Equality Summit or: GayCon 2009
“If the progressive movement were a firing squad, it’d be in a circle.”
-the wonderful Eva Paterson, Keynote Speaker at the Equality Summit
A day or two after Prop. 8 passed, a huge protest congregated in front of the Mormon Church on Santa Monica. Afterwards, they streamed past my Century City building on their parade back to the safety and comfort of West Hollywood. I watched this great scene with one of the senior partners at the firm, a 60 year old gay man. He said what I was thinking: “What should we do? Do we run down there?” Then he said, “I’m too old for this. I’m going to give money. You march. I marched 30 years ago, I helped get you here. Now, it’s your turn to do something for us.”
I took part of my turn this past Saturday. While Matt was on the other side of the Convention Center, I attended the statewide Equality Summit in the same locale, organized by Equality California. Essentially the activists’ version of a corporate retreat, complete with crap continental breakfast-type food, the Equality Summit was billed as “a gathering of community leaders committed to winning back marriage equality in California, to network, share information and resources, and plan next steps.” Personally, I hoped for discussion on how to unite the plethora of post-Prop. 8 groups that currently are engaging in a variety of pissing contests over strategy and territory. I also hoped that there would be discussion about uprooting the seeds of the marriage equality problem – homophobia. But, as you’ll see, hope springs eternal.
Standing room only at the Equality Summit
In a positive step away from what was often a classist, top-down No on 8 campaign, the event was free to all. Over 400 old-school and new-school activists showed up. As an activist powwow to air weaknesses and failures, it was intended to be off-limits to the media. After a huge outcry and a resignation or two, the decision was reversed and the media received access.
The event began with members of the formerly hidden No on 8 Executive Committee explaining their strategy decisions and giving us various after-the-fact poll numbers. Molly McKay kept calling everyone “love warriors” which drove me nuts. This has to be the top priority on our Gay Agenda: Stop with the morally superior (and horrifically eye-roll-inducing) terminology.
There were legitimate questions about why the committee failed to engage the religious or the non-white groups. Even as they asked this, though, I noted:
There are a lot of white people in this room trying to figure out their non-white problem. Is the problem that we as a whole: (a) don’t know enough minority activists who would like to attend free events like these; (b) don’t know how to advertise our activities outside of Facebook, thereby leaving out those on the wrong side of the technology divide; (c) are too busy catering to our own white bases, so we don’t have the time to look outside of our comfort zone; or (d) all of the above? Ah, my Scantron has D bubbled.
At one point, someone suggested that before the next ground war, we must “Teach white people about non-white issues.” Amen to that. Amen to that with regards to almost every social or political issue there is.
Participants' proposed topics for break out sessions
After holding the official leadership accountable, it came time for the gay community to hold itself accountable for its complacency and for, once friggin again, being co-opted by the other side’s use of children as proxies for its homophobia. Confessionals were completed through a series of professional break-out sessions, including how to better engage those cloaked in their faiths; how to utilize the labor movement; and, in a tiny room in the corner, the (non) role of transgendered and transsexuals.
I went to the tranny session and out of all the minorities struggling to find their voice in the LGBTI movement, none is between a bigger rock and a harder place than trannies. Generally considered a liability – as in, “You Buffalo Bills and walking Thai surgery centers represent that slippery slope argument they keep talking about” – trannies are the black sheep of the LGBTI family. My group was stymied as to how to make their social and political challenges relevant to the movement without alienating the public and indirectly hurting the gay community as a whole. What I took away from this was: that’s how non-white gays and lesbians used to, and still do, feel!
After the breakout session, the panelists reconvened to talk yet again about how they did their best to win. Thank Gods they were interrupted by an unscheduled appearance by our hometown mayor. Mayor Tony gave a brief, rally-the-troops speech. Apparently, he had no idea until that morning that there was an event of this magnitude in his hometown. Once told, I guess he hauled ass to come show his support. This is symbolic of the problem, people: insular visibility and poor utilization of our allies. If our own mayor doesn’t know that GayCon 2009 (full credit for this term goes to the girlfriend) is happening in his own backyard, just a mile or two from City Hall, how is anyone outside WeHo, Silverlake, Long Beach, or Laguna Hills supposed to find out about us?
After Tony the Tiger, I attended two region-specific break-out sessions. Both were supposed to focus on how to outreach and strategize in a specific region. The LA-based folks disappointingly came up with the same, tired, non-LA-specific solutions. The Orange County/Inland Empire session was similarly generic. Sample “regional” solutions: Protect the judges in case they overturn Prop. 8 (um, ok). Have multi-language literature (if the gay community truly is serious about this one, it must go beyond the mantra that our literature should be “in the Asian language.” Lesson 1 on the Teach White People About Non-White Issues syllabus: ASIAN IS NOT A LANGUAGE.) Must have clergy. Must reach out to straight allies. There was very little productive talk about confronting, and getting over, our fear of the valley lands yellowed by Yes on 8 signs.
Wall to wall of "next step" type of ideas from participants. Let's hope these are actually implemented.
At the end of the day, what was accomplished? The energy and dedication towards participating in our revolution was powerful. There was a much needed vent session. Without the need to defend ourselves in front of straight people asking, “Why didn’t you care more?”, there was space to honestly evaluate ourselves and our shortcomings.
Nonetheless, my impression was that the event didn’t unite everyone as much as it solidified our current Balkan state: different groups competing to do different things in the same safe places. We have a problem with insular visibility. We have a racial and religious schism between what we want to do and what we must do. We have little direction as to what we, as a whole, are going to do about these problems.
The event didn’t erase my fear that, much like over-exaggerated declarations that the election of Barack Obama is synonymous to the End of Racism, we’re treating this marriage equality debate as if its resolution will eradicate homophobia. It won’t. There were only mere whispers that though marriage equality is a significant step, what we’re ultimately fighting against is people’s fear, often violent, of our very existence in this world.
With the dawn of Stonewall 2.0, I hope this circular firing squad avoids shooting itself in the foot. Because, as one panelist said, the only thing that would be worse than losing Prop. 8 would be to lose again.
Related posts:
A very impressive recap & editorial. Thank you!
I want to believe that you are not serious about literature in "the Asian language" being a goal, but it seems all too likely that you are. Bleh.
I echo la_michele: Very impressive recap. Bravo.
I question the effectiveness of ‘literature’ in any languange, though. The Watchtower, for example, has NEVER come anywhere near changing my mind about anything. (Talk about horrific eye-rolling, though.)
Isn’t it a mistake to leave laws regarding things like equality to a popular vote in the first place? Doesn’t it take bold, brave (and perhaps literally "unpopular") action on the part of the legistlature and the courts to "do the right thing" and pass laws that say that discrimination is illegal and will not be officially tolerated?
The Civil Rights act was never a ballot proposition. (Can you imagine how long it would have taken to pass if it had been?)
Of course, legislators and judges are people, too, and subject to the same fear and ignorance about "those people" as the general voting population.
But isn’t fear & ignorance reduced (in many, but by no means all) by being seen and speaking up for a long enough period of time? Isn’t the gay couple that moves in next door a little less scary when you see that they don’t copulate in the street and that there seems to be no recruiting booth on the front lawn?
