Categories
Uncategorized

“Don’t Say Gay Bill”: What Does it Mean?

By Meghan Serceki

Florida’s Senate Education Committee has passed a bill nicknamed the “Don’t Say Gay Bill” which would ban discussion of LGBTQ+ topics in primary grades and would even have teachers notify parents if their child is questioning their gender identity or sexuality.

To be clear, similar laws have been around for years. There are major systemic issues in the United States educational system that take away queer students’ access to a safe learning environment. Many LGBTQ+ students face discrimination, bullying, a lack of resources, and representation in the curricula. A number of states actually have laws barring educators from teaching LGBTQ+ topics.

The Human Rights Watch asserts that these problems undermine “a number of fundamental human rights, including LGBT students’ rights to education, personal security, freedom from discrimination, access to information, free expression, association and privacy.”

The “Don’t Say Gay Bill” is yet another step in the wrong direction and puts LGBTQ+ children further at risk not only at school but also in their homes.

The bill is purported to protect the “fundamental right of parents to make decisions regarding the upbringing and control of their children in a specified manner” all while ignoring the freedom and safety of the children.

First, like other states, it forbids teachers from teaching LGBTQ+ topics in their classrooms. Representation and discussion of these topics are key to reducing prejudice and hostility towards queer individuals, so even this restriction has devastating effects. But beyond this, the bill also forbids all staff from having these discussions, including the counselors. 

Children who are questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity sometimes have few safe spaces to talk through the confusing things they’re working through, and school counseling should be a resource for them to be able to do this.

This bill would not only take this resource away, but it may also be used to notify parents if a student openly begins questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity. 

The clause about this is somewhat ambiguous, simply claiming the necessity of “parental notification and involvement in critical decisions affecting a student’s mental, emotional, or physical well-being.” But, given the surrounding context and the clause that comes soon after specifically regarding discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation, human rights advocates are worried at the implications this has.

Arguably, with schools being required to disclose all information with parents, some children may be outed before they are ready or while living in an environment that will not be accepting of them. This puts them at great risk of retaliation and abuse.

This bill poses a great threat to the progress we have made in LGBTQ+ rights, and those who would be affected by its being signed into law need our help.Organizations like Equality Florida made a petition to oppose the bill, and you can contact the representatives even if you don’t live in the state. Your voice is important, and this bill sets a precedent not only for Florida but for the future of education in the United States.

Categories
Uncategorized

Loving Your Authentic Self on Valentine’s Day

By Meghan Serceki

Dating can be difficult for anyone, but many trans* people face a unique set of obstacles when it comes to opening up to and starting relationships with others.

In romantic relationships, there is often an expectation of total vulnerability. Being in the closet or passing as cis can cause trans* individuals to feel they are hiding something and that coming out is necessary to progressing the relationship.

However, people are not defined by their gender identity or what their body looks like or what it used to look like. Vulnerability comes in many forms, but at its core it’s about being willing to show emotion and put faith in someone. It’s something that requires support from both parties and only comes when there is trust and comfort between them. This confidence in someone forms at different rates, and there is no rulebook on when or if anyone has to open up about their gender identity. 

Coming out is a big deal and holds a great deal of trepidation and fear over how the other person will react. This fear can be amplified in romantic relationships as the couple grows increasingly emotionally attached to each other.

Not everyone knows how to act when someone comes out. Some who have not experienced gender dysphoria might have questions that aren’t necessarily comfortable to answer. In these cases, they usually don’t mean harm by it, and they probably just want to know how to better support their partner. But they are not entitled to answers about any individual’s gender identity, and there are plenty of resources they can use to learn more without making their significant other uncomfortable in the process.

The worst case scenario is a cisgender partner reacting negatively to the news and rejecting or hiding their relationship. While this loss can feel heartbreaking in the moment, it has nothing to do with the trans* individual’s gender identity and everything to do with the one perpetrating the harm. People deserve to be loved fully, and if someone can’t do that it just wasn’t right.

No one is just their gender identity. A persons’ experiences of transness can be hugely impactful events that shape their character, but they do not make up the entire beautiful individual they are. The goal in any relationship is to be happy, to feel safe, and to have support from a person who respects you fully. How, if, and when you choose to reveal parts of yourself is entirely up to you, and you are only responsible for your own actions not your partner’s reactions.

Categories
Uncategorized

Why Trans* Matters

By Meghan Serceki

In some of Cloud Dancers’ previous articles, we’ve used the term trans* to be inclusive of all identities along the gender spectrum. But what does it mean exactly? And why is it important?

The Oxford English Dictionary added the term in 2018, defining it as “originally used to include explicitly both transsexual and transgender, or (now usually) to indicate the inclusion of gender identities such as gender-fluid, agender, etc., alongside transsexual and transgender.”

Queer scholar Jack Halberstam expands on this, explaining that it is derived from the use of an asterisk in internet searches to account for all other terms associated with the word before it. 

He says, “Rather than falling into the trap of replacing one system of classification with disciplinary effects with another vernacular but just as normalizing system, I prefer to use the term trans* and to leave the variability open as a question for any and all bodies.”

Helping people feel seen, represented, and comfortable can be as easy as using an asterisk.

Categories
Uncategorized

The Communicative Harm of Dave Chappelle’s “The Closer”

By Jeremiah Ancheta

Last week, Cloud Dancers released the first of a two-part piece concerning Dave Chappelle’s “The Closer.” The first piece covers what exactly Dave Chappelle said that is considered transphobic. This piece is about the communicative harm that the special has on the transgender community.

By communicative harm, I refer to the sort of harm that occurs due to certain information being conveyed and accepted about a marginalized community, which leads to thinking about that community in a harmful way, ultimately perpetuating the oppressive social conditions of that community. In particular, “The Closer” contributes to a false perception about the transgender community, which gets in their way of successfully conveying the social injustices they face. 

This post will analyze the background conditions that allow for the harm to take place, how the harm manifests, and what it ultimately results in. My analysis will draw upon empirical evidence and literature put forth by academic philosophers.

The Background Conditions in Place

Chappelle as an Authority Figure

Dave Chappelle has been a comedian for over 20 years, considered one of the best comedians of all time by magazines such as Rolling Stone and Billboard. Chappelle’s place as a renowned celebrity makes him, in the eyes of the general public, an authority figure whose words have credence, especially concerning political issues. For instance, a research study by Craig Garthwaite and Tim Moore focusing on the effects of celebrity endorsement in politics found that “[Oprah] Winfrey’s endorsement was responsible for approximately 1,000,000 additional votes for Obama.” Insofar as transgender issues are also politically divided issues, as evidenced by a 2017 Pew Research Center article, then Chappelle’s position as a celebrity plays a partial role in the public opinion of transgender issues.

Furthermore, what adds to his power as an authority in this case is the fact that much of his comedy performances involve social commentary on issues concerning identity and oppression. For instance, a paper by Andrew Fishman of Trinity College notes how Chappelle’s Show “captured both the absurdities and difficulties of navigating race and racism in our so-called post-racial America.”

As such, Chappelle’s status as a famous comedian known for his social commentary on issues concerning identity and oppression gives him a perceived authority to speak on other social issues such as transgender issues. So Chappelle’s transphobic attitudes and beliefs he expresses throughout “The Closer” have the power to influence his audience’s beliefs about the transgender community.

“The Closer” as a Comedy

The context in which Chappelle’s transphobic comments occur is in a comedy special performed by the well-liked comedian Dave Chappelle. As such, Chappelle’s utterances are perceived as merely making jokes that can’t harm anyone.

The comedy style of “The Closer” blurs the lines between humor and social commentary. However, much of the problematic things that Chappelle says clearly express his genuine beliefs and attitudes about the transgender community. For instance, his explanation of TERF ideology and his declaration of being “Team TERF” are clearly expressed as his beliefs on the matter. Insofar as we can say it is a joke, then it’s not clear what the punchline is in saying such things.

From personal experience, my conversations surrounding the bigotry in “The Closer” have consisted of interlocutors defending Chappelle. In claiming that Chappelle’s remarks were transphobic, my interlocutors responded with “it’s just a joke” and “you just don’t understand Chappelle’s humor.” This goes to show how Chappelle’s remarks being expressed in the context of comedy gets in the way of people understanding the issues at hand.

How Communicative Harm Manifests

Misinformation about the Transgender Community

Just before the 53:00 mark, Chappelle acknowledged that he initially didn’t know what a TERF was, and proceeded to say “but I know that trans people make up words to win arguments.” However, Chappelle does not give a single example of such a case. Such a comment paints the transgender community as being dishonest when, in reality, transgender people are making substantial claims about the discrimination they face.

Furthermore Chappelle makes problematic claims about what it is to be a woman. As noted in our last post, Chappelle makes various remarks to the effect that a ‘real’ woman is someone who has the capacity to give birth, have periods, and have a vagina that was not attained through vaginoplasty or vulvoplasty. We also noted how Chappelle’s views on gender are at odds with various academic and professional fields. 

