From a place of general agreement with you, looking for thoughts on how to go forward:
Are second-wave feminists more transphobic than a random member of the population? Or do you think second-wave hypocrisy is evidence that the whole second-wave argument is flawed?
Because as skeptical as I often am of third-wave as actually practiced, they are particularly good (compared to society as a whole) on transgendered folks, right?
I don’t think the problem is especially about transphobia, I think it’s about a harsh style of enforcing whatever changes people from that subculture want to make. They want to believe—and try to enforce—that the harshness shouldn’t matter, but it does.
I think that “calling out” types can be extremely harsh and unpleasant—I agree with NancyLebovitz there. However, I don’t get what she meant by the problems between feminist and trans people leading her to respect it less.
I mean that call out culture presents itself as an optimal way for people with different levels of privilege to live with each other, and I think that intractable problem between second wave feminists and transpeople is evidence that there are problems with call out culture, even if .what second wave feminists have been doing is technically before the era of call out culture.
There used to be a really good analysis of the problems with call out culture at ozyfrantz.com, but that blog is no longer available.
I see. Personally, I’m struggling with the proper application of the Tone Argument. In archetypal form:
A: I don’t like social expression X (e.g. scorn at transgendered). B: You might have a point, but I’m turn off by your tone. A: I don’t think my tone is your true rejection.
But in practice, this can devolve into: B: Social expression X isn’t so bad / might be justified. A: B deserves to be fired / assaulted / murdered. (e.g. a mindkilled response) B: Overreacting much?
which is clearly problematic on A’s part. Separating the not-true-rejection error by B from the mindkilled problem of A is very important. But the worry is that focusing our attention on that question diverts from the substantive issue of describing what social expressions are problematic and identifying them when they occur (to try to reduce their frequency in the future).
The fact that second wave feminists exercised cisgender privilege to be hurtful to the transgendered seems totally distinction from “Tone Argument” dynamic.
From a place of general agreement with you, looking for thoughts on how to go forward:
Are second-wave feminists more transphobic than a random member of the population? Or do you think second-wave hypocrisy is evidence that the whole second-wave argument is flawed?
Because as skeptical as I often am of third-wave as actually practiced, they are particularly good (compared to society as a whole) on transgendered folks, right?
I don’t think the problem is especially about transphobia, I think it’s about a harsh style of enforcing whatever changes people from that subculture want to make. They want to believe—and try to enforce—that the harshness shouldn’t matter, but it does.
This may offer some clues about a way forward.
IME “call out culture” feminists are very anti-transphobia. Second wave feminists aren’t so interested in getting people to check their privilege.
If that’s true, then I don’t understand NancyLebovitz’s criticism of “call out culture” or the relevance of her statement to Multiheaded’s point.
I think that “calling out” types can be extremely harsh and unpleasant—I agree with NancyLebovitz there. However, I don’t get what she meant by the problems between feminist and trans people leading her to respect it less.
I mean that call out culture presents itself as an optimal way for people with different levels of privilege to live with each other, and I think that intractable problem between second wave feminists and transpeople is evidence that there are problems with call out culture, even if .what second wave feminists have been doing is technically before the era of call out culture.
There used to be a really good analysis of the problems with call out culture at ozyfrantz.com, but that blog is no longer available.
I see. Personally, I’m struggling with the proper application of the Tone Argument. In archetypal form:
A: I don’t like social expression X (e.g. scorn at transgendered).
B: You might have a point, but I’m turn off by your tone.
A: I don’t think my tone is your true rejection.
But in practice, this can devolve into:
B: Social expression X isn’t so bad / might be justified.
A: B deserves to be fired / assaulted / murdered. (e.g. a mindkilled response)
B: Overreacting much?
which is clearly problematic on A’s part. Separating the not-true-rejection error by B from the mindkilled problem of A is very important. But the worry is that focusing our attention on that question diverts from the substantive issue of describing what social expressions are problematic and identifying them when they occur (to try to reduce their frequency in the future).
The fact that second wave feminists exercised cisgender privilege to be hurtful to the transgendered seems totally distinction from “Tone Argument” dynamic.
http://web.archive.org/web/20130412201542/http://ozyfrantz.com/2012/12/29/certain-propositions-concerning-callout-culture-part-one/
Thanks very much.
I wanted all three of the major articles, but that was easy enough to find from your link.
http://web.archive.org/web/20130412200333/http://ozyfrantz.com/category/callout-culture/