Understood ladies.
Then, why exactly should the GLB community be doing anything to aid your position?
Kate, you hit the nail on the head when you drew the distinction between queers and transitioning folks.
Queers are fighting for independence, and expanding rights.
Transitioning folks are fighting for the right to assimilate into the heterosexist culture that dominates everything. Truth be told, none of you would be here if you had not been forced to seek out like-minded people, because transitioning is NOT your identity, it is a phase.
In no small way, that actually makes you all my enemy instead of my ally. Any person that works to keep the status quo is working against me. Yet, I am called upon to be supportive and understanding. It's wonderfully ironic.
Tink spells that out very clearly when she quotes the rules, which apply to allowing transitioning folks to dress and behave as they like, as long it falls within the assimilationist goals. But it prevents anyone from doing anything that falls outside of those gender norms for men and women. So anyone not like her and Kate, i.e. transitioning, is screwed, and they are OK with that fact.
So, should transitioning folk be removed from the GLBT umbrella? I would state emphatically yes, if T stands for anything other than trans-
identified folks. GLBT should not include trasitioning folks that intend to assimilate, or transsexuals that plan to do the same. Otherwise, we queers are shooting ourselves in the foot.
Posted on: September 23, 2007, 08:38:41 PM
QuoteI've begun to dwell deliberately in a more focussed section of this sight because I've been turned off by remarks that I believe are non-inclusive towards anyone who differs from a certain paradigm. I believe in unity. Some people believe in themselves. I believe that if one of us is not doing well then none of us are doing well. Some others believe that if they are doing well then it doesn't matter how others fare.
They don't want unity m'friend, they want the status quo. The only difference between them and the gender police is that the police want no one to transition, while they want to control who transitions, the extent of said transition, and the exact parameters of that transition.
They are the champions of conformity and assimilation.
But when I point that obvious difference out, I am labelled as being divisive. I don't think so.
Let me state for the record, as clearly as possible, that anyone ought to be able to dress as they like as they feel like it ~ as long as they are not getting nekid in public. I agree that women ought not be flashing their breasts or their camel toe, in public. I don't want to see a guy's chest or his stuff in public either.
I find it especially ironic that it is OK for people to be out in public flashing flesh and leaving absolutely nothing to the imagination, but when two consenting adults decide to get busy in the privacy of a toilet stall, that is wrong? That is very twisted to me. I don't care what people do as long as it does not affect me. People smoking in my presence is more afflicting to me than two people having sex in a bathroom that I cannot see. [sorry DE] I could care less.