Andrea James believes a straight cis woman is a better choice for the GLAAD Board than queer trans women

TERFs are the new Westboro Baptist Church
July 28, 2014
Houston, know thy bigots: outing the haters
July 30, 2014

Andrea James believes a straight cis woman is a better choice for the GLAAD Board than queer trans women

By Mari Brighe
@MariTheTNF

 

In her latest cognitive-dissonance-filled diatribe, “comedian” Andrea James attempts to maintain her waning relevance by criticizing the GLAAD Board of Directors for having too much trans representation. The piece, published on Queerty (a blog with its own problematic racist and transphobic history), forwards the idea that GLAAD has been subjected to a “trans takeover” because trans women are more common on the board than they are in the LGBT population as a whole. James claims that the presence of trans women on the board, particularly writer Jenny Boylan and sports journalist Christina Kahrl, is causing “mission creep” in GLAAD’s operations, and it is responsible for the “conflict” between trans women and the rest of the LGBT community on media issues. Ms James then returns to viciously flogging her favorite deceased equine: accusing queer trans women of all manner of sins including: “hating drag”, being assimilationist, oppressing drag performers, and being “newly minted queers”, all in the name of protecting mainstream LGBT culture.

Let’s begin by looking at the very first beginning of Andrea’s piece. She begins:

“Meghan McCain’s recent appointment to the GLAAD board of directors is promising. LGBT rights are not a partisan issue, and allies are critical. Her appointment is most important, however, because she was socialized as female from birth, a point of view that is slowly being squeezed out of the GLAAD board, replaced by people who were socialized as boys from birth, including four current transgender board members.”

If you aren’t familiar, Ms McCain is the daughter of Arizona Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain. She is a white, wealthy, straight, cisgender member of the GOP. She is quite literally the picture of privilege in the United States. Andrea expresses excitement for McCain’s appointment at several points in her piece, primarily because she was “socialized as a girl”, a demographic that James feels is underrepresented on the GLAAD board, and she goes on to criticize both Boylan and Kahrl for being “socialized as boys.”  So, in James’ opinion, the input of a very wealthy straight cisgender woman on matters of LGBT media representation are considerably more important than those of queer trans women because of “socialization.”

James next launches into a slap-dash comparison of the demographics of the GLAAD board as compared to the queer demographics of the US. Here, she makes perhaps the only useful points of the entire piece: that there is an astonishing majority of cis gay men on the board, and a disappointing dearth of bisexuals and trans men. But, instead of focusing on those salient points, James decides to focus her energy on railing against the four trans woman on the board for being the wrong kind of trans women (which, according to James, is queer and later-in-life transitioning). Particularly galling is how James then attempts to accuse Kahrl of this exact same behavior by misrepresenting a tweet in which Kahrl expresses appreciation for the writing of another trans writer. Misrepresenting tweets without context is a technique that Andrea appears to be quite fond of. James makes the point that trans representation on the GLAAD board is a new phenomenon, and appears to long for the days when she still gave presentations to the trans-excluded Board. It’s unclear whether this because she is bemoans the reduction in her own influence, or she has simply internalized the transphobia of the gay male community to such an extent that she fears life without their dominance.

It’s at this point that James descends into frightening incoherent series of accusations for which she provides absolutely evidence or rationale. She writes:

“Now that we are gaining greater rights and acceptance, a few comfortable elitists in the trans community suddenly want to exclude those who are not “true” transgender people. Nowhere has this been more evident than in the recent campaign led by Boylan and Kahrl to make “tranny” a slur under any circumstance.”

So, after praising the inclusion of Meghan McCain – the very picture of American elitism – Andrea accuses two far less wealthy and considerably less influential trans women of being “comfortable elitists”. Never mind the fact that the entire GLAAD Board of Directors is made up of elite and respected members of the media; James makes zero attacks on the “elitism” of the rest of the board. Beyond that, her accusations of attempts to “exclude” people from the trans umbrella are both unfounded and astonishingly hypocritical, considering how recently she defended Calpernia Addams for her assertions that young queer trans activists had not “earned their place at the table.” Interestingly, both Addams and James were featured quite prominently featured in the photos from this years GLAAD Media Awards and both have bragged about their influence and Hollywood connections in their writing. Could this be nothing more an ugly case of projection from an LGBT elitist threatened by the rise of other activists who don’t share her narrow gay-male-preferential view of the world? James then gets into what appears to be the ACTUAL point of her article, finding another excuse to rant on and on about how important the word “tranny” is. A good long search of Twitter and Google turned absolutely no evidence than either Boylan or Kahrl had led any kind of “campaign” against the word, only that they support ceasing to normalize the use of a slur used frequently to harm and demean trans women, in line with GLAAD’s current media guidelines.

As she seems to do just about every time she finds another outlet to print her drivel, James then returns to her obsessive need to make absolutely every conversation about drag performers. She states:

“This “tranny” debate exemplifies how many transwomen socialized as straight boys dislike drag. They did not come up through the club scene, they were not forced to seek refuge among the LGBT community. People socialized as straight males (myself included) enjoyed respectability and privilege, and now many of these newly minted queers are trying to impose their brand of respectability politics onto a group they joined after transition. They want to exclude drag from the trans community, because they don’t like its countercultural in-your-face offensiveness.”

Here again, James appears to hold the gay-male dominated drag club scene to be the be-all-end-all of queer culture and denigrates anyone who did not take part in it as “socialized as straight boys”. This categorization is absolute absurdity. Many queer trans women lived their own versions of gender non-conformity for years before transition, with a relatively small minority living anything approaching a socialized straight male existence right up until transition. In fact, many of us who lived in non-binary identities prior to transition found the gay-male-controlled LGBT culture that James appears so fond of to be hostile and unwelcoming, and had to seek refuge elsewhere- most frequently in each other. Simply put, James’ continued labeling of queer trans women as “newly minted queers” is functional erasure of our queer experience simply because it doesn’t align with the standard narrative of the monolithic mainstream LGBT culture. For queer trans women, the rejection of James mainstream LGBT culture represents a rejection of the iconography of a culture that consistently views us as less-than, shoves us to the outside, and ignores our concerns.

James wraps her piece by, once again, making a point to defend RuPaul and attempting to connect Boylan to another “campaign” that doesn’t exist, this time one supposed started by Parker Molloy in her infamous (and now multiply retracted and multiply apologized-for) tweet. James’ reliance on the term “campaign” for any instance of the queer trans community expressing a view is nothing more than a propaganda-derived technique to cast us in a conspiratorial light, making it all the easier to denigrate and discount the views all of us at once. In another glaring moment of hypocrisy, James both attacks the state of LGBT activism as “mainstream and bland and corporate”, and praises RuPaul (arguably one the most maintream, corporate LGBT people out there, given that his popular cable TV show) for his “huge donations”. It seems mainstream and corporate are okay, so long as they’re the right kind of mainstream and corporate.

Following the publication of this piece, James took to Twitter to engage in trolling of the queer trans community, including some disturbingly ableist tweets in which she attacks her “haters” by accusing them being on the autism spectrum.

Andrea is no stranger to being a bully on the internet, but this kind of grade-school name-calling is disgusting. When she was repeated called out for her abusive, ableist trolling, she created a Twitter list of anyone who criticized her:

For someone who happily writes lengthy hit pieces on anyone who criticizes her or her friends, Ms James appears to have an awfully thin skin when her own behavior comes under fire, and she compensates for it in the same manner that all bullies do – by lashing out.

Sadly, Ms James was not at all wrong to be critical of the composition of the GLAAD Board. Better representation of bisexual people and trans men would add vital voices to the organization (far more vital than a cis-het white woman’s voice), and the gay male contingent could stand to lose a few seats. But, James’ decision to attack the queer trans women on the board, and to make absurd stretches of the facts to connect that attack to the same tired talking point she’s been using for months, point not to a legitimate concern for diversity, but instead to a personal agenda.

At the end of the day, Andrea James seems to have reduced her role in the trans community to little more than a classless irritant of fading provenance. Years of swallowing and internalizing the transphobia of the mainstream LGBT culture appears to have made her willing to subvert herself and attack other trans women to appease the gay men who control that culture, and further their agenda.  Given her connections to the wealthier members of the LGBT media community (which she happily flaunts on Twitter), I suppose it can come as no surprise that she functions as their lapdog. It would just be nice if they’d keep her on a shorter leash, because we’re tired of listening to her bark.


Tip this TransAdvocate!

Writers for the TransAdvocate work hard to bring you news and commentary. If you found this article meaningful, let the author know that you appreciate the work they do with a tip!
TipJar

36 Comments

  1. allyreneer says:

    I’m a proud trans woman, and I would never take this obvious ‘comedians’ word for anything! I laugh off the remnants of her supposed importance.

  2. Sami says:

    -Using the word ‘hate’ to describe someone who promotes the use of transhobic slurs reveals a deep character flaw which invalidates everything else they ever say no matter how much they apologize and walk back from that comment.

    -Using every possible opportunity to bash your critics for being raised as straight boys, an obvious attempt to demean and insult them as less female-than-thou, is perfectly acceptable.

    Does anyone else find this double standard infuriating? The most blatant example I’ve seen was this article:

    http://www.therainbowtimesmass.com/2014/04/30/dont-hate-rupaul-thoughts-drag-race-controversy/

    It’s a whole page going on and on about how horrible it was for Malloy to use the word hate in a tweet, going so far as to compare her to the friggin Nazis and KKK, while not making any mention at all of the fact that slur supporters were praising a video where we get shot in the head.

    And yes I am the same Sami in their comments section pointing out their BS.

    • Kathy11 says:

      Socialized as straight boys……….

      If one buys into a normative socialization process for LGBT people when children as Ms. James implicitly states – that this means almost all gay men and women with trans histories who are solely attracted to men……were socialized as straight boys. Very few were raised to be or had the societal expectations upon them of growing up gay men or straight women.

      Ms. James was socialized as a straight boy by that standard. Likewise almost all lesbians would then have socialized as straight girls.

      How are bi and lesbian women insufficiently queer? Why is gay male society the only queer culture?

      The standards she’s proposing are homophobic and misogynist – straight women are queer in her lexicon – and coming out in bi, pan or gay women’s society is straight. She undermines their (and her own) identities as women.

  3. fkd says:

    Your article just made me take Andrea’s side, though I don’t agree with her offending disabled people

  4. Jocelynn says:

    This person, comedian, whatever she is, she is very offensive! I’m a nerdy transwoman who is pansexual, and in a relationship with a beautiful and amazing transwoman who I going to marry in the future. That doesn’t denote my queer experience, it’s just who I am….people really make me mad sometimes.

  5. friday jones says:

    Was I really “socialized as a straight boy?” I transitioned at age 22, seven years after my first consensual sexual encounter with an adult gay man. For someone who attained legal drinking age in the early Eighties, I considered myself pretty much the opposite of straight. And Drag has fuck-all to do with being Trans. Trans women who do Drag are trying to make money, period. Drag is how men make fun of women and everything that is distinctive about the feminine gender. Drag is misogyny personified. In the case of “performers” like Shirley Q. Liquor, Drag is misogyny plus racism, personified.

  6. LizLox says:

    Great article saying everything I would have said. Thanks for writing it, Mari.

  7. LizLox says:

    Great article saying everything I would have said. Thanks for writing it, Mari!

  8. Tammy Twotone says:

    What a bunch of horseshit. She’s not a comedian. When the hell did that happen?! Did she somehow appoint herself a comic? Are you kidding me?! That’s just sad.

    • Sassafras says:

      She’s been trying to rebrand herself as a “comedy writer” because she’s written three obscure comedic short films that nobody watched. Given her twitter output, I imagine they have lots of dated pop-culture references, mean-spirited and uncreative insults, and “wacky” non-sequitors.

  9. I just find it sad. Andrea is someone I respected, and now is someone I don’t know what’s happened to.

    • Nikola says:

      Same here Autumn. When I was transitioning, Andrea’s website was one of the key sources of information – I raved about it – I still do in fact. So that was back in the late ’90’s and although I still read a lot of opinion pieces about trans stuff, I realise that since I transitioned … soooo much has changed in the trans world and so, instead of continuing to voice my opinion about things on websites, blogs and forums, I now take a back seat and know that those who are far younger than I (I’m now 49) have a far more open viewpoint on the current state of things than most of us who transitioned around the turn of the century or before. Sometimes I think she’d be better served to do the same.

  10. Judithe Frances says:

    Thank you, Mari!

    You hit it out of the park!

    “Andrea James seems to have reduced her role in the trans community to little more than a classless irritant of fading provenance.” If she ever had one.

  11. […] I strongly encourage those who continue to support and promote Andrea James to look for themselves w… and consider carefully the implications of her words and actions. […]

  12. Dee Omally says:

    Trans Exclusion is trans exclusion. Andrea James has crossed over and has in so many words confessed to be a TERF. She had her choice and chose to defend the indefensible: defamation of females (trans) should have been permitted by RuPaul. This is beginning to convince me that some trans females will always remain gay drag males…and for them “trans” is the same as when drag: a female uniform that as RuPaul himself (Trans Enemy #1) states has a $50,000 price tag. This is a copy of my benevolent shout out to someone who has now publicly betrayed the very community that she claims to be a member of. She has proven to be no friend of the trans community, no matter her beginnings.

    THE USURPATION OF FAME: TRANS TREACHERY WITH A DRAG HISTORY

    The first clue that the author, A.J. is hiding behind academic-speak while wielding a proverbial spear, as she targets another’s back quickly asserts itself with this problematic phrase: “…socialized as female from birth”—let’s not pretend that this is not euphemistic for “real women”, or stated otherwise “women born women”. In rapid succession the literary spear is quickly launched as we read “…socialized as boys growing up”, and “…people socialized as straight white males, and “”…were socialized and identified as straight pre-transition.” In a world where most children mature into adulthood and discard parental and environmental “socialization”, this begs the question: A.J. what is the big concern with “socialization”? Did you not yourself discard such male socialization? Of course we know that had she said “women born women”, the uproar would be incessant. ENTER: “socialization” as euphemism.

    The author then thrusts the spear and places blame not on the parties who in march 2014 unsuccessfully attempted to mainstream the two very worst trans slurs in existence today—the She**** and Tra**** words. The horrific reality that these two words, despite benevolent usage in tiny private circles, are uttered to revoke and de-legitimize sex/gender complete transitions is completely beside her points, as she dons the lanyard from which dangles a “drag ally” placard. She knows it not, but her journey to irrelevance has begun as she will awake one day to find that history has moved on, without her. Rather than place blame on the “public-use of trans slurs are just fine with us” perpetrators who jump under the trans “umbrella” by day, and under the “gay” umbrella by night, she blames us, who dared to stand up, not unlike the LGB of old, and say “NOT IN MY WATCH YOU DON”T!” It is not RuPaul who “clashed” as he despicably tried to promote the horrific public-slurring trans S & T words, but we who “clashed” by daring to stand up to him! ENTER: betrayal & deception.

    She continues to write, lumping in drag (cross-dressers who remain gay males) with transgender (persons who do NOT remain birth sexed but undergo a complete sex/gender change). She pretends not to know that distinction is not synonymous with superiority. Those opposed to trans equality remain opposed due to this very drag = trans myth because who could ever blame them for not wanting males in the female restrooms? It is about the sex, not the gender expresson. It is about a medical doctor’s confirmation of a sex change, an ID sex update…24/7 social recognition at work…full assimilation into society, passing ability notwithstanding! The distinction between cross-dressing (drag) and sex/gender transition is one that is as crucial as a distinction between male and female, regardless of birth sex! How dare A.J. pretend that this is a moot point!

    She continues to pretend that we want drag “excluded” from the trans community when it already is excluded, hence the very reason for disparate labeling! Duh x 1,000! Gay males are already represented in the LGBT under the G! Duh again!! Drag is never a subset of the trans/sex change community and never has been, no matter who tossed it in for gay measure! The early history of transgender was referred to as “transvestite” but only because trans history had not yet evolved to make the distinction (not superiority) between cross-dressing (an act) and sex-changing (a medical/legal reality)! How dare A.J. pretend not to know this!
    Ru, one reason trans women don’t wish to be called “t—-” is that we don’t want to be mistaken for someone like you.

    History has proven Parker Malloy, Cristan Williams, Jennifer Boylan and Christina Kahrl absolutely spot-on correct. How so? Simple. RuPaul’s continued intransigence supported by his male drag cult followers who to this day, in psychopathic fashion, truly believe victimizing speech, particularly to a very fragile and extremely under-represented group, has a constructive role to play in public media. The group in which I am included, more specifically Latina trans(itioned) transfemales, and trans women of color, is so often lethally targeted that a perennial TDOR memorial event is held. How dare A.James pretend that all of this is fiction, that communicating trans slurs to an audience who to this day believe that drag = trans, and worst of all, in her destined-for-the-shredder story above, one “tr*nny” wasn’t enough—-it had to be uttered seven times. Oh of course the quotes made the word disappear….and appear innocuous—NOT! We already live in a policed-world, precisely the reason America has remained insulated from 3rd world “normalcy” of violence. To even attempt to argue that LGB/Trans slurs don’t rise to the level of requiring “policing” over public media is at minimum naive, at maximum delusional.

    Transgender, transvestite, gay, lesbian, penis, vagina, even cisgender are labels, but not labels with a history of hate. A.James gets an A for attempt, but an F- for credibility and effect. BTW, drag has value…$ value…just as Hollywood has $ value…entertainment value. In relation to transgender equality, drag has absolutely zero value, in fact it’s value can only be destructive because selling the drag = trans fiction will only convince religious, straight, gay and lesbian bigots that trans equality is a non sequitur. This is a fight for what is right…and in 2014 it is now a fight laden with might, make no mistake. Yes, RuPaul, and the non-trans drag or former drag advocates of trans slurs uttered via public airwaves have themselves stood up and declared themselves as enemies of the transgender community. This written Sad Sack rubbish story is Exhibit A.

    • Dee Omally says:

      That was my comment at Queerty.com. As trans rights gain momentum, we are beginning to see where our enemies have been residing. To think that all we did is what the LGB of old has done….stand up for our respect and dignity that has eluded us for 65 years and this is how one of our peers, with ties to Hollywood, RuPaul and the gay (drag) community shows her respect to fellow trans sisters.

      As if we don’t already get called the most vulgar names by TERF lesbians, TERM gays,….now a trans female engages in trans cannibalism. Can it get any worse?

    • Nicole H says:

      perfectly stated! Thank you.

  13. Shayne O says:

    As a CIS/Male white guy I can’t say I fully understand the issues, but don’t let haters get you down guys and gals, lifes too precious to waste on fuckwits and turncoats. <3

  14. Dana Taylor says:

    Andrea doesn’t get how abelist that is. How can she not get how offensive this is? Also, why does she keep biting the hands that feed her? Maybe it is time for a boycott of her products.

  15. […] Mari Brighe – Andrea James believes a straight cis woman is a better choice for the GLAAD Board than queer trans w… […]

  16. Nicole H says:

    I’ve pretty much lost all respect for Andrea James. She seems to have lost her friggin’ mind.

  17. timberwraith says:

    “classless irritant of fading provenance”

    Wow, now that’s a well crafted turn of phrase. May I steal that? 😉

  18. DarlieB (@DarlieB) says:

    Ah I see there is still more time for petty infighting here at the Transadvocate. How proud Twitter must be having it’s gloriously unedited , unmonitored ,limited broadcasts elevated to that of a journalistic literary spectacular! No! it’s twitter everyone, it’s important! Really important! There aren’t millions of moronic tweets from lots of celebrity’s a day! It’s serious!

    Now it’s not that I agree with Andreas wanting exact representation for the LGBT demographics ,in fact ,I’m more than satisfied to be represented by any member of the LGBT. Man , woman, bisexual , lesbian or gay or any of the various assortment of transgender. As long as they aren’t TERF. So now that I disagree with her opinion I suppose I should join in the Andrea is so unimportant I have to write an article about her that actually just proves how important she really is (cue face palm) but Im not going to.

    So enjoy. Have fun.

    http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130813020608/villains/images/8/8a/Elephants_(Dumbo).jpg

    • Dee Omally says:

      Her very actions here (A.J.) spells TERF. A TERF by any other name is still a TERF.

      • DarlieB (@DarlieB) says:

        Who has she misgendered ? Who has she outed ? Who is she calling a man , doxxing , phoning employers or showing up ar radfem events claiming o be against gender? My definition of TERF has a bit more requirements than dislikeing what someone sys.

      • Dee Omally says:

        To: DarlieB 🙂

        Excellent and completely valid point. Thank you for giving me pause to reflect. Brief utterances should be explained, no matter which side of an issue one is on. Not doing so usually reflects a “hit and run” exercise of oral flatulence, often depicted in social media.

        Every group, organized or not, is based on a common identity or purpose, and retains (of course) individual diversity. The group is the macro snapshot and the individual the micro. Reflecting individual attributes (courage, intellect, bravado, showmanship, knowledge, socioeconomic power, ego, etc.), that have historically been used in constructive and destructive ways, member participation can be categorized under these headings: Commission Omission

        It need not be said that not all is known (details) about why some assertive deeds are undertaken, and that some are far beyond fair play. No matter the group “membership”, no one is beyond due accountability for not playing by “the rules”. Stated otherwise, no matter the hatred, the loathing, the animus, or disagreement, boundaries are important. It need not be said that there are indefensible deeds that exceed such boundaries. Although we no longer reside in gladiator Rome, we still live in a gladiator world and society, as reflected in MMA, boxing, football, and other physical head-on conflicts that draw literal blood. To live is to have to fight through life, and to live for what is right is to fight the good fight. There is such a thing as vehement and yet respectable combat, literal and physical (sports).

        Of course, many subscribe to the adage “All’s fair in love and war”, and truly figurative war has been waged against those of us who took destiny by the hand and exercised control over it, sex/gender speaking. This has and always will be a noble part of human free will: destiny is malleable, and yet for having done so, others have waged war against us since 1973. Ever since then, females (trans) have been the subjects of wrath meted out by tooth and nail worshipers of femininity (although typically expressed in masculine ways), as we continue to be met with a Fort Knox-locked door (MitchFest), merely for not “looking female enough”. Undoubtedly many females (trans) do attend MitchFest without obstruction. The 2014 reversal of medical care for some females (trans) that was denied in 1981 stands as prima facie proof that the exclusion of these females (and males) from SOC medical care was a colossal mistake—one that over 33 years undoubtedly caused the loss of lives, as denying medical care for anyone else would. Nothing is as final as the end of life, making it obligatory that the advocates still alive fight on behalf of their memory. Failure to do so could very well cause further loss of life, even perhaps to self.

