News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.



Nuance Lost On Some LGBT Journalists Using The Term "Tranny"

by: Autumn Sandeen

Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 06:00:00 AM EST



This is part one in a two-part series on trans-related terminology. Part two will be a discussion about how many classic transsexuals don't want to be labeled as transgender, and how new and legacy LGBT media needs to address self-identification when people who could fall under the term transsexual don't want to be unwillingly absorbed by transgender terminology into transgender community.

I believe there should be a lot of nuance to how lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) reporters, LGBT editors, and LGBT new and legacy media organizations using the term tranny, but in the name of "reclaiming" the term for the LGBT community, the nuance is often lost. Since I've seen two examples of LGBT media using the term tranny in a defamatory manner in the past week, and the defenses of the using the term tranny based on the reclaiming of the word by the LGBT community, I believe I need to explain the nuances in ways LGBT new and legacy media can understand.

Let me give you a case study to think about: This is a story I made up to make a concise point, but most of the elements of the story are taken from real life:

~~~~~

There are three gay men and a lesbian at a bar. Gay Man A calls Gay Man B a "faggot" in the course of the conversation. Gay Man B says to Gay Man A:

"Please don't call me a 'faggot'; I believe the term 'faggot' is derogatory. My friend was beaten up recently, and his attackers screamed 'faggot' at him while they were beating him up. I find the term offensive.

Gay Man A replies:

Gay Man C and I read in an interview that a bisexual who starred on the L Word said that gay people are reclaiming the word 'faggot.' So, we think it's identifying gay men as 'faggots' is fine because the actress said it was fine.

Hey, we're going to keep calling us all 'faggots,' and we think you're overreacting in objecting to being called 'faggot.' We're reclaiming the word for our community, and you should too.

Lesbian A chimes in:

Oh, okay. Since gays are now reclaiming the term 'faggot' for their community members, I'll start calling all gay men 'faggots' too.

~~~~

As we see in the scenario above, "reclaiming" a word has can have an emotional impact for those who don't want to reclaim that word as a community term for themselves, and that some people within a subcommunity of the LGBT community -- in this case, gay men -- can't speak for all the people in their subcommunity.

So who gets to claim that they're reclaiming a community term is a function of the broad community? Under what circumstances should those who identify as lesbian, bisexual, or transgender feel comfortable in "reclaiming" a word specific to those who identify as gay within the gay subset of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community? Or those who identify as gay, bisexual, or transgender feel comfortable in "reclaiming" a word specific to those who identify as lesbian within the lesbian subset of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community, etc.?

With this in mind, it needs to be discussed when it's okay for journalists to use a community related word that's been claimed to be "reclaimed,"  and how to use a "reclaimed" word in media reports when the term can be offensive to subsets of people in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.

So, a real life example: Pam doesn't personally identify as queer; she identifies publicly as a lesbian. Is it okay to identify as a queer because many in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community have been in the process of reclaiming the word queer for many, many years? And more importantly, should mainstream or new media identify Pam personally as a queer, or identify groups without queer in the title or mission statements that Pam belongs to as queer groups?

And, what if Pam found the term queer okay for others to identify themselves with, but for herself she found the term derogatory, defamatory, and/or offensive? (She doesn't think the term queer to be derogatory, defamatory, and/or offensive when used by LGBT community members to describe her, but let's run with the idea that she does for a moment just to make a point.) Would you still call Pam a queer, or the community groups she belonged to queer groups, if she didn't want to be called queer, and found the term derogatory, defamatory, and/or offensive?

And, if you identified yourself as belonging to the LGBT media and thought it was okay to identify Pam with the word queer with her considering the term to be derogatory, defamatory, and/or offensive, would you justify calling Pam queer by saying that many lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community are reclaiming the word queer for themselves? -- or say it's okay to call Pam queer because an actor or entertainer that identifies as queer says it's okay to call lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community members queer because the community is reclaiming the word? (Remember that last question -- there's a real life parallel pointed out to that scenario that I highlight later in this piece.)

I believe the nuance her is that most people (but not all) who identify as queer would consider themselves as belonging to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community, but not everyone who identifies as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender would say they belong to the queer community. In other words, for the most part the nuance of using the term queer is that queer functionally is a subset of the LGBT community -- which is why many people add a Q to LGBT -- but that LGBT isn't a subset of Q. With this in mind (in my opinion), legacy and new LGBT media should reflect in it's coverage that the term queer community isn't interchangeable with term LGBT community.

[Below the fold, RuPaul seems to indicate that it's okay to call him by the N-word. And, referencing the NLGJA and GLAAD Media Stylebooks, I discuss use of the term on tranny in relationship to use of the word queer.]

Autumn Sandeen :: Nuance Lost On Some LGBT Journalists Using The Term "Tranny"
Reflecting this in their recommendations for the use of the term queer, the National Lesbian and Gay Journalist Association (NLGJA) Stylebook Supplement states this about the term queer:

queer: Originally a pejorative term for gay, now being reclaimed by some lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people as a self-affirming umbrella term. Still extremely offensive when used as an epithet.

And, this is what the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) Stylebook Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual Glossary of Terms states about the term queer:

Queer: Traditionally a pejorative term, queer has been appropriated by some LGBT people to describe themselves. Some value the term for its defiance and because it can be inclusive of the entire LGBT community. Nevertheless, it is not universally accepted even within the LGBT community and should be avoided unless quoting someone who self-identifies that way.

In my opinion, these are well thought out lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community related style guidelines for the word queer. And, in my opinion, if a lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender new or legacy reporter or media outlet (new media to include blogging) doesn't follow these LGBT media guidelines for the word queer, then they should be ready to logically justify why they don't agree with the LGBT media styleguides, and expect to have LGBT media watchdog organizations and LGBT people to take them to task for their decision to deviate from one or both of the LGBT media stylebooks.

Well, let's redirect our attention to the term tranny, keeping in mind the nuances of how LGBT people and LGBT media use queer in mind.

First, what the NLGJA states about the term tranny in their Stylebook Supplement:

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.

This is what GLAAD Media Stylebook states about the term in their Transgender Glossary of Terms:

DEFAMATORY TERMINOLOGY

Defamatory: "deceptive," "fooling," "pretending," "posing," or "masquerading"
Gender identity is an integral part of a person's identity. Please do not characterize transgender people as "deceptive," as "fooling" other people, or as "pretending" to be, "posing" or "masquerading" as a man or a woman. Such descriptions are extremely insulting.

Defamatory: "she-male," "he-she," "it," "trannie," "tranny," "gender-bender"
These words only serve to dehumanize transgender people and should not be used

A number of months ago, I complained in an email to the editors of OutSports about how they use the term tranny; I specifically complained about an Outsports article from last July that used the term trannies (entitled How effective will gender testing be?) offended me.

The reporter wrote the following (underline emphasis added):

The tests get into even grayer area when you take transgender athletes into consideration. IOC rules have allowed post-op male-to-female trannies to participate in the Olympics as female for years. How would they show up on these gender tests? You can only imagine.

In a reply, an editor wrote me:

I have established a long history of pro-trans reporting and writing. The post you refer to was pointing out the plight that trans people face, and it certainly had an empathetic tone. My use of 'trannies' in this case was not in an offensive context. If I use it in a mean way, BY ALL MEANS, I would change it. That is not the case here. 'Trannies' simply fit better from a writing standpoint than other identical terms.

I have spoken to many non-activist trans people about this issue and 100% of them have told me it's no problem using the term in instances like this, so I will continue to when appropriate (there are many times when I don't; 'trannies', as I said, just fit better here).

...I am one of those who feel we should use words that others try to beat us down with and "reclaim" them. I feel that by consciously avoiding these words, I contribute to their power, and I can't let myself do that. I don't prescribe to the GLAAD/NLGJA doctrine. I certainly appreciate that they are there, and they do good work (we work with both of them). But on this matter, I simply disagree and feel fortunate that I'm part of a community with diverse perspectives.

Last week, a writer from LA.MetBlogs used the term trannies in a piece, and I wrote about my objection to using the term here, and in the comment section of the piece where use of the term offended me. In justifying use of the term tranny, she wrote:

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 [sic] way. Let's go back to the NLGJA style guide - of which I am well aware - and read the rest of the paragrah [sic];

"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.

Then, this past Friday (January 30th, 2009), the Dallas Voice defended its use of the term tranny in it's piece RuPaul approves 'tranny' (The subheaders for the article are: Trans activists demand Dallas Voice to stop using 'drag queen' and 'tranny' and For words of wisdom, we turned to America's expert):


RU'S RULING: The 'Judge Judy of Drag' says, 'Sticks and stones - words will never hurt.'

This week, the blog Planetransgender demanded that Dallas Voice cease using the terms "drag queen" and "tranny." They say the words are derogatory and inspire bigotry, which could result in the violent murders of our trans brothers and sisters.

