Jump to content
  • Welcome to the TransPulse Forums!

    We offer a safe, inclusive community for transgender and gender non-conforming folks, as well as their loved ones, to find support and information.  Join today!

Are you comfortable enough to be an activist for LGBTQ+ community?


Heather Shay

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Betty K said:

 

This just sounds like capitulating, laying down and dying to me. And there is more than one way to win over the majority. You may win over your friends and neighbours by being invisible, but that will not communicate to a wide audience. 

I believe that attempting to communicate to a wide audience is an individual is generally a mistake. Big groups of people you don't know are much easier to hate. What overcomes hate is personal relationships, seeing people as individual human beings rather than as nameless masses.

 

I believe that in the 21st century, the isolation created by technology has reduced our personal relationship opportunities in general, and is a factor in our increasing social and political division and conflict.  

Link to comment
  • Replies 138
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Betty K

    46

  • awkward-yet-sweet

    21

  • Birdie

    16

  • MaeBe

    10

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

  • Forum Moderator
5 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

Big groups of people you don't know are much easier to hate. What overcomes hate is personal relationships, seeing people as individual human beings rather than as nameless masses.

So true @awkward-yet-sweet 

 

The one on one interactions are so important and more affective than group think. However sometimes we have to show solidarity in the masses by peacefully assembling in protest. The opposition has to see us in a volume sizeable enough to be considered a voting block. Groups like the Log Cabin Republicans are a good example in my opinion.

 

Mindy🌈🐛🏳️‍⚧️🦋

Link to comment
20 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

So the question is, what do others know you for? If the first word that comes to other people's minds is transgender, I'm not sure that is a good thing.

 

For many people this is not a choice. There are trans folk who don't pass and will never pass (I may be one of them). Yes, maybe the first word that comes to many people's minds when they meet me is "transgender". As they know me longer, I presume that is no longer the first word, but tbh I don't care if it is. I'm proud to be trans, and I involve myself a lot with the trans community. Caring for trans people is my job. If a lot of people think of me as trans that is absolutely fine with me.

 

26 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

I would be most pleased if my gender were far down on the list as an, "oh, by the way...."

 

This is called passing privilege. I'm sure most of us would love to have that privilege, but some of us never will. For the foreseeable future, at least, my gender will never be an "oh by the way". It's unmissable, and I refuse to dress in dour colours or hide in the shadows or stay at home or act meek or remain quiet about injustice so that less folks notice it.

Link to comment
24 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

I believe that attempting to communicate to a wide audience is an individual is generally a mistake. Big groups of people you don't know are much easier to hate. What overcomes hate is personal relationships, seeing people as individual human beings rather than as nameless masses.

 

I believe that in the 21st century, the isolation created by technology has reduced our personal relationship opportunities in general, and is a factor in our increasing social and political division and conflict.  

 

I agree that personal relationships can overcome hate, but that's exactly my point. If I go out in the street trying to "blend in" then I will be far less likely to meet people and develop personal relationships in the first place. Believe it or not, people are drawn to me because I am unashamedly myself. Who would have thunk it? I have made so many more friends and friendly acquaintances since coming out and being openly trans than I could have hoped to make when I was trying to blend in. And not all of those were allies before I met them.

 

As to the bit about attempting to communicate to a wide audience as an individual, that's your opinion, but you've said absolutely nothing to back it up. Just because Proposition #1 (ie, "Personal relationships can overcome hate") is true does not mean that Proposition #2 ("Communicating to a wide audience as an individual can overcome hate") is not. By framing your opinion as "What overcomes hate is personal relationships" you are "begging the question". That's logic.

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, Betty K said:

This is called passing privilege. I'm sure most of us would love to have that privilege, but some of us never will. For the foreseeable future, at least, my gender will never be an "oh by the way". It's unmissable, and I refuse to dress in dour colours or hide in the shadows or stay at home or act meek or remain quiet about injustice so that less folks notice it.

It is certainly true that some people pass better than others. And of course that will affect your social interactions. I don't believe that passing is a one-size-fits-all kind of experience, and there seem to be lots of people pass at a glance but might not pass upon closer inspection.  "Privilege" is mostly a political label for what others call "the hand that life dealt me."

 

Maybe I pass, maybe I don't. But mostly, I don't try. I let people think what they want, and I frequently conform to whatever it is they expect.  If that makes me dour and quiet, then I'm fine with that.  I don't put myself or others at risk that way.

 

24 minutes ago, Betty K said:

As to the bit about attempting to communicate to a wide audience as an individual, that's your opinion, but you've said absolutely nothing to back it up. 

