Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: I Hate You Even Without The Jesus Previous entry: Don’t Know Much About History

Also, men are picking up the wearing of high heels because they’re so comfortable

I was recently alerted to the fact that this is what ABC considers an edgy, "high-concept" sitcom:

Yep, two men who, facing a horrible world of anti-male oppression that prevents an ordinary guy from getting jobs that are solely reserved for women by employers who blatantly discriminate in direct violation of federal law, decide to dress up like women in order to get those cush, high-paying jobs, presumably instead of being relegated to low-paid work like child care or working as hotel maids. Which are jobs that are dominated by men, you know, because getting a job while male is so hard. Sure, these guys provoke people to wonder if they're "really" women, but that's no big deal, because hey, the only people who have better access to high-paying employment than cis-women are trans-women, amirite?

This is all irritating shit, but honestly, my first thought was, "Uh, lazy ripoff much?"

But upon reviewing the evidence, I realized that "Bosom Buddies", while still sexist and transphobic, was actually less sexist and transphobic than "Work It" appears to be. The assumption underpinning "Work It" is that men are so heavily discriminated against in the job market that they have to dress as women to get jobs. On "Bosom Buddies", the rationale was more plausible: they wanted housing in a women's hotel. Affordable women's temporary housing has a long history in NYC and apparently, these places still exist. They have a long history that has nothing to do with anti-male discrimination, but are more properly understood as a response to some of the economic and social constraints put on women, as well as the expectation that single women are in a holding pattern until someone marries them. So that's interesting.

But beside the larger point. The larger point is that there's continuous hunger for mass entertainment that is predicated on the outrageous and utterly false claim that men have to endure living in a matriarchy where the mere fact of being male means they constantly suffer from domineering women and, now, employment discrimination. "Work It" is just the most obvious example, of course, but there's also the new Tim Allen sitcom "Last Man Standing", which is about a man whose life is constrained by a cadre of oppressive female forces. You know, to follow up "Home Improvement",, which was predicated on the idea that there's intense pressures for men to give up being "manly" and that power tools were a form of resistance. And that's not even touching the long list of domineering and ever-competent wives pushing their childlike husbands around on pretty much every other sitcom on television. 

In real life, while cis-women have made great strides (and trans-women are actively fighting for equal rights), men still dominate at home and in the workplace, and any responsible social science will attest to that. Women, not men, are expected to change their names upon marriage and expected to roll back their presence at work in order to care for children. Women make only 77% of what men do, and that's after you control for work hours. (In other words, full-time female workers make 77% of what full-time male workers do, and so claims that women "choose" to work less are irrelevant.) Men who transition to women make 32% less on average than they did while still publicly identifying as men, which means that the men on "Work It" would, in real life, be rewarded for moving from publicly male to female with a paycheck that's only 2/3 of what they had before. 

It's just a stupid sitcom, blah blah, but the reality is that shows like this that present the world as if it were completely opposite of how it actually is do a great deal of damage. People do turn to fiction to ponder what real life is like, and good fiction responds by showing characters who behave like actual human beings do. Unfortunately, bad fiction can legitimately confuse people and give audiences the sense that there's "evidence" for conservative claims that women are not only not discriminated against, but that it's men who are. 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 07:39 AM • (63) Comments

Well, I did laugh and laugh and laugh at the premise, which makes it funnier than most sitcoms I run into, even if for all the wrong reasons.

Comment #1: Tapetum  on  12/06  at  08:39 AM

There’s always the possibility that the show may evolve to include showing the ways that women are still discriminated against.

Yeah, I’m an incurable optimist.

Comment #2: Jayn Newell  on  12/06  at  08:50 AM

I guess the fact is it’s just not the best time to be a stupid, lazy, incompetent white man. You just don’t get handed all the unfair advantages your fathers and grandfathers did. You have to feel doubt about your natural superiority to women and colored people. You still get all kinds of advantages, not that you can actually appreciate them, and on top of that people feel sorry for you and make endless excuses for you, but it can’t be the same. I would say that’s the problem with unearned privilege; it rarely does much to make you feel truly deserving.

Comment #3: junk science  on  12/06  at  09:09 AM

It always hurts when everyone stops treating a person like they are the center of the universe and have to do things for themselves.  The majority of people begin to make this transition somewhere around 2 or 3 years of age.  With members of groups that historically have had so much unearned privilege it usually takes a little longer.
For those who have not seen it, I recommend Echidne’s take down of teh wage gap.
http://www.echidneofthesnakes.blogspot.com/

Comment #4: helen w. h.  on  12/06  at  09:18 AM

“Home Improvement” was terrible and sexist in exactly the way you say, but I do think a case can be made that Patricia Richardson subverted some of what the show was trying to do by being a much better actor than Tim Allen and thus creating a much more interesting character.  Doesn’t make up for Heidi the tool girl, I know.

The more interesting thing to do with this, if they really want to write about the plight of men in difficult economic times, would be to do a story about a working class guy who gets laid off a good union job and tries to get a job as a child care worker, only to confront snotty upper class moms who like to hyperventilate about pedophiles, along with the horrible pay and working conditions that many child care workers face.  There are endless comic possibilities in telling off rich snotty mommies.

Comment #5: dopus dei  on  12/06  at  10:03 AM

I thought the idea of Home Improvement was to skewer machismo (if lamenting it), then Tim Allen learned from his neighbor what his problem was.  The good part was when he would overpower some simple tool to create a disaster.
This show looks awful and like no one would watch it, but there’s always the Constanza response to “Why am I watching this?” - “Because it’s on TV.”

Comment #6: ganews_  on  12/06  at  10:08 AM

Now I read the comment @5, and I wonder if my memory only comes from having watched it as an adolescent…

Comment #7: ganews_  on  12/06  at  10:11 AM

The point of Home Improvement, like every other “family” sitcom, was, “yes, men suck and are incompetent, but you’re required to like them and put up with their bullshit anyway.”

Comment #8: junk science  on  12/06  at  10:21 AM

dopus, even then I’d have my reservations, because that would incorrectly portray day care as a privilege of the “rich”. On the contrary, day care is used primarily by working class and middle class women who work, mostly full time. Rich women can hire nannies, allowing their children to benefit from more one-on-one attention, and also avoiding the problem of the harried pick-up time that every person I know who uses day care hates with a passion. (There’s usually mandatory pick-up at 5PM, creating a crush of people, and steep financial penalties if you pick up late. This disadvantages working women even more, because it functionally makes staying late to finish projects impossible.  Calling your child’s father is generally off the table for single mothers and frankly, many married mothers who don’t want to deal with a husband who are prone to argue every time his wife suggests that he should alter his schedule around child care duties.)

Cis-men are at the center of the majority of comedies. If TV producers are struggling to come up with new ideas, casting women as the leads is always a fucking option. Or, if they want to be really brave, breaking down a wall and actually considering transgendered people.

Comment #9: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/06  at  10:23 AM

I have this memory of the end of Home Improvements subverting itself, when the mother character gets her Master’s Degree and a new job in a different place, and the father character gives up his Tool Time job to go with her for her to follow her dreams.  But I may be misremembering. And doesn’t excuse the rest of the man-cave-tool nonsense.

And god, the last thing to world needs would be a comedy effectively about bashing working (in the paid employment sense of the word) mothers.  As Amanda said, the rich have nannies (although, for the record, I don’t necessarily think that’s preferable), so if you really feel the need to skewer rich mothers instead, a TV version of Daddy Day Care ain’t going to cut it. 

And frankly, I feel the idea of “comedy” around “ho ho ho look at the man trying to do child things” decidely regressive.

Comment #10: Katherine  on  12/06  at  10:37 AM

Honestly, it depends on your definition of preferable. There may be no scientific evidence that it’s better for kids—-in fact, I could see drawbacks—-but not having to drive to and from the day care and minimizing the amount of kid germs your kid brings home is definitely preferable for the parents.

Comment #11: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/06  at  10:44 AM

In my experience, day care is not just limited to the middle class; among other parents I know, there is a blend between hiring a nanny and using day care. It might be more accurate to say there are different kinds of day care. There are the scary dilapidated house day cares with boarded up windows and twenty year old sesame street murals; there are the creme de la creme early childhood education type day cares that are basically mother’s day out. My wife and I are scared to death of child abuse at the hands of care workers. We won’t put our baby in anyone’s care as long as he is pre-verbal. However, we’re not so misinformed as to think that only men perpetrate child abuse, though such attitudes exist.

Any perceived or real prejudice against men in a couple isolated fields does not make up for the overwhelming advantages men enjoy in employment. Men have even broken down barriers in nursing, for instance.

As I am sure that ABC will have to go over the top with homophobia to make this show palatable, it is doubly offensive. This show makes Too Wong Foo seem positively enlightened. Is this new culture of aggrieved males a result of income stagnation and economic crisis? It might be akin to other revanchist social movements in the face of widespread economic disruption. The current fascistic craze in right wing European parties also comes to mind.

