eftychia: Me in kilt and poofy shirt, facing away, playing acoustic guitar behind head (Default)
Add MemoryShare This Entry
posted by [personal profile] eftychia at 05:24am on 2013-10-23

"The message here is clear. Bigotry and transphobia? Possibly annoying, but really nothing to worry about. Calling out bigotry, however? That's a major disruption that needs to be stopped. The real problem with the discussion wasn't all the people declaring that transgender people are mentally ill and denying them their basic identity. It was that anyone got at all upset about it.

[...]

"[A]ll of this has a particularly bitter ring to it for the trans community. It is, after all, another instance of the most innocent seeming and yet destructive trick in the transphobic arsenal - the manufactured debate about time and place. The trans community sat through years of this at the hands of the larger GLBT community, as trans issues served mainly as the first thing that would be offered as a concession in any political negotiation. Trans issues were actively treated as the thing to deal with after marriage equality. But there's a larger trick involved. Trans issues aren't appropriate for federal non-discrimination laws because they'd imperil passage of laws to protect sexual orientation. They aren't appropriate for Wikipedia, because they have to win victories elsewhere first. The process of telling trans people that their concerns were inappropriate for a given venue goes back as far as 1969, when Jim Fouratt cut trans people out of the formation of the Gay Liberation Front immediately after the Stonewall riots.

[...]

"Often, of course, the harmful effects of this are coupled with talk about how this isn't some slight against trans people. It's just the rules, as those arguing for transphobia kept saying during the naming debate.

[...]

"[T]his is the situation Wikipedia has given us. Vehemently and hatefully denouncing the validity of trans identities? OK so long as you don't reference their genitals. Arguing passionately in favor of misnaming Chelsea Manning while covering up the fact that you work for her jailer? Not even worth mentioning. But knowing trans people? Means you're too involved to take administrative actions regarding trans people. Being willing to call out transphobia and hate speech for what they are? Means you can't even edit on trans topics."

-- Philip Sandifer, "Wikipedia Goes All-In on Transphobia", 2013-10-22 [ thanks to [info] - personal bcholmes for linking to this (and quoting different, also-important bits than I did)]

There are 4 comments on this entry. (Reply.)
gingicat: deep purple lilacs, some buds, some open (Default)
posted by [personal profile] gingicat at 10:02am on 2013-10-23
Wait, am I reading this correctly? Wikipedia is denying people who are trans, trans-friendly, or trans-rights the right to edit, and justifying it in a horrific manner?
rmd: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] rmd at 10:42am on 2013-10-23
Well, I think we can all agree that the real problem is bigoted privileged folks being made to feel slightly uncomfortable. Will nobody think of the bigots?

some days I want a flamethrower. I think I mean that metaphorically. Usually. But not always.
gale_storm: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] gale_storm at 03:44pm on 2013-10-24
Understandably.

Here's wishing you to have a giant, ass-whapping flamethrower.
gale_storm: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] gale_storm at 03:43pm on 2013-10-24
The longer I live, the more I think that some people, singly or in groups, are just afraid of change and hate anyone and anything that might suggest it.

I'll just be over here in a corner, shaking my head slowly.

Really.


Links

January

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31