Wow, talk about diversity. In addition to the Equality Summit and the Go Green Expo, juiced lugheads and their siliconed molls were next door at the Fitness Expo, the Lakers were taking on the Spurs at the Staples Center, and who knows what was going on at L.A. Live? It was definitely pretty crazy along Fig and Pico. I thought the half-dozen guys drinking beer in my parking lot were getting psyched for the game, but maybe they were going to the Summit.
Wilberfan, I have to agree the courts should be the absolute final say in this matter. Like all civil rights matters in the past people had laws in place because they were in by popular vote and ran contrary to the constitution. It took a court ruling to establish the law of the land.
If the courts had not stepped in we would still have the Jim Crow laws in effect, blacks could not marry white in other states, even ENTIRE communities that outlaw a black with in the city limits between dusk and dawn. Marriage between same sex couples should fall under the category of civil rights and let it be adjudicated to establish a precedence just like the other issues in the past.
I have to agree pretty literature won’t do squat and your example of Watchtower as why nice people passing out stuff doesn’t work.
Excellent post btw.
I’m Autumn Sandeen, the other new media reporter who attended the Transgender breakout session.
Your coverage of the Transgender breakout session is extremely offensive. To begin with, the word tranny is considered defamatory by GLAAD. Hey, I personally don’t like being called a tranny — you do not have my permission to refer to me as a tranny in the context of discussing trans people discussing transgender people’s civil and marriage rights.
And, referencing to the Silence Of The Lambs‘ serial murderer when referencing the Transgender breakout session/transgender people in that room is just beyond the pale.
If I ever see you in a trans space again, expect me to ask you to leave. You’re no longer welcome.
Autumn:
I highly doubt Q was attempting to be offensive, let alone was aware that some in the LGBT community find the term offensive. I have a friend who is a transgender, and before I met her she was described as a tranny… by her gay friends, and only in the context of relevent discussions. This isn’t to defend the word or your offense to it – but realize that unless people understand a word is offensive, their use of it doesn’t equate intolerance.
Secondly, Q doesn’t equate transgenders with Silence of the Lambs – he merely brings up how some people view the transgender community, and the issues it brings up. If anything, Q should be applauded for bringing up the issue, which rarely, if ever, is discussed on Metblogs or other LA blogs, at least in any sort of positive fashion.
An LGBT writer who writes about trans people and hasn’t first read the Associated Press Styleguide on the term transgender, GLAAD’s Media Guide’s Transgender Glossary, and the NLGJA Stylebook Supplement on transgender terminology shouldn’t be writing about transgender people. It’s easily knowable that tranny is considered a pejorative, defamatory term by many in the trans subcommunity of the LGBT community.
And, it’s offensive in all circumstances to discuss transgender civil rights issues in the same paragraph as Silence Of The Lambs, Dressed To Kill, Psycho, or any other film where a transgender person is depicted as a serial killer. Period. There is no room for discussion on that Mr. Markland — it’s as I said, her reference to a film’s cross-dressing serial killer is byond the pale..
Q did a hell of a job offending me — especially if she wasn’t trying to. I didn’t expect the horrible coverage like from an "Alphabet Soup" reporter who visited trans space as an ally.
I’m a transgender new media reporter for Pam’s House Blend. Sometime later today Q can expect me to blast her coverage of the Transgender breakout session at the Equality Summit. It was that horrible.
Autumn:
Q is a volunteer blogger, and I know of very few bloggers who have ever picked up an AP handbook, one specific of any kind.
And Q wasn’t writing specifically about transgender people – it was in the context of an event.
BTW, you’ve referenced movie references to transgenders IN THE SAME EXACT WAY as Q did. In fact, you referenced 3 times as many films. Period.
If you can explain to me how your context is any different than Q’s, you win a no prize.
On a positive note, though, thanks for the link to the NLGJA styleguide. The relevent portion:
tranny: Often a pejorative term for a transgender person, it is now being reclaimed by some transgender people. Caution: still extremely offensive when used as an epithet and should be avoided except in quotes or as someone’s self-identified term.
Congratulations Queequeg, you’ve upset your first commenter (or maybe it happened in an earlier post?). It’s a rite we all go through. Watch as the comments thread now takes on a life of its own over this specific issue.
I’ll defend Q by saying the following:
1. Q makes no secret that she’s part of your (LBGT) community.
2. Q used the full word "transsexuals" in the previous sentence. It seems to me that she was just abbrreviating the term in subsequent mentions, the way I’m doing with "Q."
3. As David wrote, you should be thanking Q for bringing this issue, which gets little play in the MSM, to our attention.
4. Metbloggers and other bloggers don’t need your permission to refer to anyone by any term!
5. I’m offended by comments that are all linkage.
Hi Autumn – Good to see you again, if only in the virtual space. I do apologize if I offended you, but, as you would expect, I completely stand by what I said.
1) The use of the word "tranny" to me is just as non-offensive as when people refer to lesbians as dykes — when I know the person does not mean it in the perjorative way. Let’s go back to the NLGJA style guide – of which I am well aware – and read the rest of the paragrah:
"Often a pejorative term for a transgender person, it is now being reclaimed by some transgender people. Caution: still extremely offensive when used as an epithet and should be avoided except in quotes or as someone’s self-identified term."
If you look up "dyke," you’ll see the same caveat. Clearly this wasn’t be used as an epithet. I didn’t get your permission to quote you, because I was expressly asked not to quote anyone. And so, though I didn’t directly quote from the people who referred to the "T" in LGBTI as trannies, people who do identify themselves as trannies were both there and elsewhere at the Summit.
This doesn’t take away from the fact that you, Autumn, were offended by my use of that term, and so, again, I do absolutely apologize for that.
2) Now, if you read the rest of the sentence that I wrote regarding Buffalo Bill: "Generally considered a liability – as in, ‘You Buffalo Bills and walking Thai surgery centers represent that slippery slope argument they keep talking about’ – my point is *precisely* that transsexuals and transgendered are pathologized even within the gay community itself, and that is the misconception that is popularized in our culture. Obviously, this must be corrected. How to do it? It’s not "offensive in all circumstances to discuss transgendered/transsexual civil rights issue in the same paragraph" as any negative media portrayal of that community. To the contrary, if you want to debunk these violent misconceptions, you have to talk to about them in the same space. You have to acknowledge that these conceptions exist and figure out how to start the re-education process: Here’s Buffalo Bill. Here’s why, even though Jodie Foster is a flaming dyke and was the lead character in this movie, this film perpetuates a horrendously inaccurate portrayal of a transgendered person. Discuss.
And if we are in the same trans space again, expect me to remain where I am when you ask me to leave.
One must keep in mind that social misfits like Autumn Sandeen whom i know personally can’t function in mainstream society and must seek refuge in margins of LGB society.
The real transsexuals don’t bother with those gatherings. We have equality in the mainstream and don’t usually seen any more discrimination than the average woman does.
Sandeen and his ilk have a long way to go before they reach life in the mainstream of society.
Thank God the Transgenders don’t represent true TS women and men and people of operative history.
We fixed bout birth defect and moved on.
The use of the word "tranny" to me is just as non-offensive as when people refer to lesbians as dykes
The issue is not whether or not it’s offensive to you. You don’t get to decide what is offensive to another group of people. You also don’t get to take part in reclaiming something that is offensive to another group, just like I shouldn’t casually toss the n word around and then claim I’m "reclaiming" it when someone calls me on it.
Now, if you read the rest of the sentence that I wrote regarding Buffalo Bill: "Generally considered a liability – as in, ‘You Buffalo Bills and walking Thai surgery centers represent that slippery slope argument they keep talking about’ – my point is *precisely* that transsexuals and transgendered are pathologized even within the gay community itself, and that is the misconception that is popularized in our culture. Obviously, this must be corrected. How to do it? It’s not "offensive in all circumstances to discuss transgendered/transsexual civil rights issue in the same paragraph" as any negative media portrayal of that community. To the contrary, if you want to debunk these violent misconceptions, you have to talk to about them in the same space. You have to acknowledge that these conceptions exist and figure out how to start the re-education process: Here’s Buffalo Bill. Here’s why, even though Jodie Foster is a flaming dyke and was the lead character in this movie, this film perpetuates a horrendously inaccurate portrayal of a transgendered person. Discuss.
You didn’t debunk anything. You just threw it out there.
The real transsexuals don’t bother with those gatherings. We have equality in the mainstream and don’t usually seen any more discrimination than the average woman does.
And when an employer does a background check, we know there’s nothing to fear, because the magical Harry Benjamin Syndrome Fairy will erase it from their minds, just like it did for the opposing counsel in the Christy Littleton case.
I’m sorry, but your use of the term ‘tranny’ was incredibly offensive in the context it was written. As Lizboo noted, you do not get to reclaim a pejorative term referencing a community you yourself are not apart of, ever. Secondly, if your intent was to expose popular misconceptions with the Buffalo Bill/Thai surgery reference then it was poorly executed and is either a reflection of your own poor judgement or poor writing. Finally, as breakout sections by groups like transgender groups, people of color, or women are about feeling safe to talk and such, if someone asks you to leave I would hope that you’d be respectful enough to do as they ask if you are not part of that community.
Sue Sue wrote: "Sandeen and his ilk have a long way to go before they reach life in the mainstream of society.
Thank God the Transgenders don’t represent true TS women and men and people of operative history.
We fixed bout birth defect and moved on."
Wow! And, I thought I couldn’t be more disappointed than by the blogger’s poor choice of words and frame of reference. You reinforce the us vs. them problem that permeates the TBIGL community. We’re all fags, dykes, trannies, honos, fairies, and drag queens to the majority of the str8 world. And, you having had your surgery doesn’t change that one iota.
We will not achieve equality until the vast majority of the community accepts that we’re queer and we need to stick together to make progress.
By the way, I’m post-op too, but my surgery was genital reassignment sugery and yours was obviously a lobotomy.
Just so we all have this straight;
The term Tranny applies to one of those penis carrying men in a dress and makeup.
If you Guys don’t like the term I suggest you have the appropriate surgery and get on with your life instead of trying to create some imaginary third sex.
Have a nice day Guys.
Oh and Autumn the next time you and I cross paths in a ladies restroom I will throw your Tranny ass out.
Your just a man in a dress.
Wow, I’m sorry suesue but you have the maturity of a 3 year old.
This is why we are unable to outreach to communities of color. We first must learn how to communicate with respect for each other not to mention tackling the racism, classism, sexism and other prejudices inherent in our own communications. Until we do that, don’t expect others to listen to our concerns when we can’t listen to theirs.
queequeg I admire you. I admire your putting out there first person. It will be really nice when more people can just put it out there instead of worrying who will be offended or not. In the end we’re just a bunch of people out there trying to do the right thing by each other and our neighbors. Sorry you drew the ire, you can count on me to support what you said and how you said it.
Of course I admire that you drew haters faster than the rest of us who had to resort to parking tards. (kidding).
Well Bricar1632
I don’t need to reach out, i live a stealth life.
And I stay as far away from the local tranny community as possible.
I would just like to know when are people like y’all are going to grow up and make a life for yourselves in the mainstream. When are you going to stop whining when someone makes a comment or uses a word you don’t approve of.
The reason You People are discriminated against and I am not lies in my willingness to deal with the world in it’s terms.
There are tens of thousands of us who live and work in stealth in the mainstream we marry adopt children and we don’t need your sense of equality, we already have it.
The only reason we ever pay any attention to you is because you make a bad name for all of us with your incessant whining about equality that is already there for you, but because you want to act out and not conform to society’s traditional male / female boundaries you make fools of yourselves and make all of us look bad.
There is nothing worse then to see one of you walking, talking and asserting male privilege while dressed as a woman and insisting to the world you are a woman when every other behavior suggests otherwise.
Get a life and join the human race.
Not that it matters, but I’m a gay male, not transgender, and I will not standby and let anyone degrade another person be it someone who is transgender, a person of color, a woman,…no one. Secondly, I would rather be myself and be around people that are accepting of me than let someone or some community dictate to me how I should act, dress, love…any of it. Finally, you are embarrassing yourself by exposing your own backwards prejudices and your following of patriarchal definitions of what it means to be a man or a woman.
Wow. Lots of comments from both sides being thrown around that are unwarranted and rude. I, personally, never knew the term "tranny(ie?)" was offensive. I have gay and lesbian friends who use the term all the time with no negative effects that I’ve seen, so I can understand the misunderstanding. As far as the comments thrown out about transgendered on here, I think that was extremely rude and uncalled for.
We as writers here do our best not to offend, but in reporting stories we’ve experienced it sometimes happens. If you disagree with what we say, please feel free to speak up, but there’s no need to be an asshole about it because all you do is make yourself look stupid. We’re happy to hear counterpoints as long as they’re written in an adult tone. Sounding like an angry child (even if the post was written in that manner) makes you sound childish and uninformed.
frazgo- there’s a difference between being brave and just being a jerk.
Just so we all have this straight;
The term Tranny applies to one of those penis carrying men in a dress and makeup.
Right, because everyone on earth follows suesue’s particular idiosyncratic definitions of words, because, um… you say so. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
If you Guys don’t like the term I suggest you have the appropriate surgery and get on with your life instead of trying to create some imaginary third sex.
Right, because anti-trans people always change their tune when you tell them about the configuration of your genitals. Which is a topic of great and appropriate interest to everyone. Really.
There is nothing worse then to see one of you walking, talking and asserting male privilege while dressed as a woman and insisting to the world you are a woman when every other behavior suggests otherwise.
Oh and Autumn the next time you and I cross paths in a ladies restroom I will throw your Tranny ass out.
Hmmm… don’t think I need to say anything here…
Trust me, you really don’t want to try constructing your True Transsexual(tm) heirarchies right now, because I’m pretty sure on every measure you could think of, I’d rank higher than you. But here’s the thing about those stupid imaginary heirarchies: they’re, you know, stupid. You’re stealth? Wow, so am I. Know what? All it takes is the wrong person digging too deeply into your background, and your little imaginary security won’t be worth a damn.
I’m not willing to be out and proud fighting for trans rights right now, but I’m not going to crap on the people who are.
I have gay and lesbian friends who use the term all the time with no negative effects that I’ve seen, so I can understand the misunderstanding.
I know. It’s just like when I sit around with my white friends and we all use the word nigger. No negative effects I can see.
We as writers here do our best not to offend, but in reporting stories we’ve experienced it sometimes happens. If you disagree with what we say, please feel free to speak up, but there’s no need to be an asshole about it because all you do is make yourself look stupid. We’re happy to hear counterpoints as long as they’re written in an adult tone. Sounding like an angry child (even if the post was written in that manner) makes you sound childish and uninformed.
Um… if you’re really interested in doing your best not to offend, you might want to start with not calling Autumn a stupid, childish asshole. Just sayin.
Um… if you’re really interested in doing your best not to offend, you might want to start with not calling Autumn a stupid, childish asshole. Just sayin
Touche’. Is meany-head better?
Touche’. Is meany-head better?
Oh, I definitely understand the need to put her in her place. After all, she stepped outside the natural order of things and didn’t pay homage to Almighty Gay Entitlement.
So to sum up, using pejorative terms for transsexuals is okay as long as gay people use them, and comparing transsexuals to serial killers is fine as long as you claim after the fact and buried down in the comments section that you’re only doing so to debunk it, despite providing no such "debunking" in the actual piece.
Meanwhile, if the offended group dares to speak up, slap em down and put em in the back of the bus where they belong.
Glad I understand now.
I’m sorry, but I don’t know any writers that are unaware of ‘tranny’ being a pejorative term. A professional publication that cared about its reputation would post a retraction and apology and not make excuses for a writer’s ignorance/bigotry and poor judgment nor would they allow someone like SueSue space for her hate-speech and intellectual violence.
"I’m sorry, but I don’t know any writers that are unaware of ‘tranny’ being a pejorative term."
Well, then, welcome to Metblogs and the blogosphere. And please don’t confuse us with a professional publication. Not until we begin receiving paychecks and/or readers begin paying for a subscription.
Jeez, I step away for a few hours and look at this.
(1) suesue: bricar1632 is spot on. Join the human race and get a life. Autumn, and every transperson, and every person, have every right to do whatever the fuck they want to do so long as they don’t hurt anyone. You, on the other hand, are hurting everyone.
(2) bricar1632, regarding others’ requests to step aside: You make a very legitimate point, but let me be a little clearer in my reply. The breakout sessions at the Summit were explicitly public. Attendees were cautioned that they were not actually entering into any private space because the media would be there and they would be filming, recording, and photographing. The sessions themselves all related to strategy for marriage equality; the trans session in particular discussed the role of the trans movement within the general fight for marriage equality. In a public space like this, I’m staying put.
On the other hand, if there is a private group – say, a group of people who wanted to discuss something amongst themselves outside the official forum of the Summit, or a support session, etc. – I’d certainly leave if asked.
(3) Thanks, David, frazgo, Matt!
(4) To those offended – A transgendered attendee referred to me as "that dyke," as in, "The coffee is over there next to that dyke." I was not offended. That is just me, though. I understand why the term "tranny" is sensitive to some. Just please bear in mind that it is not as sensitive to others. Whether it should be offensive is also the topic of another post (and, again, not the point of my post above). In any case, to those I did offend, I hear you and absolutely apologize.
(5) lizboo – I understand your point, but I wasn’t trying to debunk any myths in my post. My statement related to debunking was in the context of replying to Autumn’s comment that we can’t mention Buffalo Bill (or Norman Bates, etc.) when we talk about trans civil rights issues – that, in my opinion, we absolutely must mention these people when we talk about rights issues. However, debunking this portrayal is another post for another day in probably another blog.
Again, I referenced Buffalo Bill to illustrate that the gay community sees trans people as a liability because they still pathologize them. This is why trans people have such an onerous uphill battle in trying to claim space in the queer movement. If you think I worded it poorly, then fair enough. I don’t think I did, but there lives a copy editor in everyone.
(6) Everyone: My dubious distinction of being the Metblogger that incited the most ire notwithstanding (huzzah!), I am nonetheless happy that this discussion even exists. Though I don’t agree with everyone, the concerns raised by even the most critical are consciousness-raising opinions that I don’t see aired very much outside of a very specific subset of queer blogs. For that, thanks. Let’s keep it going outside the computer screen.
queequeg, I didn’t call you by any gender or LGBT pejorative, even though you have personally offended me very deeply with the language in your blog entry. I didn’t call you other names, such as social misfit, as one of the commenters did in this thread. I’m angry, but name-calling solves nothing. I also wouldn’t call you a lesbian, bisexual — or a dyke — unless that’s how you told me first that’s how you identify.
And yet, you defend your use of the term tranny when you identified me by a term I consider pejoritively used. You’re a reporter — not knowing what the appropriate styleguides say regarding offensive terminology on subject matter you’re reporting on is just not justifiable. As a publicly identified trans person in that room, you called *me* a term that the styleguides identify as a defamatory, offensive term when you renamed the Transgender Breakout Group the tranny session.
I should not have to educate a peer LGBT new media reporter on what the LGBT styleguides say about LGBT-related, defamatory and/or offensive terminology. I believe that really has a lot to do with how angry I am at you. As another in this thread has already said, you don’t get to reclaim words for my subcommunity of the LGBT community.
As for not leaving trans space when asked, you apparently don’t know your Gay Liberation and LGBT civil rights history very well. Trans women have been booted from gay and lesbian spaces:
And, trans women have been accused of colonizing lesbian and women’s community spaces.
Now, after you were welcomed into our space — but then offending members of the trans community after being in that space — you’re demanding to be allowed into trans space in the future. You’ve stated you wouldn’t leave is asked to. There’s just something ironic about that.
Oh, and one final thing. There were other points in my post that are worthy of just as much discussion – i.e., where do we, post Prop. 8, go from here? How do we actually implement the ideas we, and others, have?
And for all you cynics out there, this is in no way intended to deflect criticism (bring it on if you still have it in you, 28 comments later). Just wanted to remind us all that there is a forest surrounding this tree.
I understand your point, but I wasn’t trying to debunk any myths in my post.
In the comments you said:
To the contrary, if you want to debunk these violent misconceptions, you have to talk to about them in the same space. You have to acknowledge that these conceptions exist and figure out how to start the re-education process: Here’s Buffalo Bill. Here’s why, even though Jodie Foster is a flaming dyke and was the lead character in this movie, this film perpetuates a horrendously inaccurate portrayal of a transgendered person. Discuss.
But your later statement is right; you didn’t try to debunk it. You didn’t try to "start the re-education process." THAT’S WHY IT WAS WRONG. You just tossed it out there and then made a transparent attempt to cover yourself later when called on it.
I understand why the term "tranny" is sensitive to some. Just please bear in mind that it is not as sensitive to others. Whether it should be offensive is also the topic of another post (and, again, not the point of my post above).
You’re still not getting it, so I’ll repeat:
You do not get to decide what is and isn’t offensive to other groups of people.
And pissing people off is not an end in itself, unless you’re Ann Coulter.
Just jumping in here to back up what Markland said above – Autumn, Queequeg isn’t a reporter, new media or otherwise. He’s a blogger and I can probably count on one hand the number of bloggers who have ever read a style guide so your constant harping on that issue is not making any valid points. The issue is you think a word he used is offensive, and he’s telling you why he used and it and why he doesn’t think it’s offensive. That’s the issue, new media reporting style guides have nothing to do with it.
That said, I’d also like to echo Q’s sentiment above that it’s interesting that all the valid points and important questions he brought up are being completely ignored over simple word choice.
Sean;
Keep in mind Autumn doesn’t speak for true TS Nor does he even speak for the mainstream transgender community.
To me it seems that feelings were hurt because of remarks made, so to quell those feelings, attacks are being made with with shit like "style guides" being used as an excuse to critique and attack. Don’t hide behind politics if that’s not the real issue. No one will think less of, or make fun of anyone if your feelings are hurt because a derogatory comment was thrown. Personally I’m glad this
bitch session discussion occurred because now I know not to use the work "tranny". I had no idea the hate it held behind it and I’m sorry if I’ve ever unknowingly offended anyone with it.PS I have no f@*%ing clue what a style guide is……….
dammit…..only "bitch session" was supposed to be crossed out. Stupid HTML deficiency.
Wow, this is going to be my final post on this. I’d like to point out that Myself and Lizboo are also ‘harping on that issue’ that Autumn is continually bringing up and it’s because the term ‘tranny’ is pejorative and its use is tantamount to hate-speech. So unless you’re quoting someone you don’t use it.
The fact that your publication doesn’t understand that is mind-boggling to me. It doesn’t matter what justifications queequeg has for using it and it doesn’t matter that queequeg doesn’t think it’s offensive. The persons to which he’s referring to when using that term feel it is offensive so you don’t use it.
Why is it that you think you get to decide what does and doesn’t offend someone else, that kind of arrogance is just beyond my understanding?
Anyway, I’m done with this topic, I am sorry if I was rude at times, but I believe this issue should be straightforward and not up to debate because it’s not about free-speech when you use a pejorative term in reference to someone or a community. Doing so shows a lack of respect and is just wrong.
Get a life guys the word Tranny or sometimes spelled Trannie. Is not anywhere near hate speech and is not a pejorative Transgenders use the term all the time to describe themselves and others who are TG.
This is just one of Sandeen’s little tantrums.
If Sandeen doesn’t have something to bully people with he isn’t happy.
Give it a damned rest for the sake of God, and the rest of us.
This blog is a place where people are encouraged to express their own opinions. We make no claims to follow style guides or journalistic rules.
I chose Queequeg to write for this blog because she has a powerful personality, strong beliefs, a clever voice and fascinating thoughts. I fully stand behind her right to write what she sees fit.
I don’t like offending people, and I doubt Queequeg does either, but we all have a right to our opinions. She has apologized for using a term some people found offensive.
I want this to be a place that encourages discussion, and I appreciate Queequeg broaching what are delicate and, apparently, lightning-rod issues. In fact, I’m flattered she feels safe & supported enough here at Metblogs to do such a thing. But if these comments don’t promote discussion and understanding, and only degrade into name-calling, I will close these comments, and will ban anyone "trolling."
No matter what side of this debate you are on, let’s put our best foot forward and do the right thing. If you so strongly believe your position to be "right," then I would expect you to represent it with dignity, honesty, and openmindedness.
Queequeg, thank you so much for your post. In re-reading it several times what I took away from your graf on the transgendered/transsexual session was primarily your tone of sympathy for the alienation often experienced by transgendered/transsexual individuals.
I also hope that more people bring their attention to bear upon the Prop 8 issues discussed here.
Funny thing about those who scream about the use of "tranny", "transie", or "rrannie"…….they are the first to insist that others do not have the right of self definition when it comes to "transgender" or "transgendered". Both of those are considered extremely insulting by a very very large number intersexed people and women with transsexual pasts but that means nothing to the Sandeens who will use any and all means to deny them the right of self definition. And using those GLAAD guidelines as a defense by Sandeen is the the height of dishonesty given that Sandeen is the one who forced it on them claiming the right to represent the opinions of EVERYONE from fetishistic masturbators to drag queens to full time crossdressers and finally those who suffered from birth from a neurological birth condition known as classic transsexuality.
Some from the classic transsexual background fight and have fought tirelessly for greater LGBt rights, some feel outside that struggle but all who disagree with Sandeen and "hir" third gender terrorists" are silenced, banned, oft times threatened and sometimes victimized by terrorist tactic.
Sandeen is on disability for severe mental issues, nuff said.
That the suesue comment on January 26th, 2009 @ 9:44 pm is still up on this comment thread, when she calls me by a male pronoun, says a lot about this blog’s failed commitment to respecting trans people and trans issues.
Only calling a trans person she-male or he-she is perhaps more offensive than calling a trans woman by male pronouns, or trans men by female pronouns. Read the GLAAD Transgender Glossary text on defamatory language I linked to in a comment above if you want to verify how offensive calling a trans woman by a male pronouns is.
Nice job, moderators…editors…queequeg. That you have sanctioned such a comment as suesue’s by not moderating it highlights your continuing failure to understand how astonishingly cruel and detestable this blog has been in this post (and this thread) towards many trans people and trans issues. The blog is continuing the insult that queequeg made when she personally labeled my peers and me who were in the Transgender Breakout Session as trannies, when I don’t identify as a tranny, and personally consider the label discourteous and objectionable.
That this blog hasn’t updated the initial post after I took offense at being called a tranny is also incredible. Again, you continue your failure to understand how astonishingly cruel and detestable this blog has been in this post (and this thread) towards many trans people and trans issues by not even adding a comment to the initial post about how a trans person in the Transgender Breakout Session took great offense at being labeled a tranny.
Unbelievable.
This entire comment thread is a wonderful demonstration of the tranny trap…..The subject was marriage battles in California…….suddenly it’s all about the outraged trannys.
The writer was sympathetic towards trans people and has been attacked anyway on perceived "insults" which were defined as insults by the person taking offense! That "insulting" nature of the words in question are far from universal positions among those with trans backgrounds btw.
Sandeen also totally banned from Pam’s Transgendered Blend another woman of operate history for saying that if you come to women’s space as anything other than a woman, you don’t belong there. This was considered so hateful that Sandeen then launched from Pam’s a personal vendetta against this woman labeling her a racist falsely.
The latest fad in trans-activism is the trans as universal victim. Everyone not trans identified is now a potential oppressor as "cis-gendered" or cis-sexual"…….two ludicrous terms that basically mean everyone oppresses me who isn’t like me. This is extended to those they forced under their "umbrella" term "transgender" who object to it. These poor women (who never "trans’ gender because the very definition of classic transsexual is someone who’s gender identity is at odds with their body and that identity doesn’t change, but the body is changed) are called elitist snobs, suffering from poor self-esteem and transphobic and self loathing. Trannys are absolutely ruthless in suppression of ANY discussion they disapprove given that ability, witness Pam’s TG Blend.
Autumn, we don’t moderate or delete comments here. Everyone is responsible for their own words and are held accountable for them. We keep all comments online as an accurate record of the discussion that took place. This has been our policy since the day we launched almost 6 years ago.
Autumn;
Society has for much longer then there has been a society defined men and woman by their reproductive organs.
If for some reason you can’t handle that, perhaps you should seek therapy.
You and your ilk have taken political correctness to new extremes by insisting that women do in fact have a penis and in some cases testicles. I have never heard a more ridiculous assertion than that made by those of your ilk.
Thankfully the rest of the world is on to what you are doing and states like Washington who will be requiring that a person have appropriate genitals in order to obtain a change in the sex marker on their driver’s license. Unfortunately thanks you people like you this hard won privilege that true transsexuals have enjoyed for nearly fifty years in most of these United States may be coming to an end. If that is what is needed to stop this tranny silliness and the invasion of woman’s spaces I am all for it.
By the way for those who don’t know.
Classical or True Transsexuals had won all their rights well before 1990 and without the aid of the Gay and Lesbian community.
Have a nice day Autumn;
Be careful of those public bathrooms You never know who will out you.
I have to agree with radicalbitch. It is transgender identified people like Autumn who will jump at the first violation of a stylebook “guideline”, moan if they are not addressed in the correct manner, and whine all day long if some sensibility is violated. They have a radical rule book that they expect everyone to follow. And if it’s not? the transgender mantra…transphobic, homophobic, self-loathing, internalized hatred, etc. ad nauseum insults come raining down. Yet if those of us who, for whatever reason, don’t identify as either gay or transgender but simply female voice our objection in the blogs to being included within a group we feel we don’t belong we are banned or shouted down. This is not an isolated circumstance I illustrate. It happens all the time. Sandeen doesn’t realize to be referred to as transgender is just offensive to us, if not more so, as being called a trannie is to her. The trans activists have become so damn anal with their rules even the transgender don’t know what they are…they all tip toe around on eggshells. The fabricated transgender spectrum runs from the occasional crossdressing wanker to the long term post op…and the transgender activists like Sandeen try to tell us we are all the same. Well, hardly are we all the same and the “spectrum” is a load of cat dung. I’ve been post op for years and want nothing to do with transgender non-op drama queens like Sandeen.
A while back, I posted a link to a petition at Pam’s House Blend which objects to transsexuals being included under the transgender umbrella. Autumn immediately took it down as a violation of the TOS. In my blog, Enough Non-Sense, I documented numerous links to petitions on PHB. Autumn’s MO is to silence, bully, and ban as many people’s opinion as she can. Her bully comment that started this thread is proof of that.
It’s quite amusing to see Autumn whine when she steps into a blog that is not hell bent on censoring every comment that doesn’t adhere to the GLBT party line.
For someone who is ignoring the issue sandeen has posted quite a bit over at Pam’s House Blend.
That is quite typical for that person.
I’m guessing this thread is unlikely to return to how to actually achieve equality for the LBGT community.
Sean, this will be the last visit to a MetBlog website, unless I stumble on it by accident.
You’re website appears to have no discernable journalistic standards it adheres to, and your editorial staff apparently embraces its use of defamatory language. Your website also apparently welcomes the defamatory language of your commenters. Would your site embrace the known defamatory language racism or sexism by your contributors with the same level of acceptance as your website has embraced the defamatory language regarding transgender identified people? At this point I actually wonder.
And, exactly how is anyone supposed to look at MetBlogs as a source of credible information or credible opinion when you website doesn’t adhere to discernable journalistic standards? Well, I don’t know.
I do know I certainly don’t see your website as a credible source of written product at this point. As your terms of use suggest I should, I’ll go elsewhere for news and commentary — queequeg and you certainly have taught me there’s no point coming your website unless I enjoy being provoked, offended, and infuriated. And frankly, I don’t enjoy these feelings at all.
And queequeg, if I ever do see you again as a media representative in a trans or LGBT space, do expect me to call you out for your defamatory language and imagery. And, if it’s a trans event you’re covering, do expect me to point out to the event organizers that you shouldn’t be welcome as a media representative due to your past, unapologetic use of defamatory language regarding trans people.
Actually I find the name calling in headlines over at PHB to be offensive and demonstrates no journalistic standards whatsoever. People who live in Glass Houses should not throw stones.
Have a nice day Autumn.
Freedom of speech, according to Sandeen.
Diversity of opinion, as long as it follows her rationale.
Inclusion, as long as it’s by her definition.
The world through the eyes of Autumn Sandeen. All she needs now is a law.
Yikes, where is a militant when you need one?
Autumn, I’d hate for us to lose even one reader, but Metblogs, or blogs generally, just might not be for you. As Sean and others pointed out, Metblogs, like many other blogs, is a place for free-form discussion, where authors and commenters express strong, heart-felt opinions. Sometimes what they write is provocative. Sometimes it’s offensive to individual readers. That’s the price we must pay for the right to free speech.
As a reader and commenter, you have the right to state that you’ve been offended. You have the right to try to use facts and good reasoning to convince people that they were wrong in what they said, and that they should say or do something differently next time. But you have no guarantee of success. We have a free market of ideas, and people on Metblogs or anywhere else do not need your permission to voice theirs!
I also noticed that you used the word "defamatory" over and over again. Do you know what the word means? It’s a legal term, which means "the unprivileged publication of false statements which naturally and proximately result in injury to another." So if someone calls a transsexual a "tranny," or a lesbian a "dyke," or a gay man a "faggot," or a black person a "nigger," or a Jewish person a "kike," or an Italian person a "wop," or a Chinese person a "Chink," that may be offensive to the recipient, but it isn’t false, and thus it’s not defamatory. By the way, I’m a lawyer and have specialized in communications law.
I’d hate to live in a place where we all had to use language that was so bland that it was intended not to offend anyone, even the most sensitive reader. That wouldn’t make for very interesting blog reading. Luckily, we don’t live in such a place.
I think you said it best when you wrote "queequeg and you certainly have taught me there’s no point coming [sic] your website unless I enjoy being provoked, offended, and infuriated. And frankly, I don’t enjoy these feelings at all." I couldn’t agree more.
Autumn can’t handle having autumn’s opinions challenged.
Sandeen must exist in a controlled environment well away from the pressure of diversity of opinion, a product of an over sheltered childhood.
[...] this comment by an LA Metblogs contributor: Autumn, I’d hate for us to lose even one reader, but Metblogs, or blogs [...]
Great article! I can’t help, but also feel the frustration at the lack of direction. Is it a civil rights issue… love… equality… religion?
To me it is first and foremost a civil right’s issue, but more importantly (especially for those that were FOR Prop 8) this is a freedom of religion issue. Heterosexuals are free to marry in their church, outdoors, with or without a priest, when ever and where ever, so should everyone else be free to practice their religion to marry and have it be legal. Seems like this is the best rhetoric to take to relate to those for Prop 8, since religion seems to be the main focus for their decision.
i find it ridiculous that you are worried about name calling and trolling on behalf of queegqeg. autumn was justifiably angry, and has every right to express that. she, nor anyone who agreed with her, ever resorted to name calling. SHE wasn’t the one who used offensive language. your writer did. howabout banning the folks like suesue who insist on using incorrect pronouns for trans people, and refer to trans women who don’t meet her narrow gender definitions as men.
You know…
I really don’t recall sitting around with Jason back in ‘04 trying to decide what to do with the web community we had somehow helped foster and and ending up with the decision to set up Metonlinehappyfunlandwherenooneevergetstheirfeelingshurtorsaysthingsthatanyonemightdisagreewithanditsallflowersandkittensunlessyouarealrgictokittens.com
Yeah, I just checked and I don’t own that URL. Good thing because that would be fucking stupid.
We set up metblogs, and made sure to put BLOG in the name because we didn’t want anyone to forget that’s what we are. We’re not "an online magazine" or a "digital alt weekly" we’re a blog, and we say what we are thinking and we don’t pull punches. Sometimes that means people get black eyes and bloody noses. But that’s a million times more appealing then cutting off the free flow of ideas and discussions anytime something comes up that someone doesn’t agree with. Last time I checked the idea of free speech and the first amendment don’t have anything to do with ensuring feelings aren’t hurt. Since journalists by and large have giving in to advertisers and crybabies, and lost all their guts it’s up bloggers to remind the world that some topics are provocative and some freedoms are worth standing up for.
[...] 2008 at TDoR 2. Tranny Day – Sunday Times ZA 3. Equality Summit or: GayCon 2009 – LA MetBlogs Posted by minamagpie Filed in activism Tags: journalism, journalist, reporting, style [...]
The sad irony of this is that Queequeg, a member of the LGBT community, takes time out of her life to attend the Summit, write about it here, and publicize the marriage equality cause, which is surely the community’s number one issue of importance at the moment, in order to help further that cause. So what happens? One commenter, with, apparently, a chip on the shoulder, some kind of agenda, or, at best, a thin skin, objects to one word — one word! — and hijacks the post, making it an internecine fight over a word. It’s pretty hard to see how picking such a fight engenders more support — the first step toward equality — for one’s cause. Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.
Meanwhile, the Mormon Church and the other opponents of the LGBT community and marriage equality must be laughing at you. You’re playing right into their hands. Divide and conquer. Just like some of the mistakes and shortcomings and the "circular firing squad" that Queequeg identified at the Summit, this is surely a lesson in how not to achieve success for your cause.
Q – I’m late to the party, but welcome to Metblogs. I’m buying you a drink. You too, Autumn.
Let’s hug it out.
Queequeg…just so I can be #60 and back on point. This is a civil rights issue for the courts to decide as a constitutional issue to establish the law of the land.
Didn’t mean to hijack the trolls
commentswhining, but this is one I’m quite passionate about…you’d know that if you saw what I already posted pre and post election on 8. I was disheartened to see it go south but in hindsight I think litigating is our best solutions. Votes will just keep being re-voted until we get it set as a matter of national law.Wow, I can’t say that I’m surprised your publication won’t take responsibility for the mistake of one of your writers, something I am discussing on my blog site since negative portrayals and communications with and/or about the transgender communities is not a unique occurrence with your publication, but is a prevalent theme across the blogworld, especially within the LGBT community. Before I do, however, I would like to say a few things.
First of all, it wasn’t ‘one commenter, with, apparently, “a chip on [their] shoulder, some kind of agenda…“ taking offense to this post. Your blogwriter offended myself, a transgender ally, and others within and without the transgender community. Her use of the pejorative ‘tranny’ did nothing to critically enhance her post and therefore was completely unnecessary. Had she taken responsibility for that mistake instead of fumbling through ridiculous rationalizations for her use of it, this drama could have been avoided. If, for example, she were not African American, and made a similar argument about reclaiming the ‘n-word’, I seriously doubt we’d have this discussion. Unfortunately it didn’t end there and SueSue, an obvious bigot, was allowed a platform to spew hateful vile that should be embarrassing to all of us.
Sean Bonner stated that:”…we’re a blog, and we say what we are thinking and we don’t pull punches. Sometimes that means people get black eyes and bloody noses. But that’s a million times more appealing then cutting off the free flow of ideas and discussions anytime something comes up that someone doesn’t agree with. Last time I checked the idea of free speech and the first amendment don’t have anything to do with ensuring feelings aren’t hurt. Since journalists by and large have giving in to advertisers and crybabies, and lost all their guts it’s up bloggers to remind the world that some topics are provocative and some freedoms are worth standing up for.“
Come on now, do you really believe you were standing up for our first amendment rights when you said nothing about SueSue’s statement, ”Just so we all have this straight; The term Tranny applies to one of those penis carrying men in a dress and makeup.“
You really believe her other statement, ”Oh and Autumn the next time you and I cross paths in a ladies restroom I will throw your Tranny ass out. Your just a man in a dress.,“ was ‘provocative’ and a ‘freedom worth standing up for.’ What about, ”There is nothing worse then to see one of you walking, talking and asserting male privilege while dressed as a woman and insisting to the world you are a woman when every other behavior suggests otherwise. Get a life and join the human race.,“ you really believe that doesn’t deserve a response from your publication.
Yeah, I can see how you might feel these statements are about the exchange of , ”a free market of ideas“ and discussion” rather than a declaration of hate and bigotry, possibly for the sake of sensationalism and readership.
It’s very hard for me to see your actions to be that of a patriot standing up for our freedom of speech, as opposed to an amateur publication lacking the principles needed for the promotion of respectful communications that take into account the diversity and mutli-cultural nature of this summit, principles that would also denounce hate and bigotry, especially from those commenting on a post.
By the way, the first amendment is just in regards to Congress enacting laws to limit free speech. It doesn’t mean you can’t and/or shouldn’t promote the principles I just mentioned Hopefully LGBT organizations take this situation into consideration before allowing your writers access to sensitive spaces like that of the transgender breakout session.
OH LORDY!!!!! Maybe when this thread hits #100, it will get back to the main point of this whole "Equality Summit"!!!
FOR THE RECORD I AM a self-proclaimed "TRANNY" and all of you who say that this writer or blogger or journalist or whatever, however bone-headed she or he was, does not "get to decide" who is and who is not offended – well YOU KNOW WHAT, NONE OF YOU DO EITHER!!! Just because YOU may be trans, it doesn’t give you ANY MORE OF A RIGHT to decide who is and who is not offended!! FOR EXAMPLE, YOU don’t get to decide FOR ME whether I am offended or not. I, in fact, AM NOT, but to each his or her own! This term has MIXED ACCEPTANCE in our little community!! Even if it WAS a MISTAKE to use it, she or he ALREADY SAID SORRY. NOW to go on a WITCH HUNT against a NON-TRANS PERSON who was ACTUALLY INTERESTED ENOUGH TO ATTEND, much less WRITE, about this "breakout session" is INSANE. This BLOG is not about trans isssues, but yet here is a POST that mentions US!! WOW!!!! MAYBE it was not TOTALLY PC, but IT IS A GOOD FIRST STEP. IF we want EQUAL RIGHTS, we CAN’T ALIENATE the FEW SYMPATHETIC NON-TRANS people! We need to EDUCATE and WORK WITH them, NOT shut them out. I bet all this ALREADY HAS DONE THAT.