Chappelle’s comments contribute towards anti-trans rhetoric. His claim that the transgender community ‘make up words to win arguments’ paints them as being dishonest and not having anything of substance to say. Furthermore, the expression of his belief that a person is not a woman insofar as they can’t give birth and have periods or have certain genitals may lead some viewers to hold this belief as well, contributing to the denial of a transgender woman’s identity.

Netflix’s Defense of Chappelle

It is also worth noting Ted Sarandos’ comments about “The Closer”, as they also contribute to the communicative harm on the transgender community.

After “The Closer” was requested by transgender people to be removed from Netflix, Netflix CEO Ted Sarandos rejected the request, saying “we have a strong belief that content on screen doesn’t directly translate to real-world harm. The strongest evidence to support this is that violence on screens has grown hugely over the last thirty years… and yet violent crime has fallen significantly in many countries. Adults can watch… shocking stand-up comedy – without it causing them to harm others.”

The standard that Sarandos sets for media to be problematic enough to be taken down from Netflix is that it causes physical violence. There are some problems with this.

First, a report by the Human Rights Campaign reveals that 2021 saw “at least 47 transgender and non-conforming people” being killed. This is the highest amount of killings of transgender people since 2013, with 2020 being the second highest. So Sarandos’ point about violent crime significantly decreasing is not representative of the transgender community’s experience. One might argue that Chappelle’s comments about trans people have no role in perpetuating violence against them. This leads me to my second point.

Second, the way we think and talk about a certain group of people can lead to harmful actions towards that group. Lynne Tirrell, a philosopher who has written substantial work on how language affects the social conditions of marginalized groups, gives an example of this phenomenon in her work “Genocidal Language Games.” 

In this paper, Tirrel talks about the 1994 genocide of the Tutsi in Rwanda. Tirrell argues that prominent slurs used against the Tutsi people were vital to enable certain sorts of genocidal action. For instance, the Tutsi people in power were commonly thought of as ‘inyenzi (cockroaches)’ This way of thinking of the Tutsi reduced them to being thought of as bugs, as non-human creatures with no moral consideration. Tirrell notes how thinking of the Tutsi people as inyenzi lead to “morally prohibited actions like murder, rape, mayhem, and mutilation to be regarded as socially appropriate and even required” (pg. 217). A direct call for genocide was even incited on the radio, when it urged its listeners to “exterminate the cockroaches.”

So the way we think and conceptualize about some group of people can facilitate acting towards such people in a harmful way. To connect this idea with Chappelle’s remarks, Chappelle’s various remarks, in addition to the perceived authority he has, plays a role in promoting anti-trans rhetoric. Such rhetoric involves conceptualizing transgender people in a problematic way. Insofar as “The Closer” plays a role in promoting anti-trans rhetoric, then it also can contribute to the violence that transgender people face. 

A commentary by Marianne Mollmann of The Fund for Global Human Rights captures this idea just as well, “By letting trans-exclusionary groups define who gets to call themselves a woman and who doesn’t, we’re accepting that every woman’s appearance—including our makeup, clothing, behavior, and physical attributes—can be policed in the name of “gender purity.” And because the policing of trans and gender queer folks has always been violent, trans-exclusionary rhetoric ultimately justifies misogynist violence.”

The Upshot of Communicative Harm

Discursive Injustice

In their paper “Performative Force, Convention, and Discursive Injustice,” non-binary philosopher Quill Kukla (writing as Rebecca Kukla) describes the phenomena of discursive injustice. For simplicity’s sake, discursive injustice can be understood as the phenomenon where speakers of a marginalized group are unable to use their utterances in characteristic ways, which results in further social disadvantage. An example that Kukla uses to illustrate the phenomena is that of a female boss giving orders to her male employees. The male employees instead interpret her orders to be mere requests, and thus don’t comply with their boss’s orders. This mismatch between what is said and what is interpreted occurs due to the fact that the boss is a woman. The female boss’ orders don’t have the characteristic effect of obligating her employees to do their work, and this perpetuates the social disadvantage that women have in being authority figures in the workplace.

The relevant examples I want to draw upon and which relate to “The Closer” are cases in which marginalized groups attempt to substantially address the social injustices they face, but are interpreted as “whining” or “crying”.

For instance, transgender people make various substantial truth-apt claims regarding the social injustices they face. However, these claims are interpreted by various people not as assertions that address discrimination and oppression, but rather are interpreted as transgender people expressing non-cognitive attitudes such as whining or being offended. This is evidenced by the popular belief that marginalized people are merely “offended” about words, when in fact, they are addressing the social injustices caused by language and communication. 

So the discursive injustice that is perpetuated due to “The Closer” involves Chappelle’s remarks and Sarandos’ defense of “The Closer” contributing to the utterances of the transgender community regarding social issues being interpreted as transgender people being offended. Take this comment by a Youtube user for instance, where they state their approval of Netflix’s defense and claim that the transgender community is “offended about nothing.”

Furthermore, Chappelle’s unsubstantiated claim that transgender people ‘make up words to win arguments’ paints them in a dishonest light, which also plays a role in people not accepting the claims made by transgender people that address social issues. Those who come to believe that transgender people are dishonest due to Chappelle’s remarks will be resistant in accepting the former group’s claims about the social injustices they face. 

Conclusion

In “The Closer,” Chappelle expresses many false beliefs and problematic attitudes towards and about transgender people. The transgender community is further harmed when these beliefs and attitudes are accepted or reinforced by the general public. Chappelle’s position as a perceived authority on social issues, in addition to his remarks being said in the context of a comedy special, makes people more likely to accept the things that he says, which plays a role in the communicative harm that transgender people face. 

Much like other marginalized groups, transgender people are perceived as being merely offended by words or “jokes” and as being dishonest to push a problematic “narrative”. These perceptions get in the way of transgender people being heard when they try to bring awareness to the social injustices they face, and are further reinforced when they are held and expressed by people like Chappelle.

Ironically, at the 53:00 mark Chappelle says “I shouldn’t speak on this because I am not trans.” As a non-trans person, Chappelle has never experienced transphobia and is thus epistemically disadvantaged when it comes to trans issues compared to trans people who have experienced transphobia. In claiming that his jokes are not transphobic and firmly holding this belief in the face of transgender people who claim otherwise, he is implying that he understands what is and isn’t considered transphobic better than trans people themselves. 

Categories
Uncategorized

5 Gender-Neutral Clothing Brands

By Meghan Serceki

Clothing is a universal language that allows us every day to put out a message to the world — to express who we are. However, the clothing industry has been dominated by gender norms, making people feel uncomfortable wearing clothing that blurs those lines and therefore limiting this form of expression.

Recently, more and more clothing brands are breaking through the gender binary and creating fashion that allows for everyone to express themselves and feel comfortable. Here are a few and where you can find them:

  1. COLLUSION

“THIS BRAND IS FOR THE COMING OF AGE, SHAPED BY, AND FOR AN AUDIENCE WHO DEMAND SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM FASHION.”

COLLUSION has clothing and accessories of all kinds, allowing customers to search by clothing type and collection rather than ascribing certain styles to “men” or “women.” On top of that, they have inclusive sizing and are committed to sustainability.

2. Human Nation

“IT’S OUR GOAL TO CREATE GOOD BRANDS THAT EMBODY LOVE, RESPECT & CARE.”

From The House of LR&C, Human Nation is a gender-inclusive brand that works for every body. They have a numerical sizing system, focus on sustainability, and encourage feedback from their customers to help them on their mission. Unlike COLLUSION, they do not sell dresses, but their collection is large and impressive nonetheless.

An added bonus of buying from Human Nation  is that 3% of every purchase goes to the Why Not You Foundation, “a nonprofit dedicated to education, children’s health and fighting poverty, empowering today’s youth to lead with a why not you attitude.”

  1. Lonely Kids Club

“A SAFE SPACE THAT INVITES PEOPLE OF ALL AGES AND GENDER IDENTITIES TO ENJOY OUR CLOTHING.”

Lonely Kids Club is an Australian-based company that produces their clothing in small batches with local artists and designers. Each item comes with an original drawing and printed by the Lonely Kids founder. They don’t limit their sizing, marketing, or styles to any one gender identity, and actively promote sustainability and mental health resources (see “The Stigma of Seeking Help”).

You can also join their private Facebook group they monitor to keep it a safe environment for people to post, share, and reach out for help if they need it!

  1. TomboyX

“UNDERWEAR THAT ANY BODY COULD FEEL COMFORTABLE IN, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY FELL ON THE GENDER SPECTRUM.”

TomboyX offers underwear, activewear, loungewear, and more for all bodies and everyone’s needs. From compression tops to period underwear and boxers, they create functional and quality products for all with sizing based entirely on one’s measurements rather than on one’s assigned sex.

  1. The Phluid Project

“TO GIVE ALL PEOPLE A CHANCE TO EXPLORE AND EXPRESS THEIR TRUEST SELVES WITHOUT FEAR OF JUDGEMENT, OR THE LIMITS OF TRADITIONAL GENDER IDENTIFICATION.”

The Phluid Project partners with creators who share their values in inclusivity and purpose. They highlight queer, trans*, Black, Latinx, and women-owned brands and run their own foundation to further support their mission.

Besides clothing and accessories, they also spotlight gender-neutral fragrances and beauty products. All sizes are inclusive, and you can rest assured that you’re supporting a company that cherishes visibility for all.

These are just a few of the brands that are supporting gender-inclusive clothing. Others that have started collections for all include Old Navy, Dr. Martens, and Levis. There are plenty of options out there, and supporting them will encourage more liberation in retail going forward.

Fashion is a way of presenting yourself to the world as the person you are, not something that should limit you or make you feel like someone you’re not. I hope this gave you a good place to start!

Categories
Uncategorized

Trends in Gendered Parenting

by Meghan Serceki

Gender norms are often imposed on children from birth — in some cases, even before that. Some new parents, however, have been helping their children explore who they are beyond the gender binary.

In 2008, Jenna Karvunidis held the first “gender reveal party” while she was pregnant with her child, Bianca. This trend took off, with expecting parents finding increasingly extravagant ways to announce their child’s assigned gender. While these parties were held in celebration of their children and out of excitement, even Karvunidis herself has since expressed regret over starting the craze — not only because of the announcements which have gotten out of hand, but also because, in an interview with The Guardian, she expressed that she feels “they overemphasize one aspect of a person” and limits what they feel they can do, who they can be.

While gender reveal parties were becoming more common, other parents began challenging what it means to raise a “boy” or a “girl,” adopting a more gender-neutral approach to raising a child. Some have coined the term “theybies,” keeping the sex listed on their birth certificate unknown, and using they/them pronouns until their child chooses their own. Major wins have been made on this front in the last few years, too, with certain states allowing a third gender — “Gender ‘X’” — on a birth certificate. These parents try to expose their child equally to things traditionally deemed “feminine” or “masculine” rather than telling them they are one or the other and having the child come to the realization later that they might not fit into that category.

Some may not want to raise their child as completely nonbinary, but there are still ways they can promote the exploration and challenging of the limitations of gender. Toys and games are often geared towards one gender or another, meant to instill certain values or passions in them. Clothing trends press the gender binary as well, as children’s clothing was actually a gender-neutral bleached white until the 1940s when retailers started a marketing campaign which designated “pink for girls” and “blue for boys.” Allowing children to explore beyond this “gender barrier” simply through the toys they play with or the clothes they wear can have a significant impact on their relationship with gender and their understanding of themselves.

The truth is, though, we still live in a gendered world, and giving children the opportunity to challenge gender norms will necessitate parents’ support. This means making gendered toys equally accessible and as unstigmatized as possible, reducing the shame which can sometimes result from not following gender expectations. Who we are as individuals is so much more than what is written on our birth certificates. The possibilities for each of our lives are endless. Why limit ourselves or future generations based on marketing and anatomy?

Categories
Uncategorized

Transphobia in Dave Chappelle’s “The Closer”

By Jeremiah Ancheta

On October 5, 2021, Netflix released “The Closer,” a comedy special performed by Dave Chappelle. Throughout the entirety of the special, Chappelle makes comments about and towards women and the LGBTQ+ community. These comments have been met with criticism for being misogynistic, homophobic, and transphobic.

This post will be the first of a two-part series about “The Closer.” Although Chappelle’s remarks throughout the film are misogynistic, homophobic, and transphobic, this first piece will focus on the latter remarks and explain why his ‘jokes’ are transphobic. The second piece will talk about the communicative harm that the special has on the transgender community.

Team TERF

Around the 52:00 mark of the special, Chappelle mentions J.K. Rowling’s comments about transgender women and that she was called a TERF (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist) in response. 

Chappelle then says he looked up what a TERF was, saying what it was an acronym for, and proceeds to explain their ideology. In doing so, he claims that TERFS “look at transgender women the way we [Black people] might look at Black face,” that TERFS believe that transgender women are “doing an impression” of women. 

Black face is a racist practice going as far back as the 18th century in American theatrical performances to ridicule black people. The practice involved white theatrical performers painting their face in black and speaking in an exaggerated African American vernacular, painting a caricature of African American appearance and behavior. In making an analogy between Black face and transgender women, TERFs are claiming that transgender women are a caricature and mockery of women.

After giving this explanation of what a TERF is, Chappelle ultimately claims that he is “Team TERF.” In other words, Chappelle agrees with TERFS that trans women aren’t ‘real’ women and that trans women are ridiculing women just in virtue of being trans women.

What it is to be a Woman

Just before the 54:00 mark, Chappelle claims that “gender is a fact.” On its own, it isn’t clear what is exactly meant when Chappelle says this. However, he clarifies what he means by proceeding to talk about a woman’s capacity to give birth and have periods, as well as their genitalia.

Chappelle brings up the fact that Caitlyn Jenner, a transgender woman, won the Glamour Woman of the Year Award in 2015. Immediately after, he sarcastically remarks “ain’t that something” and says “[she] never even had a period.” Furthermore, he says “I’d be mad as sh*t if I was a woman.” In making such comments, Chappelle expresses his surprise and disapproval that a person who has never had a period can win a Woman of the Year award.

Around the 55:00 mark, Chappelle reasserts that “gender is a fact” and immediately starts talking about the capacity for women to give birth. He says “Every human being… had to pass through the legs of a woman… that is a fact.” Chappelle then ties this point about birth to the genitals of women.

Chappelle begins talking about the genitalia of transgender women. He says, “I’m not saying [a transgender woman’s genitals] is not pussy, but that’s like Beyond Pussy or Impossible Pussy… It tastes like pussy but that’s not quite what it is, is it?”

Chappelle’s joke of calling a transgender woman’s genitals as “Beyond Pussy” and “Impossible Pussy” is a reference to Beyond Meat and Impossible Meat, plant-based alternatives that look and taste similar to meat. Such plant-based food is often called imitation meat or fake meat. In making the joke, Chappelle is claiming that transgender women who went through vaginoplasty or vulvoplasty have “fake” genitals or “imitation” genitals.

All these remarks reveal that Chappelle believes that what it is to be a woman necessarily involves the capacity to give birth, have periods, and have genitals of  a certain sort. However, these beliefs are absolutely false, as it goes against what various academic and professional fields have to say about gender. 

The World Health Organization does not define gender in the same way that Chappelle does. The Yale School of Medicine made the distinction between sex and gender, which is at odds with Chappelle’s beliefs. A vast amount of literature in academic philosophy points out problems with conceiving of gender the way Chappelle does (e.g. see the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article “Feminist Perspectives on Sex and Gender”).

Chappelle’s Defense

Starting from the 56:00 mark of the special, Chappelle brings up a transgender woman he knew named Daphne Dorman. Chappelle describes Dorman as a transgender woman who was a big fan of his and found his transphobic jokes to be funny, the latter point being greatly emphasized. Unfortunately, Daphne Dorman died by suicide.

In emphasizing that Daphne, a transgender woman, found his jokes about transgender people to be funny, Chappelle is making the argument that his remarks about the transgender community aren’t transphobic because a transgender person approved of them.

However, it’s important to note that the transgender community is not a single monolith with a single opinion that is shared by all who are transgender. Rather, the trans community, much like other socially recognized groups, consist of various individuals with differing beliefs about what is appropriate and inappropriate. So Chappelle’s defense that he isn’t transphobic because a single trans woman found his transgender jokes funny is unwarranted.

Conclusion

The contents of “The Closer” consisted of Dave Chappelle’s transphobic beliefs and comments about and towards transgender people. His exclamation that he is a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (at least, what he takes them to be) is in itself transphobic, as he admits to essentially claiming that transgender women are not ‘real’ women. Chappelle’s comments have also consisted of false information about gender and womanhood, again excluding transgender women from genuinely having the latter.

Cloud Dancers does not condone Dave Chappelle’s comments about the transgender community, and hope that Chappelle and his fans eventually understand why “The Closer” is problematic. If you or someone you know has been personally harmed, either directly or indirectly, by the special, we note the Trans Lifeline below for anyone who needs it.

Trans Lifeline – US (877-565-8860); Canada (877-330-6366)

Categories
Uncategorized

A Parent’s Guide to Being an Ally

By Carrera Christman

Jamie Lee Cutis’s daughter, Ruby, recently came out as transgender. The media was able to get insight into how Jamie Lee Curtis handled the situation, which in turn, could help guide how best to support your own child if you find yourself in a similar position. 

As gender and sexuality become less of a nuanced topic, it is likely more parents are having these conversations with their children. The first step is to understand that gender and sex are two different things. Sex is the biological attribute a person has; gender is socially constructed, which ultimately allows it to be determined on a spectrum. Gender is fluid, and it can take time and reflection for a person to understand what makes them who they are.

Curtis’s daughter, Ruby, described her experience this way to PEOPLE magazine: “When I was about 16, a friend of mine who is trans asked me what my gender was. I told them, ‘Well, I’m male.’ After, I’d dwell on the thought. I knew I was — maybe not Ruby per se, but I knew I was different. But I had a negative experience in therapy, so I didn’t come out [as trans] immediately when I probably should have.”

Coming out at a young age can add complexity for parents. It may be difficult to process what their child has conveyed, or even question their truth. A lack of understanding is not an excuse to be anything but supportive. We’ll dive into how best to be an ally for your LGBTQ+ child.

More likely than not, before coming out, you can assume your child has thought of every scenario to best tell you about their identity. Some are much more laid back; however, others may be dreading the experience. So, when they come to you, take time to listen to them. Listening allows them to see that you care about what they have to say and understand who they are. Today, about 48% of youth identify as strictly heteronormative, which indicates that more likely than not, your child will have a conversation like this with you.

Be intentional with your words when you do speak. Nothing is worse than passing over what your child just shared. Make sure you convey that you are here for them in any capacity and that you love them no matter how they express themselves. This small action is huge to your child. It shows that your love is not conditional based on how they portray themselves.

Take time to reflect internally, just as your child has done. Many people have internalized prejudices. Navigate through why you have those prejudices and how ultimately, you can overcome them. Ask yourself the hard questions, such as “Why do I have these beliefs?’ or “Does my view affect how I view my child?” The inward reflection allows for growth because, at this time, the best thing to do is to provide love and support to your child. It will take time and effort, but your child will see your progress and work to be better. These actions will not go unnoticed. 

It is significant to note that you can go to your child for their feelings and experience; however, do not rely on them for education and information. You, as the parent, should be well vested in the well-being of your child and do what you can to find out how best to support them. Your child is not there to tell you what it means to be transgender or non-binary; they are there to feel your love however they express themselves.

Understand that it took a lot for your child to open up to you about who they are. Be that person to relieve their tears and fears regarding coming out and what comes next. The best practice is to show compassion and support during this time. One thing to ask is how best you can support them. Doing so allows them to acknowledge if they need space after telling you or if they want to feel close to you. Giving them the power to determine the relationship structure allows them to feel in control of their lives. 

You may have had a different plan for them. That is totally okay, but accepting that things change or do not go to your plan is important. The plan may not have included different pronouns to use or partner to love; however, it is who they are. You would want to be able to live your life the way you choose if you were in their situation. You have lived your life the way you chose. This is theirs, and they need to feel supported throughout it. It may be difficult to understand initially. How would you feel if you were in their shoes? It may take extensive education to understand how your child feels entirely, but it is who they are, and through patience and understanding, full acceptance and appreciation is possible 

Identity is fluid and constantly evolving. The spectrum of how to represent yourself can be daunting, but once you find your niche, it is exciting and makes you feel seen. Your child has found a way to describe themselves in a way that makes them feel seen. Let them live the life they chose, and support them endlessly.

Categories
Uncategorized

Rainbow Reflections: It All Works Out Beautifully

By Olivia Williams

In our Rainbow Reflections series, we highlight the experiences of members of the LGBTQIA+ community in their own words. For this series, we spoke to seven people around the world about their varying experiences. For an introduction to our participants and their thoughts on the labels that they use, please read the first article in the series, here. Their takes on the familiar question “Am I queer enough?” can be found here. The phenomenon of coming out is discussed here. In this final installment, interviewees offer advice to other members of the community. 

Despite the fact that they have never met you, seven members of the LGBTQIA+ community, spanning from the United States of America to Spain, Britain, and Australia, want the best for you. True, they may not know much about you, and your journeys may be wildly different, but they have all struggled at some point in their journey. Here are their best pieces of advice. 

On Being Gentle with Your Journey

“[O]nce you understand that you are queer, the specifics of that are only what you need them to be, as long as you aren’t devaluing someone else’s identity in the process. [G]ive yourself the space to look different, to try out different styles, different haircuts, and be aware that you’re not always going to look the way [that] you want. It’s a process, and you’ve [not] done something wrong.” 

  • MK

“I want people to know that you are not broken. It doesn’t matter if you feel a certain way because of a certain reason. You still feel that way. Your feelings in that moment are still every bit as valid as someone else’s.”

  • Kathryn

“It’s okay to be different and for people to not understand you. What’s important is to be comfortable with yourself and to know who you are. Reach out, ask questions, and, above all, know [that] you aren’t alone.” 

  • Edward 

On the Need to Compare

“Looking back, I’d tell myself not to judge my own transition based on what other people want.” 

  • Emerson 

On Finding a Community, and Even Love

“[H]aving people in [your] life just being their queer selves helps a lot [with] embracing the possibilities of who [you] are [are] and how [you] can exist in the world.”

  • Miriam

“It is not impossible to find love, or a healthy relationship, without sex or with limited sexual contact.”

  • Kathryn

“The most important thing I did to help [myself] accept my identity was [to] find community in other queer folks.” 

  • Emerson

“[C]ommunity is really important. I think as soon as I started having friends that were queer, it made it so much easier to learn things and share thoughts and relate, because it is so personal. [A]nd reading about it or learning about it from people who don’t experience it firsthand is never going to be the same thing.” 

  • MK 

On Protecting Yourself

“It’s okay to protect yourself however you feel you need to. Nobody is entitled to your truth if you feel unsafe or not ready to share it.” 

  • Kat

I just want everyone to know that saying no is an option. You don’t have to be ace or graysexual. Literally anyone, for any reason, can just say no. There is literally no reason to have sex with anyone other than you want to, and you are both consenting and happy to be there.” 

  • Kathryn

On the End 

“It all works out beautifully.”

  • Hannah

Categories
Uncategorized

Petra Wenham: A Life-long Journey to Being Her True Self

By Meghan Serceki

Petra Wenham came out as transgender at age 68, began transitioning, and now in her mid-70s, is committed to educating people on what being trans really means. Her story is one of finding acceptance and of accepting herself.

She felt signs of her transness at a young age: she suspects between the ages of three and five when children develop a sense of self. When she started school, she recalls not “clicking” at all with the boys but rather with the girls. However, Petra recalls, “slowly the girls drop you because you’re seen as a boy. But you do not connect with the boys, therefore, you tend to become a loner.” She got bullied and called names, and when her mother got the sense that something was different about her she was sent to an all-boys school at age 11.

At the all-boys school, she felt even more isolated, struggling to find anyone she related to. She realizes now that others were doing the same. Although she wasn’t close with them, she says of the boys that she did get to know there, “it wouldn’t surprise me at all if some of them had been somewhere in the LGBT umbrella.”

Receiving her degree. Source: Petra Wenham

Things got better for her when she met her wife, Loraine. After she got her degree, she started a successful career as a cybersecurity expert for British Telecom, where the two met. She is Petra’s support system, her soulmate. Even before they got married, Loraine knew that Petra would cross-dress and was comfortable with that. She still had not yet had her “egg-cracking moment” (that is, the moment when she realized she was transgender)and wrote off the cross-dressing as an occasional occurrence which could at other times be suppressed.

In 2001 she guessed she was transgender, but media coverage of LGBTQ+ individuals at the time was more focused on homosexuals, drag queens, and transvestites, not on transgender people like her. As a result, she still felt somewhat alone and unseen. Even though this thought lived in her mind, she says “what I did and what quite a few trans people do is you bury it; you try to ignore it and you sort of try and carry on.”

The stress of burying and suppressing a huge part of herself built up for years. When her home got broadband, she remembers realizing, “Oh, hang on, I’m not unique. There are other people out there like me.” Reading other trans people’s stories, she became more and more aware that she in fact is trans, starting to be more comfortable with her transness but still not accepting it.

It wasn’t until 2015 at age 68 when she was hospitalized with colitis, was in urgent condition, and was reevaluating her life that she had her egg cracking moment. While in the hospital, she came across an opinion piece by Jennifer Finney Boylan, “How a Sliver of Glass Changed my Life” in which Boylan compares hiding transness to a glass shard lodged in your foot, causing great pain and feeling almost instant relief when taken out. Petra decided then and there that she had to live fully as the woman she is.

Coming home from the hospital, she sat down with Loraine and told her that she is a transgender woman. She immediately recognized the “tremendous stress” that had been building up by keeping this from her wife, her soulmate, herself. Like the shard of glass, “trying to push it away only really caused it to fester,” and being open about it, removing that shard, provided the relief she had always needed. Loraine accepted her with open arms, and Petra references author Amanda Jetté Knox when she recounts it, saying “love is genderless, it’s sexless. It’s human being to human being.” Next January, the two will celebrate their 49th anniversary together.

Petra’s mission now is to educate people. Source: Petra Wenham

Petra holds that “the trans community in (the UK) and, I suspect in America, we estimate we’re about 10 to 15 years behind where the gay community is, in terms of the public acceptance.” Looking forward after her transition, she has one simple goal: to educate people. She says, “What we’ve got to do is to show people that we’re not a subspecies, we are human beings. Women should be totally and completely equal with men. It is equality. And we as trans women, we do not want anything over and above anybody else. We want to be initially treated completely as women. We will then work with the women to lift us up to make sure that we are equal with the men.”

Petra’s story shows that it is never too late to accept yourself in your entirety, to live the kind of life you want to live and to make a truly significant impact on the world by being exactly who you are.