Reposted from mariedippenaar.tumblr.com
In response to this video:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/31/okcupid-queer-transgender-petition-_n_3367210.html?utm_hp_ref=transgender
I’m fascinated by Pogensky’s redefinition of the words “queer" and “transgender." At first, I was offended by the way the proposed reform seemed to third-gender trans people. But then I realized that, coming from the perspective of a genderqueer person, Pogensky might have been using “transgender" to refer to people to transgress binary gender, perhaps projecting their own non-binary identity onto other trans* people.
The word “queer" is a fascinating one. I went to an MCC - Metropolitan Community Church, a denomination founded by and for LGBT Christians - service this morning where “queer" was used by members of my parents’ generation as an inclusive term for all people excluded from societal norms. But it was only used after an apology to the 65+ crowd, for whom, statistically, the word is unredeemable. So hearing this video use “genderqueer" and “queer" as two relatively specific, unquestionably redeemed words was interesting. I’d like to know what Pogensky’s distinction between “queer" and “unlabeled" sexuality would be, or between “transgender" and “genderqueer." They’re certainly stretching definitions in different directions - I love and hate that definitions are always so fluid in the LGBT community. It gives us something to bitch about ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment