I hope everyone had a great week! Hang out. Chat. Talk about what’s going on. Have fun :3

  • good_girl [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago
    more book more book

    Oh! I just remembered!

    These last two comments reminded me about a specific part of Whipping Girl that I think can elaborate a bit on the kind of thinking that informed Imogen Binnie and possibly led to these views.

    In the last chapter of Whipping Girl, Serano touches on the topic of subversivism within the feminist movements of the time (90s to the early 10’s).

    There’s quite a bit more than what I’ve put below, but I remember feeling conflicted when I first finished this chapter. Obviously today definitions have changed and the idea of political lesbians and genderqueer identities has shifted. I wanted to understand more after finishing the book in regards to this topic but the trans spaces I looked in were severely lacking in even basic transmisogyny discussion, so I had no hope of finding more on it.

    Passages attached

    The practice of subversivism also negatively impacts trans people on the MTF spectrum. After all, in our culture, the meanings of “bold,” “rebellious,” and “dangerous”—adjectives that often come to mind when considering subversiveness—are practically built into our understanding of masculinity. In contrast, femininity conjures up antonyms like “timid,” “conventional,” and “safe,” which seem entirely incompatible with subversion. Therefore, despite the fact that the mainstream public tends to be more concerned and disturbed by MTF spectrum trans people than their FTM spectrum counterparts, subversivism creates the impression that trans masculinities are inherently “subversive” and “transgressive,” while their trans feminine counterparts are “lame” and “conservative” in comparison. Subversivism’s privileging of trans masculinities over trans femininities helps to explain why cissexual queer women and FTM spectrum folks tend to dominate the queer/trans community: Their exceptional gender expressions and identities are routinely empowered and encouraged in such settings. In contrast, there is generally a dearth of MTF spectrum folks who regularly inhabit queer/trans spaces.

    To me, the most surreal part of this whole transgressingversus-reinforcing- gender-norms dialogue in the queer/trans community (and in many gender studies classrooms and books) is the unacknowledged hypocrisy of it all. It is sadly ironic that people who claim to be gender-fucking in the name of “shattering the gender binary,” and who criticize people whose identities fail to adequately challenge our societal notions of femaleness and maleness, cannot see that they have just created a new gender binary, one in which subversive genders are “good” and conservative genders are “bad.” In a sense, this new gender binary isn’t even all that new. It is merely the original oppositional sexist binary flipped upside down. So now, gender- nonconforming folks are on top and gender-normative people are on the bottom —how revolutionary! Now, I understand the temptation for a marginalized group to turn the hierarchy that has oppressed them upside down, as it can feel very empowering to finally be atop the pecking order, but it’s absurd to claim that such approaches in any way undermine that binary. If anything, they only serve to reinforce it further.


    I believe that if the transgender movement had simply continued to view itself as an alliance of disparate groups working toward a shared goal (like making the world safer for gender-variant folks), it may have avoided such exclusivity while respecting the distinct differences and specific concerns of its various constituents. Instead, by promoting the idea that we must move beyond the supposedly outdated concept of “identity,” the transgender movement has created its own sense of “oneness.” Rather than viewing ourselves as a fragile political coalition of distinct subgroups, some activists instead encourage us to see ourselves as one big homogeneous group of individuals who blur gender boundaries. Rather than learning to respect the very different perspectives and experiences that each transgender subgroup brings to the table, the transgender community has instead become a sort of gender free-for-all, where identities are regularly co-opted by others within the community. These days, many transs*xuals assume that they have the right to appropriate the language of, or speak on behalf of, intersex people; similarly, many cissexual genderqueers feel they have the right to do the same for transs*xuals. This needlessly erases each group’s unique issues, obstacles, and perspectives.

    This sort of “gender anarchy”—where individuals are free to adopt or appropriate any identity as they please—might seem very limitless and freeing on the surface, but in practice it resembles gender-libertarianism, where those who are most marginalized become even more vulnerable to the whims of those who are more established. In this case, it leaves those of us who are cross-gender-identified susceptible to negation at the hands of the greater cissexual queer community. Indeed, it has become increasingly common for people who are primarily queer because of their sexual orientation to claim a space for themselves within the transgender movement.7 This is particularly true in the queer women’s community, which has become increasingly involved in transgender politics and discourses due to the recent sharp increase in the number of (1) previously lesbian-identified people transitioning to male, (2) dykes who now take on genderqueer or other FTM spectrum identities, and (3) non-trans queer women who seek a voice in the transgender community because they are partnered to FTM spectrum individuals.

    Because of our history, the fact that cissexual queers now dominate transgender and queer/trans communities and discourses is highly problematic for those of us who are transs*xual.

    • ashinadash [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago
      Unending bookposting!

      Oooooh look at this ✨ holy shit it’s incredible… You know…

      subversivism creates the impression that trans masculinities are inherently “subversive” and “transgressive,” while their trans feminine counterparts are “lame” and “conservative” in comparison.

      Now I think about it, Kieran and Maria kind of play this silly dichotomy out exactly, that must be intentional I suppose. But yes, I can see the whole-ass roots of Nevada’s weirdo takes right here, I feel like I put on the shades from They Live glasses-on this is fuckin awesome. Take a shot every time bad actors in the trans community recreate a gender binary. I know what “oppositional sexism” is! Kinda scuffed, again, claiming that non-binary gender identities are “on top”, like even just today I’ve watched a nonbinary person get conversationally trodden upon by binary trans women, what horseshit.

