Get Over It.

Dear, not-so-dear, pro-feminist man,

I demand, I command, that you be perfect.
I know that you are not. You make me painfully aware
Each time you say:
‘We should’
‘You should’
‘I think’
Who is this ‘we’? We are not sisters.
And ‘you’, like dogs. ‘You dogs should bark’.
If you were perfect, you would not tell us what you think;
We know already.

Each time you sit down in this room
With your neutral, thoughtful silence
Your ‘I am listening to the women’ face
You apology for patriarchy
Your silence says:
‘Patriarchy does not gag you’
‘Men do not gag you’
‘I do not gag you’
But we are silent as you are silent
In our nice dresses and our ‘conversing in front of the man’ face.
We’ll say it later;
Out back;
With the noise of the cars in the distance.

-- Lisa Millbank, of A Radical TransFeminist

My earlier posts might have given impression that I think I am actually somewhat good at what I am talking about. They might have given the impression that I consider myself above and separate from the "bad men". This is not the case -- I write about these things because these are the things I struggle with. ("I struggle with" -- gag! I need a better way to word this.)

When I read this poem last week (before I had worked out the stuff I recently posted about) I was filled with the familiar man guilt. Oh god, what should I do? Speak, not speak? What should I do? Not exist? That last isn't a flippant statement -- I don't joke about suicide -- it was real, though thankfully fleeting. (I need the skills I am developing here as much for my own well-being as for my political responsibilities.)

That, needless to say, is not the right way to respond to the poem. Responding that way doesn't do anything. Well, anything but make me miserable. It doesn't help anything to make the poem about me personally -- to make it a personal judgment, the sentence being despair.

It is better (for me) to read the poem as being about the persistence and pervasiveness of the harms caused by patriarchy. Men, and other people who politically function as men, are going to cause harm, are going to cause hurt. Even if you are pro-feminist, even if you try to be perfect. Speaking, not speaking -- simply by politically functioning as a man in a patriarchy (the only context in which one can politically function as a man?), you will cause harm. There is no set of rules you can follow to be perfect, but the demand for perfection still stands, is still valid. So get the fuck over it and do what you can.

I need to get over it.

What I Am.

I've had some time to think. This is an update on the other personal post, A Right to Not Know.

I am a survivor.

What happened to me was a violation of my sexual boundaries without my understanding and without my consent. This is not diminished by the fact that there was no penetration involved. This is not diminished by the fact that the boy who did it was only a few years older than me. This is not diminished by what, in retrospect, is the likelihood that the boy was sexually abused by his father or step-father. This is not diminished by the fact that I was friends with this boy, or that I continued to be friends with him. This is not diminished by the fact that, for another person, this exact same situation might have been regarded as a normal part of childhood sexuality.

This is mine to claim -- in this space, in this context. My claim, my experience, is not an argument against the gendered nature of rape as a societal institution, and it does not need to be attacked as such. I'm not going to bring this up in your conversation about rape as a crime men commit against women, and I'm not going to demand that you always include a disclaimer to acknowledge my experience, because my experience is not always relevant. But leave me be here.

I am queer and trans*.

I am attracted to people of various genders and bodies -- sexually, socially, politically. My own relationship to gender is complicated and difficult for me to define (for now, perhaps forever), but I am certainly not cis. I will not entertain audits of my sexuality or gender identity -- I am what I say I am, and I don't need to act in a certain way to prove this to anyone, nor do I need to claim some specific etiology of my queerness or my trans*ness to qualify. I have a right to exist, without apology.

But I won't hide behind this to deny my responsibilities to women. Though I am not a man (by which I mean that I don't regard myself as a man, which, in my experience, is the only relevant criteria), I doubtlessly act in ways typical of the gender class "man", in ways I don't always realize. I doubtlessly, to some extent, politically function as a member of the gender class "man". To the extent that this is true, I must be responsible for my role in the patriarchy. I remain dedicated to a radical understanding of gender.

Likewise, I won't hide behind this to deny my responsibilities to other trans* people. I have no right to demand that other trans* people, especially not binary trans women, accept radical feminism. I, as a non-binary trans* person who experiences gender in a way that is largely congruent with radical feminist theory, am, at most, a secondary target for the trans-hating elements within radical feminism.

And there are trans-hating elements within radical feminism, elements which go beyond theory or the callous application of theory. To such individuals, I am going to break ranks to say the following: Can't you see what you are doing? By making criticisms of trans people central to your politics, by intentionally misgendering individuals and classes of individuals, by erasing the existence of trans* people in your discussions of rape and reproductive rights, by mocking the experiences of trans* people with scare quotes and vile epithets like "twans", you are attacking a materially oppressed class of people. It doesn't matter that some trans* people describe their experiences in ways that conflict with theory. It doesn't matter that the existence of trans* people is sometimes used by anti-feminists (cis anti-feminists, by the way) to apologize for patriarchy. It doesn't matter that some trans* people adopt stereotypical gender roles and accoutrements. It doesn't matter, because the people you are attacking are just that, people, and your attacks cause pain. Insensitivity to the pain of others doesn't make you radical -- it just makes you cruel.

I maintain that it is possible to ascribe to a radical understanding of gender that is nonetheless inclusive of trans* identities -- all trans* identities. On this hill I am willing to fight against both the trans-hating radicals and the anti-radical cis people, both those who are genuine allies to trans* people, and those who are just using this as a political tool.