Trans and feminism
2006-02-21 17:57![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
flexibeasti had a rather geekily-amusing thought yesterday. When people learn that i'm trans, the majority immediately ask whether i'm "pre-op or post-op". This is hardly surprising, of course, since the general public typically has difficulties differentiating between 'gay', 'transvestite', and 'transsexual', a situation that the mass media does little to amend. So the question usually results in an explanation of the diversity of trans* identities, and the fact that, though i'm on hormones, i never intend to have SRS.
So last night it occured to me that i could describe myself as a 'no-op'. As a programmer, i found this notion amusing. :-)
Speaking of being trans: effectively going through puberty a second time has meant that i'm breaking out in zits again. This time, however, they're not on my face, but on my ass! And for some reason, i feel that's more embarrasing . . . . make of that what ye will. :-)
Finally, and on a related note:
Bashing second-wave feminism seems to be the 'in' thing at the moment. i've read a number of threads where people seem to be homogenising second-wave feminism into representing little more than simplistic anti-male sex-hating transphobia. The reality, of course, is that the second wave, whilst certainly containing such attitudes, also contained the very antitheses of those attitudes.
The second wave represented an upswelling of consciousness amongst women about their social and political situation, and a corresponding upsurge in activism around this. It didn't revolve around some sort of well-defined 'second-wave manifesto'. So a plethora of feminist currents were born and developed during this period. Take, for example, Pleasure and danger: Exploring female sexuality, a collection of feminist writings edited by Carol Vance and published in 1984. The writings in that book certainly don't neatly fit into the homogenised caricature of "second-wave feminism" described above; and yet we can hardly say that they're part of so-called "third wave feminism".
And quite apart from that, even though i disagree with certain strands of feminist theory that emerged during the second wave, we shouldn't lose sight of the achievements and gains made by feminists during that period: raising awareness of the unpaid and unrecognised (or trivially recognised) work performed by women in the home; bringing to light the continual acts of violence committed against women around the world, acts not condemned but implicitly condoned by society; criticising the harassment and discrimination faced by women in the workplace; pointing out the hypocrisy of "left-wing" groups who gave lip service to fighting for women's equality, and yet perpetuated sexist behaviour within their own organisations; picking apart the notion that a woman is incomplete without a man in her life; and so on.
It all reminds me of an argument i had with someone a while back: this person basically said something along the lines of "It's one thing for women to be affectionate with their female partners in public, but weirdo trans people like you are just disgusting." i pointed out to this person that people used to feel the same way about women being affectionate with their partners in public, and that if it's any more acceptable for women to do so nowadays, it's because some women actually dared to put themselves out there and demand the sort of respect for their relationships that's usually given to heterosexual couples.
Second-wave feminism wasn't all bad; it actually did a lot of good. People that don't recognise this need to study their feminist history and get some perspective.
So last night it occured to me that i could describe myself as a 'no-op'. As a programmer, i found this notion amusing. :-)
Speaking of being trans: effectively going through puberty a second time has meant that i'm breaking out in zits again. This time, however, they're not on my face, but on my ass! And for some reason, i feel that's more embarrasing . . . . make of that what ye will. :-)
Finally, and on a related note:
Bashing second-wave feminism seems to be the 'in' thing at the moment. i've read a number of threads where people seem to be homogenising second-wave feminism into representing little more than simplistic anti-male sex-hating transphobia. The reality, of course, is that the second wave, whilst certainly containing such attitudes, also contained the very antitheses of those attitudes.
The second wave represented an upswelling of consciousness amongst women about their social and political situation, and a corresponding upsurge in activism around this. It didn't revolve around some sort of well-defined 'second-wave manifesto'. So a plethora of feminist currents were born and developed during this period. Take, for example, Pleasure and danger: Exploring female sexuality, a collection of feminist writings edited by Carol Vance and published in 1984. The writings in that book certainly don't neatly fit into the homogenised caricature of "second-wave feminism" described above; and yet we can hardly say that they're part of so-called "third wave feminism".
And quite apart from that, even though i disagree with certain strands of feminist theory that emerged during the second wave, we shouldn't lose sight of the achievements and gains made by feminists during that period: raising awareness of the unpaid and unrecognised (or trivially recognised) work performed by women in the home; bringing to light the continual acts of violence committed against women around the world, acts not condemned but implicitly condoned by society; criticising the harassment and discrimination faced by women in the workplace; pointing out the hypocrisy of "left-wing" groups who gave lip service to fighting for women's equality, and yet perpetuated sexist behaviour within their own organisations; picking apart the notion that a woman is incomplete without a man in her life; and so on.
It all reminds me of an argument i had with someone a while back: this person basically said something along the lines of "It's one thing for women to be affectionate with their female partners in public, but weirdo trans people like you are just disgusting." i pointed out to this person that people used to feel the same way about women being affectionate with their partners in public, and that if it's any more acceptable for women to do so nowadays, it's because some women actually dared to put themselves out there and demand the sort of respect for their relationships that's usually given to heterosexual couples.
Second-wave feminism wasn't all bad; it actually did a lot of good. People that don't recognise this need to study their feminist history and get some perspective.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-21 08:15 (UTC)i'm a NOOP transgrrl! that's awesome :)
no subject
Date: 2006-02-24 08:23 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-22 08:10 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-24 08:23 (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-22 15:53 (UTC)Well said - I still treasure my Gloria Steinem "Outrageous Acts and Everyday Rebellions", which was my first introduction to feminism. While she was writing it though, I was a dense teenager, who had no idea about women, feminism or just about anything else.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-24 08:36 (UTC)i don't remember the first feminist book i read - but Greer's The Female Eunuch would be pretty close. Sadly, though, her rabid transphobia is probably one of the things contributing to the current hostility towards second-wave feminism. :-(
no subject
Date: 2006-02-24 15:52 (UTC)