Troll Patrol: Trans people and othering

I recently received a troll comment in my inbox to be moderated relating to this post about the International Transgender Day of Visibility. The comment was not as easy for me to write off as most troll comments are.

The troll spewed off the normal sort of "why are you paying attention to these people and not to ME" attitude prevalent in most troll-speak, but it was the last line of the comment that caught my eye.

And for the record, what you're doing is counterproductive to getting a group accepted as "same as everyone else", because you're making them separate and
"different" and "othering" them through your actions.

Full disclosure: Someone very dear to me is trans*. The same is true of several of my friends at college. So that is part of the reason this particular troll comment hit somewhat close to home.

That last line of the comment gave me pause because I was concerned that perhaps, after all the time I have spent trying to educate myself as best I can about issues particular to trans people, that maybe my cisgender privilege had led me to do something that may have hurt people I never intended to harm.

What is othering?

The basic concept of othering entails the creation of a dynamic of opposing groups of “us” versus “them.” There is nothing essentially bad about othering. It is a categorizing process that is given qualitative value based on it use. Negative othering could be taking on aspect of a person that makes them distinctive (that they are transgender, for example) and using that as a reason to harm them. Positive othering includes using one’s point of view (that sexism is bad) and using it against the opposite side (that sexism is good) in order to gain rights for more people. So, while the concept of othering is not necessarily either good or bad,

“…we do have to be careful about it, even positive othering can turn into something negative, for example when talking about countries that need aid we tend to treat them as inferior to us, and in doing so we are distancing ourselves from them and viewing them as ‘the other’.” – h/t

The Comment

In the quoted section of the comment there are several problematic assumptions. First is that the goal of bring to light the lives of trans people is to have them viewed as “same as everyone else” and that by promoting the Transgender Day of Visibility was “counterproductive” to that goal. While it could make sense that this would be a goal for those who work for the rights of trans people (after all, trans people are often persecuted and killed for being the “other”), it is not necessarily the case. True, some members of this community may want to pass and live without being openly trans, but other members of the same community (Monica, Queen Emily and Lisa for examples that I read often) are vocal about their trans identities and even use them to shape their activism. Basically, we have to be sensitive to the fact that the trans community is diverse in many ways, including their feelings on passing.

The second assumption in the comment is that by blogging about this Day of Visibility I was othering trans people in a way that the comment author implied was negative. This ties back to the simple understanding of what is best for a group of which he is not a member. In response to this assumption, I would like to address a few points.

Acknowledging how a group is different, especially when that group is already being denied jobs, harassed, and killed for being different every day is not an inherently threatening move. Difference is an important trait in being human. You know the phrase: “No two people are alike.” While acknowledging the difference between themselves and cis people may not be comfortable for all trans folks, it does not necessarily follow that creating a safe space for people to express their differences, if they so choose, is dangerous.

Without awareness and education, there is no hope of working towards ending transphobia. If we completely stopped discussing trans people, their lives and issues particular to them in order to avoid othering them in a negative way, think of all the ignorant, transphobic hate that would manifest itself in the lives of these people. While making the issue of transphobia visible may not stop all transphobic attacks, without it I believe the world would be much worse off.

That comment forced me to consider this issue, but I believe that as long as we work to make safe spaces for people who choose to be vocal about their lives as trans people (and maybe educate a few people along the way) that we’ll be just fine.

Thanks for your interest, though, Troll.

*EDIT 4/3/10: Thanks to a comment left by Queen Emily, I realized that I unintentionally othered my trans friends by mentioning their positions on surgeries/hormones. That information has been removed because it is irrelevant to this post. I had included it originally because I had written a slightly different post that mentioned feelings on surgery/hormones (and I question if it was even necessary there), but I take full responsibility for my mistake. I appreciate all readers and commenters who help me recognize instances of my cis privilege and help me grow in my understanding of these issues.

Troll Patrol: Say What???? Edition

In response to my post about our radio show (which didn't happen due to some bad technical difficulties), I got this utterly confusing troll comment:

There's also no such thing as "bisexuals". You have gay men who don't want to be "out" all the way, and you have college straight women who make out with their friends for drinks.
No such thing.

This same troll also told me that there is no such thing as homophobia.

But according to this person, apparently, there is also only one kind of woman: the "college straight" kind. No other varieties, even if they "make out with their friends." Because they would only do that for drinks. Not as a legitimate expression of their sexual/emotional desires. And as far as men go, well, they're all totally gay. Maybe straight, too, but this person leaves that up for interpretation.

What??

Attention Trolls: A quick definition

From the lovely comment moderation box on "Apologize." for your consideration:

Feminism: Advocates of censorship and thought control.

Rape means more than "Sex with a woman that didn't want it".

Shame that feminists refuse to acknowledge this, and instead try to make every single thing on earth solely about them.

Why... one might as well call it "What about teh wimmenz???"

Not. Everything. Is. About. You.

Rape has multiple meanings, look it up, please. Celebrating this moron makes you look foolish and ignorant.

Also, there's no such thing as rape culture. Pushing idiotic buzzwords just makes you look idiotic.

Thank you, Anonymous for your lovely, though-provoking comment.

I'll have to admit, you're right about one thing. Rape does mean more than "sex with a woman that didn't want" - I'll broaden the definition to "sex with a person that didn't want it". Because that's EXACTLY what rape is.

Unless, of course, you're refering to the less commonly used definition of rape as "an Old World herb (Brassica napus) of the mustard family grown as a forage crop and for its seeds which yield rapeseed oil and are a bird food" (M-W). I'm going to use my deductive reasoning skills here and guess that's not what you mean, or what the person who used rape originally intended. "I'm going to herb of the mustard family you in this video game"? Nope.

So when we refer to rape, it's talking about "sex with a person that didn't want it", FYI.

Impersonators, any other important things I'm forgetting about in our definition of rape?

Women aren't Human

As much as I would like to deny it, some people really do think that women aren't human.

Really.

Consider the Humanist. He or she says that they are opposed to Feminism. They object to the "raising of one gender above another" and would rather spend time crusading for human rights. Among those that profess such lofty sentiments are MRAs, intellectuals, liberal dudez, anti-feminist women, and control-troll writers.

So how do I know that they think women aren't human?

Simple! If they profess those who are for women's rights are against or not for human rights, they are operating under the premise that the movement for women's full agency is somehow in opposition or contrary to the movement for full human rights. The only way that an ideology that speaks for the female gender, or 51% of the global population, is not for human rights is if women are not human.

So next time someone tells you that they think feminism is anti-human rights, or that it is too myopic, tell them that you don't associate with morons who think the prerequisite for humanity is a penis.

(Cross-posted)

Life and Blogging: Incompatible, accompanied by relevant comic and video

Planning my grandparent's 50th anniversary luncheon with my mother was such a time-suck that I've been completely absent from the internets for the past week or so. I didn't even read any of my blog subscriptions which was a blasphemy of the highest degree. My very small audience will be happy to note that I'm currently sitting on a rant on the pornification of bisexuality.

In other news, I totally caught that interview with Jessica Valenti, writer and founder of the popular Feministing.com, on Moblogic:

Nothing particularly hard-hitting there, but we feminists tend to be a bit stand-offish in wider forums with our views. Probably because of trolls on comments like this:

Jessica Valenti is a bigot, she just happens to back what is currently a politically correct and popular form of bigotry.

The way they talk on her website you'd think women were living in some kind of planet of the apes scenario and yet she seems to manage to live a rather privileged life of celebrity, book deals and socialising.

She's not even an intelligent bigot, or she's highly intellectually dishonest, but then again her career is based on this notion that women are horribly oppressed - it's in her interests to keep perpetuating this idea.

No, I will not link to the comment. Trolls don't get free audiences here.

