#...then i personally think that those ideas of trans liberation you may have are flimsy

[sepublic]

The Unspoken Story with Representation & Diversity

           Y’all ever have this feeling, where you see a character… And their experiences just immediately resonate with you, and you just feel and KNOW exactly what they’ve been through, without them necessarily having to say or present it aloud within the text? Like you can tell this character borrows exactly from this specific experience, and so while others unfamiliar with it may not get the idea, or need clarification… For the kind of audience that really gets and understands how it goes without saying, it’s an almost clever, implicit show-not-tell way of conveying to those who get it, exactly what’s going on? AKA subtext?

           An example would be this one time in Fullmetal Alchemist, where we have characters Jerso and Zampano, who’ve been experimented on and given the ability to transform into monstrous chimeras, and then back. Despite being able to function as both regular human AND chimera however, Jerso and Zampano differ from their teammates Darius and Heinkel in that they’re not big fans of their new bodies… They actively hate them and feel uncomfortable with them, and want to go back to being regular humans. And to me, I never got this at the time as I was a young and inexperienced kid- I made up in my head that maybe Jerso and Zampano’s alterations caused them chronic pains, or something like that. Otherwise, I had to wonder if it was just insufficient writing…?

           But then I met someone, a trans woman and a fellow Fullmetal Alchemist fan. And she explained how she immediately understood Jerso and Zampano’s experiences, and how it connected to her own dysphoria. There wasn’t anything wrong with the body she used to have, it just… wasn’t her, and that’s why she felt so much more liberated when she recognized her true identity! And when I heard this from her, it just… clicked. It suddenly made SO much sense, and I never again questioned Jerso and Zampano’s dilemma, never tried to justify it in my head by providing headcanons of downsides to their chimera forms. 

          I was reassured that this kind of experience and feelings were real and valid, that the story didn’t have to justify them to me because they already tangibly existed in real life- This WAS something that happens, in a sense. I didn’t have to worry about confirming it for myself when I knew that others got the idea, since just because I didn’t understand, that doesn’t mean it’s not there. I didn’t personally relate, but I knew it existed, and thus I could feel sympathy and believe in this by trusting the experiences of others... My experiences are not universal, and this of course has an effect on how I engage with media, ensuring my knowledge and analysis is always limited.

          I’ve heard real-life anecdotes about how dysphoria can make someone feel like a monster, and while this hasn’t been outright confirmed within Fullmetal Alchemist itself… There’s always the potential of subtext. Unintentional, or otherwise- Given the series’ recurring themes of finding a body you’re actually comfortable with, or coming to terms with it, as part of the whole disability experience with characters such as our titular protagonist.

          It’s a sort of implication to a specific experience, a metaphor for it, that allows those who get it to instantly fill in the gaps. To get into a philosophical tangent, it reminds me of how stories are really defined, a lot, not just by the author; But how an audience engages with them, how stories are defined in different ways by different people. Now, obviously there are examples where some parts of the text are outright indisputable and not up for debate, such as Star Wars being Anti-Fascist for example. But my point is, writing a story can involve a lot of thought as to the type of audience you’re writing for… Especially when it comes to representation.

          When it comes to representation, when someone is writing for a marginalized group, the writer doesn’t need to lay down much within the text; Because they KNOW that the people they write it for will get it. Others not of that group and not familiar with its struggles can still generally get by, but for those who really engage with the material, or share that same experience that is being alluded towards… There’s an added depth, a bonus facet to the story that only adds to and enriches the experience, even more than it already is.

           And, sometimes it can be a little frustrating, to trying to convey this to someone who doesn’t quite get it, and you start to wonder if maybe you’re just projecting a bit. Maybe this is all in your head, it’s not really there, or that wasn’t necessarily the author’s intention at least. You know there’s something that’s supported by how this characters shares this experience; It’s not stated within the text, but you can tell it’s there, because that’s such an integral part of the experience you’re used to, and the character is clearly a part of that as well. And when you apply this consideration, it just suddenly puts everything into a new light, adds that additional depth as I mentioned earlier…

          And you really can’t ignore it, because you feel it just adds so much enriching layers to the media, that maybe you’re doing it a disservice to not openly acknowledge and defend this take as if it were real. You feel you have to defend this interpretation of yours, because you feel that this character really, clearly is meant to connect to that experience that resonates with you and others; And it can be a little frustrating if others just don’t get it, even if you can’t necessarily blame them for not doing so. It’s because you know the text is talking about people like you, so it feels like you really are more of an expert on this matter, that you’ve got a lot to add that needs to be taken into consideration, if the author is setting up your group to have an inherent advantage in understanding what’s going on.

          When asked to explain yourself, you feel a little embarrassed because maybe you’re relying too much on your own experience and not the actual text… And it feels almost silly to cite yourself as the main, if not the only necessary, point of evidence. You start to question and doubt if what you and others have gone through, is worth considering. What you’re saying sounds stupid at face-value because it lacks context, and a lot of things without context sound flimsy… Aloud, from a ‘rational’ standpoint I suppose, it sounds foolish to rely on such personal emotions, because surely the author doesn’t know you specifically and wasn’t drawing from what you went through.

          Maybe you’re unloading a bunch of stuff that isn’t necessarily relevant to the subject, maybe you’re asking too much for people to connect your experiences to what’s in the text, and thus you’re really stretching things… And handing out waytoo much information as well. It can feel like you’re boiling down your reasoning to, “Because I said so,” and that doesn’t sound right nor fair to the person you’re conveying your take towards, insisting they take you at face-value without being given their owed explanation, because anyone should be questioning and critical of what they’re given.

          Perhaps you just need to ‘detach’ yourself from things, look at it objectively… But what is objective, what is the default perspective? I don’t think there actually is one. So when you have to approach the text as JUST the text, you remember that that text is being written by someone, and that someone has a lot of things in their head that influences them, but not everything can be explicitly written down. A lot of the inspirations and experiences that this creator draws from aren’t shared amongst everyone who engages with their story.

          And if you feel this creator is resonating with that specific experience of yours, you become a lot more confident that this is where they were drawing from, and thus this is being alluded towards between the lines; Because it just makes so much more sense this way! You might be wrong- But what if you’re right? You don’t want to discourage people from finding stuff that could be out there, anything is better than nothing, creation and discovery should be enabled, even on the off-chance that there’s nothing there, because at least not you know for sure there isn’t anything, and thus your curiosity has been sated to an extent.

          Even if the creator hadn’t intended it to be this way, the experiences of others can reassure them that there’s nothing more that needs to be said, because they alone can fill in the gaps… And it kind of ties into how a lot of media intentionally leaves stuff open for interpretation, or at least allows certain takes. It’s kind of like how a lot of fans resonated with Jenny from My Life as a Teenage Robot, as her struggles feel so topical to that of a trans person; And while the creator confessed to never intending this, they could recognize the similarities between what they’d written and what trans people go through, so maybe there IS a connection there to consider!

          TL;DR Diversity and Representation IS in fact important, and a vital part of not only engaging with media, but just with the experiences of others in general. It can reveal meaning that isn’t immediately obvious to others, and/or create it by recognizing the fundamental similarities within the text to real life experiences, and how that piece of media’s themes both contribute towards and are supported by what a person or group has witnessed. Your experiences DO matter, even if they’re a minority; Perhaps especially because of this, as it gives you a new and rare angle that is not often known, and this piece of media’s connection to that experience can be used as a medium to convey it to others who don’t resonate the same way.

          It is through media that people can learn about the experiences of others even if they’ve never went through such things personally… An experience so intimately conveyed that you may as well be there, you can imagine yourself there, and so you don’t exactly have to have gone through it in real life to now understand- Especially since making someone go through that experience in real life has both logistical and ethical concerns. It encourages empathy, where you may not necessarily know what this person is going through; But you’re willing to open your mind, consider, listen, and change and/or add to your current knowledge and understanding.

          It’s also important to remember that even people within the same group have different ways of engaging with that specific experience, and that these diverse takes are all valid and worth considering; So if a person from that same group as you differs, perhaps consider listening? Of course, if someone believes there’s depth and the other insists there isn’t, perhaps hearing out the former option provides more room for discussion and thought, that while not canon, can pay off and inspire in other ways regardless, and thus be meaningful and worthwhile in the end.

