We sat down and talked, Whittney Matlock and I. Whittney is an amazing guy, and he had just been thrown for a loop. I asked him afterwards if I could write about it.
We sat down and talked because one of his classes had gone pearshaped. He was doing a class on male member masturbation practices. It is a no spectators class, where you yourself must either have a cock, or be with someone who has one. No exceptions. And a transguy had hoped to attend the class as the guy with the cock.
When he said that his class would not be a good fit for that student, the student said Whitney was transphobic. And the event producers at Dark Odyssey sided with the student, saying Whittney had to allow all male identified students into his class for male bodies.
Whitney is not transphobic. Whittney, I would argue, is actually a bit of a trans fetishist at times (he told me once that I smelled more like a man than most men he knew, from daily testosterone into my system). He is, however, a first chakra educator and pagan.
Physical, flesh and blood, what is here under his fingertips. Skin and sighs and body responses. Moans and bones. Dirt and dancing. This is the magic that Whitney excels at, that he is skilled at as an educator.
“Don’t get me wrong,” he said, “I would love to teach a class for transmen and energetic masturbation,” – but that is not what the Male Member class is about. It is about external genitals and ways to handle them. Transwomen are welcome in his class who have cocks, and he can work around the language there, allowing for handling “her cock.” He was on the verge of tears, into full tears at other points, as he just shook his head and wondered what had gone wrong.
You are a root chakra educator Whittney, I said, and these guys were asking for a sixth chakra educator. They do not understand that working with prosthetics and strap-ons as their phallus is really, truly, physically- different. Not better or worse, just different. And you are teaching physical technique in this class, not energy work. They want to attend, learn some stuff, and getting to be in that space, coming from Ajna Chakra, they will learn stuff for them. The logic is that they can translate for themselves.
As educators we each have strengths. Whittney’s strength is in what is physically there, seeing unfettered the body for its potential. He is a massage therapist, a drummer, a sacred firetender. He is great at what he does.
The class had other physical realities too. The lube they were using could cause yeast infections for folks with internal genitalia if it dripped down and in from a prosthesis. Prosthetic cocks do not move and react in the same ways. The class he was doing is usually a 2 hour class, he had a 1.5 hour slot, and was now being asked to add in extra material he was unprepared for.
Teaching is hard work. Some folks do what they do well because they have a chance to prepare. Other folks teach only on what they know- asking a single tail top to fill in on a flogging class may make sense to some, but if the instructor *knows* how to teach single tails and has never taught flogging in his life, will they be able to deliver a quality learning environment? Some folks would much rather not teach than teach something that is a waste of their student’s time and energy.
I get it- there is a hunger for trans inclusion in men’s spaces. There is a desire to have classes that cater to transmen and our needs. Hooray. That is great. But taking it out on a nice guy and saying he is transphobic because he can’t cater to your needs- uncool. Yeah, maybe he did not phrase it it the most eloquent language- he said he kept stepping on feelings when he said he could not teach his techniques on a “plastic cock,” and when I pointed out that for many transguys, that tool is a prosthetic, he was mortified that he had phrased it so callously… he needed told with love what the behavior he had done was that had hurt someone, not to be told he is mean, with no other information.
In addition to all this, when events cancel classes, ban attendees, etc over another attendee’s word or perspective- they (often unintentionally) make accusations real. If the rumor is that a teacher is transphobic, and you stop inviting them back and treat them like they are transphobic, you make it true through the rumor mill. When an attendee is asked to not come back because or rumors of bad behavior, you make them true by banning that attendee. People’s entire kink careers can be changed or even destroyed on the actions of the rumor mill and behaviors based on that rumor mill, and there needs to be more transparency of what is the mill, and what is reality.
Our community, she eats her own.
I am in awe of some of the work that Whittney Matlock does. He was the first person to ever give me a massage that did not hurt, tears rolling down on his table. I have danced to his drums and writhed on wooden dungeon floors to his beat. He knows root and womb, he knows base, he knows this dirt and body and moan stuff. It is something I am still working at, so often based in my own work at heart, throat, third eye and crown. I envy his skill as a root chakra educator.
And I think he deserves an apology.
***
Comment from Lee, March 2011:
The above entry was my personal take on Whittney’s story. It is never my intention to define the reality of all trans people, or people of any sort. I try to speak from my body experience, but have regularly posted around that there is a wide variety of body experience for folks of all genders, shapes, and sizes. There is no one-size-fits all system for, well, anything.
The person in question in this piece was going to be using his strap-on/prosthetic in Whittney’s class, rather that his bio-cock. I do not mean to infer that all transmen use prosthetics when referring to their cocks- I certainly don’t. My issue is not with the person who had challenges, but with the producer response of throwing Whittney under the bus as it were.
I do not think that it is right to have transwomen welcome in a “male member” class *simply* because they have external genitals, and right to exclude transmen because of their complex body realities. I was speaking, the day I wrote this post, from my frustration that no one was willing to have a conversation with Whittney, and instead decided to villanize him.
Each person has their own journey. I know many trans folks who work at a root chakra/body experience level. I do not and cannot speak for all trans people. But I do stand by the fact that some people (no matter if they are trans or not) experience from their physical realities, while others extrapolate and theorize, able to take information from things that do not always pertain to their physical realities. My understanding is also that the person had basically said that they could use anything Whittney said and transfer it to his own reality. Extrapolation is, in my experience, a 6th Chakra experience.
Thank you all for understanding, and continuing the dialogue 
The language around gender and gender-experience is ever-evolving, and sometimes what a person writes, miles away, can be misinterpreted.
Yep. I totally agree. Whitney was an amazing force at CampOUT 2010, an event that for the past 6 years has been focused on trans men, and transmasculine people. He transformed many lives, and did it with respect, and love. I only heard positive things from the attendees. If he styled a class for a specific group of people that needs to be respected. I can’t imagine he attempted to directly discriminate against anyone. He was offering a technique that he could only offer to a particular group of people. If there was a question from the organizers about attendance they should have addressed that before the workshop was even added to the schedule.
It is difficult for me to address the original issue because I wasn’t there. As I only have your account to go by, that is what I will speak to.
“Whitney is not transphobic. Whittney, I would argue, is actually a bit of a trans fetishist at times…”
I have not found “transphobic action” and “trans fetishist” to be automatically mutually exclusive. You may not consider him or his reaction to the situation transphobic, but saying he has the capability to think some trans people are hot isn’t evidence for your point.
“But taking it out on a nice guy and saying he is transphobic because he can’t cater to your needs- uncool.”
Similarly, nice isn’t a defense. Nice people do crappy things all the time; doing a crappy thing doesn’t necessarily make them less nice overall, but being a nice guy definitely doesn’t make the thing less crappy. If his actions or his words were transphobic, then that’s what the discussion should be about. If the transphobic actions or words are pervasive and willful, the person might be transphobic; otherwise, the person might have some unexamined privilege that is tripping them up.
“…he needed told with love what the behavior he had done was that had hurt someone, not to be told he is mean, with no other information.”
I’m glad that you were capable of a response that you felt was more appropriate, and were able to point some things out about his language that might have been hurtful to those involved. I hope that he was able to hear that from you as a friend and he will use different language in the future. To say that the person who was hurt had a responsibility to be conciliatory to a person who was hurting him—I don’t agree. In many people’s experiences, “nice” isn’t any more effective than “mean” when attempting to educate others in these situations; and sometimes “mean” is being hurt and drawing attention to a problem at all and “nice” is accepting responsibility for the other’s privilege and education so they don’t have to make the effort.
“If the rumor is that a teacher is transphobic, and you stop inviting them back and treat them like they are transphobic, you make it true through the rumor mill.”
I read this paragraph initially as saying that if people or organizations call out actions that may be transphobic, the person so called will acquire transphobia if they didn’t already have it as a reaction to being treated as transphobic. Is that what you meant? Another reading might be that perceptions may overtake reality and it no longer matters whether the original incident was rooted in transphobia or not because the person will never have a chance to prove they weren’t transphobic in the first place or if they were that they have changed because the original consequences influence others’ decisions and opinions about that person. Is that more accurate to your meaning?
In the end, the question of what type of bodies belong in which spaces is a large and complicated one, one I can’t answer to my own satisfaction. Sometimes you just don’t have the skills or training—I personally don’t know enough about chakras to question your assessment of root chakra vs sixth chakra; that is a system I am outside of for various reasons. But the social currents that produce and are produced by these systems and institutions can have real harmful effects on people through the hands and mouths of the well-intentioned.
My comment about the rumor mill, what I was referring to is that when event producers make assumptions on who was “right,” without talking to all sides, it makes the rumor “seem” true in the eyes of other attendees. It verifies the rumor by being backed by folks higher up on the totem pole.
I do not think that offended folks need to stand up to the folks who offended them. I have far more issues concern about the actions of event producers in this case, and the larger community… anythinh that perpetuates rumors instead of actually asking the folks involved, if that makes sense
As always, eloquent, candid, and incredibly insightful. You’re right. A teacher needs the support of her/his/zer organization in decision making. Ultimately, if a teacher is teaching a course and a member is not allowed to be included, for whatever reason, that member needs to respect the instructor enough to bow out and wait until afterwards to discuss the issue. Furthermore, it’s a sad symptom of America’s lost identity that this situation happened.
People don’t like being told no. We are so concerned with preserving people’s feelings today that we can’t even say no or refuse. If someone does not fit in an activity, we get so preoccupied with political correctness or respecting someone else’s spirit-journey that we can’t even maintain the rules of the activity. Sometimes, you just have to tell someone they are not allowed to be involved. It is not a reflection on her/him/zer. They are not bad people or unwanted or unworthy. They are simply not qualified or do not meet the criteria to be included. Big deal. But so often, especially in the lgbtq/bdsm/kink/fetish community, there are so many misfits, outsiders, and outcasts involved that people are afraid not to include everyone. Well, the point is, this is not junior high. Sometimes, you don’t get to sit at the cool kids’ table. It’s not that big a deal. That is how real life works. If the class is for First Chakra and the requirements are having a cock, then there is no ambiguity. If you don’t meet the requirements, deal with it. As you so beautifully put it, those students could have joined a Sixth Chakra class that would have suited their needs. But forcing a teacher to change the rules because they have inadequacies that needs to be fulfilled is unfair, both to the teacher and the other students. It sets a precedent that most people can easily see.
We as a whole need to accept the fact that you can’t make everyone happy. It’s not right to embarrass or hinder the instructor’s ability to teach, not to mention hurting him personally and making him question is strengths as a teacher, a spiritualist, and a man. It is hard to call yourself a compassionate pagan and then be told that you’re not being nice enough to someone. Where do you draw the line? Feeding someone’s ego or holding to your rules?
Anyway, I’ve been in this position myself and it is the organization’s responsibility to back up Whitney and explain the rules to the students who have a problem.
Whitney, you’re doing great. Keep on keepin on.
Na’amah
sorry but justifying transphobic behavior because the whole theory is transphobic isn’t the solution to discrimination. Also I think you are aware that just because someone is “a nice guy” doesn’t make them incapable of transphobic behavior. History and reality of full of nice people who are transphobic, sexist, racist and just blame ignorant. The reality is that new age, pagan and creative spiritual practices are either going to have to develop new theories and practices that aware of issues of gender and abilities or they just wouldn’t get paid or have students. Why would I encourage clients or friends to go to an educator that is uneducated and discriminates against groups?
His actions are transphobic, his beliefs are transphobic and fetishizing trans people is certainly transphobic behavior. However he has a right to choose to believe those things. Just like organizations have the right to not hire him, people have a right to not attend his class. But I find most interesting is the claim that to do that chaka work you must have a cisgender penis and therefore he should just go to another class. How is this any different than gay cisgender men who claim for a man to be a leather man and run for leather men titles he must have a penis. So for the spirituality of male leather space, a cisgendered penis isn’t needed according to you but for “root chakra” it is necessary? talk about a double standard, even sadder when it is from a guy who has demanded his right to be men’s space but doesn’t support that same access for others.
Dear Jack,
I think there has been a dramatic misunderstanding of what I say when I believe Whittney is a root chakra educator. He is not teaching about the root chakra. In this class he teaches on playing with attached external phalluses. It is not an energy class, it is a physical techniqie class.
What I mean by this is that Whittney looks at what is in front of him and assesses based on what he, from his root, sees. This is my language, not his. He is actually pro-trans-men in mens spaces, and has actively encouraged me to come to men’s pagan events etc.
Thus, I feel your second paragraph was taken out of context, and parts of the first.
The rest of the first on the other hand- I am sorry you feel so much pain over this. It sounds like you have a very distinct vision of what you see transphobia to be that is not part of my vision on the matter. I believe and see myself as a man, but as a different sort of man, and that that comes with a few drawbacks and some huge bonses… just as if I were a short man, or a big man, or any other man-shape that interacts with the world that comes with bonuses and drawbacks.
Each of us is beautiful and unique, and I personally feel that not every classon every topic should have to cater to every person. I too agree that we can vote with our wallets
re: “Whitney is not transphobic. Whittney, I would argue, is actually a bit of a trans fetishist at times (he told me once that I smelled more like a man than most men he knew, from daily testosterone into my system)”
We may be on totally different pages with this, but I certainly do not believe that one of these things (that Whitney “is not transphobic”) cancels out or is canceled out by the other (that “he is a bit of a trans fetishist”). Being able and willing to fuck a trans person does absolutely not imbue anyone with magical non-oppressive power. And certainly no more than a cis mans willingness to have sex with a cis woman does not remove his gendered privileges. I’m sure many folks would agree how messed up it is when cis men make such claims. No different here. Or that a white person somehow relinquishes white privilege vis a vis having sex with a person of colour. This is basic.
One of the things that really concerns me about this article is that there was next to no discussion about why this person felt like _what Whitney did_ was transphobic, and respecting the right of trans people to speak to that. It’s all about how Whitney feels, what Whitney wants, how he was on the verge of tears, proving somehow that it wasn’t about transphobia (because he will fuck trans people after all!), showing what a good person Whitney is, how this could impact Whitneys career, and how it was all just mean.
