The Many Ways Queer Theory Hinders Trans Acceptance | Trans Sandwiched #18

How queer theory basically puts LGBT people on another planet.

Welcome back to Trans Sandwiched by TaraElla. Today, I want to go deeper into the ways queer theory actually hinders mainstream society's understanding and acceptance of trans people. As I previously described, queer theory is anti-essentialist in a fundamentalist way, and insists that all categories of gender and sexuality are entirely socially constructed. As such, its mission is to challenge, and actively 'deconstruct' in a postmodern sense, all stable meanings of terms like 'male' and 'female'. While some may say that queer theory is about questioning established norms around gender and sexuality, it actually goes much further than that. The problem with queer theory is not with rejecting rigid binaries and categories. The problem is that is takes its anti-essentialism way too far, to the point that it simply can't accept any essential core meaning in terms like 'male' and 'female'. This means that, ultimately, no shared meanings are possible, which severely hampers meaningful conversation and understanding.

Queer theory's refusal to accept at least some level of essential meaning for 'male' and 'female' hampers both trans people's formation of a stable identity in themselves, as well as our communication with broader society. Many trans people, like myself, understand our identities as not feeling comfortable living as 'male' and more comfortable living as 'female', and vice versa. For me, I formed this view from a very young age, and it has been a stable part of my reality. Even non-binary people often form their identities in relation to not fitting with 'male' and 'female' as pre-existing concepts. If 'male' and 'female' were empty categories that meant nothing at the core, statements like these wouldn't even make sense! By rejecting all essential meaning for 'male' and 'female', queer theory invalidates the stable self identity of trans people. Instead, it reduces trans identities, and indeed all LGBT identities, to opposition to stable meanings of 'male' and 'female'. Not only is this not our authentic sense of self, and not how most of us arrive at our own understanding of what being trans is, it also has important harmful consequences for trans understanding and acceptance in wider society.

Queer theory robs trans people of an important way to build understanding and find common ground with the mainstream. Fundamental understandings of 'male' and 'female' are part of the common shared meanings of society going back to before civilization. This understanding isn't always best reflected in rigid categories, but the basic archetypes of 'male' and 'female' are basically eternal. The old-school trans narratives that were rooted in our relationship to the widely understood archetypes of 'male' and 'female' thus provides a way to build a bridge between mainstream understandings and the trans experience of life. Even such oversimplied statements like 'a woman trapped in a man's body' were often useful to help people understand us. In a way, this is similar to how gay and lesbian people gained understanding and acceptance through the marriage equality campaign. Through striving for marriage, which has a widely understood meaning, gay couples were able to demonstrate their shared values and shared humanity with mainstream society, thus building a bridge between mainstream understandings and the gay experience of life. Queer theory activists are now trying to deny trans people the same opporunity to build bridges with the mainstream, because of their ideological commitment to anti-essentialism and deconstruction. This, in my opinion, is unfair and cruel!

Another particular concern is that, in reducing LGBT identities, particularly trans identities, to opposition to stable meanings of 'male' and 'female', it distracts from the actual experience of trans lives. Instead of discussing the challenges faced by trans people in our everyday lives, with a particular focus on the needs of people living with gender dysphoria, and how trans people can be accomodated, queer theory makes the trans discourse all about opposing stable meanings of 'male' and 'female'. Queer theory activists are essentially turning trans people into a chess piece for their radical objectives, and in the process displacing the meaning of trans identity from one based in lived reality to one based in ideology.

Queer theory activism has already had harmful effects in the real world. For example, the media discussion of trans people rarely focuses on gender dysphoria and the needs of trans people anymore. There is also not much talk about the validity of trans identity from a scientific or empirical point of view. Indeed, I think the way mainstream media portrays trans lives nowadays sometimes makes being trans look like a lifestyle choice. All this allows the pseudo-scientific talk of anti-trans activists, including gender critical feminists (sometimes known as TERFs), to sound 'more scientific' than us, and hence more credible to many observers.

This, in turn, has led to a false narrative of trans identity being able to be 'resolved' by reducing gender stereotypes, as if issues like physical dysphoria did not exist at all. This narrative is now suprisingly prevalent, especially in certain circles, like IDW fans, and 'anti-woke' socialists. I think this just shows how queer theory and gender critical feminism ultimately have the same aim, i.e. gender abolition, and they are just using trans people in a different way to achieve their aim. Different methods but same goal. One might even observe that queer theory and gender critical feminism are actually playing out a false dialectical narrative that ultimately moves towards the 'abolition of gender' and the necessary erasure of trans people and gender dysphoria in the process. If one takes this view, the dominance of queer theory on one side of the trans narrative, and gender critical feminism on the other side, is indeed a scary situation for trans people, and one that we must urgently seek to change.

We Don't Need to Erase Differences to Gain Acceptance | Trans Sandwiched #17

Why History Has Made Queer Theory-inspired LGBT Activism Obsolette

Welcome back to Trans Sandwiched by TaraElla. Today, I want to explore the likely historical motivations of queer theory-based activism, and why the experience of the past two decades has proven these motivations to be misguided.

Queer theory is a set of philosophical theories about gender and sexuality that is rooted in the idea that both gender (male and female) and categories of sexuality (e.g. straight, gay and bi) are entirely socially constructed. According to queer theory, the deconstruction of these categories is key to liberation of humanity, especially LGBT people. I have previously criticized this view, on the grounds that the total denial of stable identity categories ultimately denies LGBT people a clear and understandable identity. This makes us less able to effectively promote understanding and argue for acceptance in wider society. My concern is that queer theory-based LGBT activism essentially makes LGBT identities not understandable for mainstream society, which I strongly believe is bad for us.

I think that, to understand where queer theory-based LGBT activism is coming from, and why it is so ill-suited to the needs of LGBT people today, we need to understand its historical context. Queer theory was born in the 1980s-90s, and was highly influenced by postmodern thinkers (particularly Michel Foucault) who wrote their works even earlier. Thus, the historical context in which queer theory arose was one that was highly hostile to all things LGBT. You have to remember that, for example, homosexuality remained an offense in parts of America until 2003. Even outside America, things weren't much better, with parts of Europe and Australia banning homosexuality well into the 1990s. Until quite recently, LGBT acceptance was often a very difficult and hopeless campaign.

It was in this context that the queer theory idea of erasing the distinction between 'categories' of sexuality like straight and gay looked like the way forward for some. This was to be done by promoting a variety of philosophical theories and practices to 'deconstruct' gender. I think the logic is basically that, if there was no difference between male and female, it would logically follow that there was no difference between straight and gay, and any discriminatory laws and practices would become untenable. Of course, back in the homophobic 1990s, those interested in anything 'queer' were in the very small minority, and queer theory did not have any impact on wider society. Still, the idea lived on.

Meanwhile, the history of the past two decades has shown us that LGBT acceptance can come about, even without erasing differences that are scientifically established as well as objectively evident. Today, more than 60% of the population in most Western countries support gay marriage. The fundamental difference between male and female, and hence between straight and gay, is still widely acknowledged, yet this has not hindered the acceptance of gay and lesbian relationships at all. In other words, there was no need to erase our differences all along, they simply needed to be accepted. Promoting understanding, not erasing differences, is the key to LGBT acceptance.

In a way, queer theory-based activism has a similar difference-denying mentality to the 'stealth model' that was historically standard for trans people, and both were ultimately rooted in the same unaccepting social context. The difference was mainly that the 'stealth model' required only effort from the trans person, and some cooperation from government policies. Therefore, the 'stealth model' was at least sustainable until there was widespread awareness of trans people. On the other hand, the queer theory model would require a very fundamental change in the worldview and culture of the whole society. Moreover, the queer theory model would also require widespread challenge to established science to succeed. This, I believe, is the biggest fault in the queer theory model.

Anyway, the point is, the aforementioned models of LGBT identity only make sense if one believed that the unaccepting social context couldn't be fundamentally changed. And history has already proven this to be wrong. Therefore, I think it's time we moved on from a difference-denying mentality, towards a truly open and proud mentality.

Let's Build Bridges & End Tribalism | Diary of a Trans Popstar

Music: Listen To My Heart by TaraElla

Why Queer Theory is Bad For Trans People | Trans Sandwiched #16

Welcome back to Trans Sandwiched by TaraElla. Today, I want to talk about why I have come to the conclusion that queer theory is bad for LGBT people, particularly trans people. I will also talk about what we might do in response.

The fundamental reason why queer theory is bad for LGBT people is because it is ideological, i.e. it is rooted in certain philosophical commitments rather than empirical reality or the actual lived experience of LGBT people. Queer theory is heavily influenced by the philosophy of postmodern thinker Michel Foucault, which means that it is fundamentally committed to a postmodern, Foucauldian worldview. Included in this package are very problematic ideas like how knowledge and discourse is fundamentally about power and oppression. These ideas have fueled an LGBT culture that is overly focused on matters of language, style and identity labels, which I believe is ultimately unhealthy for us. As a trans person, I can say that my life experience of the world does not agree with the postmodern worldview. I simply don't see how language games will change anything. Instead, I believe an obsessive focus on language unnecessarily divides us, and is not helpful for building bridges.

Another reason why queer theory is harmful for trans people is because of its deconstructive nature, again due to its philosophical inheritance. Queer theory sees both gender (male and female) and sexuality (e.g. straight, gay and bi) as entirely socially constructed, and to be deconstructed. As such, queer theory resists having stable definitions and identities for everything. It's really postmodern deconstructionism on steroids. In fact, some queer theorists even resist having a definition for queer theory itself, arguing that putting a definition on queer theory is limiting. In the world of queer theory, all definitions and limits are to be resisted and knocked down. The problem with this approach is that it practically denies the ability of people to have a stable identity with a stable meaning at all. Right now, what trans people need most is for the rest of the world to understand us better. An ideology that basically says trans people are not understandable is certainly not what we need right now.

