, they’re incredibly comfortable to wear on a daily basis. Two things that get an incredibly bad rap as being uncomfortable, but really aren’t. I have a small selection of cute heels, between 2 and 3 inches, which I have no trouble wearing on a daily basis (including dance classes!). The few times in the last couple years that I’ve tried wearing ballet flats (with the vain hope that perhaps their design has changed enough to be comfortable), I’ve barely managed an hour or two before my feet were in agony. Obviously, not everyone is going to have as bad a reaction to flats as I do, but there is definitely evidence out there that shows how damaging flat shoes are. If we just had access to shoes with small heels (that aren’t orthopaedic specialist shoes), perhaps this fallacy wouldn’t be so wide-spread.
Now that that’s out of the way, lets get to the more offensive parts of this article. I’m a proud feminist and devotee of vintage fashion. I feel the most comfortable and the best about myself when I’m wearing my winged eyeliner, my red lippie, a cute outfit with heels, and my hair curled in the manner of the 40’s and 50’s. I never leave the house without first applying sunscreen, blush and mascara, at an absolute minimum. How DARE you insult, belittle and demean MY choices, especially from behind the shield of ‘feminism’. Last time I checked, feminism was all about CHOICE. Giving women the space to be able to choose how they want to live their life, without limitations due to gender. How is dressing in a manner that makes you feel good about yourself ‘anti-feminist’? These looks are hardly deserving of your judgement of them as ‘repressive’. As someone who has been dressing in such a manner WAY before it was ‘in’, I copped plenty of abuse from the fashionista set for daring to step outside what was considered fashionable. I can’t tell you how absolutely freeing and EMPOWERING it was to be a very pale girl (flying against the tanned trend) wearing these beautiful girly dresses combined with my full face of make-up, and absolutely NOT give a damn about what other people thought of me or the judgments people like you were making about how I dressed. And for the record, my look is NOT high maintenance, nor does it take me especially long to look as perfectly put together as Dita. It is something I do FOR MYSELF, because it makes me feel good, not because I feel pressured by outside forces, or because I’m worried a picture will end up on Facebook, or because I’m trying to hook a man. So it’s certainly not repressive in that respect either.
Following that train of thought, burlesque is also incredibly empowering, and hardly anti-feminist; I think you’re confusing your own moral reservations and judgements with feminist ideals. To reduce this wonderful art form, one that celebrates femininity and the female form, to such simplistic terms as ‘objectification of women’ is disrespectful to the women of burlesque, past, present and future. I really think you should educate yourself about the history of burlesque, as it has such a rich past that is full of strong women making political statements, taking back the ownership of their bodies and their sexuality. Regardless of your own moral aversions to striptease (and yes, burlesque IS stripping and anyone who says otherwise is in denial), these women are an incredible inspiration, and embody feminist ideals. Dita Von Teese is an incredibly intelligent woman, who many look up to, for far more than her impeccable style. She’s a savvy business woman, an incredibly creative artist, a woman who promotes positive body image and self love, who dares women to be different, step outside the mould, reclaim their sexuality and do things that make them feel good. Hardly anti-feminist!
The very act of policing women’s bodies, passing your own judgement on other people’s choices of fashion, make-up and footwear, THAT is anti-feminist. It only serves to promote the very misogyny that we’ve been fighting against for so long. You have absolutely no right to put your own value judgements on other people, deciding why it is they’re choosing to dress in a certain manner. Unless, of course, you’ve specifically spoken to said people, and determined that they’re just mindless sheep, forced into these choices by those evil outside forces, conspiring against feminism! As a self proclaimed feminist, you really ought to know better.
(abimused)
Wow, Maggie. I hate those towering heels too. I’m in awe of anyone who can walk in them. I’m sure if I tried my hip and back would be out for days.
However, I think it’s actually possible to write an article praising flat shoes without transphobic and whorephobic comments slung in to hold the readers’ attention. Is your writing not good enough to hold our attention without those cheap shots? That’s just lazy and hateful writing.
You have a platform for speaking out provided to you via the media. How about trying to be a little smarter and cleverer with it. Now THAT would be Old School Feminism.
(MYS)
Dear Maggie,
Whorephobia and transphobia are neither chic, stylish nor clever.
Just ignorant, classist, and further marginalising to people who are already thought of by mainstream society as less-than human.
What makes you think that trans people and sex workers don’t read your blog?
