Should I back out?

[suzifrommd]

Suzi, what you wrote is well thought out and makes a great deal of sense.

Nope -- she's promoting herself as an expert, and if your PFLAG chapter is paying her to speak, that's just damn insulting.

Actually, I don't think they're paying her, or if they are, it's hardly more than travel money. I'm sure PFLAG brought her in because she DIDN'T cost them much.

If I correctly read between the lines at her last engagement, she really wants to write another book on gender, or modernize her old one, and she's trying to drum up interest and support for the project.

[E-Brennan]

Her "book learning" on trans is ok. She's read all the books, knows the words, etc. But her book was written about a decade ago based on speaking with people who were educated about transgender even before that. She seemed clueless about the modern thinking on trans. She had a very medicalized view of transition, for example. Her impression seemed to be that it was more about hormones and surgery than it was about social stuff. On the whole I thought she had a lot of knowledge, and not a lot of insight.

. . .

The fact that the author is cisgender is probably not relevant to any of that, except in so far as it EATS AT ME that cisgender people believe that they know enough about us to tell us who we are.

It's at the root of pretty much ALL the problems I read in these forums - gatekeeping, acceptance by families, schools, workplaces, problems with changing documentation, issues with insurance, anti-bathroom bills, all of it.

It all boils down, IMO, to the fact that cisgender people feel perfectly comfortable appointing themselves and each other experts on our lives and identities.

And I'm sick of it. I really don't want to be part of it, and I'm really, really disappointed at the leadership of our PFLAG chapter. I've talked to them about this and I think subordinating the two trans people on the panel to a cisgender "expert" is such a POWERFULLY NEGATIVE MESSAGE, that nothing, NOTHING, I say there could adequately counter it.

I think I might actually do more effective educating by explaining why my being on the panel won't be helpful or effective, than anything I might say as part of it.

That makes a great deal of sense to me now, and in light of that it might be worth reconsidering your participation in the presentation and the group if it makes you uncomfortable.

I don't agree with the tone of _______ ("how special we are aren't we"). (Perhaps that wasn't the intention.)

Absolutely not my intention.  Even with my little disclaimer at the start of the post, it did sound rather mean.  Apologies for any offense caused - it was one of those responses where I kinda knew I shouldn't have hit the "post" button, but did so anyway.  Re-reading it, I think you're right, aleon515 - it did come across the wrong way (in a big way), and ended up being a touch inappropriate.  Note to self: when in doubt, don't post!

Anyway, I'd still be inclined to honor the commitment.  Ok, so it doesn't work out.  What's the worst that can happen?  A wasted opportunity.

The program will go ahead at this point regardless of suzifrommd's participation, so the author's message will be heard.  I still think it would be far more constructive to address these issues head-on.  Take the opportunity to explain the gatekeeping etc.  It's a bad situation, but that happens sometimes.

Again, sorry if the purpose of my post didn't come across as precisely as I had intended.  I was trying to urge cooperation rather than isolation, as I'm a firm believer in the idea that we make the most difference when working together, even if not under ideal conditions.  Never let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

[aleon515]

I've heard her speak about her book before and have met her in person.

Her "book learning" on trans is ok. She's read all the books, knows the words, etc. But her book was written about a decade ago based on speaking with people who were educated about transgender even before that. She seemed clueless about the modern thinking on trans. She had a very medicalized view of transition, for example. Her impression seemed to be that it was more about hormones and surgery than it was about social stuff. On the whole I thought she had a lot of knowledge, and not a lot of insight.



And I'm sick of it. I really don't want to be part of it, and I'm really, really disappointed at the leadership of our PFLAG chapter. I've talked to them about this and I think subordinating the two trans people on the panel to a cisgender "expert" is such a POWERFULLY NEGATIVE MESSAGE, that nothing, NOTHING, I say there could adequately counter it.

I think I might actually do more effective educating by explaining why my being on the panel won't be helpful or effective, than anything I might say as part of it.

Well, if you decide to do it, at least you know her particular viewpt. Yeah, sounds old fashioned and "book learning oriented" and not an actual advocate.  (I think that an advocate would not take the spotlight, even if it were given, but I doubt that this person will do avoid it.) I totally see why you wouldn't want to do it.

Yes, ______ I see your point actually. I just think the point ignores what Suzi is saying here. I don't feel that having a cis (outmoded) person as "leader" of the discussion will accomplish anything of teaching this audience. Given absolutely perfect circumstances it might be possible for someone to change the atmosphere, but certainly not even close to a guarantee. I see this as an antagonistic situation, which isn't everybody's preference. I'm not sure I would do this. 


