Posts Tagged ‘trans-misogyny’

h1

What Bathroom Bills Are Really Doing

23 February, 2017

Let’s breakdown what the anti-transgender/public privacy bathroom bills and laws are really doing.
(1) The laws are unenforceable without a bathroom attendant checking people’s birth certificates so
(2) It encourages citizens to make personal judgements based on what a person looks like leading to
(3) The unofficial nod to approve cis men and cis women carrying out vigilante justice against suspected transgender citizens (unless you live in Texas or Kansas where politicians openly endorsed vigilante enforcement).
(4) The number of transgender children and adults who don’t eat or drink so they can last eight hours without using a public bathroom will rise past the 1 out of 3 it is already at. Meaning,
(5) More and more transgender people will develop malnutrition, dehydration, UTIs, and other negative health consequences. Further,
(6) Students and employees’ concentration, productivity, and effectiveness will suffer and impair their ability to get an education that can lead to successful employment or hold onto employment if gained.
(7) Without an education and viable employment they will not have an income and will be unable to secure housing, food, and healthcare.
(8) They will not be able to use shelters due to the same gender enforcement laws that affected them in school and public accommodations so they will be forced to seek alternative housing and illicit jobs (prostitution being the most common).
(9) Living on the streets and performing survival sex work will further endanger their health and physical safety and
(10) Will eventually lead to an early and likely violent death.
So, really, it is not, nor was it ever, about bathroom safety. Rather, it is the legislative genocide of a minoritised group.

h1

​An Open Letter to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton

26 October, 2016

Thank you, Mr. Paxton. Thank you for making your opinions on transgender people so clear. In a cultural climate that does not question the unfounded fears and hatred lobbed against those who are different, it is good to know we can count on you to lead a national campaign of hatred and toxic Christianity against us. Thanks in large part to your bigotry we cannot use the bathroom, we cannot get an education, and, now, we cannot even expect our health care officials to use our names and pronouns much less give us medical and psychiatric care.

Mr. Paxton, your rhetoric against us has stirred the coals of hate and fanned the flames of a national Salem witch hunt. You have declared the transgender medical condition “evil.” You use debunked pseudoscience to incite hatred and promote very non-Christ-like attitudes. You have sounded the cry of discrimination against yourself and those who believe like you, but I ask you, are you truly being discriminated against? Have transgender Americans sued the federal government to prevent you from using public accommodations? Have transgender Americans sought legal methods of stripping you of your rights? Are transgender Americans filing suits to prevent you from receiving timely, appropriate, and life saving medical care? How can you consider yourself oppressed when you are the person doing these things and more to a vulnerable population both in your home state and in your country?

Mr. Paxton, you have brought forty-three (43) suits against the government all intended to curtail or remove laws protecting one of the most discriminated against populations in the United States. You sow division and approve rhetorical methods that paint those different than you as malicious, evil, and destructive. Your rhetoric and abuse of power has turned family against family. I know because I have experienced the result of your hatred and propaganda. Your campaign against other Americans, the legal actions you have taken against us, the ads you have supported that spread lies, hold up pseudoscience, and are filked with malicious intent has twisted the thoughts and attitudes of a brother who once stood beside me into a holier-than-thou, self-satisfied bigotry. I would ask if you are pleased with this result, but we both know the answer would be yes.

We, also, know that this is not really a letter to you because even if it found its way to your door, you would not read it. This is a letter besseching my allies to take a stand against bigotry. This is a letter to encourage those whose voices have been trampled by your culture of hate. This is a letter to those still undecided, those riding the fence of public decision, those who believe they can stay neutral in the face of active hate and bigotry. Ultimately, this is a letter to my few remaining family and friends in hopes that they, too, shall not be swayed against me by the rhetoric of a tiny, fearful man with too much authority.
In relation to this article by ThinkProgress.org: 

Providing Transgender People Health Care Violates Religious Beliefs, New Lawsuit Claims

From the article:

The suit claims that even providing “psychiatric support” as part of a medical transition would violate its “best medical judgment and its religious beliefs.” Even simply providing insurance coverage for such procedures would “constitute impermissible material cooperation with evil.”

Combined with a court decision last week that justified a funeral parlor firing a trans woman for religious reasons, this lawsuit sets a terrifying precedent for transgender people. If these cases reach the Supreme Court and it follows the same reasoning it used in Hobby Lobby — perhaps less likely without Justice Antonin Scalia, but still possible— it would create a society in which transgender people could legally be denied the necessary foundations of life simply because of their identities.

h1

Hollywood’s Complicity in Anti-trans Violence

3 September, 2016

Content warning: discussion of trans misogyny

Mark Ruffalo’s casting of Matt Bomer as a trans woman in his soon to be released film Anything has received a lot of negative feedback from the trans community, including such stars as Jamie Clayton and Jen Richards. These criticisms are justified because, as Jen Richards points out, there is a correlation between cis men portraying trans women and spikes in violence against trans women. When we say this, we are not exaggerating. The more Hollywood is willing to foist the idea that a man in a dress is comparable to a trans woman, the greater the violence trans women face because it gives fuel to the lies told about them and creates justification in the minds of bigots and those who act with violence.