(SA)
Maggie, I also prefer flats over heels. But there’s no need to go hating on every other demographic of woman who isn’t you. Next time, try writing an article that isn’t so steeped in discrimination and elitism. Geez.
(KellyMyDear)
How hopelessly retrograde to sneeringly slut-shame and deny agency to women in stripping under the guise of “feminism”. As a feminist, a sex worker and an occasional burlesque performer, I resent the implication I am nothing more than an object or that my work - whether in burlesque or sex work - encourages objectification- with no further complexity, narrative or dynamic.
As if it isn’t enough that sex workers have to deal with those in the burlesque industry denying that burlesque is strip tease with sneering whorephobic classism, now so-called “feminists” deride burlesque by calling it a “fancy name” for strip tease. With sneering whorephobic classism.
Both sides demonstrate hopeless ignorance of not only the history of burlesque - it was the FIRST form of striptease and stripping has always been inherent to it - but the agency, self-determination and awareness of strippers and other sex workers.
This is patently ANTI-feminist, as one of the guiding rules of feminism is the recognition of a woman’s autonomy and capacity to choose her path - even if you, Maggie, don’t like it.
Furthermore, you police women’s bodies and images with snide remarks about “too much makeup”, or big hair, or styles of dress - exactly who ARE you, if you believe in women’s rights, to deny womens’ ability and right to express themselves visually in whatever means they see fit? Why would you presume that women are so stupid they’re merely “taken in” and “manipulated” by advertising and marketing? Has it ever occurred to you some women LOVE looking like “drag queens”? That for some women the artifice of exaggerated femininity is fun - is enjoyable - is a very conscious and deliberate ownership of a constructed image? Or is your own insecurity in the face of such brazen self-determination so threatened you can only conceptualise it as helplessness? Not very feminist. At all.
Finally, you round it all off with a grotesque example of transphobia with your reference to “trannie hookers”. “Trannie” is a highly perjorative term, associated with violence and murder against trans women, and is not a term to use casually or flippantly - unless you want to imply you hate trans women and have no empathy or consideration for the particular discrimination they face - which is VERY closely connected to misogyny, is actually an aspect of misogyny.
And as someone whose worked the street - extremely high heels aren’t suitable. But way to perpetuate an ignorant stereotype!
This kind of misogyny, whorephobia, transphobia and prejudice dressed up as “feminism” doesn’t serve anyone, Maggie. And YOU should know better.
If you wanted to express YOUR personal preference for flat shoes, I’m sure you could’ve done it without insulting a whole bunch of other women (inculding trans women - who are also women, Maggie).
Seriously, Dita has “won you over” by wearing flat shoes and carrying the same bag? If only you could read any number of intelligent and insightful things this woman has said that go far beyond the regular wearing of flat shoes - surprise, surprise, Dita is an independent woman who has her own strong opinions, a variety of life experience that have informed her decisions, sexual, financial, business and social autonomy and - GASP - is able to choose her footwear - and openly admits to adoring towering stilettos, all by her own widdle self! But, no, instead all you need to do is reduce Dita to the clothes she wears and she becomes worthwhile to you? How strangely like the sexist standards you proclaim to be against!
Frankly, I’d rather be dressed by any one of Sydney’s esteemed drag queens than wear anything dubbed “stylish” by you.
(Starlet)
What’s the problem, Maggie? I know for a fact you’ve received more than one slamming critique for this woman-hating post, yet the only ones you’re approving are the bum-crawly ones? Afraid of criticism? Surely someone who’s been in the media biz as long as you have can cop a little dressing-down.
That you can approve Jasmine’s brown-nosing without regard for how incredibly classist and anti-feminist and woman-hating it is just indicative of what’s really motivating you here: hate and prejudice. To allow something as classist as “And don’t even get me started on the striptease and pole-dancing crazes – sorry, but if it were really about fitness/athleticism/art, you would be doing gymnastics, ballet or aerial” to go through just because that commenter is kissing your butt is gross. Because it’s not as if pole-dancing is perhaps made to seem more accessible than ballet, gymnastics and aerial (speaking as someone who has studied all four arts)? Or perhaps women just want to do something that makes them feel sexy? Oh but we should laugh and ridicule them right, cos women shouldn’t feel sexy – that just makes them hopeless victims of the patriarchy? And sexy woman are disgusting sluts, right?
