the evil witch on cnn (coulter)

@ http://larrykinglive.blogs.cnn.com/2009/05/01/friday-joy-behar-ann-coulter-former-miss-usa-takes-on-gay-marriage/

To attempt to negate another person’s relationship is not free speech. To take away rights - to take away the possibility of certain rights from a specific group of people - is not the American way! At least not the way it was intended to be. Throughout the history of this country certain groups are singled out and discriminated against under the guise of free speech and protecting the “morals” of the American people.

To the haters: The marriage of two other people of the same sex should not interfere with your marriage or values! If you think it will, then you need to reexamine your own relationship instead of striving to limit the rights of other people.

In this country there is supposed to be a separation of church and state. (I say “supposed to be” because in the past 8 years or so, we’ve seen these protections crumble under the Bush administration.) You can say that God intended marriage to be for a man and woman, but for those of us who don’t believe in your hateful interpretation, why should we have to live under your rule? Really when it comes down to the laws about same-sex marriage in this country, one specific religion should not be the deciding factor!

--------------------------------

Normally when Coulter is on I just change the channel. This time I didn't. She makes me was to scream, but I wouldn't give her the satisfaction.

Gender Roles and Assumptions

People see me and assume quite a few things. They see someone that appears to be female dating someone that appears to be male. They assume heterosexuality on both parts. They assume gender and sex based on appearances. But appearances don't give the entire story. I've spoken on my identity before, so I won't dwell on it too much right now. And because of what is assumed, I get certain privileges. For example, when I am at work occasionally other (male) employees will help me get product off the top shelves. To step in and say no thanks would be taken with an odd glance, at the very least. People hold open doors for me. They call me miss and mam, and respond well when I use like terms. When I use that saccharine voice I picked up doing retail sales in the South, they respond unbelievably well. When I act like me, remaining polite and casual, I tend to get overlooked.

White heterosexual female privilege. (Plus a ton of other things that I could mention. ex. American citizenship) The female part is contingent on the situation, heterosexual too. (For example, a straight couple in a queer hangout gets a ton of odd looks. Don't deny it, it happens, not all the time, but it does happen.) This all brings me back to the aforementioned issue of identity in bisexual people. People who may appear to fall in one category are treated a certain way, while they may in fact identify as something entirely different. The bisexual person dating someone of the opposite gender is assumed to be heterosexual, and for the same gender, homosexual.

Why don't we ask questions before making assumptions? In the time that I've consciously tried to stop making assumptions I've found dealing with people to be much easier. Another side effect was that I stopped caring. I don't care about your sexual orientation or your gender identity unless you want me to care. And even then I'll care out of friendship, not out of curiosity or a need to define you.

That being said, I think it is necessary to acknowledge the privileges we experience, even if we don't often notice the benefits from them. It makes me think of the "privilege walk" activity. Everyone lines up evenly. A list of attributes are read, for example "Take a step forward if you graduated from college" or "Take a step backward if you identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual". It was always interesting to see where the other people end up, and what I stepped forward or backwards for. I think everyone should do that activity at least once in their lives. That's what I should do: travel the country doing diversity retreats and education... =) Now if only I could find a degree that leads directly to that instead of all these winding roads and twisted paths I'm currently looking at.

Identity (Draft 3.14159...)

I've been thinking about the same topic for weeks now. I keep finding new things to add, so I figure that posting this now before it gets too long is a good idea. I've decided to split this up into a few topics. Self identity, group identity, stereotypes/categories, and identity politics (to be continued in a later post).

What is identity? Who has the right to define it? Can someone be in denial of their own identity? What about rejection of identity and group identity? What about multiple and intersecting group identities?

For the purposes of this post I'm going to define identity as two separate but related issues. First, there is the identity that refers to a sense of self (self-identity). Your own mental self-image, the mental mirror of sorts. Second there is the identity based on group associations, the shared attributes that link people (group-identity). Basically, the categories we use as tools to define ourselves and others. We may not like these categories, but they do exist as useful tools.