[crossdreamers]

Trans Visibility Won’t Save Us

Alex Verman has published an interesting take on the generation gaps of the transgender community, using the Contrapoints twitter controversy as a startingpoint.

You do not have to agree with Verman to get something out of this article. It will help trans people of all ages and background to understand where other trans and non-binary people come from, especially as regards the tension between cultural assimilation and political rebellion.

“On the one hand, we know intellectually that ‘trans’ doesn’t necessarily imply a politic, because a trans person is just a fucking person,” writer and critic Andrea Long Chu told me over the phone in September. “But there’s clearly a political meaning to the very speakability of transness. So there’s an inherent tension.” For Chu, 27, the ContraPoints debate and Wynn’s self-fulfilling prophecy of a generational divide in the trans community pointed to the different ways in which individuals want to feel as though they belong under the unsteady trans umbrella.

I think for a lot of people — including those whom Wynn may have imagined with the phrase “vanguard zoomer trans” — trans identity does mean something politically. On some level, it would be ridiculous to assume otherwise: To even be able to describe oneself as trans in a public way requires a kind of political consciousness. Our existence, the saying goes, is resistance. But is our existence really resistance on its own?

Trans people in 2019 are incredibly visible: Nonbinary identities and androgynous aesthetics have gained mainstream appeal; influencers and celebrities have put our ideas and shortcomings on the international stage; new arguments have opened up old wounds in the pages of celebrated newspapers and right-wing rags; and fights over identity and expression have made their way to the highest offices of government. Against a backdrop of multiple, highly publicized killings of Black and brown trans women, trans identity has been the subject of comedy specials, op-eds, public hearings, legal cases, and Supreme Court decisions — to the point that questions about what it “means” to be trans are suddenly inescapable. This has been a year of startling contradictions: one in which the divisions beneath the flimsy umbrella we call the “trans community” have grown increasingly stark, and the stakes seem impossibly high.

Visibility and representation can be deeply affirming for those marginalized from the mainstream. But a politics of identity and its recognition have come to overshadow the ways in which recognition carries unique consequences for some trans people and not for others.

As far as I see it, the transgender struggle will always have to be political in the face of traditionalist and extreme conservative opposition. Not necessarily in the sense of “radical”, “leftist” or “liberal”, but in the sense that you have to fight for your right to exist. You have to understand that adopting to a system that see your very existence as a threat to the social order will never give you the acceptance you seek.  Your goal has to be to change that culture, and make those involved see that trans people are people too.

Read the whole article here!

Screenshot from video by Natalie Wynn AKA Contrapoints, YouTube vlogger and social media star.

[whitehotharlots]

So we’re just gonna straight up embrace conservatism?

A few months ago I came across the story of a group of young trans activists who wrecked up the opening of a feminist library in British Columbia. To avoid accusations of taking sides or whatever, here’s what the feminists had to say about it, and here’s what the trans activist kids had to say about it. (Direct link: https://www.facebook.com/notes/gag-gays-against-gentrification/response-to-vancouver-womens-library/379623995740078 )

Both sides agreed that the activists physically disrupted the opening of what was purported to be a feminist space, caused several hundred dollars worth of property damage, threatened physical violence against the library’s proprietors, and demanded that a dozen or so books be removed from the shelves.

I decided not to write about this. Firstly, because engaging with trans discourse in any way other than nodding politely guarantees you will be accused of Literal Murder, and I just don’t want to mess with that. More importantly, I felt I couldn’t say anything that wouldn’t amount to a simple, maybe even pedantic observation: namely, it’s kinda weird how we’ve begun to fear subjectively perceived, metaphorical “violence” so intensely that we’re willing to accept literal, physical violence as a response to it. It’s easy to make fun of people who say that using gendered pronouns is a direct cause of murder or whatever, but these people aren’t just obscure cranks anymore--they control the discourse; we’re living in the world they’ve built. 

