There’s a disturbing misogyny, a degraded and degrading attitude toward women, lurking in dark corners of the transgender community’s attic. The evidence for it is readily available but not widely known. Research recently released by two Johns Hopkins’ medical professors revealed a certain level of emotional weakness in the transgender community. This new information supports those findings while shining a revealing light on the form that weakness may take.
The common description of a “transwoman” (one of our culture’s accepted terms for a person “assigned male” at birth and now identifying as female) is that of “a woman among women.” On this view, if a transwoman is in the women’s room along with another woman, there are simply two women there: no difference, no distinction.
There is clear and readily available evidence, however, that this is not the case…
Continued at The Stream >>>
Ok, Tom. I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that your intentions in writing this article were good.
That being said, what you wrote here is, quite frankly, ignorant. And I mean that in the most literal sense – you have no idea what you’re talking about here.
First: yes, the stories you’re talking about are indeed (among other things) misogynistic – we can *absolutely* agree on that. I probably have even more of a problem with them than you do, in fact. But you’re pointing the finger at the wrong people. Trans people, by and large, are not the ones creating these stories, and they’re not the ones consuming them either. Quite the opposite – the creators and target market here are what the trans community calls “chasers” – people who fetishize sex with trans people. And the trans community doesn’t like them *at all*.
You mention that you “searched with Google and found no TG* person publicly condemning this misogynistic fantasizing”. I’m sure you did. I’m also sure that the reason you didn’t find what you were looking for is because of how Google works – most popular results at the top. Most trans people have pretty small platforms (by which I mean, their blogs and youtube channels don’t have very many followers), and the ones with larger platforms tend to focus on broader or more consequential issues. Furthermore, if you include “fanfiction” in your search, you’ll just get the fanfiction sites themselves, and if you don’t, you won’t get sites relevant to the topic at all. And finally, most trans people who comment on issues like this do so on social media sites like Twitter or Facebook; it’s kind of hard to find stuff like that on Google.
What you could have done before writing this is practice better research methods. It’s fairly easy to spend five minutes looking for trans people to ask for sources on this, or directly for their own opinions. Seriously – go hop on twitter, tumblr, facebook, or reddit, and *actually talk to some trans people* (politely).
That being said, here’s some sources I found that you could have used (some of these may contain strong language):
http://myrddinwylt.tumblr.com/post/37652143533/pro-top-for-fanfic-writers-cissexism-and
http://fandomsandfeminism.tumblr.com/post/37731404709/trans-characters-gender-swaps-and-magic-in
http://agendervic.tumblr.com/post/125902765954/tips-for-writing-a-transgender-character
https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/3nz4ly/is_there_anywhere_i_can_read_respectful_erotica/
(this one even mentions fictionmania specifically – “it’s hard finding the good stuff buried in a huge pile of questionable content.”)
https://www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/2hhlpv/is_there_any_decent_pornerotica_for_transwomen/
(you probably don’t want to click any of the sites linked to here)
http://handbasketproductions.com/call-for-submissions/
In addition: while I am not myself trans, I have often expressed distaste with the way trans people are portrayed in erotica in discussions with friends, and every trans person I’ve spoken with about this topic has expressed a similar sentiment.
* in a twist of irony, I have it on good authority from someone very active in the trans community that trans people don’t like to be referred to as “TG” precisely because that abbreviation is so often used in these demeaning stories.
Hmmm… thought I added a comment last night, but it’s not here.
Skep, are you saying that on these sites, transgendered persons:
a) renounce the misogyny on sites like Fictionmania, or
b) reject any association with those sites?
It wasn’t clear to me how either of those was being said, so maybe you could clarify. I did not go behind the “18 and over” walls; I’ve done enough of that already.
Thanks.
I’m also wondering how you would put that in context with lgbt.wikia.com, with almost 10 million registered members in the LGBT side alone, posting this article referencing Fictionmania positively as a transgender site.
Remember, I haven’t said Fictionmania is representative of all or even most of the transgendered community. I’ve pointed out that the community hasn’t renounced it. This page is one evidence that what I said is accurate. But if you’ve got additional information I’ll be glad to hear it.
Tom:
first, the preferred nomenclature (except in a few special cases that you’re definitely not referring to here) is “transgender persons”, not “transgendered persons”. Anyway, here’s more info from those links.
1. This is a tumblr threaded discussion addressed to fanfic writers. It criticizes several transphobic tropes in fanfiction, and says “We need more fic about trans* people. But we don’t need more **** that dehumanizes them by reducing them to their genitals and treating them like freakshow exhibits.”
2. This is a tumblr post addressed to fanfic writers. It tells them to talk to trans people before putting a trans character into a story about how to represent them respectfully. The author is trans.
3. This is a tumblr post containing a list of 13 tips for writing a transgender character. The author is trans and is “very angry and very desperate for respectful trans representation”.