Self-Identification and Group Identification

Two topics of self identification come to mind when I think of this. Some people say that gender is hard wired, that it can't be changed. Others say that one's concept of their own gender identity can change over time, that it can be fluid. If we are to believe that people can grow and change as individuals then why are we so rigidly stuck in this system? That being said, is changing one's gender identity a choice? I think the answer isn't so clear. I think that some aspects of gender can be hard-wired, such as behaviors learned in early childhood, but I also think that people can change if there is enough desire to. I used to think that life was a process of self-discovery, finding the person you already are and learning more about that person. Now, I think that we are in a process of creating ourselves, nothing is truly predetermined. So on the issue of gender, perhaps it really is just a combination of hard wiring and social conditioning. (Although I really don't want to go into this whole nature vs. nurture debate. I lean toward the "it's a combination of many different influences" side of things.)

The second example that pops up is the issue of belief systems. Particularly in the realm of changing religions. Like gender, this is often a crucial aspect to self-definition. As someone who has never clearly identified with a religion this is a difficult topic for me. Which is why I'm relating it more to belief systems, not just organized religion. There have been a number of times in my life where I've changed how I think about things, my moral system, and what I actually believe in. These have been gradual transitions, changing with me as I grew as a person. With most aspects of my life I haven't had those sudden moments realization. (The one major exception was when one day I decided to stop eating meat. Which lasted on/off for about 6 years or so.)

These two issues bring up some of the same questions. Does the original identification still manage to play a role later on? In my psychology of women class that I was in about a year ago, we discussed something similar to this topic. A rebellious teenager doesn't want to be like their parents so they do everything possible to be different. Even though they are different, this new self is based of what the parents were in some way. Just like a person who changes their belief system may still can use the previous lens/perspective. (The opposite of this is the desire to belong, coming from admiration of the parents and a desire to be like them.)

How is identity formed? Well, we've touched on this topic a number of times already. I feel that self-identity (in most mentally healthy people) is something that grows and changes with them. As society changes, people can change too. In our world of increasing globalization, these identities are beginning to mix. Especially with the issue of group identities.

As previously stated, group identities are changing. Things are mixing and many people identify with many groups. Someone who belongs to two different groups may be pulled one way or the other. This makes me think of light-skinned African-American models who for a long time have been picked because the lightness of their skin. Does the desire to belong to certain groups effect the self-identification of people who are in the middle? What about people that define their sexual orientation as bisexual? It seems like a similar situation. The pressure to clearly fit into one group or another has the potential to change or erode one's self image.

Can we be in denial of our own identities. Maybe, but I think that it may just be part of the path to realizing who we want to be. Sometimes we may not choose to outwardly acknowledge that which we may already know, but other times we may just not want to admit it. This is a process that can be painful for others to watch, but it is a necessary process. (And the recent inspiration for this post since I have a few friends going through their friends identity issues right now. It always complicates relationships.) I think it is generally unfair to say that someone is in denial about their own identity. Who are we to say what that other person is? I guess I'm just a huge fan of self-definition here. I think we should have the right to say which groups we feel we belong to, or state who we are as individuals, abstract an undefinable by categories and groups association.


Group Identities As Defined By Others

Then there are the groups we don't know we belong to. The one's that other people create and assume we belong to because we fit the basic criteria. For the past week I've been searching for a way to flesh of this topic.
A few days ago I came across "lifestyle groups" at my new job. Many stores have some sort of customer profiling, but the extent of this sickens me. First, an age based category is defined. Then within that category, say 20-35, it is divided by sex. Let me repeat that: Immediately these groups, supposedly used to define customers personalities, wants, and needs, are broken down based on the assumed gender identity of the customer. For this age range and gender, let's say "male 20-35" different types of customer personalities are created. The fun loving guy, the social guy, the responsible guy. Ways to sell to them are suggested. It is also interesting to note that this company specifies subcategories for the young men, but not for the young women. They only get one category: self-absorbed. Of course, the creators of these groups are quick to say that every customer is different and that as sales people we should understand that not all people fit into these categories. Does that make it right to have that little disclaimer after the stereotype system is taught? No. In fact, as an employee I'm supposed to know this system backwards and forwards. All of this from a supposedly inclusive and diverse company. (And for my little disclaimer: other than this issue, my feet hurting, and them scheduling me for seven hours when you get a lunch break only after working seven and a half hours... I do like the job. I'm also thrilled to be working for a company that includes gender identity in its nondiscrimination policy. =)

So when does this go too far? How can we tell if the preconceived notions, these stereotypes are affecting our thoughts and actions? I think that there is no sure way to tell. There is no way to determine if a person feels judged based on our actions, especially on such a large scale.

Personally, I'm tired of the groups, the stereotypes, the categories. If we didn't have these specific either/or things weighing over our heads, we would be a freer and more accepting society. Especially of the people who fit into the gray areas between categories. There is pressure to know who and what you are, and to know it right now. (No gray area for you!) To openly question your identity or choose to not define yourself can bring attacks from all directions, including friends and family. Why can't we let ourselves exist in that gray area as long as it is needed?

In my frustration I can understand the purpose behind groups/stereotypes and their place in human communication. It makes things easier to say I have this in common with you or I don't. It is all just true and false answers, black and white, a series of 1s and 0s. My first honors class in college was called Understanding Prejudice and Discrimination, Not Just Black and White. It made me realize all the different stereotypes out there and how prejudice comes into existence. Now though, the name takes on new meaning for me. Life is not black and white and we need to stop treating it like it is. Even the categories used to define the gray areas a exclusive, not inclusive. Bisexuality, for example, does not include transgender people, only men and women. This is why I prefer the term pansexual, it is significantly more inclusive. Life is thousands of different hues and shades. Not every color has a name, some are defined by composition alone.

A Political Post. Run. Screaming.

This is a rambling bit of a political post centering on the Republican side of things. (Don't laugh yet folks, if you want something to *rofl* at go look up screenshots of Fox accidentally labeling Palin "pro-choice".) Anyway, this is stuff that I've jotted down over the past few days, sloppily thrown together by a need to express some bit of the politically driven thoughts going through my mind right now.

I'm watching Patrick Sammon (President of the Log Cabin Republicans) on c-span at the moment, not live, just a replay. I even turned off Athens Boys Choir to watch this guy. I'm pretty impressed with him (even though the Log Cabin Republicans are so strongly supporting the McCain/Palin ticket). With so many of the callers trash-talking him, he's doing a pretty good job of keeping calm and getting his points across. And Sammon has some good points, particularly that "gay rights are an important part of the equation". LGBT voters will play a part in this election. Not as a deciding force, but still as an important voice. With no doubt, the Democrats are doing a much better job of wooing LGB voters. (Yes, the T is left of intentionally. *cough cough* ENDA *cough cough*.) The Republicans are in a pretty bad position here, and perhaps too tied up in social issues in this election. But who am I to say what the Republican Party should or shouldn't do? (How about taking the most radical stances possible so the swing voters will run back to the Obama/Biden ticket? Palin could help with that! Okay, okay, I'll stop being sarcastic and bitter now.)

But this makes me wonder, having never been a Republican, and quite unlikely to become one: What are the main values of the Republican party? Almost every single Republican I've met has different opinions on this. Some think that being a Republican is all about a lack of government involvement, a focus on states rights. Some think that it is about conservative social issues. Others seem to fit somewhere in between. So what is the Republican Party now? What do they stand for. It seems like there are two (or more) groups claiming to represent the traditionally held views of the Republican Party. While no one person can say they represent the views of a group, and members of most groups don't agree on all points; what are some of the basic beliefs/ideas of the Republican Party?(Oh no, here comes a bad culture reference...) Will the real Republicans please stand up?