Are you lot seriously so intimidated and threatened by this sort of woman that you would pass your little bitch-fest off as fashion critique?
That’s pathetic.
(Starlet)
January 24, 2012
This is a fabulously written article by a trans man directed at other trans men. There’s been a very intense discussion happening over the last few years about why it is inappropriate for trans men to use the perjorative ‘tranny’ to describe themselves, as it’s primarily been used against trans women. Trans women have been writing and talking about this brilliantly for years and are, as the article indicates, the foremost experts to be heeded on the subject, but this article really is great - it’s concise, sensitive, warm, intelligent and gently-humorous without pulling punches.
Trans brothers, dear dear dear men, whom I respect and look up to and adore, allow me to quote noted gender theorist Inigo Montoya:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I’m writing this because there’s been tons of talk about this slur recently. Trans men, some of them high profile, using tr*nny, trans women calling them on it, trans men demanding that they have a right to say it, et cetera. So before I start the serious stuff, I want to say that I’m not who you should listen to. This is really a trans women’s issue. You should listen to trans women. But they are already talking, and from your reactions, it’s clear we need to talk about this. From one trans guy to a bunch of others.
I’m not mad, guys. Well, ok, I’m a little mad. But mostly I just want to help fix this. We’ve made some bad mistakes. I used to use this word too, and I own that. I fucked up. We fucked up. Now let’s work to make this better.
Tr*nny is a slur. I think we’ve all agreed on that. Diverse sources, from Julia Serano to Kelly Osbourne, all agree. But for whom is it a slur? We know what image is summoned when we hear n*gger–a Black body. When we hear fag–a queer male body. When we hear d*ke–a queer female body. These words evoke certain identities. There are clear images associated with them. Fags are effeminate. D*kes are too masculine to be proper women. What clear image is evoked by tr*nny?
You know as well as I do: it’s the image of a trans woman. A “male” body, or rather, a body doctors would assign as male, in women’s clothing. A person attempting–and always failing, in these images–to be female. That’s what the image has historically been, and with only a few tiny changes, that’s what the image is now.
Whenever I have this debate, I suggest people google “tr*nny.” I stand by that suggestion. Click over the image tab and you’ll see trans women and drag queens galore, a few car parts, and fabulously enough, a picture of Kate Bornstein with a photoshopped mermaid’s tail, but almost never a trans man. When you do see trans men online associated with the slur, they’re almost always calling themselves tr*nnies. They’re not having the word pinned on them by cis people. This distinction is excruciatingly important.
The fact that cis people don’t call trans men tr*nnies very often illuminates two important things about trans male experience: the degree to which are and have been invisible, and what a weird place we stand in as female-assigned men in a patriarchal world.
The invisibility is a big part of what’s scary about being a trans man. We’re so unspeakable that there isn’t even a common word used to degrade exclusively us. When we look into history for gender variant people, we see trans women, and we see this word used against them. We see few trans men, and just like those historical trans men are mostly invisible, so are the structures of oppression used to keep them down.
Reclaiming tr*nny feels like a way to have a history. But that word was never our history. It feels like a way to name and confront those invisible oppressive structures. But it doesn’t do that work, because while the structures that oppress trans women have many elements in common with the ones that oppress us, they’re not the exact same ones.
That’s because, like I said, trans men are in such a weird position in relation to patriarchy. To the patriarchal eye, we seem to following the sexist imperative that being a man is better than being a woman, which of course the patriarchy is all for. But we’re doing it by violating another central patriarchal imperative: that people with vaginas are women.
So we move through this sexist world in a peculiar manner–able to wield our male privilege when we’re allowed to function as men, but subject to a particularly painful brand of transphobic and homophobic sexism when we’re understood as women.
Sure, sometimes trans guys get called tr*nny. But let’s please be real: It’s not that often, and it’s a recent phenomenon. Maybe we’ll get to the point where it’s a common enough slur against trans men that we can start to have the reclamation conversation. But man, I hope we don’t. It’s depressing and comical, us wanting our very own slur.
Sure, you might have a trans woman friend who doesn’t mind you calling yourself a tr*nny. This is because women, like men, don’t always agree with one another!
Sure, you may be very attached to the word “tr*nny” as a part of your identity. You can identify as anything you want! But if it is absolutely imperative for you to use that word, and you using that word makes trans women feel unsafe around you, I’m not sure what to tell you. Maybe you should do some work within yourself, trying to discover why you have such an intense need to own a word that makes people feel unsafe. All of which is to say that, ultimately, your identity is your identity, but you don’t need to share all of it with everyone if it makes them feel unsafe.
