In a case of spectacularly bad timing, Fox News happened to choose the day before the Zimmerman verdict was handed down to publish an op-ed proclaiming “the White American Male” to be the most oppressed creature on Planet Earth. In a piece entitled “Men — The New Second Class Citizens,” professional antifeminist Suzanne Venker declared that
From boyhood through adulthood, the White American Male must fight his way through a litany of taunts, assumptions and grievances about his very existence. His oppression is unlike anything American women have faced.
What is revealing about this quote, besides its complete disconnection from reality, is that Venker makes no other references to race in the rest of her piece, which runs through a number of tiresome and oh-so-familiar MRA talking points about the alleged oppression of men.
Venker complains about schools being biased towards girls, from grade schools that force students to sit still to colleges with their infernal Title IX. She whines about “sit coms and commercials that portray dad as an idiot.”
Quoting antifeminist psychologist Helen Smith, a friend of and sometime contributor to A Voice for Men, she suggests that women can get their boyfriends or husbands locked up on a whim just by claiming abuse.
I’m surprised she didn’t talk about the evils of “friend zoning.”
But when Venker refers to “men” in all of these complaints, she is evidently thinking only of white men — why else would she switch so seamlessly from talking about the alleged oppression of “men” to proclaiming “the White American Male” the ultimate victim?
There’s really no other word for this than, well, racist.
The day after Fox published Venker’s nonsense, we were of course reminded (as if any of us really needed to be reminded) of the very real oppression faced by “the Black American Male.”
Trayvon Martin didn’t die because he happened to see a show featuring a bumbling sitcom dad. He died because George Zimmerman saw a young black man in a hoodie walking home from the store and assumed, apparently because Martin was young and black and wearing a hoodie, that he was up to something sinister.
Trayvon Martin didn’t die because he was male; he died because he was a black male. His killer walked free not because his victim was male, but because his victim was a black male.
Suzanne Venker did us all a favor by revealing the unconscious racism underlying so many Men’s Rights complaints. The Men’s Rights movement is not only a movement that is overwhelmingly made up of white men; it’s a movement that’s almost exclusively about white men, and their largely imaginary oppressions, as well. We might as well call it the White Men’s Rights Movement.
@Argenti: You’re painting the picture of the life of a trans men waaaaaaay too rosy. Granted, I’m not one myself, but I have a friend who’s a trans man, and he gets an unbelievable amount of shit from the world for being trans. Yeah, women get away with liking manly things and dressing manly and what-not, but trans men who actually transition, have surgery and hormone therapy, grow a beard, change their legal gender to “man” and all that – lots and lots of people think they’re sick in the head and needs therapy rather than surgery and hormones, and that’s on the nicer end of things people say to trans men. Like, he was on radio a while ago talking about transitioning, and people would call in and literally call him a monster, a devil spawn, all these horrible things that I really can’t think of as coming from the idea that “manly is too good for him”. Lots of people are terrible transphobes, meaning lots of people are truly terrified by and incredibly hateful towards people “switching sex” as transphobes like to put it, and… your post is just written as if this didn’t exist.
Also: Your post makes it seem as if all trans men were perceived as tomboys on growing up, which is a prejudice. My friend was fairly girly as a kid, played with dolls and liked pink stuff. And he still likes the colour pink and dressing in a fairly feminine fashion.
Yeah, I know, you tried to get across what “society” thinks in your post. but… as I said in my post above, even as that it was a big fail.
I disagree, Dvarg. I didn’t read Argenti’s post as suggesting that’s all trans* people’s experience at all, but as an example, an illustration of how misogyny plays its part in social attitudes to transsexuality. Women are worse, lesser than men; a woman or girl aspiring to male status is both natural (men being better) and reprehensible (women daring to aim so far above their stations). But men aspiring to be women is laughable, contemptible, and a betrayal. If I read Argenti’s comment right, it was about that extra prejudice trans* women face, not erasing what trans* men go through.
This quote right here. It says that “the only flack they get is because being manly is too good for them.” The only flack they get. That’s what Argenti writes. Continues to say “by and large, they’re ignored, unless being mocked on the assumption that they’re lesbians”. That’s simply false regarding those trans men who are not considered by the world at large as being merely women in butch clothing.
And yeah, women dressing in men’s clothes are considered “acceptable by mainstream society” but there are tons of trans men who aren’t regarded by others as women in men’s clothing, and for these trans men, the fact that women in suits are fashionable on and off is pretty fucking irrelevant.
Really, it’s like arguing that there’s no racism against people of North African decent, just because some North Africans look white, and they don’t face racism (as long as their background isn’t revealed).
So yeah, I get intersectionality and trans women facing extra shit because women, but Argenti’s post is really diminishing the problems that trans men face, I can’t read it any other way.
Blarg, clearly my barely awake attempt to grasp at how a great deal of transphobia is based in misogyny failed. Yes, trans* men who transition get shit for that, but not to the degree trans* women do. And yes, some people are just plain bigots. And no, I wasn’t trying to say all trans* men were tomboys.
In any case, I should’ve included a disclaimer about knowing big city New England culture best, cuz liberals. But yeah, I’m sorry I came off as painting trans* men’s lives as free of transphobia, and particularly that I wasn’t clear enough on the difference between women in men’s clothing and transitioning.
And now I need to have left 5 min ago, so I’ll attempt a better response later.
Ok, now that I’m not running out the door, let’s try this again. First, yes, transphobes are totally a thing, and I made no attempt to explain people who are just viscerally repulsed by, well, anything. I can translate MRA to what form of bigotry they’re channeling, but explaining why? Impossible. Same applies to transphobes — they hate that which is different than them, and trying to parse the logic seems to me to be as useful as trying to parse the logic of cats. There’s just no logic to it.
Second, yes, I definitely should’ve noted that my experience is in major New England cities — some the most liberal parts of the US. Where, by and large, shit trans* men get is for an association for femininity — if they aren’t read as men, and aren’t dealing with someone who just viscerally hates their existence, the sort of shit they get isn’t “why would you want to be a GIRL!?!” but “I assume you are a girl and what makes you think you can be a boy?!” I either case, it’s the association with femininity that’s hated. By the people who say anything besides “you are evil // a monster // etc”, which, in the (liberal New England) places where I know much about the trans* communities, is rarer than trans* women getting that shit.
Summary — trans* men get straight up transphobia, and I didn’t even attempt to explain that, cant’ even attempt to explain that, but should’ve mentioned it, and for that I am sorry.
And yeah, tomboy => trans* man ignores all the trans* men who weren’t tomboys, and, fro that matter, does comparing trans* women to boy children into girly things. I really should’ve made it clearer that I went that route to highlight the differences between how cis (wo)men and trans* (wo)men are treated — namely to point out the tomboys are pretty much accepted by adults, and, uh, “sissy boys” are obviously not. Which I should’ve made clear, and for that I am also sorry.
What I was trying to get at was more things like “…lots and lots of people think they’re sick in the head and needs therapy rather than surgery and hormones…” well yes,but most of them are not the medical professionals standing between them and surgery and hormones (at least here). Whereas trans* women still have to prove their sanity to psychologists and jump through other hoops to get hormones or GRS (particularly the later) — to the point there’s a black market for frikken estrogen.
But outside comments for complete transphobes, they’re more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt. Yeah, this almost certainly only applies to the beardless, and I don’t know any trans* men capable of growing facial hair who actually do. But this is what I was trying to get at — that trans* men are less shamed by medical professionals, more likely to be given the benefit of the doubt, almost never a punch line, and that I can’t even come up with a comparison to “she’s a trap!” and that sort of degradation.
As for my use of the word flack, idk where the problem there is, I was using what’s slang here for, well, shit. You probably know that seeing how you’re not dumb or anything (wow, wording fail) but yeah check the urban dictionary definition, it wasn’t meant as “not fucking abusive shit” but “additional pressure and bullshit”. In any case, I guess I should’ve just stuck with calling shit shit throughout, would’ve been clearer and the clarity failure, it burns.
Uber short version of what I was trying, and clearly failing, to say about trans* men is that they don’t face discrimination for by men, but for being trans* and transgressing social norms in a why that’s usually (in my experience) verbalized in degrees of girls invading on boy things. Which is fucking obviously wrong on about a million levels (they’re not women!), but it isn’t hatred of them as men. Whereas trans* women get discrimination for being trans*, transgressing norms to do things below men (again, they’re not fucking men — including being treated as punch lines, accused of being “traps” and [insert a shit ton of slurs that don’t seem to have a trans* man counterpart], attacked and killed.
That was not the short version, and you can add that to the list of things I have to apologize for.
“Lots of people are terrible transphobes, meaning lots of people are truly terrified by and incredibly hateful towards people “switching sex” as transphobes like to put it, and… your post is just written as if this didn’t exist.”
Yes, yes it was, and I definitely should’ve said as much, and for that I am sorry. I can’t grok their hatred, it has no logic at all, it’s just a visceral hatred that doesn’t manifest in words that can be analyzed at any level besides “you hate trans* people, and you are an asshole for that”. In any case, yes, I really should’ve said I wasn’t going to try to explain them, because I just can’t.
“Also: Your post makes it seem as if all trans men were perceived as tomboys on growing up, which is a prejudice. My friend was fairly girly as a kid, played with dolls and liked pink stuff. And he still likes the colour pink and dressing in a fairly feminine fashion.”
Again, that’s because of how I went about approaching what I was trying, and clearly failing, to say. And I apologize for not making it clear that I wasn’t saying all trans* women act like girl children, or that all trans* men act like boy children.
And regarding androgyny being fashionable…I have lots of MIXED FEELS. On one hand, I’m not thrilled about being a fashion trend, on the other, being seen as socially acceptable is obviously better than having to face the straight up viscerally repulsed transphobes (I mean, I still get some of it, but the low levels of “freak!” not the threats, and even then, only sometimes)
——
This is turning into a novella as I try to both explain what I was getting at in the first place, why I said what I said; and apologize for the lack of clarity in that regard, my failure to mention that I wasn’t touching straight up transphobes, I can’t make heads or tails of them, and my other oversights in regards to the discrimination trans* men face.
When really, my only point was that trans* women face all the transphobia, with a side dish of misogyny, and trans* men don’t face discrimination for being men, “just” for being trans*. And yeah, “just” there is a massive understatement, transphobes are scary scary evil people, but even they don’t have slurs for trans* men qua trans* men (e.g. a counterpoint to shit like “chicks with dicks” or “shemale” or…no, I refuse to continue, you get the picture here)…Well, as far as I’ve seen anyways, surely some transphobes have devised similar slurs, but you don’t see them in movies and on TV and treated like a hilarious thing where the slurs are more acceptable than the trans* woman.
And now I’m going to stop sticking my foot further in my mouth and offer a blanket apology for the things I missed, the disclaimers I failed to make (especially that I was ignoring complete transphobes because they make no sense), and my general lack of clarity.
@Argenti: 🙂 I understood that the major point you tried to make was that trans women have it worse, and that’s probably true overall. But you can also see how you got my hackles up, since I know this guy who definitely not passes for “woman in masculine clothing” and really has gotten tons of shit for being a supposed scary sex changer. And I know he’s far from the only one.
But you’ve apologized and that’s cool as far as I’m concerned. 🙂
This part though surprised me:
AFAIK, trans men do not have an easier time at all with medical professionals here in Sweden. My friend I told you about, it took him years and years of psychological investigations to be allowed hormonal therapy etc. They really, really questioned whether he was masculine enough to be a real trans man – one thing I remember particularly was that he supposedly wore feminine-looking glasses (he was like “uh, aren’t these just completely ordinary glasses?”), and the medical professionals thought this might be a sign that he was a woman after all. And also, being vegan is apparently cause of suspicion, because caring about animals=girly. Oh, and he’s gay, whereas loads of medical professionals still think true trans person=straight. Basically, they saw signs of “no you’re really just a confused girl” everywhere, and from what I’ve understood, yeah, this is super common for trans men here as well as women.
It got to the point where he felt he really needed to put up some über masculine image just to convince the health professionals that they ought to allow him testosteron, and it wasn’t till he was done with transition that he could relax and be his somewhat more feminine natural self.
Would be interesting to know what the situation is like in general, worldwide, for trans men vs trans women when dealing with medical professionals? Whether Sweden or New England is an exception to the norm?
This is, I think, my most frustrating part about how the medical community treats trans* people. It’s so fucking ignorant to attach gender and sexuality like that and so awful that many people I know have to lie about their orientation in order to get proper medical help.
And it plays into the larger issue that you can’t just have an identity and be a person, you have to perform to some supposed “ideal” gender in order to be taken seriously. It’s like, you have all this gender dysphoria, and you’ve done all this emotionally-draining work pretending you’re something you’re not for years and years (because society is terrible and bigoted and dangerous if you don’t perform correctly), and then trying to fix the gender dysphoria you have to pretend something else for who knows how long while you go through the process of transitioning. It’s such bullshit…
Re: surgery — the other thing is I’ve heard of trans* women being required to have “bottom surgery” to get a legal gender change. Not “just” sterilized, but removing the whole nine yards. Specifically, I learned this third hand from a trans* women who did not have dysphoria in regards to her penis and really regretted having it removed. In other words, the gatekeeping did notable harm.
I’ve never heard of similar with regards to trans* men, but I guess it wouldn’t completely surprise me…on the other hand, manboobz. Or more accurately, man boobs, they’re a thing. Depending how large he is in the first place, this may be moot (I know a trans* man who’s a natural A cup, obviously he’s not had “top surgery”, it wouldn’t be worth the risk)
I’m trying to figure out if access to T is a cultural difference, a doctor difference, or what. Because obviously having a trans* friendly doctor helps a lot.
I’m going to have to get back to this, my birthday party is starting without me!
Happy birthday, Argenti! Have a great party!
I’m celebrating in spirit! Or else I just got drunk for no reason whatsoever. So yeah, I’m celebrating.
That’s really terrible… wouldn’t surprise me if it’s common here too. I’ve heard that trans men generally get a bit more leeway regarding bottom surgery; it’s generally considered that neo vaginas are better than neo penises, and therefore it’s sort of comprehensible if you don’t want a neo penis, but everyone ought to want a neo vagina.
Regarding the sterilization thing though, here in Sweden trans people were legally forced to get sterilized if they wanted to change their legal gender until this very year.
Oh, and happy birthday!
Happy Birthday! @ Argenti
Happy birthday, Argenti!!!
*hands out birthday cake* Thanks guys!!
Dvärghundspossen — do you know if that required simple sterilization, i.e. vasectomy, or removal of the external genitals? If it’s the later, I see no difference and they’re both fucking with people’s self-image, which seems, idk, slightly worse than the internal procedure of a vasectomy (also, they can sometimes be reversed). I mean, both are fucked up, but if you’re going to be fucked up can you at least not fuck with people’s self-image in the process? It’s kinda a sticking point for us non-cis folks.
Also, from my understanding, bottom surgery for trans* men has Really Fucking Shitty results. The clitoral growth from T is what most people seem to go for. (And it can end up resembling a small penis, without the risks of surgery — YMMV hugely, but it’s certainly safer)
Do you have my email? I’d be willing to discuss this from a more personal angle, but I don’t want to do so in the public, troll infested, fora.
Where was Petey bloviating on 9/11? Because they want to charge $25 for admission to the museum. And in a common trend this week, a petition.
@Argenti, it was simple sterilization, but it’s still a HUGE DEAL for people who want to have CHILDREN one day. I’m happy without children, and I think it’s almost impossible for us who are to fully comprehend what an enormous tragedy it is for people who do want to have children to be forced into sterilization. I know people who were forced to be sterilized are trying to sue the state now, but so far no luck. And one of the big arguments used by conservatives against removing the forced sterilization thing was “but… if we don’t force trans people to get sterilized, we might see pregnant men in the future!”.
Actually, some health professionals tried to push this friend of mine into getting sterilized – they said “it’s no use waiting for a change of the laws, these laws are never gonna change, so if you want to change your legal gender you really must get sterilized”. But he’s pretty involved in trans social issues and knew the tides were turning, so he held out against the pressure, and sure, the law finally changed this year, and he could legally change his gender without sterilization.
I don’t have your email, but my own is [email protected] . You can just mail me there.
At this point, email will probably have to wait until I get home, but I’ll drop you a line later. And yeah, sorry if I came off as downplaying what a fucked up mess forced sterilization is, I was trying to say that it can be reversible, unlike complete removal of the relevant bits of anatomy. But that doesn’t make it right or anything, certainly shouldn’t be legal.
And good on your friend!
Dvar: My general impression of Europe as a whole, and Sweden in specific, is that misogyny, while still there, is less rampant and ‘in-your-face’ than in the U.S. That could account, in turn, for the differences in the treatment of trans* men and trans* women, between the two areas. Argenti does pretty accurately sum up the American (not just New England) perspective, I think. It’s a bit like how (again, in the U.S.) lesbians are often ignored or just sexualized for straight men’s pleasure, but gay men are targeted for additional hostility–like trans* women, they’re taking on what the gender-binarists (I make up words when English fails me) insists is a feminine role, which undermines the very concept of “Masculine: Good/Right :: Feminine : Evil/Wrong”.
Hippo birdies, Argenti!
Cake! ::nang::
Great to see the mainstream media talking about these issues more and more. When enough men show up, all this feminist nonsense will be dumped into the garbage bin of history. Bravo Fox, you finally did something right (other than the Simpsons).
I think Mark Jones is fidelbogening-while-fedora’d.
Haha! Fox news a legit news source? That’s hilarious.
For a useful example of the way that American cultural misogyny complicates everthing to do with sex and sexuality and how people identify, look at the G0ys site that LBT linked us to. It’s absolutely overflowing with misogyny even though it’s not addressed to women, nor does it talk about women all that much. But it constantly frames its issue with anal sex as “ew, you’re treating men like women!”, and talk about how its members don’t use men for sex like you’d “use” a woman.
I’ve lived in lots of other places it feels like it’s issues to do with sex where misogyny is most obvious in the US. We’re doing way better on, say, employment issues than a lot of other places, but in terms of America’s sexual culture? Misogyny distorts everything.
(YMMV depending on your specific circumstances, outsider’s perspective, etc – insert standard disclaimer here.
Thanks for the input, Freemage and Cassandra.