Trans/Genderqueer/Agender/Questioning Thread

the stuff some prominent media feminists have been coming out with on trans issues is absolutely shocking. not even coded.

a more +ve story - r kelly's 13-yr-old son came out as trans. i didn't know where to put it initially, as he seems to have so little contact with his dad that the link seems tenuous, and he explicitly says that he doesn't like the way the media have caught on - but anyway, his ask.fm is just a really touching and encouraging place, and all kudos to his mother

http://ask.fm//MI_YLNO_NAMUH

I haven't had a chance to read all of this yet but looks interesting and relevant: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-tobia/genderqueer-professional-_b_5476239.html

Deconstructing "Professional Appearance"* is a very very interesting debate on so many levels and so many different axis, and it's such an insidious thing, and so hard to fight, because the costs are so high. It's one of the places where all the really pernicious -isms meet the worst aspects of ... (god I feel like such a college student for wanting to type ~capitalism~, maaaan here) but it really does show the whole concept of "Corporate" as a blunt instrument of erasure.

But, on the other hand, even while trying to read that article, I kept getting distracted by the sidebars and adverts and trappings all around the Huffington Post site, and realising that they have now codified "Queer" as a marketing demographic, which makes me feel revolted and icky and pressed into some corporate mould in a different, but still bothersome way.

*One of my favourite stories to tell of ~how I get things so wrong~, was when I first got to NYC, honestly, I was about 23 and had no idea how to dress myself. I'd gone to a school with a uniform, and grown up wearing charity shop clothes. So a couple of weeks into my first Proper Office Job, I was taken aside by my boss and told that there had been complaints about my dress, and though she appreciated my hard work, could I maybe dress more professionally? And I confessed that I had no idea how to "dress professionally", what should I do? So she told me to walk about the office and look at how all the other ~successful people~ in the office dressed, maybe surreptitiously peer under desks and check out people's shoes, because apparently my footgear was a problem. So I did exactly that, and walked around peering at board members as they came out of their offices.

Then went home and my housemate took me clothes-shopping in this big warehouse in Brooklyn, and I kitted myself out in what I had seen, and came into work on Monday wearing a grey suit that some old man had probably died in, and shirt and tie and clompy black brogues. And my boss came in and saw what I'd done and was just like *headdesk* "Branwell, noooo...." I was sacked from that job soon after. ~Can't imagine why~

I mean, I tell this story like it's really funny, and make out like I was so much more naive (well, I was, but also, I knew what I was doing, though I didn't understand the reaction I'd get) but then again, this was the same workplace that I tell the green card story about. It's kinda LOL, but it's also... y'know.

Sorry, I generally hate the "drop a link on a thread without explaining or reacting or otherwise commenting on its contents" school of ILX posting, but there's this, too:

http://the-toast.net/2014/06/05/fanciest-genderqueer-youll-ever-meet/

On perceptions of "genderqueer", class intersection and "fancy".

been thinking about the media feminists reacting so strongly against the label "cis" the other day, and...even if they think it's because gender is a construct and weapon of the patriarchy (which, yes, but more about how narrowly socially acceptable performances of gender are defined), it's at root a denial of the trans experience. it's what we all talked about on branwell's gender thread really.

I haven't seen the twitterbarney but there's one aspect I can sympathise with: many prominent cis feminists, well before they were accomplished and recognised as such, had to run a gauntlet of abuse re. their gender or presentation of same by individual men (in addition to The Patriarchy bullshit we all suffer with and rail against to varying degrees). If they're being mean to transpeople on that basis, though, ARGH, the following words are important:

Intersection
Continuum
Spectrum.

We're all on one somewhere and the sooner we collectively understand that, the better.

No, sorry, I just don't buy that shit, because there are loads of feminists who went through all that same shit and yet still managed to come out of it managing to get through their lives without bullying trans women.

There's a part of me that thinks it's that same tight ringfencing, of people who have had to fight for a tiny modicum of power, hang onto that power for all its worth, yank the ladders up behind them. (Same as the persistent, recurring stink of racism within ~White Feminism~; I think it's telling that it's often the *same people* involved.) Someone who has had power used against them their entire lives, and finally gets a tiny bit of power, they have that sense of "I get to make the rules now, I set the boundaries" but instead of using those experiences of having been the subject of oppression to empathise with others, and attempt to find common ground with people being marginalised in other ways, they use it to exclude people worse off than them. Which is so counter-productive, and in which case, Patriarchy Wins Again (mwah hah hah hah!)

It's just infuriating, because there have been so many times I've tried to read TERFy logic, and it's so frustrating, because there are so many points where their logical argument goes A (yes, I agree) therefore B (yup, agree there too) therefore C (WHOAAAA NELLY NO, WAIT WTF). And part of that, I think is a logical error, of conflating "Gender is socially constructed" with "Gender is entirely a social construct" and then claiming that social constructs do not exist, or are purely imaginary or something.

I dunno; it's just that blunt-faced denial that other people's experiences are what they say they are and that a huge part of the ~feminist project~ is supposed to be believing that and practising that, even in the face of people who have not even had access to those kinds of experiences insisting that they cannot possibly be.

I mean, I can understand to a certain extend, the idea of the right to reject labels that are applied to you without your consent (rejecting negative labels like "bitch" or "slut" or "bossy" or whatever) but it's that weird mindset where it seems like people are rejecting "cis" not because it's applied to them without their consent, but because they object to the very concept, and are tainting the word with some negative connotation that it does not inherently have! It's one thing to say "I am not Cis, I feel very much non-binary, thank you"; that is a perfectly reasonable response. But that whole "there is NO SUCH THING as cis!!!" is just unaccountable.

Blah blah blah I feel like a broken record at this point and I have a garden to weed.

But mostly, just wanted to say "but I was hated on by the Patriarchy/individual sexists on my way up the ladder!!!" is just a pretty piss poor reason to throw shit at people on the ladders below you. Not buying it.

TERFs get no sympathy from me, just so we're clear. And I'm not buying it either, because I just plain don't buy allowing once-bullied people to perpetuate cycles of bullying/ganging up once one's 'gang' forms as if they're passing a particularly troublesome parcel. I wasn't terribly hetero-normative growing up (how many seven-year-olds toga themselves up in a zigzag afghan and scream "I'm a DRAG QUEEN!" while running around the neighbours' lawn, I ask you) and I got a lot of shit for it until I was about 16. If someone tried to apply cis to me in a very personal, hurtful way (as opposed to a theoretical, spectrumy way) I think my response would be the 'no thanks' one rather than the no-such-thing example.

Yeah, there's the rub. "I don't know that that fully applies to me?" is a valid response. "That doesn't exist" is not.

Ugh, I broke down and checked out what went down on twitter and all I can say is fuck TERFs forever, especially when just in the past couple days the body of a trans immigration reform activist in Anaheim was found behind a Dairy Queen, and a trans teenager here in Seattle who a bunch of my friends knew committed suicide. Straight to hell with that lot.

re: "Professional dress" - This is another good article I read not too long ago. Though the author identifies as a cis woman, she's working through a lot of the same things while trying to figure out how to present as butch in a corporate world that demands she wear dresses and heels:

http://mediadiversified.org/2014/03/17/first-boi-in-dressing-queer-in-the-corporate-world/

brazilian mecha ‏@fujoshidad

@CCriadoPerez 'we are all nonbinary' is the new 'i dont see race'

Ugh, I'm so sorry to hear about your friends' friend, Rev. I think I missed most of the Twitter harrassment toward non-binary people, and I don't want to ask anyone to dredge it back up, but was the Sarah Ditum blog post the catalyst?

Actually, never mind: there's no reason to give TERF discourse more attention here.

Yeah, on one level, I just feel like... ugh, stop giving the oxygen of publicity to TERFs, with a few notable exceptions*, they make a lot of noise but they are not the ones killing trans women and dumping their bodies behind Dairy Queens, why can't we direct the outrage and the vitriol towards those monsters, as well as merely old-fashioned feminists on twitter. (But maybe I'm just all out of outrage at the moment and trying to cut down the anger in my life right now, so TERFs are just something to avoid, for me, at the moment..)

*The exception being a noted TERF who I am not going to name here, with a nasty habit of genuinely vicious outing trans women's birth names and targeting their employers and using the legal system to make people's lives hell.

But then again, it does all form part of the same ecosystem of denial and erasure and hatred.

Basically, I just think that TERFs and MRAs should go off and form their own colony together in the desert somewhere, where they can live out each other's worst nightmares forever.

Also, I know her heart is in the right place, but this: "'we are all nonbinary' is the new 'i dont see race'" reads as much "throw non-binary people under the bus" as the crap it's against. I don't think it's helpful.

Should there be gender segregation w.r.t. restrooms & other public facilities at all? This is a serious, non-troll qn; I'm just curious about the take of people who know a lot more about this stuff than I do. I feel invested in the gender politics of restroom access because I have Crohn's disease & have to use public restrooms fairly often. Feel free to dismiss/ignore.

You know what the best loo setup I have seen recently was? A whole corridor of individual loo-lettes, each with its own door and lock, and everybody of every gender had to queue to use them.

I mean, why is it such a big deal to gender segregate public toilets? (And why is it so important for trans women to be able to access them?) Because SOME men feel so entitled to the bodies of people that read as "women" that if they are undressed or vulnerable for any reason - including relieving themselves - that they feel entitled to attack them.

I feel like I'm probably going to get piled on for even saying that. But the whole hundreds of years of "modesty" codes which have resulted in gender segregation of loos, changing rooms, locker rooms, basically boil down to "women cannot be seen naked, because men cannot control themselves." Which is total rape culture bullshit, I agree. But when trans women actify (is that even a word? I don't know that it is) to use gender-appropriate toilets, it is often because it is *their* safety that is at stake.

So, y'know, self-locking loo-lettes work for me.

sorry for the following quick derail: actify is listed in merriam-webster online as another word for activate, but I have no idea how you were using it just now

I was using it in the sense of trying to cram the political sense of "agitate" and "perform activism" into a short catchy verb but I'm not sure it works.

