Frank Maloney - Gender Reassignment

[CKDexterHaven]

Lived over 60 years with full male privileges - Check
Rose to the top of a male-dominated profession - Check
Right-wing political candidate for UKIP - Check
Homophobic public comments - Check
Believes in family values and traditional morality - Check
Believes in a 'female brain' (like people used to believe in a 'negro brain' and a 'Jewish brain') - Check

Nasty radical feminists are meant to be the reactionary ones but, to me, it is the transactivist movement that is conservative, homophobic and longs for the days when homosexuality was criminalised and men were men and women were women.

*then they ret-con their entire sexual and personal histories so that they've "always been a woman."

CBG has a good post about this.

You know, this really strongly reminds me of the kind of newspaper articles I don't think you see any more (but you used to) - where a gay man comes out, and it's all 'I treated my wife appallingly, but then, I really hated being in the closet'.

We seem to have moved on from that and accepted there isn't some magic wanker gene that forces gay men to act like gits because they're in the closet, so maybe we could get past this too, huh? Kellie acts like a misogynistic homophobe because Kellie is a misogynistic homophobe. It's not excusable.

vicmackie, I'm the blogger who runs CBG! :) The post is called "Two Stories, True Stories." culturallyboundgender.wordpress.com/2013/05/07/two-stories-true-stories-on-the-creation-and-re-creation-of-gender-in-memory/

Aside: Nothing about transgenderism but about memory: if you observe children (and adults, come to think of it), especially when they disagree about something, you can see the unreliability of memory. I always think that Kazuo Ishiguro's books tell so much about the unreliability of memory and everyone should read them ...

in France posting on really crap connection on my phone, but yes to the fact that this person is a homophobic twat, who was either gay in the closet, or is now becoming a lesbian (though I am not convinced about calling trans women lesbians), so how does the ex-he square that one?

That's a great read AFG.

I've been thinking about this, and wondering if anyone can articulate my thoughts a bit better than I'm going to attempt to.

When a man rejects the stereotypical trappings of his sex, (being physically strong, less emotional, refusing sports and having a liking for domestic stuff say) he could imagine that having been brought up in a rigid stereotypical male scene the only alternative that its possible to be is "woman".

The way I see it is that if men (and women) continue to press 'man values' onto boys, some boys will be doubtless be happy with their emerging responsibilities but some aren't going to want to identify completely with those trappings (in the same way that I as child hated girly stuff and as a teenage girl rejected my puberty and periods, becoming anorexic so I could control and delay both).

So Men really are their own worst enemy. Has the macho culture forced boys into such narrow moulds that they have to deny any 'alternative' qualities, calling them feminine (and therefore 'lesser') when they aren't really, I mean, like cross dressing? I don't wear dresses or lipstick and I feel uncomfortable and "a bit of a fraud" if I do. So what am I?

So when frank maloney calls himself a woman because he has decided he doesn't want to play the the stereotypical male role anymore, he's saying he doesn't understand there's anything outside of the male stereotype. To me he looks like a man who doesn't want to understand feminism, he just wants to be 'ladylike'. Why can't he just be ladylike, be softly spoken and wear tights and flowing scarves? Because he lives in this narrow stereotype, which has been reinforced by men like him. So he's actually acting stereotypically by thinking he can be a woman by just putting on the garb and saying he's a woman. Is a man thinking he can be a woman the most glaring example of male privilege?

Not sure where I'm going with this, confusion and wine has fuelled it. If anyone reads it all, thanks.

Is a man thinking he can be a woman the most glaring example of male privilege?

In my opinion yes, it is.

So when frank maloney calls himself a woman because he has decided he doesn't want to play the the stereotypical male role anymore, he's saying he doesn't understand there's anything outside of the male stereotype

IMO that is an element of it but another huge contributing factor is the bizarre idealisation/fetishisation of "femininity" and all things that are supposedly "feminine," like long hair and lady clothes and make up etc - CBG (aka AbortionFairyGodmother) talks about this too I think - all the trappings that signal "woman" from the point of view of the male gaze are regarded as desirable, and once you've convinced yourself that something is maximally desirable, the next step after owning it is becoming it.

If you become it you can become the focus of all that attention. IMO it seems to suggest that a lot of men see women's bodies not only as a collection of body parts but also, in a sense, as a costume, a fancy dress. And if we can wear that costume (aka our actual bodies) then why can't they? Why can't they slip into a lady costume with a fanny and boobs - how fun would that be? Because fannies and boobs ARE fun, right? That's what they're for! They're exciting and fun, so why not get your very own?

Good luck to him. Must have been a difficult choice

I don't think there is any concrete evidence, so far, that Frank was a repressed homosexual. The vast majority of transwomen are sexually attracted to women. A few years ago men saying they were 'male lesbians' was a horribly laddish joke but now it's something we have to accept or we're the bigots.

I thought the name 'Kellie' was significant because there is an autogynophiliac tendency to present as the kind of woman you fetishise. Apologies to anyone called Kelly, but 'Kellie' with that kind of spelling conjures up a 20-something lap-dancer, not a 60-something woman. I think the fact that so many men transition around retirement age is, not only have they then got the full benefit of male privilege in terms of family, career and money, but because they are becoming sexually invisible as men and need a way to get a thrill again.

Is a man thinking he can become a woman the most glaring example of male privilege?

It's pretty much the apogee of mansplaining. 'Here's how it's meant to be done you hairy-legged, frigid, bolshy feminist bitches.'

Really interesting thread.

Is it facile to ask why we think Frank wanted to become Kellie?

Thank you for the compliment on my analogy VillaVillekulla. However, I think one of the best analogies as regards the relationship between transgenderism and women was found on a previous thread on this board. If anyone remembers it, it was concerning two rooms and tea-making/drinking. Whoever came up with that was very insightful.

Yy the pos about tea rooms was excellent.

The name thing is a bit strange. I mean, Frank (Frankie) is a unisex name, it can be a diminutive of Francesca.

Even Kelly (without the whimsical 'ie') is a unisex name. So why didn't he just stay as Frank or be Frankie?

I've got to say, the idea of autogynophilia really bothers me. I'm not keen on deciding something is a sexual fetish when I don't know the person.

I can see why you'd want to change your name, TBH. People would call you Frank and you'd think of you as you used to be.

Anyway. I just read an article which was all 'ooh, good on him, maybe he'll inspire gay footballers to finally fess up' by Paris Lees. I don't expect Paris Lees to be writing genius-level prose, but it really annoys me that there's no acknowledgment Kellie is the last person anyone gay might want to use as a role model. It is such a load of bullshit.

I'm not keen on deciding something is a sexual fetish when I don't know the person

I don't think autogynephilia is regarded legally as an "acceptable" reason to be given treatment to transition so I don't think you'll ever meet anyone who'll admit to it.

I would like to thank you all for this thread. It has really helped me articulate my concerns. I find it so sad that people are willing to go to such extreme lengths to conform to a society stereotype. And incredibly disappointed that people are willing to facilitate it with drugs and surgery.

vic - I'm sure. That's not exactly what I meant.

I mean, it seems like a perjorative term, and unnecessarily so.

Sure, some people have fetishes and we're all adults and it's nothing to be ashamed of. And sure, I think reifying gender is harmful. But I also think high heels are harmful, and I'd be pretty annoyed if someone told me the only reason I wear heels is because I have a sexual fetish.

I don't know if that's too ridiculously trite a comparison.

I don't think it started out as a pejorative term, I think it started out purely as a descriptive term for what was being observed.

I guess the reason it's seen as a pejorative now is because it's seen as dismissive? As in "Oh you're only doing this to get your jollies," as opposed to "You're doing it to satisfy your deep yearning to manifest your delicate feminine character in your physical form."

The thing is though I find the ladybrain argument so incredibly insulting and damaging (and stupid) that I think I might actually regard autogynephilia as the more palatable argument.

Yes, I think that's what I mean - it comes across as dismissive.

I don't think there need be a choice between 'ladybrain' and 'autogynephilia' at all.

Ladybrain is sheer nonsense, obviously.

But we could also just say people live in a world where gender is an oppressive system, and this might be a coping strategy for that. That argument has the benefit that it doesn't let Kellie off the hook - even if this is how she best copes with how she wants to live her life, she is a misogynistic homophobic person.

Whereas, if you claim to know that she's autogynephelic (sp?), or anything else 'diagnostic', people will respond with screams of 'bigot' and we get nowhere, while the LGBT community end up being pushed into a nasty position of being implicitly supportive of someone who publicly condemns most of them.

I don't think there need be a choice between 'ladybrain' and 'autogynephilia' at all

No - I think being traumatised by being raised in a society with rigidly defined and ruthlessly enforced gender roles is a very likely source of much if not most gender anxiety, but that's currently not sayable and I think it needs to become sayable.
I do think autogynephilia is a thing though and I do think it motivates some trans people.

while the LGBT community end up being pushed into a nasty position of being implicitly supportive of someone who publicly condemns most of them

Why would they be implicitly supportive of them?

I believe autogynephilia is a thing too - I just don't feel ok saying it's the thing in this case. And I agree about gender anxiety.

As to why the LGBT community would be pushed to be implicitly supportive - basically, at the moment, there is a huge pressure on people to publicly support anyone who is trans, and (IMO) it has moved from a positive, encouraging 'let's be decent to each other' type of thing to a 'you didn't say you were supportive! TERF!' kind of namecalling.

A lot of people are accustomed to the T being in LGBT, and have thought of trans issues as being close to LGB issues. I have seen so many supportive posts and comments about Kellie, from people who are either unaware of the earlier misogynistic/homophobic statements, or somehow feel they can't criticise them. It is making me extremely uncomfortable.