Bite – Bittersweet Portions from a Trans Female Troublemaker!

spaceykate:

amydentata:

Neither a titillating tell-all autobiography nor a cry for loving acceptance, Amy Dentata’s first chapbook defies the stereotypes of transgender women’s literature. Through poetry, short stories, and mini-essays, Bite tackles the intersection of child abuse and gender politics with a voice that is simultaneously shocking, hilarious, and provocative.

Fake (Yet Accurate) Praise for Bite:

“That was powerful! Life-changing! Now please go away so I can cry in a corner for a week.” – General Consensus Among Live Audiences

“I am a trans person or ally with a decent grasp of feminist and activist terminology, despise anti-trans bigotry, and think Bite is a must-read.” – The Author Just Described Her Target Audience

“What does ‘cisgender’ mean?” – Most Cisgender People


Download PDF (Recommended donation $5)

Print Edition via Amazon.com ($6.00)

I’ve posted this before, but it’s worth reposting, because you should probably go read this if you haven’t already. I mean, you’re not going to argue with General Consensus Among Live Audiences, are you? Of course not, they court martial you for arguing with generals. Go read this now.

image

dearcispeople:

If the energy I spend to educate you so you won’t oppress me is just being wasted on you I might as well use that energy to retaliate. If you won’t stop oppressing and try to learn I might as well get revenge.

News Flash!

werebutterfly:

theresmoretomethanthis:

Cause I’m tired of seeing this. Being autistic doesn’t mean you are transgender or lgbt. Being transgender or lgbt does not mean you are autistic. Autism and gender/sexual identity are two different things.

People are saying that?  O_O

Hang on, people are saying that?  o.O

(Source: straightedgemeansbetterthanyou, via zombiekittensandmadscientists)

A Pat on the Head

tybaar:

During my youth, when I lived in the role of a young queer boy I would often only feel truly safe in GLBT spaces.  The communities I frequented were often completely supportive and there for me no matter what I was going through, and so I naturally assumed that coming out as trans would afford me that same safety in the spaces I had grown to know were accepting and respectful of my expressions and identity.


However after transitioning and being out in the same type of spaces for some time, I began to notice a subtle trend that slowly and subconsciously gnawed at my nerves until I was forced to face it.  And upon doing so I was shocked to see how I had gone so long never noticing it in the first place:

The constant and unabashed exclusion of transgender issues from, ironically, a community that so proudly totes us around inside it’s acronym.

To be honest, it’s something I should have noticed from the very beginning when I looked to the GLBT community for trangender information during my own first budding feelings of trans self-awareness.  I remember having an unnecessarily difficult time actually finding sound, constant and relevant info and being led into dead ends with such unhelpful non-answers as “it’s complex” or “transsexuals are a difficult subject”.  I ended up, in the beginning, cobbling together only that trans issues are a mysterious subject that most folks - both in and out of the community - knew little to nothing about and had a curious aversion to actually digging into.

Of course in my youth I was happy to excuse this and chalked it up to the simple fact that, as a minority inside of a minority, I would of course have a more difficult time finding what I wanted since we are so “rare” in the first place.  I didn’t even think, at the time, that this was a big red flag as to the kind of treatment I would receive in the future.

My increasing weariness at the GLB(t) community came slowly as I started to actually voice my opinions on issues that affected us.  I would interject in discussions and debates that I previously would hold at least a respectable sway in, and now found myself the target of rolled eyes and wincing “Oh, you people” looks.  A sort of “Why do you have to intrude on our community?” feeling.

I quickly realized that the GLB community has a disturbingly large amount of  animosity towards it’s confusing little “T” tacked onto the end of it.  Like it was their bizarre little sibling who they’re forced to take care of for the weekend but begrudgingly puts up with because “they’re family so they have to.”

So it should have come as no surprise when I started to harbor a certain level of resentment when a bone was actually thrown to me.

There’s this idea in the GLB(t) community - this disturbing trend I see over and over wherein if trans issues are actually addressed in ANY kind of light - there’s an unspoken expectation that I should be suddenly and thoroughly so grateful that I’m actually being included in something.  A kind of “Hey I know we haven’t talked about you people for a while but look!  Look I mentioned a trans person in passing.  Aren’t you so validated?!”

So I sort-of-kind-of belong but only sometimes when it’s convenient, in this community where I’m supposed to be equal in the first place.  Great! Thanks brah!

It’s this idea that I’m supposed to be happy, I’m supposed to be content with only receiving a tiny slice of the pie.  The equivalent of a sarcastic smile and pat on the head as I’m tolerated within these spaces and that bare tolerance in and of itself should, of course, be enough to fulfill me.

And I’ll be frank and fair about this - I mean, there’s lots of issues that affect only one portion of the community.  If it’s an issue that only affects cis gay men for instance, then sure - absolutely I don’t expect to see anything trans-specific in there.  I’m not saying that I have to be constantly validated in everything that’s said about the community as a whole, but there is still - by far - a massive imbalance at the inclusion and visibility of trans folk and if I’m going to be up there in that acronym I don’t think it’s unfair that I should at least expect to have myself represented in something more than an afterthought.

What turns my stomach the most about this though, is the apprehension I see from cis queer folk when we actually attempt to call out our exclusion.  You can see this in situations such as DADT, where trans folk are still excluded, but when we attempted to speak up on the unfairness of that we were met with an exasperated “why can’t you people just let us have our victory” mentality.

And you know what?  That’s great that a victory was scored for GLB rights and inclusion.  It’s fantastic  and I of course, completely support it.   But when a side effect of that is me and everything I am being blatantly and completely erased from an issue that should have rightly applied to me as well?  I’m gonna call bullshit.

I see this illustrated in burning clarity when a pro-GLB(t) “ally” or popular figurehead member of our community speaks with transphobic and erasing remarks in the media and we call it out.  Because we’re met with a backlash of “How dare you pick on them, they’ve done so much for GLBT rights!” and “There are much worse people to go after with your hatred.”

And you know what?  That’s right - There ARE much worse people. And we do call them out.  But when it’s someone from within the community, who we look to to deliver a positive, respectful message to the rest of the world, and who for all intents and purposes should know better when having the balls to speak FOR us and not even do their homework?  I’m going to call them out just the same.

But time and time again, my outrage at this shit would fall on deaf ears. It was at this point I realized the community I had once called home suddenly and harshly became alien to me.

So I was not surprised when my growing trepidation at the GLB(t) spaces I used to inhabit was often met with a perceived elitism from others, like I was distancing myself because I had become “too good for the rest of them” and people would much have rather tisked and rolled their eyes at me as I got heated and offended at blatant trans exclusion, instead of - I don’t know - actually asking me why I’m pissed and possibly learning something about their own busted viewpoints and misconceptions in the first place.

And the delicious irony of this all is that it’s a perfect, stark illustration of the accepted and tolerated aversion to actually having to deal with that pesky little “T” in GLBT.

And they still don’t get it.

So you know what?  Don’t expect me to be filled with joy and graciousness in  the offhand event you remember I exist up there and decide it’s about time to toss me a cookie.

Because for me, I’ve learned that more often than not the “T” is silent.

As tybaar shows all too well, the T is silenced.  Even those of us who refuse to be silenced are silenced.

Tags: trans lgbt

skankassqueer:

fallingtowardsecstasy:

LET ME START OFF BY SAYING —

I am in no way prejudice against any of my fellow LGBT brothers and sisters. AND I AM NOT SAYING THIS TO GENERALIZE A WHOLE COMMUNITY OF PEOPLE — but I am constantly offended and upset towards the treatment I receive from my transgendered F to M (female to male)…

You are making a good point but your language (F to M, sex change) needs to be checked.

  • XtY language is harmful because it puts a focus on trans peoples’ assigned genders, and buys into the harmful stereotype that trans people were “really” x that “transformed” into y. Many of us feel we were born with our current gender, and that we were coercively assigned the wrong gender, not that we were “born the wrong gender” or “born in the wrong body.” 
  • Sex Change: the correct term is genital reassignment surgery. The term “Sex  Change” harkens to the categorisation of bodies as having a “sex” that is male or female - which is easily disproved, unless you believe that having surgery is the only way for someone who is trans to actually be their own gender. The implication that all trans people want or need GRS is also false - especially among trans men, the number of trans men who desire surgery is actually a small minority of the overall population.

Moving on from your language: you make good points. It is not OK for anyone to use homophobic, demeaning slurs (faggot) towards people. And I also despise when trans men think that being a man means being a hypermasculine douche nozzle. Hey dudes: there are more kinds of men than Dane Cook.

I think it is also important not to paint all trans men with the same broad stroke, there are LOTS of trans men who aren’t homophobic douche platters.

also, why is this tagged “lesbian” when you are a man, talking about other men. there are no mentions of women or lesbians anywhere in your post. same for “bisexual.”

(Source: camkoa, via skankassqueer-deactivated201207)

image

misohead:

(via Political cartoon: The End Of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell | Alas, a Blog)

Yeah, this is pretty much what it feels like.

image

yourfandomsucks:

Top 5 most progressive LGBT characters on TV

—> Number 1 Canton (Doctor Who.)

Canton is probably one of the most, if not the most progressive LGBT character I have ever seen. He is an openly gay, ex high level FBI agent living in the 1960’s. He told the Republican president of the United States to his face  that he wanted to marry his non white boyfriend. He stood his ground on his homosexuality even though it got him fired, and despite this, he never gave up or acted like a victim. Canton instead persevered with The Doctor and friends to help save the world. He is strong, loyal, and intelligent. The amazing thing about Canton is that his character is very unusual for a gay character. It’s extremely rare to see gay men casted as “the muscle” in entertainment. Canton defies every stereotype that the media places on gay men, which is why he is so progressive. He is proof that a man is much more than his sexuality, and that gay male characters can and deserve to be casted as badasses. 

(via bobamuel)

image

miniar:

damaskandplaid:

waltdisneyconfessions:

“I truely believe that everyone deserves a chance at love. And that everyone should be taught to believe in gay rights, and things. But for all the people who want Disney to do a movie about a gay couple, it can’t ever happen. As much as I want everyone to accept everyone, and six year old doesn’t need to see that all the time. Sure, Disney can hint at it, but they can’t make them the main couple, and that really is sad but it’s true.”

“…[a] six year old doesn’t need to see that all the time.”

Do they need to see heterosexual love all the time?

Is there any harm in them seeing queer love? Because you seem to be implying that it’s something they ought to be shielded from, and that’s fucked up.

In my experience, little kids are often more accepting, understanding, and undisturbed about these things than adults anyway.

Whenever a person uses “they don’t need to see that” as a reason for why children should not be taught/shown that minorities exist and that they don’t all fit a standard stereotype they aren’t offering logic or reason. 
They are suggesting that witnessing/learning about things that don’t fit the stereotype is substantially more harmful than repeatedly exposing them to stereotypes.

For example in this case. The OP doesn’t appear to have a problem with children being exposed to heterosexual romance, let alone violence, sexism, racism and other forms of oppressive presentation of negative stereotypes. They just think that children don’t need to be exposed to the existence of homosexual couples the same way as they are constantly reminded of the existence of heterosexual ones. 

There is no logic behind this alleged protecting of the children. What usually is at play here is that the person making such a statement is uncomfortable when they themselves are reminded that homosexual couples exist.
They maybe don’t mind gay people at all, but when they’re reminded that they actually have relationships, physical and emotional relationships with each other (kinda the definition of being gay you know), their homophobia kicks in and they are uncomfortable.
They project this sense of discomfort onto what they’re seeing instead of examining their internal reaction and so are often oblivious to what it really is. Prejudice. 
In a way, I can understand, as a parent, why someone would like to protect their children from whatever makes them uncomfortable, but the thing is, it’s not the homosexual couples that are the root of this discomfort, it’s the internalized and ignored prejudice, in part fueled by the lack of exposure to non-heterosexual people, that is at the root of the reaction. 
If they admit that the root is there, they have to admit that their reaction is wrong and that the way to correct the reaction is to learn and watch and expose oneself to what has made oneself uncomfortable.

And we all know how we hate to admit it when we’re wrong. 
It can really hurt sometimes.

Also, I have to comment on the image chosen for this confession because this helps illustrate my point.

On the left you have Pocahontas from Pocahontas……
Where do I even begin….
The movie “mostly” avoids the negative stereotype of the Native American as a bloodthirsty ignorant savage, but only by presenting the hyper-natural stereotype in turn (Pocahontas is so spiritually connected to nature she can talk to trees!)
Then there’s the historical accuracy, or shall we say, the complete and utter lack of it. A few names and places is all there is. Practically nothing is left of the original history. It’s all been whitewashed and turned into a “classic” Disney love story.
The real human being who used to go by the nickname Pocahontas has been completely rewritten by this movie and the only reason to do that is so that the movie sells.
I mean, they “could” at the very least renamed the characters so as not to exploit a real historical person, but they didn’t.

And she’s pictured next to Belle, from Beauty and the Beast on the right.
What could I possibly have to say that’s “negative” about a pretty, intelligent, and independent white girl?
Well, how about Stockholm Syndrome.
“In psychology, Stockholm syndrome is a term used to describe a real paradoxical psychological phenomenon wherein hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.” ~ Wikipedia
Not only is Belle held against her will, but it comes to pass because she’s willing to give her freedom for the freedom of her aging father. Instead of rallying troops and going to save her dad, she sacrifices herself. (Yeah, I know, wouldn’t be a full story without this event… )
There’s also the changes from the fairy tale to the movie to take into account. In the original fairy tale, the beast is utterly hideous and frightful to look at while being a truly sweet-natured person on the inside. In the movie, there’s a threat of physical violence (though the beast never actually harms Belle physically) and the beast terrorizes the household, but it’s Belle’s sweet and gentle nature that changes this terrorizing and abusive beast to someone who’s sweet-natured. 
What is the message that this conveys?
The original fairy tale sends the “don’t judge a book by it’s cover” message, but when it becomes the woman who changes the man from abusive to kind, the message has changed has it not?
Are you okay with exposing children to that message? 

Both stories contain violence, the threat of violence, traditional gender roles, abusive behavior, inaccuracies, and a fair bit of xenophobia.
Please, can someone explain to me why this is okay but having a same gender romance as the core of the story is something that children “don’t need to see”? 

^^^ Commentary.

socialismartnature:

Students at Harvard protest the decision to allow the U.S. Army's ROTC program back on to campus

Hours after President Drew G. Faust led a ribbon cutting ceremony celebrating the repeal of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy and the return of the Naval Reserve Officers’ Training Corps to Harvard, Lecturer Timothy P. McCarthy ’93 and a number of students spoke out against the University’s decision.

… [S]ome Harvard community members have continued to voice opposition to the decision, arguing that the military violates Harvard’s non-discrimination policy since it does not allow people who are transgender to serve.

“Today marks a milestone in the long struggle for human rights,” McCarthy said. “But today is only a partial victory.”

“Incomplete justice is still injustice,” he added.

“As the leader of a student organization with members that identify as gender queer or gender non-conforming, to ask students not to protest the ribbon cutting to me is deeply disturbing,” Queer Students and Allies Co-Chair Samuel Bakkila ’12 said. “We were never explicitly asked not to by the administration, but the undercurrent was there.”

“This was a big test for the non-discrimination policy, and it failed,” said James R. Sares ’12, who is gay and handed out pamphlets in protest at the ribbon cutting ceremony. “The policy should not be flexible for political opportunism. As a member of a marginalized minority, I hope that I won’t be thrown under the bus if it’s opportune for Harvard to do so.”

image

I also need more of this.

(via dirtyxygirl-deactivated20130502)

image

I need more of this.

(via dirtyxygirl-deactivated20130502)

miniar:

Linda Harvey, the founder of Mission America, says that LGBT people don’t exist. She made the comments during her weekend broadcast while she was attacking the Gay, Lesbian, And Straight Education Network.

Harvey was particularly perturbed by the GLSEN Sports Program which works towards “creating and maintaining an athletic and physical education climate that is based on the core principles of respect, safety and equal access for all students, teachers and coaches regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.”

Harvey believes there is no need for such a program because according to her, there is no proof that LGBT people exist.

Harvey: “There’s one big fact that’s not backed up. There is no proof that there’s ever anything like a gay, lesbian or bisexual or transgendered child, or teen or human. One of the other things you’re gonna see as I mentioned is a big campaign GLSEN’s gonna roll out this year calling for ‘respect,’ respect! Not just for people, but for homosexual lifestyle. The PR campaign to hold up gay as a good thing: the lifestyle, not the person, because there are no such humans.”

Mission America’s major area of focus is homosexuality from a conservative Christian viewpoint, particularly as it relates to American youth. It also opposes the influence of pagan and feminist spirituality, and provides a range of apologetics for Christianity.

Linda Harvey is hateful and in denial. There are many LGBT people in the public eye who are living proof that gay people exist like Rachel MaddowzBarney Frankz, and Ellen DeGeneresz, just to name a few. If you are part of the LGBT community, feel free to contact Harvey and her organization to let them know that you exist.

Mission America
Phone: (760) 200-2707
Fax: (760) 200-8837
Mail: Mission America Coalition
P.O. Box 13930
Palm Desert, CA 92255

That thinking is just so bizarre to me.

(via miniar)

cydne-should-be-sleeping:

tooyoungforthelivingdead:

droppingthefbomb:

Oh Fuck of Metro. 

This is not a gender-confused boy going back to school

The headlines needs to be changed to: 
 Girl goes back to school recognised as who she is.


just goes to show the state of entrenchment of the gender-sex identification in our society that even when the mother uses “she” as a pronoun and the whole gender dysphoria part, they still describe her as a “boy” solely because of her body

education, y’all

In the Daily Mail they had a quote from the mother saying ‘my daughter’ and they’d put ‘[the boy]’ next to it.

The Daily Fail fails again.

(via 2ndhersesameasthe1st)

postmodsexgeek:

polerin:

maevele:

thefremen:

[tw: transmisogyny, transphobia] Feminist Blog Outs Trans Women, Posts Pictures

fromonesurvivortoanother:

This blog post outs several transwomen with both pseudonyms AND legal names, their photos, where they can be found at the festival, and in some cases…

This shit right here?  THIS RIGHT MOTHER FUCKING HERE?

This is why I go in on TERFs.  This is why I’m out, why I spent hours fighting each one that popped up like a poisonous mushroom from the fetid ground of their.  It’s been a few months, but I can see I’m going to have to do it again.  Outing someone as trans in this manner endangers not only their job, and their ability to live life, but their very safety.  So you know what?  Here’s a trans woman for your hitlist.

My name is Erin McCargar or polerin on the net.  I’m a trans woman. I’m a Nashvillian.  I’m not scared of you.

In fact, I’m not even going to let you ruin my day.

This is utter bullshit. It’s not acceptable and those assholes need to stop this hatred NOW.

This continues to be utter bullshit but I have to say that is a great photo of polerin.

(via justasexgeek)