Dear Class,
In your intros, one thing that strikes me is how careful you all are being with your language. This desire to be sensitive is quite admirable, but at the same time, I don’t want you to be so worried about language that you clam up. Mistakes are easy to make, and as long as you don’t have malicious intent, most LGBTQ people are very cool about making gentle corrections.
So yes, dear student. Be sensitive with how you use language, but there’s no need to be overly cautious or overly-apologetic, either. Ask 100 queers what one term they want to be called and what one term they find offensive, and you’ll get 413 answers! For example, in my circle of friends, we've used "gender-bender" with affection and humor for decades to describe androgynous men and women, going all the way back to Boy George and Annie Lennox! And some of my transgender friends, people in their 40's, 40's and 60's who've been trans long before the latest round of politically-correct terminology came about, feel the same way about the term “tranny”! As for the term “homosexual," that term never bothered me either. It's accurate! But I can easily see why gay people just a few years older than me don’t like it or think it sounds too “clinical”. They had to endure during a period when “homosexuality” was considered a disease or mental illness in need of a cure.
During my lifetime, the correct thing to call black people has evolved tremendously. When I was a little kid, I already knew that I oughtn’t utter the “N” word, even though I heard the black kids at the park using it among themselves. During my early childhood of the 1960’s, some well-meaning white people still occasionally used the words “colored” and “negro” without malicious intent. I was 4 years old when the Watts Riots of 1965 took place three miles east down Imperial Highway from where I lived. I could see all the smoke, flames, fire trucks, and police cars out the window as I rode in the backseat of my pop's 1961 Plymouth Fury across the intersection at Hawthorne Blvd. & Imperial. I remember seeing a really pissed-off black man on the news that night screaming that they were gonna “push Whitey into the ocean!” I was terrified, not by his blackness, but by his rage. At the same time, I felt an innate attraction towards his rebelliousness, During my 1970’s teenage years, the Crips, Brims, and Bloods emerged from my neighborhood in south central Los Angeles, and eventually they rose into the gangsta powerhouses they became in the 1980s and 1990s.
I grew up in a fairly liberal home with a chilled-out dad and countercultural mom, and the little radical fag in me (which was still at least a decade from fully emerging) was definitely attracted to hippies and rebels. I instinctively grooved with the Flower Children, the Ecology Movement, the Anti-War Movement, and the Black Power movement, I loved Angela Davis and the Black Panthers, and got in trouble for the glowing, approving report I wrote about them in my high school freshman year social studies class. I understood and dug their messages, in the way that an anti-authoritarian 14-year-old white queerboy could.
Throughout my childhood, black and brown people were integrating our formerly lilly-white neighborhood schools. My best friend in 7th grade was Sandra Brown – the only black girl in the whole class. At first we almost got into a fistfight over something – I don’t remember what – but then we quickly bonded on the playground swings over soul music, dancing, and Twinkies. By this point my faggotry was difficult to hide, even though I would be a virgin for many more years. But Sandra (my pet name for her was “Chok-o-lette” -- she loved the candy and the name), she always stood by my side and even defended me against some of the more aggressive bullies. I remember we saw "Blacula" together at the decrepit bargain theater in our neighborhood. But Sandra went to another school for 8th grade and I never saw her again.
More black kids came in 8th grade, but they mostly kept to themselves and sort of made it clear they wanted to keep it that way. Nevertheless, one of my best friends in 8th grade was Walter Grant, who had a black dad and a Japanese mom. He was lighter than all the other blacks, and they sort of rejected him, but I wasn't very popular and never turned away anyone who wanted to be friends with me. Walter had such a huge afro that it totally exceeded the boundaries of his class picture, so it looked like he had square hair! We used to laugh about that. He also had a really good collection of porn under his bed, which he showed me when we would ride our bikes to his house for lunch.
Throughout my childhood, black and brown people were integrating our formerly lilly-white neighborhood schools. My best friend in 7th grade was Sandra Brown – the only black girl in the whole class. At first we almost got into a fistfight over something – I don’t remember what – but then we quickly bonded on the playground swings over soul music, dancing, and Twinkies. By this point my faggotry was difficult to hide, even though I would be a virgin for many more years. But Sandra (my pet name for her was “Chok-o-lette” -- she loved the candy and the name), she always stood by my side and even defended me against some of the more aggressive bullies. I remember we saw "Blacula" together at the decrepit bargain theater in our neighborhood. But Sandra went to another school for 8th grade and I never saw her again.
