Aqueertheory at Below The Belt, nutshelling Julie Serano, ((I posted a similar quote from Serano last year.)) writes:
…one of the main problems that trans women face is the common belief that their femaleness and femininity are somehow fake or inauthentic. This view is constantly (re)emphasized in the mainstream media. Transsexual women are routinely portrayed “in the act of putting on lipstick, dresses, and high heels, thereby giving the audience the impression that the trans woman’s femaleness is an artificial mask or costume” (41). Their desire to be female is reduced to the pursuit of “stereotypically feminine appearance(s) and gender role(s),” which emphasizes that they are not real women, but men who are simply parading as women (41).
This notion is reinforced in movies that feature trans women characters. Serano identifies two major cinematic archetypes: the “deceptive” and the “pathetic” transsexual. The former successfully pass as women, but their trans status (usually signalled by the presence of a penis) is eventually revealed in a dramatic fashion as an “unexpected plot twist” (36). This pattern is evident in the Jim Carrey movie, Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. At the end of the film, Ace Ventura strips Lois Einhorn, a female police lieutenant, down to her underwear so that the audience can see her penis and testicles tucked between her legs. All of the characters present in the room with Einhorn proceed to retch in disgust – the “deceptive” transsexual has been revealed and everybody is expected to exhibit shock, horror and disgust at the “fact” that she is “really a man.” […]
In contrast, the “pathetic” transsexual is portrayed as completely unable to pass as a woman, even though she strongly insists that she is female. She is given obviously masculine mannerisms and characteristics, such as the five o’clock shadow, and openly makes references to the absence of a penis or to her intention to eventually “ha[ve] the chop” (41). According to Serano, this “extreme combination of masculinity and femininity does not seem to be designed to challenge the audience’s assumptions about maleness and femaleness… [the ‘pathetic’ transsexuals’] masculine voice and mannerisms are meant to demonstrate that, despite her desire to be female, she cannot change the fact that she is really and truly a man.”
I agree with all that. Unfortunately, even some of my favorite performers, like the brilliant British comedy group The League of Gentlemen, engage in exactly this sort of bigotry.
I have to admit, I can’t think of a single mainstream media presentation of transsexuality that doesn’t fall into one of these two categories (unless you could the psycho serial killer trans stereotype). Even relatively progressive films still tend to contain the “transformation” scene, usually shot in an almost fetishistic style (close-up of lipstick being applied, etc.).
Comics don’t do much better. I think there was a good trans character in Dykes to Watch Out For, who wasn’t presented in these ways. There was a major trans character in Sandman, but although she was also presented respectfully, she wasn’t able to be genuinely female, rather than “fake,” until after she died and was in Heaven.
Aqueertheory does misstep a little, I think, writing:
The situation is unfortunately not that much better in the allegedly more progressive feminist, academic and transgender/queer circles. Serano notes that, “there are numerous parallels between the way trans women are depicted in the media and the way that they have been portrayed by some feminist theorists.”
Serano seemingly took care to make it clear she was talking about some, not all, feminist theorists (at least in what Aqueertheory quoted). Unfortunately, Aqueertheory seems to ascribe transphobia to all feminist, academic, and transgender/queer circles. There are bigotries and problems in all these communities, true, but it’s a wild overstatement to claim that the transgender community is only marginally better at avoiding transphobia than Ace Ventura, Pet Detective. And it’s a wild overstatement that denies the hard work some people in those communities have put in to address exactly these issues.
I am definitely not saying that transphobia in the feminist community shouldn’t be acknowledged and criticized (past “Alas” posts have criticized feminist transphobia), and Aqueertheory makes many points I agree with. But I don’t think that we should pretend that the transphobes own all of feminism, either. Certain transphobic feminists may think that their views represent the One True Feminist Viewpoint, but I don’t think those of us who aren’t transphobic should concede feminism to them.
First, I agree with your points, and I didn’t bother to click on the link you provided, since I don’t need to start my day with another transphobic comedy routine. They do pop up all over.
DtWOF had at least two good trans characters, one adult and one kid, both MtF. It was nice to see. In fact, Bechdel did a strip especially for a book (_Gender Outlaw_, I think), in which Mo gets neurotic about being in the bathroom with a trans woman, and Lois tells her to get a grip on her transphobia.
But the main reason I wanted to reply was Sandman. I enjoy pretty much everything Gaiman writes, and I loved most of Sandman, but I had trouble with his first trans character, Wanda. He got some things right, like when Barbie demonstrates a bit of transphobia by asking, “Alvin? That’s your real name?” and Wanda replies, “Wanda’s my real name, Barbie-baby, Alvin’s just the name I was born with.” So there were bits of dialogue which were good, as always. But her last name? Mann? Really, Neil? Did you really think that was clever? Really?
But the thing which really burned me was that the story centered around a dream world, and involved a magical journey, and a death magic worked by a witch (Thessaly), but Wanda can’t go along … because she has the wrong chromosomes.
It’s biology-as-destiny again, and it was terribly jarring that a story which could not have been more fanciful and fantastic got reduced to something as scientifically determinative as chromosomes. I accept that Wanda couldn’t go along on the journey with the other women, but Gaiman could have written so many other reasons for that. Instead, he chose one which said to the audience, “She’s not really a woman.” In such a fantastical story, perhaps Gaiman could have granted that what counts most could be what was in the deepest part of Wanda’s being: her soul.
Now, it was utterly appropriate that Thessaly, the radical feminist character, rejected Wanda’s desire to go along. Many radical feminists reject trans women to this day, let alone back in 1993. And since Thessaly was running that part of the show, all she had to say was, “You can’t come. You’re not a real woman.” In fact, it would have rung very true if Thessaly had done that and we later found out that her rejection of Wanda was arbitrary, and entirely her own decision. That was all Gaiman needed, to get his characters where they needed to be. And that would have been a twofer, because it would have added a different nuance to the plot.
I accepted that Wanda died, and that she was the real tragic character of the whole story arc, and that Barbie, and therefore the audience, got to learn something out of the whole thing. Barbie’s act of defiance after the funeral, by using lipstick to cross out Wanda’s birth name and write “Wanda” instead? That was ground-breaking at the time. If it might seem obvious now, that’s a sign of how far we’ve come. Wanda taught a lot of cispeople that a trans person could at least be a sympathetic token, so that was good.
1993 was not long after “The Silence of the Lambs” came out, and we all learned that trans women are psychotic murderers who skin people in order to expand their wardrobes. It was wonderful to have a trans character who was portrayed positively in any light, let alone as a heroine who dies while protecting a friend. That was awesome. So it’s not that I’m angry at Gaiman or didn’t like “A Game of You”.
But … chromosomes? As a condition of entry into a dream world?
Gaiman’s work is so good, so much fun, so delightful… it just sticks in my craw. In anyone else’s work, it wouldn’t be remarkable at all. In the end, it’s mainly the contrast which makes it stand out.
Whew. Got that off my chest. Thanks for reading.
Grace
In fact, it would have rung very true if Thessaly had done that and we later found out that her rejection of Wanda was arbitrary, and entirely her own decision.
Yes! Exactly this! Thessaly strikes me as a gender essentialist and it was certainly in character for her to deny Wanda’s womanhood. I could happily cope with Thessaly’s magic – founded on her beliefs – not working for Wanda, either. The fact that her views were backed up in the text – and Wanda did not live to refute it – was genuinely transphobie.
Interesting read. Prompted me to think about the trans character on Ugly Betty. That is possibly a case where we don’t see the transformation scene?
Grace,
Alison Bechdel’s DTWOF did have two trans characters. One young teen MtF and one adult FtM, the teen the child of Lois’s girlfriend, the adult a mechanic friend of Lois’s.
There was an episode of Veronica Mars with a pretty good trans woman character; I think it was towards the beginning of the first season? She was part of the caper of the week, so it was a small role, but she was never presented as “fake” or anything of the sort; you found out that she was trans because her son (from a previous marriage, before her transition) hired the title character to find his father. While the son’s initial reaction to the discovery of his parent’s gender was somewhat negative, it ended positively (with the son making steps to get to know her and to have her in his life again). There was deception involved, but the deception had been practiced by the boy’s mother, who had told him that his father was dead.
That’s the only mainstream example I can think of, unfortunately.
Alison Bechdel’s DTWOF had three transsexual characters. 1 young MtF, 1 adult MtF, and 1 adult FtM.
The adult MtF was only in a couple of strips.
There was a debate by transauthors regarding the portrayal of the transwoman in Sandman. One who was ok with it, and another who wasn’t. It was published in an lit crit book on the topic of the sandman. That said, the one who was ok with it herself wrote a story with Wanda.
Favorite scene with a transwoman was in a comic (Deathwish). She’s watching a talkshow with a stereotypical portrayal of a transwoman. She eventually shoots the TV.
The Education of Max Bickford had a Transwoman character that was pretty prominent in the story. But they cut her out quickly and very cruelly. She was outed to her boyfriend by Max’s son. Boyfriend left, and the transwoman character was not seen or referred to again. It was a good portrayal up unil that point.
Good find on the article, this is an issue that’s fairly important to me. It’s one of those issues that never seems to make much progress. As a friend of mine once pointed out, “the only two communities left that everyone feels safe to dump on are the overweight and the transgendered; and fat people are making progress thanks to McDonalds.”
Has anyone ever written how social progress is like a huge game of Musical Chairs, and eventually there will just be one group everyone else will feel it’s fine to treat like crap? If no one can think of such a diatribe, I shall write it, spam it to the world, and nominate rich white Republican bankers to be the last group standing in that game.
Brian, I’d be very careful in the choice of terms. Transgender is NOT the same thing as Transexual. Check out this thread on my blog. Plenty of good info there about Transexual and Intersex. http://thomascwaters.com/2541
Grace Annam
I also reacted to Wanda’s disallow from entering the Dreaming in the same way, but on reflection I thought Gaiman made a very deliberate, thought provoking choice in it. They pass into the Dreaming through the moon, which ties into the feminine via its connection to the menstrual cycle. As a transwoman, this is something that Wanda is biologically barred from, despite being mentally female. Gaiman portrays this as the way things are, but not, however, as something that is “right” or “fair”. Anyways, it definitely gives you a thinking point to come back to. Of course, part of this could just be that I love Gaiman so damned much.
Apart from that, yeah, I’m finding it hard to think of any real positive transperson representations in mainstream media. I can think of at least a few sitcoms in which a person from one of the main characters’ pasts comes back as a different gender, the episode plays with the character’s discomfort for laughs and ands with an Aesop about accepting people for who they are, but usually the trans character would be gone forever by the end of the episode. I guess that’s something of a positive portrayal, at least compared with the pathetic/sham/murderer trinity.
Sam L,
Gaiman has actually said in interview explicitly that the way Wanda was treated in that scene is unfair, and meant to be so: Thessaly is not a nice woman, and neither are the Goddesses she serves very nice. He said that while he wrote Thessaly and her deities cruelly excluding Wanda from “counting” as a woman, he did not mean them to speak for him, the author, and meant the final verdict to be the one we see approved by Death, who is not only rather more sympathetic than Thessaly and her moon-Goddesses, but, as far as the world of the Sandman, is the closest thing any character is to always being right.
That is: Gaiman wrote Thessaly and her deities treating Wanda poorly in much the same way he wrote Wanda’s family treating her poorly, but with much more power, and when a character we as the readers are always meant to trust weighs in, it’s on the side of confirming Wanda’s womanhood.
