FrustratingMangooose t1_iryrr49 wrote
Reply to comment by bookdealmaybe in The hidden transphobia in "The Art of Being Normal" by hayzulhay
> The Art of Being Normal got a lot wrong.
After reading the information you have provided, I will say the author could have done better as an author and trans ally, yes.
> I do not believe having transphobic thoughts or biases innately makes people transphobic.
As much as I hate using Google definitions, Google defines transphobia as “dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people.” If you do this to yourself, you are, by definition, transphobic. The fact that you do it to yourself and you do not find it transphobic would be a marker of transphobia. “These are thoughts, so I can’t be transphobic, right?” If the thoughts are causing you discomfort with your trans identity due to heteronormative expectations from society, then yes, that is transphobic. I agree that it does not make anyone a nasty person, but if it is anything but transphobia, why call it internalized transphobia? Internalized transphobia does not only mean that you experience transphobia in yourself; it can also mean that you project those beliefs onto others subconsciously, which does become externalized transphobia if you do not address it.
> I do, however, think she’s harmed us.
Okay, I agree that she has harmed the community, but I still have my doubts as to how harmful they are to us. I do not remember any book with the Pride flag, but I searched for it, and I will agree that it would be more appropriate to have our flag, and it does misrepresent us if you use the Pride flag, and I cannot fathom any reason why they would change it. There is no defending that kind of misrepresentation since it takes zero effort to use our flag.
> I think Kate asking Leo if he was ‘in disguise’ when she meant stealth [...] does harm us
Okay, now this is what I wanted. I agree that this does harm us because saying “I disguise” has different implications than using “stealth.” Although the author cannot use “stealth” because what child knows that, right? She can leave it out and not have it affect the plot. You are right.
I agree that passing stems from transphobia. There is an air of expectation that we have to be passing to be valid, rather than for our safety or because we want it, but I feel the book is still good. I suppose it is because I had it easy as a trans individual (well, aside from HRT being a pain in the ass) that I am more accepting. It fits closely with how my trans journey was growing up, and as a result, it describes how it felt navigating as a trans person. Not everyone will like how the author writes about us; that is okay, so you have every right to discredit a book like this.
bookdealmaybe t1_iryseqc wrote
I'm not gonna talk about other points, cause while I may not agree with you on them, I do recognize that I may be wrong.
>Okay, now this is what I wanted. I agree that this does harm us because saying “I disguise” has different implications than using “stealth.” Although the author cannot use “stealth” because what child knows that, right? She can leave it out and not have it affect the plot. You are right.
This I want to talk about. Cause you're right, it's not unheard of for a trans kid to not know the word stealth. That's not the problem I have with it. The problem I have is that it is specifically mentioned that Kate has done a TON of research on trans issues that she has in a binder to show her parents when she decides to come out. But... she's never seen the word 'stealth' before?
FrustratingMangooose t1_irytfc0 wrote
I don’t know; until now, I did not know what “stealth” meant, and I used to do a lot of research about trans folks. I do not know when the term became used for trans folks but growing up when you “stealth” it means you have unprotective sex without the recipient’s permission. Is it weird, yes, but not far-fetched; this could be because not even I knew what that term meant, and yes, I did have to search it up before responding because I was like, “stealth? Huh?” Considering I am 20 and had no idea, I think it is a tiny bit reasonable to assume a 14-year-old would not know.
bookdealmaybe t1_iryu188 wrote
Yeah, I can see that since you explained it. Idk, I've known the term 'stealth' since I first learned what trans is. I do have a tendency to project my experiences onto other people, so I concede the point that she may not have heard the word before.
FrustratingMangooose t1_iryvxhc wrote
Yeah, I had no idea what that word meant until now. I mean, I am glad I do, but I always called those specific people “toast.” Trans ghost. People who cut off ties with their trans identity and live as cisgender people after transitioning. I highly doubt anyone else called them that, but I had no term to describe them.
bookdealmaybe t1_irywdly wrote
Well, yeah, but you had a non problematic term for it, which was the point I was initially making. Even if you didn't know 'stealth' specifically, you had a term that didn't imply trans peeps were playing pretend.
​
Though, I do agree a kid might not realize 'in disguise' is problematic
FrustratingMangooose t1_iryxtqy wrote
Yeah, I do not think a kid would know, but that does not excuse the author for writing it. She can omit it and the plot would remain the same, so you are right regardless.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments