![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
compare/contrast
Oct. 28th, 2003 03:48 pmI tend to think of myself as a dilettante in all things, but nothing more than an occasionally talented amateur at any one thing. While this may or may not be an accurate take on things, it's a perception I tend to apply across the board, even when it's probably not true. One such instance seems to be gender issues/theory/research.
I know I am more well read than most people who don't seem to have a vested interest in gender issues, but I assume that's true of many things; I don't read a great deal about livestock issues, because I don't raise, or intend to raise, livestock. I tend to think though, that surely others with vested interests, either personal and/or professional, know more, are more widely read, than I. I think this comes in part from my own experience of the insufficiency of my knowledge. If I don't know enough, surely, someone out there does, right? And yet there are times in which I come to realize that my breadth and depth are pretty out of the ordinary in this area. Usually, it's reading/hearing "experts" who seem to know less than I, or miss (or simply not care about) the implications of their own works or positions. I will admit, there is a slight preening to my ego at that, but it's more disappointing than anything else; I want someone else to know, so they can share with me, damn is.
One of the more recent (as in years, not weeks/days) surprises to me has been with what I will refer to, in shorthand, as ftm resources. I suspect that at times past, innies with gender issues were either dismissed or pushed into the feminist camp, such that they were practically invisible in the literature. (I suspect that the relative gender freedom granted to innies played a part, as well, but I've commented on that in many other entries). Now, however, it seems that a critical mass has been reached. On Livejournal, for instance, there appear to be way more ftm groups than mtf (at least, last time I checked). There seems to be a tendency, in the literature and associated areas, for ftm issues to be treated with a greater degree of... dynamism? Presentations on 'getting buff' seem to be treated with much more respect, and none of the wink-and-nod, than similar presentations on 'getting curvy' (though there are a dearth of the latter, from what I see). I'm sure power relations play a part, as well as historical visibility, the historical fetishization of outies with issues, etc.. To an extent, I've internalized this as well. I know when I read about ftms who are very open about their desire to be strong and muscular, and wondering if it will ever be enough, I take it as face value, and seriously. Unfortunately, when reading about mtfs, I tend to crnge inwardly at the stated desires to be curvier; I wonder at the reinforcement of societal stereotypes, worry about gynophilia and fetish, etc. It may be a case of being far too close to one issue to see clearly, of familiarity breeding an insidious form of contempt, but I do note that it isn't just me who tends to respond one way to one person (innie) talking about developing a 38" chest, and another way to another (outie) doing a similar thing.
I know I am more well read than most people who don't seem to have a vested interest in gender issues, but I assume that's true of many things; I don't read a great deal about livestock issues, because I don't raise, or intend to raise, livestock. I tend to think though, that surely others with vested interests, either personal and/or professional, know more, are more widely read, than I. I think this comes in part from my own experience of the insufficiency of my knowledge. If I don't know enough, surely, someone out there does, right? And yet there are times in which I come to realize that my breadth and depth are pretty out of the ordinary in this area. Usually, it's reading/hearing "experts" who seem to know less than I, or miss (or simply not care about) the implications of their own works or positions. I will admit, there is a slight preening to my ego at that, but it's more disappointing than anything else; I want someone else to know, so they can share with me, damn is.
One of the more recent (as in years, not weeks/days) surprises to me has been with what I will refer to, in shorthand, as ftm resources. I suspect that at times past, innies with gender issues were either dismissed or pushed into the feminist camp, such that they were practically invisible in the literature. (I suspect that the relative gender freedom granted to innies played a part, as well, but I've commented on that in many other entries). Now, however, it seems that a critical mass has been reached. On Livejournal, for instance, there appear to be way more ftm groups than mtf (at least, last time I checked). There seems to be a tendency, in the literature and associated areas, for ftm issues to be treated with a greater degree of... dynamism? Presentations on 'getting buff' seem to be treated with much more respect, and none of the wink-and-nod, than similar presentations on 'getting curvy' (though there are a dearth of the latter, from what I see). I'm sure power relations play a part, as well as historical visibility, the historical fetishization of outies with issues, etc.. To an extent, I've internalized this as well. I know when I read about ftms who are very open about their desire to be strong and muscular, and wondering if it will ever be enough, I take it as face value, and seriously. Unfortunately, when reading about mtfs, I tend to crnge inwardly at the stated desires to be curvier; I wonder at the reinforcement of societal stereotypes, worry about gynophilia and fetish, etc. It may be a case of being far too close to one issue to see clearly, of familiarity breeding an insidious form of contempt, but I do note that it isn't just me who tends to respond one way to one person (innie) talking about developing a 38" chest, and another way to another (outie) doing a similar thing.
