Okay, I'm not making much sense of the article, so I'm just going to soapbox and ramble on Julie Marie's first sentence.
The mention of RuPaul here is interesting, because I have vaguely considered the implicated of RuPaul's work. Not because I even know who the heck RuPaul is (I have to thank a fairly inappropriate remark by a pro-athlete for even knowing of RuPaul's existence). But rather because I, in moments of grandeur, have aspired to be a comedian/humorist while also properly attired.
A theme that I sort of hold dear to myself is that TG people (as a whole) are about as normal as anyone else. Or rather, they are generally about as weird as everyone else. I want to discuss clothes for a while, but they are not the entirety of what I want to talk about -- there is more to life than that, and I have other stories to tell, too.
My particular case is not as visceral as for the typical TG (or at least those who recognize themselves as TG or having been TG), but something I want to communicate is that the clothes are not an act. I'm not doing drag. Drag, in my understanding, generally implies the person is dressing for an *act* rather expression or identity. Doing it for an act has other kinds of implications: you are doing an imitation or caricature of a target group (a person in drag may "act like a woman"). While this sort of conduct is often acceptable (or at least moreso than being boring old TG), I see it as being morally comparable to Black Face... which the US generally regards to be particularly racist (and unacceptable).
I actually don't know that much about RuPaul. However, this "RuPaul's Drag Race" show, at a brief glance, seems to embody the wrong things -- that the presentation is the entertainment rather than expression, and there's no substance underneath. It's about fitting into a role rather than capturing the essence of oneself and one's life.
My sister considers herself especially GLBT friendly now, but a decade ago in high school, she mentioned she couldn't stand flaming gay people. And both of these ideas can co-exist, I think. A lot of people are open to accepting GLBTs, and they may even be cool with GLBTs showing "pride," but they may not care for a gay man in skintight shorts shaking his pelvis around while riding a float. Some of these people will even concede it's just as "inappropriate" for the cisgender "heterosexual" equivalents to occur, although they may not necessarily be quick to recognize them or point them out (probably because they are so accustomed to their own). As these people see normal or good examples, we can reinforce we are genuine human beings and ultimately show that TG is not just a game or lifestyle.
I suppose the idea is that if you want to create understanding, especially to "outsiders," you need to have substance. There is a lot of literature that has substance, but the amount of substance in entertainment-based media is overwhelmed by anti-TG or TG-exploiting content. This disparity is problematic, because it serves to perpetuate myth rather than promote truth. Still, I think hope remains in us being authentic and true to who we are. If I ever can do comedy, I desperately want to live up to that ideal.
