In another back flip with half twist, layout position reversal with projection style points, SRS activists agree that “drag” and anything less than full on SRS IS just the female-mimicking Stepin Fetchit of our day. Lard forbid a cheeky dude wear a skirt to a protest — woe to him who stealz genderz from the gender politburo.
Are there enough metaphors and analogies in this comment? Just not sure if I’ve used enough of them.
SRS activists agree that “drag” and anything less than full on SRS IS just the female-mimicking Stepin Fetchit of our day. Lard forbid a cheeky dude wear a skirt to a protest — woe to him who stealz genderz from the gender politburo.
Well, the tranzjacktivicts do both don’t they? Claim that SRS (or the ultimate path to SRS) constitutes “real tranz”, and at the same time, ‘we’ should not be ‘judging’ the ones that don’t pass so well, because somehow *magically* we are to know who is pursuing SRS and who is not, just like in the restroom when we are to *magically* know which are genuine TWs, and which are the creepy pervs that don drag just to get into our spaces to prey on us.
All I know is that Predator Mentality does not go away with a bit of concealer…
What’s lovely is that now there’s an internecine war broken out between the SRS-only camp and other tranz. Just doin’ my part to push that wedge issue 😉
That second show is an example of one of the positives that I can see coming from the existence of transgendered folks out there, which is to demonstrate how ridiculous marriage laws that exclude same-sex couples from getting married are.
I mean, here you’ve got two biological females–living as two “men”–who by almost any definition are homosexual, but able to get married because one had surgery on their genitals? Yeah. It just shows the absolute ridiculousness of not allowing same-sex marriage.
Not sure what you mean, Selah. I read it differently. The people who are against L’s and G’s from getting married are gender essentialist, conformist conservatives and they would just love to use this as an example of the depravity/derangement of the lesbian mind and a super duper reason why marriage should be held for only real men and real women. They already tell themselves that we engage in unholy practices and this just confirms their worst fears. This would just give them more ammunition, in other words (and get them on an anti-trans crusade, too, BTW). There’d be a whole movement of them saying: OMG, lesbians want to BE men, we need a constitutional amendment saying that only XY humans get to be called that!111!!1!!1!!1
Well let me put this into context of when I first thought of it, which was when the church that I’m part of made a decision at their last global conference NOT to put any sanctions on trans pastors, whereas there ARE sanctions on gay pastors (you can be ordained if you’re lesbian/gay, but you can’t be “practicing” so basically you have to be in the closet, have a hidden same-sex relationship, or be celibate if you are lesbian/gay and want to be clergy). The denomination also prohibits the performance or even the celebration of same-sex marriage or commitment ceremonies.
The decision NOT to put any sanctions on trans pastors followed the “coming out” of a MtF pastor, about which I was speaking with a friend who said, “so, what if that person was trans and married? So like, they went from being in a heterosexual marriage to a same-sex one? Could they be a pastor then?” This was all back when I was buying the trans party line that one could actually “change sex” so I would phrase it differently now, but I think the point still stands. The existence of trans does in some cases raise some important questions about how gender essentialism informs our anti-same-sex-marriage/relationship stance. It may force people to think about whether they really believe that by “changing sex” something *so fundamental* about a person changes that their marriage goes from being valid to invalid, in God’s–or whoever’s–eyes. I think, at least in my church, these questions can help our dialogue move toward justice. Not with the people who are really hateful, but with the people in the middle, not sure whether to stand on the side of justice or tradition.
Maybe it’s wishful thinking on my part, but I was hoping that it might sway at least some of the more moderate people in the general public as well.
I really worry about the physical consequences of being pregnant after taking male hormones, to yourself, to the child you’re giving birth to. Women have a hormonal balance that is designed to support pregnancy, but when you’ve changed it, you’ve altered how nature and your body will respond to pregnancy and I doubt we’ve even begun to understand the potential problems associated with this.
Just when you think you’ve seen it all, we have an all new drag show — woman with a male voice–= hey maybe it’s a newly discovered Rembrandt painting that they can put next to Woman in the Half Opened Door… sheesh.
And why would a woman want to immitate that dulled and dulling monotone of the rapist / robot voice known as male voice? Don’t we have enough of the male dullards droning all over the airwaves, boring us to death at corporate speak conferences? God what a dullard in the making!
Towards what Selah said- the fact that transsexuality is conservative and patriarchal is revealed in the way it is legally embraced by homophobes. As you say, Lesbians who undergo surgical sterilization and commit to lifetime cross-hormone injections and legally renounce their sex may get married, but regular lesbians cannot. This is because transsexuality supports social gender binaries based on physical sex, which is A-OK with male supremacist power structures.
‘My male voice’ – drag queen without the drag?
Drag – it’s female ‘blackface’ – and it’s really fucking offensive.
In another back flip with half twist, layout position reversal with projection style points, SRS activists agree that “drag” and anything less than full on SRS IS just the female-mimicking Stepin Fetchit of our day. Lard forbid a cheeky dude wear a skirt to a protest — woe to him who stealz genderz from the gender politburo.
Are there enough metaphors and analogies in this comment? Just not sure if I’ve used enough of them.
SRS activists agree that “drag” and anything less than full on SRS IS just the female-mimicking Stepin Fetchit of our day. Lard forbid a cheeky dude wear a skirt to a protest — woe to him who stealz genderz from the gender politburo.
Well, the tranzjacktivicts do both don’t they? Claim that SRS (or the ultimate path to SRS) constitutes “real tranz”, and at the same time, ‘we’ should not be ‘judging’ the ones that don’t pass so well, because somehow *magically* we are to know who is pursuing SRS and who is not, just like in the restroom when we are to *magically* know which are genuine TWs, and which are the creepy pervs that don drag just to get into our spaces to prey on us.
All I know is that Predator Mentality does not go away with a bit of concealer…
What’s lovely is that now there’s an internecine war broken out between the SRS-only camp and other tranz. Just doin’ my part to push that wedge issue 😉
I think they are self-wedgying…
But it never hurts to help it along a bit. 😛
That second show is an example of one of the positives that I can see coming from the existence of transgendered folks out there, which is to demonstrate how ridiculous marriage laws that exclude same-sex couples from getting married are.
I mean, here you’ve got two biological females–living as two “men”–who by almost any definition are homosexual, but able to get married because one had surgery on their genitals? Yeah. It just shows the absolute ridiculousness of not allowing same-sex marriage.
Not sure what you mean, Selah. I read it differently. The people who are against L’s and G’s from getting married are gender essentialist, conformist conservatives and they would just love to use this as an example of the depravity/derangement of the lesbian mind and a super duper reason why marriage should be held for only real men and real women. They already tell themselves that we engage in unholy practices and this just confirms their worst fears. This would just give them more ammunition, in other words (and get them on an anti-trans crusade, too, BTW). There’d be a whole movement of them saying: OMG, lesbians want to BE men, we need a constitutional amendment saying that only XY humans get to be called that!111!!1!!1!!1
Well let me put this into context of when I first thought of it, which was when the church that I’m part of made a decision at their last global conference NOT to put any sanctions on trans pastors, whereas there ARE sanctions on gay pastors (you can be ordained if you’re lesbian/gay, but you can’t be “practicing” so basically you have to be in the closet, have a hidden same-sex relationship, or be celibate if you are lesbian/gay and want to be clergy). The denomination also prohibits the performance or even the celebration of same-sex marriage or commitment ceremonies.
The decision NOT to put any sanctions on trans pastors followed the “coming out” of a MtF pastor, about which I was speaking with a friend who said, “so, what if that person was trans and married? So like, they went from being in a heterosexual marriage to a same-sex one? Could they be a pastor then?” This was all back when I was buying the trans party line that one could actually “change sex” so I would phrase it differently now, but I think the point still stands. The existence of trans does in some cases raise some important questions about how gender essentialism informs our anti-same-sex-marriage/relationship stance. It may force people to think about whether they really believe that by “changing sex” something *so fundamental* about a person changes that their marriage goes from being valid to invalid, in God’s–or whoever’s–eyes. I think, at least in my church, these questions can help our dialogue move toward justice. Not with the people who are really hateful, but with the people in the middle, not sure whether to stand on the side of justice or tradition.
Maybe it’s wishful thinking on my part, but I was hoping that it might sway at least some of the more moderate people in the general public as well.
I really worry about the physical consequences of being pregnant after taking male hormones, to yourself, to the child you’re giving birth to. Women have a hormonal balance that is designed to support pregnancy, but when you’ve changed it, you’ve altered how nature and your body will respond to pregnancy and I doubt we’ve even begun to understand the potential problems associated with this.
Just when you think you’ve seen it all, we have an all new drag show — woman with a male voice–= hey maybe it’s a newly discovered Rembrandt painting that they can put next to Woman in the Half Opened Door… sheesh.
And why would a woman want to immitate that dulled and dulling monotone of the rapist / robot voice known as male voice? Don’t we have enough of the male dullards droning all over the airwaves, boring us to death at corporate speak conferences? God what a dullard in the making!
Towards what Selah said- the fact that transsexuality is conservative and patriarchal is revealed in the way it is legally embraced by homophobes. As you say, Lesbians who undergo surgical sterilization and commit to lifetime cross-hormone injections and legally renounce their sex may get married, but regular lesbians cannot. This is because transsexuality supports social gender binaries based on physical sex, which is A-OK with male supremacist power structures.