______________________________________

Now on to what I was originally going to post about. My first word then I heard McCain picked Palin was "shit". People say that the die hard Hillary Clinton supporters won't go for Palin. I think they're right to a certain extent. The supporters that liked her because of her views, experience and other attributes are going to reject the idea of voting for McCain. On the other hand, the Clinton supporters that picked her based primarily on gender will probably shift back to the McCain/Palin ticket. But we know that, and that's perhaps the main reason why Palin was picked in the first place, since she wasn't in first place among the potential vp's beforehand. Palin is bad news for women, I've heard that said over and over and wholeheartedly agree. I think this is very bad news for the Obama/Biden ticket, but considering recent events some of the damage might be mitigated. I fear that if the Republican ticket succeeds I will lose rights, not just as a queer person, but as a female-bodied person.
So for a second or two, let's pretend that Palin is actually qualified (despite her lack of experience) and lets also pretend that she isn't more conservative than McCain (despite her nomination drawing greater support from conservatives who had previously criticized McCain). Why are people supporting her? What's the big deal? Is it that she's a Republican? Is it that she's from Alaska? Is it her views on gun control? Is it the fact that she's a woman? I honestly don't know, and it is probably a mixture of things, but I do feel that her gender is already playing too big of a role in this election. I do like that feministing.com is treating her with respect while still showing how ridiculous some of her stances are. The sexism is going on already. (The vpilf group on facebook makes me want to bash my head into a wall.) When Clinton lost the Democratic nomination I thought that would end the racism vs. sexism debate going on in my mind. I had wondered if people were more fearful of appearing sexist or racist. But with Palin, now it has hit the national stage. Although nothing is ever so clear - since there are many factors playing into the decisions of voters - I am curious to see how this election turns out. Also, I'm just as curious about the election coverage.

Speaking of election coverage, we've gotten a real zinger from the McCain/Palin side of things haven't we? I'll only speak briefly on this, since I feel sorry for her daughter, only 17 years old and stuck in this position. We'll probably never know if she wants to marry the guy, but as far as we know its a shotgun wedding. She's not even old enough to vote, although I'm only assuming this since finding her birthday online is next to impossible. Good job Republican damage control, (seriously). Still, this whole makes a real statement about the ineffectiveness abstinence only sex education supported so adamantly by Gov. Palin.

I don't understand why we can't support sex education that says "Hey, we encourage abstinence, but just in case you decide to have sex, here's what to do! And if you have unprotected sex, get raped, or some other thing that abstinance only education doesn't fully address, here's what to do!" Personally, I think that'd be a decent compromise since I don't see the burden of chastity being taken off young women anytime soon. But this is a rant for another day and another post.

Now time for some democrat/florida love ...
1.) Biden, "Hurricanes don't have Florida written on them." (in support of national level funding for hurricane damage)
and
2.) The Best Hurricane Map Ever.

Non-Binary Phobias

Not exactly a new trend, I know, but still an important one. As people we want to categorize and fit everything and everyone into these nice neat little boxes. Life isn't that simple. I find myself referencing a group conversation yet again. In some ways, as nonbinaries, we're screwed, stuck between a rock and hard place. (Why do I say "we're" when I could just refer to me? Because I'm not the only one, in some aspect of your life I suspect there is at least one area where you don't fit into that either/or/but never both dynamic.) I would like to note three examples of nonbinary prejudice: race, sexual orientation, and gender. (Of course there are thousands of other categories, but these are useful in making my point.)

Biracial people face this stigma from a variety of sources. And an unwillingness of people to talk about race doesn't help the situation much either. Some people might ask: as someone who was born white, what concern should I have over this? Personally I feel that if we don't acknowledge this within other - often intersecting - communities then we are just hurting ourselves. Even on forms we still have specific categories, often with the option to only check one box. We assume that a person cannot have multiple identities coexisting. As a society we should be past this point, but we aren't. Which brings me back to the non-binary point.

In terms of sexual orientation many people still assume negative things about bisexual (and pansexual) people. Today I was reading "Identity and Community: The Social Construction of Bisexuality in Women" (Wosick-Correa). It was very relevant to my recent thoughts on the issues nonbinary people face. The study echoed many things I have felt in my life, such as the desire to just fit in with a group, but to do this I would have to sacrifice my nonbinary sexual orientation. It disturbs me how many negative stereotypes about bi/pansexual people exist today, particularly among the LGBT community.

Additionally the Wosick-Correa article mentioned a desire among some bisexual identifying women to not be associated with polyamory or any other sort of non-monogamous behavior. There is a fear that this will perpetuate the negative stereotypes about bisexual people such as promiscuity. Although I can understand the desire to have the appearance of "normality" or whatever that may be, I believe that cutting segments out of an already discriminated against group can only serve to hurt that group. Especially in terms of fighting for equality and acceptance in the long run.

This all brings me to my point about discrimination about nonbinary genders from the Trans community. I'm shocked by the eagerness of people to write off certain groups, particularly the desire (something voiced to me recently) to not have genderqueer people in leadership positions because it projects a negative stereotype. My point is that we need to have genderqueer and other nonbinary individuals equally represented within the trans movement. If we don't it will serve to damage the community as a whole by creating a rift.

Honestly, I hate labels. They are necessary, but only to a certain extent. As a society, we need to be more willing to accept people who don't fit in the box. Small steps to a more inclusive and free society.

How about this for a first post

Gender Theory and Random Thoughts:

So I've been thinking (that's never a good sign right?) ... mostly thoughts spawned by the gender breakers meeting last week. Being that I can't turn on the TV or radio without hearing something that restarts my train of thought again (particularly related to MLK Jr. or the election), I thought I might as well post some sort of rambling opinion statement on some of the subjects I've been pondering lately. Also, being that it is at 2:30am and I'm at work, forgive my rampant spelling/grammatical/logic errors.

I cannot help but think of gender as a continuum now. I find it difficult to exist any other way because if I do not acknowledge the essential fluidity of gender, then in a way I negate my own existence. When I came out as transsexual in high school I felt that I was simply not female. I fell into that binary system of thinking, assuming that I had to either be masculine or feminine, male or female. There was a lot of self-hate involved in that. The mismatch between my body and mind caused me to dislike the parts of myself (usually the femininity of my personality and of my body). It took a long time for me to get past that, to feel that I could be okay in my own skin. [Let me, at this point clarify something, if I could choose, male or female body, I would, without second thought pick male. It is the body that I feel is right for me.] I had to learn to love myself again and realize that there are some parts of my personality that can be considered masculine and others that are feminine. I believe it is like that with everyone (gender being fluid, no one person really is masculine or feminine. These are just random categories that we place traits into.) This is why I stepped away from identifying as transsexual, it no longer applied to my definition of self (I needed to reexamine myself to continue to grow as a person). I found more freedom in the word "transgender" and I needed that freedom. (Here I am, speaking in past tense while truthfully: I still need this freedom.) Ah, my love affair with the word transgender. There are a thousand different definitions circulating out there. The one I most commonly use: defying gender, crossing gender lines, barriers and stereotypes. I see transgender as the umbrella term, on that people who identify as genderqueer, transsexual, cross dressers ... etc. can find common ground under.

This is unusual for me. Can you all tell? At some point along this path I just stopped caring. I needed to do that for a while, tune out of the theory, distance myself from it to focus on me. One of my favorite quotes is, "I am who I am." That has stuck with me since I first heard it in high school. Nothing is unusual about distancing myself from a topic, really the unusual part is my direct discussion about it at the moment.

So less about me, more about theory for a bit, although now I've returned to the point where I can no longer distance myself from it. The personal is the political ... and I can't help but be a little bit emotionally involved. Gender is changing, it has changed, and will continue to change. It is part of the many evolutions or revolutions that I seem to occur in society. Gender is not the only area ... sex, religion, race, class, even age and other areas tend to have heightened periods of social awareness, change and growth. [On a side note, I can clearly remember when I finally grasped this concept, I was at whataburger, late at night. I must've sounded delusional, or drugged. I'm certain I was neither.] In these r/evolutionary stages drastic changes to society are more likely to occur. People aren't always ready for it, in fact rarely are most people ready for such wide scale change. Think about the first and second "waves" of feminism, about the civil rights movement, and gay rights. (More on the "wave theory" later).

So where are we now? Gender, I guess. We randomly add certain attributes to the categories of male and female. We assume gender by manner of dress. Let's not play around here, people who defy gender norms are still given lots of shit. Society has not progressed as much as most people like to think it has. Gender and sex are still seen as the same. The binary is the only system. Think about the blank stares that happen when people talk about non-binary systems of gender. (To reference a previous conversation as an example.) Which brings me back to the word transgender and my thoughts on nonbinary people within the trans movement. This part only a few people may understand the conversation/specific figure I'm referencing, but I think that the point is universal: No one person can represent a movement. We can try and say that one person did represent the ideas, beliefs, and actions of a number of groups involved in a movement (such as in the case of the media portrayal of MLK Jr.) but in doing so we are not giving appropriate credit to other people involved in that specific movement. To say that because one person, as a leader, does not conform to all of the ideas of the group they are trying to serve, is to damage the movement as a whole. We are what we are, nothing more, nothing less, and that holds true in this situation. Would you want someone who was forced to lie about themselves for a leadership role to be the one who leads your movement? I'd certainly hope not. So some (not all) transpeople want to tone down the movement a bit. Clear out the genderqueers, the genderfucked, etc. and make it seem a little bit more normal. Newsflash folks: "normal" doesn't exist! (Okay now I need to tone it down a bit, I think I've crossed the line into full blown rant.) The trans movement needs to be inclusive, to not be inclusive would slow progress and create a rift within the movement. (If you don't get what I'm referencing go pick up a US history book. K, thx!)

Something I've been thinking about since speaking to Jessica Valenti: the "wave" theory in feminism. I think it is great to acknowledge the past of feminism, but certain things are looked over and the wave theory helps to create an age divide among feminists today. The racism and homophobia that existed (and still do exist) in feminism are often overlooked. Let's assume there is a certain validity to the wave theory by considering my previous statements on revolution. What is the next step? The next wave? I wonder if the next major step may not be solely centered around reproductive/family planning and other rights that have traditionally been associated with women's rights ... but maybe there will be a greater focus on gender theory. Maybe that's a wave or two away. How fast will society progress? A thought on time: It took nearly 300 years to get interracial marriage legalized in the US, how long will it take for same-sex marriage?

Being that it is nearing 4am, I might as well finish this up and go to bed. I'd love to hear what other people think about this, if only because I love discussing gender theory. So what more can I say? Surely there's tons to add to this dialog, but at this point my mind is too gone to say anything else remotely intelligent. One brief clarification though, because if anyone reads this whole thing the question is bound to come up: I identified as a female-to-male transsexual. I came out in high school. In college I went back into the closet. Good or bad, it just happened. So here I am, about to graduate college, still partially not out, but this isn't necessarily something that I feel the need to shout from the rooftops. It is mentioned here because I feel that I cannot hold an honest conversation about gender without being honest about my own identity. Well, you might ask, what is that gender identity? I prefer the term transgender. Genderqueer is cool too, but I'm not overly fond of the word "queer" I've had it used against me negatively too many times to really feel comfortable with it. Given the option, (say the perfect surgery or something along those lines) I would change my sex (but my gender identity is still not entirely male or female). That really isn't a possibility in this world, so I'm just going to be me, Jess.