Cincinnati Pride or Privilege?

Cincinnati Pride is approaching, and this year issues have gone beyond the usual problems with Pride. Pride is a clusterfuck or issues, visibility, consumerism and corporatization, access, politics... but this I guess it was bored of the old problems and wanted something new. One issue vexing Cincinnati Pride this year is location. Pride has moved from its ‘gayborhood’ home to Cincinnati's downtown center, a change which has sparked some controversy. But there is another issue that is less obvious, and far more serious.

The project of Pride has been picked up by the Gay Chamber of Commerce, an organization focused on gay business success and representation in Cincinnati. “Doing pride fits right in our mission to promote the city and support our businesses." stated George Crawford, 45 year old local gay business owner, member of the Gay Chamber Commerce and the Chairman of Pride. Support our businesses? But what about our community? The queer community is not made up of businesses and their owners, its made up of everyday people. He confirmed that the Gay Chamber of Commerce was using a project called Equinox Cincinnati to run Pride. Equinox formed last year to host a party for the purpose of, in Crawford's words “to show the changing climate” of Cincinnati as a gay friendly city. (From where the rest of the community stood, it was a gay VIP rich folk only event.) I was surprised to learn Cincinnati had changed into an equality focused queer friendly city because as a visibly queer trans person working in the activist community, I figure I would have noticed if Cincinnati magically transformed into a mini-San Fran. When I asked about those who still did not feel safe, Crawford's thoughts were that it was the queer community’s fault that they didn’t feel safe in Cincinnati. "We have the chip on our shoulder and scars... we need our community to get on board..." Get on board for what? He made a decent point in saying "We can't continue to hide in a safe neighborhood like Northside [gayborhood]… we need to get out on the main streets.” I can’t help but agree with the on the streets part, but I'd like to know what I'm “getting on board” for, with who, and why. Crawford repeated words like “image,” “profit,” “income” and “reputation” - something very relevant to a business making money, but not very relevant to a community in need of resources.

According to Crawford, the goal is to make an “image” for the city as a good place for “gays” to live. Which is a nice idea, but what gays are we talking about here? I asked about visibly queer folks, trans folks, and people of color, and while Crawford stated that "Pride belongs to everybody"stressing the importance of diversity. When I asked him to expand upon efforts for diversity, however, his answer was "We didn't do as well as we could have, but there are always going to be people you miss." Honestly, I think the numbers are a little high for a menial oversight, though he did give a shout out to "transsexuals and drag queens" which was hard for me to appreciate.

Speaking of visibility, lets discuss the name Equinox Pride. When Pride was taken over by Equinox, Crawford said anonymous organizers thought it best to keep the name Equinox because it would bring in money. “People see “Pride” and they go ‘ew’ and don’t give it money.” said Crawford, “But with a name like Equinox they are more likely to fund it…We’re trying to re-brand our Pride.” He spoke of other cities that had ‘de-prided’ Pride, extensively removing the queer visibility from the event. Isn’t the point of Pride to be out and visible so everyone knows its queer? “Re-branding” seems a little counter productive to me, unless you’re trying to appeal to a fancy audience that is more interested in social acceptance than identity visibility. Crawford stressed that his committee only worked with queer supportive businesses that saw us as more than numbers and money, but that doesn’t meld with his statements about “re-branding” Pride.

Issues have also arisen from the communities of color, drag kings, burlesque performers, and lower income communities about inclusion and accessibility. When I approached Crawford about issues of transparency and accessibility he aired his frustrations stating that it “must not be in [kings, femmes, people of color's] priorities to know what was going on," and that was why people could not find the contact information. He then listed several articles and posts with contact information starting back in October, but when I went looking, including in the specific publications listed I could not find them in any archives. He also said that there is submission information on the site for volunteers and performers, but no such forms exist nor has there been clear information about how to get involved. Several people, myself included, have experienced problems and even rejection while trying to get information or getting involved. I asked Crawford directly if drag kings contacted him or the Equinox organizers. “They [ the drag king community] have not approached us...” he said, lamenting over his suffering as an organizer and the audacity of the kings to feel “slighted." But upon speaking to people in the drag king community I found several people from various troupes who had directly spoken to Equinox organizers about drag king performance options. One troupe was told that they could not perform because there would be no local performers this year, but when talking to me Crawford stated that "85% of [Equinox Pride] talent is local."