Yeah, the individual full-door rooms would definitely be ideal to me. I've seen those before & I'd love to see more of them, but I guess it is less economical in high-capacity venues? idk.

(the WORST restroom setup I've ever seen = a men's room with a trough & a stall-less toilet just out in the open and no door lock. I stepped in there and got freaked out and ended up going to another establishment to use the restroom. I am big on privacy!)

Thanks for responding!

the toilet debate is important insofar as trans users need to feel/be safe rather than re: cis users' feelings.

in r kelly's son's ask.fm, he said he used the toilet in the nurse's room iirc

a club here has a setup for a unisex bathroom I like, a big row of individual stalls + a few urinals tucked around a corner + a communal washing station

Also, I know her heart is in the right place, but this: "'we are all nonbinary' is the new 'i dont see race'" reads as much "throw non-binary people under the bus" as the crap it's against. I don't think it's helpful.

― you go PUNCHING yourself in... THE DICK! (Branwell with an N), Monday, June 16, 2014 1:39 AM Bookmark

Eh, I don't see this as an attack or erasure of non-binary people. If anything, it's pushing against the erasure of the former statement.

#HowToSpotACisPerson has been a good one to follow today

https://twitter.com/search?q=%23HowToSpotACisPerson&src=typd

timely; my new office is casually proposing unisex toilets and everyone is o_O
Ally McBeal amirite

Unisex toilets, as in shared washing up area, and urinals out in a space that women have to use just provokes in me a deep, instinctive FUCK NO.

The only way unisex toilets really work for me is if they are entirely self contained.

But, this may also be due to my perceiving loos as a safe space for MH issues, and I do not want to have to explain to strangers why I am crying in the toilet if I am having a bad MH day.

shared basins ok but I prefer separate M/F areas for cubicles.
ours would be entirely self-contained cubicles (but not designated M/F at all) in a shared space ie no urinals

The urinals in the bathroom I described are hidden around a corner from the rest of the bathroom behind a sign that says "urinals", no one even would see them unless they specifically went over there. (Plus the stall doors are totally solid and not open air.)

I really like this on the #howtospotacisperson tag:

https://twitter.com/ixKylie/status/478619667888476160

Kylie Jack ‏@ixKylie 1h

I’m not into this #howtospotacisperson HT. As Ive said before, cis people should always disclose.

no one even would see them unless they specifically went over there.

Really not familiar with the WHOOPS MADE YOU LOOKIT MY DICK tactics of ~~~~****SOME****~~~~ str8 dudes much, huh.

I mean, true, if a dude really wants to show you his dick, he will do it to you on the street or in hallways or staircases or wherever, regardless! (Yes, I am speaking from experience.) But I would rather not give them the opportunity to do it in what I think of as my "safe space".

I really like this on the #howtospotacisperson tag:

https://twitter.com/ixKylie/status/478619667888476160

Kylie Jack ‏@ixKylie 1h

I’m not into this #howtospotacisperson HT. As Ive said before, cis people should always disclose.

― The Reverend, Monday, June 16, 2014 8:59 PM (29 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

not sure i get this one--a riff on 'trans people should always disclose'?

yes

Yes.

Branwell, I am sorry, you are right. This is my privilege as someone who is usually perceived as male speaking. :/

(Also it's a gay{-ish?} club, although that definitely does not mean there aren't sometimes noxious str8dudes there.)

Justin Vivian Bond has a longer explication of his defense of the word "tranny" in The Stranger's new trans-centered queer issue: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/about-the-word-tranny/Content?oid=19946137

Wasn't the first one long enough?

I really don't have the time to read anyone whose first sentence is equating "can you be more sensitive with your language" with "OMG CENSORSHIP!!!!!11 ~CONSERVATIVE~!!!"

You got your shovel, you just keep digging, but don't expect me to watch.

Anyway kinda burying the lead there I guess; The Stranger's whole queer issue is about transgender rights:

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/queer-issue-2014/Content?oid=19946096

Sorry to just do the 'link drop' thing; I don't really feel this is an area where I am qualified to comment. I am trying to learn tho & I appreciate this thread for how much I have learned from it.

Sorry, Crabbits, that "shovel" comment was directed at Mx. Justin, not at you, in case there was any doubt.

Oh no, I know! That said, I always have my shovel in hand for about the same reason.

eg constantly making mistakes and saying disagreeable shit
also for gardening

I somehow have little faith in an issue on transgender rights from a paper edited by Dan Savage.

And written by Albert Camus! #shoveling

who needs productive discussion about modes of interaction wrt gender identity when we can react and react to insensitive language.

I would argue that using insensitive language makes it difficult to have a productive discussion

agreed.

I just discovered this thread when I was trying to ctrl+f "Transformers."

A friend's take on tensions within LGBT activism, touching on the language debate in which Mx. Bond's essay takes part: http://prospect.org/article/45-years-after-stonewall-lgbt-movement-has-transphobia-problem

hiiiiiiii

https://fbcdn-sphotos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/t1.0-9/10251916_10202958359054705_8527134742160850902_n.jpg

Rad! (Is that CeCe with you, Rev?)