Yet Another Kiri Bloggish Thing

Aug 22

transmisogyny is patriarchy

skysquids:

fear and hatred of trans women is absolutely central to patriarchy.  it underlies the most common acts of homophobia - every time someone gets called a faggot or bashed for being an effeminate male.  it underlies the violent construction of masculinity - the orders to man up, don’t be a pussy, don’t act ‘like a woman.’  fear of trans women is the specter that our culture congers up to stifle empathy for women in little boys.  it is used to demean and dismiss strong women both cis and trans.

to support transmisogyny, or to fail to support trans women, is to strengthen one of the central pillars of patriarchy.  transmisogyny is a patriarchal act.  it doesn’t matter who is doing it, the effect is to support patriarchy.

prokopetz:

kiriamaya:

prokopetz:

kiriamaya:

prokopetz:

New rubric for deciding whether a female character’s pose is badass-sexy or just objectifying-sexy: can I picture Bucky Barnes striking the same pose without laughing?

Umm, if you would laugh at DMAB people in “female” poses, you’re a transmisogynist. Just saying. (Didn’t y’all learn anything from trans women complaining about the Hawkeye whatever-it-was?)

Oh, I totally understand the criticism. But there’s more than one factor in play here.

The notion that there’s something inherently funny about “male” characters striking “female” poses does indeed encode shades of transmisogyny.

However, there’s also the argument that some “sexy” poses are ridiculous for everyone, and that the primary reason we don’t immediately find it laughable when female characters are depicted in those poses is because we’ve been desensitised to them by their ubiquity in popular media.

Or, to put the second point another way: the reason that certain poses aren’t seen as sexually objectifying for female characters even though they indisputably would be seen as sexually objectifying for male characters is because female characters in popular media are objectified by default; the gross, undignified poses merely reinforce that established framing, rather than recontextualising it as they would for an otherwise-identical male character.

"Yeah, a perceived man doing something our society codes as feminine is ridiculous and laughable!" <— the very essence of transmisogyny.

I am sick and tired of cis feminists dismissing trans women’s concerns over transmisogyny in order to make a point. And I get your point; I really do, but why did you have to choose this way to make it?

Mm. Off-the-cuff remarks are rarely amenable to deep analysis. If I had to unpack it, though, I’d say it was largely motivated by the realisation that the camera’s gaze in The Winter Soldier sometimes frames Bucky Barnes in ways that are traditionally reserved for female characters (particularly those of the “badass waif” archetype that seemingly every straight male geek on the planet has a boner for), thereby establishing a visual context that’s typically absent in these sorts of comparisons. I can see how that wouldn’t be at all apparent if one had seen only this one post and not those immediately preceding it, though.

(The same comparison could have been made with a comparable cis female action hero, except that Hollywood typically doesn’t let us see those types of characters in the first place. I’m trying to think of one who’d be recognisable to the readers of this blog… hm. Gina Carano’s character in Haywire, maybe? Would she work?)

Yeah, no. The “haha, laughing at a dude and/or person perceived as dude presenting in ways coded feminine, so ludicrous!" thing is transmisogynist, no matter what the context. I mean, it’s just obvious on its face that that’s what it is.

If you still need clarification, please read this, and then read this, and then read this. Hopefully that will help. Or I can just quote polerin from the first link:

Making choices of clothing based in femininity/femme-ness on a dood isn’t a context free choice.  Doubly so when you are mocking something.  It relies on the deep history of cissexism and oppositional sexism in our culture.  Even if that’s not the intent of the artist, it is impossible to look at these drawings and not have all the jokes about guys wearing women’s clothing or “acting like a girl” come up.  That’s the POINT of these drawings.

And that point pins trans women to the wall as a side effect of (rightly) critiquing the sexism in comics.

Make sense?

Also

Trans women are under the same pressure to be hypersexualized as cis women are. (We’re women, after all.) But since we’re DMAB, we tend to be mocked for doing the exact things patriarchy expects of us. Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.

And shit like “lol a male character in a sexy female pose” plays directly into that.

So don’t.

Look, here’s the thing

When most people see a dude in a hypersexualized feminine outfit/pose/whatever, they don’t think, “Wow, what a brilliant and hilarious commentary on women’s objectification!” They think, “lol omg what a faggot.”

And if you can’t see that that’s transmisogyny, I seriously don’t know what to tell you.

prokopetz:

kiriamaya:

prokopetz:

New rubric for deciding whether a female character’s pose is badass-sexy or just objectifying-sexy: can I picture Bucky Barnes striking the same pose without laughing?

Umm, if you would laugh at DMAB people in “female” poses, you’re a transmisogynist. Just saying. (Didn’t y’all learn anything from trans women complaining about the Hawkeye whatever-it-was?)

Oh, I totally understand the criticism. But there’s more than one factor in play here.

The notion that there’s something inherently funny about “male” characters striking “female” poses does indeed encode shades of transmisogyny.

However, there’s also the argument that some “sexy” poses are ridiculous for everyone, and that the primary reason we don’t immediately find it laughable when female characters are depicted in those poses is because we’ve been desensitised to them by their ubiquity in popular media.

Or, to put the second point another way: the reason that certain poses aren’t seen as sexually objectifying for female characters even though they indisputably would be seen as sexually objectifying for male characters is because female characters in popular media are objectified by default; the gross, undignified poses merely reinforce that established framing, rather than recontextualising it as they would for an otherwise-identical male character.

"Yeah, a perceived man doing something our society codes as feminine is ridiculous and laughable!" <— the very essence of transmisogyny.

I am sick and tired of cis feminists dismissing trans women’s concerns over transmisogyny in order to make a point. And I get your point; I really do, but why did you have to choose this way to make it?

prokopetz:

New rubric for deciding whether a female character’s pose is badass-sexy or just objectifying-sexy: can I picture Bucky Barnes striking the same pose without laughing?

Umm, if you would laugh at DMAB people in “female” poses, you’re a transmisogynist. Just saying. (Didn’t y’all learn anything from trans women complaining about the Hawkeye whatever-it-was?)

(via knitmeapony)

masturbaedding:

Hey! So, my financial rug kinda just for yanked out from under me so I kinda need $350 for rent by next week. The job I thought I was going to get paid for is suddenly not paying soon enough and I need help, I don’t know what to do and nobody else is hiring me.

If you could paypal money to daxrus@gmail.com I’d appreciate that a ton I don’t know what I’m going to do oh my god

Boosting!

(via baeddelpherneliatakesthesquare)

Aug 21

kiriamaya:

Hi. I am disabled and need to eat. Please help me eat? Thanks. <3

gayorb:

girls are just . girls are literally just so good.i cant move

(via baedull)

kepral:

i find it rlly fuckin funny when straight homophobic dudes make shows with only dudes and then get surprised when they look in their fandom and it’s just gay porn 

(via kaalashnikov)