Sandy Stone and the practice of "Reading Oneself Aloud"
Trans Panic: Butler on Gender Compliance and Coercion
ADULT CONTENT. See syllabus section "Additional Information" before viewing video below.
"Buck Angel: The Transgendered Subject in Transnational Context
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This is what we didn't get to go through in our presentation on Susan Stryker's book. Please comment!
Things Mariah and Sarah Thought Were Important . . .
1. tone is more academic than her online article
through the material she includes, she tells a radically politicized story
2. though she names intersectionality and talks a little on racism at the beginning, she doesn’t follow through
a. relationship between race and the transgender movement is not part of the other story line, so we are led to believe that it’s not part of the larger context
b. as if the intersectionality stopped in the ‘60s and as if trans people were all white
c. most of the characters who get their stories told at length are white
d. maybe her mentioning the intersection of race and the trans movement is an attempt to separate herself from non-inclusive white trans communities
3. mentions that most of the information available is about/written by MTF people
a. FTM people experienced rejection from lesbian feminist communities, so they tried to blend into gay male or straight culture, so their history was lost in some ways
4. does talk a lot about the intersection between feminism and transgender and queer movements in comparison with these other intersectionalities that she just scratches the surface of
5. How do you tell a story of communities that have been made invisible?
a. there could be a bias in what you’re looking for
b. there could also be limitations in the materials available
c. this is a secondary source in general, though the stuff about Compton’s Cafeteria is primary source material—what voices do you get through that?
6. Is (this) history about the stories of individuals who identify in the same way, or about individuals who organize themselves into groups or communities?
a. how do you discover the history of people who’ve been isolated from communities?
b. she focuses mostly on these groups, mostly in San Francisco and New York
*she contextualizes all of this with her own history, her own experiences
That's a really great list that the two of you came up with. For right now, though, I want to comment on the Buck Angel video.
It's very apparent how much the interviewer wants to hold onto the concept that Buck was once female. Towards the end of the video, he addresses Buck as "Susan" and even admits that he assumes Buck is being vaginally penetrated "as a woman."
There is a fine line between letting one's past be known and disrespecting one's past. I believe that the interviewer definitely did the latter. Using myself as an example, while I do not plan on going "stealth" (living full-time as a man and never letting it be known that I was born female), and will usually happily answer questions about my past, I would get extremely angry and uncomfortable if someone was to address me by my birth "female" name.
Ignoring those unfortunate attitudes, though, I very much enjoyed the video, especially Buck's attitude towards his genitalia. Especially with the nature/quality of current "bottom" surgeries, I have noticed that it is somewhat common for transmen to be less dysphoric about their genitalia as opposed to their chests, but it was very interesting to hear the opinion of someone who likes his vagina. I suppose this would be seen by many as an unnatural attitude... Sandy Stone sadly agrees in The Empire Strikes Back, saying "Under the binary phallocratic founding myth by which Western bodies and subjects are authorized, only one body per gendered object is 'right.' All other bodies are wrong." In our society, a man with a vagina would be considered "wrong," even if he is happy.
This made me think of the My Right Self documentary project, created by Arthur Robinson Williams. I went to his presentation at Swat on Tuesday (thank you, Nikki, for sending the email about it!) and, in the presentation, I was introduced to one participant, Jake, who was self-conscious but happy with his breasts.
"But sometimes I feel happy with what I have. Actually, I’m kind of proud of it. I like to walk around the house with my shirt off, even though I haven’t had top surgery. [...] But if I’m honest I think it’s amazing. I’ve always been attracted to the idea of hybrids. I like how certain aspects of my body marry images of masculinity and femininity together in a very striking way."
This was a very alien concept for me to grasp, mostly because I feel so strongly the opposite. Since I was very young, before I even knew I was trans, I was taught from movies, books, etc that breasts were very feminine and, in some contexts, even the essence of what makes a female. And the fact that I was rather “well-endowed” in that area was devastating to me, as it only reminded me what I was and what I could not be.
Looking back (after having had “top” surgery), I wonder if I would have felt similarly if these social attitudes towards breasts and other sex characteristics did not exist. Obviously, physical problems would have remained, but could I have dealt with those problems? Could I have even learned to love my breasts? (They could be very useful, as well. If I get into a fight and need nunchucks… :P )
Of course, I’m extremely happy now, having had the surgery, but attitudes like those of Jake and Buck Angel make me think: how much of my dysphoria was caused by my own genuine hatred/uncomfortableness, and how much of it was caused by societal attitudes towards breasts and my attempts to conform to the body that other people think I should have?
That being said, I think it’s wonderful, despite the terminology, to have what society (and Sandy Stone) calls “the wrong body.” Especially from my experiences in the toy store, it is very apparent to me how attentive people in general can be about physical characteristics… how can we stop judging people based on looks if we can’t ignore body parts we can’t even see? It is for these reasons that I continue to think that we, as a society, must deconstruct and reevaluate our views on gender and sex, and attitudes like those of Jake and Buck Angel will help us achieve that.
My thanks to Mariah for posting the questions she proffered for our consideration with Sarah. I hope we follow up. I'm especially interested in the question of race, the "intersectionality" that Sarah and Mriah refer to. Thank you, also, Charlie for your comments. I do want to register a note about "tone." Stone's assertion, as quoted by you, Charlie, could be read literally but she is being ironic. If read as such, how would her ironic tone alter a more literal interpretation of her piece?
Post a Comment