Hey, ducks! I’ve been talking quite a bit of late about Ticked Off No-I-Won’t-Say-Its With Knives. You know, because of the outrage, and because I went to the protest. What ho!
Now, the general consensus here in Transland (Population: More than you think) is that this thing is outrageous, especially the trailer (which Luna has now modified to take out the references to recently brutally murdered transfolk. Um, thanks–I’m glad to know it took a massive outcry for you to display basic humanity! No, kudos to you, sir!) But that doesn’t mean that there’s massive agreement on the film. Some people actually are defending it! Trans people! Trans people who were not employed in it as actors!
Take, for example, Tom Leger’s post over at Trans Group Blog:
Essentially, the boycott was proposed by people who have very little experience with reading and comprehension of media and representations of trans people in film, perpetuated by GLAAD, an organization that is no friend to trans people who is seeking to jump on what it sees as an opportunity to curry favor with what it sees as a grassroots movement because it is too lazy to do any real work on trans issues. The “movement” is actually mostly a facebook group that has grown in size because of the lack of effort required to “join” a movement online (what I call single-click activism) and I predict very low turn out for tonight’s “protest.”
Oh, there’s more–that’s just the last graf–but modesty and my digestion prevent me from quoting further. Suffice it to say that for those of you who say trans people aren’t “really” their gender–well, Tom picked up mansplaining right away! (I’m going to run out of blue ribbons for that soon.)
Even sadder is the response of someone I generally admire, Kate Bornstein, who put out this series of tweets the other day:
Look. We’re all entitled to our opinion. Even me! And no, I haven’t seen the film, so start flinging your brickbats in my direction. But. I’ve read the opinions–and talked to–people who have seen the film. They were appalled. And frankly, anyone who’d be so unbelievably crass and insensitive as to use the names of our frakking martyrs to promote a film he gleefully concedes is trashy–well, I seriously don’t need to go much deeper than that; when a guy yells “Fag!” at me, I’m not going to sit down and discuss how I’m actually bisexual; I’ve already gotten the message that he hates me.
What’s really disappointing is that Bornstein falls into the same tired trap people always do when it comes to protests against movies or books or plays. It’s not censorship if it isn’t government action, or at least the action of the very powerful. What sets the protest against TOTWK off from, say, the recent brouhaha about a college in Texas performing Corpus Christi, is ultimately that it was a state college in Texas that was being pressured–not a privately organized film festival.
But more: I’m not saying Luna can’t make a movie, or even show it–though I’ll probably protest it wherever I can. He has the freedom to say whatever he wants, and let’s face it, if he really wants people to see it, there’s always the internet. But I don’t have to be blithe about one of the most prestigious film festivals in North America screening his movie. I don’t have to sit by, impotent, while he gets to show his movie to a ton of distributors who potentially could bring him fame and (less likely) fortune by picking up his film. More importantly, Luna isn’t guaranteed the right to show this film anywhere, any more than I’m entitled to have my blog posts displayed on the big screen in Times Square. (As much, of course, as they infinitely deserve to be, so I can write for a living instead of chasing after computer jobs.)
I’ve covered some of the more ludicrous defenses of the film at Shakesville, but it seems a few will never die. So again: that some of the trans people who made the movie defend it doesn’t mean that it should be shown at the Tribeca Film Festival. That it’s “just a movie” doesn’t mean it should be shown at the Tribeca Film Festival. And the “but it’s a campy throwback to the blaxploitation/grindhouse movies of the 70s” is pretty much the least intelligent defense you can give. Again, folks: the “ploitation” stood for exploitation. It’s one thing to appreciate the blaxploitation genre for showcasing actors who wouldn’t have been noticed otherwise. But let’s not pretend that it wasn’t a ghettoized genre, okay? Or put it this way: I’m sure that Fred Williamson is proud of his work in those films. But don’t you think he, and a lot of the people who watched his films, would have rather seen him as, say Han Solo, to cite another frequently copied genre from the 70s? I am supposed to be all overjoyed that hey, some random non-trans guy has decided to make a film that mimics the exploitative (and in the case of the grindhouse films, pretty misogynistic) films of a period better forgotten about? No frakking thanks.
TOTWK offends me as a trans person. It offends me as a woman–I’m rather sick of “light-hearted” films involving the rape, beating, and murder of women. It offends me as a trans woman, not the least because several of the performers in the film are cisgendered men playing trans women. It fucking offends me because it uses an ugly slur in the title. For these–and a ton of other reasons–I’d love to see Tribeca drop it.
Because too, defending this movie isn’t standing on the side of the angels. Censorship is pernicious because it prevents the speaking of truth to power. But what truth is being spoken here? How does this film upset even the tiniest piece of the ugly narrative so many of the powerful spin about trans women? That we’re fake? That we’re gay men in dresses? That we only work as entertainers? That we’re the lowest form of victim? This isn’t standing up to oppression. This is fucking illustrating it.
So yeah, Tom, and yeah, Kate, I get that it’s cool to be contrarian. I get that it’s cool to go against the popular opinion. I even get that it’s cool to throw your own under the bus, especially when you can reinforce the mainstream narrative, and accuse us all of being too emotional, not rational, and completely humorless.
And I also get that those have been the classic techniques by which women and other minorities are silenced.
Who’s censoring who now?
Great post!
I hadn’t seen Bornstein’s tweets before, but yeah, I definitely get the sense that she’s actively trying to be one of the cool kids. “So edgy” that it makes you quiver? In a good way? Seriously? Or perhaps she was being ironic, like the way some folks are when they get called on their b.s.
And since when have MTFs been GREAT at anything? Don’t get me wrong, we’re a fabulous demographic. Some of us (myself included) love camp. It’s just that it’s really painful to see someone (a) imply that we’re monolithic and (b) that one of the things we’re monolithically “good at” is camp. It’s not as if I haven’t heard cis people make similar claims as a means of, say, dismissing our identities.
As for referring to efforts to “ban” TOTWK: Kate, that’s not even trying.
As a note (an even before I finish reading the post) not only is true that you don’t have to be blithe or sit on the sidelines, there is also the factor of *should*.
Should you do such things?
In my personal case, my response is *no*, I shouldn’t. I should be getting up and making sure that people stop being metaphorical toiletpaper about it.
Rock on, Dyss 🙂
Pingback: Tweets that mention Kate Bornstein ?’s TOTWK; Or, It’s Hip to be Au Contraire - (un)popular entertainment beating them at their own game bitterness don't get your panties in a bunch Humorless Tranny™ i heart oppression kyriarchy the transsexual empire str
I’m not protesting it because it looks like shit, and I’m not worried what message it will send because few will watch it and those that do will hate it.
On principle, I’m with you, C.L. In practice, it seems like a lot of effort spent over a tiny threat.
@Leah: Did you not read my post on Shakesville where I mentioned the idea that the Law of Conservation of Protest is never valid reasoning? (IOW, concern trolling to the tune of “aren’t there more important things to worry about?”) Or how I bring up the point in *this post* that one of the reasons I’m upset is that this thing is being shown at what’s maybe the third most important North American film festival? (It’s somewhere in the mix of Sundance, the Toronto Film Festival, and the New York Film Festival.) So that there’s a chance that it will be picked up for wide release, and a chance that yet another misogynistic, anti-trans piece of trash will get out there to reinforce my Recommended Daily Dose of Oppression?
I’m drawing my line here because I’m local. It’s not a big deal for me to take the subway down to the Screening Room to make some noise. That’s one thing. Another is that this is in my wheelhouse–transness and feminism–and *pardon me* for being an activist in my area of specialization. Another is that there are like, no films per year about transness, so when one comes along that is shite like this, I gotta jump on it so that maybe films that are better than this will come along. (And don’t say Transamerica. I got mostly the same issues with that film, which pretended to be sympathetic to trans folk but still ended up making the main character ridiculous.) And seriously, am I not supposed to call things out when I see them? Wouldn’t the world be better if we called folks out on *more* small stuff, rather than waiting until it passed an offensiveness level that the dominant culture can get behind? If every “right-thinking” guy called out sexism when he saw it, if every “right-thinking” American called out nativism and treason when she saw it, wouldn’t we be in a lot better place?
So wev. I’m glad to know that this is insignificant to you. But kindly do me the favor of not trying to silence me with your concern, m’kay?
I just read Tom’s post. I met him on a number of occasions years ago, at the Center, and I guess he’s a nice young man. But, geez, “mansplaining” is right. Where does he get off telling trans women why they shouldn’t be offended by this?
Not to mention the incredibly insulting nature of the comment that the people opposing this have “very little experience with reading and comprehension of media and representations of trans people in film.” I was reading and comprehending media and representation of trans people in film long before you were born, Tom!
I’m just sayin’ I’m not worried about it. You got your reasons, you feel strongly, go for it. It’s not an issue that stirs my passions.
As IF I could silence you.
Wow. Ouch. I’ll stand by both the comments you quote me on—statements I made before I saw the film—and my review of the film as post on out.com at http://www.out.com/detail.asp?page=1&id=26757. But ouch. K
I watched TOTWK through a link some person left for me on change.org saying “i dont agree with the boycott of this after i watched it” and “oh, hell no” That crap dosent represent me AT ALL… Im NOT transgender because “oh my gosh im gay” or “i like to wear womens clothes” fuck that shit.. leave that way of thinking for the crossdressers there is a ginormous difference.. and oh! for the fucking ending of that CRAP shit i watched when whats her name says, “Do you know the difference between them (The dead straight guys) and us” No what? I dont know” Stupid ass! so, ignorent
I would just like to point out Kate Bornstein’s prior statement about the word “tranny”. First off, her “fact” that it was created in Sydney during the late 60s as a way of “unifying community” is dubious at best. Who told this bit of information… Doris Fish/Philip Mills (who lived as a gay man most of the time), Aussie drag queen. The term existed well before that in reference to transvestites (not transsexuals).
http://katebornstein.typepad.com/kate_bornsteins_blog/2009/07/who-you-calling-a-tranny.html
There’s a lot of other Bornstein BS in this post.
Ze compares telling FTMs not to use “tranny” to lesbian feminists in the 1980s telling her she couldn’t use woman. How these two compare is beyond me.
Here entire view that MTF people in Sydney in the 60s-70s all came through the drag scene is a bizarre assertion. Where did Bornstein get this info… Doris Fish. Please note that even a transsexual like Amanda Lepore said in an interview that all the transsexuals she knows have a hyper sexualized idea of womanhood. Erica Andrews (who’s in TOTWK) said this at the Q&A following the film’s premiere at the Tribeca FF:
“The main problem in our community is that we label too much. If we just learned to express ourselves for exactly who we are there would be no more discrimination, no more issues, no more challenges in life. I’m Mexican by the way and I can say Wetback, it means nothing to me, it’s just another label. Tranny, I guess is what people label people like us that choose to live this lifestyle. They went from transsexual, to transgender to tranny.”
Yes, she’s calling being trans a lifestyle… just like the Christian Fundies do. What this tells me is, before you get all your information about a community from people, be certain your source actually knows what the hell they’re talking about.
As a transwoman who lives in the same city as Luna I have been witness to what truly inspired the tragedy. Transphobia. Pure and simple. Luna despises transgender people and knows how to hurt us. He knew how we would react to the title, connecting this movie with Angie, the content, advertising and how we would be repealed by is ilk as they parrot his mindless dribble about how he wanted to ’empower transgender woman”.
He did not count on one thing. You, the transgender community responding as furiously as you have. We are making this conversation ours. This is about transgender people owning our identity and destiny.