This WITCH HUNT really IS "SHOOTING OURSELVES IN THE FOOT."
Bricar – Perhaps you should read this article about freedom of speech as you seem to think it means the freedom to say anything except things you don’t think are worthwhile. Turns out the actual definition is a lot less restrictive. Who knew?
Bricar’s problem is the assumption that people should know the use of the word "tranny" is considered offensive.
As pointed out previously, that Bricar and others here want to harp on the use of the one word, vs. applausing the fact that these issues were even brought up on a popular Los Angeles blog, indicates an even larger problem among some in the transgender community.
And as I also noted, the point about the word "tranny" being offensive was made and acknowledged by both Q and me… and way early in this conversation.
This shows that the transgenders shouldn’t be taken seriously. They are far too thin skinned and dependent on political correctness to live a viable life in the real world.
I happen to know Sandeen personally and local gay paper won’t pay any attention to Sandeen’s medication induced rantings. So it should come as no surprise that the TG movement is not taken seriously not even among the gays and lesbians.
Okay stick a fork in me because I am done.
This is a nice place I shall have to visit from time to time.
Take Care All.
S
I’m also buying Jaxson a drink.
If this continues, I’m looking at an outrageous tab.
oh, i’m sorry, i didn’t realize that trans people are supposed to kiss the feet of lgb people who decide to write about us, regardless of how they do it, or the language they use. honestly, reading the responses here just makes me less and less hopeful about the future of non-trans lgb folks as allies to trans people. to have so many people here imply that trans people who are upset about this are just crybabies is such a slap in the face.
it’s the most trite analogy, but if this was a straight liberal blog writing about the "fag session", would you think it was no big deal, and just TOTALLY AWESOME that you got a shout out?
Jason Burns…drinks on your tab…IF it wouldn’t offend I’d say I love you almost as Queequeg for this post. Back on point, I still believe this is an issue to be litigated and let the courts rule once and for all. It is a civil rights issue and we need some permanence.
I can’t wait to see what happens on question #69, but then again am a snarky smart ass and was tempted to do a "?" so I could claim it but opted to let some else have at it.
bondsinseconds
I can understand your worries about "the future of non-trans lgb folks as allies to trans people," considering how ugly the environment has been here. And while I am only one gay man, I hope that my example is proof that there are those of us who believe transgender issues and visibility are just as important (if not more so) compared to the issues and rights of the rest of the LGBT family. I personally believe that your community is a barometer for the overall successes and failures of the LGBT family. So instances of discrimination and/or violence against your community says a lot about all of us and is an attack on all of us.
Wow. This is still going on? Really?
The inner-12-year-old was already giggling when I saw the number of comments on this thread, and I was a little sad that I was one comment too late. Frazgo made a noble effort to let someone else have the fun, but something tells me that the numerological humor was lost.
I’ve stayed out of this fray so far, but here’s my two cents: Queequeg wrote a great post about a topic that probably doesn’t get enough coverage. In it, she used a lot of words that she doesn’t find offensive, but someone took offense to **one** of those words and hijacked the comment thread with their indignation, all but demanding a public apology and caning. Q did, in fact, apologize (jury’s still out on the caning, though I’m guessing probably not.) That was apparently not good enough, because those whose feathers were ruffled are still here complaining three days later in the longest MetBlogs comment thread I can ever recall seeing.
In Q’s experience, the word "tranny" was not offensive. It was brought to her attention that someone took offense, so she apologized. The end. Beyond that, it would seem that those who continue to complain do so simply to keep the issue alive and drawing attention. Negative attention, by the way, as it is based in controversy. It should be noted that I think Q’s original intent with this piece was to bring *positive* attention to her subject.
I hope it doesn’t seem too harsh when I say…get over it! Whenever Bill O’Rielly (okay, I don’t really watch Bill O’) says something that offends me beyond repair, I just change the channel. I would hate to lose a reader, because I think MetBlogs has a lot of great stuff to see, including this original post, but if someone isn’t getting what they need here there are a lot of other channels to turn to. There’s no need to keep making the same complaint over and over once it has been addressed.
"There’s no need to keep making the same complaint over and over once it has been addressed."
Sandeen is mentally ill, clinically so as in on SSD for being so. You think you got comments here? Sandeen fired up over 148 comments on Pam’s Transgender Blend attacking this blog and the original poster completely with threats of physical violence against women of transsexual history. What Sandeen is not is a journalist. Many of us were laughing our butts off because Sandeen is the idiot that browbeat GLAAD into "trans" definitions that simply are ludicrous. Tranny and it’s variations were time honoured terms of endearment within trans communities for decades prior to Sandeen. Add ed to the end of transgenger and Sandeen will spring for your throat despite the fact that it’s used almost with the same frequency in writing with trans circles as without it. And worse of all was the promotion of the term "transgender" as an umbrella term. Again for more than a decade those who were born classic transsexuals have voiced our open opposition to that. We don’t "trans" our gender, it’s consistent from birth, the term itself was coined by the rabidly anti-transsexual Charles Prince and it links those with a neurological form of intersexuality with those with sexual fetishes. We have been silenced, threated, harassed, banned etc just for voicing this opposition. So watching Sandeen try to pull the bullying here and failing is wonderful to see.
You wish to support some of us? Sign our petition to GLAAD to stop using "transgender" as an umbrella definition against the express wishes of a segment pushed under that umbrella in direct disrespect of our collective wishes:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/transgender-is-not-an-umbrella
And for what it’s worth, a number of us found this fine blog as a result of the controversy so I’d guess you’ll gain many more readers than you will lose.
BTW, for those following along: one reason you should be happy we don’t eliminate "hate speech" is because it keeps the person who wrote those words accountable. So if someone does write something idiotic, it can be used to bite them in the ass later on.
[...] January 31, 2009 So You Want a Gender Revolution?..The Binary Bites Back Posted by catkisser under Pam’s House Blend, bigotry, cis-gendered, cis-privileged, cis-sexual, feminism, gender terrorism, transfeminism, transgender, transsexual, women of transsexual history Lisa Harney just showed up in my comments section. She complained that I “misrepresented” her positions when the entire first 2/3 of the blog entry was her own unedited words. Hmmmmm. Trannyland is currently up in arms about folks using the word tranny…another hmmmm. “Autumn” Sandeen actually blew a gasket over it on Pam’s Transgender House complete with allowing almost endless attacks on a trans supportive lesbian, Maura Hennessey, and on another supportive lesbian ally on LA Metblogs. [...]
[...] of the GLBT. They are also the most vocal and, by far, the easiest targets. At the recent GayCon 2009 equality summit of the GLBT, one lesbian reporter had this to say: “I went to the tranny [...]