I like Young's assessment. I have considerable issues with Burkett's reactionary TERF claims; at the same time, radical linguistic policing does not help our movement. I have no issues seeing the Vagina Monologues pre-op; I am happily able to accept that I am a woman, but I am *also* a transwoman, and I am not here to deny that I have had some different experiences from many other women. We are all women in the same building; we can have different conversations in different rooms when our experiences do not intersect, and conversations in the same room when they do, all while retaining our womanhood. I don't see why this is so hard to understand for some people.
I did take issue with the 'transgender dogma' comment, but this may be more poor phrasing than anything else.
My main concern is what the article outlines early: that many people identified with Burkett's comments. Transphobia, even a relatively polite form of it, is something that unfortunately unites people on both sides of the political spectrum at times. And I admit that since Burkett's article, I have been paranoid that people I know, and will meet in the future, will treat me as a woman out of politeness rather than conviction (if I am open about being trans* and do not pass perfectly, that is). The Dolezal 'transracial' scandal, therefore, could not have appeared at a worse time, as people who are already ignorant about trans* issues are simply invalidating our experience now by comparing us to her fabrications, ignoring that there is a science of being trans* but not one of being 'transracial' because such a thing is neither properly defined nor likely to realistically exist.
Quote from: BenKenobi on June 15, 2015, 09:31:07 AM
People seem to wonder if gender roles are the only thing that's a factor and put so much focus on MtF that they forget about FtM. Caitlyn has gotten so much media attention but I don't remember that much hype over Chaz (maybe because i was young).
If they really want to understand the transgender mind I think they should pay attention to the whole spectrum and not simply 'oh this man wants to wear a dress, how bold!" as what discussions are basically being boiled down to.
It's a shame science hasn't quite caught up and the bit that's there people, ignore.
I agree that FTMs have gotten far too little attention in all this. I think the reasons are many, unfortunately: there is still a sense of privilege for many people whereby it is 'good' for a woman to 'want' to become a man due to unspoken male privilege, but it is, by contrast, sensationalistic and perplexing to these same persons for a 'man' to give up male privilege; the sensationalism around transwomen, particularly those who do not pass well, is so great that it has almost erased the opposite, the idea of FTMs passing as male, and as a result many people are only peripherally aware FTMs exist at all; FTMs are often mixed up with butch lesbians by ignorant people, a form of erasure; the surgeries for transwomen are generally more visible in the media and more readily viable for now from science, and, beyond that, gender reassignment surgery for MTFs is seen, again, as a loss of 'male privilege' through a kind of castration, which makes it sensationalistic in a way that does not fully correspond to GRS for FTMs, etc. Basically, subconscious ideas about privilege and what qualifies as 'sensaitonal.'
None of this is fair and I think we need far more equal coverage, but to me there are many problematic reasons why the media did not sensationalise Chaz Bono as much as Caitlyn Jenner, despite both coming from celebrity. Hopefully we are, despite transphobic commentary, moving towards a world of broader acceptance.