But telling someone _what they did_ was transphobic is not about calling someone mean things, is not about calling them a bad person. It is not about _who_ they are, it is about _what_ they have done. It is about the actions they have taken and how those actions impact others.
What about some more exploration of how he told this trans person he was not welcome?
All people, including trans people, need to be empowered to speak to incidents which feel like this, in this kind of environment, and be supported in that, and I am rather disappointed that this has focused on Whitney, with really no discussion about why it might be important to include pre-surgical trans men in the mix (beyond a nod to guys wanting to be included as the men they are. It goes way beyond that), how it is entirely possible to do that, with some thought, some discussion. (For example, lube shmoob. Have folks bring their own lube. I for one would never use the lube provided at any workshop, but would insist on bringing my own.)
This: “They do not understand that working with prosthetics and strap-ons as their phallus is really, truly, physically- different.” is more condescending than necessary. How do you know this? What do you know of this trans mans awareness of the differences? Of what it is he was seeking? Perhaps he was very clear about it, and is more educated on the matter than you give him credit for? Perhaps, even with all the differences, he felt he belonged there, and sought out instruction from someone aware, and when confronted with “maybe he did not phrase it it the most eloquent language- he said he kept stepping on feelings” this trans man interpreted that to be transphobic? I would ask that you and others keep an open mind about what transpired. I’m not suggesting one way or the other in terms of who should get to attend what class, that’s up to instructors. But if it’s ok for him to step on feelings and not be particularly “eloquent”, perhaps he shouldn’t assume he’s going to get the warmest response?
I actually think that the discussion is wrongly framed.
The word “cissexism” is a much better descriptor. The idea of a “real” vs “plastic” cock is based in a system that values a cissexual person over a transsexual person.
The statement was cissexist, in that it valued one kind of cock over another. I will state that not all cissexism is based in transphobia, because it is part of a system and not about individual belief.
I’ve met Whittney and can vouch for him being an awesome person full of wonderful energy to share. If the program said “only for this kind of cock” where it is described that it can only before a certain kind of cock without placing value on it, then any confusion would have been the fault of the attendee. Then I would hold DO responsible for at least attempting to find a comparable workshop for trans men. (personally, I would not go to something that said “for cunts/pussys” tho I might be up for something “for clits.” I also think my junk works differently ever since starting T anyway.)
my 2 cents.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts.
This is my blog, not an essay. I feel I need to clarify that, as I am writing from my voice on my thoughts, not reporting for the press etc. Whittney is not asking for an appology, and I have been unable to talk to the transman in question, though I asked who they were and was told that they would not give out that name info (Whittney and the DO folk). I am sharing the story of a friend who shared his sadness an dfrustration with me, and my feelings on the matter.
I am glad the upset person spoke up, this is good. I am more upset, as I said to another on here, of the notion of folks giving folks bad names and reps.
Hope that make sense
I am someone sharing my thoughts. Whittney said he would be okay with me talking about him and my thoughts on this. He did not ask for this in any way.
I am pretty darn sure the program talked about masturbating biological phalluses or some such language. Sadly I am not near my records. And actually DO has had classes over the years for vaginas only, and queer bodies classes, etc. This was one of the few things offered for cis men only, and folks seemed to have no vocalized concern over vagina based classes, but cis cock classes cause an uproar in many parts of the “queer supportive” community it feels like to me.
Well, the transguy got his wish in this scenario. He became a dick.
“And actually DO has had classes over the years for vaginas only … This was one of the few things offered for cis men only, and folks seemed to have no vocalized concern over vagina based classes, but cis cock classes cause an uproar in many parts of the “queer supportive” community it feels like to me.”
I can’t quite put my finger on it, but this dynamics feels like it has something to do with the masculinization of trans spaces/politics/dialog. That is the dominance trans masculine voices and identities have in trans spaces.
Like the reason there is no vocalized concern over vagina based classes is because it is not seen as a “big deal” when such classes, by default, exclude pre-op and non-op trans women. It’s just considered the way things are. They don’t have innies yet, so what are people expected to do. There is no or little uproar over the issue.
But tell a trans man he cannot be included in something, and all hell breaks loose.
Hmmmm, not sure I am making sense. I’m going to have to reflect on this.
I think the difference in a vagina class vs. a cock class is that a trans woman who had a vagina would be able to participate in a class on vaginas. If a teacher gave a class on vaginas and told a trans woman she could not come even after she showed you her vagina you would be called transphobic. In this case, a trans man had what he considered to be the requisite anatomy for this class and the instructor decided for him that his anatomy/prosthetic was not sufficient. If a man had a microphallus would he also be told he could not participate because it was different that the cocks that this teacher was familiar with? If a man had had a prostate surgery or removal and could not achieve an erection would he also not be able to participate? Or a man who had a kinked penis? I have encountered each of these kinds of penises and all of their owners liked them being masturbated. Just like I (and lots of other trans guys) like to have my prosthetic cock masturbated.