That little detour was to illustrate my point that “black” became the term of choice around that time. But as the years went on, debates raged about what the “name” of these people should be – these people seeking to unite as a political, social, and cultural entity. Several different names had short trial periods. In 1988, when I was a graduate student still doing my student teaching at SFSU, I’ll never forget how one day I referred to “Afro-Americans” in class. A black undergraduate, probably only five or so years younger than me, and probably fresh out of her first African American Studies class, shot up her hand up and said, “Excuse me! An Afro is a hairstyle. The proper term is African Americans.” She was right, of course. I hadn't kept up with the latest terminology. I said something to the effect of “Sorry. No Harm Intended. I Stand Corrected.” Boy I sure learned THAT lesson! But get this… It turns out we’re Back to Black! And that's fine with me. Black is Beautiful Baby!

Many LGBTQ people experienced the effects of this "diagnosis" in the 1950's and 60's -- prior to the advent of the modern Gay Liberation Movement on a mass scale -- and suffered terribly from over-medication, electro-shock therapy, and even lobotomies. It was only in 1973, the American Psychological Association re-categorized homosexuality as a human variation (like left-handedness) rather than an illness. So I totally get why some people don’t like that term.
Keep in mind that when a person simply doesn't KNOW what term to use and they aren't trying to be mean, just chill out and be kind, understanding, and clear. No need to get offended so easily, especially when someone is merely ignorant and not intending malice.
Let’s save our "being offended" for when it really matters (like when we're not being treated equally under the law!)
Such wise words.
ReplyDeleteExcellent points to share with students who are still learning who they are, who they want to be, and how they relate to and understand others.
ReplyDelete1 of 2
ReplyDeleteThis is a well-written and considerate article that rightfully points out the flaws in assuming all members of a certain group will react to perceived slights in the same way. I completely agree with your closing argument:
"Let’s save our "being offended" for when it really matters (like when we're not being treated equally under the law!)"
It's better if taken charitably as inspiration rather than admonishment toward offended queers, though I'm sure it can come off as either. Despite the fact that individual offense isn't equatable with the systemic oppression that inequitable laws represent, the example given is a pretty good one. Here's another example of when it's good to speak up against mistreatment of queers: the inappropriate use of slurs. Which is why it's disappointing this very article then goes on to utterly undermine itself by wielding the power of a slur outside of its context.
"And I know a lot of trannies who feel the same way about the term “tranny”!"
I'm sure you felt this would be a spicy way to write the correct sentence "And I know a lot of transgender people who feel the same way about 'tranny'!" but because you use a slur with systemic power, it undermines your point. This one slip right here merges the ideas of individual offense (which I agree is overblown) with systemic oppression and the slurs that propagate the ideas of that oppression. In a way, it's a self-defending statement: because of the merging of individual reactions and systemic reality, anyone who takes issue with the use of systemically real oppressive words can be written off as "just one of those queers who is easily offended". I'm extremely confident that's not your intention. Nevertheless, people who don't yet have a queer education are more prone to just believe you or take this for a universal rule. Or worse, go on to think that slurs are no big deal, don't have power, or that certain words (which are) aren't slurs.
Tranny has historically, and continues to this day, to be used as a dehumanizing slur against transgender people, most specifically trans women which intersects with problems society has with people who are assigned male at birth not acting in accordance with its extremely strict definition of masculinity, including and especially people who aren't masculine and are in fact women. The problem is not the word being used ever. You can type it out to demonstrate that it exists or that it has meaning, as you almost did. A member of the group can use the slur as language that identifies that group in a positive or neutral way (sometimes self-denigrating which is a whole can of worms). A comparable example for those not convinced could be something like "Those whores are fine with me calling them whore!" referring to a couple of individual women you've met, who are not sex workers. Or just replace "whore" here with bitch, bombaclaat, bleeders, babyfactories, or any one of a number of misogynist slurs. Some of which are more harmful at carrying society's disdain for women than others. In this way you would not only hurt the individual woman (which I guess you can call offense?) but if gone unchallenged, would help propagate the establishment views toward women. You didn't do this. Instead you called people tranny outside of that group which was okay with your use of it (I am charitably assuming, otherwise we have another problem). A word that historically and currently undermines a trans person's existence as their identified gender, especially femmes. A word slung from every hate-mongering reactionary's mouth to dehumanize and deny trans people legal rights, equity, and further stigmatizes them within the queer movement. The word isn't doing all of these things at once. It's fluid. That's the insidious thing about slurs versus offensive language.
2 of 2
DeleteSlurs are not the same as offensive words. The usage of the language of hate contains the power of hate. To equate the carrier-language of systemic oppression with the feelings of individuals is to myopically marginalize all individuals in that group and poison the well against any that express discontent with the continued use of harmful slurs. We all know what a slur is. I'm sure you can think of a few right now. Tranny is one of those. Different slurs have differing kinds and amounts of power. To misuse them in this way is to unjustly wield that power. How many students have read this article and thought (or even wrote an assignment) indicating that they now believe "tranny" is okay to call people in some general sense? We can't know thoughts, but if you've seen any actual responses to that effect, then you can't ignore the power your platform as an educator and white cis man gives you. All of those are proud things to be. But each one gives you the unconscious power to suggest to others what is acceptable in society. No individual should of course wholly decide what is acceptable or unacceptable in societal canon. But if you're not a member of a group, you should not be writing into social canon what is acceptable or not. The act of doing so is plainly demonstrated here.
I think you should know better already. Most trans people I have ever known don't abide the word tranny at all, but least of all from non-trans people. Just like most gays I know do not abide the word "faggot"/"fag" and least of all from heterosexual people. Whatever the case an individual's tolerance for slurs is, that shouldn't be the basis for using one outside of interaction with that individual or group of individuals. I'm sure we can all draw comparisons to using other slurs in public.
I wrote all of this because I think you're worth talking to about it. I think this article is worth making better. I don't think you're a bad person or that you will materially propagate the same level of hate as some anti-queer politician, minister, CEO, or lobbyist. This is a small action to make a small difference to a relatively smaller power. Your article would be significantly more impactful and uplifting if you could just change "tranny" to literally any other non-slur word that indicates the person is a trans gender person.
Thanks for your feedback, Alice.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the sentence you object to would be more effective with your suggested edit, so I've made the change and added a bit more detail for context.
Rest assured that I've never had a student infer from my blog that "tranny" is an acceptable term to use for transgender people. Keep in mind that this is just one of several readings regarding LGBTQ terminology that my students read.
Your response also serves as a perfect illustration of my point. Remember that I am not the enemy. Your lecture on the differences between individual offense and systemic slurs, carrier-language, myopic marginalization, and the misuse of power indicate that you've educated yourself on the ways you've been oppressed, but the queer studies jargon only goes so far in accomplishing social change. What are you going to do with this knowledge, beyond increasing your ability to talk with other educated queer activists? What practical use will your knowledge serve? How will you put it to use? Perhaps the time and energy you spent attacking an obvious ally could have been put to better use? Maybe you could have written to an anti-queer politician, minister, CEO, or lobbyist.
I worry about the Left eating its own. I worry, because when I went to the National LGBTQ Task Force Creating Change conference in Washington DC last year, I felt unwelcome. Being a fag isn't enough to be part of the club anymore. When looking at me, most of the activists there saw only a cisgender, white male. Uh oh! Three strikes against me! I'm out! I worry, because a lot of the criticisms the radical Right make about the new Left activists have a grain of truth in them. The concepts of "triggering" "safe spaces" and "microaggressions" all imply that people no longer recognize the benefits of growing a thick skin. Whatever happened to "sticks and stones . . ." I worry that the academic discipline of Queer/Gender studies has done a good job of analyzing systems of oppression and teaching students why they should be angry, but has failed to teach students how to put that anger to practical use.
So yes, my original blog WAS intended, in part, as an admonishment toward easily offended queers. And my message remains the same. Choose your battles carefully. It’s better to build bridges than bomb them.
~ JMM