Comment #12: JonE  on  12/06  at  10:59 AM

Around where I live, the rich have the NANNIES take the kids to half-day cares or enrichment programs that start at 9 and end at noon.  My poor mother-in-law worked herself nearly to death at one of those places for years.  No benefits, no respect, and no recognition of the incredible amount of care and professionalism she put into her job.

I agree that there’s absolutely no need for another sitcom about a dude trying to make it in wimmenz world.  Your idea for a comedy starring a transgendered character is much better, Amanda.

Comment #13: dopus dei  on  12/06  at  11:00 AM

I hope this doesn’t qualify as a plea for “mansplaining,” but why is Bosom Buddies “transphobic”?  I get how jokes about Ann Coulter’s Adam’s apple are.  Does all drag comedy risk transphobia?

Also, I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if, as Jayn Newell said upstream, this show attempts some, even many, “Soul Man”-like moments of purported insight into what Other People’s lives are really like.  I’m imagining a lot of “high heels make my feet hurt!” and “this bra is killing me” and “I can’t believe how much I need to wax!” laffs.

Comment #14: FlipYrWhig  on  12/06  at  11:09 AM

A woman at my work did have some good things to say about Last Man Standing, but said that was because she could relate to often dealing with the fallout from her kid being in the care of a somewhat whacky grandpa.

I’m liking Suburgatory so far this year. It sucks as suburban satire, or maybe I just haven’t been to the right suburbs. But it’s created a pretty likable lead in Tessa. Jeremy Sisto is better as the dad than I thought, although he seems much too reasonable and cool for the show’s original premise of dad freaking out because he found his daughter had some birth control. And Alan Tudyk and Cheryl Hines are great as whacky cartoons. And the dead-eyed popular girl is pretty funny, too. The supporting characters are so over the top that the problems with the premise don’t bother me.

Comment #15: witless chum  on  12/06  at  11:13 AM

My MIL has been a nanny for over 20 years, and I can think of a pretty big disadvantage with that over daycare. When the kid starts going to full-time school, the nanny has to get a new job .... and the kids lose a caregiver they’ve known since infancy.

@Katherine, #10: I can’t even figure out what is supposed to be a celebration of “masculinity” and what is making fun of it anymore. On a commercial for Tim Allen’s new show, he’s clowning fantasy football players, which is a game played mostly by men. A Burger King commercial from years ago had a song about BK being man-food, while depicting the man eating the burger as an unappealing slob. Not to mention Miller Lite - the beer you drink with your frenemies.

Comment #16: Yawgmoth  on  12/06  at  11:14 AM

Trans women could provide clarification on this, but I know many of them don’t ever consider themselves to have been men.  In the next sentence you clarify you’re talking about transitioning from living as men to living as women in the eyes of the public, but the wording at the start is essentialist.  “Transitioning trans-women make 32% less—” says the same thing but without the essentialism.

Home Improvement was one of the few sitcoms my dad deemed “family-friendly” enough for us to watch.  I see re-runs now and feel vaguely queasy.

Comment #17: bomberE  on  12/06  at  11:20 AM

The Roseanne Barr article in the New York Times a few months ago called it—during the first season of Roseanne, when she was constantly battling with the head writers over the sexist bullshit lines they wanted her to say, the head writer finally quit and started Home Improvement.

Comment #18: Mighty Ponygirl  on  12/06  at  11:22 AM

@helen, #4 - could you link directly to the wage gap post? She doesn’t appear to have a site-specific search function and she’s blocked Google from indexing her posts so I can’t find it without more work than I have time to put in right now, but I’d really like to read it.

Comment #19: Hobbes  on  12/06  at  12:14 PM

I haven’t watched mainstream network television for well over 15 years now. I do not miss it - and in fact, when I’m exposed to it now in waiting rooms & such, it seems so loud & obnoxious that I can’t imagine why everyone doesn’t shun it like the plague.

What set me on this path? Well, besides the bad writing & endless shilling, it was my brother - who was going on & on about what a terrific show Home Improvement was & that I should be watching it (instead of Buffy) - because HI was “true to life”.

True to life.

I can not begin to imagine how anybody could see reality through the lens of a dopey sit-com with Tim Allen as being the template for what real American life is all about - but it literally frightened me off TV forever.

Comment #20: MHF  on  12/06  at  12:16 PM

Man, even cracked, the bastion of endless repetition realizes that cross-dressing comedy is played out and calcified. Modern entertainment is nowhere near treating trans women like human beings, with the whole dangerous “deceptive” narrative which gets them killed in real life still being pulled out on the regular, but i’m hopeful some day trans rights will drive a stake through the heart of these sorts of comedies.