Here’s a sample of what I tried to write:

Here, in the interest of objectivity, it’s traditional for a writer to point out the tremendous amount of danger faced by those trans people who committed violent acts against the cis feminists and have demanded that the cis feminists radically alter their own space. A writer should re-cite the oft-cited statistic that over twenty trans people were murdered in 2015--and that, no doubt, at least half of them were beaten to death with a copy of Andrea Dworkin’s Pornography. And I don’t mean to be facetious: should a trans activist suggest that these books were being wielded as literal, physical weapons, there might at least be a smidgen of logic behind their demands. But such a connection, however tenuous, is never proffered. We are left instead with a vague implication by association: the trans activists understandably don’t like trans people being murdered and they also don’t like books they assume question the essentialist foundation of their self-understanding, therefore a responsible author will make sure to establish a sense that the former is indeed caused by the latter. Or, if it’s not a case of actual causation--since obviously it’s not and no one would ever be so daft as to suggest that it is--at the very least we should respect the trans activists’ sensitivities toward literature they find upsetting, seeing as they’re acting out of a sense of extreme fear that they at least believe to be justified. Criticizing them at lashing out would be like getting mad a cornered raccoon for showing its teeth.

Just… can you believe this? Honestly? Here, very real violence and property damage is excused simply by putting in the context of the emotional state of those who committed it. Can you imagine any parallel situation taking place in contemporary America? A black man would have a much more solid case in going down to his local police station and wrecking up the place. Police violence against black people is an actual, direct, and literal thing--no flimsy metaphors are required to explain it. If such a thing were to happen, however, the black guy would be killed or imprisoned and his actions would be condemned in all but the most radical of spaces (try to find a mainstream publication that supported Chris Dorner. You can’t). Or more on point: let’s say a group of radical zionists entered a store the specializes in classical music, so at to disrupt a talk about Wagner. They post threats on social media. They wreck merchandise. They tear down posters, shove some elderly classical enthusiasts, cause several hundred dollars worth of damage, and leave a manifesto demanding that certain naughty works be banned. Again: they’d most likely be arrested. They would find no defense within the mainstream press. Their sense of victimhood would certainly not be used as justification for their actions, and no serious person would yield to their demands that certain works of music be banned from stores.

So… yeah. I was having trouble not sounding dismissive. But since then other shit has gone down, and it’s dawned on me that this tendency to prize the metaphorical over the literal isn’t new. It’s very old. It is, simply put, the general grounding of the American conservative worldview. It just happens to be coming from woke people now. 

For an example, take a look at a piece about trans activists vandalizing a rape crisis center with death threats. The vandalism was, of course, denounced on all sides. But check out the phrasing here: 

Trans people face employment and housing barriers, Jenkins said, and the graffiti could be a product of a trans person’s pent up frustration. Vancouver Rape Relief, she said, is a visible organization at which to point a finger.

“A lot of the actions of Vancouver Rape Relief through exclusion of trans women I think are symbolic of society’s disdain for trans people generally,” she said.

“So I can understand that for someone who is having a really hard time generally, this is a symbol of everything that is wrong with the world that is treating me terribly — which is no excuse, but I can see how someone could get to that point.”

Just… fucking seriously? Again, can you imagine this kind of even handedness being afforded to any other marginalized group? The only time you see violence regarded in such an apologetic or celebratory manner is when cops and soldiers do it. 

But, oh, it gets even weirder and stupider:

More graffiti adorns the sidewalks of Commercial Dr., further east from the Vancouver Rape Relief location. In support of trans people, the message “Trans women are women” appeared on sidewalks near Grandview Park earlier this summer.

Another message reads “Lesbians unite,” coupled with a double Venus symbol. Claire Ens, president of the Vancouver Dyke March and Festival Society, said the two Venus symbols are a coded threat to trans people.

“The two Venus symbols, that may seem innocent and to some even a call for lesbian rights and women-power, but in fact it is the opposite,” she said.

Two Venus symbols, side-by-side, is a larger symbol for “biological essentialism,” she said, a belief that peoples’ identities are determined by their genitals or chromosomes, which is inherently discriminatory to trans people who may have genitals that don’t match outdated ideas of what it means to be a man or a woman.

