I think there is a layer of time in the difference in terms. In my gender support groups, older trans folks tend to be more likely to use transsexual, but the younger folks use terms like generic “trans”, transgender, and with a higher number of genderqueer, and nonbinary folks. I think some of it has to do with access to the internet, and how fast information travels that way with younger folks.
I think it is pretty impressive that the interviewer is most concerned with his friend breaking the law and less concerned with who is is breaking it with.
I suppose it just depends with how much one wants to differentiate themselves. I do think word choice is affected by many people thinking erroneously that “transsexual” refers to sexual orientation or activity, so a lot of trans people tend to distance themselves from it. I personally find “transgender” to be a somewhat ineffective word unless one is discussing extremely broad gender variant topics. But, that’s just me.
just look for personals touting or seeking “straight-acting” as a trait, or gay men requesting “no femmes.” Because of the stigma around a “gay” identity, many men attracted to us seek out trans women who are “passable,” or they parse their desire so only the receptive partner in a sexual act is gay, and the other is straight.
I’m not sure this can be wholly interpreted as a behavior of people with an interest in transpeople, but who nevertheless wish to avoid confronting this interest. More often than not, what I see on online personals sections (e.g. Craigslist) is that there is such an overwhelming number of heterosexual men frequenting them, compared to the availability of cisgendered women of a compatible orientation, that men will, after some time of pursuing only cisgendered women (to no avail), give up and settle for an encounter with a transwoman, pretending that the person they are meeting is a cisgendered female instead; in effect, asking the transwoman to engage in heterosexual roleplay with them.
I can see that.
I was thinking the other day, that folks outside the trans umbrella often see us as one monolithic experience, when in reality there is so much diversity. Different stages, different gender identities, and different race, which effects how society treats us.
I kind of like the explosion of new terminology and identities. It’s really nice to see a non binary approach being accepted.
I found the entire interview incredibly powerful and moving. Much respect to Ebro and Cee.
FWIW I’m genderqueer and I’d guess I’m about Cee’s age. I’m a long-time hip-hop head and I just dug out a 90s-era Cee mixtape and put it in the box. I can’t help but think of how inconceivable this interview and the positive response it’s generated would have been in the year he released the mixtape (1998).
There’s no question that the world still needs to see a lot of learning and change, but sometimes I can’t believe how much things have changed in a positive sense, particularly over the last two years.
Actually I think there is a pretty big difference. I think of kinks and fetishes as focused on the sex act itself while an orientation focused on a particular type of person. So I think the terms actually differ in denotation and not merely connotation.
Doesn’t mean he is Gay, he likes Women with extra. Remember Gender =//= Sex, the two are totally separate. If he was with a FtM that would be more of a homosexual relationship.
There is a lot of Homophobia if the Black/HipHop Community. I would say it is worse for Men, because there have been many Lesbian and Female-to-Male producers, managers, within the Hip Hop Community. However, if you are Male, it isn’t acceptable to be feminine in any way.
So in a way it is a war against femininity within the Hip Hop Community. It is kinda shameful, that other ethnicities other than Black that like Hip Hop and are embraced, except if they’re Queer.
In Hip Hop, Gender is like this. Females are considered “bitches”; Males are considered “Niggas”; if you are anything, but they will call you a “bitch ass nigga” or “faggot”
I’m trans - live in compton, ca, love hip hop, and rock, metal. pop anything. use to do music (tranny bass player ftw!), but no one wanted to work with me. Couldnt pay the bills, decided to do something else in life. But glad to see more men opening up and being honest with themselves. Because I know escorts who you wouldn’t believe give them calls. Athletes and Rapper be frontin’ !
Man dating a MtF = Straight
Woman dating MtF = Lesbian
Hope more Hip Hop listeners would try to understand.
RAPeAndGetAwayWithIt@yahoo.com if anyone in Queer in LA wanna meet up and do music. lol worth a try
I can’t be bothered to keep track of all the different terms for trans/cis/LGBT etc, so I tend to stick with the generic; ‘people’.
I think that’s great until you need to discuss issues that affect a specific group of people.
That’s a nice sentiment as far as not being judgmental about differences, but it makes real-world communication a problem.
“Hey, Bob and Susie are both single and into low-budget horror movies. We should hook them up!”
“Nah, didn’t you know? She’s a person.”
Hmmm. Reminds me too much of white people claiming they “don’t even SEE color! We’re all just human beings!”
Also bear in mind that for many people the term “transsexual” isn’t offensive at all–it’s descriptive of a specific physical state. In the context Ms. James is writing about many of these transgender women might be (this would be up to their self-identification) “pre-op transsexuals”.
Still within the context of the article though, does this mean that post-op transsexual women are invisible? Her article was notably silent on this variation, and I’m left to assume that as long as there’s only one penis in bed at a time, there’s no taxonomic problem to vex. But we know what happens when one assumes…
What are you trying to say, here?
Andrea James is not really the most enlightened trans advocate and I’m pretty disappointed to see her on Boing Boing.
I’m pretty far removed from the community, but I thought/think Andrea’s okay. I liked her last article and this one too.
What am I trying to say? Nothing big. Just wondering how, by and large, the men who date us perceive post-op transsexual hetero women – whether there is a “taxonomic” issue – which is my perhaps-too-clever shorthand for people having an issue trying to decide what category transpeople fall into (man, woman, gay, straight, etc.) and thus what categories they can comfortably adopt for their own desires.
