OT: Trans Woman Allowed To Compete In Miss Universe Canada

[Artemisia]

I don't normally do this, but since this was from a presser and we had a huge discussion about it earlier:

http://lezgetreal.com/2012/04/trans-wom ... se-canada/

[Alice Macher]

Well! That was a fast turnaround. Kudos to GLAAD.

[Kamino Neko]

Ah, cool!

[Doc Harleen]

Hoorays! That is some serious awesome. I agree with Alice - I am surprised (pleasantly so) by the turnaround time. Congrats and good luck to Ms. Talackova!

[Freemage]

A... less salutary response to the way this fight went down:

So “we” did it, everyone! “We” successfully petitioned and fought and made a fuss and now “we’ve” won! Donald Trump himself has announced that Jenna Talackova will be permitted to participate in the Miss Universe Canada competition!

By banding together as a community, and making our voice heard, we have successfully ensured that this totally passing-privileged, beautiful-by-cisnormative-standards, successful beauty queen will be able to subject herself to objectification in an ultra-patriarchal competition built entirely around the premise that a woman’s worth and validity is dependent on how well men are able to sexualize her and project their desires onto her!

In the column, Natalie references a case currently going on in Germany, but doesn't mention the child's name or provide a link (regular readers, mind, would know both already; she's linked them in the past). For those who don't read her column, here's a useful link or two. Warning: Follow those links at your own risk for increased agitation, anger and sorrow. It's rough reading.

[Lia S]

Warning: Follow those links at your own risk for increased agitation, anger and sorrow. It's rough reading.

That's an understatement.

[svenman]

In the column, Natalie references a case currently going on in Germany, but doesn't mention the child's name or provide a link (regular readers, mind, would know both already; she's linked them in the past). For those who don't read her column, here's a useful link or two. Warning: Follow those links at your own risk for increased agitation, anger and sorrow. It's rough reading.

According to this (German) source (at least the correction in the lower part), the case has apparently been misreported initially. There has been no court ruling to institutionalize the child against its will, and so far no psychiatric institiution has been identified that would be ready to begin psychiatric treatment on the child against its will. All the courts have decided is that the mother will not unilaterally receive custody of the child that the parents had on their separation yielded to the state, represented by the youth office.

While the matter seems to remain that the father's stance in this case is certainly unenlightened, and one may even deplore that his position is not immediately dismissed by the youth office, I'd prefer to remain skeptical of the alleged facts rather than join an uproar of indignation, when it all may actually boil down to an attempt at getting public pressure involved in a battle of custody.

At any rate, the (rather nonsensical, IMO) attempts to link the state authorities' alleged anti-transgender position in this case to Germany's Nazi past are a big warning sign that we are not dealing with unbiased reporting here.

[Freemage]

In the column, Natalie references a case currently going on in Germany, but doesn't mention the child's name or provide a link (regular readers, mind, would know both already; she's linked them in the past). For those who don't read her column, here's a useful link or two. Warning: Follow those links at your own risk for increased agitation, anger and sorrow. It's rough reading.

According to this (German) source (at least the correction in the lower part), the case has apparently been misreported initially. There has been no court ruling to institutionalize the child against its will, and so far no psychiatric institiution has been identified that would be ready to begin psychiatric treatment on the child against its will. All the courts have decided is that the mother will not unilaterally receive custody of the child that the parents had on their separation yielded to the state, represented by the youth office.

While the matter seems to remain that the father's stance in this case is certainly unenlightened, and one may even deplore that his position is not immediately dismissed by the youth office, I'd prefer to remain skeptical of the alleged facts rather than join an uproar of indignation, when it all may actually boil down to an attempt at getting public pressure involved in a battle of custody.

At any rate, the (rather nonsensical, IMO) attempts to link the state authorities' alleged anti-transgender position in this case to Germany's Nazi past are a big warning sign that we are not dealing with unbiased reporting here.

I looked through both articles I linked to, and to the online petition, and didn't find any references to Naziism. I'm sure that some comments in the threads have made that allegation--this is the Internet, spawning ground of Godwin's Law, after all. But none of the media reports seem to be encouraging that sort of allegation (and I agree, it would be horribly out of line for them to do so).

My biggest issue is that the father and the state agency have both refused and resisted any effort to get the child evaluated by actual psychiatric experts in gender identity issues, and that the judge found this to be a reasonable position.

[Alice Macher]

I disagree with Reed's complete dismissal of the Talackova case. The point isn't whether one personally approves of beauty pageants. By her logic, we should dismiss as insignificant the fact that trans* people can now compete in the Olympics because after all, why is money being spent on the Olympics that could go to feed starving people in the Third World? Or we should pooh-pooh the fact that gays can now serve openly in the U.S. military (as they've been able to do in Canada, the U.K. and some other countries for many years), because war is horrible.

That's not the point.

The point is that whatever a person wants to do in life, as long as it's legal and of their own free will, should not be barred to them on the basis of their gender, sexual orientation, cis or trans* status, ethnicity, among other factors.

No one's pointing a gun at Talackova's head and making her enter beauty pageants. If that's something she wants to do, she shouldn't be barred on the grounds of the biological sex she was at birth.

[Artemisia]

I've always felt that, if we are going to be equal, it means that we are equal in both the good and the bad.

[Freemage]

I disagree with Reed's complete dismissal of the Talackova case. The point isn't whether one personally approves of beauty pageants. By her logic, we should dismiss as insignificant the fact that trans* people can now compete in the Olympics because after all, why is money being spent on the Olympics that could go to feed starving people in the Third World? Or we should pooh-pooh the fact that gays can now serve openly in the U.S. military (as they've been able to do in Canada, the U.K. and some other countries for many years), because war is horrible.

That's not the point.

