Julie,
[...]
I am afraid you have confused transsexuals (those of us who are type IV or higher on the Benjamin scale) with genderqueers, genderfu--s, crossdressers and drag queens. I can assure you RuPaul and his ilk do NOT speak for us. [...]
The basic message throughout the "open letter"? Don't consider transsexuals as second class citizens because life is so difficult for them. But it's okay if you consider genderqueers, genderfu--s [sic], crossdressers and drag queens as such. (Presumably because life is a bowl of cherries for such folk?)
Yup. Basically, Sarah is requesting that Julie Burchill narrow her discrimination a bit.
Nice, right?
Definitely a "fail", though.
Carolyn Ann
PS I'm going to ignore that Sarah seems to think Julie Burchill is an employee of The Guardian.
Edit: I added the bit about difficulties; I was trying to add in a bit about "not because of equality or anything like that", but couldn't and not substantially change the post.
Genderqueers? Crossdressers? RuPaul?
ReplyDeleteI get the impression that Sarah did not actually read the article she was responding to.
Yeah, I got that impression too.
DeleteIt's a pity because she did raise some important issues - life for many transsexual women is more difficult than it should be. But that doesn't mean she can relegate others to a lesser status. I read her piece a few times, just to make sure it wasn't clumsy wording or something like that. And while I still have my hopes it is - the rest of her post didn't correct that initial impression.
How do such individuals expect to be taken seriously if they advocate that they are more deserving of equality and consideration than those they despise? I'll never know, but I thought this failure was worth noting.