And now for something hilarious (but serious)

[drwex]

http://www.equalpaybackproject.com/

Sarah Silverman is awesome and hilarious. This is sort of NSF a lot of workplaces.

ETA: Please read the comment below - this ad has been called out for being trans-phobic and not particularly enlightened. I think this falls into the category of "Liking Problematic Things" for me.

(Full disclosure: I'm a supporter of the National Women's Law Center and this is a fundraiser for NWLC. That doesn't make it less awesome.)

Comments

[coraline]

that video was hideously transphobic and the sex-worker joke was just uncalled for.
i agree with their cause, but will be supporting someone else who's fighting for it.

http://hellogiggles.com/sarah-silverman-wage-equality/3

http://twitchy.com/2014/10/08/way-to-punch-down-sarah-silvermans-sex-change-video-ticks-off-trans-tweeters/

[drwex]

Ooh. Thanks for that pointer. I've updated my entry to call attention to your comment.

[frobzwiththingz.livejournal.com]

Um, I dont get it, I seem to be clueless. I fail to understand how this video is transphobic. Reading the two linked articles hasn't helped me.
One article simply has a lot of people calling it out for being transphobic without saying anything about why. The other talks about how they
they don't like society's equating of "gender" with genitals. Fair enough, but completely orthogonal. Most people pretty much sort out Man/Woman
by outward appearance. Even trans folk [or why else would they want surgery?] Personally, I dont believe in "Gender" any more than I believe in "Race",
and believe that the movement of people to arbitrarily create all these other fluid gender categories only makes the problem stick around longer by reinforcing
the ridiculous idea of "gender" as something that exists at all, but that's another kettle of fish.

I fail to see why someone deciding they want to change their bodily appearance from "Set A" to "Set B" for reasons *other* than
"I feel I was born into the wrong body" disparages folk in that latter set in any way whatsoever. That's just like folk who claim that those gay people getting married
somehow cheapens hetero people getting married.

Clue me in, someone.

In line for clue

[vibrantabyss.livejournal.com]

I'm a +1, starting off puzzled, finding the reading unenlightening, and finding the 'logic' pattern matching to the 'logic' of the group you mentioned.

I was flailing miserably, and quite frankly afraid to speak up, so thank you for stepping up.

[dcltdw]

I'll take a stab. I don't really know, so I'm guessing.

So, the video is about Issue A. It then invokes Thing B. But was B really necessary to include?

I realize analogies are suspect, but I think it's akin to saying, "Look, women are suffering from a wage gap. Should we be treating them like *insert racial epithet*s? No! Women should make the same..."

> I fail to see why someone deciding [...] disparages folk in that latter set in any way whatsoever.

I think this falls under the heading "why did you even bring that up in the first place?". Another analogy; again, let me be the first to say to say that all analogies are suspect:

Male co-worker: Hey, wow, pretty outfit!
Female co-worker: Why are you even bringing this up?
Male co-worker: Wait, why is this disparaging?

I know my sensitivity to trans issues is low, so I could very easily believe I'm getting some subtleties wrong.

[melebeth]

Another issue (not the only one, but I'm too tired for detailed analysis) is the way that it trivializes the process of gender confirmation surgery (which, in response to phil's comment, is NOT something all transgender people are interested in) as something that people with cross-gender identities can do on a lark (Hey! I want a penis and my breasts removed!) when, in reality, it requires going through a number of cis-gendered gatekeepers trying to determine if you have the "right" to undergo the surgery. The fact that transgender surgeries require gatekeeping that no cis-gender plastic surgeries or body modifications do reflects systemic injustices that this ad trivializes for the sake of a cute joke. Is it funny? At times. Could it have been made in a way that was more respectful of trans identities? Absolutely.

[drwex]

Thanks for responding. I've been hesitating to respond because sure as hell my knowledge is incomplete.

I think a big sticking point is "this ad trivializes for the sake of a cute joke". I got the cute joke part and really missed the way in which it was trivializing something that is difficult and serious.

I think "phobic" might not be the right term, in the sense that I don't think anyone's afraid of trans people; I think "disrespectful" is a term I would use and goes to the notion of "punching down" that is highlighted in the linked commentaries.

[coraline]

i used the term "transphobic" because it seems to be the standard term of art for the class of agressions (micro and non) against trans people. a better term might be genderist (parallel to racist) but i don't think it has any currency. "phobic" is often the wrong term, both trans and homo.

another big one is the fact that trans folks consistently earn less than their cis counterparts, so it's another huge slap in the face -- "i'm not actually trans, but i'll change my body this way and get more money!" is painfully contrary to the lived experience of trans people in the workforce.

[drwex]

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I was not aware that trans people earned less. I've read a couple of well-publicized accounts of folk who discussed how their earnings changed with their outward gendered expression (in the direction this ad describes).

I agree that the language is imprecise; I think we also agree that the specific term isn't that important - it's the underlying concept that is being highlighted.

[coraline]

my very quick research indicates that transwomen's wages drop to less than cis women's, and transmen's rise, but not to as much as their cis male counterparts'. so my original statement isn't quite correct, and there is some credence to the original "point" of the joke, but i don't think it outweighs the other problematic aspects.

[coraline]

here's some data! (haven't had time to read it myself, but if you are curious)
http://www.thetaskforce.org/downloads/reports/reports/ntds_full.pdf

[drwex]

Thanks, I did read it. It's important data to keep in mind, though it doesn't bear on the specific point you raised.

[chhotii.livejournal.com]

Thank you for articulating this. I think you explained better than my own brain could one of the reasons this video irked me. I couldn't watch the whole thing. Not "Sarah Silverman is an awful person" level of irked, more like "I am failing to be amused and want to stop".

[coraline]

I fail to see why someone deciding they want to change their bodily appearance from "Set A" to "Set B" for reasons *other* than "I feel I was born into the wrong body" disparages folk in that latter set in any way whatsoever. That's just like folk who claim that those gay people getting married somehow cheapens hetero people getting married.

this is more like "watching straight people treat marriage with no respect (getting married for trivial reasons, getting divorced after 36 hours, etc.) and joke about it can be very painful to people who desperately want to marry their same-gender partner and can't". it trivializes a painful, difficult, impossible-to-acheive-for-many, traumatizing experience and uses it purely as the funny punchline for publicity-raising for another cause."

as i said below, "phobic" is a bad term since the root here isn't fear, but it seems to be accepted term of use for things-hurtful-to-trans-people-aimed-from-a-place-of-societal-advantage. "genderist" or "transist" might be more appropriate (parallel to racist, but specific to trans issues instead of women's issues) but i don't see that used anywhere.

[coraline]

additionally, i am also not the most educated person on this topic, but when i see many trans people (friends and strangers) on social media claiming to be personally hurt by this ad, i find it important to listen to them and broadcast that message, whether or not i understand all the places that hurt is coming from.

[drwex]

I agree. My understanding of "how to like problematic things" involves not hiding the problematic elements, which is why I edited the post to include your pointers. If you can think of other or better things I should do I would be happy to be told about them.

[coraline]

and i completely agree with "how to like problematic things" as a concept and more or less as executed here. so thank you for boosting my statement to the entry level.