Sunday Linkfest!

[jhameia]

.... It's officially Monday for me right now but better late than never!

Note to James Cameron: Native Women are Not Trophies

James Cameron's Avatar is a Stylish Film marred by its Racist Subtext - there's a reference to Conrad's Heart of Darkness in this critique, which is quite apt.

A Broken System Part I: Unconstitutional - on the US public school system

a difference of what matters

Walt Disney Co.'s Princess and the Frog Stirs Controversy Among Evangelicals. (Because no matter how much P&F speaks to traditional conservative values...)

Colonial Mentality:

Colonial mentality is a cultural notion of inferiority sometimes seen amongst populations previously subjugated and colonised by foreign entities.
When a colonial power is strong, and cannot be effectively resisted, often a population may have to simply accept the rule of the foreigners as an inescapable reality. As time progresses, these colonised natives will sometimes procede to mimic the foreigners in power as they begin to perceive the "foreign way" of doing things and acting as different, and since the foreigner is also in power, the foreign way comes to be seen as the "better way". The foreign way is then held in a higher esteem than previous native ways.

They may mimic the behaviours, business & government practices, but also the language, dress, food, and other customs of the foreigner.

On being Polite and Being Right

More Musings on Marriage

Why do Gropers Grope

Good Touch, Bad Touch

X-Ray Scanners, Security Theatre and Marginalized Bodies

Yes, I can Make An Informed Choice

Teaching Feminism and Body Image: What is Dove Really Selling?

So how does an awesome girl like me come to have an Eating Disorder?

In the Name of Awareness

A Wish List for the Pro-choice Movement for the Next 10 Years

Either Stand Up for Yourself, or Keep Silent

Where Does Hate Come From?

Cripchick's Five Favourite Tools to Dialogue about Justice

I Am Not You:

Telling me that I need to look at the word usage differently, as a given culture or society’s accepted usage or slang, does not erase these experiences. They do not magically disappear. They will always be a part of the person and yes, such usage can trigger them and cause harm. It also does not magically show me your perspective or why I should understand it or change my perspective to match it.

Legacies of Trans-Exclusive Feminism (aka Why Are You Angry)

Quick Hit: Parenting and Able-ist Language

I won't even come CLOSE to everything that's wrong with this picture (about Wonder Woman bondage origin claims, and Blackest Night)

Realms of Fantasy: Call for Submissions: Women in Fantasy Issue

Comments

[katherineokelly.livejournal.com]

I'm of a divided mind on the whole trans-exclusive feminism thing. It sounds like Daly is a raging transphobe, but that aside, are no ciswomen allowed a penis-free space?

I prefer the ideal that all people (majority and minority) should be allowed in all spaces, and I remember being affronted in college when I worked at a newspaper and a white reporter was denied entrance to a meeting about black rights he wanted to cover. The reporter in question was a Afrocentric liberal who would have put a positive spin on the article, and publishing an article on the event could have drawn attention and support for the AA group, I thought. Where did the AA group get off excluding people based on color if that's exactly the sort of discrimination they're fighting against, I wondered.

Since then, I've become more aware of how often non-minority groups try to speak for a minority group, and how incredibly ignorant and off-base they usually are. Time goes by and I'm more and more convinced of the importance of safe, private spaces for minorities where everyone present is in your in-group and you're free to say what you want.

But where is that space for a ciswoman survivor of sexual assault who may be triggered or uncomfortable by the presence of a non-op transwoman? Trans people are allowed safe places where cisgendered people are strictly prohibited, but the reverse isn't allowed. Excluding trans people simply for discrimination's sake is unaccepabtable, but if it's for the sake of the mental well-being of victims of abuse, then I think it's fair to make space for ciswomen who may be triggered or feel unsafe.

The article makes a good point saying:
The mere presence of a pre-operative trans woman, therefore, is being legally enshrined as threatening, emotionally violent in some circumstances...

It perpetuates negative stereotypes to assume that non-op transwomen might be threatening or violent like cismen, but as many feminist articles point out: I don't know you and your noble intentions. You've posted plenty of links supporting a woman's right to protect herself, supposing that any of the men she meets could be potential rapists. As such, it's not hard to imagine that a ciswoman may feel unsafe in the presence of a person who may look, sound, and perhaps act like a man.

...whilst the very real violent erasure of trans women by cissexual women is elided under the sign of “women’s safety.”

This is unacceptable, as well.

People shouldn't be turned away and denied resources just because they're trans. At the same time, I don't want to strip choice of a ciswoman-only environment away from victims of sexual assault who may be triggered or uncomfortable sharing a living space with non-op transwomen. My proposed solution is to make the vast majority of women's shelters and support services trans-inclusive, but still allow for a tiny minority of ciswomen-only shelters for those rare cases where women would be triggered or avoid seeking help due to the presence of someone they perceive as male.

I suppose the logic is a matter of more protection to the smaller minority. Transwomen may exclude ciswomen from their support structures, but ciswomen may not exclude transwomen from their support programs. I don't really like that imbalance. Minorities should be allowed their own space, even if it excludes other minorities. For instance, PoC can be seen as a collective minority, but individually, they're allowed to split into Asian-only or AA-only groups. Women can be seen as a collective minority, but individually, they may have different needs as ciswomen or transwomen. Why can only one group exclude the other, but not the other way around? Should there truly be no space where a woman can expect to find herself in a completely penis-free group?

I'm open to discussion and other points of view.

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

There are blogs which cover what you're asking about quite well - Questioning Transphobia (questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com/) is one. They have an article up called "Beyond Inclusion (http://questioningtransphobia.wordpress.com/beyond-inclusion/)" which I think would address your concerns.

As to the question of minorities creating spaces for themselves where non-minorities aren't allowed, this isn't a space for segregation as it is about spaces for sanctuary. While it's important to maintain dialogue with white people, it's also important to maintain spaces where PoC can figure their own way out on what equality would look like to them, asserting their identities in a way no white person can help them with. It's not even a matter of how Afrocentric a white liberal is - there are times when some people are not comfortable with members of the majority present, and that can affect /stilt conversation significantly.

(There will be an Asian Women Carnival under the theme of "Who I Am When I'm (Not) With You", which I think will cover your thoughts on small groups excluding larger groups quite nicely. I'll post when it goes up.)

[katherineokelly.livejournal.com]

your thoughts on small groups excluding larger groups...

I understand the sanctuary concept now; it just befuddled me in college. I understand the need for small groups to exclude larger groups, but I also think assigned women and transwomen have different sets of issues and needs, some of which transwomen may wish to discuss with other transwomen (social ostracism, treatment options, growing up in a trans body), some of which ciswomen may wish to discuss with other ciswomen (infertility, menstruation, growing up in a female body.)

Like the example I gave, the larger umbrella of PoC can be broken down to Asian or African American sub-groups that may exclude each other in their private meetings. Can't feminism incorporate ALL women, while still allowing a private space for different subgroups with different needs? These times would be extremely few--(I mean excluding transwomen from all-women conventions and music festivals?? Please!)--but if it's genuinely relevant to have these separate spaces for specific needs, it seems appropriate.

From the article:
More to the point, do cis women (let alone trans male spectrum people) legitimately have that power, to decide whether or not trans women should be allowed into “their” spaces?

This question makes me wonder: If there was a meeting strictly for African Americans and a blond-haired blue-eyed white girl like me shows up identifying as a transracial black woman, would she be included or excluded?

Actually, I'm curious about your thoughts on the concept of transracial identity in the first place.

[fantasyecho.livejournal.com]

I'm not transracial, so my thoughts on it would be extremely limited! I don't even understand transracial politics - appparently a person with a drop of black blood is called black, no matter if they identify with other groups? And Tiger Woods has come under fire for refusing to identify solely as black? I couldn't tell you, to be honest. The only perspective I can give with any form of intellectual honesty is from the point of view of the Asian diaspora.

Resist Racism and Womanist Musings might have some thoughts on that question though!