Temporarily Removed

[Post taken down temporarily. I need to get to rewriting it, and a lot of it was more my personal views and understanding than consensus. As such, I believe that it was doing more harm than good in the interim. Sorry to those who found it helpful.]

Advertisements

7 Responses to Temporarily Removed

  1. MorriganInFlight says:

    Thanks for the work you put into this!

    If there is any way I can be of help, I’d be more than happy to chip in.

  2. Jeanne says:

    Oh, wow, this list/article is awesome! Thank you for putting this together!I’ve learned a lot from reading it ^^.

  3. […] I need to revise the draft page I have up so far. Mostly I need to fix the tone so that it’s more of a conversation with […]

  4. libractivist says:

    Awesome resource, thanks. I’ve done enough reading on the subject that I can’t tell if it’s really at a 101 level or not, but this is wonderfully explained and I’ll be steering people here, if you don’t mind.
    One quibble, though. In the gender expressions section, the way you’ve worded the first paragraph seems to conflate lesbianism with butchness, and being a gay man with being camp. I’m sure that’s not intentional, but perhaps you could rephrase so gender expression and sexual orientation are treated separately? (And do something about the bi-erasure at the same time, pretty please?)
    I’d love to see where this goes…

    • TAL9000 says:

      I was going to redo most of it to change the tone and make it more 101-y, and talk more directly to the people I’m writing it for.

      I’ll mention other orientations when I rewrite it; for something about trans people, considering how many trans people are queer in other ways, neglecting to mention the huge diversity of sexual orientations is a major mistake. I was trying to clearly separate camp from gay and butch from lesbian; I’ll write that section with a more clear separation in the next draft.

      Thanks.

  5. Mellanvärld says:

    Re bodily vs social dissonance:
    I once read a post that said that trans*-issues was really about ill fitting gender roles; to which I replied that it did not describe me well, as for me it is mainly about bodily dissonance. The reply I got was:

    Thou dost not know what I put into “gender role”.

    (no further explanation given)
    I had no idea what to reply to that…

    • TAL9000 says:

      That looks like a desperate attempt to save a beloved theory in the face of evidence proving it wrong. If you define “gender role” broadly enough that it includes what parts you have it loses all meaning. So, I don’t know if it can be rebutted. Gender abolitionists and similar types are willing to give up any amount of theory or consistency to keep their cissexist beliefs about trans people (including that transition is all about gender roles, i.e., about capitulating to oppressive social constructs).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: