Its a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world

[raybear]

I need to come out about something. I really, really dislike the use of the word "tranny/trannie". I'm not even talking about that Project Runway dude. I'm talking about my friends and neighbors.

I'm more okay if its used to describe some sort of event/space/concept that is about being intentionally provocative, like "Trannyshack" in SF. I'm not okay with it being used a general noun or descriptor of a category of people, e.g. "you could come, its full of trannies!!" or even things like "tranny yoga class" or "tranny dance night." Even if this is supposedly being used as a positive selling point. If a trans person uses it self-referentially, I don't notice as much, since I respect any homos right to call themselves a fag, a dyke, a lesbian, a queer, etc. But non-trans people saying it really gives me the willies the most. Its like all the gross fetish buttons get lit up on my emotional switchboard.

So, I'm curious to know what others think.

[Poll #1226144]

Please don't be shy about checking any box, as all of them are things I've thought myself while pondering this question.

Comments

[fuzzilla.livejournal.com]

I really don't know anything about the trans experience, but I blow the "intentions don't matter" horn all the damn time. "...but I didn't mean to run over your kid..." "...but, you did..." True, it might make some difference in how I felt to know my kid was run over 'cuz the driver suffered a stroke and lost control of the car, as opposed to looking at my kid and licking his lips and saying "woo HOO! Ten points!" and hitting pedal to metal. The intentions don't change the end result, though. To pretend that the end result "doesn't matter" because the intentions were good/neutral is unfairly dismissive toward the offended party.

I can see what penpusher is saying, though. When person B labels person A, of course person A is gonna get defensive and probably stop listening.

[trooper6.livejournal.com]

I agree labeling a person is going to get that person defensive...that is why I avoid intentionality.

I have consistently said, "That think you said was jacked up" (which is a statement that doesn't take into account intentionality)...vs. "You are jacked up" (which is all about intentionality).

[fuzzilla.livejournal.com]

>I have consistently said, "That think you said was jacked up" (which is a statement that doesn't take into account intentionality)...vs. "You are jacked up" (which is all about intentionality).<

I think ideally, labels shouldn't be used at all, though. I try to say "I'm bothered by what you said, and here's why..." rather than "what a jerky thing to say..." Though I do agree that focusing on specific behaviors rather than the whole person is a better response.

[trooper6.livejournal.com]

It is not always useful to dance around things. Sometimes when a statement is racist, it just needs to be called out as racist. (or Sexist, Homophobic, transphobic, etc.)

[fuzzilla.livejournal.com]

>I have found emotion to be one of the only ways to reach people who are hurtful. To get them to be empathetic by appealing to their emotions. If I say, "That statement could be construed as upsetting to transgender people because it dehumanizes them" The person I'm talking to often shrugs and says, "No it doesn't" or "I didn't mean to." But when I say, with feeling, "You have hurt me" -- that is harder to shrug off.<

Hmm. This is an interesting point. I don't think anyone's saying "pretend you don't have emotions," though; rather, to control them to keep *yourself* emotionally safe and in control, no matter if the other person's response is shitty or ideal. I find using neutral language and other shrink-approved communication techniques helpful and calming. I don't think it dilutes my message or "dances around" what I mean (but then, I tend to be kind of a hot-head; my issue is not how to "allow myself" my emotions; rather how to "navigate the flood of"). ;o)