Transgender - The Transamorous Network

November 14, 2017October 12, 2017

When racism and transphobia look the same

racism-transphobia It’s an interesting question. This article article takes a good, long look at that question. It begins with recounting the murder of a transwoman, so be forewarned…

The article’s main message is, you’re transphobic if you think a person who is trans needs to tell potential suitors that fact before they engage in a relationship. The argument goes that a person who is not attracted to transwomen will want to know ahead of time who they are getting involved with. Because if that person is transgender, there is a possibility the cis-person (or other variety of human) won’t choose to be with that person.

I guess the same argument could be made for being racist: if somehow black people could conceal their blackness, racists would want to know ahead of time whether the person they find themselves interested in is black, so they can check their interest.

Sounds dumb, right? I mean, in order for a person to want to be sure they aren’t interested in said black person is because they are somehow interested in them, right? Interestingly, we don’t have to worry about that because black people can’t conceal their blackness. Most anyway. As a result, people who make their partner choices based on skin color alone can merrily avoid all us niggers. lol.

Not so with transgender people apparently.

Which is the point, I think, of the article. Not that all transgender people conceal their trans ness…many actually do. Intentionally and unintentionally. But that’s not the point I’m making. I’m saying it’s quite possible that a person who is scared of being with a transgender person can easily find themselves attracted to a transgender person before discovering the person is indeed trans. I mean have you seen Dusty Rose? This of course has happened in many of the trans murder cases in recent years.

But being scared of a person because they are trans is an interesting thing.

The author puts it more plainly:

None of this means it is transphobic to not be attracted to individual trans people. Nor is it transphobic to not be attracted to specific genitals. But it is transphobic to claim to not be attracted to all trans, people. For example, there is a difference between saying you won’t go out with someone for having a penis and saying you won’t go out with someone because they’re trans.

It’s similar to someone saying they aren’t attracted to all black people. So is it a preference? Or is it phobia/racism?

Incidentally, many, many transwomen are racist if held to this same definition. Couldn’t a transwoman’s lack of interest in black men – because of their skin color – or some other aspect of their physical disposition, something they can’t help bing, be interpeted the same way?

You better believe it.

“Oh, but THAT’S a preference,” some will say….Not according to many, many, many, many people. But not everyone. Some think it’s just prejudice. Others do think it’s a preference. So how is not wanting to be with a transwoman, even if a person is initially attracted to such a person, not a preference then? I think it depends on the story.

That’s Dusty Rose. And yes, she’s fine, period

After all, there are a LOT of black people, men too, who are loving, caring people. Just as there are probably similar such people among transwomen.

Here’s a great definition of racism: “people making negative assessments of large groups of individuals that they’ve never met, based solely on the color of their skin.” Replace “based solely on the color of their skin” with “based solely on their status outside the heteronormative binary”, and we start coming to some interesting parallels.

Suffice it to say this is an great example of why I wrote the post recently on why it’s so hard to be the “woke” police. Everyone has a picadillo or two. You’re bound to have yours exposed when you start exposing others. So it’s tough to call people racist or transphobic, especially in the grey areas. If a person is calling people racist slurs, or anti-trans slurs, or demeaning a person, or a group of people in either category on the basis of that alone, that’s one thing. But it gets really slippery when a person starts trying to parse out examples that could be just preference.

It’s far better – if you’re wanting to be happy – to leave all that shit to other people. It’s far better to create stories which create the best reality circumstances for your life and let other people live. If that means sometimes (in the early stages) meeting a dick, or a racist or a transphobe or two, so be it. In the end, those people won’t be able to find you….if you’re telling the right stories.

And you’ll live happily ever after.

November 7, 2017November 5, 2017

I knew the day was coming….

THEY CAN DO THAT It was only a matter of time before medical advances made womb transplantation a possibility. This technology already has been pioneered in cisgender women. It becoming available to trans women was a foregone conclusion.

While it may be some time before it is perfected. I am certain it will be. After all, as I’ve said many times, All That Is seeks to express itself in as many varied ways as possible in its effort to explore its expansion and creativity. So no wonder some trans women would ask for, and receive technologies making it possible for them to birth children.

And, of course, there are souls waiting to come into the world in exactly this manner.

Prepare for a massive backlash of ethical and moral arguments, particularly from those trapped in perspectives which see only “man” and “woman”. Those words and concepts are increasingly being blown out of the water as All That Is exerts its true nature upon human narrow-mindedness: humanity, as everything else, is an expression of All That Is. That means there never was a hard distinction between the two genders….and that includes the two sexes. I would not be surprised, for example, for a gay male couple, in the future using this technology to “birth” a child between them.

Stranger things have and will happen.

And this is just the beginning. We are in momentous times. Expect the unexpected. But just know, everything is always working out. Even when you think it’s not.

October 10, 2017October 4, 2017

The civil rights issue of our time

McBride_with_Vice_President_Biden — Sarah McBride and Joe Biden

Sarah McBride’s book is coming out soon. Former Vice President Joe Biden wrote the forward for her memoir saying transgender equity is the civil rights issue of our time.

