The dynamic duo is back, and admit it, you missed us! Peterson and Zack fill you in on all the crazy fun stuff that’s been happening in their lives, Peterson brings us some more queer erotic poetry, and then the two launch into a roundtable on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Prop 8, Trans Day of Remembrance in Botswana, and the removal of “sexual orientation” from the United Nations Resolution on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions. The charming rapport, sophomoric euphemisms, and cutting analysis of LGBT issues is back like never before. Leave your comments and tell all your friends to download your favorite queer podcast.
The Queer and Queerer Podcast!
Listen to this week's episode:
(Please click here to listen on iPad/iPhone or download.) | Open Player in New Window
Here’s some more information about what we talked about this week:
» Read more of C.P. Cavafy’s poetry.
» Read Zack’s analysis of the Prop 8 Oral Arguments or watch them on C-SPAN.
» Autumn Sandeen: What Would The Repeal Of DADT Mean For Transgender Servicemembers?
» The U.N. Resolution Change and the British Muslim group’s condemnation.
» Botswana’s first-ever Trans Day of Remembrance.
» Machelli’s new song, “In Your Face.”
(Hat tips to Pam Spaulding and Big Hollywood.)
When we talk about homophobia and transphobia, it’s usually not people who are overtly hurtful. Often such feelings can lie just under the surface of a “supportive,” “I have gay friends,” façade. All it takes is a catalyst and it all comes rolling out.
And it can be pretty small. For example, you might have someone like Martin Scheinin. Scheinin is the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism. That’s really his title. His job really is to make sure that security efforts don’t violate people’s rights. I think it’s fair to assume that part of that would be making sure that specific groups of people aren’t unfairly targeted. That’s what I think he was doing when he proposed rethinking security checks that “focus attention on male bombers who may be dressing as females to avoid scrutiny [and] make transgender persons susceptible to increased harassment and suspicion.”
Sounds great. Trans folks shouldn’t be thought of as suspicious. That seems reasonable, right?
Not to Greg Gutfield and his posse!
Let’s deconstruct all the transphobia…
Translation: checking for dudes who conceal bombs via cross-dressing hurts the feelings of men who cross-dress as a lifestyle choice… like Bill.
I can’t figure out if this is the worst story ever, or THE GREATEST STORY EVER.
And they’re off!
Use of demeaning language “lifestyle choice”? Check.
Make fun of friend by calling him trans? Check.
Completely denounce a story about protections for trans folks? Check.
I mean,by revealing what the UN does best, this report takes the transgendered cake: simultaneously undermining the war on terror while mocking common sense. When the UN isn’t trying to minimize mass murder, this mishmash of maniacs tries to commit it themselves.
Conditionalize people’s identities with grammatically incorrect “transgendered”? Check.
Translate nondiscrimination policy as “mocking common sense”? Check.
Suggest that not discriminating is tantamount to mass murder? Check.
The war on terror is not a lab for social engineering. The war on terror cannot be guided by feelings belonging to someone who fried his brain on Oprah. The war on terror is meant to protect the innocent from terror – be these innocent folks gay, straight, transgender or half man/half unicorn (they exist). If America were to take this UN report seriously, we would put everyone at risk, including the transgendered and those dumbasses at the UN.
Suggest that war is more important than respect and that compromising respect is essential for protection? Check.
Accuse trans folks of having their “brain fried” by the sympathies of Oprah? Check.
Include mythical in-breed for comparison to identities you don’t respect? Check.
I would hope that the gay, lesbian and transgendered community would find this idea equally as ludicrous, but if they don’t, I don’t care. I’ll still be wearing my floral caftan in first class. And those embroidered sunflowers are not stains, by the by. And if you disagree with me, then you’re probably a racist.
Assume you can speak for other communities and blow them off at the same time? Check.
Blatantly mock trans identities by presuming it involves being prim about dress wearing? Check.
Somehow suggest that you are the victim of racism when you are pretending to talk on behalf of others’ peoples rights but instead are offending everyone and making a total ass out of yourself? Check.
Let’s see how things unfold with the rest of his friends there on Red Eye. Here are some excerpts…
Here’s some nice racism from John Devore, espousing a policy of “maximum paranoia”
If you eat falafel for lunch, you’re a terrorist. If you have a bad attitude, you’re a terrorist.
Greg asks his friend, “Actor/Comedian” Allen Covert (whoever he is), a profound question:
If we relax standards on the transgendered, won’t that encourage terrorists to cross-dress? Because that way they can get through faster.
The use of “transgendered” is at least up to five now. Just a note: “transgendered” is not a word! If transgendered were actually an adjective, transgender would be a verb. But it’s not. Transgender is an adjective. It is not only incorrect but offensive to use a word that conditionalizes people’s identities as if it was something done to them instead of respecting it is simply part of them.
Anyways, how does Covert respond?
Look, Greg, I think you have it all wrong here, because I firmly believe that it is better for a million people to die a fiery death than to offend one dude who’s not comfortable unless he’s wearing his Vera Wang wedding dress in first class.
I happen to agree with you. Feelings are more important than atrocity.
Let the man put the wang in Vera Wang. Let him do it. Let him do it.
I’m personally of the opinion that when somebody starts juxtaposing respecting an identity with genocide, they’re really in over their head.
It’s totally clear that these people have no understanding for trans identities whatsoever, let alone respect. A trans woman is not a “dude” nor a “man.”
I’ll let you watch the rest of the clip. But Bill Shulz gives us one more piece of brilliant wisdom about trans identities:
It is not a lifestyle choice if you force me to do it, Greg, particularly if I’m cleaning your office while doing it.
I think he might be on to something legitimate about the way his manpurse is searched more thoroughly than women’s, but I think he might actually have just been joking.
So there you have it. If you have ever wondered what transphobia looks and sounds like, you’ve now got a whole little collection of comparisons all in one tidy little clip.
Keep it up, Fox News. You’re doing great.
I missed seeing this story, but apparently in March, the United Nations passed a resolution condemning “defamation of religion” as a human rights violation.
Does that mean that my challenges to religion in this blog are a human rights violation? I’m pretty sure I’m still protected by the United States Constitution, but it’s still quite the infringement on individual freedoms. It is not a precedent I’m a fan of.
Given that the resolution blatantly reinforces the Respect meme, it seems to be regressive. Maybe the resolution will never be mentioned again, but it seems like a sad sign for human rights and understanding. What are your thoughts?