The point is that whatever a person wants to do in life, as long as it's legal and of their own free will, should not be barred to them on the basis of their gender, sexual orientation, cis or trans* status, ethnicity, among other factors.

No one's pointing a gun at Talackova's head and making her enter beauty pageants. If that's something she wants to do, she shouldn't be barred on the grounds of the biological sex she was at birth.

She does acknowledge that point, towards the end of the article--she definitely agrees that Talackova has the right and shouldn't feel any pressure to not participate in the contest.

I think Reed's primary issue is that beauty pageants and other cis-normative exercises have the downside of making life harder for any trans* who doesn't have what she's referred to as 'passing privilege'--ie, of meeting a standard of feminine appearance established by cis culture. (For the flipside of that, consider the classic variations on "That's a woman?" that pass for humor even in current media.) I'll admit, I'm a bit... vulnerable to this argument--once upon a time, my cis-judgement of a particular trans individual was very much based on how well they passed, and for transwomen especially, how well they met conventional beauty standards. Given the mix of environmental and biological factors, that's granting status to a fairly narrow group of trans*, and it's an unfortunate thing.

That, and the fact that while there was a massive, global effort directed at the beauty pageant, several other, arguably more crucial battles that got ignored. I think what she'd like to see is a more concerted effort to use media attention on a case like this to draw it to other issues. Trans activists who, when interviewed, would talk about the case in Germany, or the public bathroom/changing room battle here in the U.S., for instance.

[svenman]

I looked through both articles I linked to, and to the online petition, and didn't find any references to Naziism.

It's in the last paragraph of the second article, even if phrased somewhat obliquely (emphasis added by me):

[...]especially in light of a nation known to have had a torrid history with respect to gender rights, discrimination and what has to date been publicly left unsaid, previous ethnic purity aspirations.

Actually, on closer sight that article is just a translation of the original one here on the site which later added the correction that I reported to this forum, and the corresponding part in the original German article had registered as a separate occurrence in my mind. So, I'll concede, basically one oblique reference to Naziism, not multiple ones.

(In particular, the "ethnic purity" bit seems completely unrelated to the case at hand and to serve no other purpose than to reinforce the "Nazi shame" card that was being played there.)

Yes, Germany's Nazi history is something that any German in his right mind feels ashamed of, and rightly so. However, this shame from time to time tends to get instrumentalised in order to push some particular agenda, like here, and I think it is justified to point out and resist such attempts. But that is getting way off topic now.

My biggest issue is that the father and the state agency have both refused and resisted any effort to get the child evaluated by actual psychiatric experts in gender identity issues, and that the judge found this to be a reasonable position.

The claims that this is the case all seem to go back to the original article which is now shown to be, at least in part, incorrect. Maybe we should reserve judgement here until more substantial reports can be obtained. Being in a position somewhat closer to potential sources than the most of you here, I'll try to keep a lookout on the German media for any further reports relevant to this case.

[Ameyal]

I'm gonna play my ignorant card(again) and ask, since I have seen the term used several times by now, and feel more comfortable getting information from you guys than from wikipedia, so...

What the tartarus does "cis" mean?

[svenman]

I'm gonna play my ignorant card(again) and ask, since I have seen the term used several times by now, and feel more comfortable getting information from you guys than from wikipedia, so...

What the tartarus does "cis" mean?

"cis" is a Latin prefix meaning "on this side of" and is the opposite of "trans" ("on the other side of" or "through"). In this context here, it is shorthand for a cisgendered or cissexual person, which is a person that is not transgendered/transsexual, i. e. most of us.

[Freemage]

I looked through both articles I linked to, and to the online petition, and didn't find any references to Naziism.

It's in the last paragraph of the second article, even if phrased somewhat obliquely (emphasis added by me):

[...]especially in light of a nation known to have had a torrid history with respect to gender rights, discrimination and what has to date been publicly left unsaid, previous ethnic purity aspirations.

Actually, on closer sight that article is just a translation of the original one here on the site which later added the correction that I reported to this forum, and the corresponding part in the original German article had registered as a separate occurrence in my mind. So, I'll concede, basically one oblique reference to Naziism, not multiple ones.

(In particular, the "ethnic purity" bit seems completely unrelated to the case at hand and to serve no other purpose than to reinforce the "Nazi shame" card that was being played there.)

Yes, Germany's Nazi history is something that any German in his right mind feels ashamed of, and rightly so. However, this shame from time to time tends to get instrumentalised in order to push some particular agenda, like here, and I think it is justified to point out and resist such attempts. But that is getting way off topic now.

My biggest issue is that the father and the state agency have both refused and resisted any effort to get the child evaluated by actual psychiatric experts in gender identity issues, and that the judge found this to be a reasonable position.

The claims that this is the case all seem to go back to the original article which is now shown to be, at least in part, incorrect. Maybe we should reserve judgement here until more substantial reports can be obtained. Being in a position somewhat closer to potential sources than the most of you here, I'll try to keep a lookout on the German media for any further reports relevant to this case.

Thanks. I really would appreciate learning for a fact that the world isn't quite as horribly fucked up as I think it is.

Edit to avoid double-post:

I'm gonna play my ignorant card(again) and ask, since I have seen the term used several times by now, and feel more comfortable getting information from you guys than from wikipedia, so...

What the tartarus does "cis" mean?

"cis" is a Latin prefix meaning "on this side of" and is the opposite of "trans" ("on the other side of" or "through"). In this context here, it is shorthand for a cisgendered or cissexual person, which is a person that is not transgendered/transsexual, i. e. most of us.

And to make it clear, the point of using "cis-" and "cissexual" is to undo the effects of 'othering'--which is what you get when one group (almost always the majority/plurality demographic) is the default, and anyone else has to be highlighted to be made reference to.