“The Venus symbols are meant as a warning sign to trans women, to state that trans women are not included nor welcomed, and is a perfect example of ... ‘dog whistling’ (because it is) innocent to those who aren’t in the know about it (but) harmful and hateful specifically to trans women,” she said.

Oh... oh dear. 

I’m reminded of the time when I was in 8th grade and my best friend did some weird art project where he put an arrow through a George Jetson doll he won at the carnival and painted the wound with a red marker. His mom found the doll. She spoke with her evangelical busybody cunt friends at work, who informed her that the “ritualistic sacrifice” of stuffed animals was a surefire sign that the boy had been brainwashed by Satanists. She then had him involuntarily committed. A state official determined him to to be depressed but not under any demonic influence, and so he was released under the condition that he start going to cut-rate therapy, where yet another evangelical busybody cunt informed him that the doll was, in fact, a sign that at least one satan lived within him (possibly several) and advised his mother to throw out all of his cds and videogames and keep him under constant watch. Oddly, this did not help with my friends’ depression. Made it a lot worse, in fact. Kicked off about a decade of severe substance abuse. But that’s neither here nor there--the point is, he did something objectively harmless that a bunch of hateful conservatives found offensive, and demonizing and bullying him was a small price to pay to get him to stop doing said harmless-but-offensive things. He might not have meant the plush art project to be a sign of aggression. A dispassionate observer would most likely not regard it as such. But the subjective, spiritual harm suffered by his mother engendered a violent reaction, and the cruelly conservative social structures of our community prized her perceived victimhood over any actual harms, and so they therefore encouraged her to damage the boy so as to make herself feel more safe. Nobody wins. Everyone was worse off. But the woman got some momentary catharsis, and that’s what was important.

Uhh… shit. I was gonna try to connect this to something else, but I think maybe I made my point. If you don’t agree with me yet, you’re never going to. But just remember, pedantic as this argument may be, there’s a reason censorship has historically resided in the conservative purview. There’s also a reason why it used to be considered virtuous, in liberal spaces, to not regard your own tastes and pet peeves as moral issues that warranted vicious remediation. Conservatives are conservatives, regardless of their color of their skin, the people they like to fuck, or whether or not they regard themselves to embody the gender they were asigned at birth. Cruelty is likewise always cruel. A cunt is a cunt. And there’s nothing to be gained by denying these basic truths.

[sammiedetroit]

In The Moment

I was at a semi mainstream social event recently hosted by an old friend.  A mixed affair of college students along with some faculty and various other apparently educated, liberal types.

I was engaged in innocuous conversation with a middle aged woman when she decided to introduce me to her husband and, in doing so, misgendered me...not once but three times in quick succession.

I quietly leaned in and corrected her, explaining softly that it is “she” not “he”.

After a brief slightly puzzled moment she laughed and replied “Oh well, I never know what to say...I hear we are supposed to say “they” now”

Now, in this situation, the woman was obviously educated, and apparently at least somewhat liberal, and, most likely, of a fairly affluent life. Equally obviously, she meant no harm and did not even realize what she had done. Her misgendering was unintentional and totally lacking in any kind of malicious intent.

But...how could she be so clueless? You see, it wasn't that she misgendered me. Anyone can, in a conversation, become excited and forget. I totally understand that. Rather it was that, when corrected, she failed to respond adequately.

Look, I am is pretty honest about my appearance.  Brutally so, really. I walk through this world every day expecting people to just know that I am transgender.  I mean, heck, I am six foot two... barefoot.  No matter how hard I try I am still going to attract additional scrutiny.  In truth, some do “make me”, and some either don't or, better still, just don't care.  But I assume they do.  

It isn't that I wear a “tranny as fuck” t-shirt, or anything.  Rather, it's just that I teach myself not to care either way.  I find life far more relaxing having decided not to exchange the lie of pretending to be male for the lie of pretending to be cis. If anything I am proud of being myself, as I feel any trans person should be. I mean, cisgendered people have problems, sure, but trans individuals? We have all those same problems but must also face the overwhelming fear of rejection, humiliation and physical violence ...and overcome it....transition and then walk through life everyday expecting “situations” to occur. This is the nature of transgender. This is the reality of being non-binary in a binary world.