Comment #21: JilliefromChile  on  12/06  at  12:23 PM

You know what else is hilarious? Sex slavery.

Comment #22: Proboscidea  on  12/06  at  12:26 PM

Transphobic because the whole point of cross-dressing comedies is that someone who was assigned the male gender at birth putting on women’s clothes is the MOST OUTRAGEOUS UNBELIEVABLE HILARIOUS THING EVER. It assumes there’s no reason on earth someone would be female unless they had to be female, and makes the experience of being assigned male but feeling female seem like the most perverse thing ever. It also has implications for some of the very concerns expressed in the transgender community about “passing”, suggesting that it’s okay to treat someone who doesn’t “pass” as if they were a freak or a threat.

Comment #23: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/06  at  12:46 PM

I suppose it is possible to make a non-transphobic TV show about some kind of mandatory crossdressing, but if it was supposed to be comedy, there’d be too much weirdness and awkwardness about it to pull off any kind of mainstream appeal. And I don’t mean fake “ew women’s clothes have cooties” awkwardness, more like “I’m cool with this… but I’m not cool with this… but but but…” awkwardness, the confused messing-with-your head kind that sometimes happens in real life.

Comment #24: BrianX  on  12/06  at  12:58 PM

I can not begin to imagine how anybody could see reality through the lens of a dopey sit-com with Tim Allen as being the template for what real American life is all about - but it literally frightened me off TV forever.

A lot of people do use TV characters as a template for how they should act and conduct their relationships.  They’re like authority figures to them.

Comment #25: DonnaDiva  on  12/06  at  01:04 PM

The thing about these trans-gender shows—they don’t even make a good effort!  Someone who is truly trans-gender usually does a better job of it.  These guys just look like clowns.  Bad clowns.

Comment #26: James  on  12/06  at  01:27 PM

A lot of people do use TV characters as a template for how they should act and conduct their relationships.  They’re like authority figures to them.

Worse—I was watching one of the BCS preview shows on Sunday, and you know what one of the announcers used to justify a rematch between LSU and Alabama?  Rocky II.

Uh…  That was a movie.  You know, fiction?

Comment #27: James  on  12/06  at  01:29 PM

So, I had to go see what field was so terrible for men that they have to be women just to make it.  It’s SALES.  These dopes expect us to believe that the SALES industry is now a woman’s domain!!!  BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment #28: Blitzgal  on  12/06  at  01:30 PM

As a Woman With A Hearty* Appetite, the Women Only Eat Salads scene at about the 50 second mark is so fucking annoying.

*I eat the same kinds of foods and about the same amount of food as what I see guys my height and build eating.

Comment #29: rain  on  12/06  at  02:15 PM

I’m not comfortable with the claim that fiction should never be used as a lens through which to view the world. One of the major points of fiction is to speak to higher truths than messy, mundane reality can reach. It’s a commentary on the human condition, whether dramatic or comedic. Which is why bad, misleading fiction is such a problem.

Comment #30: Amanda Marcotte  on  12/06  at  02:25 PM

You know what industry is highly transphobic?  Sales.  (and really, anything-phobic from fat to the non-christian religion to alternate colored hair or piercing.?)

Comment #31: Crissa  on  12/06  at  02:27 PM

I think that the “men are so emasculated meme” comes from the fact that work sucks because you have to hide your feelings and act nice and pleasant and assume that you are wrong and the customer is right, which is basically being expected to act how women are always expected to act. Unfortunately, dumbass comedians and much of the public at large just assumes that this means women are forcing men to act like women rather than seeing the metaphor between boss, employee and family, women.

Comment #32: alysia  on  12/06  at  02:50 PM

Well, life is emasculating. You can’t eat whatever you want and play video games all day without getting fat. You can’t get good grades if you don’t study. You usually can’t make money without working hard. You can’t be as big an asshole as you want and still get people to like you. What does the world think you are, a fucking woman or something?

Comment #33: junk science  on  12/06  at  02:54 PM

minimizing the amount of kid germs your kid brings home is definitely preferable for the parents.

There’s actually evidence that shows minimizing germ exposure is harmful to children, and that children who attend day care will have a lower risk of cancer as adults.

So, I had to go see what field was so terrible for men that they have to be women just to make it.  It’s SALES.  These dopes expect us to believe that the SALES industry is now a woman’s domain!!!

I believe it’s actually medical/pharmaceutical sales, which is a woman-dominated field.  Of course, one major reason why women are hired to be pharmaceutical reps is to present a “pretty face” to doctors and hospitals.

I’m not going to defend this piece of shit of a show, but it is true that men have been harder hit by this recession than women have.  Of course, the show’s premise is still bogus because it’s not white collar men who are hurting, but construction workers and those few men who still had manufacturing jobs as of a few years ago.

