I think a lot of you have heard of Rachel Dolezal by now - the white woman who spent years in the NAACP, pretending to be black. She identifies as 'transracial' (a word stolen by white people from adoptees of color, btw) and a lot of racist transphobes have supporting this, making the claim that if one can change their gender, why not their race?
Here's why not:
1. Transracial identity doesn't go both ways. If it (in this post, I'm using it in the same way Dolezal thinks it's supposed to be used) were legitimate, there would be people transitioning to whiteness and receiving white privilege. But there's not, and don't bring up Michael Jackson. The man had a skin disease.
Trans men gain male privilege when transitioning and are often accepted as men. Trans women do not have male privilege while they are closeted and presenting male, as the 'womanly' aspects of their identities would still be shamed and they would still have grown up in a misogynistic society. But when trans women are out, they definitely don't have male privilege.
A relatively minor example - minor, that is, compared to trans women of color being murdered and young trans girls being kicked out of their homes - would be the sexual objectification of Caitlyn Jenner. Most of you have probably heard people joke about how pissed Kris probably is about Caitlyn's attractiveness (a beauty contest that neither woman consented to), or you've heard them ask what the point of being a woman is if one is not attracted to men (this is heterocentric, and for the record Caitlyn's asexual. I don't know if she's also homoromantic, but she has specified that she is not a lesbian). Men, even trans men, don't get those comments. Just the fact that trans womanhood is so much more sensationalized in the media than trans manhood is an example of misogyny; it is not considered shocking or scandalous to be a man.
But people of color, even if they said they were white, would still face racism. They would be mocked and belittled, and only decades ago they might have been lynched for it. But Rachel Dolezal, a white woman, does the same thing and is encouraged and applauded by her fellow white people. White people love to appropriate black culture, but if a black person likes rock music they are accused of acting 'too white.' How is this fair?
2. Transgender identity has been around for centuries in multiple cultures - look at the Two Spirits of Indigenous America, or the kathoey of Thailand, or the fa'afafines of Samoa, or the hijras of India. It is something that people all over the world, regardless of race, sexuality, religion, socioeconomic class, body type, or any other factor, experience.
The words that modern, western genderqueer people use to define ourselves - like genderfluid, for example - were born from the fact that white Christianity dominated our politics and cultures, and therefore our lives, for so long. We, for too long, hadn't had the ability to articulate our identities in any way that already existed in our cultures. We needed new words, so we made some up. That's how language develops; otherwise, we'd all still be grunting and howling incomprehensibly.
But transracial identity, as Dolezal and her racist, transphobic cronies define it, didn't really become a thing until a few decades ago at the most.
And...that's pretty much it. So, don't be a transphobic racist, 'kay? Transracial=/=transgender. Don't defend Rachel Dolezal, or any other white person who appropriates non-white cultures. Don't excuse them. And for the love of all that is good and holy, DO NOT conflate transracial with transgender.
Here's why not:
1. Transracial identity doesn't go both ways. If it (in this post, I'm using it in the same way Dolezal thinks it's supposed to be used) were legitimate, there would be people transitioning to whiteness and receiving white privilege. But there's not, and don't bring up Michael Jackson. The man had a skin disease.
Trans men gain male privilege when transitioning and are often accepted as men. Trans women do not have male privilege while they are closeted and presenting male, as the 'womanly' aspects of their identities would still be shamed and they would still have grown up in a misogynistic society. But when trans women are out, they definitely don't have male privilege.
A relatively minor example - minor, that is, compared to trans women of color being murdered and young trans girls being kicked out of their homes - would be the sexual objectification of Caitlyn Jenner. Most of you have probably heard people joke about how pissed Kris probably is about Caitlyn's attractiveness (a beauty contest that neither woman consented to), or you've heard them ask what the point of being a woman is if one is not attracted to men (this is heterocentric, and for the record Caitlyn's asexual. I don't know if she's also homoromantic, but she has specified that she is not a lesbian). Men, even trans men, don't get those comments. Just the fact that trans womanhood is so much more sensationalized in the media than trans manhood is an example of misogyny; it is not considered shocking or scandalous to be a man.
But people of color, even if they said they were white, would still face racism. They would be mocked and belittled, and only decades ago they might have been lynched for it. But Rachel Dolezal, a white woman, does the same thing and is encouraged and applauded by her fellow white people. White people love to appropriate black culture, but if a black person likes rock music they are accused of acting 'too white.' How is this fair?
2. Transgender identity has been around for centuries in multiple cultures - look at the Two Spirits of Indigenous America, or the kathoey of Thailand, or the fa'afafines of Samoa, or the hijras of India. It is something that people all over the world, regardless of race, sexuality, religion, socioeconomic class, body type, or any other factor, experience.
The words that modern, western genderqueer people use to define ourselves - like genderfluid, for example - were born from the fact that white Christianity dominated our politics and cultures, and therefore our lives, for so long. We, for too long, hadn't had the ability to articulate our identities in any way that already existed in our cultures. We needed new words, so we made some up. That's how language develops; otherwise, we'd all still be grunting and howling incomprehensibly.
But transracial identity, as Dolezal and her racist, transphobic cronies define it, didn't really become a thing until a few decades ago at the most.
And...that's pretty much it. So, don't be a transphobic racist, 'kay? Transracial=/=transgender. Don't defend Rachel Dolezal, or any other white person who appropriates non-white cultures. Don't excuse them. And for the love of all that is good and holy, DO NOT conflate transracial with transgender.
No comments:
Post a Comment