Why would I say this? Because I noticed that the article was entirely about men loving on transwomen who have the OEM gear. Which implies two penises in the same bed. Which seems to be the problem some people are having with themselves (or more specifically, how they are thus perceived by others).
My way of talking about it all may be pretty far removed from current usage, and is intentionally a little flip, so I hope I’m not inadvertently giving offense. Certainly that’s not my intent. Hopefully though this clears things up a little bit.
Her last article? The last article I saw from her here was her shitting all over Chelsea Manning, Uncle Tomming for cis people, praising herself undeservedly, and straining to be one of the “friendly, non-threatening, assimilated people that many non-trans people can support.” (Zinnia Jones: “When what I say is used to fuel some expectation that we should all be unfailingly kind and patient in the face of nonsense, I don’t feel good about that. It’s not something I want my words to be used for at all, and such approval is not something I seek. When they try to separate us into “good ones” and “bad ones” based on how agreeable they find us, it’s often my friends who are considered the “bad ones”. And I know who I’d rather be with.”) What did you like about it, her endorsement of shithead Kristin Beck’s transphobic screed? Suggesting that Chelsea should have stayed in the closet because she’s hurting the cause? Dismissing Manning’s own lived experience and superseding it with her own arrogant narrative crap? No thanks, we don’t need anybody else throwing any of us under the bus - got enough of that already.
I don’t know why you want us to worry about some asshole who thinks he’s gay for liking me, and this constant focus on penises and what ignorant cis people think as the magical arbiters of labels needs to disappear, not be indulged. People sitting around gatekeeping sexuality, especially cis men so preoccupied with their transphobic hangups that they’ll play semantic games with the people they supposedly care about, are way out of line. This piece is bizarre.
For the last three weeks I’ve been in Bangkok with a friend as she underwent bottom surgery. She’s the same person she was before. She and I are still alike. We’re both women. She is no more a woman than she was three weeks ago and she’s no more a woman than I am now. Her boyfriend isn’t suddenly straight. Men who like me aren’t magically gay against their will because it “implies two penises in the same bed.” Andrea is so inundated in cisnormative bullshit it’s coming out her ears (and her mouth).
Yeah, that wasn’t really my take on her Manning article.
Good luck and well-wishes to your friend. I hope she likes her results.
One term created by AIDS researchers and epidemiologists, men who have
sex with men (MSM), completely erases trans people.
I don’t think that was the attempt or reasoning - it was more to get a term that the men themselves would accept. It’s a real problem addressing a community as ‘gay’ or ‘straight’ or whatever for sexual health messages when they reject those terms. The majority won’t deny they are a man having sex with a man, anyway.
BTW I like transfan, that sounds quite cute. Whereas transoriented sounds like disoriented, and transattracted sounds like transacted, which might be close to the truth with some of the encounters, it’s probably not intended.
Anyway strength to Mister Cee - who even said in the audio he was still in denial about who he was when he said he was straight, but as I pointed out elsewhere one does not ‘catch teh gay’ from having sex with a man - some may see it as somehow contrary to argue that MSM men are straight, but in their minds they are, and kind of diminishes the whole argument again into who puts what where and with whom, which orientation is not completely about. I’d argue it’s a small part of who you are and who you are attracted to, and attraction and desire are MUCH more complicated than that. Anyway if it was dark you’d not know nor probably care whose mouth it was anyway…I suspect some blokes it is in fact ‘any hole is a goal’ type thinking…does not automatically make them gay.
Fetishizing heterosexuality in this way is a form of self-hatred found throughout the LGBT community: just look for personals touting or seeking “straight-acting” as a trait, or gay men requesting “no femmes.”
Oh this sounds familiar…sigh.
Some truth here, but also I used to get stick for liking men with beards and hairy large guys. Why was I in denial? Why was I in such self-hate because I don’t get off on smooth shaven thin guys in tight Ts? (which then was the common ideal that we were supposed to lust over, pushed by the porn and club corporates?). I had the internalised homophobia pushed down my throat, especially online…or the classic ‘ewwww!’ response.
In the 90’s (coincidentally the last time I used straight-acting, yes I agree it’s a terrible term but like Mister Cee we all have paths through our sexual orientation, it doesn’t happen all at once) through to the early-mid 00s there was much debate over expressions of masculinity in the male gay scene. But I don’t buy it, you can’t control what makes you hot, you can’t deny it either…it just happens. And it doesn’t mean you hate the other options just because you like one.
It’s the expressions of hate which are the problem, but claiming those are in self-denial who don’t like feminine guys is also dangerous, we all have our own likes and dislikes, we can learn to be more accepting, even try and look behind the package somewhat - in fact I’ve upset friends for reminding them we are all queens however butch - but the fact is your desire, your libido, etc. knows what it wants. In some rarer cases this can get you in trouble, and if it causes harm yes it should be resisted - but that urge is there, and to deny it for whatever reason then at some point you’ll explode and something much worse will happen…as seemed to happen here with Mister Cee. So openness and acceptance is a better way…strange how even in the LGBTQ I struggle to get that acceptance though. I’m too open, too poly, like men than are too old, too bearded, too political…
My point is, it’s not about self-denial, or self-hatred, I’m well past the point of working out what ticks for me. It’s about liking, loving, shagging who you desire and not getting hung up about what other people think. And standing up to 'phobias and hatreds of all kinds - I had to face up with my initial dislike of camp for instance - but also knowing that the surface package is not what it seems, that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes you just like older furry men with beards, and no Mr Freud, I don’t have daddy issues…
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.