First of all, since when is feminism popular? I think our dear troll is confusing feminism with Suicide Girls or the various teenie-bopper fads that confuse titillation with empowerment and equality.

It's really obvious that Jessica is "privileged". I mean, she has to put up with asinine trolls and their sophomoric logic day in and day out! I do that too, although on a much smaller scale, and I can tell you how much fun it is, and how much money I make. Jessica's "socializing" is called activism. Instead of getting drunk and shooting the breeze with buddies, which is fun in moderation, try something more productive like writing books.

Finally, our dear troll punctuates his sentiment with the tired-and-true, "shuttup opportunistic man-hating whore!" sentiment. Any feminist knows she's doing something right when she gets this gem thrown at her. From trolls in my very personal rape thread whining about teh poor menz to anonymous emails about how I alienate people from feminism with my awful, terrible book reviews and pop-culture sociology, there seems to be no shortage of men, and the occasional woman, who seem to think that the people pointing out discrimination are somehow more to blame for society's ills than the people that perpetuate those attitudes with the defense of their willful ignorance.

In more colloquial terms, via Penny Arcade:

(Cross-posted)

When You're Fat, You're Not Just Fat

Five years old, my first diet. Seven years old, being declared officially "overweight" because I weigh ten pounds over what a "normal" seven-year-old should weigh. Ten years old, learning to starve myself and be happy being constantly dizzy. Thirteen years old, crossing the border from being bigger than my friends to actually being "fat." Fifteen years old, hearing the boys in the next room talk about how fat (and hence unattractive) I am. Whenever I perform, I remember the time when my dad said he didn't like the dance I choreographed because I looked fat while I was doing it. Every time I dye my hair I remember when my mom wouldn't let me dye my hair in seventh grade because seeing fat people with dyed hair made her think they were just trying to cover up the fact that they're fat, trying to look attractive despite it (when of course it's obvious what they should really do if they want to look attractive, right?) - Nomy Lamm, It's a Big, Fat Revolution

Fat hate is constant. Turn on your TV. Ride the subway. Open a magazine. Eavesdrop in a restaurant. Because when you're fat, you're no longer human. Your body is open to discussion and debate everywhere. Your health is analyzed by strangers, and you're constantly reminded that you are unattractive. You are sneered at. You are laughed at openly. You are pointed at.

But, at the same time you are invisible. Your existence is ignored in films. Clothes featured in magazines are not made in your size. Doors are slammed in your face, as they are held open for other people.

Because, in case you didn't know, fat people are not human, and they don't deserve respect. And they are also pretty stupid, which is why they constantly need to be reminded by strangers that their hearts are in danger, or they might have diabetes. Oh, and they are lazy. The only reason that they are fat is because they refuse to get off the couch and get to the gym.

Or not. Fat people know whether they are healthy or not. (Because fat can be healthy, btw.) They know the risks of a sedentary lifestyle because they watch the news and go to the doctor. They don't need to be told by you. Yeah, except they might not lead a sedentary lifestyle. They are active. They workout. They eat healthy. Because there is more than one way to become fat. Yes, they might be sedentary (but, the thin person next to you may also be). But, they also may have thyroid problems. Their bodies might be built differently than yours. They might be depressed and coping through food. But really, that's not you're problem. It's theirs.

And fat people do face a lot of problems. Fat discrimination is real. Fat employees make less a year than thin ones. Far less. Fat students are less likely to be accepted to prestigious universities than thin ones (but how do they know the students are fat? Most Ivy-leagues require interviews).

Well, maybe you would hire a fat person, but you would never sleep with one (that's the sentiment I've gotten from a lot of commentors here). You're just not attracted to them. Fat is gross. But why? Would you still think that fat was "gross" if you hadn't been bombarded with images and messages that thin in sexy? If you had been raised away from an image-filled media, would you think like that? A teacher once told me that in "the days of radio" women were attracted to deep voices and valued those deep voices in a potential mate more than their physical appearance. Just a thought.

Also, read this.

