Susan's Place Logo

News:

Since its founding in 1995 Susan's Place forums have blossomed into a truly global lifeline. To date we've delivered roughly 1.4 billion page views to hundreds of millions of unique visitors, guided more than 41,000 registered members through 1,985,081 posts and 188,474 topics across 193 boards, and—most importantly—helped save tens of thousands of lives by connecting people to vital information and support at their most vulnerable moments.

Main Menu

Trans Terminology: Of ->-bleeped-<-s and ->-bleeped-<-s

Started by Natasha, July 11, 2011, 06:51:26 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages1
User actions

Natasha

July 11, 2011, 06:51:26 PM
Trans Terminology: Of ->-bleeped-<-s and ->-bleeped-<-s

http://blogs.montrealgazette.com/2011/07/10/trans-terminology-of-->-bleeped-<-s-and-->-bleeped-<-s/
7/10/11
By Jillian Page

Funny thing about trans terminology: what is acceptable to some is unacceptable to others. Take the word "->-bleeped-<-," for example. The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation's media guide — used by many media outlets — says the word "->-bleeped-<-" is derogatory, and we in the media must not use it. In theory, if it is derogatory, nobody should be using it, right?

Wrong. Case in point: comedian Eddie Izzard, who will be performing in Montreal as part of the Comedy Festival this week, has referred to himself as a ->-bleeped-<- (though I am not sure if he still does). I first heard the term used in reference to Eddie on the wonderful BBC car-review show Top Gear, in which Eddie was a guest. The host referred to him as a ->-bleeped-<-
  •  
Print
Go Up Pages1
User actions