Perhaps the shape and size or texture or attachment point of this trans man’s equipment was different from what your friend the teacher was familiar with. Perhaps he might have needed to bring his own lube (which surely some other men might have had to do, too, due to allergies or whatnot). But would it not have been okay for the instructor to have said “i will be teaching this class based on my personal knowledge of penises I have encountered, therefore, if your penis is different you may not get as much from this class, but if you still wish to participate then you are welcome. Please do understand that I will be teaching my curriculum I have prepared, though, and there won’t be time for me to tailor it to specific individuals’ anatomy. If you can accept that and still wanna come, by all means, do.”
I guess I don’t understand what harm would be caused to the teacher or other participants in having the trans man participate with his personal anatomy/prosthetic? I go to fitness classes or yoga classes or ritual activities that have folks at them who tailor the activities for themselves while the class is going on if they have a disability or injury or they cannot do something exactly the same way as others, and this causes no disruption for anyone else, even the teacher, if they are good.
Also, “energetic masturbation” is probably not what the trans man was wanting from this class. There is a difference between a psychic cock and a prosthetic cock. For me, at least, and for at least some others I have talked with. He was probably wanting to learn himself, and possibly have his partner learn, how to masturbate HIS cock, the way any of the men would want to. To me it can be really gratifying to know that I am touching my cock the way other men like to, even if it might feel somewhat differently for me. Your friend the teacher cannot possibly know how this man’s cock feels on his body. Having played with a bunch of cocks while asking their owners how it feels, I have had an amazing plethora of answers, many very different from each other. Each of the men in his class would likely have their own sensations and this trans man would be just another person having different sensations. Perhaps, if he had attended, he would have learned alot, and maybe been able to manipulate what he had learned to be the most useful for his needs and desires. AND his attending may have also taught your friend alot that would help his work, too.
Also, you said that the instuctor would have been okay with having a trans woman come with her cock, so it wasn’t really a class only for cis men.
I don’t know that your friend is trans phobic, since he doesn’t seem particularly scared of trans men. I do think this particular choice was being trans phobic though. I think he made a major mistake in how he handled this and from the way you describe his language use and stuff it does seem like he has at the very least seriously insulted a particular trans person. He needs to learn about how different trans men see their bodies and how it is not his place to determine how a trans man interacts with his own phallus. (and needs to learn not to refer to someone else’s cock as a “plastic penis”.) I think the teacher learned alot in being called out and hopefully if he is the good person you describe then he will continue to do more learning. It may lead him to wonderful new insights or growth of knowledge and experience. If I were him I would be asking my trusted trans male friends if I could practice my class with them to see if it really is something that could not be easily tailored to include them. And I would be asking myself what I was afraid of about letting a trans man come.
Assuming the venue was in tune with the original concept, yes they owe an apology for allowing the conflict to grow at all.
Dealing with tiny nerve bundles on differently oriented bodies is a purely physical act requiring specific actions to get other physical reactions. It is not a defiling of spirit to acknowledge this reality.
It no more offensive than a trip to a specialist doctor to get relief for a specific issue.
The gender issues there are massive as you must deal with both educated and uneducated Stigma, all well entrenched….
We are taught as Human’s that we can do anything we wish to as part of our right of existence. We live with the belief we can overcome all physical barriers.
We can not.
We are not, in fact, gods.
We are animals.
Sometimes we hurt each other.
It is not wrong or evil.
It is the nature of real life.
It is in the nature of Human life that it strikes raw when life is perceived as unfair. Humans are constantly striving for Fair.
Life and nature do not care.
They move on.
So should we.
Rob, thank you for the cooment. Reading your reply prompted a thought – what it sounds like we could be doing, as a community and as teachers/presentors/lecturers/etc. is be very clear about what are the physical anatomical aspects and requirements of our techniques.
I hear that Whittney is a friend, and that your intentions are good, Lee. But I feel hurt by this post of yours. I am a trans man, and I have a cock. It’s a lot smaller than your average cis guy’s “member,” but it is made of the same flesh, and I use and relate to it like any other guy. Is there a size requirement to the class that would exclude a cis man with a small penis? To tell a guy that his dick is too small to qualify for a class on male masturbation is generally experienced as a deep insult to his masculinity.
As a trans man, I encounter jibes from people who say I’m not a “real man” or who find the idea of having a cock the size of mine a joke. They’re transphobic jerks whom I avoid. I really don’t want to hear the same from my allies.
I too have a cock. I do not however have testicles or a prostate, things the class actively incorporates and discusses.
I am not saying someone has too small of a cock or not a real cock. But instead that they have different anatomy that needs discussed for what it is and the amazing stuff it can do
I’ve been in a men’s erotic massage class as a trans man. I know what my (flesh) cock is capable of, and what feels good to it. It was really valuable to me to be in that class, because I learned a lot more about the ways my cock responds similarly to and differently from non-trans men’s cocks. At the same time, I had some challenges with the way the material was presented—challenges I had to take responsibility for dealing with, as the only trans man in the class. I’m really glad to have had that opportunity.