In breaking down this connection, we should begin by addressing the dramatic increase in legislation designed to outlaw being transgender and in many cases to systematicly impede or prevent the transitions of trans women. “Bathroom bills” primarily target trans women because most people believe trans women are just perverted men. The rhetoric always revolves around preventing those psychologically ill men from gaining access to to women’s spaces where they will rape and prey on “real” women and girls. North Carolina governor McCrory and Senator Ted Cruz have openly compared transgender women to pedophiles. Liberty Counsel president Anita Staver threatened to carry a gun with her into the women’s room to protect herself from trans women. Representative Richard Floyd has threatened to physically assault trans women and James Dobson, the Christian head of Focus on the Family has encouraged the murder of trans women. Often these people blame Hollywood for propagating the acceptance of “men in dresses” and they point to films’ casting cis men to play predatory and pathetic trans women as proof of the “man in a dress” myth. They use Hollywood’s depictions as part of their justification toward legal and physical violence.

This attitude goes beyond the laws we make and impacts how we enforce existing laws, as well. Specifically how cases in which a trans woman has been assaulted or murdered are handled. In the United States legal system, people (typically straight, cis men) can and often do claim murdering trans women is not their fault because the mere thought of a trans woman existing is so horrifying to them that it produces a temporary insanity that results in a violent, destructive response to this “man in a dress.” It is called Trans Panic Defense and is based on the idea that a trans woman’s existence is such an unnatural perversion that the only psychologically sound response to the revelation is to murder them. Hollywood has often depicted this faux psychological break in its films. Whether it is shown as a serious, relatable response as in the attack on Dil in The Crying  Game (1992) or played for a cheap laugh as when Ace Ventura strips Lt. Lois Einhorn in Ace Ventura (1994) and everyone vomits. Ironically, even though Hollywood helped popularise this defense tactic, California is the only state where its use is not permissable in court.

Hollywood’s casting decisions and portrayls even impact the occurance of crimes against trans women. Straight men attack and murder trans women because they cannot reconcile their attraction to a woman of transgender background to the social perception that trans women are men. Straight men are afraid their attraction makes them gay so they respond with violence to prove their straight masculinity to themselves and others. Because of films like Soapdish (1991) where Robert Downy Jr gags after his encounter with a trans woman, Naked Gun 33 1/3: the Final Insult (1994) where Anna Nicole Smith’s striptease reveals a penis and results in a freak out by her suitors, and The Hangover Part II (2011) in which Ed Helms has sex with a transgender prostitute who is depicted as having taken advantage of his drunken state, straight men are taught to fear trans women as deciving gay men tricking straight men into gay sex. The casting of cis men as trans women reinforces this type of thinking. Mark Ruffalo’s casting of Matt Bomer, a gay, cis man, will doubly do so. In Anything the straight main character forms a taboo relationship with a transgender sex worker portrayed by a gay man. How did Ruffalo think this would be read by a primarily straight audience? Did he consider what the result of the this choice would be?

In reality, the violence that results from straight men’s fear of being duped into gay sex is not after an unexpected physical reveal moments before the sex act. In cases of assault and murder a trans woman has not “surprised” him in the bedroom. This reaction plays out in straight men (and sometimes women) who have seen a trans woman on the street and freaked out. It plays out when a straight man is attracted to a woman and their buddy mocks them for “being fooled” by a “man in a dress.” In these situations they are responding with violence against someone they often have not even talked with.

This happened in May of 2014 on an Atlanta train where two trans women were stripped and beaten. They were being harrassed by straight men, men who saw them and could not reconcile their appearance to the ideal of attractive femininity, men who saw them as gay men in dresses. The men began harassing the trans women on the station platform, demanding the women acknowledge them, reveal their “real” gender, and describe their genitals. On board the train, where the women could not get away, the men stripped them naked and beat them. They did this in front of witnesses. The witnesses did nothing to intervene. The witnesses laughed at the stripped and beaten trans women, filmed their assault, and posted it to social media. The response to this was that the trans women deserved to be attacked because they were men tricking people into believing  they were a women. When Hollywood casts men to play women (because trans women are women) they support and (intentionally or not) encourage people to view trans women as men. There is a direct correlation between the depiction, the belief, and the action.

When straight, cis actor Jared Leto was seen in Dallas Buyers Club (2013) as a trans woman, there was a spike in violence against trans women like what occurred in Atlanta. When straight, cis actor Eddie Redmayne was seen in The Danish Girl (2015) as a trans woman, there was a spike in violence against trans women; 2015 turned out to be the deadliest year on record for American trans women. Now, when gay, cis actor Matt Bomer is about to be seen as a trans woman in Anything, we steel ourselves for another spike in violence against trans women. Through its casting decisions, Hollywood is complicit in this violence. Through its casting decisions, Hollywood has blood on its hands. But the actors, directors, producers, and casting agents who make these decisions care more about the money to be made than the lives to be lost. It is profitable and brave to cast a man as a woman of transgender background in a way that it is not profitable or brave to cast a man as woman of cis background.