I agree.

It’s one of the many reasons why I frequently draw parallels between transgender equality and the civil rights movement of the 60s. There are so many common struggles, events, tactics and strategies being used in the transgender equality movement that almost identical to those used to bring civil rights to black people.

You may remember Sarah McBride. She made history by becoming the first transgender woman to address a major political party when she spoke at the Democratic National Convention. Her new memoir is called Tomorrow Will Be Different: Love, Loss, and the Fight for Trans Equality.

We also had a small cameo in her illustrious life, featuring her on our YouTube show this year.

I’m not surprised McBride got the Obama-era VP to write the forward for her memoir, just as I’m not surprised at the parallels between this modern-day civil rights issue and the one from the bygone era. I’m just happy to be doing my part with The Transamorous Network to make it possible for transgender people everywhere to get the rights they deserve.

Kudos Sarah. And thanks to Biden for recognizing the plight of transgender Americans.

October 10, 2017September 5, 2017

This should be no surprise

The number of transgender people running for office recently has skyrocketed. That’s such wonderful news, because it more representation in our “lawmaking halls” will mean more legislation favorable toward transgender people.

Here’s an awesome perspective on this, which was excerpted from this report:

A survey of 2,400 U.S. state lawmakers regarding their choice to support or reject same-sex marriage conducted by Alissandra Stoyan and Andrew Reynolds from UNC’s LGBTQ Representation and Rights Research Initiative revealed the votes of straight lawmakers were importantly influenced by their LGBTQ colleagues.

The reason behind this appears to be that simply knowing someone who is LGBTQ makes people more likely to support LGBTQ rights.

“Being visible and present continues to change hearts and minds, and humanize us and our issues,” Aisha C. Moodie-Mills, President and CEO of the Victory Fund, told NBC OUT.

According to Reynolds, “When LGBTQ people come out, they become your daughter, uncle, friend, work colleague. They become humanized, normalized. We know that the number of people who support marriage equality tracks the number of people who say they know someone who is gay.”

Check out this great graph. It shows the increasing number of transgender people running for office and the number elected. These data are from 2015. They don’t include this year or last. What this tells me is, the future is bright. Very bright. That’s cause to celebrate.

Screen Shot 2017-07-25 at 20.50.56 PM

Now, if you frequent our content, you know that focusing on news like this, creates more awareness of similar news. As you focus on more of that kind of news, you feel better. As you feel better (whether you believe it or not) you are creating by virtue of feeling better, more experiences of connecting with more similar kinds of news. That means you create more of this kind of progress in physical reality.

If instead you focus on news that is depressing, negative, and disempowering, the same holds true. You feel worse. As you feel worse you are creating through your negative feelings more experiences of connection with similar kinds of news. That means you create more of this kind of (negative) progress in your physical reality.

And this is where your freedom comes in: you are free to create whatever “reality” you want to experience. The choice it completely yours. So why not create what you want, instead of what you don’t?

A wonderful life experience can be yours.

September 19, 2017September 15, 2017

California courts side with trans people

Slate Online just published an important article which should be shared throughout the transgender community. It accurately clarifies how the oddest allies of the transgender community, Richard Simmons, and his loss in a California libel suit has benefitted transgender Americans.

The article requires careful reading. Here’s the background:

A tabloid called Simmons a transgender woman. Simmons sued for libel and lost. What the judge said in his ruling was the key stroke which establishes a legal landmark for trans people:

For the first time in United States history, Keosian declared that misidentifying a person as transgender is not defamatory because it does not subject that individual to “hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy.” Keosian further explained that the judicial system should not countenance anti-trans animus, notwithstanding its existence in pockets of society. “While, as a practical matter, [transgender persons can] be held in contempt by a portion of the population,” Keosian said, “the court will not validate those prejudices by legally recognizing them.”

From the actual court document, which you can download here.:

The court does not mean to imply in its holding that the difficulties and bigotry facing transgender people is minimal or nonexistent. To the contrary, the court has reviewed the evidence submitted by Simmons regarding the deplorable statistics relating to transgender people….However, this court finds that even if there is a sizeable portion of the population who would view being transgender as negative, the court should not, in the words of our cousins in Massachusetts, “directly or indirectly, give effect to these prejudices.” (Albright, supra, 321 F.Supp.2d at p. 137–138.) Similar to the that court’s reasoning regarding the prejudices facing homosexuals, “[i]f this Court were to agree that calling someone” transgender “is defamatory per se—it would, in effect, validate that sentiment and legitimize relegating [transgender people] to second-class status.” Such a finding is consistent with holdings that misidentifying one’s race, medical condition, or sexual orientation is not libelous per se simply because there exist a portion of the population that expresses prejudice towards those groups.

The entire Slate article is worth a read. What it tells me is the legal foundations of the country are increasingly coming down on the side of transgender people. Added to this is the current administration’s hardline on indicting murderers of transgender people with federal hate crimes, and you have just a boatload of positive news about how society is shifting.

Good news all around!