Do You Feel Pride Parades Hurt Us?

Okay, I admit it. I was grasping straws there. I can't justify my argument because I know it's shitty. The only counterpoint I could make was "you can't assume people's situations", and you probably took that into account, considering heterophobia is only an internet phenomenon (I hope!).
:dead: ...Sorry.

 

I don't really understand why my argument is getting ignored here. It seems like gender expression is pretty inconvenient for you folks arguing a politics of respectability where we bend over backwards for cisgender heterosexual perceptions.

Also, JStevens96, your sexual morality is quite disturbing. It is not, in fact, "reasonable" for people to be getting up in arms about how many partners another person has had. Quite to the contrary, their desire to know and their condemnation of promiscuity should be seen as immediately suspect.

 

...But the argument is against vulgarity and nudity, not people's gender expressions.
I think that's why.

 

You know full well that people outside of our community don't differentiate, which is why it cannot be ignored in this conversation.

 

Any movement which has to change to make the people who oppress it comfortable, is not doing the right thing and is inherently failing. If you'd ever been to a pride parade, you might have noticed the crowds of average people marching along with the handful of flamboyant ones, the same-sex parents and the queer families.

By moral, you're basically saying "as long as straight people approve." And that is not something I care about with anyone's sexuality.

 

Fair enough.
I don't think doing more of a controversial thing will get us acceptance points.
Instead, we should make it innocuous to do the controversial thing.
I can't say I'm the most eloquent person (and my syntax is probably strange), but you get what I mean, right?

 

This.

Or in assless chaps.

 

^ Heh heh, assless chaps.

 

How could I have made it clearer that I'm not advocating doing the controversial thing? I feel like I disavowed it every time I posted.

The only argument I am making is that the expression of trans* and genderqueer individuals is ALSO controversial, so gender expression very much ties into this discussion.

I think you're being disingenous about the nature of this conversation. It's not about vulgarity and nudity at all. Those are just specific instances of the real nature of this conversation, which is the politics of presentability and respectability.

You know full well that the mainstream society doesn't accept trans* identities as being legitimate, so the gender expression of trans* and genderqueer Pride-goers is going to be "controversial" and something which undermines the "respectability" that assimilationist liberals require. But I would argue, as All Paths suggested, that gender expression should be treated differently in this discussion of respectability.

And that's my whole problem, which I tried to articulate over and over and over and OVER with nobody understanding or acknowledging: the politics of respectability in the eyes of the cisgender heterosexual is going to negate and injure the trans* or genderqueer individual since it is too simplistic in its justification behind what kinds of dress and behavior should be considered acceptable.

What I'm saying may be something you and others consider to be a logical leap, but remember, we've made this conversation about what cisgender heterosexuals could think. Which means we've already defenestrated logical thinking.

No, I don't really know what you're talking about, I'm afraid. You're talking about the "controversial thing" which is more than just nudity and vulgarity. You're talking about what cisgender heterosexuals think, and they don't always think reasonable things. So I don't see a scenario where it ever becomes "innocuous."

 

Okay, but now my complaint is that you have no principled basis for saying it's okay, but dressing like a leather daddy is not.

Remember, we're not talking about educated people like you and All Paths. We're talking about cisgender heterosexuals who don't always have reasonable thoughts, and even if they are mostly reasonable, they may not understand issues of gender identity.

This lack of understanding will cause them to be critical of gender expression, which will then cause some liberal assimilationist jerk to say trans* people need to stay home "for the cause."

Since we've made this about what they think, and how they perceive us, what makes gender expression different?

 

You know, I think the overarching point for many of us is, as distasteful as it might be to some, one does not, again, draw flies with vinegar (anger, ostentatiousness, rebellion, shock value and defiance), but with honey (peace, communication, reconciliation, humility).

I very much recognize the spirit here of wanting to "stick it to the Man" (vulgar as that expression for defiant disobedience may be), but you're not only alienating the very audience that you're trying to communicate with, but by doing it that way, as you've heard from many of us here, you're also alienating a great percentage (maybe even a majority?) of your LGBTQ brethren, whom you're losing the respect of and turning off.

And how is that not shooting us ALL in the foot?

 

@ Pret Allez

Okay, so I'm not so good at figuring out people's intentions. My complaints really were about excessive nudity.As a pretty much gender-conforming person, I can't really relate to those who don't.I'd much rather just get a refund and a better body and move on with my life. Why call being transgender an "identity", though? I didn't choose a path of suffering, I was born into it.

Inb4 I go on a tangent, I'm just going to say that I still have a hard time grasping your argument, partially because I'm tired and partially because I honestly don't see what gender expression has to do with people wearing stripperiffic clothing.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're saying is that most "cis-hets", as Aussie792 would say, don't understand gender variance and think it's weird, so they shun it. And that's related because people see Pride parades as weird for similar reasons. Am I right?

"No, I don't really know what you're talking about, I'm afraid. You're talking about the "controversial thing" which is more than just nudity and vulgarity. You're talking about what cisgender heterosexuals think, and they don't always think reasonable things. So I don't see a scenario where it ever becomes 'innocuous'."

I think the communication problem here is when I thought I was talking about how to stop people from believing that it's controversial to act in ways that aren't "gender-typical", and you thought I was talking about "cis-hets" and how they think that.

 

Right, and I've acknowledged that repeatedly. However, I am saying the very same logic can ultimately be used to tell trans* and genderqueer people they need to stay home. Since this is, again, is not about educated people like you but rather about the untrained perceptions of heterosexuals.

 

Guys, I think this thread is officially Off The Rails.