The 30 Day Genderqueer Challenge

  30 days, 30 posts, and 30 opportunities to dig into who I am!  Every day I aim to answer these questions, in chronological order, as best I can.  The 30 Day Genderqueer Challenge is taken from the tumblr Genderqueer Identities.

The Questions:

1) Do you use any other terms to define or explain your gender?

2) How did you grow up with your gender?

3) What’s your favorite ways of upsetting gender roles / genderbending / genderfucking?

4) Name some queer heroes, influences, or crushes

5) Dysphoria and how you manage it

6) When did you realize you were Genderqueer?

7) What are your favorite physical features of yourself?

8) An unpopular or unsure opinion about the GSM community

9) What have you done or plan to do to socially transition? Pronouns, name, coming out, etc.

10) Are you taking any steps to physically transition?

11) Your first experience with a GSM organization or event

12) Discuss your relationship with the term transgender

13) How has your family taken it or how might they take it?

14) Are you part of the Gender and Sexuality Minority community?

15) How do you deal with gendered things? Clothes shopping, bathrooms, forms, etc.

16) Name some media you connect with queerly

17) How do you, or would you, deal with being misgendered?

18) How does your gender factor in to your future plans?

19) What terms in the cisgender, GSM, or trans* community are problematic?

20) Have you faced any problems or gone through any changes regarding religion?

21) How has your relationship with yourself been affected since you realized you were Genderqueer?

22) What is your sexual and romantic orientations? Are they affected by your gender?

23) Do you feel comfortable answering questions about your gender to friends? Acquaintances? Strangers?

24) How has your relationship with the cisgender people in your life changed?

25) Your first queer crush or relationship

26) Discuss how your clothes do or don’t reflect your gender

27) Write a poem about being Genderqueer. (if you struggle, try a haiku, acrostic poem with your name, or just a stream of conciousness paragraph)

28) Who are some people in your life, on or offline, who make your life better? Your relationship doesn’t have to be related to queerness.

29) Some positive Genderqueer experiences

30) What does Genderqueer mean to you?

Feedback Made to !ndigo About Dan Savage

Update: !ndigo responded within 24 hours.  Before registering my complaint, I scoured their website for any content guidelines: I found nothing.  !ndigo’s customer service response via email was very helpful, however:

“Stocking a certain book does not mean that we condone or promote its point of view, but having said that, there are three types of books that we will never sell:

 

  1. books/magazines that instruct how to build weapons of mass destruction
  2. child pornography
  3.   written material which has as its sole intent inciting people toward the annihilation of a particular group in society

 

Thank you again for your time and commitment to this, while I can appreciate your concerns regarding Mr. Savage the book does not violate our current guidelines regarding books we will not sell.”

And you know what? I totally agree with these guidelines.  I just wish they were available on their website, or, if they already are, the guidelines should be easier to find.


 

Remember when I wrote this? I registered my complaint via Indigo’s online feedback form.  I eagerly await their reply!Chapters Indigo Biphobia

Science and Religion Mix– but Should They?

retractionwatch.com/2016/03/02/hands-are-the-proper-design-by-the-creator-plos-one-paper-suggests

Many are wondering why the now infamous Plos One paper, Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living, was published.  In case you aren’t familiar with it, the paper has come under fire by scientists for its mentions of “the Creator” and intelligent design.  Some are wondering if it was proper to retract the piece at all.

“The biomechanical characteristic of [the human hand] is the proper design by the Creator”

–Biomechanical Characteristics of Hand Coordination in Grasping Activities of Daily Living

Jabs about creationists aside, the debate over how the paper passed reviewer’s judgement should take a step back.

One good point that has been raised is that we should tolerate calm discussion of different points of view in academia.  On the surface, I agree with that statement. However, in this context, it does not apply.  A scientific paper should not debate matters of theism, philosophy, etc.  This should be left to the liberal arts.  Philosophy exists for weighing different ideas, views, and truths–such as if there is evidence of a “Creator.”

Secondly, the paper does not try to argue that “the Creator” exists and designed human hands.  It is merely an offhand mention.  Since the authors are not intending to convince you of “the Creator’s” existence, I would say this is simply inappropriate wording.  It was a poor decision to bring religion and deities into a banal piece about fingers.  Not to mention that is risks alienating Plos One’s reader base.  If I were the editor, I’d be a bit embarrassed right now.

Finally, I need to mention that the authors have claimed that “the Creator” is a poor translation of a Chinese saying, which was intended to mean nature.  I don’t speak Chinese, but I think it’s a fair point–translations are not always accurate.  It can be difficult to convey the feelings and ideas associated with certain foreign words and phrases to an English audience.

We can only wait and see how Plos One manages the blunder. It’s also pertinent to say that the retraction of somebody’s work can ruin their career, their livelihood.  Will the authors regain respect in their field, or be dismissed as creationists?

Huffpo Restores Faith in Humanity, Readership Disappoints

www.huffingtonpost.com/zachary-zane/bisexuals-passing-and-straight-privilege_b_9374272.html?utm_hp_ref=queer-voices

Notice all of the biphobia in the comments.  Arguments include:

  1. Bisexuals are broad group, which includes “the curious” and “buffet tasters,” therefore making it difficult to tell if somebody is “truly bisexual.”
  2. It is ok to question somebody’s sexuality when you find out they are bi.
  3. Suggesting that bisexuals are unhappy in monogamous relationships.

Now I will refute each commenter’s point:

  1. If somebody identifies as bisexual, they are bisexual unless they say otherwise.  I don’t walk around telling lesbians they aren’t queer enough, so why should you insinuate bi folks aren’t queer enough either?
  2. Try asking a straight(or gay) person details about their sex life and sexuality upon first meeting them, to determine their “true” sexuality.  Should I get some ice for the punch you will surely receive? If they say they are bi, they are bi!  Can you even imagine how hurtful it would be, to have people deny your identity, without even knowing anything about you?
  3.   I am bisexual and have no interest in polyamorous relationships.  I’m sure there are so-called “unicorns” out there, of course, but not all bisexuals are polyamorous.  This is a common stereotype, often paired with the belief that bisexuals are greedy.

In conclusion: If they say they are bi, they are bi!

IF THEY SAY THEY ARE BI, THEY ARE BI!

Get it through your thick skulls.

 

 

 

Did You Know: Balaclavas are Illegal in France

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering

The French ban on face covering is ridiculous. This isn’t just about allowing muslims to practice their religion, it’s about every French citizen being free to express themselves however they wish.  In addition to masks, balaclavas are considered breaching this ban, meaning French citizens will now suffer from cold faces. Brrrr!