On a personal level, I am afraid of the fallout these decisions have. I am teaching at a school where I am stealth, I have not divulged my transgender status to anyone and the adults and children there read me as a cis woman. What happens to me if someone begins to question that? What happens to me if someone begins to wonder if I am not a cis woman? Based on the lived experiences of others trans women and based on my own experiences, what happens is violence. At the very least it will be verbal violence but at the most the violence is unfathomable. Before I was living authenticly, I was afraid of what would happen to me if others found out who I was. Once I transitioned, I was afraid of what would happen to me (and afraid of those things that did happen to me) because it was obvious who I was. Now that I live quietly stealth, I am afraid of what will happen to me should anyone discover or even suspect my past.

To live as a trans woman in America pre, mid, or post transition is to live in fear. Watching Hollywood reinforce the idea that trans women are disturbed men in dresses heightens that fear. This is why we callout casting decisions that reinforce bigotry and violence. This is why we need our cis friends and allies to take casting decisions seriously and to callout the poor choices being made. It is literally a matter of safety for us.

h1

Awesome Con DC is not a Safe Place for Trans Women

19 April, 2014

Awesome Con DC is not a safe space for trans women.

i had been looking forward to going to the convention for several weeks. i was excited, but also nervous. The geek/nerd community is not always the safest place for those of us considered outliers. i debated whether i should wear a cosplay and who i should go as, but the more i thought about it the more i wondered if i would be more likely to be misgendered, to be mistaken for a guy in a dress, if i was in costume than if i just went as myself. So this morning, i decided to put on a light weight skirt and an Alice in Wonderland t-shirt. i wore my hair loose, letting it hang past my shoulders and with a side swoop to soften my face. i wore a little make up, some nice nail polish, and a cute necklace from my Mum. i was sending out a very clear signal. Include in this, my not having been publicly misgendered in about a year. This was totally feasible.

Standing in line, waiting to get in, a woman approached me and said, ‘Nice costume.’ Then wandered off before i could tell her i was not in costume. my girlfriend and i talked about it and decided she must have liked my shirt and said costume by mistake because of all the people in costume. Inside, we went to artists alley. While i was standing near a booth i overheard a conversation between a man and his wife about a ‘man’ they saw and the wife said ‘that he is a she!’ i told myself, they could have been talking about anyone. Maybe a girl doing a cross-play? Though there were not many around . . . and fewer still were in costume . . . and they were looking toward me.

i started feeling overwhelmed and did not know what to do. My girlfriend took us over to Carla Speed McNeil’s table (the authoress and artist on Finder and creator of Lynn, my favourite trans character–confirmed by her). She remembered me from the last time i saw her (at SPX) and we had a nice talk about her work, what was new, and what her plans with Lynn were. i was feeling better; i thought i could take it on again. So we went to the panel “Representation is Important.” i sat down in the back row and my girlfriend set her stuff down by the wall behind me (she had her Hela cosplay with, in case she decided to change) then rubbed my neck and shoulders. The room filled up fast and soon the seat beside me, that i was saving for her, was the only one left. One of the staff members asked if this other person could sit there. My girlfriend said that was okay and i said it would be all right, too. He asked my girlfriend, “Are you sure you don’t mind?” and she said it was fine. Then he indicated me and the neck rub i was getting; he said, “Clearly he doesn’t mind.” [emphasis added] My girlfriend said, “She. She is a woman.” The staff member said, “Oh. Sorry,” and walked away.

This was too much for me and i shut down. i shut out everything. i did not hear much of the panel. i did not feel the less-than-comfortable convention seating. i did not feel my body or my presence in the room. After the panel, i told my girlfriend i wanted to go home, but i would be sad if she missed the convention just because i went home. It took a little talking, but i did convince her to stay and have fun.

All the way home i could feel people, especially men, staring at me. Whether it was on the sidewalks or on the metro they gave me that double look. The one that first says ‘oh, a woman,’ and then says ‘ew, a he-she.’ The glances that turn to glares and the people who catch their breath as you walk by. i got one smile; a sad, reassuring smile from a young lady who recognised and offered a moment of sympathy. That smile got me home.

i’m sad. i’m sad because there were panels and Q&A’s i wanted to go to. There were events i wanted to participate in. There were booths i wanted to visit and comics i wanted to pick-up. i really wanted to get a yuri manga because i just got introduced to them and i was excited to buy a couple, to see my girlfriend and i represented in a story. i didn’t get to do any of those things because i was made to feel so out-of-place. The environment and my interactions indicated to me that girls-like-me, that i, did not belong there.