      I do actually find it kind of fascinating that Serano takes it back to queer unity though, that’s very interesting. But uh

      These days, many transs*xuals assume that they have the right to appropriate the language of, or speak on behalf of, intersex people; similarly, many cissexual genderqueers feel they have the right to do the same for transs*xuals. This needlessly erases each group’s unique issues, obstacles, and perspectives.

      What does this mean, lol. Please do not tell me that cissies have been stealing our language behind my back??? I beg of you… “Gender libertarianism” is fucking hilarious though. But this whole thing is fascinating, dang. I have been enlightened, and it turns out the solution was just to read theory all along!!! It almost reads like Maria misread Whipping Girl now, lol

      • good_girl [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago
        no gender-libs

        These days, many transs*xuals assume that they have the right to appropriate the language of, or speak on behalf of, intersex people; similarly, many cissexual genderqueers feel they have the right to do the same for transs*xuals. This needlessly erases each group’s unique issues, obstacles, and perspectives.

        So this is one of those parts that Serano intentionally left unchanged in later editions and Whipping Girl’s age becomes apparent again. Serano herself, and from what I gather- queer activism of the time, made the distinction between Transgender and MTF identities (MTF being anyone born male that displays exceptional feminine traits, qualities, or behaviors but can identify as their assigned gender or otherwise. Transgender being anybody who displays exceptional cross-gender traits, qualities, or behaviors but can identify as their assigned gender or otherwise) and Transs*xuals. (Essentially what we acknowledge today as transgender, meaning someone who identifies with a gender that’s incongruent with their assigned gender.)

        I’ll attach a passage at the end where she goes into it a bit as well.

        In this passage Serano is saying that cissexual genderqueers (meaning cissexuals who identify as genderqueer due to politics or potentially people who do not feel within the gender binary but also do not identify with transs*xuals.) had a tendency to speak for trans individuals while not entirely being affected by the same societal systems and pressures.

        I feel like I explained it badly but the messiness is a product of the age of the text I think.

        also i’ll just attach a link to the book to make it easier to look up if you need to.

        passage

        Now that we understand “sex” and “gender,” we can begin to consider the word transgender, which is perhaps one of the most confusing and misunderstood words in the English language. While the word originally had a more narrow definition, since the 1990s it has been used primarily as an umbrella term to describe those who defy societal expectations and assumptions regarding femaleness and maleness; this includes people who are transs*xual (those who live as members of the sex other than the one they were assigned at birth), intersex (those who are born with a reproductive or sexual anatomy that does not fit the typical definitions of female or male), and genderqueer (those who identity outside of the male/female binary), as well as those whose gender expression differs from their anatomical or perceived sex (including crossdressers, drag performers, masculine women, feminine men, and so on). I will also sometimes use the synonymous term gender-variant to describe all people who are considered by others to deviate from societal norms of femaleness and maleness. The far-reaching inclusiveness of the word “transgender” was purposely designed to accommodate the many gender and sexual minorities who were excluded from the previous feminist and gay rights movements. At the same time, its broadness can be highly problematic in that it often blurs or erases the distinctiveness of its constituents. For example, while male crossdressers and transs*xual men are both male-identified transgender people, these groups face a very different set of issues with regards to managing their gender difference. Similarly, drag queens and transs*xual women generally have very different experiences and perspectives regarding gender, despite the fact that they are often confused with one another by mainstream society.

        • ashinadash [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago
          haha...

          …okay that’s really strange, huh. That’s not a definition I’ve ever heard of in my life and it doesn’t make any sense to me, not a word of it. So needlessly complicated and weird, thank fuck I was not on trans internet in 2007 because wtf.

          I see, are there really “political genderqueers”? Huh, now I don’t understand anything anymore blob-no-thoughts

          Is… the entire book steeped in ridiculous crusty terminology like this? A crisis, I wonder if I read Gender Outlaw wrong by not having this bizarro definition of “transgender” in mind. Maybe I am a lib.

          • good_girl [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago
            spoiler

            I see, are there really “political genderqueers”?

            I imagine that there were at the time in the same way there were political lesbians. Their existence would connect back with subversivism and the desire to ‘break the gender binary’.

            Is… the entire book steeped in ridiculous crusty terminology like this?

            Unfortunately it’s definitely spread throughout the book, but Serano does well to front-load the definitions. She goes into it a bit in the 2nd editions preface.

            While the major themes that I forward in Whipping Girl remain just as vital and relevant today as they were when I was first writing the book, some of the specific descriptions and details will surely seem increasingly dated as time marches on. So in this preface to the second edition, I want to place the book in historical context, as it most certainly was a reaction to what was happening in society, and within activist and academic circles, during the early-to-mid aughts (or “the zeros,” as I prefer to call the first decade of this millennium). While a decade is not a huge amount of time in the grand scheme of things, it certainly feels like a lifetime ago when it comes to public understandings and discussions about transgender people.

            http://juliaserano.blogspot.com/2016/04/excerpt-from-whipping-girl-second.html