Maxx Lixgood, founder of the well known hip hop drag troupe The Lixgood Family, spoke with Crawford himself several times about performing online and on the phone. Repeatedly Maxx was told that organizers would get in touch with him with more information, but no one ever did. After months passed, Crawford contacted Maxx in hopes of reconciliation but by that point Maxx had given up.

"They aren't advertising to black people or low income... drag kings..." Maxx said in reference to Equinox, "We're urban, they don't care about us. They don't want me or my people, and this isn't just me. This is how our community feels. Black people aren't gonna go to Pride."

Maxx also stated that Crawford specifically requested that he leave a comment on the Equinox Pride Facebook page to publicly show that they had spoken - Crawford also instructed Maxx on exactly what to say. This leads us to another serious issue. Censorship and image control.

Much of Pride's advertising and networking has been happening on Facebook. In online organizing/writing/blogging it is generally understood that comments are a style of dialogue and unless they are seriously abusive, they are to be left as a method of documentation regarding whatever it is you're reading, be it a blog or public community organization's Facebook page. There have been several comments (including some made by me) on the Equinox Pride's page that were less than positive about the event, but none were malicious or abusive. All of these comments have been deleted. One comment about drag kings on the main Facebook page resulted in a somewhat heated conversation of an anonymous Equinox Pride representative. Over the past day over half of the comments in this discussion have been deleted, leaving only the more positive feedback, and none of the negative or comments contradicting Equinox's public statements. Crawford, who runs the Facebook page, stated that "to my knowledge we have never deleted a comment.” and “Personally I have never deleted a comment; and all admins can’t act without approval from me." He went on to say that there was a glitch on Facebook that was causing comments to not show up, or to disappear, but even the worst glitches on Facebook wouldn’t delete comments that were there for weeks, and then only delete parts of conversation threads but not all, not to mention it would be a site-wide problem, and no one else is having issues. If Equinox Pride was a person or a private organization it would be within reason for them to monitor feedback on their page, but it is not. It is a public event for the queer community and deleting constructive feedback, dissenting or not, is censoring the community.

One idea suggested that the Gay Chamber of Commerce using business model, which would automatically lead to less transparency and a more PR oriented method. It is clear to me that this is indeed the case. When a non-profit was running things, all meetings were open and it was well advertised who organizers were. From a business standpoint, you hide all negative feedback about your product so people will think it is perfect. You manage things quietly so people can't steal your ideas and create a fantastic front making your product out to be the best there is. No matter how consumer-based Pride becomes, it is about community, not cost, it is about PRIDE, not products.

Transparency is essential. How can we stand together if we can not trust each other. I legitimately believe that the Equinox organizers are well-intentioned people who care about their community. That said, I do not think they understand who is in their community and what we need. ? Withholding information, providing false information, censorship, and essentially creating a VIP club of rich gay folks, no matter how well intended, is manipulative and problematic. It cannot be taken lightly. The new organizers may be business profiteers, but Pride should not be a business, operating behind closed doors. This is a community event for the community, not for businesses and not for city image. It is for the people, all of our people.

“I don't think people look at the big picture." Crawford says, but I think its Crawford and Equinox who are not looking at the big picture, or at least, their “big picture” is not big enough. I have little interest in turning Cincinnati into a gay-money paradise when we still don't have basic community resources and education. The opinion of Equinox seems to be that less visible communities should be doing the work to fight our way through their power so we can be seen, like it’s so easy for us to push our way to the front. I understand change is necessary, I understand money is necessary. However, I do not think that making Pride bigger is synonymous with making Pride into an ablist, classist, racist, and elitist gay shame party for the benefit of the moneymakers from the pockets of our community. To quote a friend: "We need to expand, I agree. However, let's expand in the right way and be inclusive." I truly believe that Crawford and Equinox thinks they are being inclusive, and have openly admitted they need improvement and even have made mistakes, but the gross attempts at cover-up and misinformation erases all of that well-intentioned regret making me feel that the confessions aren't so much about actually caring about inclusion as much as they care about looking good and making money.

In addition to the Equinox Pride, local organizers have put together an event called Northside Pridefest as an additional event to take place in Northside in August, but I was unable to get any information about it for this post. There is more to be said in this conversation, and I am interested to see where Pride goes. Surely more posts to come – and they hopefully won't be so crazily long.

Update: several people have requested a plan of action or response -Post this article on your Facebook page and Twitter. Spread the word!

Visit the action event page to make your voice heard!

woot!

xposted midwestgenderqueer.com

One of these things is not like the others

I can definitely understand why L.A. School Superintendent Ramon Cortines was upset that students were carrying pictures of O.J. Simpson at a Black History Month parade. The man is widely believed to be a brutal murderer, and is currently in prison for robbery and kidnapping. I can also understand why Mayor Villaraigosa was upset that the children were wearing pictures of Dennis Rodman, who was recently in rehab for alcohol addiction and has been convicted of spousal abuse. However good they were as athletes, they are not good role models like the other choices, who included President Obama and Dr. King.

Like Calpernia Addams, I'm very disturbed, however, by the fact that Cortines, Villaraigosa and NAACP branch president Leon Jenkins seem to be just as upset that the students were looking up to RuPaul Charles. A school district spokesperson implied that the administration believes RuPaul, like Simpson and Rodman, is not "appropriate for Black History Month." Jenkins is quoted as saying, "These are not the people we want our young people to emulate or believe these people represent the best of the African-American community."

I honestly haven't seen too many other Black drag queens, but RuPaul is one of the best I know of any ethnic group. More importantly, aside from his talent, he has a reputation for being professional, hardworking and an all-around decent human being. I've never heard about him being involved in any instances of drug abuse or violence. Children of any race could do a lot worse than to emulate him. In that regard, he's a much better role model than Michael Jackson, who died of a drug overdose and was accused of pedophilia.

RuPaul has been something of a role model for me, too, over the years. He can look glamorous in a dress, but is comfortable being seen in men's clothes. He doesn't sweat the pronouns. His presentation is wild, sexy and provocative without being clownish or degrading. And for a guy who's pushing fifty, he still looks damn good, even without the airbrushing.

It remains to be seen whether this was a deliberate racist joke on the part of three white teachers, or a fumbled attempt to appeal to things that impress kids. But I know that if I were a kid at that school grappling with transvestite or homosexual feelings, and I heard people like Leon Jenkins lumping RuPaul in with O.J. and Dennis Rodman, I'd be pretty crushed. No wonder the suicide rate is so high.

I would like to see Cortines, Villaraigosa and Jenkins retract their condemnations of RuPaul. I hope that TBLG leaders will let them know that this kind of homophobia and transphobia is not okay. I hope that some national Black and Hispanic leaders will also come out in support of RuPaul, and of cross-dressers everywhere. We can be good role models.

Update: the World of Wonder blog has more on RuPaul and the homophobic Ramon Cortines. I should also point out that Rodman has done drag too, much more clownishly than RuPaul.

On Eve of the Day of Remembrance: Criminal Justice and Our Communities

This is the opening of a recent AP report on the resurgence of anti-black racism, since Obama's election:

"Cross burnings. Schoolchildren chanting "Assassinate Obama." Black figures hung from nooses. Racial epithets scrawled on homes and cars. Incidents around the country referring to President-elect Barack Obama are dampening the postelection glow of racial progress and harmony, highlighting the stubborn racism that remains in America. From California to Maine, police have documented a range of alleged crimes, from vandalism and vague threats to at least one physical attack. Insults and taunts have been delivered by adults, college students and second-graders. There have been "hundreds" of incidents since the election, many more than usual, said Mark Potok, director of the Intelligence Project at the Southern Poverty Law Center, which monitors hate crimes."

I'm writing past midnight, having just taken part in a discussion on anti-trans hate crimes for Gender Blender Radio, hosted by Jacob Andersonn-Minshall and Rebecca Nay. This morning, I finished a quick newletter piece about the criminal justice issues facing transgender people for the Mass. Lesbian and Gay Bar Association newsletter. Earlier this week I sent someone a copy of the Sylvia Rivera Law Project report on violence against trans and intersex people in prisons, It's War In Here. Apparently, every November, I spend time immersed in thinking about crime and violence.

Perhaps it's obvious, but I think it might be worth stating: even as we mourn those of us who have been killed or hurt by hate crimes, dealing with hate crimes is not enough.