If you read what I wrote, you'll find that I never claimed that it was anything but my own personal belief.  As your statements are.  We are trading experience for experience here, right?

 

In the context of "activism," it seems to me that the activist style of relating to a wider audience tends to be aggressive.  Do you have examples of activist techniques that are not? Or are we seeing the same activities in a different way? I ask because I do not believe that relating to a wider audience in the way that I have seen activists do it is desirable or positive in the context of being a small and vulnerable minority.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, Betty K said:

This is called passing privilege.

Wow! This is a new term for me. 😯

Link to comment

Very few can actually say they have the passing privilege. I don't have it at all. I get clocked all the time because how broad I am. I will never fit in with the standards of being a female or the feminine appearance. I have come to the conclusion of accepting it. I'm not happy how I look but as far as other's views of me I could care less as long as they don't try to harm or kill me that's it. I have enough battles with myself to care about other's opinions. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

If you read what I wrote, you'll find that I never claimed that it was anything but my own personal belief.  As your statements are.  We are trading experience for experience here, right?

It's exactly what we should be doing.  And I'd also like to add that when someone disagrees with our view, it doesn't pit them against us.  We are all made up of different experiences that mean our viewpoints are often different, but too often this results a mindset that says: "you don't agree with me, therefore you must be against me."  It isn't true.  We are all entitled to our own opinions and beliefs.  It shouldn't make us enemies.  (Politicians take note)  Healthy discourse should rule the day.  Sorry, I didn't mean to take this thread in a different direction but the direction it looked it was beginning to go raised my hackles just a little.

Link to comment
  • Forum Moderator
1 hour ago, Sally Stone said:

Healthy discourse should rule the day. 

Well said Sally, and I don't think it changes the direction of the thread.

 

Mindy🌈🐛🏳️‍⚧️🦋

Link to comment

I hope it's okay if I interject with a bit of a digression from the conversation that's been going. There's an idea that I've been chewing on for several years now but done nothing with, and I'll explain why in a bit.

 

The idea is essentially just interviews, a library of videos of people from the LGBTQIA+ community as they tell their life stories. It wouldn't focus purely on the LGBTQIA+ness of the people, and instead would be more like an oral history project. This would be documenting the lives of (preferably) elders of the LGBTQIA+ community in their own words, and then sharing their stories. 

I think this is something that could have a ton of potential for building community for LGBTQIA+ people, and for de-stigmatizing our community in the eyes of the general public.

I know that as a young trans-masc guy I've felt absolutely starved for these sorts of stories. After a lot of internet scouring, and hitting the point where stuff starts to repeat, I would love nothing more than to sit at the knee of Grampa Mandude and listen to him prattle on about his life, not just his trans related hardships. This aspect of the community has been incredibly difficult for me to access, and would have been hugely helpful to have just to not feel quite so alone at times. 

 

My reasons for not going through with the idea are a mix of situational realities and safety concerns. 

The reality: I'm monetarily limited, I have no experience with videography and associated tech, video editing is tedious as all get out, travelling with a cat is really difficult, and lastly, I have my drivers license, but I'm still learning how to drive comfortably. 

The safety concerns: I'm afraid of accidently doxing people and their houses getting burned down. I wouldn't share locations, names, or other identifying information unless specifically asked to, but there would still be a lot of potentially identifiable information in the interviews. I'm deeply afraid of the potential harms that could befall the interview-ees because of my interviews. 

 

The reality-based difficulties are all surmountable, but the safety concern has been a big part of what's held me back. The only thing I've been able to think of as a workaround has been something along the lines of keeping video links only accessible to registered members of the Transpulse forum in some way. Something like that at least, even if it defeats the secondary goal of building acceptance.  

 

I could write a short essay with this, so I'll stop myself here.

What are y'all's thoughts?

Link to comment

Hi @Conrad, I think your idea is wonderful, but I would certainly prefer to see it distributed widely than for it to only be available on TransPulse. As to safety concerns, I think that is partly what this conversation is about. There are some trans folks who would prefer to live in anonymity without their trans identities being widely known, and they might not be willing to be in such a film. But there are others who are ready to "step up to the plate" and publicly advocate for positive change, even if just by telling their stories. I think that second group would be willing to take some risks. I also think potential harms could be minimised by careful editing in collaboration with interview subjects and by techniques such as blacking out subject's faces or even voice camouflaging in especially sensitive situations.

 

It does sound like a huge project though, and I understand how daunting it might be to undertake!

Link to comment
7 hours ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

In the context of "activism," it seems to me that the activist style of relating to a wider audience tends to be aggressive.  Do you have examples of activist techniques that are not?

 

MLK, Ghandi, Jesus Christ. Were their techniques aggressive? It's an honest question. For me the answer is no, but maybe for you...?

 

Again, here's that first dictionary definition of activism: "the use of direct and noticeable action to achieve a result, usually a political or social one". Going on a lecture tour discussing trans rights could qualify. Advocating to government departments or corporate bodies. Educating folks about gender-affirming care for children. A letter-writing campaign. A petition. Etc etc.

 

7 hours ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

Maybe I pass, maybe I don't. But mostly, I don't try. I let people think what they want, and I frequently conform to whatever it is they expect.  If that makes me dour and quiet, then I'm fine with that. 

 

That is great for you if you are happy with that situation and you'll get no criticism from me. As I said above, I don't believe it is my or anyone else's business how another trans person looks or presents themselves.

 

7 hours ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

If you read what I wrote, you'll find that I never claimed that it was anything but my own personal belief.  As your statements are.  We are trading experience for experience here, right?

 

Yes of course, I take that as a given. The thing is, you made an appeal to logic earlier in the discussion and I presumed you were still trying to make a logical argument. I apologise for getting snarky; "begging the question" is one of my least-favourite logical fallacies.

Link to comment
7 hours ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

In the context of "activism," it seems to me that the activist style of relating to a wider audience tends to be aggressive.  Do you have examples of activist techniques that are not?

See this section of Leeja Miller's "Why you need to talk to Republicans" video, it talks about "deep canvasing":

 

 

The person is very much an activist, meeting people where they are. Activism does not have to be many to many or one to many; Activism is being active with a cause. It need not be violent or aggressive, however there are times that it must. I don't think anyone on this board is suggesting we all rifle-up and getting in people's faces, even if they are advocating being loudly supporting trans rights.

 

3 hours ago, Sally Stone said:

Healthy discourse should rule the day.

Agreed. Discourse requires both parties to listen to the other's side and be able, but not compelled, to change their opinions.

 

1 hour ago, Conrad said:

What are y'all's thoughts?

Interviews can be captured and recorded by a meeting app, such as Zoom or Teams, and distributed without the need to travel or expose personal details. Curating these would be an effort, but editing can be made easy by using a strong journalistic approach to the conversation: pre-define questions, share them with the interviewee, stay on topic, and use identifiable stops for editing.

Link to comment

I think interviews can certainly be enlightening and should certainly be one of the tools we use to get "civilians" to understand us.  It has been my experience, however, that when I put myself out there, in and amongst civilians, they get a better sense of who I am.  Meeting and interacting with me in person, many are surprised to find I'm not a mutant.  In fact they generally always come away with the notion that I'm really not much different than they are.

 

Maybe what I am doing is more clearly defined as outreach, but I still believe there is activism in my actions.  I'm acting to affect change, which in my mind is extremely effective.

 

We need activists who put themselves out there, sometimes in harms way, to fight for our cause, but not all of us are wired for that kind of activism.  That's okay.  What we need to remember is if each of us finds a way to do our small part, all of those individual efforts add up.  So, I say, be out there, confident in your own skin, expressing who you really are.  It goes a long way, me thinks.

Link to comment
2 minutes ago, Sally Stone said:

So, I say, be out there, confident in your own skin, expressing who you really are.  It goes a long way, me thinks.

 

I totally agree.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Betty K said:

As to safety concerns, I think that is partly what this conversation is about. There are some trans folks who would prefer to live in anonymity without their trans identities being widely known, and they might not be willing to be in such a film.

 

For me, this is definitely about safety concerns, but perhaps in a different way than folks have seen it so far.  And I realize that this could very well be a "chicken and the egg" kind of issue.  Also it probably varies by area.  I don't remember transgender issues being discussed much if at all until rather recently.  10 years ago, maximum, but more like 5-6 years.  I feel like this coincides with the increase in visibility and protests and activist stuff.  The legal situation is worse rather than better.  That may not be special, as most things are essentially worse....but I feel like activist behavior and protests have created these issues in the public mind.  Would I have been assaulted in 2022 if a large portion of the public wasn't irritated about this?  I feel like I'd be safer if things could quiet down.  I feel like I'd be safer if LGBTQ+ rights weren't so publicly linked with the Democrat Party....its like my existence becomes guilt by association.  Very unsafe for me.  🙄

 

1 hour ago, Betty K said:

MLK, Ghandi, Jesus Christ. Were their techniques aggressive? It's an honest question. For me the answer is no, but maybe for you...?

 

Again, here's that first dictionary definition of activism: "the use of direct and noticeable action to achieve a result, usually a political or social one". Going on a lecture tour discussing trans rights could qualify. Advocating to government departments or corporate bodies. Educating folks about gender-affirming care for children. A letter-writing campaign. A petition. Etc etc.

 

Yes of course, I take that as a given. The thing is, you made an appeal to logic earlier in the discussion and I presumed you were still trying to make a logical argument. I apologise for getting snarky; "begging the question" is one of my least-favourite logical fallacies.

 

Are the techniques of today's activists a match for MLK, Ghandi, and Jesus?  And yes, I'm addressing activism in general, not just LGBTQ+ folks, because sometimes the issues are a bit hard to separate. 

 

We were significantly affected by the violence in 2020.  What would Ghandi's response have been?  I recall that Ghandi undertook multiple self-punishing penitential fasts to stop violence...even when that violence wasn't directly due to his followers or done in his name.  There's no established leader of today's movements, but has there been any any notable individual with a similar level of commitment to nonviolence? 

 

Jesus' activities are well-documented, as well as his position towards the Roman authorities of the time.  Certainly today's traffic-blocking protest activities are not in the style of Jesus.  "And whoever compels you to go with him one mile, go with him two."  (Matthew 5:41).  This directly refers to the Roman solders' practice of forcing local folks to carry their stuff for a mile on the public road.  Jesus instructs peaceful cooperation rather than to protest the injustice by blocking the road.  As MLK was a pastor, would he have done something differently than Jesus?  (I'm no scholar on either religious issues, or the Civil Rights time period...simply asking.) 

 

If advocating for change via lectures, petitions, letters, videos, and such things are considered activism....I heartily approve of those things and I even participate in such.  I would shy away from the term "direct action."  Fascists, communists, and violent groups have used the same term.

 

I think that perhaps you and I use the English language in different ways, and have different approaches to logic.  We've run into this before, you and I, where we agree more on the subject than perhaps we understand in our words.  Cultural difference, perhaps?  I see logic in grades, rather than as black-and-white.  I use logic when I write, but I write in the way that I talk, and in the way that people here talk to one another on the porch or in a bar.  While I dimly understand the idea of "logical fallacies" I also dimly recall that my husband stated the fallacies could be fallacies themselves depending on application.  He's an interesting combination of soldier and professor, so much of what I discuss is heavy with his teachings, and probably poorly presented 😉

 

1 hour ago, MaeBe said:

Activism does not have to be many to many or one to many; Activism is being active with a cause. It need not be violent or aggressive, however there are times that it must. I don't think anyone on this board is suggesting we all rifle-up and getting in people's faces, even if they are advocating being loudly supporting trans rights.

 

Interesting, very flexible definition.  And I think people may have different ideas about what is "aggressive" and what is not...and about the acceptability of those actions.  Perhaps we don't all see the concept of activism in the same way. 

Link to comment

@awkward-yet-sweet, the thing is, words have meanings. “Logic” is a particular systematic approach to thinking; it is not a synonym for “common sense” or “rationality”, and of all modes of thinking it is the least forgiving of grey areas. “Activism” was coined long before today’s activists existed and does not mean what certain media outlets commonly use it to mean — ie, a particular sort of rabble rousing which, while being a form of activism, is not the sum total of activism. I have nothing against porch- or bar-style conversations but even in a bar if two people start strongly disagreeing I think it is helpful — sometimes crucial — to go back and define what they are actually arguing about. As to logical fallacies, I agree with your husband: they are not infallible. But there are some cases where they certainly apply and they can be helpful reminders not to fall into poor reasoning. 

 

As to whether today’s activists are a match for MLK, Ghandi or Jesus, as I’ve said, I mentioned those three examples only to show that activism need not be aggressive. I agree that such commitment to a cause is exceedingly rare, partly because (imho) it takes far more courage to practise non-violence than violence, at least if, like Ghandi, Christ or Dr King, you are ready to put your life on the line for it. But like most things, non-violent activism is on a spectrum. I believe it may still be possible to effect change peacefully without risking death. 
 

38 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

I would shy away from the term "direct action."  Fascists, communists, and violent groups have used the same term.


Fascists, communists and violent groups have used all sorts of terms to describe their actions; we can’t realistically hope to avoid using all of them. Nor do I think it would be constructive if we did so. Whatever euphemisms we adopted could easily be tarnished and co-opted just as the words they replaced had been, and then we’d have to invent new language all over again. 
 

47 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

I don't remember transgender issues being discussed much if at all until rather recently.  10 years ago, maximum, but more like 5-6 years.  I feel like this coincides with the increase in visibility and protests and activist stuff. 


I would say it certainly coincides with an increase in visibility, and it is a backlash against that visibility. But I don’t see this as a reason for us all to be less visible. I think there is generally a backlash against any progressive advancement in culture; I don’t see capitulating to that backlash as a constructive strategy. I also want to reiterate that for some of us blending in is not an option, not unless we go back to presenting as our genders assigned at birth.

 

As regards Christ, I would have thought his casting of the moneylenders from the temple, for eg, was certainly more of a disruptive act of protest than an example of peaceful cooperation? But I’m sure you know the story better than I do.


 


 

 

 

 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

I feel like I'd be safer if LGBTQ+ rights weren't so publicly linked with the Democrat Party.


Sorry, one last thing: I find this sentence so strange! Wouldn’t it be more pertinent to say that you’d be safer if the Republican Party weren’t openly advocating for your erasure? Clearly if it’s a two-party system and one party wants to thoroughly erode rights for LGBTQ+ people then LGBTQ+ people are going to tend to link themselves with the other party. Yet you seem to be blaming everyone except the Republicans for this situation. Or have I misinterpreted your comment?

 

I do sympathise, btw, when you say you don’t feel safe. I’m very sorry to hear that. 

Link to comment
51 minutes ago, Betty K said:

the thing is, words have meanings. “Logic” is a particular systematic approach to thinking; it is not a synonym for “common sense” or “rationality”, a

 

“Activism” was coined long before today’s activists existed and does not mean what certain media outlets commonly use it to mean — ie, a particular sort of rabble rousing which, while being a form of activism, is not the sum total of activism.

 

I would say it certainly coincides with an increase in visibility, and it is a backlash against that visibility. But I don’t see this as a reason for us all to be less visible. I think there is generally a backlash against any progressive advancement in culture; I don’t see capitulating to that backlash as a constructive strategy. I also want to reiterate that for some of us blending in is not an option, not unless we go back to presenting as our genders assigned at birth.

 

As regards Christ, I would have thought his casting of the moneylenders from the temple, for eg, was certainly more of a disruptive act of protest than an example of peaceful cooperation? But I’m sure you know the story better than I do.

 

Interestingly, my thesaurus lists "common sense" and "rationality" as synonyms for logic.  Again, perhaps differences in language.  I agree that words mean things, but perhaps they mean different things depending on culture and context.  Perhaps you mean "logic" in a more old-fashioned, Greek sense in the same way that people used to study "rhetoric?"  Of course, we use that word quite differently now also.  And we might be using the word "activism" differently as well.  Currently (and as used in my area), it almost exclusively means a form of abrasive rabble-rousing. 

 

One reason I would not participate in much of the activism that goes on is because much of what goes with the LGBTQ+ movement...."progressive" stuff....is not what I would call progress.   I'm from a rural, religious background, and much of the "progress" seems urban-focused, overly enthusiastic about government regulations, and anti-faith.  What I really crave is something consistently oriented towards freedom and limited government - which neither of the main political parties in the USA seems to be.  I'm fairly certain that activism truly oriented in that direction would be crushed by the government jackboot ASAP. 

 

20 minutes ago, Betty K said:

Wouldn’t it be more pertinent to say that you’d be safer if the Republican Party weren’t openly advocating for your erasure? Clearly if it’s a two-party system and one party wants to thoroughly erode rights for LGBTQ+ people then LGBTQ+ people are going to tend to link themselves with the other party. Yet you seem to be blaming everyone except the Republicans for this situation. Or have I misinterpreted your comment?

 

I suppose this would be more appropriately oriented towards the political part of the forum, but I'll answer it here.  Yeah, the Republicans (recently) have been calling for trans erasure.  But being intersex/trans isn't the only part of my identity.  I'm very torn on this....voting for Republicans means voting against being intersex/trans.  Voting for Democrats means voting to destroy my family and community.  The Democrats (and government as a whole, really) have been actively regulating and destroying my way of life and my part of the nation for a long time.  They oppose cheap fuel, working power plants, farming, domestic manufacturing, advantageous trade, denuclearization, avoiding war, effective immigration control, decent cars, land ownership, home ownership, decent income, small business, firearms, private military organizations, religious organizations, and they never met a tax or "welfare" socialist enslavement measure they didn't absolutely love.  They strangle the citizens to the benefit of foreigners and elites.  I dislike the Republicans as they are complicit in a lot of this, all talk and no action on the real issues....Trumpian bragging and bluster.  I dislike the Democrats more...and being favorable (sort of) on LGBTQ+ issues doesn't absolve them.  In fact, I'm rather suspicious that they're using us for some sort of nasty underhanded thing.  Its like the whole trans issue is an orchestrated sideshow to distract everybody.  

 

Those things just describe the elected critters in DC, however.  The average Republican voter isn't an enemy or a hater.  I live among them.  They're mostly indifferent to what the elected folks say about LGBTQ+ people.  They're busy fixing their pickups, working, raising kids.  As long as we're busy doing the same, nobody cares.  That changes, however, when there are protests, disruptions, attempts to introduce "drag queen story hour" at the library, and continue pro/con propaganda in the media.  It is like going up to a beehive and thumping the side of it with a stick!!!  If we could just get a year or two of total silence on the issue, this whole thing would blow over and I'd be safe. 

Link to comment

I wonder if overall, this topic might be better off in the Politics forum?  After all, activism is definitely a political technique.

Link to comment
  • Admin

There are a WIDE VARIETY of "Activism" things that are NOT political in the direct sense of what is normally thought of.  Two of us at least on the Staff here have been instrumental in managing community organizations for the benefit of LGBTQI people as social and interpersonal care activities.  ALL of the Forum Staff are activists just by managing and caring for our on-line community members here at Trans Pulse. @Carolyn Marie who lives in the same general part of California and I have crossed paths over the years, and she was the coordinator for a Transgender Day of Remembrance in the local area and speaks of her work on the board of a National Organization that has gained much for the communities by communicating with leaders in business and in legal improvements.  Both she and I have spoken at a major Medical School. I am one of the Founding Members of a singing group of Trans and NB singers that has been on the Disney+ Pride Celebrations and has collaborated in the background with over 25 name celebrities (with some to come).  Not to mention two of their own productions. All of the singers and production people are volunteers who have fun with each other. Through an LGBTQ Center I was on the Board of Directors of, I have done education for a group of Foster Care homes that are seeing an influx of Trans and Queer clients who have been removed from their homes due to safety issues. All of this is activism and support for the Trans,NB and IS folks without getting near a single politician other than hosting a few at LGBTQ Community Centers, which by the way may be active in helping all kinds of community work such as Food Pantries or special Back To School or holiday toy giveaways for needy families.  None of this is walking the streets with picket signs or shouting rude noises at Transphobes in a parade.  Yes, actual politicians do see us and occasionally they will come up and talk to me in a dignified manner which I return.  I got political a few days ago by voting early, but that does not mean the topic MUST be in politics.  Lets look at other Activism that can be fun and meaningful, it is there.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

Interestingly, my thesaurus lists "common sense" and "rationality" as synonyms for logic.

 

I apologise, I should not have used the word "synonym", since it can mean both a word that means the same as another word and a word that means something similar. (Eg, "night" is supposedly a synonym for "dark", but I doubt many people would claim they meant the same thing. If it's daylight outside and I turn off the light in a windowless room, am I now in the dark or in the night?) What I should have said is that logic, rationality and common sense are not all interchangeable; they do not mean the same thing. But I take your point, people do often use them interchangeably. I find this worrying, because many people also seem unable to reason logically. For eg, recently one of my teenage clients told me that all people with brightly coloured hair are trans; when I related this comment to some people at a trans support group one of them said, "But that means I can't be trans, because I don't have brightly coloured hair." That is a thoroughly illogical argument, and the type of misunderstanding that is the source of so many disagreements.

 

But I am going way in the weeds here. Again, sorry everyone. I will try not to go down any more language rabbit-holes.

 

As to what "activist" means in your neck of the woods, luckily I don't think that meaning has become accepted common usage just yet. Of course that is a grey area, but there are still certainly people in many countries who use the word in the sense I used it above.

 

1 hour ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

The Democrats (and government as a whole, really) have been actively regulating and destroying my way of life and my part of the nation for a long time.

 

I understand that this is your view as you have expressed it many times elsewhere, and tbh I think many people on the left would fundamentally agree with you, though they would slightly favour the Democrats over the Republicans. But I still find it very strange how you framed your lack of safety as if it were more the fault of the Democrats than the Republicans.

Link to comment
7 minutes ago, VickySGV said:

There are a WIDE VARIETY of "Activism" things that are NOT political in the direct sense of what is normally thought of.  Two of us at least on the Staff here have been instrumental in managing community organizations for the benefit of LGBTQI people as social and interpersonal care activities. 

 

That is so great to hear, Vicky. Much respect to you and Carolyn Marie.

 

8 minutes ago, VickySGV said:

Lets look at other Activism that can be fun and meaningful, it is there.

 

Awesome! Again, so great to hear. And thanks for giving me some ideas.

Link to comment

@VickySGV You've got an interesting, very broad definition of activism.  Seems to encompass almost any sort of positive activity, even perhaps reaching to things that aren't directly LGBTQ.  I suppose under that umbrella even I might be an activist of a sort (unusual thought). 

 

I'm certainly involved in my community's food program, and I've been part of finding jobs for my two trans friends (and I doubt they'll be the last.)  To me, those things just seem like everyday human stuff.  And I suppose my presence could even have a mild influence in government.  My husband is a member of the Defense Board, our sheriff is a close family friend, and my sister (she's lesbian) is running for Constable of our township.  Husband's mother is the coroner and head of the county medical clinic, and her office is decidedly respectful and inclusive after hiring my friend as a nurse - complete with nondiscrimination signage on the wall.  If these sorts of things are aspects of activism, it is certainly quieter than what's often associated with the word. 

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Who's Online   7 Members, 0 Anonymous, 106 Guests (See full list)

    • Davie
    • VickySGV
    • Carolyn Marie
    • Abigail Genevieve
    • Susie
    • SamC
    • EasyE
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      80.6k
    • Total Posts
      768.1k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      12,020
    • Most Online
      8,356

    Tami
    Newest Member
    Tami
    Joined
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Amanda May
      Amanda May
      (75 years old)
    2. bleep
      bleep
    3. onaquest
      onaquest
      (59 years old)
  • Posts