Comment #34: keshmeshi  on  12/06  at  03:01 PM

It isn’t like the recession hit men harder because of direct discrimination though, it just decimated the male dominated field of construction first because the housing bubble is what started the downward spiral, and with all the state and local government cuts, women are closing the gap on the “he-cession.”

Comment #35: alysia  on  12/06  at  03:25 PM

@ bomberE

RE: Whether trans women ever consider themselves to have been men.

Answer: Some do, some don’t. I personally don’t. I mean, my second conscious memory ever hinges on gender dysphoria, so with that in mind, it would pretty hard for me to ever identify with maleness…my entire life has been about pushing away from it while others try to pull me into it. But I know trans women who, despite having similar feelings, feel obligated to acknowledge traditional definitions of biological sex. It’s an increasingly rare phenomenon…when I do see it, it’s mostly among women of my generation (35+). When absolutely necessary to refer to such things, many are using the terms MAAB (male-assigned-at-birth) or CAMAB (coercively-assigned-male-at-birth), and even that language is evolving. Trans men, of course, would use FAAB or CAFAB.

Apart from that slight miscue, which some wouldn’t even see as a miscue, I appreciate all of Amanda’s comments here. Drag entertainment always treads that line of transphobia. At the very least, most of it makes life harder for trans women, especially when it’s comedy; the joke is always “look how goofy these people look”, and that kind of reinforcement of appearance/behavior as gender-designator is always going to be problematic, for both trans and cis women. But especially for trans women, and especially those of us who weren’t able to transition until later in life. “Passing” culture is retrogressive, and yet it’s so firmly entrenched in our notions of femininity and masculinity that congressman Barney Frank included language to that effect in the last version of ENDA bill made its way around congress before being dropped (largely because transgender inclusion of any sort is oh-so controversial). As someone who lost her career of 14 years because her employers were afraid to let her use a public restroom, that’s something that hits home for me, and just the previews of Working It reopen some of those wounds.

One last thing: Although it’s not entirely universal at this point, the trend when referring to transgender people is to use the word “transgender”, not “transgendered”. For the same reasons we do not use “colored” to refer to poc.

Comment #36: Renee_in_Mich  on  12/06  at  04:49 PM

@ Amanda et al, I get the point about the demeaning implications for transgender folk that come of treating wearing clothes that are identified with the “opposite” gender as hilarious.  Do any of the same hurtful implications come from punkish reclamations of androgyny?  I can feel myself doing the Clueless Guy Needs Remedial Explanation thing, which is like the bete noire of the feminist blogosphere, but I didn’t really realize before that there was a risk that people might react to a man in a dress as a kind of gender-blackface.

Comment #37: FlipYrWhig  on  12/06  at  05:12 PM

Do any of the same hurtful implications come from punkish reclamations of androgyny?

Not to speak for anyone else, but from what I know about androgyny, it isn’t usually held up for horrified mocking.

Comment #38: junk science  on  12/06  at  05:22 PM

I’m not the best authority to be talking about punkishness or androgyny, but after re-reading my own comment above, I feel like I neglected something really important that I’d like to insert into the conversation, assuming this conversation goes any further, and that’s that “man” and “woman” aren’t the only two genders that people can have. Now, having a non-binary gender does not automatically mean having an androgynous or conflated gender presentation, but in any conversation about gender and presentation, it’s sometimes good to keep in mind that for some people, there’s really no culturally-understood presentation that exactly correlates with their gender.

Comment #39: Renee_in_Mich  on  12/06  at  05:36 PM

Agreeing with Amanda that fiction builds a narrative that influences reality.  So fuck you sideways, “Work It,” for teaching your audience that women are favored in the American workplace.  Women are hugely disfavored on the job.  They get paid less, they’re promoted less, they have fewer opportunities.  Punished for being female when they can do the work at least as well as men.  Except for the tiny number who can receive for preferences in trade unions that have a history of anti-woman discrimination, they do not receive affirmative action boosts either. 

If I had a dollar for every time a woman of color got called an affirmative-action twofer I could retire.  Wrong, losers, as far as jobs are concerned.  I mean, let’s not even think about all the affirmative action that helps privileged white boys get into private colleges, at the expense of girls.  Today in the U.S. there’s very little affirmative action to help people of color on the job, and (outside a few trades) zero to help white women. 

Sure, “pharma babes” get sales jobs not open to men (another tiny number—the prescription drug business has been in the toilet for years), but the dudes on this show aren’t even trying to be babes.  Meanwhile, men scoop up favoritism in the other types of commission sales work.