--Jay

[helen2010]

Suzi

Given the additional information I tend to agree that you should not proceed with the panel.  If the author is ill informed, is presenting a less than contemporary view, but still has prime billing then it feels like a lose lose situation

Aisla

[Polo]

Suzi, would you consider pushing for "demoting" the author to a supporting role? I agree with you that making an outdated cisgender author the headliner over actual trans people is both insulting and possibly misinformative, and hopefully you can express this to the organizer beforehand. If the author refuses to take a supporting role then it both reflects badly on her supposed Ally status and maybe SHE will back out.

The only benefit I could possibly see to having an outdated cis gender author is if your audience couldn't accept your own first-person experiences.

[Beverly]

If I correctly read between the lines at her last engagement, she really wants to write another book on gender, or modernize her old one, and she's trying to drum up interest and support for the project.

So, teach them all a lesson. Go and give no warning of what you intend to say then stand up and start with

"Here in this meeting is an example of how trans people are marginalised. In a meeting about what it means to be trans I am the supporting speaker and not the main speaker. The main speaker is a cis-person. Your opinions about what I feel and what I think are being influenced by someone who has no first hand experience of what being trans really means. Meeting trans people, writing about trans people and knowing trans people is no substitute for being trans"

I would then put the following point

"How would those of you who are gay feel about being the supporting speaker in a meeting where a straight person describes the gay experience? Think about that."

At this point you might get asked to leave.....     If I had the opportunity, I would do it without a second thought, but I refuse to cross the Atlantic to give a talk.

[AnnieMay]

Wow, you really touched a nerve in many of us.

My first reaction was that you were being asked to be an attraction in a circus event. My second thought was questioning the reason for the event -- not the one that has been told to you, but the one the event organizers really have in mind. Is it educating? Who are we educating? What is the intended outcome?

But then I began to examine the depth of my reaction,  all my assumptions and internal prejudices, and try to understand why am I reacting this way. Perhaps it's that I still believe other are out to exploit me in some way. And that's really not fair. It really comes down to what would be MY goal in participating and can I achieve it. If it's something I believe in, then what others may have in mind is really their business. My inclination to antagonize the author is really a reflection of the fact that I have some work to do with me.

Thanks for the opportunity to see that I still have work ahead of me.

[suzifrommd]

Go and give no warning of what you intend to say then stand up and start with

"Here in this meeting is an example of how trans people are marginalised...

I hope you were joking. You did pick up that the organizer was a close friend of mine, right?

[Beverly]

I hope you were joking.

Nope. I have a sense-of-humour bypass fitted

You did pick up that the organizer was a close friend of mine, right?

No I did not see that. In that case put the argument I outlined to your close friend privately. The only people who can speak about what it is like to be trans are trans folk.

[AnnieMay]

I'd like to present another point of view. I agree that only trans people can speak about certain aspects of being trans. But an author's talent is to gatherer information from the appropriate sources (like us) and then present it in a readable and understandable manner. And based on all the information that is gathered (by speaking with a broad enough section of the trans community) she can perhaps speak more generally and clearly about the diversity and spectrum of being trans-gendered.  I can speak about my point in that spectrum with authority, but anything I say will be autobiographical in nature and may not apply to you. (Just consider the various opinions and experiences documented on this forum..) To the extent that the author is not misrepresenting herself or overstating her qualifications, I think it benefits us. And hopefully, in the process, we gain an ally and advocate who can speak to that segment of the population who would otherwise be turned off you or me.

[E-Brennan]

The only people who can speak about what it is like to be trans are trans folk.

Much as I hate to jump into this thread again...

I have to disagree with this statement.  While I'd much prefer it was only trans people who are speaking on behalf of trans people, we don't have the luxury - yet - of dictating the ownership of the debate and who may participate.

If someone competent and who commands an audience wants to speak to that audience positively on our behalf, then that's cool with me.  Not ideal, but cool.  Going back to Jared Leto's portrayal of Rayon in DBC, while it would have been preferable to have a great actor/actress with trans credentials play that role, there was far more good than harm done by him knocking it out of the park and winning an Oscar.  It might have been better (or at least more noteworthy) if a trans actor/actress had been picked, but that's beside the point.  An example of a perfect situation would be Laverne Cox in OITNB; trans actress playing a trans role.  But things like that come along once in a blue moon.

Trying to dictate who can and can't speak for us is futile.  We need all the allies we can get right now, even allies who are less-than-perfect.  And we also need to be our own strongest allies by making sure that we don't give cis people a reason to point at us and what we do/say/write and think to himself or herself, "Yeah, that's why I don't like those crazy trans people."  Best behavior when in public (or at least try - I too have been known to set a bad example at times, although alcohol is raising its hand too and admitting its role in the debauchery), and that includes not deliberately shaming a writer and alienating ourselves from our friends in the process.

That's not to say that this issue can't be raised in a mature and cooperative manner.  We're perfectly entitled (and expected) to point out to others why we should be the subject matter experts, but we should also temper our expectations and not let a dozen good opportunities slip past while waiting for that one perfect opportunity.  We gotta work with what we have.

