A trans man and a cis woman ("Sam and Melanie") who had been married since the mid-1990s (legally in New York before a late-90s annulment due to cissexist and heterosexist marriage laws) broke up in 2007. During their marriage, they had a child, "Sam Jr.", together. At first, they shared custody, but now Melanie is seeking custody, and taking the high road to get there:
"When the judge gave him standing to sue for custody, I thought, 'What's happening? She voided the marriage, she knows he is a woman.' It's ludicrous," the boy's mother told the Daily News...
Melanie says she is straight and didn't even know Sam was a woman until the relationship got serious.
Citing the "strong emotional and psychological bond" between Sam and Sam Jr., Morgenstern noted that Sam "is the only father that the child has known."
The whole article is full of cissexist misgendering on the part of the ex (through quotes) and the writer (which is why I'm not linking). "Father" and "man" are placed in quotes throughout, with incorrect pronouns, like it's some kind of charade or spectacle. It's crappy and wrong.
Other reactions:
1). I'm glad that the judge has some damn sense and puts the welfare of the child above cissupremacy.
2) Melanie's heterosexuality does not need to be reinforced - after all, she was married to the man in question for many years. There was no need to "reveal" that her lover is a woman because he's not a woman. And when he told her about his trans status is not of any consequence in this case because Melanie certainly knew about it many, many years before she decided to raise a child with Sam. It's the tired old trope of the deceptive transsexual person (usually a woman, but not in this case obviously): even when the "victim" is aware of their trans status, they're still tricking said "victim"!
Here's a link to a rewrite of the story which does not use dehumanizing language.
Other reactions:
1). I'm glad that the judge has some damn sense and puts the welfare of the child above cissupremacy.
2) Melanie's heterosexuality does not need to be reinforced - after all, she was married to the man in question for many years. There was no need to "reveal" that her lover is a woman because he's not a woman. And when he told her about his trans status is not of any consequence in this case because Melanie certainly knew about it many, many years before she decided to raise a child with Sam. It's the tired old trope of the deceptive transsexual person (usually a woman, but not in this case obviously): even when the "victim" is aware of their trans status, they're still tricking said "victim"!
Here's a link to a rewrite of the story which does not use dehumanizing language.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated at a pretty glacial pace.
Please be polite and respectful, even in disagreement. Rudeness will not be tolerated. I encourage blogwhoring - if you've written something relevant or referenced this post, please link.
Also, please remember when commenting: I'm not asking you to do anything. I'm not telling you to do anything. I'm not telling you you have to be offended by anything. These are my thoughts, and I do not think that they are universal in any sense.
Comments are moderated at my discretion. Please choose some kind of moniker as a sign of good faith in commenting. I am a LOT less likely to publish anonymous comments
Check out my comment rules for more detail. You can also email me.