Enough that it's a problem? I mean, this is what I'm hearing from Trans people, yeah. And seriously? Because a whole audience laughing at what you are is upsettting? Not everyone can just tough out a room full of people finding their identity to be funny punchline.
You're making a generalization about an entire group of people. Stop. Discrimination shouldn't be tolerated. Period. Drag is a lifestyle choice, not a set of beliefs.
Okay. How about, transphobia is a problem deeply rooted enough in drag culture that Trans people feel more comfortable not being exposed to it and really it's their party so it;'s up to them. That less discriminatory?
Because trans people are second-class citizens, trans people in many states can be fired without cause, trans people have a higher rate of homelessness, a higher rate of drug abuse, a higher rate of suicide, they are at greater risk of being murdered, etc. But yeah, they should just be able to laugh at themselves in a country that hates them.
If by all inclusive you mean not discriminating against people then yes. Just because you've been oppressed doesn't mean you should go around using the same thought process's that led to your oppression (some drag queens are bad therefore all drag queens are bad). The same goes for everything, otherwise your simply perpetuating a never ending circle. It may not be easy but eventually something has to give.
Turns out I woke up today and trans people magically now have the awesome power of oppression, whereas before the whole "exists on a lower rung of society" thing literally made it virtually impossible for trans people to actually oppress people. As I've said, being told that you can't perform at an event is not oppression. No one is oppressing you if they want to have an event that focuses on trans performers. It's the same shitty logic as demanding that a black rights movement MUST allow white voices.
Even ones who may do performances that are considered transmisogynistic? Or, as I cited earlier, a cis man like Ru Paul using bigoted terms like shemale?
RuPaul basically didn't say anything like that at all.
Both slurs are used as slurs to both drag queens and transgendered people alike, some people have appropriated them, some have not. whenever RuPaul and drag queens use those slurs they are talking about themselves.
Some transgendered people are angry about a word alone without a modicum of understanding about the context and history surrounding it.
Seems like a conflict between wanting to stand against discrimination and wanting to explore gender with a political perspective. I can understand that someone who is transgender and has to defend gender as something innately defining to them would be uncomfortable with the political stance that advocates and explores the erosion of and control over one's gender expression.
46 years ago, transgender people and drag queens were rioting together in NYC to be able to just "live".
Now we're reduced to this. Sometimes I really think perspectives have become skewed as fuck. And I mean that from all sides. The more I think about this, the more I'm becoming depressed by the LGBT+ community. We don't need "them" to tear us apart anymore - we're doing a relatively good job ourselves.
The headlines and thread title are somewhat inaccurate. They're not banning attendees from dressing in drag; they merely decided not to have (cis) drag performers.
Which I still can't bring myself to support, though I do sympathize with the impulse behind it.
You're making a generalization about an entire group of people. Stop. Discrimination shouldn't be tolerated. Period. Drag is a lifestyle choice, not a set of beliefs.
I'd go a step further and say that the current discourse around transgenderism is a direct extension of the work done by people like Butler who, in studying drag queens, made a fairly solid case for the fluid, non-binary nature of gender that transgender people directly benefit from.
That's incredibly dumb. Drag is a form of performance art. There's usually a heightened element to it, a bit of a wink that gives the audience permission to be amused. And when the camp factor is downplayed, the result can be truly elegant female illusion. How in the world could that demean your status as a woman? Drag is celebratory, if anything. At least from what I've seen.
I would be very surprised to hear of a drag performer showing up at a pride event with disrespectful intentions.
Every Pride I've gone to has featured cisgender drag queens making transmisogynist jokes and making fun of the trans people in the audience. Every single one.
Look I already understand that your stand-point. I'm saying it's not at all fair.
YES, some trans are offended by drag. No one is disputing that. What you are doing however, and I suppose is done by the people who complained to make this decision happen, is basically shitting on drag and saying that it is offensive.
I really equate this to being just like a pastor (who is not homophobic) saying that since he is also scheduled to marry heterosexual Christians that day, he can't marry the homosexual couple on the same day.