Central to the transgender civil rights agenda must be a robust and multi-faceted approach to reforming the criminal justice system and reducing violence in society. As a community, we experience extraordinarily high rates of so-called "ordinary" crimes, not just hate crimes. Not surprisingly, many of us are reluctant to report crimes for fear of retaliation and police harrassment. If we are incarcerated, we are likely to be subject to horrific violence and are at high risk of being denied proper medical care.

Not surpisingly, many of our concerns are shared by non-transgender communities of color. One cannot have a society with a substantial history of complex discrimination, human exploitation, and serious disparities in wealth and life opportunities and expect otherwise.

In turn, as the racist backlash to Obama's election reminds us, we have everything to lose if we fail not only to fight transphobia, but to fight racism and other intersecting oppressions.

People of color are not to blame for California passing Prop 8

First, let me just say this: This is a little ranty, and the ranting is not directed, as far as I know, at anyone on this blog or anyone I know personally. A good bit of frustration about the anti-gay amendments is spilling out in all kinds of different directions in all kinds of different communities. Some of it's been spilling over into blame-slinging racism from white queers. Now some of it's spilling over into blame-slinging at our not entirely effective marriage equality campaign, which didn't really do half a bad job considering what we were up against... but clearly we needed to do better, and we needed to do better in one specific area in particular: Involving people of color.

Okay, folks, there's been a good bit of noise in the blagosphere that if Black and Latino voters only hadn't turned up to the polls in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama, Prop 8 wouldn't have gotten passed and (presumably white) queers would have nothing to do but celebrate on November 5th.

But Dan Savage can bite me.

If you really think that statistically speaking, Black and Latino homophobia is to blame for Prop 8's passage, first go here and read this, then get back to me.

Here? Okay, good. To recap, there are insufficient numbers of Black and Latino voters in California to have ensured Prop 8's passage all by themselves. If they voted for Prop 8 only in the same proportions as white voters (which, one exit poll suggests, they didn't), the Proposition still would have passed by a narrow margin. If every Black and Latino voter in the country stayed home, maybe Prop 8 wouldn't have passed... but we'd definitely be looking to John McCain and Sarah Palin to uphold our rights on the federal level, which, let's face it, is an unlikely prospect at best.

Need more numbers? Maybe simpler ones? You're excused for another few minutes to look here.

Okay, but the exit poll says that Black and Latino voters voted for Prop 8 in greater proportion than white voters did. Leaving aside the notorious unreliability of exit polls, why might that have been? I'm hearing from the Dan Savage quadrant that it's because Black people are homophobic. Chil', please, as any number of white gay men might say.

Proportionally more people of color supported Prop 8 because Yes on 8 did a better job asking for their votes. No on 8 didn't bother. We tailored our message to straight white women. We didn't do any coalition building with communities of color. It was a reasonable course of action from a political standpoint. After all, Hilary Clinton was a foregone conclusion for the democratic nominee. And when it turned out she wasn't after all, we still knew white women were going to be the decisive factor in the election; all the media said so. It was all about whether white women would vote for Obama because he's young and good looking, or whether they would vote for McCain because they were disillusioned and angry with the Democrats and the Obama campaign, or whether they were for Palin or against Palin. Why, we had no way of knowing people of color would get to the polls and actually vote. You know, after fighting so long and hard for that right, a fight that continued during the elections this year, given (as it happens, ineffective) voter suppression attempts aimed at people of color.

Still and all, many Black and Latino people, gay and straight, found a way to support marriage equality. The NAACP came out opposing Prop 8, without much fanfare from the No on 8 campaign. President-Elect Obama officially opposed 8, even though he did cave and make the obligatory "marriage etc etc" statement that the Yes on 8 people twisted in their dirty robocalls. And many more regular people would have if the Yes on 8 campaign didn't get to their families and churches first. Because believe it or not, Black civil rights leaders have a history of supporting gay rights. Jesse Jackson and the NAACP were there at the 1987 march on Washington for gay and lesbian rights. Gay rights leaders don't have the same history of supporting Black civil rights. And in the gap between what white queers owe the Black community and what they owe us, it's just possible that marriage fell.

So if anyone would like to continue to pin the responsibility for Prop 8's passage to Black people, go right ahead, but only if we actually learn something productive from it instead of just slinging blame—and that's that we can't win our rights without the help of people who've had many years more experience at it, and we've got to earn that help by lending a hand unasked in the continuing fight against racism. (And no doubt about it, it is a continuing fight: just because Barack Obama was elected President doesn't mean there aren't millions of young Black men, maybe some just as smart and talented, behind bars for no crime or for a crime a white man would have got off for.) If you won't acknowledge the context so we can learn from our mistakes, then you'd better chalk up those extra few votes to bad luck and start organizing for the next four years. Just don't make the same mistake.

Here's my suggestion for a plan of action for the marriage equality movement for the next four years:
1) Reach out to LGBT of color organizations first. Cop to the mistakes we made in organizing against Prop 8, eat some crow, and ask them what they need to be involved.
2) Having done that, offer help to queer-positive anti-racist organizations. Acknowledge that in the past, mainstream gay organizations haven't been doing all we could in the fight against racism. Follow through on commitments we make at this time.
3) At the same time, build inroads in mainstream communities by lending a hand in community projects. Go out with teams of VolunQueers to work on explicitly non-gay related projects that affect the lives of Black people, Latin@s, Asians, Native people, and poor straight white people. Volunteer at their churches' food banks. Be hard working, open hearted, and humble.
4) Ask moderate church and community leaders what it would take to make a counter-amendment palatable to them and their constituents. WHAT?!? Yes. Not every demand could possibly be met without failing in our aim of equality—but you might be surprised, for several groups to get on board, it might take as little as the addition of a line that explicitly states that no church will be required to marry same sex couples, just to counteract the lies Prop 8 supporters have been telling. Perhaps the next marriage amendment will state that religious organizations are responsible for defining the meaning of the word marriage for themselves, and the state is required to recognize every religious marriage and civil union equally—but that would still work for me.
5) Value people of color's work. Give thanks and reciprocate. Follow up and maintain the coalition. Call every so often and ask if there's anything they need, find out what they're working on and volunteer to help.

We're in the equality caucus together.

Keeping Gendered Jobs

As transpeople, I think we many of us become hyper aware of those who transition around us. I don't think its out of a morbid fascination of the carnage that often accompanies our transitions, but more for the shared and often unique learning experiences that we can relate to.

I have wondered what it is that, so often transitioning folks change not only their sex and/or gender but also their jobs. Sure, I understand that there are some jobs in which being of one sex or gender may be hold some advantages in successfully completing the work, but I'm having a hard time thinking of any. No, I do think that most work can be equally achieved regardless of sex or gender. That's not to say that there are many, many jobs that have been traditionally held to the gender binary. I also understand that sometimes a job that one has worked for many years and just wasn't fulfilling is worth changing when the right opportunity occurs. I'd be the first to jump on the bandwagon and say 'go for it'. Unfortunately, these issues just don't answer why it is that so many M2F's also seem to transition their job as well and transition to a job that often is associated with women.

I'm a landscape architect and when I started in my field, it was predominately male. Thirty years later, the field has become mostly female if only by a percentage point or two. I am meeting and working with more women at all levels of practice. The difficult part however, is that in the upper echelon's of practice and its organizational politics, the old (white) boy's club is still firmly in power (and in my field, it is sad that still, minorities are very underrepresented). For what its worth, many there at the top are openly fearful of the changes that have been occurring, that they are losing their dominance, in a 'place of privilege', to women, of all people.

I remember, early in my career, male practitioners ridiculing the entry of women into this field. Of the women in my undergraduate class and concurrently in the master's program, it seemed that a significant number of the women were older, perhaps married, and many had established families. I also remember how often the men mused that the only acceptable avenue for their future practice was to 'put on a face' on a clients home or residence. This demeaning attitude for their perceived contributions to our field earned the women the anachronism, PPP's or posy pushing practitioners (or for those special occasions, posy pushing pussies).

Looking back I can clearly see that their reference was the humanistic design point of view women often brought to the field and the fact that many were splitting their time between family and work, in between dropping off and picking up kids from school and not 'focused' on a male driven career track. As a result, many of these early practitioners did focus on residential design, an area of practice often looked down upon as less challenging than commercial or public works, with little regard to understanding a short project makes it much easier to manage time and to sharpen skills thru repetition. I would also go as far as saying that the perception of the home as a women's place, as a symbol of femininity, certainly affected the male viewpoint and the early ability of women to move beyond the boundaries that male practitioners then assigned to practicing women.

Which brings me back to my pondering, why so many transitioning women transition out of their pre-transition professions. (std. PC disclaimer: Of course, all of what I will be saying comes from MY experience, in MY profession and others may have different experiences from their industries.) I am someone who transitioned in place and as a result of that very visible transition, I have become quite visible as openly Trans. A consequence is that I have become a sounding board for folk, in my profession, on Trans issues and concerns. For these reasons I suspect there are a couple of other issues that may influence whether a transitioner stays in her original field. (I need to say that I have never met a practicing transman in my field, though I'm sure they do exist)

Perhaps one aspect that is not widely explored is the fact that there are transitioners that do stay in their fields, however they chose to start or start over while remaining stealth. Lynn Conway's story is a well known example of someone who followed this path. In my field, there are presently only two of us that are openly out. She and I have shared some of our experiences and we each have a handful of contacts with women who have come out to us, but are still stealth to the rest of their world.

The stealth women that I know all are close to my age, have achieved professional recognition since transition AND transitioned while young, early in their careers. In essence, by giving up their male privilege so long ago, they pioneered the gender inroads in my field with the rest of the our practicing natal women. Their career paths were full of the same obstacles that all women had to endure and those obstacles were imposed on them by the dominant culture of professional white men. I also suspect that being stealth, being well established in their practice and perhaps more importantly, in their private lives, they have little to gain from coming out and lots to loose. Unfortunately, by not become visible as trans, they perpetuate the stigma exceptional gender and they offer little as a role model to those who would like to keep their workplace history intact and professionally moving forward.

The other point I've noticed is this, not only are the two of us the only out transwomen in our profession, we are also people of colour (interestingly, we are both Native American). People of colour are not unfamiliar to being 'othered' and having to fight for any kind of positive recognition. In my graduating class of over 50 classmates and of that, no more than a dozen being women, there were only two people of colour. We also were the only people of colour in the entire department, two of six in the entire college. Mike, who was black, shared with me another commonality, we were both the first in our families to go to college. Our families encouraged and supported us, to be proud of who we are, not just as people, but culturally proud as well, to fight for our rights and to excel in whatever we pursued. The support we received was not limited to that that came from our families and extended families. We also received support from our communities as well. As but one example, Mike mentioned that every summer his church sponsored a BBQ and that the proceeds of that BBQ went to help young people like him meet the costs of going to school. We were held up and perhaps more importantly, pointed out (or outted), by our communities in a way that made not succeeding in our goals not only not an option, but also a very public process.

None of the stealth practitioners that have come out to us are people of colour, all are white, economically middle to upper class women. These are women that not only experienced male privilege but also some degree of dominate culture and financial privilege. Now they still experience the same dominate culture and financial privilege as white men, that has never been taken away from them (and I'm purposefully omitting second class status applied to all women, that is for another post). Which brings me to wonder if a fear of, or the unpreparedness in, being part of a less privileged social class (women) supports a culture of stealth or professional transition after transition? Is there something about always being the other that makes it easier for minorities to go ahead and stay in their field and even do so in place? Since people of colour already know that we will have to prove that we are just as qualified as a member of the dominate culture, regardless of our gender, are we less willing to give up what we already have fought for so hard to win? I am very aware that history is often written by the victors and looking back I can now say that all those little battles I fought and won are adding up to my own personal victory. I'm no longer afraid of who I was and I certainly am not afraid of or hiding from that history.

I also wonder why, in choosing a field outside of their former male field of work and moving to a more traditionally female profession, that there is an expectation that some or all of their former male privilege will transfer into their new profession? Is 'Hey, now that I'm a woman, I'll still rise to the top of this field too', part of a transferring of the male privilege workplace mantra? I don't know if I will ever know.

I will concede that where late transitioners are concerned, there may be other influences in play. I understand how the concept of the mid-life crisis can be linked to transitioning and what it could be like to try something that you have always wanted to do but never had the opportunity. Transitioning is something like that and when combined with so many of the other changes that occur during transition, starting a new career doesn't seem too far out of line. I have been accused of taking my 'midlife crisis' to far by way of my transition and have also pondered a similar scenario, going back to school and starting over in an other profession. I no longer respond to my transition as the midlife thing because its not relavent. I always wanted to change, but didn't know how to change THAT much back then. But changing profession, I don't think so, because I still really enjoy that part of me, and since I've already tackled some pretty big challenges, any other change that I try would have to be a piece of cake!

Finally, I would like to digress for a moment. On my ma's side of the family, it is also interesting it was the women of my grandparents, a traditionally maternalistic patronage, that wanted to improve their lives. My ma, was the first one to come north and then she hosted 4 more sisters and two female cousins in their efforts to do the same. I was the first of the grand children to go to college and I have been told that I was a role model for many of my cousins. Again every one of my female cousins went on to college, two receiving their masters. Not one of the male cousins went beyond high school. I'm not sure what that says except that we come from a long line of very strong women and my miss O certainly seems to be following in their foot steps. I am also especially proud of one of my cousins recently telling me recently that as she was growing up and was looking up to me as a role model, she saw the problems that I overcame and that was when she knew that she would be able to survive as well. Now she realizes that it all makes sense, that I too am yet another one of the strong women of our family.

Power Out

This is cross posted from My Husband Betty's message board. I've paraphrased a couple of the comments of some of the referenced posts in an attempt to tie their thoughts to my comments. I hope I've kept their comments true to their intent.

A few weeks back, the center of the City was shoved into midday darkness when a big transformer was KO'd by a construction worker. At my office, we ran the battery backups down and my laptop was nearly dead, so I sent everyone home. But at my house I pulled out my camping stuff, yep my solar panel and right now I have my laptop and wireless running on sun power.

I wasn't going to post, but since I can't get into the office server, I thought I would share some thoughts. In each instance, the event was almost a non-event, but its funny how serendipity sometime unifies.

About 12 hours ago, I read a couple of posts and their responses, to this article, that dealt with the arrogance of men in assuming that women are not smart enough and have to have things explained to/for them, even though they may be experts in the subject matter. Central to many of the responses was that 'spotting this sort of sexist crap is difficult, that many women may not even notice it, because they're conditioned to just accept being treated as second class citizens. The responses further hypothesized that it may take transitioning to really point out the inequality, to underline it, in bold type, with exclamation points.' This all struck a common nerve in me, how male privilege is commonly expressed in certain fields. As I have said, in some circles, it is much more likely now a days that people I meet do not of my past and, as a result I think, its much more common now a days that I get 'spoken down to'. Not that I can do much about it, or as my sweetie is fond of saying, 'be careful what you ask for!'

Later last evening, my wife had a friend over and I agreed to split, so the two of them could talk privately, taking miss O with me. We went for a bike ride and as we went by one of our neighborhood parks, we noticed a large crowd and miss O suggested that we stop and check it out. It turned out to be the terminus for the march from the university to Take Back the Night, an event to show solidarity in the face of sexual assault. There of course were many women, but there were also many kids. A couple of girls approached miss O and asked if she wanted to play with them, she did. So as I sat, watching the girls run through the park, it dawned on me that the majority of people in attendance were women of color and when one of the speakers mentioned that, in our town, women of color are 5 times more likely to face sexual assault than women of the dominant culture, it really hit home. Perhaps one of the most disturbing points mentioned was how young girls, young girls, miss O's age are now facing this threat. Why, no how can someone so young have to even think about this.

Miss O was having a good time, eating ice cream and hot dogs, running with the girls. We stayed until it was nearly time for her to go to bed and by then she was part of a pack of girls about a dozen strong. I called her out and as we were getting our helmets on, she looked up to me and asked, 'Papi, what is rape, they said I was too young to understand'.

What could I say. I told her to take off her helmet and we need to talk. We did and as I looked into her face, it made me sad to see a little bit of her beautiful innocence disappear.

Forever

I went running this morning and from a weather point of view, right now is my most favorite season in which to run. The mornings are slightly cool, giving me a little chill, but within a few blocks, I've warmed up to a comfortable temp, the result of a beautiful balance between temperature, sweat and 5% relative humidity. This was the first morning since last fall that I was able to run in my summer garb, running shorts, sports bra and athletic tee. Yea, its skimpy, but heck its 5 am, I'm still half asleep, over 50, gray headed and dressed to run, nothing else.

So what happens? My annual spring shit with some guy in a beat up old pickup truck (with a chain saw and gas mixed among the beer cans in the bed) following me. Three times, he'd pull to the side of the road, wait for me to pass before starting talk at me and then pulling forward to do it again. The third time he tried, I stopped and pulled out my cell phone. He immediately went over to the left turn lane and took off.

So what is it with men? Why do we have to put up with this crap? Who's dad told their son that this was the way to treat other people? (I'm not really asking, just pissed)

Damn, why does my sweetie have to be so smart.


Quetzalli

Colorbind

A great, much-needed and overdue article on the intersections of transness and race by Daisy Hernandez at ColorLines:

Louis Mitchell expected a lot of change when he began taking injections of hormones eight years ago to transition from a female body to a male one. He anticipated that he’d grow a beard, which he eventually did and enjoys now. He knew his voice would deepen and that his relationship with his partner, family and friends would change in subtle and, he hoped, good ways, all of which happened.

What he had not counted on was changing the way he drove.

Within months of starting male hormones, “I got pulled over 300 percent more than I had in the previous 23 years of driving, almost immediately. It was astounding,” says Mitchell, who is Black and transitioned while living in the San Francisco area and now resides in Springfield, Massachusetts.

This essay might be an interesting read to compare to Jacob Anderson Minshall’s essay in “The Enemy Within: Becoming a Straight White Guy” which details what it’s been like for a feminist to transition to male. It’s in the new anthology Men Speak Out: Views on Gender, Sex, and Power.

(via Feministing, where you will also currently see a blog ad for She’s Not the Man I Married)

Race and Transgender, Racism and Transphobia

The intersections and interactions between race and transgender identity, racism and transphobia are complicated and underexplored. The magazine Colorlines has published an important article about those complex intersections. Importantly, the writer respects the racial diversity of our communities. http://www.colorlines.com/article.php?ID=265

I Now Pronounce You A Return to the Bad Old Days

There's not been much discussion of racial oppression on this blog, but it need hardly be said that racism and transphobia intersect. Trans persons of color tend to experience higher rates of unemployment and HIV than white trans people. Multiple factors are involved and the demographic reality is complicated.

... and then there's just raw, undiluted nastiness. It's bad enough that a movie like I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry relies on nauseating gender and sexual stereotypes, but heck, throw in some yellowface -- why not!

Apparently, just as it's still "comedy" in TV and films to mock trans people or cross-gender expression expression ("hey, let's put a man in a dress for laughs!"), it's still ok to play Charlie Chan. Anti-trans attitudes and anti-Asian sentiments are supported by similar forms of caricature and their continued cultural permissibility.

The following commentary comes from the very astute blog, Angry Asian Man:

"So... I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry was somehow the number one movie at the box office last weekend. I mentioned this movie a few months back, when folks caught of glimpse of Rob Schneider doing some kind of crazy yellowface in the trailer... the word on the street is, the movie pretty much manages to offend anybody and everybody. According to the San Francisco Chronicle:

"Whatever gay stereotypes exist in this movie -- and they probably number in the hundreds -- the writers of the comedy are much tougher on morbidly obese people, hot women, the homeless, mailmen, unattractive women and particularly Asians. Even the band Journey probably deserves a bigger apology from the makers of "Chuck & Larry" than anyone in the gay community."

Note that the producers didn't invite any Asian American groups to check out the movie, which features Rob Schneider as an Asian minister who is a racially offensive Abercrombie & Fitch T-shirt come to life.Schneider appears to be the Jewish/Asian owner of a wedding chapel who married Chuck and Larry. And it's bad. How bad? Bad:

"But the most appalling aspect of "C&L" is Rob Schneider, who plays the owner of a wedding chapel and offers up the most offensive Asian caricature since Mickey Rooney's notorious yellow-face performance in "Breakfast at Tiffany's." What were they thinking? Simple: They weren't."

Never mind the fact that Rob Schneider is actually half-Filipino. Doesn't really seem to matter, does it? Here, he's got some kind of makeup job going on to look super, over-the-top Asian. Recalling Breakfast at Tiffany's Mickey Rooney is an appropriate comparison. Somebody, please revoke this guy's card to the club."