Raise your hand if you’re a young white trans guy who went/goes to a liberal arts college and is reading this on his Macbook. (My hand is raised.) Please know that most people who get tr*nny used against them on a daily basis are poor trans women of color. Please try to remember that working to include poor trans women of color in our movement is like, one of the most important things we need to do right now.
Which is more important, working to make trans women feel comfortable and safe in our community, or using a word that makes us feel all tingly and transgressive?
Resist transmisogyny. You do not need someone else’s slur to connect with your own history. Stop using that word. I don’t think it means what you think it means.
Stephen Ira is a writer and an activist who was assigned West Coast and showbiz but identifies as East Coast and books. He writes poetry, fiction, and essay-shaped objects which have been published in Spot Literary Magazine, 365 Tomorrows, and can be found on his own blog, Super Mattachine.
Reblogged from skankassqueer January 23, 2012
skankassqueer:
crazy-:
A documentary that explores antagonism in the lesbian community as a result of the increased visibility of transgender men.
A drama film based on the real-life story of Brandon Teena, a transsexual man who was raped and murdered by his…
yeah, trans women have more visibility in film, but how many of them are:
- serial killers like Norman Bates or Buffalo Bill or Bobbi Elliot?
- played by cis women in “ugly makeup” like Sabrina Osborne
- portrayed as crossdressers or drag queens rather than trans women
- full of transphobic and transmisogynist tropes and stereotypes
take that all away and basically you’re left with Breakfast on Pluto. that’s about it.
Word to the word.
Though - and it has been at least ten years since I last saw this film so I don’t remember it very well and it may have problematic elements - Better Than Chocolate had a woman who was trans in it and attempted to deal with some of the stereotypes and stigma, including the drag queen associations (a performance art piece by the character is ‘I Am Not A Fucking Drag Queen)
(Source: love-is-folly)
This all went down back in September but I wasn’t really blogging politically at the time and just had my memory jogged on it by privilegedandgoodlooking and so thought I should promote it here as well because it’s also a very serious case of hate-speech and seriously transphobic sentiment being published online - including photographs, full names and other personal details of trans women without their consent, with the intent of inciting abusive backlash and possibly putting these women at risk of physical harm. It speaks with severe hatefulness and prejudice against trans women and misrepresents as well as invalidates and disregards identity and perpetuates highly negative and damaging stereotypes. The dogmatic and violently expressed hatred in this post is very intense to read positions its transphobic attitudes as normal. GROSS.
There has been a campaign going to get this blog reported and removed as well, so PLEASE REPORT IT!!!!
Once again, reporting only takes a minute!!!!
This is the blog post in question (again: engagement with poster not recommended).
THIS IS WHERE YOU REPORT IT. Fill out your name, email, provide the link of the blog post and then a message explaining it as hate speech.
"rk
I think most people don’t understand the gravity and breadth of the situation. They don’t see the day-to-day violations of prostitute’s most basic human rights. They don’t see our vulnerability and can’t grasp how much the criminalization of prostitution affects our work and our lives; how much it impacts us emotionally, socially; how much it costs in human lives.
But my request is for transgender activists to stop their sinister appropriation of the abuse and violence that transsexual and transvestite prostitutes endure on every continent. When you look at the majority of transsexual, transvestite, and transgendered people who are attacked, raped or murdered, being a prostitue and being part of that specific social and cultural context seems to be a common denominator. So realizing that almost all trans victims of violence are prostitutes, you have to start asking serious questions about societal attitudes towards prostitution. You have to investigate how such attitudes might contribute to–or perhaps even constitute the main determinant in–making trans prostitutes targets for hatred and attacks. And you also have to consider, in addition to transphobia, other facts such as racism and misogyny.
So when you ask why transgender activists do not take prostitution into consideration, I am forced to say that if they were to do so, they have to give up the majority of their martyrs […] Their campaigns have everything to do with supporting their own political agendas, agends that are all about securing and maintaining their middle-and upper-class privileges through and after transition but have absolutely nothing to do with improving the working conditions of lives of transsexual and transvestite prostitutes.
"
(Sex Change, Social Change, “Interview with Mirha Soleil-Ross,” Women’s Press 2005, p91)
via http://www.questioningtransphobia.com/?p=1069
(via workingsex)
This is an extremely interesting quote. I’m wondering what others might think.