And make no mistake....I don't accept that gender is binary in nature. Why should it be? Once you realize that genitals define only biological sex and not gender identity, then you have to accept that gender itself is determined in the brain.  And it is.  But having said and accepted that premise, then one must further accept that gender is neither male and female, black and white, on and off, in or out.....but rather a vast and intricate spectrum as complicated and detailed in degree as there are individuals on Earth.  Where any one person is, on that spectrum, is determined solely by the nature of that particular individual. This theory truly explains so much.

But, it also flies in the face of a million years of learned conditioning.

The task for TG is not to insist that the world change overnight, but rather to learn how to live as a nonbinary person in a binary society.

Mostly that means simply blending each day, as best one can, within the role of whichever end of the gender binary with which one feels the most affinity.  It isn't easy, especially for those of us challenged by the limitations of a physical appearance far distant from that of the internal identity.

It takes a lot of effort.

So, after all that effort...well, it may seem silly, but.....after all that effort to overcome your fears... to alter and correct your appearance, to strive with all your might to appear visually as clearly and obviously as possible to be unmistakable....totally in line and in possession of all the markers associated with the gender with which you identify.....after all that...being misgendered hurts.

It hurts badly.

It is a total invalidation of self and a total rejection of that self.

Or so it feels.

And, quite honestly, it hurts the worst when it cames not from some irredeemable asshat ( you can at least prepare for that attack) but rather when it comes from someone apparently tolerant and well meaning..... when it comes at that moment when you feel safe and your defenses are dropped. It is a little like a sucker punch to the kidneys.

You have dropped your guard and are feeling safe and suddenly ...bang!...it's all back.

All the frustration, all the hopelessness, all the pain.

So, yes, it is important.

Even among those who are the closest and most well meaning this occurs.

Truthfully, even among allies, finding a cisgendered individual who completely understands being trans is a real rarity. Support? Yes. True understanding? Rare.

And so part of our problem is learning to constantly suppress hurt feelings and constantly and gently try to educate.

And that is OK.

It goes with the turf.

Most (not all...depends where you live, of course).... most mainstream people are pretty open minded. But they are going to make mistakes.

It's important to make sure they understand their mistake....not abusively, or angrily, but with patience and kindness and love.

The woman in the conversation above meant no disrespect, and probably did not even realize she was guilty of any. The problem is that when corrected she totally failed to take ownership of her mistake. The desired response would have been a simple recognition of error and an apology. By falling back on some flimsy reference to a general “they” prescribing mythical protocols, all responsibility was avoided, and no recognition given that feelings might have been bruised.

This response was totally human and normal and quite understandable. When confronted with the idea that she had misspoken and possibly caused offense, she chose to deflect and so diminish the problem thus diminishing the discomfort she felt.

But, in no way did that response diminish my discomfort.

I mean, look.....when one is face to face with a transgender person who has just specifically informed you of which pronouns are appropriate, who actually cares what some mythical “they” have to say?

Seriously.

If you actually care to know how a transgender person feels....just listen to them.

Most TG that I know are the sweetest, kindest hearts you would ever ever want to know.

Now if you are cis gender and think this doesn't matter...if you think that this is just political correctness gone awry... if you think you are already totally fair and treat everyone equally and that this is a lot of noise about nothing.....well, no...you are either failing to understand, or simply broadcasting that you do not give a shit exactly what is at stake.

I get it

….and I forgive you.  

For many years I failed to understand what all the noise was about either.  

“White, male privilege?  

“Women's rights?”

I totally failed to understand what discrimination was really all about at all.

I mean...I walked through life oblivious...full of confidence... thinking I treated everyone fairly and everyone the same.

I was wrong.

You don't know what you've got till it's gone.

I get it now. Believe me...I get it.

But I remember how it felt to be clueless. I really do.

So, I forgive you.

I just wanted to try and drop you a line to remind you...

Every day, and in every interaction we have with anyone....we have the opportunity to truly see them ...another spark of beautiful life in the darkness.

And we also have the option to miss that opportunity.

Which do you think is better?