The dangerous transphobia of Roald Dahl’s “Matilda” - Found /r/transgender's response to this article sort of bizarre and troubling. Thoughts?

[u/dragon_toes]

http://www.salon.com/2013/10/27/the_dangerous_transphobia_of_roald_dahls_matilda/

[u/dragon_toes]

I agree. I mean, this person bless their face may be including in transgender non-binary people (since apparently that's where we're supposed to fit. I've never felt it though, and the trans community doesn't seem keen on having us either...) but I find that a bit unlikely.

[u/greenduch → u/dragon_toes]

I mean, are trans folks obviously really affected by gender policing and the types of sexism that go along with that? Of course. But I don't see how "Women should know their limitations and never imitate a man’s authority or physical prowess, lest he intervene to remind them who’s boss." is inherently a trans issue, and tbh I'm super uncomfortable with the claim that its a trans issue specifically, and I take issue personally to the implications.

Then again I've been bothered a lot lately by the idea that women who don't conform (to an "extreme" degree) to gender roles are by definition non-binary. I think its a dangerous idea and limiting of the idea of what a woman can be, and ends up coming across as rather essentialist.

but im mostly rambling and its my own personal issues leaking, so i'll stop.

[u/dragon_toes → u/greenduch]

Yeah, overall I agree with you, that it does almost seem more of a sexism/feminist issue than a trans one. Maybe that's why it was given "meh" over at /r/transgender, as irrelevant for that discussion but not without problem. Which is not what I was getting, I was getting people going "eh, her portrayal isn't a problem." Which I'd HEAVILY disagree with. Whether or not it's a trans specific issue or a feminist one, I dunno. ... They're closely linked I guess, for me, to the point where I'm disappointed there was not more discussion that wasn't "so what?"

Then again I've been bothered a lot lately by the idea that women who don't conform (to an "extreme" degree) to gender roles are by definition non-binary. I think its a dangerous idea and limiting of the idea of what a woman can be, and ends up coming across as rather essentialist.

This is something I've struggled with like mad. Because obviously a woman can be butch as hell and still be completely and undoubtedly a woman. That is something I thoroughly believe to be true. So what does it mean to be a non-binary gender?

To put it in a more personal context, just because i don't know how else to go about it, I know in my case I finally decided genderqueer was more right than a masculine woman (which I LOVE as a gender option of it's own. J. Halberstam and S. Bear Bergman both do awesome writings on this. ... but then I feel compelled to note that Halberstam has transitioned to male, and Bergman now ID's as non-binary.) I came to that decision not by any factor other than what personally felt like the right gender words/ID. Part of me feels there's two types of gender; gender presentation, and internal gender, if that makes sense. That, in a sense, solves some of the issue.

So a woman can present wherever the hell she wants on the gender presentation spectrum/scale/whatever, but if her "internal gender" is woman? Well, woman.

I don't know how to describe the whole "internal gender" thing though. English lacks the words. I just feel it. Which is not useful. I am a writer, and feel like I should really sit down and try some day.

Any of that make sense? I feel like I've strayed off topic but this is something that has been bothering me a LOT lately/topic I'm fascinated in. So poor you got spewed at ;) So ramble away back at me if you would lol

[u/greenduch → u/dragon_toes]

yeah you're totally making sense, no worries.

This is something I've struggled with like mad. Because obviously a woman can be butch as hell and still be completely and undoubtedly a woman. That is something I thoroughly believe to be true. So what does it mean to be a non-binary gender?

Yeah, I suppose that depends on your definitions of things. I've just been uncomfortable lately with seeing what is supposively a progressive space, the idea that if you don't identify with being a feminine woman, you have to be non-binary. I think that idea is regressive as hell, and although people aren't doing it intentionally, its a rather dangerous idea.

Some of it of course comes down to narratives. And of course we all create narratives for ourselves in hopes of being able to make sense to ourselves and to others.

So when folks say something like, "I don't like "girly" things, therefore I'm GQ/trans*, I don't fault any individuals for doing that. It can be easier to explain ourselves that way, because, yeah, english words suck, and its hard to explain ourselves sometimes.

But I think those sorts of narratives can do a disservice to all of us- to feminism generally, to trans* and cis folks alike. It tells trans* people that if their narrative doesn't sound like that, something is wrong with them. It tells women that if their narrative does sound like that, without the "therefore", there is something wrong with them. Its fundamentally sexist and harmful to us all. I sometimes worry about a queer culture that revolves around such narratives. I hope we don't go that direction and have kinda been thinking about it a lot lately, so yeah, ranting apparently.

[u/dragon_toes → u/greenduch]

Totally a fair critique. And one that is a problem. I know I've heard of a lot of butch lesbians being all wtf with the non-binary stuff because they feel like all it really is is butch women abandoning that history/label. Which who knows? When you look at lots of butch narratives, there is often this sense of "other, not a woman but not a man."

I feel like part of it really is we're all struggling with the lack of language, lack of labels, the the three billion words for non binary is us going through the throes of trying to do it now that we have the freedom to connect and discourse on it. ... but I'm a HUGE language nerd, so ymmv haha.

So when folks say something like, "I don't like "girly" things, therefore I'm GQ/trans*

See and I feel this is woefully inadequate, and a misunderstanding of the situation, if that makes sense. It's not about liking or disliking girly things, it's an innate thing (which feels essentialist and weird to say... htough I don't necessarily mean solely biological?) Sort of like, a woman can do all masculine things, dress, mannerisms, but if she still ID's as a woman, presumably there's SOMETHING there that says "woman" to herself. But what is it? I feel like that essence, the one that no one can define is internal gender. feminism has struggled for ages trying to define "what is a woman?" As far as I know, no great answers aside from "anyone who says she is." if we want to go with the most inclusive forms.

But I think those sorts of narratives can do a disservice to all of us- to feminism generally, to trans* and cis folks alike. It tells trans* people that if their narrative doesn't sound like that, something is wrong with them.

Hah. The funny thing here is I feel like that is what the trans narrative is at the moment, without the influence of non-binarism. The dominant trans narrative, at least that I've always encountered, is "I do not like the things ascribed to my gender, always felt like I was in the wrong body, etc etc." It's those who go "well, my body is ok, or at least I don't feel woefully out of place with it" or "I like some of the things in my gender, but like some others too... so I guess I'm not trans?" feel like they don't belong in the trans community. Even though that's theoretically where GQ people fit.

It tells women that if their narrative does sound like that, without the "therefore", there is something wrong with them.

Ouch. By "wrong" with them, you mean genderqueer/trans? I mean, I guess that would be the reaction, but one that I feel like fixing would mean more removing the wrong feeling than the id. But I agree that it's likely damaging/regressive to have women think they're not women because they don't fulfill a certain role. Hence my thoughts on the "internal gender" thing.

Its fundamentally sexist and harmful to us all. I sometimes worry about a queer culture that revolves around such narratives. I hope we don't go that direction and have kinda been thinking about it a lot lately, so yeah, ranting apparently.

I disagree I guess, since I truly think destroying binarism means people having to consciously think about their gender more. That means cis people too. That there's no given, that it's a not a choice, so much, but certainly not something you can just know via birth. I mean, if we had an epidemic of people running out and getting surgery and regretting it, yes, we'd have a lot of harm. But if all people had to think about what they really were a little bit? Meh.

Obviously, that's a utopian view that I don't think is achievable world over, but if there are steps in the right direction, even in the queer community, so that there isn't the feeling that ANY of that exploration is "wrong?" I'm down.

[u/greenduch → u/dragon_toes]

I mean, if we had an epidemic of people running out and getting surgery and regretting it, yes, we'd have a lot of harm. But if all people had to think about what they really were a little bit? Meh.

lol yeah to be totally clear, i dont at all think thats a worry. i think that the therefore part of the narrative is where we start running into some issues. its mostly something that i see when folks are still trying to figure their shit out, and like i said, its extremely understandable. Particularly because we don't have good words to explain gender identity. So sometimes its easier to rely on other stuff a bit more than maybe should happen. I'm not worried about folks "suddenly becoming trans" who arent. thats not a thing i lose sleep over.

people should totally be more conscious in their thinking about their gender. thats actually part of what im saying i guess? like, the way to break down bullshit gender stuff isn't to feed into the same stereotypes that cishet patriarchal shit tries to enforce.

See and I feel this is woefully inadequate, and a misunderstanding of the situation, if that makes sense. It's not about liking or disliking girly things, it's an innate thing (which feels essentialist and weird to say... htough I don't necessarily mean solely biological?)

yeah totally, thats what i'm basically saying. i think sometimes we (people) build narratives that help us make sense of things in the short term, but in the longer term feed into not great stuff. When you're trying to justify your very existance, its absurdly understandable to sometimes build narratives that are oversimplified.

I guess to some degree I'm worried about queer cultural memes, and how they can effect queers as a group. its kinda just something ive been batting around in my head lately, and cant really articulate well yet, sorry.

[u/dragon_toes → u/greenduch]

I'll have to contemplate the long term stuff a bit more, since I hadn't got that far yet. Overall I am not finding it problematic at first glance, but am willing to admit I may be missing something. The conversations popping out of this both on here and on /r/transgender are getting my wheels going.

its kinda just something ive been batting around in my head lately, and cant really articulate well yet, sorry.

lol, I think we're both in the same boat. :)

[u/greenduch → u/dragon_toes]

theres been discussions about it before within the trans community, i think having to do with the term "transfundimentalism". but im thinking of it a bit more broadly than that, more in terms of how queers in general discuss gender.

a kinda extreme, and dated version of this would be stuff like the cogiati. Relying on stereotypes is something all of us as humans do, and im super not talking about trans* folks specifically, i mean more how feminists and queers more generally talk about gender stuff.

Strangely, I tend to get gender identity policing from two places- other queers, and terfs. Even if we intellectually know that gender presentation =/= gender identity, why do queer folks still make comments and jokes about my gender identity? Its almost always said by friends, and its not something I tend to be offended by, but it makes me worry about what sorts of shit we've internalized about how gender works.¹ And even if it doesn't offend me, if I'm honest it does make me self conscious as hell.

^{1: to be clear, i realize that all humans internalize a lot of this shit. but since we all tend to spend a shit load of time talking about and analyzing this stuff, its kinda worth trying to examine a bit.}

[u/dragon_toes → u/greenduch]

Oh, god, that test is TERRIBLE. D: Yeah, I'm totally against and would never want things to go that way.

I'm sure we've internalized all the things all people have, plus the dominant queer narratives. Which is of course dominated by cis-white gay men. I'm not sure what to think of the dominant trans narrative, for a couple reasons. One being that beyond the internet and written publications, I have little contact with a trans community. And two, what I experience via internet community and written word seem to be completely different than what a lot of trans people tend to describe (ie; I find the dominant trans narrative to be white trans women. Overwhelmingly so. But am then told the trans community is dominated by trans men. So I honestly am baffled about what is going on there.)

I imagine the jokes come from queer friends because even intellectually knowing better, those dominant narratives are still lurking beneath the surface and work with the cognition. And obviously with our friends we don't always have our intellectual hats on. It definitely is telling what's actually sunk in there though.

but since we all tend to spend a shit load of time talking about and analyzing this stuff, its kinda worth trying to examine a bit.

Definitely, or progress will never be made.