originally posted on LJ 4-12-09
So it seems that Amazon is ranking my book again. I checked it on Sunday night and it was de-ranked at the time. But it seems to be back up now...
For those who have no clue what I’m talking about, here’s the deal:
Thursday, August 25, 2011
more comedy jokes
Originally posted on LJ 4-4-09
so I recently got back from a crazy, hectic week on the road. I had three college presentations, plus the WAM! conference, all in one week. The WAM! conference was especially fun – I got to meet lots of people whose blogs I have read and/or folks I’ve corresponded with but whom I have never met face to face. It is neat to meet people that you know, but have never seen with your own eyes. It makes you realize how often we unconsciously make assumptions about people based upon their appearance in the "offline" world.
so I recently got back from a crazy, hectic week on the road. I had three college presentations, plus the WAM! conference, all in one week. The WAM! conference was especially fun – I got to meet lots of people whose blogs I have read and/or folks I’ve corresponded with but whom I have never met face to face. It is neat to meet people that you know, but have never seen with your own eyes. It makes you realize how often we unconsciously make assumptions about people based upon their appearance in the "offline" world.
Am I the only person offended by this?
Originally posted on LJ 2-12-09
ok, so the following is a rant that I posted on a trans-themed email list. It is in reference an exposé written by folks within the gender variant community about a proponent of autogynephilia theory who happens to be a trans woman. Now this person has said some messed up things about people I respect, and she is accused of a number of other things which I have heard second hand that, if true, are very disturbing. Having said that, I wrote the following post in response to certain aspects of that exposé that really really bothered me as a trans woman and activist. For anonymity reasons, I have omitted/deleted names of the person in question, as well as those who published the exposé. I ask those who wish to leave comments to respect this anonymity...
Am I the only person offended by this?
ok, so the following is a rant that I posted on a trans-themed email list. It is in reference an exposé written by folks within the gender variant community about a proponent of autogynephilia theory who happens to be a trans woman. Now this person has said some messed up things about people I respect, and she is accused of a number of other things which I have heard second hand that, if true, are very disturbing. Having said that, I wrote the following post in response to certain aspects of that exposé that really really bothered me as a trans woman and activist. For anonymity reasons, I have omitted/deleted names of the person in question, as well as those who published the exposé. I ask those who wish to leave comments to respect this anonymity...
Am I the only person offended by this?
If I were teaching a course on intersectionality...
originally posted on LJ 11-29-08
...I would assign this article for my students to deconstruct.
One gets the impression that the SF Weekly felt that transgender women, sex work and “illegal immigration” are not “sexy” enough subjects on their own to spark public outrage. So instead, they decided to sensationalize all three simultaneously. What "edgy" journalism...
I'd post some of the pics that accompany the piece, or quote some of the more racist, transmisogynistic and sexualizing passages therein, but it would just make me mad... -j.
...I would assign this article for my students to deconstruct.
One gets the impression that the SF Weekly felt that transgender women, sex work and “illegal immigration” are not “sexy” enough subjects on their own to spark public outrage. So instead, they decided to sensationalize all three simultaneously. What "edgy" journalism...
I'd post some of the pics that accompany the piece, or quote some of the more racist, transmisogynistic and sexualizing passages therein, but it would just make me mad... -j.
eliminating people's rights
Originally posted in LJ 11-5-08
As of today, I refuse to acknowledge 52% of Californian's rights! I will do so randomly, at my choosing. I have deemed myself the ultimate arbiter of rights! After all, as a California voter, I have a God given right to decide who is entitled to "rights" and who is not.
Thus, by the powers vested in me as a California voter, I declare that:
As of today, I refuse to acknowledge 52% of Californian's rights! I will do so randomly, at my choosing. I have deemed myself the ultimate arbiter of rights! After all, as a California voter, I have a God given right to decide who is entitled to "rights" and who is not.
Thus, by the powers vested in me as a California voter, I declare that:
Whipping Girl FAQ: "Submissive Streak"
Originally posted on LJ 8-22-08
In this, the third in a line of posts that address some of the more frequently asked questions I’ve received about Whipping Girl (WG), I want to talk about chapter 15: “Submissive Streak.” I’ve found that that’s been the most “polarizing” chapter in the book, in that lots of people have told me it was their favorite chapter, while others have told me that it was the one chapter in the book that they were bothered by or didn’t like.
In this, the third in a line of posts that address some of the more frequently asked questions I’ve received about Whipping Girl (WG), I want to talk about chapter 15: “Submissive Streak.” I’ve found that that’s been the most “polarizing” chapter in the book, in that lots of people have told me it was their favorite chapter, while others have told me that it was the one chapter in the book that they were bothered by or didn’t like.
Fuck me HBO
Originally posted on LJ 7-4-08
OK, so i'm wiped out from packing all day (as i'm about to move), so i pour myself a glass of wine and i'm flicking thru the channels and i stop on an hbo channel that has taxi cab confessions, which i've never seen before. and i'm sure that they've had many episodes about all sorts of different things. but of course the one time i tune in is a scene where a guy is with his trans girlfriend, and he's bragging about how he's straight and not gay, and she's going off about how she doesn't see herself as a woman because she can't bare babies, and the cab driver is asking her about sex change surgeries, and she's sharing with him all of her friends' worst case scenarios, and i just wanna fucking kick the tv in. but i won't, because it's my fucking tv, and i'd end up having to buy a new one.
OK, so i'm wiped out from packing all day (as i'm about to move), so i pour myself a glass of wine and i'm flicking thru the channels and i stop on an hbo channel that has taxi cab confessions, which i've never seen before. and i'm sure that they've had many episodes about all sorts of different things. but of course the one time i tune in is a scene where a guy is with his trans girlfriend, and he's bragging about how he's straight and not gay, and she's going off about how she doesn't see herself as a woman because she can't bare babies, and the cab driver is asking her about sex change surgeries, and she's sharing with him all of her friends' worst case scenarios, and i just wanna fucking kick the tv in. but i won't, because it's my fucking tv, and i'd end up having to buy a new one.
BAR piece on Zucker, Blanchard & DSM workgroup
originally posted on LJ 6-1-08
So I'm sure that most of the folks who check out my blog are aware of the recent appointments of Ken Zucker & Ray Blanchard (among others) to the DSM working group that will hash out new gender/sexuality related "mental disorders" for the DSM. I have written at great length about some of the major problems with Blanchard's views of trans women and others on the trans feminine spectrum. Needless to say, I was not happy with their appointments.
An article recently came out in the Bay Area Reporter on the issue (full disclaimer: I am quoted in it) which went into great detail about the obstacles these appointments pose for trans activists. It also discussed some of the more over-the-top reactions it generated within the trans community, which included fears that the APA would put homosexuality back into the DSM or that Ken Zucker would advocate reparative therapy for young trans children in it (the DSM doesn't include therapies, only diagnoses).
So I'm sure that most of the folks who check out my blog are aware of the recent appointments of Ken Zucker & Ray Blanchard (among others) to the DSM working group that will hash out new gender/sexuality related "mental disorders" for the DSM. I have written at great length about some of the major problems with Blanchard's views of trans women and others on the trans feminine spectrum. Needless to say, I was not happy with their appointments.
An article recently came out in the Bay Area Reporter on the issue (full disclaimer: I am quoted in it) which went into great detail about the obstacles these appointments pose for trans activists. It also discussed some of the more over-the-top reactions it generated within the trans community, which included fears that the APA would put homosexuality back into the DSM or that Ken Zucker would advocate reparative therapy for young trans children in it (the DSM doesn't include therapies, only diagnoses).
more Bailey/Dreger stuff...
Originally posted on LJ 3-7-08
Hi everyone,
For those interested, I wrote a column that was just posted on Feministing.com that discusses a few recent developments regarding Alice Dreger’s “scholarly history” of the Bailey affair.
Also, I am happy to say that my “peer commentary” on Dreger’s article was accepted for publication, giving me the surreal experience of being able to say that I have a paper coming out in a sexology journal. Anyway, you can download a PDF version of my commentary here:
http://www.juliaserano.com/av/Serano_Dre
Hi everyone,
For those interested, I wrote a column that was just posted on Feministing.com that discusses a few recent developments regarding Alice Dreger’s “scholarly history” of the Bailey affair.
Also, I am happy to say that my “peer commentary” on Dreger’s article was accepted for publication, giving me the surreal experience of being able to say that I have a paper coming out in a sexology journal. Anyway, you can download a PDF version of my commentary here:
http://www.juliaserano.com/av/Serano_Dre
Hate Mail
Originally posted on LJ 2-27-08
So I sometimes receive disturbing emails. Sometimes they're from someone who fiercely disagrees with something I've said in my book or that I've posted on the web somewhere, and they're really mad about it. Sometimes it's a creepy webstalker who's particularly interested in/obsessed with transsexual women. But I don't receive a lot of actual hate mail. But occasionally I do. And here's one I received yesterday:
So I sometimes receive disturbing emails. Sometimes they're from someone who fiercely disagrees with something I've said in my book or that I've posted on the web somewhere, and they're really mad about it. Sometimes it's a creepy webstalker who's particularly interested in/obsessed with transsexual women. But I don't receive a lot of actual hate mail. But occasionally I do. And here's one I received yesterday:
Whipping Girl FAQ: on the words, transsexual, transgender and queer
Originally posted on LJ 12-31-08
In this, the second in a line of posts that address some of the more frequently asked questions I’ve received about Whipping Girl (WG), I want to discuss the ways in which I use the words transsexual, transgender and queer throughout the book. I’ve received quite a number of emails from people who have had a transsexual experience and who appreciated many of the points I make throughout the book, but who were bothered that I used the word “transsexual,” and/or who were angered/disappointed that I positioned that identity/experience under the rubric of “transgender” or “queer.” Here, I hope to explain my reasoning and offer insight into where I’m coming from on this matter.
In this, the second in a line of posts that address some of the more frequently asked questions I’ve received about Whipping Girl (WG), I want to discuss the ways in which I use the words transsexual, transgender and queer throughout the book. I’ve received quite a number of emails from people who have had a transsexual experience and who appreciated many of the points I make throughout the book, but who were bothered that I used the word “transsexual,” and/or who were angered/disappointed that I positioned that identity/experience under the rubric of “transgender” or “queer.” Here, I hope to explain my reasoning and offer insight into where I’m coming from on this matter.
Whipping Girl FAQ: the necklace issue
originally posted on LJ 11-24-07
Whipping Girl FAQ: the necklace issue
So a couple of people have asked me about the cover of my book Whipping Girl (which is pasted at the bottom of this post) – specifically the fact that the woman in the photo is putting on a necklace. Their concern stems from the fact that in the book I critique how media depictions of trans women often show them putting on feminine clothing and accessories. I make the case that the media relies on our societal assumption that femininity itself is artificial and contrived in order to portray trans women’s femaleness as inherently “fake.”
So if the media depicts trans women in the act of putting on feminine accoutrement in order to emphasize our supposed fakeness, why would I do the same with my book cover?
Whipping Girl FAQ: the necklace issue
So a couple of people have asked me about the cover of my book Whipping Girl (which is pasted at the bottom of this post) – specifically the fact that the woman in the photo is putting on a necklace. Their concern stems from the fact that in the book I critique how media depictions of trans women often show them putting on feminine clothing and accessories. I make the case that the media relies on our societal assumption that femininity itself is artificial and contrived in order to portray trans women’s femaleness as inherently “fake.”
So if the media depicts trans women in the act of putting on feminine accoutrement in order to emphasize our supposed fakeness, why would I do the same with my book cover?
TG Day of Remembrance
Originally posted on LJ 11-20-2007
So today is Transgender Day of Remembrance. To commemorate it, I wrote a piece called There's Something About "Deception" which was posted on Feministing.com yesterday - it touches on the myth of deception and violence directed against trans people. That got me thinking about an old piece that appears in my first poetry chapbook called Either/Or. The piece was called "scared to death" - here it is...
So today is Transgender Day of Remembrance. To commemorate it, I wrote a piece called There's Something About "Deception" which was posted on Feministing.com yesterday - it touches on the myth of deception and violence directed against trans people. That got me thinking about an old piece that appears in my first poetry chapbook called Either/Or. The piece was called "scared to death" - here it is...
waiting for my Colbert bump!
Originally posted on LJ on 10-25-07
***note: shortly after I found this pleasant Wikipedia addition, someone removed it. Andy Warhol was so right about that whole fifteen-minute thingy...
So sometimes when I'm on Wikipedia, I search using my own name to see if anyone is referencing anything I've written. For the longest time, the only result was on the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival page where my essay Bending Over Backwards: an Introduction to the issue of Trans Woman-Inclusion is cited. But today, a second result came up: the Colbert Report page. After searching through it (it's a *humongous* webpage) I found myself mentioned under Criticisms of the show:
***note: shortly after I found this pleasant Wikipedia addition, someone removed it. Andy Warhol was so right about that whole fifteen-minute thingy...
So sometimes when I'm on Wikipedia, I search using my own name to see if anyone is referencing anything I've written. For the longest time, the only result was on the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival page where my essay Bending Over Backwards: an Introduction to the issue of Trans Woman-Inclusion is cited. But today, a second result came up: the Colbert Report page. After searching through it (it's a *humongous* webpage) I found myself mentioned under Criticisms of the show:
"the gays" are pissing me off
originally posted on LJ on 10-14-07
"The gays" are really pissing me off! And when I say "the gays," I'm not referring to people who engage in same-sex or otherwise queer relationships (a group which obviously includes myself). Rather, I am talking about the people who identify as gay or lesbian *only* and whose homocentric mindset leads them to think nothing of marginalizing and demonizing the countless gender-variant, bisexual, sex radical, economically disadvantaged and unapologetically feminine folks in their own community.
"The gays" are really pissing me off! And when I say "the gays," I'm not referring to people who engage in same-sex or otherwise queer relationships (a group which obviously includes myself). Rather, I am talking about the people who identify as gay or lesbian *only* and whose homocentric mindset leads them to think nothing of marginalizing and demonizing the countless gender-variant, bisexual, sex radical, economically disadvantaged and unapologetically feminine folks in their own community.
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
the c-word
originally posted on LJ on 8-3-07
Okay, so some people know about this and some people don't. Because I'm exhausted having to recall this story for people every time it comes up in conversation, I am going to post it here. It's about cancer. I plan to write about this more in detail at some point, but for now, hopefully this will suffice:
Okay, so some people know about this and some people don't. Because I'm exhausted having to recall this story for people every time it comes up in conversation, I am going to post it here. It's about cancer. I plan to write about this more in detail at some point, but for now, hopefully this will suffice:
Gendercator-centered dialogs
originally posted on LJ on 7-12-07
As most of you probably know, a film called The Gendercator was recently selected and then subsequently pulled from Frameline (an SF-based LGBT film festival). It was a supposed sci-fi short produced by a lesbian filmmaker that depicts physical transitions from one sex to the other (i.e., transsexual transitions) as being imposed on gender-variant people by a rigid patriarchal/heterosexist society, thus implying that transsexuals are the “dupes” of an oppressive gender system.
Anyway, because the film was pulled (due to outrage from the trans community over the fact that a film with such blatant anti-trans stereotypes was showing as part of the LGB-and-apparently-sometimes-T Pride festivities) there have since been accusations of “censorship” (despite the fact that a blatantly anti-gay/lesbian film never would have seen the light of day at Frameline). This has resulted in a growing movement of late to 1) show the film, and 2) follow it with a panel designed to discuss the issues raised by the film. In theory, this would (*hopefully*) lead to a respectful dialogue that would heal the community.
As most of you probably know, a film called The Gendercator was recently selected and then subsequently pulled from Frameline (an SF-based LGBT film festival). It was a supposed sci-fi short produced by a lesbian filmmaker that depicts physical transitions from one sex to the other (i.e., transsexual transitions) as being imposed on gender-variant people by a rigid patriarchal/heterosexist society, thus implying that transsexuals are the “dupes” of an oppressive gender system.
Anyway, because the film was pulled (due to outrage from the trans community over the fact that a film with such blatant anti-trans stereotypes was showing as part of the LGB-and-apparently-sometimes-T Pride festivities) there have since been accusations of “censorship” (despite the fact that a blatantly anti-gay/lesbian film never would have seen the light of day at Frameline). This has resulted in a growing movement of late to 1) show the film, and 2) follow it with a panel designed to discuss the issues raised by the film. In theory, this would (*hopefully*) lead to a respectful dialogue that would heal the community.
Having it Both Ways
originally posted on LJ on 6-22-07
I went to the 3rd annual TransForming Community event tonight – it is an event that is dedicated to exploring the friction at the intersection of contemporary trans and queer communities. I think my two favorite pieces of the evening were those by Prado Gomez and Storm Florez, both of whom (in different ways) addressed the issue of trans men needing to own the fact that they are men (rather than retreating into the excuse that they are not “really” men when it suits their interests). Prado’s piece discussed how some trans guys will wield masculine/male power and privilege at one moment, then the next argue they don’t actually have such power because they’re trans, or they weren’t socialized male, or that they aren’t capable of sexually violating someone else because they don’t have a penis. Perhaps I appreciated these pieces so much because they addressed a certain double standard that I see going on all the time in queer/trans/feminist communities, but which has not yet been clearly articulated.
I went to the 3rd annual TransForming Community event tonight – it is an event that is dedicated to exploring the friction at the intersection of contemporary trans and queer communities. I think my two favorite pieces of the evening were those by Prado Gomez and Storm Florez, both of whom (in different ways) addressed the issue of trans men needing to own the fact that they are men (rather than retreating into the excuse that they are not “really” men when it suits their interests). Prado’s piece discussed how some trans guys will wield masculine/male power and privilege at one moment, then the next argue they don’t actually have such power because they’re trans, or they weren’t socialized male, or that they aren’t capable of sexually violating someone else because they don’t have a penis. Perhaps I appreciated these pieces so much because they addressed a certain double standard that I see going on all the time in queer/trans/feminist communities, but which has not yet been clearly articulated.
surgery
another old blog post from 5-10-07:
Normally, when people tell friends and acquaintances that they are about to undergo surgery, they tend to get immediate responses like, "I'm sorry to hear that," or "I hope it's nothing too serious." But when you're trans, people are often not sure how to react. I mean, is it a good surgery? The surgery? A surgery that you want, or one that you merely have to have? Should I congrat you or pass along my sympathies...
Anyway, I had surgery on Monday. Not the surgery, but merely a surgery. Actually, this was the fourth surgery on my right cheek in the last 6 months.
Normally, when people tell friends and acquaintances that they are about to undergo surgery, they tend to get immediate responses like, "I'm sorry to hear that," or "I hope it's nothing too serious." But when you're trans, people are often not sure how to react. I mean, is it a good surgery? The surgery? A surgery that you want, or one that you merely have to have? Should I congrat you or pass along my sympathies...
Anyway, I had surgery on Monday. Not the surgery, but merely a surgery. Actually, this was the fourth surgery on my right cheek in the last 6 months.
blog-born-blog
in april 2007, when I began "blogging" this was my first post ever:
my blog identifies as a “Blog-Born-Blog”. This means that it is was born and socialized as a blog, unlike your blog. While your blog may identify as a blog, live as a blog, and may face the same anti-blog discrimination that my blog faces, my blog believes that your blog isn’t nearly as oppressed. After all, your blog may call itself a “blog”, but it never had a bloghood like mine had. You should know that this is a “blog-born-blog”-only webspace, which means that my blog doesn't want so-called pseudo-“blogs” like yours around. But rather than say this to your face, my blog will instead insist that this webpage was always meant to be a place for other “blog-born-blog”s to get together and reminisce about our bloghoods - a bloghood that your blog unfortunately was not unfortunate enough to have had. However, don’t you dare accuse my blog of being prejudice against your blog, because if you do, my blog will claim that “blog-born-blog” is a legitimate webpage-identity. That way, if your blog challenges the policy, my blog will accuse your blog of disrespecting its identity, and then it can retaliate by disrespecting your blog’s identity as a “blog”. Face it, it’s a lose-lose situation for your blog...
my blog identifies as a “Blog-Born-Blog”. This means that it is was born and socialized as a blog, unlike your blog. While your blog may identify as a blog, live as a blog, and may face the same anti-blog discrimination that my blog faces, my blog believes that your blog isn’t nearly as oppressed. After all, your blog may call itself a “blog”, but it never had a bloghood like mine had. You should know that this is a “blog-born-blog”-only webspace, which means that my blog doesn't want so-called pseudo-“blogs” like yours around. But rather than say this to your face, my blog will instead insist that this webpage was always meant to be a place for other “blog-born-blog”s to get together and reminisce about our bloghoods - a bloghood that your blog unfortunately was not unfortunate enough to have had. However, don’t you dare accuse my blog of being prejudice against your blog, because if you do, my blog will claim that “blog-born-blog” is a legitimate webpage-identity. That way, if your blog challenges the policy, my blog will accuse your blog of disrespecting its identity, and then it can retaliate by disrespecting your blog’s identity as a “blog”. Face it, it’s a lose-lose situation for your blog...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)