And, a few notes, I am not anti-thin. I realize that thin women face their own set of problems; however, there has been a lot of anti-fat hatred on this blog lately, which is why I chose to write about fat oppression. And this post is meant to be fairly gender neutral. Fat is a feminist issue. But, because this is sort-of a Fat Oppression 101 post, I wanted to encompass the problems that face both men and women. More gender-specific posts will probably follow. And, as the writer of this post, I expect commentors may say that I am just "bitter" or fat myself. Both are a little true. I am not a thin woman, and I feel bitterness when I see discrimination. But, I am also a beautiful woman who wants to change things a little bit.

Edit: I am closing comments on this thread. Comments have failed to be productive and only succeeded in insulting me, all feminists, and women in general.

Troll Patrol

Hey guys, I am home for the weekend (my sister is graduating from high school on Sunday), so that means that I won't be able to check here that often. I just wanted to leave some notes for all the readers/commenters/contributors.

First of all, I would like to remind all commenters that anonymous commenting is a privilege. I started this blog for the purpose of generating productive discussion. I understood that in order to do that, I would need to allow as many people as possible to participate in discussions here, and the best way to do that was to allow for anonymous commenting. But lately, there has been a lot of bullying by anonymous commenters which has provoked tangents in the comment threads that focus more on semantics than the actual issues.

We have been experiencing a lot of trolling on this blog lately. The use of the word "troll" for me means a person who leaves comments (usually, but not always, anonymously) that are meant to provoke a negative reaction among those who support the authors/ideas of this blog. General tactics used on this blog include: generalizing about all feminists ("feminists hate men!"), assumptions about particular authors ("you wrote about x so you must be like this"), name calling ("conceited," and"vain" were alluded to in a recent thread), and others.

Many of the people that I would consider to be trolls on this blog come here, make intentionally aggravating statements, and then try to use the human reactions of other commenters to make a bad name for feminism. It is interesting that they claim to just be presenting an opposing viewpoint. Problem is that there intent obviously does not fit with this. They want to make feminists look bad.

My policy for all commenters is to allow them to comment, and if they make a generalization about something, or say something mean, or just plain wrong, I correct them. If they continue that also makes them a troll in my eyes, I try to urge other commenters to not engage in debate with them, as it is often futile because the troll has not come here for debating purposes.

I have deleted comments in the past when they have been insulting to particular people, or so full of malice that they offered nothing to the discussion. I have been accused of doing this to silence those who do not agree. That is wrong. Very wrong. You can look through some of the more recent threads to see that I have allowed a diversity of comments to be displayed. But if a troll continuously makes generalizations and covers the authors of this blog with false blanket statements like "You think women are superior," and "You just want everyone to agree," and they continue to do so even after being told that they are incorrect, their comments become no longer appreciated.

I receive every comment that is submitted to this blog via e-mail. I read every comment that is submitted to this site. This is my responsibility as I started this blog and wanted to allow people to comment anonymously, and I have to say that I do not appreciate the disrespect that comes from many people who make it obvious that their point in coming here is to disagree. I could start a more strict deletion strategy, but that would only garner more cries of "She's silencing the opposition!"

So I will not, but I would like all the commenters on this site to realize that debating with a troll is futile. You may try for a while, but you need to know when to stop. You only give them more reason to post nonsense if you respond to them.

I do not want to silence discussion. If there are people productively participating in a comment thread, engage with them and ignore those who continue to be blind to their own argumentative weaknesses. Doing so will make this a better experience for all those involved.

Thanks, everyone.

And now I will wait for someone to comment, exclaiming, "I am not a troll!" and "You think you're psychic, don't you?"

EDIT 5/18/08: The purpose of this post was not necessarily to entertain any sort of debate. It was to point out why I allowed anonymous comments in the first place, and how I personally try to deal with those I find distasteful, along with a suggestion for how I felt that people on this blog should deal with them. But I am cutting off the comments now because it is distracting. Back to the other posts!