Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Hontas Farmer | May 17th 2008 02:33 PM | 14 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
A Word On Sexism, and How Cultural Differences Divide the Transsexual/Transgender Community.

It's a small world after all!

(A word to the reader part of this deals with sociology, psychology, and the use of language. Words and meanings of words to different people. Do not be offended. Read this in its entirety and the true meaning of my words will be revealed.)

For my views expressed on this website I have been called...."Bailey supporter", a "Baileyite", a "HSTS ladyboy ", a "45 year old investment banker posing on line as a young transsexual", and last but not least "your like one of the Internet fakers on my website". Because a real, young, transsexual woman could never exist who would openly say I am not so offended by what Bailey wrote. That it has important grains of truth. That he is not Hitler is all I have ever said. I have my own ideas about transsexualism. But this is not about Dr. Bailey though his specter was present last night. In spite of all this I was able to attend a talk given by Julia Serano at Northwestern University in Evanston. Then afterward took Dierdre McCloskey's dog for a walk with a friend who is trans and is watching Dierdre's house. Let me tell you about my impressions of these people, having met one and seen the home of another. Writing as an avowed free thinker on gender issues and as a young transsexual of color and little financial means.

I was able to attend a talk by the very cunty Julia Serano (Ph.D. Biology, Author, Activist, etc. ). In which she spoke about the various kinds of sexism that transpeople deal with. It was very illuminating and I found it interesting as I had experienced similar sexism. A peculiar kind of sexism that genetic women do not face. A sexism which says feminine acting males are less competent than or inferior to those who are not feminine acting. One based on misogyny and femiphobia , the fear and stereotyping of feminine male bodied individuals. (Though Dr. Serano would never use a word made known to most transpeople by Michael Bailey. Contrary to popular myth he did not "coin" the phrase.) She pulled absolutely no punches in going after all the ways this sexism manifest itself. From book covers, including her own, which are designed by publishing houses, to movies like "Transamerica" in which no one individual ever really has full creative control. I enjoy academic things and I lived for her talk it was fierce.

This is a sexism which is hard to explain to non transpeople. In my own life it has effected me in so many ways. The most fundamental to my life history would be the notion that being a feminine male and having a deep interest in science are contradictory. Though I'll admit it's unusual. This is something which I have seen in so many context. From young ages where I played with chemistry sets as much as with dolls. To now a days having male colleagues discount my answers to a question just to later realize my answer was correct. I see this in the LGBT community where being feminine and male bodied is still treated as a negative. This is called femiphobia.

Femiphobia, the basis of much sexism. In the sense I am using it here, and as Bailey is known to have used it, is summed up as a LGBT persons aversion to, or hostility towards feminine acting persons in particular if they are biological males. Something that I think Dr. Serano , and other transactivist, ironically can at least appear to be a little guilty of themselves at various times. Two examples are what was "There's Something About Deception" . What Dr. McCloskey did was try to discredit Dr. Bailey by mentioning a certain version of the "facts" over and over again. She writes:

The entire sample, representing the world's hundreds of thousands of gender crossers, just happens to live in Chicago. Six-sevenths of the sample are first-generation Hispanic Americans, most working as prostitutes and professional drag queens (Bailey dropped from his sample women who were not in sex trades). That's not a very good sample. If most of Bailey's data come from young Hispanic sex workers in Chicago, then he has not put his theory (namely, that gender crossing is about sex, sex, sex, because gender crossers are men, men, men) in much jeopardy.

There is so much wrong with this statement that I cannot do it justice and hope to stay on topic. This statement and the myth that all of the homosexual transsexuals he talked to were 6 or 12 "Hispanic American" drag artist and adult entertainers which is repeated by McCloskey seven times and in seven ways. Dr. McCloskey's goal in writing that composition was to "expose" and "discredit" Dr. Bailey. Her repeated invocation of who those people were and what those people did for a living indicates that those "facts" are supposed to do the discrediting. Which implies that who they are and/or what they do or have done, is automatically such a horrible negative thing. To the point that even being associated with it discredits a person. So what must that imply that Dr. McCloskey thinks about the "Hispanic American prostitutes and drag queens" themselves? :-\ (Don't believe me on the sex negativity of our society. Consider the following... Remember hearing/seeing stories about this bill board advertising that it's not a sin for believing, heterosexual, married ,Christians to have sex with their spouse? I don't even think such an exhortation to heterosexuality is necessary in Saudi Arabia. Where ½ the population is less than 20 years old! That dosen't happen by adoption.)

Dr Serano on the other hand has what I have to admit is on the whole a far more balanced perspective. There is really only one thing she has written that I have taken issue with:

Programs like "There's Something About Miriam" not only reinforce the stereotype that trans people's birth sex is "real" and our identified/lived sex is "fake," but they perpetuate the myth of deception and thus enable violence against us.

I commented on her blog when it was up. What I had to say to her last night was to basically ask her to explain further what she meant with that blog. She said that basically the way the show was staged was what was deceptive. I don't know about that. Twice last week guys approached me and we exchanged phone numbers. Nothing was staged. I have also heard this sentiment expressed towards me at a support group "passing implies deception". I don't see how I am deceiving anyone. I don't see how Miriam deceived anyone. All a girl who passes and meets the standard of beauty in our culture has to do to get approached by men is walk out the door looking presentable. This to my eyes looks like and feels like a form of femiphobia. Fear that a transsexual MTF who is attracted to and attractive to men will be able to "fool" them. A fear of those male bodied persons who are feminine. To me it feels like sexism to say that anyone must tell their business to people who find them attractive.

This has no relationship to how feminine or masculine the person displaying the femiphobia or sexism is at all. Dr. Serano is a really cunty bitch. She is at I would say the low end of the female norm in terms of height. Her shape is also very much that of an average woman. I would swear that she has had silicone either implanted or injected. If it was it would have to have been really really good silicone. The way she acts is very natural and very fishy. Her mannerisms and such are all totally real. I would be surprised if she needed or had so called deportment lessons. Her voice I would even say was better than mine. Her voice is as good a voice as I have ever heard. She deserves a trophy for fem queen washed face realness. That she is so cunty is quite remarkable because she is also a lesbian.

Dr. McCloskey on the other hand. I have an impression of her based on seeing her home and hearing people around UIC talk about her and compare her to me (when they thought I couldn't hear them). According to Beth her RA who is watching her house Dr. McCloskey was in south Africa. There are those at UIC who call her Dierdre McKrazy and say she is pushy and mannish. Having seen her house that surprises me a bit. A persons home says allot about them. Dr McCloskey's Condo in downtown Chicago is quite nice, quite large and very comfortable looking. On the inside the furnishings are of good classic taste which would be expected of a lady of her age and means. Walking in I felt like Gill Chesterton seeing Frasier's condo for the first time, very impressed. It is actually two condo's joined by stairs. A large part of one is devoted to her personal library which is quite extensive. My friend Beth, a PhD. Student in philosophy's job for the summer is to put that large library in order. A notable and surprising thing to me was that Dr. McCloskey has a copy of "The man Who Would Be Queen". (No jacket cover though. Heck I didn't like the jacket cover either and went so far as to make my own.) She has only one regular (non HD) TV in the house.

I have to admit given the context of the night, TMWWBQ and Autogynephilia were the 800 lb gorillas in the room. Me and beth ended up discussing them. She was most interested in why I did not hate autogynephilia. My feelings on it are complex. On the one hand I really don't think that people like McCloskey can speak to any part of my transsexual experience. I have always been a sissy baby. With me a military recruiter does not have to ask and I don't have to tell. My scientific opinion of it is that like anything in psychology it is not rigorous enough. I am a physicist and I like to put scientific statements in mathematical form. (In an article I wrote
here at scientific blogging called "Science through rose colored glasses" I attached a PDF of a preliminary paper in which I apply quantum theory to the transsexual mind. Then demonstrated mathematically that there is a quantum entanglement between sexuality and gender identity IF and only IF you assume that two independent centers of the brain control those personality aspects. Interestingly in answer to a question after her talk Dr. Serano commented that sexuality and gender expression are not totally separate. I agree my math agrees. In that case the audience did not kill the messenger.)

After this me and my friend Beth who in case you were wondering is also a transsexual took Dr. McCloskey's dog for a walk. We talked about some problems facing beth. She looks to me for certain kinds of advice. Then we ate at subway. While at subway a crazy homeless guy who begs for money in a wheel chair came in and started snapping at people. (This will be on youtube by the end of this day. I need to edit out the faces of people who said they did not want to be on camera.) All in All it was a very strange night.

Oh and if you are offended by my calling Dr. Serano "cunty", "fishy", "bitch", and "fierce". Then you have demonstrated for me a cultural divide in the transsexual community which is central to so much strife. In the circles I run in those are all very high complements. A "bitch" is a feminine but strong transsexual presence. A TS who is "cunty" is very feminine looking. A TS who is "fishy" is very feminine acting. My saying she "Deserves a trophy for fem queen washed face realness" is an allusion to the particular subculture that took these words, and took femininity in the biological male and made them positive and empowering. If you are trans and did not know this, or look down on that culture, then it says something. I know not what.

SEE ATTACHED PDF FOR RICH TEXT, LINKS, CITATIONS, PICTURES AND A OVERALL BETTER LOOK.

(Edited for "autocomplete" induced spelling errors.)

AttachmentSize
PDF of this article (w pics and links)267.6 KB

Comments

Hfarmer's picture
I apologise for how this is formatted. I wrote it up in Openoffice.org. Then imported the HTML and it looks like this. I used the word like editor on this site and it still looks like this. I will PDF this then link to a more faithful version of this article in the near future. Dont tase me bro
Hank's picture
It's certainly interesting but, yes, a little clunky in the formatting. If you copy and paste it from Word (or openoffice) without any HTML into our non-Word editor, it will work fine.

Hfarmer's picture
Really. Hmm. I'll give that a try. Though it's kind of sloppy to have the same article twice. Part of my problems could be 1.) That I am using firefox (which has known issues). 2.) I am using Linux which could have unknown issues. Thanks for the advice. Dont tase me bro
Hfarmer's picture
In the attached listed PDF their are pictures and active links and all that. Plus it looks a bit better. :-) Dont tase me bro
Hfarmer's picture
In an email the concern has been raised that I call Dr. McCloskey "mannish". I merely report what I have heard from others. Then I refute that based on the state of her condo. Assuming she did that herself it has the touch of an older woman to it. Well she is an older woman in spirit so that should not have been surprising. Please as I caution at the top of the page READ THE WHOLE COMPOSITION BEFORE COMMENTING. Dont tase me bro
You missed one of the main points of Julia Serano's work by reducing her to her body using busted language that you later defend by saying (in your slang) that she's sexy so that makes every thing else you say about her not matter. This goes against all of what she has worked for. Trans women, as all women, should be looked at and judged on the content of their work, not by whether or not you think we have had surgery or how pretty you find us.

This all coming from a trans female spectrum person who is well familiar with the language used, where the terms might be seen as compliments, and understanding of how busted it is.

Hfarmer's picture
You missed the point of what I wrote which even Julia herself got when I informed her of it on her own blog.

The point of using that language, to compliment her, was to point out a rift in our community.  There are people out there who would take those compliments as insults. 

Oh and try this on for size.  You desire to say that a females looks don't matter at all is just a trite and overused bit of feminist theory from the 70's.  I would even go so far as to say it's a appeal to old stereotypes wherein a feminist must be a plain unappealing woman.

I said that looks shouldn't matter, not that they don't. Unfortunately we live in a world where women's looks tend to be just as important in getting ahead as our credentials. An observation of this in tennis has recently been brought to light.

A feminist does not need to be a plain, unappealing woman to be a feminist. Far from it. We should get judged on the content of our character and achievements, not by the way we look. Or, looked at another way, you started your article by talking about M. Bailey and yet felt no need to talk about his physical stature, whether or not he looked like a real man, how good his voice was, or make comments about what types of surgery he may or may not have based on how you saw him but felt it was perfectly fine to make such comments about Dr. Serano. There is inherently something wrong if this is an acceptable thing to do.

As for the language used to point out a rift in our community, I agree that it exists. However, I also think that the origin of that language in the communities its used in is busted. It derives itself from drag queen culture. Which is not to say that drag culture is bad in any way, shape, or form, and I've done my own fair bit of it in the day, but a large portion of the queens are gay men. By using those terms, which are considered insulting to a great portion of (both trans and cis) women, they are effectively attempting to reclaim terms that have never been used against them. Gay men reclaiming language that's been used to degrade women is busted. Just because there are trans women with drag backgrounds using the same language doesn't make it any less broken.

Hfarmer's picture
So you think drag queen culture is busted.  First of all, though you may be familiar with those terms, you don't seem to know much.  THERE ARE TRANSGENDER AND CISGENDER WOMEN IN THAT CULTURE TOO!  Not  just a few either.  They span the spectrum from what most of us think of as a "drag queen" to post op TS women.  Those transgender females certainly have those words used against them.   Sometimes gay males will have those words used against them too. 

I said that a feminist does not need to be plain and unappealing too.  However like it or not women are to an extent judged by apperance, more so for transwomen.  Saying that it is a high insult to mention that a feminist thinker can also be "cunty" and does not need to put up a butch front like so many do is enforcing a sterotype.  I showed her this very blog  you know what... Here it is in her own words.

Hi Hontas,

It was nice meeting you the
other day&I’m glad you enjoyed the talk! I think it’s great that
you decided to blog about it – I just thought that I would add the
following clarifications & comments (separated into 2 comments due
to LiveJournal comment length restrictions):

Regarding my
cunty-ness: While I personally don’t use words like cunty, fishy &
bitch in my day to day speech, I know they are reclaimed words that are
meant to empower femininity, so I appreciate the sentiment. There was
definitely a time when I was younger where I was ashamed about my
feminine qualities, but over the years I have learned to embrace them.
I have also been blessed with having a body that transitioned to female
fairly easily without the need for surgeries, silicone, etc. (I haven’t
even finished my electrolysis yet). A lot of it has to do with being
small. Back when I was male I was always the smallest guy in the room,
which made for some really sucky times especially when I was a kid, but
the flip-side of that coin is that it has made life a lot easier for me
as a woman.

You seem somewhat surprised that I am both
feminine *and* lesbian, but this is honestly not that uncommon. I know
a lot of trans women who are bisexual or lesbian in sexual orientation
and who identify as femmes. Within queer women’s communities, femmes
are often marginalized – we are read as purposely passing for straight,
or buying into men’s idea’s of what women should be, and other
dismissive bullshit. In fact, the unapologetically pro-feminine take
that I forward in my book is influenced by my experience as a trans
woman, but also by my experience as a femme dyke. Anyway, over the
years I’ve met lots and lots of trans women who identify as femme dykes
– like me, they are both feminine and lesbian/bisexual and they often
transition fairly early in life (which is another reason why I don’t by
into Blanchard’s overly simplistic two “subtypes”).


As you can see at least on this point she and I are in agreement. 

I never said drag culture is busted, quite the opposite in fact. It's just that some terminology used within it has the potential to be highly problematic based on who is using it and where it comes from.

Hi Hontas,

I've been reading your posts off and on for a while, and I realize this is an old post but I'm replying here because that's where it seems most relevant.

While I agree with one of the other commenters that focusing on Julia's "passability" kind of plays into the discrimination that trans women face, I think you also make very salient points about how the "BBL" controversy rests on a foundation of cultural, class, race, and other divisions that often, but not always, intersect with sexuality. I know the ballroom language you're using here, though as an outsider. I'm a white trans woman who dates women and men but mostly women, but I have history in the gay male community and grew up taking a lot of shit from people for being out as gay/bi and for my obvious femininity. And I often feel like many of the later-transitioning lesbian trans women who are engaged against BBL seem to not even KNOW many trans women with different history from their own.

So then we see things like you getting called a "HSTS ladyboy," and a white Canadian lesbian trans woman commenting on the Bailey Michael Jackson post to tell you that you look like a black boy who was on TV once. That pisses me off SO much. I have my own really negative feelings about BBL, but where do people get off thinking it's okay to respond to you by ungendering and being racist to you? Can't people check their own privileges and show some accountability before getting personal? Our communities badly need healing and dialogue, to be able to count each other as sisters, and to not let class-privileged white women, who were perceived as heterosexual men for much of their lives, who have never found themselves having to do survival sex work, stand in as the only valid face of "the community."

I hope the best for you.
Betsy

Hfarmer's picture
Thakyou for your supportive comments.  Your criticims of my use of Ball culture language is well taken.  I have to admit it was meant to hilite the divide..  A divide which has nothing to do with BBL, which BBL controversy widened.  I am sure you saw the comments on Bailey's pst from someone who called the mostly hispanic women Bailey wrote about "crossdressers".  As if what he wrote about them could not be as bad as anything written about autogynephilia.   Consider that every time you hear a transacademic complain so unevenly about BBL theory.

Thankyou again.

Ball culture and language has its place, and BTW I definitely identify as a "bitch" in pretty much the same way you used it. IMO it's not for me, or any feminist, or trans activist, or anyone else to criticize a subculture and support network that encourages sexual and gender minority folks of color to feel good about themselves and prepares them to be able to pass in an oppressive world where violence is the cost of NOT passing.. I mean, I "pass" most of the time, and some people think I'm pretty fierce, and what I get out of that is relative safety and being seen as a legitimate object of desire. And that's good for me, but on the other hand, why should I have to do that? So that's the only reason I question why you'd focus so much on Julia's "realness" when it's really her BRAIN and her work that's fierce! I would rather live in a world where no one felt they needed to pass for white, for straight, for cissexual (non-trans), for a person of a higher class status, to be safe and seen as a worthy person. I would like a world where none of us would have to get ~work done~ just to be respected as a woman and a human being, where none of us has to put up with being called a "man in a dress." So I feel like we should start creating that world in our own communities. But still, I mean, if you're a trans woman and you haven't even at the very least just sat down and watched Paris Is Burning sometime, how can you even come near knowing "the community?"

I think there's plenty to criticize about Bailey's limited "sample" in TMWWBQ, but not those women themselves, and definitely not their damn womanhood! I have to say that should also apply to Anjelica, however. It seems like a lot of the (white, middle class) trans women's community doesn't even want to acknowledge that a lot of people who work as drag queens and are part of that world ARE ALSO transsexual women! Never mind what they say about women in sex work (especially anywhere near the word 'shemale') and women who get exploited on shows like Jerry Springer. It's mostly classism and racism, and plain ignorance, and yes, femmephobia/femiphobia, on top of a situation where we're already sadly divided by those and other things.

Betsy

Hfarmer's picture
There are ways of criticising his sample size, i.e. by saying he had a small sample size.  Saying that they were all gay crossdressers etc. is an attack on them.

Ahh but I was not focused on her realness you see.  To use an astronomical analogy, what I tried to do is like looking at a galaxy in order to see the image of what's behind it.  The galaxy is in the picture, but it is not the focus.  If I had told people directly that they were out of touch they would have reacted defensively. I hinted at this in the first paragraph.  Perhaps I was a bit too subtle?

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.