As a side note, anyone on this board is welcome to sit down and spend months researching and writing a better trans-related book.   

[aleon515]

I agree that allies are important, but allies don't speak for us. I think it's inappropriate for an ally to *WANT* to take such a position esp with the presence of qualified trans people to do the speaking. I think there is a place for a doctor (such an endocrinologist) talking aspects of trans treatment or something. But it sounds like the group is comfortable with trans people taking a minor role and the cis person to take the lead. It sounds like the group took Suzi's idea and went and found a cis person to do this job.

Really trans people writing books?! Lots of trans people have written books!! There are tons of very poorly written books written about trans people by cis people.


--Jay

[E-Brennan]

You speak the truth, Jay.  It is weird for an outsider to want to speak for us (e.g. a cis author), rather than someone whose professional activities naturally coincide with us (e.g. medical professionals).  A subtle but important difference.  I'm still not entirely convinced that Trans 101 is something that an educated, informed cis person couldn't teach, but I see the point now that the implicit message conveyed by the choice of the speaker tends to negate any positives the speaker may otherwise bring.

[aleon515]

You speak the truth, Jay.  It is weird for an outsider to want to speak for us (e.g. a cis author), rather than someone whose professional activities naturally coincide with us (e.g. medical professionals).  A subtle but important difference.  I'm still not entirely convinced that Trans 101 is something that an educated, informed cis person couldn't teach, but I see the point now that the implicit message conveyed by the choice of the speaker tends to negate any positives the speaker may otherwise bring.

Thanks. I can think of cis family members(spouses or parents) and I am thinking of actual people here who could probably do an awesome Trans 101 type thing. But these are people with a stake in the community. I can think of times when a cis doctor or something could do a presentation that might be quite excellent (though I tend to think those with a special insight are maybe less common-- someone like Dr Brownstein who's a retired top surgeon is someone I would love to listen to). Still it's not so much that someone of the right mindset *couldn't* do this given the lack of other qualified people. I am more suspicious though of a cis person coming into a group of trans people and *wanting* to be in charge. Part of being a good ally is being able to take a second or even third tier.

--Jay

[suzifrommd]

Trying to dictate who can and can't speak for us is futile. 

That's a really wise statement.

But IMO, we can and must call out people and situations where our voice is marginalized and it is assumed that because a cisgender person is declared an expert by other cisgender people, they actually understand us.

There's a difference between dictating who can speak and vocally pointing out which speakers deserve attention, right?

[Beverly]

Also, the vast majority of cis-gender people cannot give a decent speech or make a presentation. I used to train people to do this and most people simply freeze in front of an audience and their mind goes blank. There is nothing magic about being "cis" to do this.

[AnneB]

So, teach them all a lesson. Go and give no warning of what you intend to say then stand up and start with

"Here in this meeting is an example of how trans people are marginalised. In a meeting about what it means to be trans I am the supporting speaker and not the main speaker. The main speaker is a cis-person. Your opinions about what I feel and what I think are being influenced by someone who has no first hand experience of what being trans really means. Meeting trans people, writing about trans people and knowing trans people is no substitute for being trans"

I would then put the following point

"How would those of you who are gay feel about being the supporting speaker in a meeting where a straight person describes the gay experience? Think about that."

At this point you might get asked to leave.....     If I had the opportunity, I would do it without a second thought, but I refuse to cross the Atlantic to give a talk.

Huzzah!!    Excellent tips!!  Yes, you might get asked to leave, or be cut off, but you would (I hope) get enough out there for the group to think about.

Suzi..  If I were in your shoes, and asked by a close friend to speak there, and informed that someone giving the bulk of the presentation has no earthly idea what it means to be trans, regardless of how many books they have written, I would have a heart-to-heart talk with your organizer friend and say whats on your heart about being second-placed, and described by someone who has no clue what you feel. 

How can someone colorblind, describe the color orange?  How can someone blind, describe a sunset?

[aleon515]

Wow, you really touched a nerve in many of us.

But then I began to examine the depth of my reaction,  all my assumptions and internal prejudices, and try to understand why am I reacting this way. Perhaps it's that I still believe other are out to exploit me in some way. And that's really not fair. It really comes down to what would be MY goal in participating and can I achieve it. If it's something I believe in, then what others may have in mind is really their business. My inclination to antagonize the author is really a reflection of the fact that I have some work to do with me.

I definitely disagree with this pov. I think if you distill this down then you are saying that those of us who are activists or advocates are just people who are really personally angry about stuff in our own lives and need to work on this so we won't be so angry and upset anymore. I hope you didn't actually mean this.

If that actually is the case, I hope those of you that identify with such terms don't work on your issues, because where are we going to be as a group if people deal with their stuff. 

--Jay

[AnneB]

Remember this one: Three blind people try to describe an elephant..  what's the difference here?  Instead of three, its only one (the ciswoman), the other two, can see.