That said, did we need another scene of a trans woman being rejected and excluded? And did she really have to be surnamed “Mann”? I don’t know.
Thomas Waters,
You point out an interesting example in “Ugly Betty”–the character Alexis, while she originally appears as the “deceptive transsexual” who is scheming and villainous and ultimately revealed as “really” Daniel’s brother Alex, is portrayed afterward as sympathetic and even heroic. There are even storylines about how wrong her family was to reject her upon coming out, and she and her mother have a very sweet relationship that leaves no question that Alexis is a daughter. However, she is constantly subjected, even offscreen, to nasty “tranny” jokes and transphobic mockery in the script, and ultimately went off the rails as an unstable attempted murderer and was further misgendered during a storyline about a child she “fathered” before transition–decisions which, among others, were considered so disrespectful by the cis actress protraying Alexis that said actress quit the show. So that ought to be taken into account, too.
Emilia,
I’d take it as a kindness if you’d put a space between “trans” and other words, like “woman.” “Trans” is an adjective; I’m not a transauthor or a transwriter or a transwoman with a transjob who goes to the transstore for transgroceries. Putting in a space–“trans woman,” “trans author,” “trans character”–makes it clearer that “trans” is a descriptor like any other, not a way to denote an alien species. I’m a woman who’s trans–a trans woman–not a whole ‘nother creature. You’ll find a lot of people carry this grammatical preference.
Really enjoying the comments. Guess I have missed a few seasons of UB, so there was more than I was aware of. Thx.
Its worth pointing out that Aqueertheory’s analysis contradicts that of Charlotte Croson quoted here:
(Ampersand has already dismissed the passage as a whole as transbigoted. Here I’m focusing upon the specific claim’s fidelity to reality.)
Becoming women, i.e., “not men”, is the very thing that trans women cannot do in the view of mainstream trans bigotry. So they’re viewed as either deceptive (men who appear to be women, but aren’t) or pathetic (men who try to appear to be women, but fail.) Cronson “can not help but think of” a murdered trans man (in her seeming view, a woman), but apparently can help but think of any murdered trans women (again, seemingly in her view, men), who, it is my strong impression, are the majority of trans murder victims.
The stark fact, that all the feminist theorising about “violence against women” cannot erase, is that (cis) men are more likely to be violently victimised, and much more likely to be murdered than (cis) women. Femaleness has a protective effect relative to maleness. Trans women are not viewed as women by their attackers, but as failed men, and it is in that capacity that they are targeted.
Without generalising to other murders of trans men, the particular circumstances of Teena’s killing suggests that he was may also have been viewed by his murders as a failed man. They and Teena had been associates, with Teena successfully passing as male until he was identified in the press as female. Clearly his overall appearance had been sufficiently masculine to pass. It was only after he had been outed that they attacked him.
Whether trans women and trans men are viewed as failed women or failed men by their attackers, or as something less than either, it is clear that they are not viewed as successful women, and do not benefit from the protection from violence that status brings.
Glad you liked the article.
One thing that’s very important to me is that I’m anti-fat bigotry (it gets a category of its own on “Alas”).
So with all due respect, Bri: Fat jokes are completely unacceptable on “Alas.” Period.
(If you want to defend your joke — and I think you shouldn’t — please use an open thread, not this thread).
I’m not sure how much this counts as ‘mainstream’, but I remember the British film Different For Girls as having a really well-written transsexual character. It’s a romance between a guy and his best friend from school who he meets again after she has transitioned. There’s a really good scene early on where he asks her why trans women ‘overdo’ things like wearing skirts and make up, and she gives him a Look and replies, ‘My second appointment with the psychiatrist, I wore jeans. He told me that if I wasn’t going to take this seriously I might as well give up now.’
There’s certainly no element of deception in the portrayal. There’s maybe a touch of fetishism; in another scene she describes how her body has changed, and he gets aroused. But Kim’s certainly one of the best trans women I’ve seen onscreen.