Notice how the people complaining about this, aren't the proposed people who would have been performing otherwise, but people who hear that there is a pride event out there that basically says it "understand that within LBGTQ... some dislike each other so we're going to separate their expressions because they don't yet fully accept each other."
And no, allowing trans drag to perform doesn't solve the issue. This event isn't inclusive at all in this sense.
The headlines and thread title are somewhat inaccurate. They're not banning attendees from dressing in drag; they merely decided not to have (cis) drag performers.
Which I still can't bring myself to support, though I do sympathize with the impulse behind it.
It's bullshit is what it is. The argument is shaky as all hell. Tell cis Drag Queens not use trans-bashing in their performances, those that do are banned. Anything else points to much deeper issues than trans-bashing.
Isn't being a dragperson sometimes an outlet for people that are transgender themselves..? I mean, throw offensive persons out? Thats a bit ridiculous. Thats like banning drag from west hollywood. They just mesh together. One isn't a threat to the other.
Pride is supposed to be a place where you can safely subvert gender-norms. Why are some people so hell bent on the dividing the community like this? WTF is the stance on bio-queens with this logic then? Are they gonna make them drop-trou and check their goddamn genitals?
I didn't think anything would be able to achieve this, but this is stupider than Shemail/Tranny-gate.
There's something interesting there, the challenge was supposed to be identifying women or drag queens, when the show used the term "shemale" it was meant to be about drag queens, not transgendered women. But both groups are mixed and those words are used as slurs against both groups, so a sizeable portion of transgendered people obviously felt offended. The thing is that most drag queens have appropriated those slurs and have all the right to do so, so they don't see it as offensive, because for them they are being playful, for them is black people calling other black people "nigga".
To be fair, some (and I emphasize "some") in the trans community have as well. I don't care if you call me "tranny" or "trap" or whateverI care about the intent behind your words, because that's what is important.
I think explaining why those words can be harmful is important, but I also think it helps you live a saner, more enjoyable life when you don't let words cut you so deep so easily.
Every Pride I've gone to has featured cisgender drag queens making transmisogynist jokes and making fun of the trans people in the audience. Every single one.
This is what happens when stories get twisted far from the reality of what happened and turned into something they're not.
In Glasgow, there's corporate Pride, and then there's alternative Pride that's free to attend, anti-corporate, and trans-centric. They came to a consensus decision to not pay drag queens to perform.
Due to the uninformed backlash, they've recently changed their stance and will be paying trans-identified drag performers to perform.
As a trans person, I've never been paid to stand on stage and hurl transmisogynistic slurs at Pride. Does that mean trans people are banned from Pride?
Pride is supposed to be a place where you can safely subvert gender-norms. Why are some people so hell bent on the dividing the community like this? WTF is the stance on bio-queens with this logic then? Are they gonna make them drop-trou and check their goddamn genitals?
I didn't think anything would be able to achieve this, but this is stupider than Shemail/Tranny-gate.
RuPaul basically didn't say anything like that at all.
Both slurs are used as slurs to both drag queens and transgendered people alike, some people have appropriated them, some have not. whenever RuPaul and drag queens use those slurs they are talking about themselves.
Some transgendered people are angry about a word alone without a modicum of understanding about the context and history surrounding it.
You're so busy telling us that RuPaul doesn't say anything relating to the slurs we mentioned that you can't even Google it to find out that you're wrong. When people said to RuPaul that tranny was offensive, he responded by basically claiming that they have a victimization complex.
Because trans people are second-class citizens, trans people in many states can be fired without cause, trans people have a higher rate of homelessness, a higher rate of drug abuse, a higher rate of suicide, they are at greater risk of being murdered, etc. But yeah, they should just be able to laugh at themselves in a country that hates them.
Please imagine a Pride event being held where gay men weren't being allowed to perform to raise awareness of lesbian issues (since really, it's not exactly the same). Are you perfectly okay with that? It wouldn't be Pride, is what I mean.
What you are painting a picture of is that trans is basically treated like a minority within LGBT group. Fair enough, but Pride is about advocating acceptance for anyone and everyone.
