Wednesday, October 17, 2007

If You Let Those Evil Transgendered People Into The Festival

I saw this and I immediately thought about the Michigan's Women's Music Fest. I think this is really how some of these folks envision what would happen if transgendered people were no longer excluded from the festival.


nexy said...

funny thing is, trans people have been attending the festival since the beginning, or so i'm told. i'm also told that lots of women walk around nekid. not something i'm really into however, especially outside, where there's lots of creepy crawly things.

Lisa Harney said...

I believe that's exactly it, plus I've seen women imply that trans women who have not had surgery might actually rape other women in attendance.

The attitudes towards trans women, who we are, what we'd do, how our upbringing affects us, and the desire to erase us from existence by denying us agency and personhood because the very concept of transsexuality seems to (in their crude misunderstanding) violate the precious tenet that "gender is a social construct" are just so paternalistic, offensive, and bigoted that it's painful to deal with them for more than a few days at a time.

One poster on the MWMF forum informed me that my transsexuality was offensive and potentially traumatic to women who attend MWMF, and I admit that it was such an insane proposition that it took a week for the full ramifications of such a statement to penetrate - and is one reason I haven't bothered to return to post more.

I mean, seriously, she's telling me that her theory of gender should take precedence over my existence as a human being.

There's so much ingrained transphobia and transmisogyny in the MWMF community. It's not hard to deconstruct and say "This is where you're wrong," but the most anti-trans posters (who will never identify themselves as such - none paint themselves as an easy target like Lucky Nkl) refuse to accept what trans people say about ourselves, because what we say is inconvenient to them. Because if what we say is true then all of their nitpicking about upbringing, hormones, male privilege, "surgically mutilating a healthy body" and how transition means "conforming to gender roles, rather than transgressing them" is irrelevant.

Not that I'm bitter.

The video in context with your post is funny, though. Because they really do fear that. They really do think it's a serious possibility - and never mind that their favored example of trans women doing stuff like this comes from a trans man making a poor assumption in the showers.

Sorry if this is submitted twice. My first submission appeared to not do anything.

belledame222 said...

you know, i've been in women-only spaces where nudity and even sex happens. transfolk were allowed in. (transwomen, as in living fulltime on the honor system, and transmen or bois who still felt part of the womens' community, is where they draw the line). the only stipulation was: no organic dick exposed in public places. but we still shared the same space, played together, etc. amazingly, nobody died, and hordes of straight cis fraternity boys did NOT thunder down the door. go figure.

AND i've been in co-ed nude spaces and you know what? sometimes, a dick is just a dick. it's the BEHAVIOR that's the problem. not someone's flesh on their own body what isn't yours which frankly should not be any of your business unless you both agree that it could be. that's sort of the frigging POINT of a goddam safe space.

seriously, yeah, there is generally a measurable difference in the feel between single-sex spaces and mixed spaces, and i get the desire for one or the other, particularly if there's sexuality and/or nudism involved of course, but 1) a handful of transpeople does NOT make a huge goddam difference even in a much smaller and more intimate setting, unless you're you know a bigoted asshole who's determined to make it so 2) either way, you still have -other- factors in making it a goddam -safe space.- If it were as easy as "outies bad, innies good!" we'd have world peace a long fucking time ago, you know it?

seriously, i looked at the MWMF handwringing and oh my GOD, what a bunch of fucking useless drama. look, i know who Renee is; did it ever occur to any of them that simply saying "see the photo of this person? well, she's a known sociopath who's hurt and exploited a number of people. don't let THIS PERSON IN" would be a hell of a lot more useful than all this fucking...crap? i mean, seriously, what happens if the next one isn't a transwoman? or does that simply never happen, in their universe?

but yeah, i'm with nexy. "whee, let's all pay money to hang around with strangers who we probably couldn't stand in everyday life, take freezing fucking showers, listen to crap music, eat crap food, sleep on a fucking rock and get eaten by insects!" fuck that noise. i'll be at the hotel down the block.