It is not just theoretical either. The deconstructive orientation of queer theory has produced real world confusion about why people identify as trans, leading to accusations that trans people are doing it for political reasons. This, I believe, is behind the so-called 'trans ideology' moral panic. From what I see, what conservatives call 'trans ideology' is basically a blend of legitimate trans issues and queer theory ideology which has been blended into the trans discourse. This blending has created multiple points of contradiction (e.g. how 'gender is entirely a social construct' but also 'gender identity is innate'), which has undermined the general public's pre-existing understanding of trans people as being 'born this way'. This situation has been seized upon by reactionary forces to argue against trans acceptance, on the basis that trans people are supposedly politically motivated to identify as trans. In this way, allowing legitimate trans issues to be bundled with queer theory, which is actually a political ideology, has caused us to suffer undeserved backlash. The trans community doesn't have an agenda to promote a postmodernist deconstructive ideology, and it is only fair that this be made clear.

The problem is that, queer theory is way too disproportionately influential in the trans discourse at the moment. This is because of its dominance in the academic humanities, particularly the parts that have historically taken an interest in LGBT issues. I believe what we need to do is to create a counter-narrative, which is basically what I'm doing now. I believe we need to speak out continuously, and get our narrative heard in the mainstream media, which has until now acted as if the queer theory influenced academics and activists actually speak for all of us. We need to speak out continuously until the bubble of academic queer theory is popped, and our counter-narrative can no longer be ignored. At that point, we will hopefully have a level playing field, on which we can engage in rational debate against the tenets of queer theory. It will be an interesting debate indeed.

Positivity | Diary of a Trans Popstar

Music: Beauty by TaraElla

Wish vs Reality: A Trans Perspective | An Asian Trans View

This is the first part of a mini series talking about my experience of living life as a trans person, what I've learned, and what I wish the trans community could come to terms with. Today, I want to talk about the gap between wish and reality in trans lives, and how we can deal with it in a healthy way.

Having a gap, a big difference, between wish and reality, is a constant feature of life for many people. This is especially true for people who suffer from gender dysphoria. While the goal of transition is to alleviate gender dysphoria, the key word here is 'alleviate'. In many cases, it doesn't make the dysphoria disappear completely, but it makes it easier to deal with, so we can go on with our lives. In other words, there is still a big difference between wish and reality in many areas, both physical and social. The reality is that, trans women can't become exactly the same as genetic women, and trans men can't become exactly the same as genetic men. Eventually, to achieve long term stability, we just need to deal with this fact. Many trans people who have transitioned for at least several years would agree that, at some point, you just need to accept this wish vs reality gap, and deal with it. Trust me, it is needed for our long term psychological health.

Which brings me onto the next issue: the difference between how people perceive us, vs how we perceive ourselves. The fact is, we can't control how others perceive us. It's another fact of life that we need to get used to. Of course, as trans people suffering from gender dysphoria, it is totally reasonable that we don't want to have our dysphoria exacerbated. Therefore, we might not want to hang out with people who constantly try to find opportunities to invalidate our gender identity, for example. We certainly have the freedom to do so, and there's nothing wrong with doing so for the sake of our wellbeing.

However, more broadly speaking, we can't expect the whole society to perceive us the way we perceive ourselves. As I often like to say, the goal of trans rights should be reasonable accommodation, so that we can have an equal opportunity at life. The goal shouldn't be to demand validation from society, because nobody can demand validation from another person. Recently, I read a comment saying that the problem with trans activists is that they sometimes demand agreement with their epistemology of transness. The fact is, we can't even agree on the epistemology of transness within our own community. It's been a point of argument for as long as I can remember. How can you expect non-trans people to agree, and to which part of the trans community should they agree with? As the history of philosophical debates shows, seeking agreement on epistemology is a dead-end. We can have trans acceptance without epistemological agreement. Who cares whether this or that person really thinks that 'trans women are women', as long as they are accepting of us and kind to us?

I guess having a philosophy that respects each of us as individuals with the right to our own moral consciences can help us navigate the way we relate with other people. After all, it was in the year that I first came out as trans that I solidified a lot of my philosophy in this area. As a Moral Libertarian, I believe that every individual should have equal moral agency. Therefore, you don't have the right to invalidate or intimidate me, and I don't have the right to invalidate or intimidate you. I have the right to identify and present the way I want to. You have the right to think or say anything about it, but it wouldn't take away my right to do what I believe is best for myself. This attitude has served me well for 15 years. I think this is the healthiest attitude for trans people to take, in a world that is not always accepting.

Against Queer Theory, For Trans Rights | Asian Trans View

Music: Not That Kind Of Retro by TaraElla