4. This is a reddit post asking for trans erotica. The original poster, who is trans, asks “I’m interested in erotica, but everything I can find about trans people is objectifying and fetishising in a really disgusting way, and it’s offputting. Is there anything better out there?” There are several comments, most from other trans people, recommending trans erotica that (I’m assuming, I didn’t read it) doesn’t contain the offputting material in question. As I mentioned before, fictionmania is cited, and it’s noted that there’s a lot of offensive content there.
5. This is another reddit post asking for trans erotica. Like before, the original poster is trans, and is asking for “porn/erotica for transwomen that is a) respectful and b) interesting”. Several recommendations are given (again, mostly from other trans people).
6. This is a call for submissions on a publisher’s website. The description says “Too often trans erotica has been written from a cis perspective, with a cis reader in mind, addressing cis concerns about trans people, but not trans concerns. Let’s create fiction that truly feels like trans people’s stories, addressing the issues and concerns you see as significant in your trans communities.”
Now, not all of my links are specifically about amateur erotic fanfiction. But similar problems exist in other forms of media too, and the critiques are the same.
Number 1 objects to dehumanizing trans people. Does it object to dehumanizing women?
Number 2 implies the same and leaves open the same question.
Number 3 implies the same and leaves open the same question.
Number 4 is ambiguous, although it very well might include a renunciation of the kind of misogyny I’ve pointed toward. I’ll allow it a “maybe.”
Number 5 leaves open the question, respectful toward whom? Women? Or trans persons? Another very generous “maybe.”
Number 6 doesn’t appear to have anything to do with misogyny, from what you’ve quoted.
So out of 6 examples you’ve got one or possibly two “maybes.”
The wikia site I pointed to in #3 doesn’t distance itself from Fictionmania one bit. That’s a definite claim to inclusion.
How does that stack up, in your view?
Tom, you keep trying to paint trans people as being ok with misogyny. How many trans people have you spoken to directly before making this claim?
As for the wiki site, it’s just that – a wiki site. Was that page written by trans people? It doesn’t appear so to me. Looking at the revision history, it was written by someone named ‘Lightbot’ in 2008, who doesn’t appear to even have an active account anymore. Is Lightbot trans? I don’t know, and neither do you.
Continuing in the revision history, there’s only a small handful of edits. Most are by someone named ‘RayneVanDunem’, who gives no indication that I can see of being trans.
And finally: most of it is plagiarized word for word from Wikipedia’s article on Fictionmania.
If it’s a real wiki, anyone on the site can revise it if it doesn’t say what they want to say. Not sure there’s much evidence anyone thought so.
As far as speaking with a trans person, I have had that contact, yes. If I were to make even more of those connections I would gain evidence supporting one of my claims: that this doesn’t represent every trans person. I would not have any opportunity either to confirm or deny the idea that this represents some trans persons, or even many of them, because there just isn’t any way to acquire information on that via personal interview. Someone who entertains secret, hidden misogyny will keep it secret and hidden.
In the world of psychological testing there is the concept of meaningful variance: if there is no variance in persons’ answers to a question (or questionnaire item), then that question or item provides no meaningful information. Asking trans persons what they think about misogyny, or whether they entertain misogynistic fantasies, would provide no meaningful information.
But there are nevertheless some people who do entertain those fantasies. There is good reason to believe they are associated with the transgender movement. (Read the Fictionmania bulletin board.) There is good reason to think many of them identify as transgender.
But let’s suppose your perspective is correct, which is (I take it) that this is all a false manifestation, a counterfeit, not actually part of the transgender movement, not representing any actual transgender person. I have these questions:
1. Can you prove that position to be substantially accurate?
2. Is it at least possible, since there probably isn’t any proof that you are right, you might be wrong?
3. Should policymakers assume that you are substantially right — that these sites represent substantially no one in the transgender community, even though they say they do, and even though there is no carefully conducted study demonstrating that you are?
You’re making some fairly absolute statements: This is not the transgender community. I made carefully qualified statements: that this represented an unknown proportion of the transgender community; that it would be wrong to think it represents the next transgender person you meet; that it would be wrong to assume it represents all; and that it would be wrong to assume it represents none.
That last statement was the key action point for policy purposes. You can refute it if you can prove that these sites represent no one who would identify as transgender. The burden of proof is on you.
Meanwhile, I note that you completely ignored comment 6 and changed the subject.
Bad form.
You get further in discussion when you say, “Well, okay, point well taken, let’s move on.” Or if you think the person was wrong, you say something like, “No, you’re still missing this … ”
The problem, of course, is if you admit someone else’s point was well taken, you invite further discussion on what that might mean to your position. Maybe it’s been shown to be lacking in all support. Maybe you have to admit that fact, and wonder whether your belief was justified in the first place.
That happens sometimes in real, legitimate conversation. I had to admit something like that in conversation with my wife last night. It was good for both of us.
You know what, Tom? Nevermind. I could keep arguing with you, but to be honest I’d rather do something else. I don’t know why, but you seem to be oddly obsessed with writing negative things about LGBT people. Sure, you’ll say things like “I was talking specifically about some individuals!” or “I also said bullying is bad!”. But these just come off as token dismissals of the worst bigotry in society so you can write guilt-free about what’s *really* on your mind.
Why don’t you ever write something where the main thesis is something positive or helpful for LGBT people? You could write an arcticle about LGBT actors in movies or tv that have given fantastic performances. Or, an article about how Theodore Shoebat’s violent rhetoric is anti-Christian. Or any number of other topics. Not just a token comment in an article about how we’re unhealthy, or how other groups are also bullied, or how stereotyped you feel, or how to convince your children that you’re right, or how reviews of your book are unfair, or how to reconcile your views on LGBT people’s lives with the worst mass shooting in U.S. history.
You were right about one thing in that post about Pulse, though. You need much more practice in loving people different from yourself.
Okay, I get that you’re angry, especially when you throw in the part about reconciling my views with the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, as if there were even anything to reconcile there.
I don’t watch movies much and I hardly know a great performance from a mediocre one. (I can spot a bad one. Doesn’t make for thrilling blog posts.)
I wrote about Shoebat once. I questioned his wisdom. I said he got his approach wrong. I don’t recall even hearing about him since then; he doesn’t cross my radar.
I write about what crosses my radar. It’s not going to be LGBT people in film, for reasons already stated. It’s not going to be about LGBT people I interact with personally because I’m not interacting with them for the purpose of writing about them.
Besides that, Skep, the fact that this kind of thing exists at some undefined and unknown layer of connection with the transgender community is not to be ignored, for reasons I need not repeat. I’ve stated them already. I don’t expect you to like it. I don’t expect anyone to like it. I don’t like it myself. But it’s there. I didn’t put it there. I didn’t sensationalize it. I didn’t exaggerate it. In fact I understated it; I could have spoken of a lot worse than I did.
It’s not there because I put it there. It’s there because some people with seriously sick, distorted views of womanhood put it there.
Love isn’t just a matter of helping people feel good about themselves no matter what.
Just now you wrote,
If you’d been arguing with me this would have come out different than it has. You’ve asked me some questions in #9. You’ve ignored my questions in #7 and changed the subject again. That’s not arguing, at least not legitimate, let’s-work-on-this-until-we-get-to-the-truth arguing. It’s poking and dodging.
I answered the complaints and the alleged evidence in your comments 1, 4, and 6; I’ve pointed out (#8) that (with one notable exception) you’ve ignored my answers, changing the subject instead; and you’ve responded by changing the subject one more time. I’d rather see you grappling with the answers, not running from them.
I write about what crosses my radar.
This is a big part of the problem here – your radar is missing an awful lot. Why, for example, didn’t Theodore Shoebat cross your radar on any of the dozens of times he’s called for people like me to literally be executed? (in case you don’t believe me, here’s just one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp4UDasTM1Q ) What sort of sites are you reading that mention his little cake stunt, but not this?
Did you know that just yesterday, a man in Florida said on Facebook, “My events are selling out cause you ******* are total patsies. None of you deserve to live. If you losers thought the Pulse nightclub shooting was bad, wait till you see what I’m planning for Labor Day.” Did the source that informed you of the New Atlantis study also inform you of this?
It’s not there because I put it there. It’s there because some people with seriously sick, distorted views of womanhood put it there.
Yes, but then you tried to implicate trans people. I could do the same thing. If you search Literotica (another erotic story site), you get 2,338 stories involving nuns, 4,569 involving religion, and a whopping 17,551 involving church.
This represents an unknown portion of the Christian community.
It’s wrong to think it represents the next Christian you meet.
It would be wrong to assume it represents all.
It would be wrong to assume it represents none.
That last statement was the key action point for policy purposes. You can refute it if you can prove that these sites represent no one who would identify as Christian.
The burden of proof is on you.
Skep, get a grip.
Fictionmania bills itself as a transgender site.
Other credibly transgender sites call it a transgender site.
It presents stories of transgender fantasies, as a matter of policy, such that all its stories are of that sort.
It’s difficult (not impossible, but difficult) to find anyone in the transgender community strongly denouncing it as a transgender site.
Therefore it’s at least credible to view it as a transgender-related site.
Literotica does not bill itself as a church site.
No credible church site bills it as a church site.
It does not present church, nun, etc. related stories as a matter of policy.
Only about 5% of its stories mention church, which presumably includes a large proportion wherein church is not a major there.
So there is no credible reason even to begin to think this might be a church-related site.
This is not difficult.
The parallelism you’re trying to build here is mindless. There is no parallel. You have no argument.
As for Shoebat and this man in Florida, I’m sorry they’re not on my radar. If that’s my biggest problem, then so be it. I can’t pay attention to everything. (But you will find me renouncing Westboro Church here very forcefully.)
BTW, I’m glad you didn’t try to associate the Beach Bear Scam Artist with Christianity. But why should I spend time pointing out he’s wrong when he’s already been identified as a scammer and a louse? Is that really my job now?
No thanks.
And before you complain again, read:
https://www.thinkingchristian.net/posts/2010/12/to-treat-one-another-as-humans-part-2a/
https://www.thinkingchristian.net/posts/2016/08/cdc-report-gives-new-food-thought-lgbt-suicide-bullying-experiences/