"like two bald men fighting over a comb"--Borges

on the other hand, Blanche keeps bringing up Vancouver Rape Relief as some sort of bolstering of her position and it makes me want to hit her. there's a difference between a fucking music festival and an abuse shelter, asshole, AND now it's national precedent, and you're blaming the person who was discriminated against, NICE ONE, Mrs. Special Lady.

oh yeah, and, I love how the MARRIED WOMAN needs a fucking SAFE SPACE from the MEN in her life whereas transwomen, partnered with women and otherwise, do not. because they're oppressing her, see, big ol' high heeled shoes on her dainty little white neck.


belledame222 said...

very concept of transsexuality seems to (in their crude misunderstanding) violate the precious tenet that "gender is a social construct"

and this makes no sense whatsoever. they can swear they're not essentialists all they like, but if one really believed that "gender is a social construct" why would one possibly get that bent out of shape over a penis or an erring chromosome? you wouldn't, is what. and no, i don't buy that they give that much of a shit about "raising" really, because how can you possibly know anyway? you don't. so instead you wait till someone does something you don't like and then call it "male energy" or "male privilege" or "male-identified."

Lisa Harney said...

It's obviously a cover for bigotry, just as the other arguments are. All of the statements they make about trans women betray the fact that they don't really understand us, they just hate us.

Heart posts saying she respects trans women and thinks we should have rights - but then you read her blog where she calls us "men" and "boys" and says that she will fight against any rights for trans women because she's opposed to rights for men. Or those who patronizingly say "I accept you as a woman" as if this is a huge favor and not simple courtesy.

I'm gratified now to see performers who do work the Fest getting denied gigs outside Fest (although not as often as I'd like) because that sends a message that the policy is bigoted. Of course, certain women (Heart, again) insist that it's horrible to ever do something like this to a woman because women should never turn on women...even while she tries to tear any woman who doesn't agree with her to pieces.

But I hope to see that happen more - to see Bitch and Animal and other performers lose jobs because they support a discriminatory policy. I'd rather see more of that and less of "lesbian and trans only" spaces where "trans only" equals "trans men only." And I can't help but think that the general "woman-only space" attitude that excludes trans women is something that is reinforced and encouraged by MWMF's paleolithic policy.

I have no particular interest in attending Fest, myself. I wish that trans women and others who support us and our identities would not attend MWMF and would not pay the hundreds of dollars to get in, and would instead find a trans-friendly cause, festival, or business to give that money to.

The Vancouver Rape Relief thing is insane. She was discriminated against, and she sued for it - and it was her right to sue. Of course, it's made out to be this big thing where she "attacked other women" just to "force herself into women's space."

What dragged me into the blogosphere overall was actually a discussion on Heart's blog about Bailey's "The Man Who Would be Queen" and the discrediting thereof. The posters on Heart's blog were willing to give Bailey the benefit of every doubt because he published such an anti-scientifically anti-trans woman piece of work that set out to stereotype (and not explain) who we are. Never mind that he's also written in support of eugenics (specifically, to defend the idea of aborting homosexual fetuses), or any of the other profoundly homophobic work of his. He must be right because a) He made trans women look bad and b) some trans women took him to task for it.

I admit that I have a lot of resentment here. I'm tired of ignorant people explaining what my thoughts, my motivations, and my experiences are, and dismissing what I have to say about my thoughts, my motivations, and my experiences just on the assumed basis that "you can't trust a transsexual to describe herself honestly." Never mind that you can trust a person with a headache, or a broken arm, or a mononucleosis to describe her condition accurately, my condition is inexplicable to me, but completely comprehensible to those who use hate speech to describe women like me.

My secondary comfort when I read their words is the fact that, to paraphrase Wolfgang Pauli, "They're not right. They're not even wrong." My primary comfort is that their thinking is repudiated by so many people.

Daisy Deadhead said...

She's over there trashing the transpeople again today (Oct 21). There's truly no end it.

Is that ALL she ever does? She's obsessive, like a professional hater.

Well, I guess she is. David Duke, Lyndon LaRouche, those are the types of people who run for president, after all.

I'd hate to be a transperson with Heart for president.