Since journalists should act as guardians of free speech, the demand was way excessive. Besides, we've all seen the word "queer" go through transition - thanks to one television show. And it wasn't "Queer as Folk."

The phenomenal popularity of "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" made wrinkly hetero dudes like Regis Philbin and David Letterman say "queer" without flinching. And without a hint of disparagement.

Is it possible to reclaim "tranny" and "drag queen"?

We're already there.

At the end of this piece, we quote Lena Dahlstrom who calls the writer and Life+style Editor of the Dallas Voice 'faggot.' Her point was reflecting on how offensive it is for her to call the writer by a defamatory epithet that he probably would fine offensive -- in the same way he was offending folk like Lena with the term tranny.

And, that's even if RuPaul says "Sticks and stones...words will never hurt."

Frankly, I'm totally bewildered by RuPaul's "logic," and mystified at the Dallas Voice's buying into RuPaul's "logic":

Okay, Let me put on my Judge Judy robe. People really need to get a life. And quit taking every opportunity to be offended by the world. Years ago, political correctness made it unbearable for anyone to have a laugh or be free. You can't make the whole world 'baby safe.' That's really the uneducated approach to dealing with issues.

There are more things to do in this life than to try to correct people with how they should refer to you. That's your problem. That's not their problem.

If words will never hurt, does that mean it's appropriate for me to refer to RuPaul by the n-word? By his own words as an African-American, it would be "[his] problem" if RuPaul didn't like me identifying him and his community by the n-word -- that just doesn't sound credible. And on top of that, the Dallas Voice seriously identified RuPaul as the go-to expert on the term tranny? -- a person who identifies as a drag queen, and doesn't publicly identify as transgender? F***ing amazing.

My comment is that their are nuances to using the term tranny, much as there are nuances to using the term queer. And, my problem isn't that some LGBT media and reporters use the term tranny, but that they don't comprehend the nuances of when -- and how -- to use the term.

And here's the nuance -- people who identify as a tranny (for the most part) identify as transgender, but not everyone who identifies as transgender identifies as a tranny. Those who identify as trannies are a subset of broader transgender community; the terms tranny and transgender aren't interchangeable terms.

And, just as it is with the term queer being considered a defamatory epithet to many LGBT people, to a good number of those who identify as transgender -- but not as trannies -- consider the term tranny to be defamatory epithet.

Most in the LGBT media understand that reclaiming the term queer doesn't make the terms LGBT and queer interchangeable, yet some LGBT media professionals have begun using tranny  and transgender -- and even transsexual -- interchangeably, using the reclaiming justification for their use of the term tranny.

And, just as legacy and new LGBT media publications -- as well as individual new and legacy LGBT media reporters  -- are for the most part nuanced in their use of the word queer, they need to be equally nuanced in their use of the word tranny. And, just as legacy and new LGBT media publications  -- as well as individual new and legacy LGBT media reporters -- should be held to account for misusing the term queer, they should be held to the same account with they misuse of the term tranny.

I would prefer that LGBT media use alternatives to tranny (for example: transgender people, trans people or transpeople) when describing groups of trans people, but there are times when the term tranny may be the most appropriate term because of the self-identification of an individual or a particular group.

~~~~~
Lena Dahlstrom has a more gritty take on this issue. In her Pam's House Blend diary The only moral use of an epithet is my own..., where she states:

Dear Faggot:

Now I know you won't be offended by me -- a hetero crossdresser who also does drag -- calling you that, since after all we're all about reclaiming terms, right? Just like you getting RuPaul to "rule" that it's OK to call trans people "trannies." The thing is, as far as I know, RuPaul identifies as a gay man, so asking his/her opinion on this issue is a bit like asking a white person whether it's OK for other white people call black people... well you know the term I mean.

The thing is, reclaiming an epithet is something that only gets to be done by the people who've been targeted by it. There's a big difference between members of a stigmatized group reclaiming a term as a way of saying "yeah I am a [insert derogatory term here], wanna make something of it" -- and quite another when someone outside that group decides to fling that term around carelessly. And no, we're not "already there" in reclaiming tranny as a cuddly term of endearment -- Christian Siriano's catchphrase "hot tranny mess" was clearly meant as a putdown down in exactly the same way as clueless straight kids use "that's so gay." ...

Lena goes on, and Lena's pretty angry. When someone feels that he, she, or ze, is referred to by language that he, she, or ze finds offensive or defamatory -- or when someone has a significant other, family member, or ally that has he, she, or ze,  finds offensive or defamatory -- then we often see tempers flare. Lena uses much stronger language than I would, but I was as angry last week when I felt personally defamed in being personally referred to as a tranny -- I was harsher last week.

If one wouldn't call people by the n-word, the c-word, queer or faggot when asked to stop using terms like these, why would one who isn't trans-identified demand to right to reclaim the term tranny on behalf of the significant number of trans people who find the term offensive and defamatory? This insistence that one has a right to continue using a term that many find offensive and defamatory -- specifically because one is reclaiming the term on behalf or others -- is absolutely baffling to me.

And those LGBT people who do insist on exercising that right are people I'm now seeing as tone deaf, clueless, and offensive. Those LGBT media types who insist it's their right to use the term tranny in their written product -- when they know that the term has been identified in LGBT stylebooks as defamatory and offensive -- Well, they are very much insisting on a personal right to use the language of LGBT bigotry when referring to others who are not in their subcommunity of the broader LGBT community.

Should I now be calling these LGBT media folks "bigots" because of they insist on using the language of bigotry? I wonder.

.

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
As A Blogger Myself...
...as well as a transwoman, I've wrestled with this issue, and I've come to some conclusions, at least for myself. About five years ago, I saw Leslie Feinberg speak here in New Jersey and ze offered what I think is a great way of looking at the word "queer" for those of us who work in print: "Queer", with a capital "Q" refers to the community and the identity, but "queer" with lower case is the pejorative.

"Tranny" is a little tougher, but the way I see it is in much the same way as most African-Americans perceive the N-word. That is, it's acceptable for one African-American to refer to another with that word (we hear it that way in entertainment media all the time), but non-AA's don't have that right, the reason being that non-AA's are responsible for the hateful underpinnings of the word in the first place.

When I choose to use the term "tranny" in my writing or on my radio show, I am doing so as a member of the minority group which has historically been negatively impacted by its use by non-transpeople, therefore I can credibly use the term to define myself and others like me in the spirit of reclaiming it.

Non-transpeople cannot credibly reclaim "tranny" because the word was never theirs to begin with. It has never been used against them in a demeaning or insulting way, therefore they have no right of ownership of the word, or of the negative feelings and attitudes the word has historically engendered by its use.

One thing I have noticed in my own personal interactions is that many non-transfolks aren't really aware of the truly negative baggage of "tranny" in the same way most people regardless of race are of the N-word. Many of the non-transpeople I've challenged for using it were befuddled by my reaction, believing it to be a kind of cutsie diminutive nickname or just popular cultural shorthand in the same way as "gay" is commonly used in place of "homosexual". I've found this to be equally true among LGB's and straights alike.

Clearly, more education is needed. We don't have popular media figures to define this kind of usage for those outside our own community in the same way as African-Americans do with the N-word, so we are tasked with doing it ourselves, and that's going to take a while.

That said, I also believe that community mediamakers, and LGBT community mediamakers in particular, have a responsibility to understand and respect these kinds of cultural usage rules if they wish to be seen as credible and in tune with the community they speak to. It's not only good form, but to do otherwise is to exemplify a level of ignorance that cannot help but damage one's credibility, certainly within the community, and likely with the well-informed outside of it as well.