    • Davie
      Good news about Iowa! "Iowa Attacks On Trans And LGBTQ+ People Fail: 20 Bills Die As Legislature Adjourns Iowa becomes the latest state to adjourn Sine Die without passing a single piece of explicitly anti-LGBTQ+ legislation. The only bill to pass was a broad religious freedom bill." — ERIN REED  April 22.  
    • Mmindy
      You look wonderful, I hope you had a great time with the makeup artist. Now tell us about the bridle shower... How did that go? I hope you were accepted by everyone and felt welcomed.   Hugs,   Mindy🌈🐛🏳️‍⚧️🦋
    • Abigail Genevieve
      I think my Mom wore makeup until her death. 
    • Vidanjali
      You're very welcome. Btw I was just looking at their bookstore & wanted to specify you'll find the books I recommended under the "mystical insight" tab. https://shop.yrf.org/yoga/books/books-mystical-insight/   And if you want a very brief and impactful primer on Vedanta philosophy, this little book is awesome.  https://shop.yrf.org/items/books/waking-dream-and-deep-sleep/  
    • RaineOnYourParade
      @Vidanjali Thank you! I'll take a look at the books and ask you if I have more questions <3
    • Vidanjali
      Such synchronicity - I also just posted in the Hinduism forum. My guru, Swami Jyotirmayananda, has written many enjoyable books which provide accessible insight into Hinduism and the mystical meaning of dieties and their doings. I recommend his books "Mysticism of the Ramayana" to learn about Rama, Hanuman, and others; his "Mysticism of Srimad Bhaghavatam" to learn about Krishna and other incarnations of Vishnu; and his "Worship of God as Mother" to learn about aspects of the Devi or goddesses for starters. You are also welcome to ask questions in this thread or DM me with any questions you have as it is my pleasure to discuss aspects of Hinduism. I have been a devout aspirant and student of Vedanta for several years now and have begun to work on developing some educational materials on behalf of Swamiji's Yoga Research Foundation.    Here's a link to their bookstore. They do ship rather promptly. https://shop.yrf.org/
    • Mmindy
      Good morning everyone,   It’s Monday for those that work, and a day of continued recovery for me. I feel a little bit better today however I’m going to continue self medicating.    I slept most of the day yesterday, as well as all night. Yesterday my wife went to the store and bought me several cans of chicken soup, which was really nice of her since she had already completed the weekly grocery shopping Saturday.    @Willow I hope and continue to pray for your health, and understand your concerns about progressive loss of speech.    Hugs,   Mindy🌈🐛🏳️‍⚧️🦋    
    • RaineOnYourParade
      I'm very much not an expert in Hinduism, but the things I have read were very intriguing to me   That being said, I recently got a story idea involving Hindu deities. It's really only a bare idea right now and not anything solid worth sharing, so I'll skip over that part to the point. If I do end up writing it, I would want to make sure to get things right even if I never share it, so if anyone has good places to get good research on the topic at large done for said story idea, I'm all ears
    • Vidanjali
      This morning I was watching my guru's daily livestream on twitch. We're watching Hindu scriptures depicted via an Indian TV show from the early oughts & Swamiji provides commentary giving spiritual insight into the events and characters in the storyline.    If you're reading this and know little to nothing about Hinduism, here's a very brief primer. Vedanta is the mystical philosophy of Hinduism. Vedanta purports that Truth is One and is spoken of in countless ways. Hindus believe God is One - absolute, indivisible & all-pervading. That Absolute is called Brahman and is also refered to as The Self. The many Hindu dieties represent various aspects of God and are meant to help the spiritual aspirant to learn, reflect, and be inspired to emulate. The demons depicted in Hindu scriptures represent various negative qualities present in the personality - impurities which the aspirant endeavors to sublimate by self-effort and surrender to God's grace.    That said, in the series we've come to the story of demons, Shumbha and Nishumbha. They represent "me" and "mine", respectively. I've heard Swamiji tell the story of Shumbha and Nishumbha many times as they also appear in the scripture devoted to worship of God as Mother & each year in October, the 9 day festival of Mother worship, called Navaratri, is celebrated at Swamiji's ashram.   Me & mine relate to ego and attachment. Today, Swamiji framed me & mine in the context of self-doubt and doubting the world. Egoism or self-doubt means you are identified with the mortal personality and body, whereas your true identity is The Divine indwelling all.   In terms of doubting the world, Swamiji humorously said, you think God got a headache one day and didn't create the right way. I found this quite fascinating, to think of mine-ness or attachment in terms of doubting the world. When you assign the label "mine" to anything, you imply that there is also "not mine". That which you call mine is dear to you; you identity with it. Conversely for not mine - at best you are indifferent about it & at worst you hate it. Such is the trap of attachment - attachment and hatred go hand in hand as you also develop hatred to some degree towards whatever you perceive as a threat to that you've identified as "mine".   Broadly speaking, the label "mine" is assigned to parts of creation. Conversely, "not mine" is assigned to other parts of creation. Every being does this all the time to some degree unless you are enlightened. And there are those who assign "mine" to parts of creation they consider acceptable, and "not mine" to parts they consider unacceptable. Certainly this is related to points of view which consider certain groups of people, including transgender people, as inferior, wrong, or evil. This is due to ignorance.   In today's message, Swamiji imparted that those free of ignorance see all of creation expressing the glory of God. God is all-pervading or omnipresent. That is easily said, but deeply profound and not so simple a point of view to attain because in so doing one must also see all seemingly adverse situations also as God's glory. This is accomplished progressively by spiritual practice - by learning, deep reflection, developing trust and faith, and constant surrender by seeing your body-mind-personality as God's instrument.   I am sharing this message as I am aware many trans folk struggle, internally and/or externally, with the idea of God having made a mistake. Here are some clips from today's livestream in case you're interested.   About "me-ness" called ahamta: https://www.twitch.tv/1391ijimaws/clip/ProtectiveBetterSpaghettiHassanChop-CycVSKmub2HU9XKJ?tt_medium=mobile_web_share&tt_content=clip   About "mine-ness" called mamata: https://www.twitch.tv/1391ijimaws/clip/FantasticBlueNostrilPeanutButterJellyTime-b3Bmo10LmukqGi_X?tt_medium=mobile_web_share&tt_content=clip   God doesn't make mistakes: https://www.twitch.tv/1391ijimaws/clip/AnimatedRelievedLadiesOMGScoots-Ojk5Y-rPndUS7AWX?tt_medium=mobile_web_share&tt_content=clip    
    • Mmindy
      Good morning @Birdie   I hope you're feeling better today. What will it take for them to understand you are an intersex person fully capable of being the woman you always were? You don't have to answer that because I know the state you live in and the troubles you face. I wish they could get over themselves and accept you for you.   Hugs,   Mindy🌈🐛🏳️‍⚧️🦋
    • Ashley0616
    • April Marie
      Perhaps I'm in the minority but I generally put on light make-up unless I'm just working around the house. Foundation, darken my eye brows a bit, gel eye pencil along the bottom of my eyes (normally blue), mascara, a bit of rouge on my cheeks to add a little color and then lipstick.   Each of us is different and going with some make-up helps tamp down my dysphoria so that's the way I ride. :-)
    • Ashley0616
      Depression is gone at the moment
    • Ashley0616
      gleeful: full of glee : MERRY
    • Ashley0616
  • Upcoming Events

Contact TransPulse

TransPulse can be contacted in the following ways:

Email: Click Here.

To report an error on this page.

Legal

Your use of this site is subject to the following rules and policies, whether you have read them or not.

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
DMCA Policy
Community Rules

Hosting

Upstream hosting for TransPulse provided by QnEZ.

Sponsorship

Special consideration for TransPulse is kindly provided by The Breast Form Store.
×
×
  • Create New...