Comment #40: Unree  on  12/06  at  05:59 PM

My wife was looking at a medical devices sales job. They most definitely wanted WOMEN who will ‘charm’ MDs into buying/prescribing their stuff. It was creepy how much they pressed her on the idea that she would be hobnobbing with doctors at all hours of the night and seemed to indicate that even being married to a man would interfere with the ‘sales.’

It was amazing how much this job was supposed to rule your life - according the interviewer anyway.

I think commenters are missing a basic truth of gender - and one that can be ‘liberating’ to contemplate:

Gender - ESPECIALLY for women, is very much an act of show biz. It’s lipstick on the pig, to quote Obama. Being feminine is largely an act, just as being ‘white’ or ‘ghetto’ is very much a conscious decision. That is the whole reason that we can even have transvestites - because so much of feminity is in the clothes and hair and makeup.

To flip this script, there are countless tales from the 19th C American West about women masquerading as men in order to gain jobs as stagecoach drivers or cowboys. They would live as men for decades, and then when they died they would be revealed as women and the town would be scandalized.

Comment #41: KingElvis  on  12/06  at  06:16 PM

@junkscience: You’ve never come across a game of “what is it?” Gender policing hits even the androgynous but the kyriarchal overlap often involves youth which is allowed/expected to push boundaries. So people bitching about tight-jeaned, shaggy-haired gender-ambigous hipster usually do so with less rancor than they would to an out transperson at work because kids these days.

@Renee_in_Mich thanks for providing a good explanation for why transgendered is not an ideal term that doesn’t claim it’s not a valid word.

Comment #42: scrumby  on  12/06  at  06:21 PM

@KingElvis

Femininity may be a show, but gender isn’t. We could debate the Butlerian notion of whether gender is constructed or not (for me, the answer is both yes and no, and I think the lived experiences of transgender women prove it), but regardless, it’s not just show. It’s a real thing, not a conscious decision, and not something most people put on and take off easily…it is not as easy as just putting on makeup and slipping on high heels. I’m not sure what your point about transvestism is…taken in context, it would seem you’re conflating all trans people with crossdressers, and that’s seriously problematic for both crossdressers and other transgender people. Although we’re part of the same community, our identities are separate, and the issues surrounding them deeply misunderstood.

Similarly, I have no idea how you think being white is a choice. It may be an artificially constructed way of separating people, but even as such it’s a deeply held, institutionalized construct that is imposed on people whether they like it or not. As much as I might like to make the choice to just stop being white and escape every bad thing that means, I can’t, and neither can anyone else.

@ scrumby

You’re welcome. I personally have a hard time saying it’s invalid because I know many transgender people who use, and even prefer, the term “transgendered”. It’s a growing minority, and mostly reserved for those of us who are a little bit older and more set in our ways, but that doesn’t mean I get to ignore their thoughts on the matter.

Comment #43: Renee_in_Mich  on  12/06  at  06:46 PM

* oops, that should have been shrinking minority.

Comment #44: Renee_in_Mich  on  12/06  at  07:51 PM

Gender - ESPECIALLY for women, is very much an act of show biz.

One that women are expected and often required to perform, so men can feel properly above it all and pandered to. But yeah, it’s always a relief to remember that all my problems would be solved if I would just pretend to be a man.

Comment #45: junk science  on  12/06  at  07:52 PM

Renee in Mich: Fair enough. When I’m talking about ‘white’ I mean “WASP” so it has a lot to do with class. Like with some white people - hometown folks - I can cut off the g and be ‘sayin’ things instead of ‘saying’ them as I would with my company’s chairman.

In the same way you have this pretty wide variation of people who have some Afro blood, but the degree to which they ‘act black’ has much to do with where they live - they’ve got to put on the blackface around the ‘homies’ but they can easily drop that at the workplace for example.

The point I was making is that femininity is such ‘social construction’ that the idea of the masquerade is easily understood - not just by transvestites buy anyone watching ABC.

Comment #46: KingElvis  on  12/06  at  07:53 PM

Also, I don’t remember anyone saying that lipstick and heels are in themselves a problem for people who enjoy wearing them. Sexist men won’t take you any more seriously if you’re in jeans or in a business suit than if you’re in a miniskirt.

Comment #47: junk science  on  12/06  at  07:54 PM

@ junk science

Agreed. If it were that easy to evade gender and the systemic abuses that come with being a particular gender, then no doubt I have simply hallucinated losing my job, and not being able to find work since. Along with about a million other things. And yeah, sexism really take a broad view towards the world.

@KingElvis

You should probably say WASP when you mean WASP, because “white” is something entirely different, with all sorts of implications. And while I know you don’t intend to imply this, the idea of gender “masquerade” is so well understood that it’s used to justify the murder of hundreds of trans people a year, not to mention all sorts of lesser kinds of prejudice. The stakes are pretty high and it does beg the question again of when is gender-bending comedically acceptable and when isn’t it? It’s a line that’s still fuzzy in my mind.

Comment #48: Renee_in_Mich  on  12/06  at  08:14 PM

Gender-bending is comedically acceptable when it, like with many things, punches up. When it undermines stereotypes and assumptions and exposes the system for how ridiculous it is. In my experience there has been a pretty sharp divided between transwomen and transmen when it comes to drag shows. Woman are already the underclass so just putting on menswear can be enough to upset the hierarchy, normalizing that style of cross-dressing and making the world safer for me. But man-in-a-dress= funny is an old as dirt way for culture to reinforce male-dominance and the gender hierarchy. It’s a lot harder to subvert that but successes should be welcomed.

Comment #49: scrumby  on  12/06  at  09:22 PM

MAAB (male-assigned-at-birth)
I could see being assigned a gender, but how can you be “assigned” the sex encoded in your very DNA?

Comment #50: Devonian  on  12/06  at  11:17 PM

I would presume that’s how the assignment was made. If all else fails, it’s a term of art.

Comment #51: BrianX  on  12/07  at  12:13 AM

I could see a Hawaii-based show having a trans character in it. Here, everyone seems to have an aunt, uncle, or cousin who is ‘mahu’, and for the most part we’re just kind of used to it. The Hula community in particular is highly GLBT/Supportive. What might have helped is that instead of the institutionalized bullying most trans are subjected to, from a really early age we are told NEVER to fight ‘mahus’...because they fight dirty and can really scrap!

Much as I like the new 5-0, it wouldn’t be that show, as it’s too Michael Bay to handle anything that sensitive.

Comment #52: Mark Temporis  on  12/07  at  02:09 AM

Devonian @50,

How do you think you KNOW what any given person’s sex, “encoded in [their] DNA”, is? Because let me tell you, it’s not as simple to tell as you seem to be making it out to be. Off the top of my head, chromosomal sex in human beings can be (among others): XX, XY, X0, XXY, mosaic XX/XY, or XXXY. Also, basically ANY of those chromosomal combinations could be correlated with ANY set of genitals in a baby. (Except X0; you’re always going to get basically female-looking genitals with X0, as far as i know.)

(I can already hear you insisting, “But that sort of thing is REALLY RARE!” Per Wikipedia, which is obviously to be taken with some grains of salt but is my closest available resource, around ONE PERCENT of live births have some degree of anomaly in genital presentation and/or chromosomal sex. One out of every hundred people. That’s not all that rare.)

“Male (or Female) Assigned At Birth” is in fact REMARKABLY accurate terminology for what happens to ALL babies. The ONLY difference between trans folks and cis folks is, cis folks are okay with the assignment they got. But don’t let that fool you: it may or may not actually be any more “correct”.

What most people think of as “biological sex” is ENTIRELY a matter of ontology. We have these two categories, and everyone gets slotted into one of them, but they don’t capture the actual complexity of the matter very well at all.

Comment #53: Adrienne L. Travis  on  12/07  at  05:02 AM

I could see being assigned a gender, but how can you be “assigned” the sex encoded in your very DNA?

Well the snarky answer is ask someone who is intersexed whose parents chose them a gender at birth.  DNA is not an absolute standard for defining gender because even the XX’s and the XY’S have more than two combinations.

Comment #54: scrumby  on  12/07  at  05:09 AM

Hobbes - sorry, the site changed the direct links since last I wanted to review.
http://www.echidne-of-the-snakes.com/gendergap

Comment #55: helen w. h.  on  12/07  at  10:23 AM

It isn’t like the recession hit men harder because of direct discrimination though, it just decimated the male dominated field of construction first because the housing bubble is what started the downward spiral, and with all the state and local government cuts, women are closing the gap on the “he-cession.”
Comment #35: alysia on 12/06 at 03:25 PM

That was then, this is now.  Those jobs are coming back, while women’s jobs aren’t.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/02/news/economy/men_women_jobs/?source=cnn_bin

The unemployment rate for adult men fell to 8.3% from 8.8%, with 474,000 additional men now saying they have jobs. The improved job market brought another 65,000 men back into the labor force.

Meanwhile, the unemployment rate for adult women also improved—to 7.8% from 8.0%.