Daran:
It’s false to imply that women are protected from violence in general. Your statement makes violence against women invisible, or at least dismisses it as anything important.
What is true is that types of violence are strongly gendered. Some types of violence are more likely to happen to men (including murder and stranger violence), some types are more likely to happen to women (including rape and intimate violence). (eta: Although there are exceptions to this rule, such as within male prisons.)
Take any response to an open thread, please.
Daran, one more thing:
You seem to be using a thread about bigotry against trans people, not to focus on or talk about trans bigotry, but as an occasion to leap upon your hobby horse (which is how much worse you think “(cis) men” have it than “(cis) women”).
That isn’t an appropriate use of this thread, and I don’t think that it will seem very welcoming to trans readers who happen upon this blog. For that reason, please don’t post on this thread any longer.
Thank you for this! Really synthesized some points on media portrayals – excellent discussion and much needed!
As for the DTWOF characters…don’t forget that Lois identifies as genderqueer! Part of the reason Lois takes on caring for Janis is because Lois wants Janis to have trans role models. We get to see a really respectful arch of Lois coming to identify as genderqueer – probably one of the few portrayals ever!
Ampersand, as a trans woman I find this topic to be very relevant, and one I’d like to hear more about. A complete lack of humor is something I do find off-putting however. Censorship is a bitch.
@Sandman, Little Light: I read the Thessaly/Wanda/moon-Goddess thing a bit differently. Also, I didn’t know Gaiman had said that in an interview, but it confirms what I’d sort of suspected. I’m fascinated by Wicca/neo-pagan traditions, but I’m not very knowledgeable and I’m not a practitioner – so if I step on toes, I’m really sorry and please feel free to correct my understanding and/or facts.
The moon-Goddesses as symbolic of the menstrual cycle and deeply tied to uterus-central behavior (the Maiden is puberty/maturity, the Mother is fertility/reproduction, the Crone is menopausal/aging) has been a criticism of Triple-Goddess-driven theological models prior to Sandman. Not everybody – particularly not everybody who is a woman – defines their life by the functioning of their female reproductive organs. An AIS girl who never experienced traditional menarche/puberty would never “become the Maiden” – and that leaves her out of a lot of the Maiden symbolism directed at girls like her by people who use the Triple Goddess religious model. I like the Maiden, Mother and Crone in a sort of vague symbolic way – entering the Mother phase of life, imo, might be starting to give lectures and nurture/teach students instead of learning from others, becoming a mentor figure to younger people, or a lot of other things that aren’t necessarily biological reproduction. In a very specific, traditional interpretation, I can see how the Triple Goddess might bother a lot of people, including Wanda, and appeal very well to people like Thessaly.
I did not think radical feminists *or* uterus-driven and somewhat unfriendly Goddesses of the moon would accept Wanda as a woman – and that they rejected her was cruel and wrong. I can see how “the Gods decided this” can seem like the-author-says-so in a story, but I saw it as “these Goddesses are being meanies because they have a tradition of being unfair in this way.” The fact that nobody really valued and respected Wanda for who she was except Death and eventually Barbie was deeply tragic.
Eva – “humor” requires that someone has said something funny.
Neither “X [and maybe Y] is the last acceptable prejudice”* nor “fat people eat at McDonald’s!” is actually funny.
So demanding that Ampersand, and his other readers, have “a sense of humor” is a great derailing tactic (it fits beautifully into the “you’re oversensitive/you like being offended” categories) and is half a breath away from the “why are you such a humorless (woman/feminist, fat person, person of color, trans person, Jewish person, disabled person, etc. etc.)” attack that is a hallmark of privilege. But it’s not worth much as a way of advocating for more levity and humor on the site.
* a phrase that, if you Google it, turns up as the alleged “last acceptable prejudice”: anti-Catholicism, classism, fatphobia, gingerism (intolerance of redheads), homophobia, intolerance of Southern accents (a kind of classism, probably), anti-autism, anti-suburbia… and a hell of a lot of posts pointing out that racism and sexism haven’t exactly been solved either; it’s just easy for people with privilege to be ignorant about how they work and how pervasive they still are. It’s mildly entertaining to debate: is it more irritating as a rhetorical device because it’s so meaningless, or because it’s so divisive? Or is it the specific combination of meaninglessness and divisiveness that makes it extra-special irritating, a kind of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup of bad rhetoric?
Interesting post! I think where feminism and trans support overlap is mostly supported on the intersectional blogs, though – I’m happy to be told I’m wrong, but the strongly feminism-only blogs I’ve found have commentary that is much more trans phobic than blogs like Alas, Shakesville, or Hoyden About Town. I’ve been really horrified by the refusal of some feminists to acknowledge trans women as female, and am unable to see their arguments as to why they feel that way as anything but justification for their bigotry.
I think the blogs where feminism is considered an equal part of the fight against all oppression is where trans people can have a reasonable expectation of respectful conversation, but I have a hard time including radical feminist sites in that collection. Of course, mainstream media is all about the hate, since it caters to the lowest instincts in the mob mentality, upholding the status quo and hammering down anyone who dares to break from rigidly prescribed societal roles.
Amp, this post made me think of the comments thread from the Taking Steps post you linked here some months ago, in which Little Light discussed her experience of growing up as a trans girl thrown in with the (I’m assuming) cis boys. A commenter said (amongst other hateful, silencing, invalidating things) that Little Light had not been a girl as a child, but a boy who wished to be a girl. I wonder how many trans people (or people who do not fit on the male/female gender binary in some other fashion) have had people tell them that their experience WASN’T REAL in this fashion.
I am a white cis woman, so I can’t say from my own personal experience what it’s like to grow up trans. I am a feminist, which means to me that I believe women are people who deserve to be treated with the same dignity and respect as any other human being. I define women as people who identify as female, be they cis or trans. I will be damned if I will tell ANYONE that zir experience is/was not real, and I’ll be doubly damned if I won’t at least try to be an ally to people whose experiences of marginalization is different from mine.
To quote the subtitle from my own blog, “No one is free when others are oppressed.”
Is anyone watching Los Victorinos on Telemundo?
A transgendered woman’s the mom of one of the Victorinos. She’s called “Tia”, because she and her spouse adopted him after his birth mother died, but she’s a mom, all the same. The kid’s trying to find his way, but there’s nothing but love between all of them.
http://www.filmchik.com/google-image-result-for-httplh6ggphtcompnqvep
I did not know about that interview, little light. Fair enough. As Larry Niven pointed out:
I could argue that perhaps it could have been clearer in the story, but that could just as easily be a reflection on me than on Gaiman. On the other hand, if enough people missed that point, then perhaps Gaiman missed his mark.
However, nobody’s perfect, and Gaiman’s writing approaches perfection more closely than mine ever will. Sometimes it hurts worst coming from the best, because we get drawn in further. I hated the Lord of the Rings movies for the same reason; the adaptation was so good in so many ways, that the errors were especially painful; I couldn’t just dismiss them entirely, the way I could earlier attempts.
As for whether we needed another scene of a trans woman being rejected? Yeah, we did, as long as she’s a sympathetic character. Writing Wanda as a tragic sympathetic character, at that time, opened a lot of people’s eyes, and we all benefited. Certainly we want to get past it to other representations, but the more times people look at a trans person getting the short end of the stick and say, “That’s not fair!” the better off we are.
Grace
“As for whether we needed another scene of a trans woman being rejected? Yeah, we did, as long as she’s a sympathetic character. Writing Wanda as a tragic sympathetic character, at that time, opened a lot of people’s eyes, and we all benefited. Certainly we want to get past it to other representations, but the more times people look at a trans person getting the short end of the stick and say, “That’s not fair!” the better off we are.”
Grace, if there’s a diversity of trans images out there then that wouldn’t be a problem. But the prevalent image of trans people do fall into the deceptive, pathetic, or dead categories.
Even Southpark stopped killing off Kenny at some point.
For what it’s worth, I did understand Gaiman’s intent — Thessaly was supposed to be shown as kind of a jerk. Death is, as someone already said, the character who is always right. On the whole, the character was definitely positive, and Gaiman (I thought) very clearly came down on the side of her being a woman.
But I still disliked the way she was shown as more “truly” female in the afterlife than she was before she died.
I see where you’re coming from, but that doesn’t bother me one whit. Like every transsexual, I’ve lived my life not seeing what I should in the mirror, and if I believed in heaven I’m sure I’d look forward to that problem being remedied.
I imagine that cisgender people think of themselves and loved ones as a bit idealized in heaven, too.
I know that this gets into a host of issues about the definition of “ideals” and the notion of gender divisions and stereotypes and so on, and I acknowledge the validity of those issues. But Wanda got to go to heaven, and got to have the heavenly body she wanted, and it felt good to see it.
Grace
Concerning Gaiman and Wanda, while I am quite a fan of him, I was a tiny bit pissed off by an entry on his blog : http://journal.neilgaiman.com/2003/06/questions-answered-neverwhere.asp , where he puts her «in the male gay camp», «depending on your definitions»…
Though, despite that, I was really happy to read that comics while I was doubting whether transitionning or not.
Yeah, there’s that. I mean, there is already not much depiction of sympathetic trans people, but sympathetic trans people that survive until the end of the story ?
For me, particularly at the beginning of transition, I really felt a lack of trans characters with whom I could have identified and who would not just be eternal victims.
Very interesting read. Really got me thinking about a few things and more so my new life that I was almost certain I wanted to have. Not so sure the more I read and see, I dont think I need/want all the complications that go along with what it is to be a transsexual. If only it were more accepted but look a how long it has taken for same sex marriage. I think we have a long long time to go, just the way the media/word is.
Ah, you have reflected every bit of my contention with the popular transgender media (and mainstream media, for that matter). Having transitioned myself and dared to make myself a public person over the years, I have found myself directly at odds with editors of transgender sex magazines. What is the justification offered by these surviving magazines for going hardcore? I am told that doing so is the only way to make money…after all, look at all those who presented trans-folk of all types in magazines that really were tasteful? They’re all gone!
Yet, what isn’t taken into account by so many people is the image the transgender media has consistently presented over the years: the image of our most common profession when we have been denied more mainstream employment for so long. While we may be much more than that, the rest of the world doesn’t see it. Theirs is a cultivated taste, based upon the contact with us as people who only come out as transpeople when working in the sex industry. The mainstream media doesn’t have that from which to draw because that which is considered honorable blends is scarcely noticed.
Anyone in the sex industry will generally be looked upon as second-rate people who weren’t smart enough to live otherwise. Never mind that transfolk are known as a well-educated demographic. The book, Transgender Voices, by Lori Girschick notes this, as well as noting that as of 2008, the average income was under $20k/annum, compared to about $38k for women and $48k for men.
It’s a state not far removed those of French people whom the Algerians allowed to remain in their country after that country’s independence…allowed only to wander and eat out of garbage cans, all to show what their idea of a Frenchman is really supposed to be…retarded, stupid, unworthy of being given the chance to live decently.
In one respect, I have done blending of my own. My blog doesn’t deal directly with trans issues, but on philosophy as connected with dreaming and innocence. Because when I committed to transition, I determined not to involve myself in the sex industry. It cost me friends. But I made others too.
And please…my transition has not been about trying to deceive anyone. It has been about living the truth of who I know myself to be. While I realize there is a difference between one who is born with the full endowments of femaleness from birth and those who transitioned from male to female, female is who I am in my heart of hearts, and others respond to me as a female as well.
Good blog!