Personally, I believe that's probably the best way to make the case against the improper use of loaded words like "tranny". We shouldn't automatically challenge from the perspective that the improper usage is evidence of bigotry, but rather evidence of ignorance. In these kinds of cases, an accusation of bigotry will often be debatable, but to define a mediamaker, and particularly an opinionated one, as ignorant and out of step for the same reason will not only be far more difficult to defend against, but also a far more effective response to someone who values their credibility as much as writers and pundits usually do.

Becky Juro

Rebecca Juro  


My take on the language of "queer"
As a self admitted heterosexual who is also quite queer, I see nothing wrong with using the word.  I do it for effect around here in Jackson (my proclamation has been aired on local talk radio) for the shock value.  People aren't used to hearing a straight middle aged white guy refer to himself as queer.  It gets their attention and allows me an angle into trying to forward the message that we are all queer in some regard.  It's a conversation starter that I use to break the ice and introduce a subject that most people really don't want to talk about (I live in Jackson, MS).  Between the homo hating Baptists and the homophobic Black population, it ain't easy promoting homosexual rights.  I do it as a civic responsibility to move the forces of HUMAN RIGHTS forward.  The reason I bang the drum for gay people is that, IMHO, they are the most reviled and repressed.  I've also witnessed first hand how the prejudice has affected my gay friends over the decades, some of whom have been entirely too timid on the subject themselves.

I cherish my queerness.  It's what makes me identifiable from the endless hordes of like-minded sheep, willing to follow whatever dog whistle is blowing at the moment.  If I weren't queer, then I'd be like everybody else.  Mom always told me I was special and I believed her.  Some of you don't think I'm special!! What? You calling my mama a liar?  LOL.

I'm still getting used to having surrendered the word gay to the homosexual cause.  I will not surrender the word queer.

Enjoy.

Mom always told me I was special and I believed her.


Pardon me, straight middle aged white guy
if I don't fall on my knees thanking you for your "support".

We'll take care of the usage of the word queer, thank you very much.

Dena



Cisgender. Because "Genetic" (or non) is so 2006.


[ Parent ]
the second part...
I am glad you are writing a piece on the second part.  I wish they would QUIT grouping in classic transsexuals, such as myself, into transgender.  My word of advice, if unsure DON'T use transgender for somebody who is transsexual, use trans.  You avoid the trap of improper terminology.  Most classic transsexuals can live with trans.  But I definately fall in the category of transsexuals who do not like the term transgender being applied to classic transsexuals.  

As far as the use of the word tranny, if a non trans person uses that word in any context...confront them over the terms use and the derogatory nature.  Plain and simple, its the only way that the use of the derogatory term will end.  


Funny you should phrase it that way
I just recently took an undergraduate course in LGBT studies, and one of my classmates was totally lost as to the transgender/transsexual terminology issue and was really concerned about offending someone. My advise, as a lesbian married to a trans woman, was that I always just say "trans" and in print I type it as trans*. So far, I have managed not to offend anyone.

So far as the term "tranny" goes, I would never, ever, use it (unless we are talking about a transmission). One of our young (twenty-two year old) friends used the term in front of my wife one day, and the look on her face said it all; I could see that it brought up a lifetime of pain just to hear the term, even though the person who said it is a trans woman herself.

susanferman.wordpress.com


[ Parent ]
Love this topic...
A few years ago, I worked at an insurance company and got into an argument with a co-worker. Voices got raised, and eventually, she called me the n-word. Keep in mind that both of us are black.

I wound up filing a complaint with HR. When I talked to my manager's boss (he told me that had never heard of a complaint like mine), I explained 2 things:

1) ONLY family members and really really close friends can call me that (and I don't like it even then but I'll grit my teeth and bear it).

2) What she said would have been OK if it she had expressed her anger while we were at lunch or on a smoke break. She said this while we were in the office working and it was loud.

And that is pretty much my policy regarding the use of faggot, girl, etc. Time, place, situation, and the identity of the person using the term mean everything.  


Now there is a blog
by porn star Erik Rhodes where he uses the word "fag" all of the time. Now my guess as to the sense that he uses it is that he's really caling them a "bitchy queen" or something of that sort: I don't find the way that he uses it offensive.

I find it offensive...
Simply because he's not so wise as to recognize he's talking about himself half of the time he talks about fags. His reasoning for the most part seems like he isn't guilty of the exact things he talks about.

But verging off of the topic.


[ Parent ]
No, it's not verging off...
I mean, Rhodes is clearly talking from within the community about backstabbing queens that p**s him off. I understand the context, heck, I 've used it in the same sense myself.

My issue with Rhodes, though, and part of Autumn's issue here is that this is in the public domain: the mainstream press could pick up on something like that and think that it's acceptable. Now I doubt that there are a a great number of people other than gay men who would be interested in all of Rhodes drama, well, other than our goood friend Petey L.

The Equality Summit, though, was a noteworthy newsevent that
carried the potential of attracting MSM.


[ Parent ]
I disagree
I don't wanna argue about this 'cause its like giving someone who I find annoying too much attention, but from his tone it always comes across as someone who is ashamed of being gay/relating to "the gay community" and blaming others for his problems like a petulant child. Its not the talk about bitchy queens that piss him off that gets my jock in a bunch; its his wide generalizations he casts about all of us to explain why he's having a bad day because of a few of us, or really himself. Faggots can be annoying, but from his use of language its always "Why do faggots do X and Y?- I Dont Do 'X and Y' Like those Faggots!" type of stuff, as if he's some outsider looking in who isn't guilty of the same bullshit he talks about.

It's always like, foreal girl? Stop. Get help.

But again, lets stop giving narcissistic sex workers more attention as thats what mirrors are for.

He can say whatever he likes. I think there are conversations that can be had within communities or between gay men, or whatever. Blocking the public is a bad idea since how else will it get to other gays/queers? Its confusing but there are conversations one can have inside the 'community' that aren't meant for outsiders... but that the outsiders should have room to listen if they are welcome.

but then thats touching on spaces, 'safe space, and the like and lets not even touch that as its a separate issue.


[ Parent ]
LOL, when I do read his blog
I do find myself saying, "It takes one to know one," quite a bit.

[ Parent ]
I am a transwoman
A "classic transsexual" woman, if you will.   Which doesn't begin to tell my story as well I can, myself.

Please call me Karen, and if you want to label me something else, ask me what I think.

At the risk of quoting a country song...

I am rosemarys granddaughter
The spitting image of my father
And when the day is done
My mommas still my biggest fan
Sometimes Im clueless and Im clumsy
But Ive got friends that love me
And they know just where I stand
Its all a part of me
And thats who I am
- Jessica Andrews

I'd rather reclaim "Karen"

Hate stops a beating heart.


As for me...
I'd like to reclaim Katrina...

but that's a bigger issue.

>^..^<


[ Parent ]
Labels...
Agreed.  I just made a reply to a Livejournal post...

*****

transgender
transsexual
tranny
transie
trans
crossdresser
drag queen
transvestite
homo(sexual)
fag
gay
queer
freak
pervert
rapist
child molester
subhuman
mentally ill
nuts
crazy
autogynephilic

None of these. I'm just a girl. The only labels that apply are any that I might give myself. I am not somebody's pigeon.  I am proud of who I am.

*****

...and hello, Karen!  Fancy meeting you here!


[ Parent ]
My thoughts
I can honestly say that I have no opinion either way about the word 'tranny.'  

I identify as 'classic transsexual' and am okay with that being under the 'transgender' umbrella (I know - that's a different war, but hear me out.)  I consider neither to be pejorative per se, but they can certainly be spoken with mannerisms/inflections to make it clear that the speaker is intending insult.

And honestly, as long as there are things out there like the 'Tranny Guide' ( http://www.wayout-publishing.c... ) and 'Tranny Shack' ( http://www.trannyshack.com/ ), I think that energy expended on any fight against the use of the word 'tranny' is, at the minimum, wasted energy - and, at worst, something that gives ammo to those who want to brand us (and LGBs) as rampaging PC-mongers who want to be thought police.

The word 'tranny'?

Fight the real enemies like HRC (beatable) and Barney Frank (outlivable).    

>^..^<


I'm picking a narrow fight with LGBT journalists...

...who should have an understanding of what the LGBT stylebooks say.

Basically, these journalists should know whether or not a LGBT-related term is considered offensive and defamatory -- and when it comes to the term tranny, and I'm finding that a good number within the LGBT journalism profession don't. What I'm finding is that some of my LGBT journalism peers really are totally clueless and tone deaf in their use of a term they should know has been identified in LGBT media stylebooks as defamatory.

I guess my overall point is that these journalists should be aware that the term has problems -- if they're using a term that's been known to be used as an epithet, they should at least be aware of that. And, for LGBT journalists to thoughtlessly refer to trans people -- as individuals or as the entire trans subcommunity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community community -- as trannies when the term is perceived by many trans subcommunity members as an epithet...well, it's just a less than adequate journalism practice.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau


[ Parent ]
Help me out
This question may seem incredibly naive coming from a gay man in San Francisco, but I'm really confused and this discussion really gets to the heart of my confusion. First I must say that when I speak about the person I'm talking about, she does not -- in my mind -- represent any larger group of people. My confusion is with her specifically. OK that said, here goes.

There is a woman at the local community college I've been attending. She is transsexual, and does not consider herself transgender or a part of that community. That much I understand well. And from what I've read here, that seems to be a common situation. She is a member of the Queer Alliance at the school, as many people across the sexuality and gender spectrums are, but what gets me is that she self identifies as a heterosexual woman, rejecting even the term transsexual and even getting very angry when anyone includes her (with language) in any group other than heterosexual. We have many heterosexual members of the queer alliance so that isn't my confusion. Whats got me confused is that she seems to want it both ways. Sometimes, when she needs defending as a trans person she demands that we, as the LGBT community, defend her as our own. But then gets very angry at the community that comes to her aid when someone in it referrs to her in conversation as part of the community.

I have really tried, in conversation to understand her but she gets offended when people such naive questions that she feels I should already just understand.

So, at the risk of making myself look bad, I humbly ask for some guidance on this. I would rather she not dislike me.

thanks in advance.


I Understand
I've known a couple of a pre-op TS women who refuse the TG/TS label and preferred to be called "queens" or "women".

I think with all things, we should call people what they want to be called and not what we think they should be called.  In that respect, I've freely used the word "tranny" when it was acceptable to use with my TG/TS friends.  But, I also know the difference when it is used in a negative context.

I think for most TS/TG people, pronouns are of more importance than political labels.

It should be noted that even the word "gay" can be taken out of context to mean something negative....like "that's so gay".  With words, context matters...always.


[ Parent ]
Q is also sometimes for "questioning"
I like, use and identify as "queer" because its all-encompassing and accurate.  It's also a pretty word, but that's just a bonus.

Also, I respect everyone's right to self-identify, but who can keep track?  I've been friends with dozens of gay women, for instance, but I've rarely even met a lesbian.  I've heard more than one gay woman say she hates that word.  Queer covers all of them.

"Tranny" strikes me as inherently disrespectful.  Maybe it's the shortened-ness of the word, but it seems snidely dismissive.  I don't think of my trans friends that way and I never use that word.  I do think of them, though, as queer.

The f-words from men are, in my opinion, lazy, stupid and self-hating, in the same way that I regard the n-word from blacks.  "Queer" is something beautiful.  An insult, however, is just an insult.

Yet, I have friends who hate the q-word because they view it as an insult.  Nothing will please everyone.  That's why in print and in public, I stick to LGBT -- but even that separates me from the GLBT-ers!

And that's why I'm queer.


What I don't understand is
why it's offensive for others to say tranny yet okay to hijack people as transgender that don't have anything to do with transgenders. It's utter hipocracy.

Does it have the same weight?
When it comes to the term "tranny" I wonder if equating it to faggot or queer or dyke etc. is actually fair.  Does "tranny" carry the same cultural history as faggot or dyke?  Does the average Joe or Jane if asked even know what the term means? Where I grew up the term meant transmission (car part).  My mother would wince if she heard someone say faggot, but would be utterly lost if someone said tranny.

Perhaps the idea of reclamation is in fact wrong, this is a word that is more nascent and is in danger of become a slur, not a slur that can be reclaimed. I suspect many people use the term without any malice but are we in danger of providing those that would hurt us with another weapon in their arsenal?

chris


This is natural and not surprising
Go back to the 70's and, perhaps, earlier.

There were arguments over the language like this going on over  the language used to refer to female and male homosexuals. Forget the B, T, and Q, or I parts.

This will be resolved and the past discussions will help, as will the past discussions about what to cal Negroes in the media.

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)


I'm of two minds on this.
On the one side, I realize that some do feel humiliating and agonizing implications from the word, and for them, it's a very real means of undermining one's identity.  On the other side, I'm so tired of labels that I don't even care anymore, or at least when it comes to myself.

But regardless of which side one takes, one has to admit that the people who should be taking back a word are the people who've been specifically maligned by it.  If you haven't been maligned by it, then wait to be told by a clear majority when you can take part in the reclamation.  Last I checked, white folks still aren't welcome to help in the N word reclamation, and for good reason.


well....
I obviously don't have a problem with referring to myself as "queer." And of course I wouldn't refer to anyone with that word who's already said they don't like it - that'd just be bitchy.

But I don't really agree with your logic on the word queer being a subset of LGBT - it really isn't. I know a quite a few people who don't identify as L, G, B, or T, but who identify as queer (and have sex with members of the same or both sexes). It just works better for them. And depending on how annoying some gay men have been, sometimes I feel like jumping the "G" ship and keeping both feet firmly planted on "Q." Sometimes the way gay male identity is deployed I feel like I have to have a penthouse in NYC, be looking to get married, and be on a perpetual diet to be a real gay men, and that's so not me.

So, I mean, if we're looking for one word that includes everyone and everyone's comfortable with, we're not going to find it.

As for faggot, I do have a few lesbian friends who use that term and I have no problem with that. But if they were in the presence of a gay man who was in fact bothered by it, I wouldn't stand up for them if called out.

As for journalism, I think that there is a distinction between what new and legacy LGBT media folks can do. The term "queer" is, IMHO, unprofessional, so the Wash Blade, etc., should avoid it in a real news story. But on a blog, especially one where the target audience is other LGBTQ people, I don't see a problem with it.

If one wouldn't call people by the n-word, the c-word, queer or faggot when asked to stop using terms like these, why would one who isn't trans-identified demand to right to reclaim the term tranny on behalf of the significant number of trans people who find the term offensive and defamatory?