But that was because 438,000 women left the labor force during the month. The number of women with jobs fell by 214,000, but the unemployment rate declined because fewer women were looking for work.

http://www.care2.com/causes/unemployment-falls-but-is-that-good.html

Even more disturbing — once more the job losses and inability to find work is hitting some of the most vulnerable our society.  According to the National Women’s Law Center, “Despite the decreased unemployment in November, single mothers, black women, and black men saw their unemployment rise….Single mothers saw their unemployment rise to 12.4 percent, up slightly from October. Black women and men also saw increases in their respective unemployment rates. Black women now have an unemployment rate of 12.9 percent and black men have an unemployment rate of 16.5 percent – much higher than adults overall.”

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/unemployment-falls-but-is-that-good.html#ixzz1frXGtKeS

 

Comment #56: oldfeminist  on  12/07  at  11:20 AM

I was kind of shocked at myself yesterday because when I read the idea about having someone transgender on a sitcom my gut first thought was “No!” even though I wouldn’t say that I’m totally attached to either gender roles or the idea that people really want to see the same shows over and over again. And I don’t think I’m a bigot(of course, bigots don’t think so either, naturally.) but there appears to be some transphobia in me too. I think there are very much two different kinds of TV viewers in me…the intellectual one who wants to see diversity and counts “The Wire” among her very favorites, and the shallower one that in her childhood *did* sort of see TV as “aspirational” and never missed “Friends” in college. I think she’s the one who wouldn’t want to ask herself the kinds of questions that she would have during, say, “The Chaz Bono Show”
Does that make sense?
Part of me thinks that wouldn’t be a very fun half-hour with me all “Ok, Jennifer is a lesbian, but Chaz is now a dude…does she feel straighter now?”(There is very much a part of me that likes TV because it doesn’t let things get too heavy…of course, that’s why people with disabilities aren’t often on it.)
Um, thanks for letting me work this out here.
Part of me thinks it would be good if some of the writers from “Curb” worked on it. Or Margaret Cho.

Comment #57: chicating  on  12/07  at  12:13 PM

There may be no scientific evidence that it’s better for kids—-in fact, I could see drawbacks—-but not having to drive to and from the day care and minimizing the amount of kid germs your kid brings home is definitely preferable for the parents.

I realise this is somewhat back in the earlier conversation, but I thought I’d reply.  Speaking as some whose child is in daycare, I vastly prefer that’s she’s there than having a nanny.  The drive to and from is no great shakes for us - we are only 2 minutes drive away though, and often just walk it.  This was the case when we lived in London, and is the case now we live in Leeds.  I don’t know anyone who has a huge drive to daycare, but (a) this is anecdotal only, and (b) it may be UK specific.

It’s also standard for the hours to be until 6pm, rather than 5 (as I think you mentioned earlier) so a wee bit less of an issue regarding work.  In fact, the London place was open until 6.30.  It seems perhaps that this is not the case in the US?

As for the germs - I’d rather she got them.  She’ll be going to school at some point, and I’d rather she had plenty of peer contact, and immune-reaction building.

But hey - I’ve known one or two people who had nannies, many who used daycare, and a bunch who decided to “stay at home”, and they won’t get any judgement from me.  I was just trying to point out that as a parent, I don’t personally regard the nanny as necessarily the “best” option, that everyone would use if only they could afford it cos daycare is inconvenient and not as good as one-to-one care.  That’s not been my experience.

Comment #58: Katherine  on  12/07  at  04:07 PM

Is anyone watching Up All Night? It’s still finding its voice but one part of the show is that the dad decided to quit his job to be a stay-at-home dad. There’s no Mr. Mom humor where he can’t figure out how to work the dishwasher because he’s a man, there’s no jokes about him being emasculated because his wife is now the breadwinner (one episode acknowledged he misses his career but he finds spending the day with his daughter more fulfilling). It’s quietly subverting a lot of these sexist cliches.

Comment #59: pepperlad  on  12/07  at  05:33 PM

Sounds interesting.  Haven’t seen it in the UK yet, but I’ll keep an eye out.

Comment #60: Katherine  on  12/09  at  05:32 AM

I watch it! Christina Applegate and Will Arnett make a great couple, and when they screw up, it’s more character-driven than genital driven.

Comment #61: chicating  on  12/09  at  03:07 PM

Here’s the TV trailer for the series, Katherine, from Youtube.

Comment #62: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  12/10  at  10:24 AM

I watch it, too.  And I too like that Will Arnett’s character is best described as a “parent” rather than a “dad” (as is Applegate’s).

Comment #63: oldfeminist  on  12/12  at  05:28 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.