A sensitive teacher informs the prospective student about what they might find challenging or inapplicable about the class and lets them decide whether they can get something out of it. A wise student takes what they can from the class and accepts that some things are inapplicable or challenging because we’re trans.
I get tired sometimes of hearing about how sad privileged people are about their privilege being mentioned. That’s just a little irritation of mine. On the other hand, I can relate to Whittney’s efforts to do the right thing as a teacher. It happens that judging from the situation as presented here, I think he fell short. Good people often fall short of perfection; it’s a learning experience. But it’s only a successful learning experience if we own up to it, accept it, and decide to do better. If we get caught up instead in the obsessive question “am I transphobic (homophobic, racist, ableist, sexist…) or not?” we never get to the learning stage.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. It is indeed a learning experience, one I think Whittney took strongly to heart. And me writing about my own thoughts on it has been a learning experience for me.
I too have been in classes that were not designed with me in mind, and part of me getting stuff out of it was compassionate instructors, but the bulk of it for me was my own headspace. Understanding that when folks say things they are not targeting me for example, and to balance my own knowledge and wisdom with what they are offering to me.
If only this trans man could have been accommodated in some way, you’d be reporting a triumph. instead it seems like more of the same.
I’m male. I have a male body.
“Understanding that when folks say things they are not targeting me for example, and to balance my own knowledge and wisdom with what they are offering to me.”
And so the problem in this case is that this instructor did not do that. He did not allow for the possibility that the trans man in question was quite prepared and capable of balancing his own wisdom with what the class offered. The instructor decided, based on likely only the most cursory understanding of this man, based in a presumption about this man’s genitals and his relationship with them, that he wasn’t capable of doing what you just said. And that is a problem.
As trans people, our ability to understand and navigate our own bodies is suspect, just for being trans. I hope this instructor takes the criticism and does something with it, because it sounds like it could be a great class.
Another issue I have with the way this class is doing things is the assertion that because the instructor can change his language around to “her cock”, that that somehow accommodates trans women. This is what I interpret as a rather troubling and haphazzard attempt to cover his bases, out of defensiveness. If the instructor wants to only deal with what he believes to be the “phallus” belonging to “men”, he needs to not be including pre-operative trans women in that. You can’t just switch around a few words and “baddabingbaddaboom there you go trans inclusive”! Doesn’t work that way. I think several people have offered really great suggestions above on how the instructor might rethink and rework this class. I hope he is able to see these things as productive.
wow. What a great discussion. I have learned so much just because you, Lee, and your responders, took time to thoughtfully and intelligently converse. If I’m not mistaken, you all have spun gold from straw; you took an event spawned from the shadow of misunderstanding, and wrapped it in light, so I could, and others can, use the light to be better than we were. I think they call that enlightening. I’m grateful.
You know… if the person involved had been a nullified XY male, they would have been refused for precisely the same reason.
It isn’t about how many Y chromosomes you have; it’s about whether you have the equipment for the class. I think it’s a perfectly valid thing for an instructor to say, “you can’t physically perform the actions that are required for this class, I’m sorry; please leave.”
If someone in a wheelchair came to an upper-level ballet class, I wouldn’t consider it “disability discrimination” to ask them to find another class. And then we can have all the discussion we want about “don’t assume that just someone’s in a wheelchair they can’t do X or Y or can’t translate the lesson to fit their body” – the point is, they’re going to require more effort and accommodation than the instructor was prepared to give, and it’s not fair to the instructor to throw them a curve-ball like that.
I think we all get a little sensitized due to our experiences – we expect that the world owes us accommodation for anything we want to do. Well, there are limits. And those limits apply to everyone, regardless of what gender roles we invest in and regardless of what we decide to do with our fiddly bits. Gender discrimination exists. Ability discrimination exists. Size discrimination exists. Height discrimination exists. But also, simple differences of capacity exist. And sometimes, it IS difficult to take the time to deal with something out-of-spec, especially when you have a bunch of other people that you CAN deal with, and you’re already pressed for time. It’s not “phobia”, it’s triage.
Thing is, at this point, I’m afraid a lot of us are LOOKING to be upset at this. Which means we’re all going to pick sides and rant and scream at each other and basically make a bunch of stupid happen.
Is that what we want?
It seems to me instead of assuming things about people and in some self-serving “for their best interests” way deciding they won’t get anything out of it, we could leave that up to the people wanting to pony up their own hard earned money and/or time to get something out of it.
I think what’s left out of this discussion is whether Lee Harrington’s friend would have been embarrassed to explain “why” there was a trans men ‘allowed’ to take the class.
And yeah, I find your ballet example ablist.
@Ialdabaoth
I don’t believe that if the student had been an cissexual man with a dick but no balls (voluntary or medical castration); or with a micropenis; or who had prostate surgery, he would have been turned away. (all of those situations bear much more resemblance to the situations of most trans men than does “nullification”) In fact, turning such a person away probably would be considered horribly impolite and embarrassing.
Also, it seems like the instructor in this case made a lot of warrantless assumptions about the trans man’s genital configuration and intentions. I.e. that he hadn’t had any genital surgeries, and was intending to participate in class by way of a prosthetic rather than his own flesh, whatever size or configuration that might be in.
One thing that I think really needs to be pointed out here.
A couple sticking points keep coming up here and elsewhere that are mainly due to ignorant comments made by Whitney.
I’d like to remind my trans-male friends here that the VAST majority of cis-gendered people do NOT understand the nuances of daily life as a transperson.
This ignorance of the subject, leads them to make statements that are factual (real vs plastic), but while factual are also unknowingly callous.
This does NOT make them transphobic.
Take a cue from Lee, sit down with someone who has done something that displays possible ignorance of something you are familiar with and find out who they ARE and what they really mean, before you go throwing them to the wolves.
Incidentally, that applies tenfold to event organizers.
Ialdabaoth, your comparison doesn’t work. The two examples are not comparable in the ways you think.
This trans man has a cock. A cock which functions just fine for him, and one that is apparently well up to the task of being masturbated, and understood by him. The teacher said he has a “plastic penis” and therefor is unable to join the class. The trans man experienced this behaviour as being transphobic.
You and some others suggest that it is unreasonable for this man to want entry into the class. But the class was on “male member masturbation”, not “cissexual male, sperm-ejaculating, erection-getting, cock masturbation”. The trans man is a male with a member who wants to learn more about masturbating it, and there was nothing unreasonable about his desire to participate.
“Male member masturbation” certainly includes cis men who cannot ejaculate for various reasons, men with “small” penises, men with no balls, men with no prostate, men with all manner of cock variation, right? But it was this man who was refused entry.
The class you mention in your comparison is described as an “upper level ballet class”. That is more specific. If you think the disabled person is incapable of determining for themselves the degree to which they fit in that class, I think you don’t give enough credit. Your example is off the mark, and it is inappropriate because while there are always overlaps, these two experiences are simply not transferable. It’s not the same and the easy comparisons being made here do no one any good in this discussion.
You said “the point is, they’re going to require more effort and accommodation than the instructor was prepared to give”
Indeed. So instead of the instructor using language that was inappropriate and rejecting this trans man carte blanche based on assumptions about his genitals, why on earth would he not simply say that? Why did he not say something like “I didn’t think about trans men attending this class. That was oversight on my part and I apologize. You are certainly welcome to join the class, but please understand that I have not considered trans men’s needs and I may fall short of your expectations for instruction. I plan on rectifying that.”? Why instead did he put it back to the trans man’s apparent “inadequacy” (his “plastic penis”)?
You said: “and it’s not fair to the instructor to throw them a curve-ball like that.”
What I find unfair is that the instructor, in his ignorance, however unknowingly, set this trans man up with a curve ball of his own. Instead of being clear about what he intended, he was vague. Instead of admitting he had fallen short, he got defensive and blamed the trans man. And instead of Lee asking the question “how can this be done better?”, he defended his friend because he is a “good person”.
This is the problem i have with this entire situation. This could have been a learning moment for this instructor, and an opportunity for this trans man to learn more. But instead it was cast aside, as it is in Lee’s post, as simply crying about not being able to access this space and isn’t that awful for the instructor? What a shame.
Interesting comment when looking at the description of how the instructor would include trans women. This is interesting, because somewhere around a year on estrogen, I couldn’t have performed the actions necessary for that class. So now, if I want a class: I wouldn’t be comfortable in a class set up for men, my body wouldn’t function like theirs anyway, and yet somehow while my body would function more like a cis woman’s, it’d be okay to exclude me from there. So now I’d really have no place to go?
Why would it be difficult, instead of excluding people because of arbitrary assumptions about their anatomy, expand the class to include the people who really do belong, and give them space to relate to their own bodies in the ways that said bodies differ from cis bodies? Wouldn’t it be less alienating and marginalizing to allow trans men into Whittney’s class and give them that space to show they really can be trusted to know themselves? And not offer a lukewarm claim of trans inclusion because you’d be willing to let trans women join into a space many of us would not want to be in?
Dear All,
I can see this is a passionate topics. A few points I feel I need to point out/share:
This is my thoughts/info, not Whittney’s. Whittney and I had one conversation on this topic. He is not part of this dialogue on here as I posted on my way to summer camp (DarkOdyssey) and don’t have his email address on my phone that I reply here from.