        There are always those members of a group who exceed boundaries and their individual choice to do so will subject them to individual and due accountability hopefully, as should and must be the case. As I proceeded on my journey (trans), I was horrified to read that some players opposed to the idea that sex is not immutable resorted to jugular-level, boundary-exceeding, back-targeting acts that are far, far, beyond any defensible/indefensible boundary. Those very acts you depict (outing, misogyny, doxxing, 3rd party conscription, etc.) are such jugular-level violent acts, because this can drop the first domino that ultimately leads to a loss of life: severing the economic lifeline can only lead to personal despair and all that entails.

        Let’s not forget that those doing those despicable, abhorrent deeds are probably very few in numbers, and probably involves privileged access to data that is then abused to mete out personal motives. There are many “bennies” available to some based on occupation, and many in the past have unethically abused such benefits. Those very deeds you itemize reflect the “militant” arm of the TERF cause and group. My definition of TERF, however reflects what the acronym literally says: feminists (radical) that EXCLUDE transgender persons. A.James has made her position very, very clear. In her article, she clearly abuses the word “socialized” by making obvious use of it as a euphemism for “real female”. Top to bottom her article is pro-drag, anti-trans (I subscribe to no umbrella—only to distinct very-real distinctions) Ru-Pablo’s “Fuck you Bitches…get stronger” affirmation. Under no stretch of anyone’s imagination is this an “exclusion” message.

        To the contrary, it is more of the drag = trans fiction that sells the RuPablo message to the world that “Don’t believe that sex can be changed. All anyone can do is play dress-up and ‘look’ like a female (TERF tenet), especially if they can spare $25,000!” “Why, I’m drag, they’re drag, even you are drag!” There are two primary ways to eliminate: legislate it out of codified existence or blur it so completely that it no longer is identifiable. RuPaul, a gay male with absolutely no sex-transition standing takes the latter position…and the world listens, and believes.

        It is obviously another straight-to-the-back “shotgun” blast at the trans-not-drag community. Exclusion need not involve the violent (jugular-level) acts of commission you itemize. Exclusion often occurs in alphanumeric format—-which A.James chose to make use of in this “no-gray-area” conflict. Again, being a TERF need not require one be a “soldier” of the TERF movement. Being a TERF might involve being a part of the TERF propaganda machine that spreads an exclusionary message—and this is precisely the role Andrea James has played by spewing out her rubbish. No one says “Look at me! I’m a TERF!” They all reveal themselves by their actions, and so too does Andrea James, no matter what name tag (trans) she chooses to wear. This is treachery-by-drag-ally, precisely the same as treachery-by-lesbian-ally. I hope this gives context to my very brief utterance that precipitated this lengthy reply, explaining why I typically write in lengthy commentary, risking the reader’s loss of attention and accusatory remarks that I write for personal gain or ego. 🙂

      • Dee Omally says:

        **Errata***reply to DarlieB. Paragraph 6 (last sentence) should read.

        [Under no stretch of anyone’s imagination is this an “INCLUSION” message.]

      • DarlieB (@DarlieB) says:

        “It is obviously another straight-to-the-back “shotgun” blast at the trans-not-drag community ”

        MMmmm no. I mean , not that she owes the trans community a thing but Andrea does not function that way. She is does not follow or “of the body”. I have known her for years and she HONESTLY is committed to her own thoughts.

        And just as a matter of conversation I disagree with Andrea on many things. I entirely disagree with the “socialization as a boy” thing but can only assume she was totally socialized as a boy and is speaking really for herself alone. To be socialized ” a lifelong process of inheriting and disseminating norms, customs and ideologies, providing an individual with the skills and habits necessary for participating within his or her own society.” And that just does not fit with the transwomen I know.

        It’s an attempt to stereotype the human experience in such a way that everyone must be brainwashed to believe a particular thing. And they aren’t and they don’t. I grew up with my mother and my sisters, they exerted the most influence of anyone n my life and my mother was a rabid feminist who never once failed to point out the social injustice against women.

        Oh and and one more point, all those misogynists out there ? Do you know WHY they came out that way ? You wont have to look far. It’s us. Our mothers, the women who raised them. You aren’t affected by patriarchy, you are he patriarchy.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1318036/Sons-really-mothers-favourites-88-cent-admit-treating-boys-differently.html

        Andrea has her own issues.
        https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152178013580213&set=a.46596475212.68690.519725212&amp;

      • DarlieB (@DarlieB) says:

        Oh and yet one more thing, I don give a damn who in the LGBT runs things, man woman , trans, queen . . . . . whatever. As long as they are a member and they give a amn. I laugh at cis radfem TERF who say I copy/imitate/emulate/fetishize them. Why would I want to look or act like truck driver ?!

      • Dee Omally says:

        Oh ok….nothing like personally knowing someone to really know someone. When I began my transition both Calpernia and Andrea were instrumental in the immense knowledge they provided that was/is of great value. Perhaps its me over reacting to how they came in defense of the drag culture who of course takes on offense to two S & T words that truly describe a drag experience. Yes, it matters not who the GLAAD reps are so long as they are fair in representation.

        Thanks for admitting your bias (we all have them) in that you personally know A. james. By bias I don’t mean that in a negative way at all, just that knowing someone does tend to rush to their defense and often extend undue forgiveness. This isn’t infighting at all. Andrea James clearly (her article) stands as a RuPaul apologist and that right there tells me all I need to know. My opinion of her is at basement level now. This commentary section and my remarks are completely based on her own remarks which I find very, very troubling. I still hold that the article she wrote is rubbish. I really, really do. I am sure we all write unflattering commentary once, maybe twice in a while, and she is no different. I continue to be amazed at your own brilliance….as you leave your mark everywhere…and that wonderful aroma that replaces the TERF stench that was there prior.

        The TERFs are thoroughly embarrassing themselves the more they write. History is already relegating them to a footnote in trans history….as they offer nothing of value—that is unless you consider all of their baseless mindless mudslinging of value. By the day, I am changing my opinion of TERFS and leaning toward them not really be lesbians, but are females (trans) who are seeking to legitimize being female by denying other females (trans) their own legitimacy. These truly appear to be the Uncle Toms of the trans movement. You’re right. They talk like vulgar foul-mouthed truck drivers (and often look like them) who have stopped to rag chew at truck stop burger joint along the old highway.

  19. friday jones says:

    Heh heh, Angrea Flames.

  20. DarlieB (@DarlieB) says:

    IF you think Andrea is bad you should check out Marc markangeloc’s lovefest with his best friend Buck Brennan.”“She is entitled as is everyone to an opinion.” Never before have I seen such love of TERF. She is the goddess of goodness to him and he will not tolerate any discussion of it.

    And listen to Jessica tell you all you could never have a “woman’s experience”. TERFTASTIC!

  21. Michelle Rose says:

    This isn’t about identity at all. It’s about power, prestige and money. RuPaul has lots of all three (although he would scream denials to the heavens if anybody bothered to demonstrate to him just how powerful, prestigious and wealthy he really is), Andrea James and Calpernia Addams have a waning amount of power and prestige but still considerably more money than most trans woman. Naturally, they’d like to retain that power and prestige because it translates into money in the bank.

    My opinion of this sloppy mess? Anyone using rhetoric to deny legitimacy or authenticity to anyone for any reason is the cheapest of cheap shots. It’s like kicking a paraplegic because he can’t run as fast as a “normally-enabled” person. The concept of the “spectrum” and “unconditional acceptance” of one’s own self-definition within the trans* community now seems to be a quaint superstition that nobody believes in anymore. How sad.

    The straight world doesn’t have to do a damn thing to us. We’re quite capable of destroying ourselves through greed, selfishness, ego and hubris. I suppose congratulations are in order. Where shall I send the bottle of champagne?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *