Thursday, July 17, 2008

On Being a Man, pt. 1

I want to write a REALLY detailed post about my recent reading of Beyond Masculinity: Essays by Queer Men on Gender and Politics, (which I LOVED) but no time for that now.

One thing that the essays as a body do is to talk about the diverse range of what it means to be a man to different individuals. (Something I knew inside me, but was SO happy to read in print.) Definitely something I need to keep in the foreground of my mind.

Lately I've been preoccupied (in a bad way) by the fact that I wasn't socialized as a boy growing up, and sometimes feel really clueless about how I'm "supposed" to act in certain situations. For example, on my recent (and first ever) trip to Hooters



and my recent experience at Marrakesh, where I found myself in the front row for the belly dancer's show.



In each of these situations, I found myself particular uncomfortable with the display of women's bodies. Now, don't get me wrong, I LOVE women's bodies, but there was something about HOW they were seemingly on display for men in particular in these instances (definitely more so at Hooters than Marrakesh) that felt odd, and frankly, unpleasant.

As a woman, I loved looking at women's bodies, and did so often, brazenly and without apology. As a man, looking at women's bodies in the same way feels somehow wrong, even when it comes to women's bodies who invite and/or take pleasure in my gaze.

I think what I'm worried about is objectifying women as a man, and the patriarchal sexist power dynamic that objectification supports. True, I probably wasn't objectifying women any less when I was one, but it's not the same.

I don't really have any answers here, but I guess it's a good first step that I'm thinking about it at all...(as long as it's not the last step!)

Trans Pride bling



I know it's hokey, but I still like rainbow pride bling. Yeah, most of you grew out of the "rainbow phase" after a couple of years...what can I say? For me, it's not a phase! ;)

What I especially like about this chain mail rainbow pride bling that I picked up at this year's SF Trans Pride was the woman's enthusiasm who gave it to me. It was in the true spirit of pride, and I feel lucky to have been able to share in it...and to be buoyed by it, too. Much thanks, Sarah!

3rd of July

I didn't see any fireworks this 4th of July (not that I even tried to see any). Instead, I took a night trip to the World War II Memorial on the National Mall on the 3rd of July. It was beautiful.





The water element of this national memorial makes it one of my favorites.

What's even better is that at this year's 4th of July Filipino veterans who fought in WWII were able to finally celebrate the U.S. Senate's approval of bill 1315 which provides pensions to Filipino veterans and restores their status as American veterans.

Now on to the House and the President, because there's still work to be done, and the National Alliance for Filipino Veterans Equity can't do it all alone!

Monday, July 14, 2008

Indian Health Care Improvement Act

This past weekend in DC was the celebration of the end of The People's Walk 2008.



As part of that celebration, The National Indian Health Board, among others, were on the mall in Washington DC trying to raise awareness about the importance of reauthorizing Indian Health Care Improvement Act.




While I wasn't part of the celebration on the National Mall, I learned about this through an acquaintance with whom I've had interesting racial discussions about biraciality and cultural hybridity, immigration, minoritarian community organizing and activism, and coalitional politics.

It is with coalitional politics in mind that I'm posting about IHCIA here, for none of our struggles can be overcome without help from allies.

Here's to hoping people will take the time to educate themselves about IHCIA, and take action to encourage its reauthorization.

Sunday, July 06, 2008

Dr. Michael Brownstein Talks Top Surgery

Can't remember how long ago I came across this youtube.com video where Dr. Michael Brownstein Talks Top Surgery, but figured this would be as good a time as any to share it.



One thing in particular that I liked about this video is that Brownstein talks about how some bigger-chested guys often wait until AFTER top surgery to start testosterone hormone treatment because of the potential dissonance between being big-chested and the secondary sex characteristics that testosterone often entails (e.g., deepening voice, facial hair, fat re-distribution, etc.).

I don't know how many people know/think about this...especially since I seem to be running into lots of folks who can understand someone waiting for surgery because of the high cost, but are less understanding of why that same person might also wait to begin hormone therapy.

I've seen a couple of guys who had Brownstein do their double incision/bilateral mastectomy with nipple-areola reconstruction, and I was pretty impressed with how faint their scars were. They did, however, have "dog-ears."

I've seen a couple of other guys who had Dr. Beverly Fischer do their chests, and while I didn't see any "dog-ears," on them, their scars did seem a bit more evident.

What I haven't seen yet (I hope, because I haven't really looked all that hard) are the surgery/scarring results of trans guys of color. As far as I know people of color more often experience keloids than non-POCs, and generally have skin that heals distinctly than what is thought of as "normal," but is really what is typical for white-skinned people.

When it comes to tattoos, I know that my skin reacts differently than others, and I can't imagine that the same wouldn't be true for surgery. (Anybody know?)

Of course, there are a lot more surgeons than just Brownstein and Fischer, but I think I'm drawn to these two because Brownstein is in San Francisco (where I'm from), and Fischer is in Maryland (really close to where I am).

Wednesday, July 02, 2008

Check yourself before you wreck yourself

One of the big business news stories today is that Starbucks announces that it will close 600 stores.

Starbucks has been previously said to be an indicator of economic health--the profitability of the company being in direct relationship to a prospering economy, and vice versa. So, I'm not surprised that the company's announcement of store closures is big news.

I'm more surprised by the celebration by some people of these closings, and the way in which some people have really seen this as a victory over "the corporation." People, these stores and closing because our economy is going to pot--that's no cause for celebration! If you are one of the ones who hate Starbucks, well, that's your prerogative, and yeah, they might be suffering with the recession we're in, but all of us are suffering alongside them, too!

What's also surprising is that these people celebrating these store closings seem to think that Starbucks is only getting what's been coming to them, with total disregard for the 1200 employees that are scheduled to lose their jobs. Industry, corporations, and employees are different entities--interrelated for sure, but distinct nevertheless. It's not only the corporation that's being hurt here, it's 1200 people, too. That, too, hardly seems like cause for celebration.

Sure, Starbucks has its faults, like other corporations, but they haven't been on Fortune's Best 100 Places to Work for list (or Business Ethic's 100 Best Corporate Citizens) in the past for no reason. In all my part-time, hourly paid job experience, Starbucks has by far been the best in terms of hourly starting wage, promotion potential, medical benefits, stock and retirement benefits, corporate social responsibility, etc. They're able to offer these great benefits because they are a big corporation...so until we have universal health care and fix social security (that is, NOT through privatization), I wish people would at least acknowledge the good that comes with the faults.

And finally, let me just say this--people love to hate Starbucks because they think that Starbucks is the big, bad corporation that ate up all the small, independent, local coffee shops. Have some small, independent, local coffee shops closed? Yes. I won't deny it. But, let's not also deny that in the beginning there was one Starbucks (in Pike Place Market), and that it was a small, independent, local coffee shop, or that it grew to be the "big, bad corporation" in the vein of doing good business. Are we saying that we want small, local businesses to be successful, but only limitedly so? (Lest they become too successful and want to expand!)


C'mon people, if you're mad we live in a capitalistic society, I understand. The dependence on a large working class to labor for the profit of those few who own is exploitative. But that doesn't mean that taking down Starbucks does anything for overturning capitalism. So, give the Starbucks bashing a break, and get the more important discussion started and write about anti-capitalist measures.