There are a lot of genderqueer drag performers, hell there are even some trans people who do drag, drag could be considered part of the trans umbrella, doesn't mean drag queen=cis male all the time.
Because trans people are second-class citizens, trans people in many states can be fired without cause, trans people have a higher rate of homelessness, a higher rate of drug abuse, a higher rate of suicide, they are at greater risk of being murdered, etc. But yeah, they should just be able to laugh at themselves in a country that hates them.
Turns out I woke up today and trans people magically now have the awesome power of oppression, whereas before the whole "exists on a lower rung of society" thing literally made it virtually impossible for trans people to actually oppress people. As I've said, being told that you can't perform at an event is not oppression. No one is oppressing you if they want to have an event that focuses on trans performers. It's the same shitty logic as demanding that a black rights movement MUST allow white voices.
Here you are, literally defending discrimination. You, along with Snitch, are bad people. There's the ability to have a good conversation on this topic, the idea of transmisogyny in the drag community, the broad painting of a community with the transmisogyny brush, and many others.
Instead you two both decided to argue that discrimination is okay in some circumstances, and you should not care about discrimination as long you're "punching up" (within your own marginalized community).
Well I guess if there's anything as bad as "the majority of Native American trans people have attempted suicide", it's "cis male drag queens aren't allowed to perform at an event that focuses on trans people."
It's amazing how this line of thought, that trans events should be open to any performers otherwise trans people are bigots, wouldn't fly if the situation was changed to say that black people should not be able to deny the right of white people to perform at a rally celebrating black culture.
Here you are, literally defending discrimination. You, along with Snitch, are bad people. There's the ability to have a good conversation on this topic, the idea of transmisogyny in the drag community, the broad painting of a community with the transmisogyny brush, and many others.
Instead you two both decided to argue that discrimination is okay in some circumstances, and you should not care about discrimination as long you're "punching up" (within your own marginalized community).
tl;dr "Cishet white men should never be told 'no'."
Sorry, but that's basically what you're saying. Marginalized groups should be able to organize and feel safe, and not have to be forced to allow entry to someone that makes the organization feel less safe. I would not expect you to understand why trans people not wanting to have cis performers is different from why cis people to want to have trans performers.
Past two pages, I'd say everyone who has disagreed with you knows what's in the OP because you keep reiterating what is in the OP via links to other sites that have quoted the exact same thing which is in the OP.
Mods should change the title. I copied and pasted it myself and I agree it doesn't say the whole message (reading the OP will), but just so that you can see that it really doesn't make much of a difference to any of our arguments.
Here you are, literally defending discrimination. You, along with Snitch, are bad people. There's the ability to have a good conversation on this topic, the idea of transmisogyny in the drag community, the broad painting of a community with the transmisogyny brush, and many others.
Instead you two both decided to argue that discrimination is okay in some circumstances, and you should not care about discrimination as long you're "punching up" (within your own marginalized community).
I've said it several times in this thread already, but every Pride I've been to featured cis drag queens punching down on trans people during their performances. But that discrimination is apparently okay and worth fighting for?
The schisms of thought in GLBTQ communities are really interesting to read up on. Just look up "truscum" vs. "tucute", and The pride "umbrella" is nowhere close to monolithic at this point.
I can totally understand how someone who has struggled with gender identity would be upset by a drag queen and might think it trivialises their experience.
A lot of gaffers are sympathetic to cultural appropriation and people even get shitty about Iggy Azalea "trying to sound black" so im not sure why this is being rejected out of hand.
This is not a good line of argument. This is the same strategy white people use to argue that the NAACP is racist.
An oppressed group certainly has the right to create enclaves and safe spaces. That really shouldn't be up for debate. If you don't think that's true, you have a much bigger problem (like, I dunno, Pride existing? Wouldn't that bother you?).
If you start by accepting the right to create a safe space, then you can start looking at the specific questions here.
I've said it several times in this thread already, but every Pride I've been to featured cis drag queens punching down on trans people during their performances. But that discrimination is apparently okay and worth fighting for?
Hey, guess 'fuck you, I got mine' is a popular ideology even here.
A lot of gaffers are sympathetic to cultural appropriation and people even get shitty about Iggy Azalea "trying to sound black" so im not sure why this is being rejected out of hand.
I've said it several times in this thread already, but every Pride I've been to featured cis drag queens punching down on trans people during their performances. But that discrimination is apparently okay and worth fighting for?
Sheesh, it's almost sounds like you expect people to listen to your perspective and your viewpoints on a matter that immediately resonates with you as opposed to ignoring you to allow their outrage to rage on.
If discrimination shouldn't be tolerated, most Pride events should probably stop giving money and a platform to cis drag queens who stand on stage and make anti-trans jokes. I've witnessed it at every Pride I've been to.
So drag queens should only be allowed to perform if they're trans? What if a trans drag queen has transphobic or homophobic or sexist or racist material? You can't assume that somebody is transmisogynistic just because they aren't trans. That's outrageous.
Yes, because drag queen performances are often transmisogynistic. Would it be discrimination if they didn't want cishet guys performing at the event? Perhaps, but who cares?
Q is far from being merely drag queen culture. Can't it simply be a response to a history of problematic performances by drag queens rather than "showing their hypocrisy" or something? Can't trans people host a trans event and be able to decide that they only want trans performers for it?
Several things:
1. This isn't a trans event. While they do make a point to try and include lesser-heard elements of the LGBTQ community (including trans people), accessiblity for all people is a stated goal of the orgnizers
2. I think a better policy than their original or revised one would be to simply evaluate any proposed drag acts on their own merits and possibly present these performances in such a way that any attendees will know what they're getting into and have the opportunity to avoid them if they so wish. However, this obviously wouldn't satisfy some people given that:
2. The complaints the organizers are acquiescing to don't that drag acts sometimes include transmisoginy, they complain that the act of cis people performing drag is transphobic in and of itself, regardless of content ("they broadly feel that such performances are more about entertainment (at their expense) than gender expression").
Well I guess if there's anything as bad as "the majority of Native American trans people have attempted suicide", it's "cis male drag queens aren't allowed to perform at an event that focuses on trans people."
It's amazing how this line of thought, that trans events should be open to any performers otherwise trans people are bigots, wouldn't fly if the situation was changed to say that black people should not be able to deny the right of white people to perform at a rally celebrating black culture.
My reservations of the existence of "black culture" aside, are you saying that it is offensive for white people to celebrate it? So like, no white people should ever speak on behalf of say, black history month? Should only black people get to talk about how bad institutional racism is etc.?
I can totally understand how someone who has struggled with gender identity would be upset by a drag queen and might think it trivialises their experience.
A lot of gaffers are sympathetic to cultural appropriation and people even get shitty about Iggy Azalea "trying to sound black" so im not sure why this is being rejected out of hand.
As much as it seemed very strange at first, since Drag Queen/King shows have been a BIG part of the Pride events I've gone to, I can 100% see where they're coming from with this. It really is kind of a blackface sort of thing for trans people.
So drag queens should only be allowed to perform if they're trans? What if a trans drag queen has transphobic or homophobic or sexist or racist material? You can't assume that somebody is transmisogynistic just because they aren't trans. That's outrageous.
I've said it several times in this thread already, but every Pride I've been to featured cis drag queens punching down on trans people during their performances. But that discrimination is apparently okay and worth fighting for?
Seriously what the hell are you even arguing about. When did this even happen? That issue can be solved by banning drag performers specifically that trans-bash, and a ban of trans-bashing in general.
That has nothing to do with what your arguing for, the only way it does, if this sort of silly revenge for slights (which help nothing and no one).
Naah, OP quoted an adequate portion of the article in his/her post to present accurately what the article is stating. Even after going back and double checking, the argument is basically "Drag acts aren't allowed cause it makes some questioning people feel 'icky'." Honestly wtf is that. Do you think this'll make anyone attending the event that might have a genderqueer appearance feel welcome? It's the same attitude bigots throw at LGBT people as a whole. "You're presence, just the way you are makes me uncomfortable." Screw that noise.
I can totally understand how someone who has struggled with gender identity would be upset by a drag queen and might think it trivialises their experience.
On a macro level though, drag queens do the exact same thing that trans- and cisgender people do every day of their lives--they construct gender through performance.
Several things:
1. This isn't a trans event. While they do make a point to try and include lesser-heard elements of the LGBTQ community (including trans people), accessiblity for all people is a stated goal of the orgnizers
2. I think a better policy than their original or revised one would be to simply evaluate any proposed drag acts on their own merits and possibly present these performances in such a way that any attendees will know what they're getting into and have the opportunity to avoid them if they so wish. However, this obviously wouldn't satisfy some people given that:
2. The complaints the organizers are acquiescing to don't that drag acts sometimes include transmisoginy, they complain that the act of cis people performing drag is transphobic in and of itself, regardless of content ("they broadly feel that such performances are more about entertainment (at their expense) than gender expression").
Fair points. As for point 1, I think that accessibility has its obvious limits, and I think that the people who came to the decision didn't make it lightly. It's certainly not as though the LGBTQ+ community is noted for treating trans people as equal in the movement (this is not universally true of course, but it is hardly uncommon either), so I can't imagine that it was a matter of "trans people getting their way" and more a matter of the people that made the decisions on the situation felt that the performances had a very realistic chance to make attendees uncomfortable.
I've said it several times in this thread already, but every Pride I've been to featured cis drag queens punching down on trans people during their performances. But that discrimination is apparently okay and worth fighting for?
Naah, OP quoted an adequate portion of the article in his/her post to present accurately what the article is stating. Even after going back and double checking, the argument is basically "Drag acts aren't allowed cause it makes some questioning people feel 'icky'." Honestly wtf is that. Do you think this'll make anyone attending the event that might have a genderqueer appearance feel welcome? It's the same attitude bigots throw at LGBT people as a whole. "You're presence, just the way you are makes me uncomfortable." Screw that noise.
This is what happens when stories get twisted far from the reality of what happened and turned into something they're not.
In Glasgow, there's corporate Pride, and then there's alternative Pride that's free to attend, anti-corporate, and trans-centric. They came to a consensus decision to not pay drag queens to perform.
Due to the uninformed backlash, they've recently changed their stance and will be paying trans-identified drag performers to perform.
As a trans person, I've never been paid to stand on stage and hurl transmisogynistic slurs at Pride. Does that mean trans people are banned from Pride?
The article didn't really break it down like that.
If it was a matter of just not paying performers across the board as an anti-commercial statement and what not, then yeah that's a totally different situation.
I was just trying to make a point that not allowing a performer into a pride event just cause they might go against gender-norms, would be an insane and probably impossible stance to uphold across the board. You're claiming it was all stemmed from an anti-corporate motivation, and it's for performers across the board, etc. which is fine. But that's really not the picture the article painted. Not saying the article has more merit. Just trying to clarify that I'm solely reacting based to what the article is suggesting.
Until this thread, I had no idea there were drag queens whose acts centered around potentially derogatory gender-based humor. There have been many, many comic performers - usually those who identify as straight cis males - who performed in drag routines that did use the kind of humor that trans people might find offensive. But all drag acts I've seen in the past have been celebratory of gender fluidity and self-expression. It seems like maybe drag performers with potentially offensive acts are the ones who should be singled out, instead of all non-trans drag performers?
Glad you cleared that up. So since you made the equivalence yourself, Pride isn't about just trans. It is not a trans event nor a trans movement. It is a movement for acceptance for all of these groups that are oppressed.
So really it would be like the BET awards saying that they don't want to award anything to mixed raced people since they ain't black enough.
It's happened at literally every Pride I've been to. Speaking with other trans people, this isn't just limited to the various large-city US Pride events I've been to. But, expressing that was apparently considered a "broad generalization". I wonder why.
