I know one of the people who defined transgender in the 1990’s for London LGBT Pride (The B and T had just been added that year after a hard fight by the group) as an umbrella term that included crossdressers, drag performers, genderqueer, non-binary and people with gender dysphoria. The decision was unanimous.
Even then, she very quickly had problems with exclusionist trans people trying to narrow the definition down to only people who are like them.
Before that definition, transgender was an abandoned word used to describe full time crossdressers who were not interested in medical treatment.
I spotted something interesting on Erin Palette’s blog recently that I wanted to share. It’s good food for thought.
To make an analogy, your sex is the country where you were born but your gender is the country of your citizenship.
Most people are happy being citizens of the country of their birth, but some people want to immigrate to a place where they can be happier. That doesn’t make naturalized citizens any less American than those who were born here; it just means they had different life experiences growing up, and that gives them a different perspective on the American condition.
Similarly, transwomen aren’t any less women than those who were born female; it just means they had different life experiences growing up, and that gives them a different perspective on being a woman.
Saying that “only those born female can be women” is like saying “only those born in America can be American”, which is a terribly limiting mindset.
I think that’s an interesting way of putting it.
☆I should probably note that Erin’s blog won’t be to everyone’s taste here. She’s strongly into guns, and seems to be of a more conservative bent than the average person here. I don’t always agree with her myself, and her guest blogger Salem with his “Social Justice Loonies” nonsense makes me want to hurl my phone across the room more often than not. But I still check in from time to time, since she’s a fellow Discordian (which is how I first found her blog) who’s got a great sense of humor and does some amazing writing, including designing role-playing games. (She is awesome at it!) And I still want her to finish that novel she started years ago, Curse/Or.
I thought the point was, though, what if women skaters could come in all sorts of body sizes and didn’t need to look so “feminine” or act so femininely in order to advance in the sport? I think it’s a provocative question.
A friend of mine used to skate competitively; I knit her some matching warm-up cardigans to go with her costumes. The short answer is they basically just have to wear a leotard, which is what you used to see more often. The longer skirts which seem to be in this year are kind of retro-50s.
Sure we could talk about the sequins and the fichus and other elements, but men’s costumes have those too.
Not to mention costume had nothing to do with whether or not one can manage a quad jump.
I thought her point was less about the costume and more about what is accepted in the sport from women - that the judges value ladylike moves over brute physicality.
That’s neat about you knitting cardigans for your friend!!
Okay, but we went through that before with the quad jumps, where women are doing them in competition despite what the tweeter claimed.
And, I dunno, I’m tired of “brute physicality” being the only measure of athleticism. I like that the Games allow things like poise and flexibility to be valued too, in men and women skaters and gymnasts – something the original tweeter neither recognizes nor apparently appreciates.
That’s a good point. It’s why I enjoy gymnastics and ice skating, that there is artistry to it and not just jumping. The people who are just good jumpers are not as interesting to me as the ones who are beautiful to watch on the ice. Last night, for example, the top Canadian skater gave a less athletic performance but was into every aspect of the artistic expression. Some of the people who are very good at the athletic components have to break their concentration on the artistic expression as they are preparing to go into the big jumps.
Last night the girl who skated to AC/DC definitely was not rewarded for that - though, I wonder if she had done it really well if it might have been more fun. I liked her attempt, at least, at being a head banging rock n roller on ice. And I did cringe when Johnny Weir said the one skater had a “nice, demure skate.”
Some of the limitation on a good performance also comes, I think, from what kind of music works in an arena. I notice that the rock n roll songs come out tinny and the symphonic pieces swell and fill the space.
And to that point, I’m not a sports-oriented person, but I was with friends who are during that opening weekend so we watched a lot of it together, and I would point out immediately which ice skaters had dance – and specifically, ballet – training and which ones didn’t. Male and female. Didn’t know any of them, but it shows in how they move through their routines. It makes a HUGE, very noticeable difference (if you know what to look for).
Which reminds me of an opposite point: I noticed in a couple of different sports that weekend that the athletes who took risks, even if they weren’t as agile and polished in completing them, got higher marks than those who had a flawless performance that was solid and interesting but didn’t take wild risks. That includes the women in the various ice skating competitions which are supposed to be at least partly based on grace and ease of execution. So, we’re back to the original idea that ‘male’ movement is more valued than ‘female’ movement.
For the record, there are lots of rainbow kippahs to choose from.
Edited to add: the problem is the Orthodox “modest” aspect…which is the same as in every other religion. The people who wear rainbow kippahs, hijabs, etc. are not in the fundamentalist side of their respective religions.
And in further news, the article was specifically about wearing religious rainbow accessories to the Pride parade in Melbourne, which reminded me of how inclusion and diversity are not always welcomed in situations like that. Take Chicago, for example:
Which harkens me back to WHY there’s a separate dyke march in Chicago: in general, the lesbian community here is incredibly hostile toward men. I used to march with a group of male friends because we were all in a dance club together, and I would be singled out and subjected to foul language and things thrown at me BY WOMEN for having the audacity to support men by walking next to them. After a couple of years, I decided it wasn’t worth the danger and the frustration to march with my friends (who happened to be male). Ditto for some concerts of folk singers I really liked but because they were lesbian, if they came to Chicago they played to all-female audiences that were astonishingly hostile if, for example, their warmup act was male, or even just a straight woman. Like, literally, there are some lesbian singers who won’t come back to perform in Chicago because of how their non-lesbian friends are treated. There’s something really weird going on here.
I have gone wandering again in my post, haven’t I?
I learned that Peggy Fleming is doing a review of the artistic expression of the 2018 Olympic ice skaters somewhere. Does anyone have the 411 on that? I’d like to watch it.
