I am... and I prefer the term...

[greeneyedgrrl]

Originally Posted by Chazz

The problem with conformity is, we don't always know we're doing it, and/or we call it by the wrong name, unintentionally or by design.

I agree, all the more reason to make it visible my friend!

Even "being alternative", "gender queer", "fringe", "going G", yada, yada, can be a form of conformity. The conformity within my biker community comes to mind. (Accountants during the work week; Hell's Angeles on the weekend.)

exactly! ..if you're not conforming to one group, you are to another, and not necessarily all at once.

Of course conformity has a pay-off, otherwise why do it? However, conformity always comes at a price, too.

Yes... of course, just as anything does, ain't nuthin in life that's free


Well, you can argue anything, if you've a mind to.

I can, and do, sounds like you do too! LOL

Being aligned with the body you're born into isn't a "privilege". "Privilege" is a social construct - an arbitrary, subjective reality based on social norms and convention. You either buy into a given social construct (any construct), or you don't.

agreed, it is arbitrary, and subjective and socially constructed, but it exists whether i "buy into" the construct or not (man if i could make shit disappear just by not buying in, no more tea party for sure). until enough people stop buying in, this is the system we're stuck with. i see it in the radical queer community as well, the same gender bullshit that the heteros buy into, femmes are expected to behave in certain ways as are butches etc. it's pervasive.. it's internalized and i look at things that bring visibility to to the invisible "dominant culture" in a conscious way, with intent, as a way, (albeit slow), to change that. nothing would happen if it wasn't acknowledged.

Butches do not have gender "privilege". They do not conform to the gender consructs of this culture be they female identified butches or not.

i id as femme, so i'll let ya handle that one...

And btw, the opposite of "privileged" isn't deprivileged - it's unprivileged. Few women in this culture are "privileged". The LGBTQs should take care not to reinforce dominant culture myths that work against, or divide us.

Deprivileged = the loss of social privilege; to lose an advantage
Unprivileged = never being socially advantaged in the first place. (Butches and most women.)

agreed...although i'm guessing that your idea of how to go about it differs from mine, and i'd love to argue, i mean hear about that... as for the women not being privileged in the first place, i think it depends who you are talking about in relation to whom. not sure why the vocabulary lesson...but ok.

PS: Foot binding was considered a gender norm among the "privileged" class in China not so long ago. Genital mutilation is still a norm in certain cultures. These practices are seen as making a woman more attractive and desirable. I suppose they advantage women who align with these practices. But, I'm loath to say they confer "privilege"

i am not even going to tough that one, that's got loaded written ALL over it.

i'm feelin a lil snarky tonight, just outta finals! woo hoo!

[AtLast]

Something that is going through my mind about the concept/construct of comformity and gender variation or fluidity has to do with when a couple a trans partner (or both could be) takes on heteronormative conformity by emulating being "straight."

These thoughts came to me while watching the Chaz Bono doc- when they said- "We are straight, now." First of all, not every couple with trans participants/partner(s) adopts being straight as it is commonly defined.

Perhaps that is the problem- definitions that are static and have no elasticity? Or maybe, the hetero-normative construct continues to be so instilled in society and so potent, we just can't shake it.

OK, I do not have any issues with anyone adopting a straight couple persona if that is what they want. I do, however, wish that this was not a conclusion jumped to- within or outside of the couplehood.

I hope I am posing this clearly... Mainly, I think we often fall prey to constructs of social conformity that are just plain false.

[Corkey]

In my mind if I were ever to transition, big if, it would be my id in flux, not my partners. Just a thought.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Corkey

In my mind if I were ever to transition, big if, it would be my id in flux, not my partners. Just a thought.

Makes sense to me and one reason I wish people didn't have hetero-normative labels bestowed upon them. Or, assumptions.

[Chazz]

Originally Posted by greeneyedgrrl

i'm feelin a lil snarky tonight, just outta

You don't sound snarky, you sound incisive. Incisive is good !

You're way better at this computer quote stuff than me, but I'll give it a shot.

Originally Posted by greeneyedgrrl

CHAZZ: The problem with conformity is, we don't always know we're doing it, and/or we call it by the wrong name, unintentionally or by design.

GREENEYEDGRRL: I agree, all the more reason to make it visible my friend!

CHAZZ: Yes, but "There are non so blind as those who will not see" and some people are deeply invested in not seeing.


CHAZZ: Even "being alternative", "gender queer", "fringe", "going G", yada, yada, can be a form of conformity. The conformity within my biker community comes to mind. (Accountants during the work week; Hell's Angeles on the weekend.)

GREENEYEDGRRL: exactly! ..if you're not conforming to one group, you are to another, and not necessarily all at once.

CHAZZ: The alternative to conformity isn't non-conformity. Nor is it about the superficial (i.e gender uniforms, posturing, or mimicry with a mythical twist). It's about self-awareness and self-reconciliation both of which are entirely inside jobs.


CHAZZ: Being aligned with the body you're born into isn't a "privilege". "Privilege" is a social construct - an arbitrary, subjective reality based on social norms and convention. You either buy into a given social construct (any construct), or you don't.

GREENEYEDGRRL: agreed, it is arbitrary, and subjective and socially constructed, but it exists whether i "buy into" the construct or not (man if i could make shit disappear just by not buying in, no more tea party for sure). until enough people stop buying in, this is the system we're stuck with. i see it in the radical queer community as well, the same gender bullshit that the heteros buy into, femmes are expected to behave in certain ways as are butches etc. it's pervasive.. it's internalized and i look at things that bring visibility to to the invisible "dominant culture" in a conscious way, with intent, as a way, (albeit slow), to change that. nothing would happen if it wasn't acknowledged.

CHAZZ: Yes, I see "the same gender BS the heteros buy into" in the LGBTQ community, too. If you call that stuff out, you risk being vilified or starting a "gender war". The question then becomes how to dialog about these things without hitting a wailing wall of denial and blind complicity. Especially since the operative these days is that feelings are facts when, of course, they are not.


CHAZZ: Butches do not have gender "privilege". They do not conform to the gender constructs of this culture be they female identified butches or not.

GREENEYEDGRRL: i id as femme, so i'll let ya handle that one...

CHAZZ: Deal.


CHAZZ: And btw, the opposite of "privileged" isn't deprivileged - it's unprivileged. Few women in this culture are "privileged". The LGBTQs should take care not to reinforce dominant culture myths that work against, or divide us.

Deprivileged = the loss of social privilege; to lose an advantage
Unprivileged = never being socially advantaged in the first place. (Butches and most women.)

GREENEYEDGRRL: agreed...although i'm guessing that your idea of how to go about it differs from mine, and i'd love to argue, i mean hear about that... as for the women not being privileged in the first place, i think it depends who you are talking about in relation to whom. not sure why the vocabulary lesson...but ok.

CHAZZ: Maybe my ideas are different from yours, maybe they are, at least in part. I do agree that "privilege" subscribes to the laws of relativity. And, not knowing you have "privilege" does not divest you from having it or (ab)using it.... I do see gender constructs as inculcated manifestations of power, control and dominance.... Those "who will not see" benefit from that even at their own expense. Life is paradoxical like that.

The "vocabulary lesson" was an attempt to reframe a misnomer. There is a tendency within the community to establish a hierarchy of oppression - everyone loses in that miscalculation. Hierarchies are a dominant culture artifact, so is misnomer-meistering. Both head critical thinking off at the pass.


CHAZZ: PS: Foot binding was considered a gender norm among the "privileged" class in China not so long ago. Genital mutilation is still a norm in certain cultures. These practices are seen as making a woman more attractive and desirable. I suppose they advantage women who align with these practices. But, I'm loath to say they confer "privilege".

GREENEYEDGRRL: i am not even going to tough that one, that's got loaded written ALL over it.

CHAZZ: OK, I'll touch it. It really doesn't serve us to become duplicating dupes. Broadly stated, men change the world, women change themselves to fit in.

[Quintease]

Originally Posted by AtLastHome

Something that is going through my mind about the concept/construct of comformity and gender variation or fluidity has to do with when a couple a trans partner (or both could be) takes on heteronormative conformity by emulating being "straight."

These thoughts came to me while watching the Chaz Bono doc- when they said- "We are straight, now." First of all, not every couple with trans participants/partner(s) adopts being straight as it is commonly defined.

Perhaps that is the problem- definitions that are static and have no elasticity? Or maybe, the hetero-normative construct continues to be so instilled in society and so potent, we just can't shake it.

OK, I do not have any issues with anyone adopting a straight couple persona if that is what they want. I do, however, wish that this was not a conclusion jumped to- within or outside of the couplehood.

I hope I am posing this clearly... Mainly, I think we often fall prey to constructs of social conformity that are just plain false.

I'm totally in agreement with you, why be straight when we already know there is an alternative? But what is straight? There are a lot of male/female couples who are, in their own way, queer. Straight couples fill the ranks of swinger parties, alternative clubs, bisexual websites, gay clubs and BDSM. I accept that it's possible to be into alternative sexual practices and be narrow-minded, but still it puts you into contact with people other than your normal social circle.

My bf considers himself a straight man, all he ever wanted was to be a normal guy. Of course his gf is queer, half his friends are queer and he's completely comfortable in a queer environment. None of that detracts from the fact that he's a normal guy who goes to work and fancies girls. Isn't that what us LGBT's have been fighting for all this time, the right to be as normal as the next guy?

[J. Mason]

Hmmm bumpin this thread up.