With that in mind, we can not know which parts were assumed and which parts were asked, and theorizing does not help ascertain truth. The post, again, is my memory, take and read on what Whittney shared, not his own set and presented words. I am writing about this coversation quite some time after the fact, and may or may not be presenting in a clear way. I am after all, human.
However, I am glad the coversation is happening. I find it fascinating to see some points folks find insult ot upset at- points that I as a transman do not share in some cases, and do in others. I am also glad to see some of the transwoman discussions and the difference between cissexism and transphobia voiced. Thank you all for sharing your voice.
lee, what I would want some people to get out of this is that many trans people would be too scared to even step into a de facto assigned sex segregated erotic space like this, and the fact that a trans man wanted to do so means he was fighting against external and most likely internal cissexism to do so. I am feeling that fact is getting glossed over here.
it also seems like there’s a bit of confusion between the “what he did/said” argument and the “what he is” argument, with regard to transphobia/cissexism. i.e, some people are saying excluding that student from the class was an example of transphobic or cissexist behavior. and other people, including Lee, are arguing that Whittney is not (in the depths of his soul, or otherwise) transphobic or cissexist. but those are two separate questions/conversations, and i think we’re better suited to focus on the “what he did” since there’s no way of knowing and no point in making allegations about “what he is”.
i’ll refer y’all to the awesome Jay Smooth for a primer on this distinction, if you care to see it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ti-gkJiXc
Yes, agreeing wholeheartedly with berele above on the distinction between being and doing. It’s almost always easier to address the “doing”, and that’s the thing that most immediately affects those aggrieved.
I’m going to be an FTM rebel and say that many trans people have internalized transphobia that makes them afraid of the parts they actually, physically have. This makes some of us overly sensitive when we are reminded about the reality of our bodies, instead of becoming comfortable with and learning to appreciate and love that reality. I use a “plastic penis” for things that require a penis-shaped object. In that sense, it is a prosthetic. But, that thing isn’t attached to me, and I don’t feel through it. I prefer things that involve the actual, physical part that I have that is analogous to a cock. Yes, a clit – but I’m okay with that. Granted, it did take me several years to feel totally comfortable with that, but I did. I’m not saying I’m perfect, but I’ve seen far too many trans people not even trying to accept themselves. My physical parts are not my identity. That should be something understandable by most trans people. However, I find that so many of us address that problem by not facing that we do have physical parts and that they do not cancel out our identity. Or at least, not trying to face it in a positive way – trying to face it only through denial and hatred of our bodies. I guess that what I’m saying is that I’m more bothered that a transguy would think a prosthetic penis with no feeling, reaction or sensation was a better part to ask to use during a class on physical masturbation technique than the flesh that actually delivers sensation to him. More bothered by that than by Whittney teaching a class on techniques that work for a flesh and blood penis. It is NOT the same, if it was, then we wouldn’t be trans. I might see my clit as a penis, and like it to be emotionally and mentally treated as one, but physically, I KNOW that the same techniques that work on a traditional penis just don’t work for me. How about some trans love for our own parts and our own selves? If we learn to be okay with our own differences, maybe we’ll learn to be okay when our ALLIES want to celebrate their own.
I’m more bothered that a transguy would think a prosthetic penis with no feeling, reaction or sensation was a better part to ask to use during a class on physical masturbation technique than the flesh that actually delivers sensation to him.
The judgement you are placing on genitals that AREN’T YOURS is really fucking disgusting. And I’m someone who’s really, ecstatically happy with my flesh genitals, so it’s not like I’m feeling defensive about my prosthetic. What you are doing here is just as messed up as what Whittney did.
I would encourage all to breathe, and pause before responding on stating what voice they are speaking from- personal life perspective, or that of “all transguys,” which I do not thing anyone is intending to do.
It seems crystal clear to me that Cambion was making a personal judgement about genitals that aren’t his. He’s “bothered” by the way someone else relates to their own body. It doesn’t matter what he intended by it–it’s a messed up thing to say. And IF that judgement was unintentional, that was sure a funny way of wording it.
“It seems crystal clear to me that Cambion was making a personal judgement about genitals that aren’t his.”
It seems equally clear to me that you are making a personal judgment about a mind that isn’t yours.
We don’t know people’s souls. We can give them the benefit of the doubt, or we can try to crucify them.
Crucifying them might be fun, but what kind of world does that lead to?
I refer you upthread for the distinction between judging words and judging the mind from whence the words came.
Hey, I’m a trans guy and I’ve formed an opinion on what might be healthy for trans guys based on my own experiences, what I’ve seen and heard from other trans guys, and what has made me happier in the end. If that makes you disgusted, then I’m sorry that people aren’t even allowed to voice opinions about their own community anymore.
@Cambion you are not alone at being sad and/or frustrated at people’s responses to expressing their own opinion about their own journey.