(via strugglingtobeheard)
Edit: I just realized I was the one who originally blogged this post. I must be really out of it today! Sorry folks.
(via workingsex)
I part ways with Mirha in supposing the motive behind trans* activists as individuals or some monolithic entity.
I do however see great value in holding this topic up front & center in all conversations where sex work comes up. This should not exclude trans* conversations or any other conversation about a sex worker, including voluntary or involuntary sex workers. The attack on sex work serves to dehumanize sex workers and it does so in order to support privilege (economic, racial, religious, military, sexist) at the direct expense of sex workers’ rights and lives. Ultimately, this behavior is interwoven with rape culture, sexism, misogyny, racism and the whole kyriarchy web of oppression and suffering. A great many more people suffer from sex & gender based attacks than profit from it. In fact, like military-prison-disaster capitalism, these oppressions specifically impoverish billions in the creation of wealth for hundreds.
(via sexgenderbody)
privilegedandgoodlooking:
mewmewfoucault:
note-a-bear:
I’d heard of him once or twice, but didn’t know much. I’d not seen anything he was in, and only knew he was a trans guy in porn. So I was vaguely positive about it out of hand.
Then I read an awful, awful, awful, article (I mentioned it earlier) about the “phenomenon” or surgery parties. Not only was the article construed in a really destructive manner, hardly speaking about the issues in medical transitioning that make it a necessity to fundraise for medical transitioning (namely insurance issues, steep costs of surgery, and the only now relaxing therapy requirements present in most places in order to get “cleared” for surgery). But the shining turd on this steaming pile of dung was the following:
Not everyone thinks the benefit parties are a positive—or necessary—thing. One of the world’s most prominent trans men, porn star Buck Angel, thinks that benefit parties only lessen the seriousness involved in transitioning to a new gender. “Ugh, don’t get me started. That’s my hugest pet peeve,” he says. “You wanna be a man? Act like a man. Men take care of themselves. Very rarely do they fucking beg for money. Get a fucking job and save your money, and save money like a man. Asking a handout for surgery—it really bothers me. It’s just wrong, and it adds to that element of trendiness. It’s ‘Let’s have a boob-removal party!’”
WONDERFUL!
Man, y’know what, Buck Angel truly is a fuckin’ patron saint of trans*ness. How could anyone find fault with this man? (sarcasm)
i have complicated feelings about surgery fundraiser parties because they’re really useful and necessary for a lot of folks but can also be a part of this hip queer scene celebrity-culture / sexual-commodity thing
but, shit, buck angel is such a dick
I’d feel way better about surgery fundraiser activites if I ever saw one for trans women on genderqueer folks, or pretty much anyone who isn’t a white chillbro.
^^^ This.
I think visibility and inclusion is the crux of the issue here. Trans women have thriving communities where they organise heaps of amazing supportive initiatives, including fundraisers… but the rest of the queer community never hears about them because the rest of the queer community does not make trans women feel welcome. They’re not seen as sexy or as sexualised or even as trendy and cool as trans men. I think trans women are characterised as ‘sad’ and ‘pathetic’ way more than trans men and, of course, are subjected to far more ‘rigorous’ policing of ability to ‘pass’. And, of course, there’s all the other phobia and prejudice and discrimination they face, such as being characterised as potentially-threatening and dangerous to women… not to mention that any trans woman who did publicise a fundraiser amongst the greater queer community would probably come under greater scrutiny than a trans man doing same… all of it tied up in transmisogyny.
Trans women are definitely doing amazing stuff, the fault is with the queer community for ostracising them.
Also, Buck Angel is totally a dick. Did you cop a load of his tantie and fauxpology for not having more POC in his porn?
privilegedandgoodlooking:
I’m really not comfortable with the idea of a man feeling he has the right to a women-only space because he was assigned female at birth. I’m even less comfortable with the fact that it’s always womens spaces (which should be open to ALL female identifing folk, like duh) who are asked to take on the responsibility of making others feel safe.
(Source: ftmconfessions)
As a cis dame on International Women’s Day, I would like to stand in solidarity with my trans* sisters who are often wrongly excluded from women’s space.
I would like to say that IWD is a day for ALL women, cis or trans* and I would not want to be included in any space that excludes women who are trans*.
Happy IWD!!!