Entitlement, plain and simple. Like those white people who complain that black people can use the n-word but they can't, I always wonder why they'd want to use it in the first place. And some of these folks who insist on using "tranny" to refer to everyone knowing that some people will be offended should really just grow up. I don't think that cis gay men or cis lesbians have any more of a claim on that word than cis straight people - neither is trans and therefore should butt out.

This all reminds me of a chapter from Miss Manners Rescues Civilization (a truly great book on American etiquette) where she discusses how to refer to a married woman. Mrs. Jane Husbandslastname? Ms. Jane Husbandslastname? Mrs. John Husbandslastname? Ms. Jane Maidenname? Mrs. Jane Maidenname-Husbandslastname? Ms. Jane Husbandslastname-Maidenname? Etc.

There are people who prefer all sorts of things there, and Miss Manners just asks for us to use in good faith whatever we think the other person would want and use whatever they want to be called when it's pointed out. And people who are called something incorrect should take it with good humor and also take the initiative to politely point out what they prefer.


Even if you consider the term a pejorative?

That's where I'm going to disagree with you, Alex. I don't believe your lesbian friends should be using terms they know are used as defamatory epithets to describe another subcommunity of the LGBT community. I would call them out on their use of the term faggot if I were in a conversation with them -- I would be offended at the use of the term faggot. It would feel the same kind of offense if someone in a conversation I was participating used the term n*gger to describe African-Americans.

I'm not black, but I take offense to the use of the n-word; I'm not a gay man, but I take offense of the use of the other f-word; I am trans, and I take offense of the term tranny being applied to those of us who find the term offensive and defamatory.

It's hard for me to be gentle to others in my broad community when they use defamatory language they know, or should know, is often used in a defamatory manner.

And, that's part of the reason I wrote this up on tranny here -- LGBT journalists should be aware already that tranny is considered by many trans people is a defamatory epithet. That they're not is mind-boggling to me. It's almost as if they are willfully ignorant of how the term has been used -- and still is being used -- to defame trans people.

And, even being used to defame non-trans people, such as Ann Coulter. I don't like Coulter at all, but seeing my peer progressives defaming her by calling her a tranny is as wrong-headed as conservative commentators calling LGBT people homosexuals, queers, or faggots.

And, LGBT people are getting educated here that they need to be personally careful in their use of the term tranny. It's not a message of not using the term, but knowing when and how to use the term.

-----
~~Autumn~~

As if there were safety in stupidity alone.
--Henry David Thoreau


[ Parent ]
FYI, I've had a few back-and-forths with the Dallas Voice Life+Style editor
His position -- as best as I can infer it -- is that epithets (and phrases that can be perceived as derogatory depending who's using them) should be used as widely as possible to defang them, otherwise we "license it so only bigots can use it," as he wrote in another piece defending his right to use "hot tranny mess" (which he thinks can be used as compliment). He's also written glowingly about artists and activists reclaiming terms like the f-word.

I suppose in the long run he's right -- look at how "queer" has gotten mainstreamed since gay activists started reclaiming it two decades ago, though obviously it's still a term the vast majority of people know to handle with care.

Of course he seems to be oblivious to issues of ownership and that all the examples he cited involved people choosing to use these terms to describe themselves, not other people. It's not the first time this has been pointed out to him -- Wanda Sykes called him out it in an interview, in which (rather inconsistently) he said, "I love that you are holding my feet to the fire over that word" after he used the n-word in a question. (Sykes put it succinctly: "We're allowed to say that. Not you.")

Likewise, he overlooks that in the here and now, his efforts to create a glorious future, he's inflicting hurt on the very people he's professing to help.

BTW, he never did give me an answer about whether -- using his logic -- he thinks it's OK for straights to casually refer to gays as the f-word.


OK - But what about news?
That may be OK for a lifestyle section, but what about news on the front page? I don't think you want explosive words used in a news story that is supposed to be objective.

In that case, you use the words that have the most consensus around them so that the language doesn't interfere with the news story.

A good rule of thumb is that if you have any doubts, use the word preferred by the person to whom the word refers.

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in time of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality. -- John F. Kennedy (inspired by Dante's Inferno)


[ Parent ]
As far as the Dallas Voice news section
In comments on their blog, the news editor indicated that she essentially follows the NLGJA and GLAAD guidelines mentioned for "tranny" and other controversial words. I.e. it's only used when relevant, and is either in reference to a person or group who uses that term to describe themselves, or is part of a direct quotation. Or in articles discussing usage of the particular term itself.

Which is all that I and others are asking for.


[ Parent ]
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?




Join the Blend Chat Room



Report TOS Violations

Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox