Tuesday, October 19, 2010

If Ms Hope is interested...

Kinsey Hope and I were exchanging a few pleasantries in an old post of mine. So old, Google had to fetch an archaeological team to dig it up. (It's dated October 1st, 2010...)

To recap the conversation so far, I wondered about Ms Hope's claim that one individual's claimed identity outwitted, or at least made irrelevant, someone else's. Her specific example was the lesbian who dates a transman; the transman's identity is, in Ms Hope's opinion, superior to the lesbian's.

Ms Hope then went on the say:
If an identity is built on bigotry (like say regarding trans folks' genders not being valid), it isn't sacred.

I don't let white people call themselves Two Spirits either. Just sayin'
So now we have two restrictions. Up from the original one. We're making progress... Soon, there will be so many restrictions, we'll all have to walk around with massive tomes just to describe who we think we are!

Ms Hope is a bit "inconsistent" in her stance, anyway. She can call herself whatever she likes, indeed, she has a post devoted to explaining her pseudonym. But if you dare call yourself something she disapproves of - her choice of identity for you supersedes yours. If I wanted to call myself "Two Spirits" (because I felt like it, perhaps), she would object. I'm not sure why.

(Actually, one thing I did notice about many of her arguments is their inconsistency.)

[As a side note, if a lesbian and a transman dated, how is it anyone's business how they identify themselves? And if Ms Hope is saying that she won't allow any white person to call themselves "Two Spirits", I'm tempted to change my name to Carolyn Two Spirits. Mostly because I can, and also because she can't banish anything. She definitely has an inconsistent standard when it comes to personal labeling.]

After Ms Hope's comment, I suggested clarity. Because I have, quite frankly, no idea what she was saying. She suggested that I might learn something from googling "two spirit", "trans" and "appropriation".

I did.

I didn't.

To be honest, I wasn't sure what I should be looking at. The junction of Wicca and Native American religions? Arguments put forth by transWiccans? What's a transWiccan? I have no idea. Transgendered Wiccans? Why should I listen to one them? Because their religion is more or less as stupid as any other? I did ask Ms Hope for some suggestions. So far she hasn't returned to the conversation.

So this is an invitation to Ms Hope to continue our discussion in circumstances that don't include me having to "approve" comments. (Stupid concept, that is.)

I do wonder if she'll take me up on the invitation.

Carolyn Ann
at
Labels:

5 comments:

  1. Jesus christ you are the most godawfully impatient human being I have ever met. Learn to wait without blowing a gasket.

    And read this about the concept of cultural appropriation in general (which did come up in the google search that you claimed to do). All of that material applies to Native American culture in spades, hence why two spirit being used by white people is a problem.

    As for inconsistencies, well, you're full of it. None of my self markings have anything to do with bigotry. In fact you keep on glossing over that little concern. You think I just don't like people iding themselves, even though you've quoted the line about bigotry. It's like you dislike reading or something.

    So, let me ask you this, why do you think identity is immune to criticism when it involves bigotry? I would think a bigoted identity would be seen as a problem by any reasonable individual. I imagine you'd at least have some basis for this lack of sense you're spouting.

    ReplyDelete

  2. I didn't see that post come up. Did you know that Google is tweaking their algorithm? So you can get new links each time you make a query.

    I'm impatient? I've been told I'm many things, but impatient is a new one. I put this post up so you wouldn't have to endure that stupid "approval" process. That's all!

    Anyway, so what if I'm impatient? Life should be lived at full throttle! :-) As the saying goes, there's time for a nap when we're dead.

    Of course I've got inconsistencies. I've never denied them. But I do try to be politically consistent. I'm not always successful (who is?), but I do try. You don't try to resolve the conflict between two contradictory views. (Do you?)

    What are "self markings"?)

    I don't understand your question "why do you think identity is immune to criticism when it involves bigotry?"

    I don't know if you like people identifying themselves or not; what I do know is that you apply a standard to such efforts. So do I. The standard I apply is different to your standard. So what? Surely there's an interesting discussion about those standards to be had? :-)

    ReplyDelete

  3. Ah. I've just read that blog post you linked to. Thanks for the link, by the way! I neglected my manners in the previous comment; sorry!

    I'd have to argue that cultural homages can be construed, or not. Fashion designers don't sit there and say "perhaps I shouldn't use this inspiration because some might not like it". They sit there and say "wow! That's powerful - I can use that to make a statement!"

    Personally, I thought that post was looking for a problem to complain about. The paragraph about rock music was definitely uninformed and woefully simplistic, for example.

    Sorry, I've got to dash. More later?

    ReplyDelete

  4. I must say - I am thoroughly enjoying this chat of ours! I just wish it were a bit more rapid... ;-)

    ReplyDelete

  5. Oops. I got myself all mixed up! I don't think I've ever been called "patient". Mostly because I'm not. :-)

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous comments are disallowed for the time being.

Comments and conversation are encouraged. :-)

Miserable attempts at insult, self-pity and whiny sniveling isn't. There are other blogs that specialize in, and relish, that sort of pedantry.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)