I feel that way about anything Nazi-related. especially anything related to the transition from the Weimar Republic to fascism. shudder.

but what I’m always interested in is the subtler shit: the soul damage that happens. And I do think it is happening to a lot of people we wouldn’t necessarily deem “oppressed,” and it might be worthwhile to find out why. I mean: maybe Joe Schmo the cube rat comes in with a gun one day and murders half the office. Was this because of institutionalized discrimination that we can clearly point to and go “aha!” Probably not. Does that mean that his behavior is therefore inexplicable, or at least completely divorced from any possible sociopolitical frame? I wouldn’t say so, no.

but I do feel like in political communities/discussions, ofttimes the response is exactly that: well, I can’t fit that into my ideological framework; therefore, he must be just…bad. Or crazy. Out of my purview.

Sure. I guess what I’m trying to say though, is: we’ve all got our blind spots. God knows Orwell did (sexism not being the least of them). And yet he’s a writer I keep turning back to for inspiration, again and again; I think that in many ways he was far more gifted with self-insight than a lot of current political voices, even ones I may identify a lot more with more on a demographic level.

Agreed. And yes and yes about Orwell. I don’t think I’m even gonna be able to read his essay on neo-English until the neo-cons leave office. Too creepy for now.

For that matter: does the reaction change if it turns out Joe Schmo is a recent immigrant who’s depending on maintaining his legal U.S. status (which in turn depends on keeping that particular job, and/or maintaining his marriage) to remain here, and going back would mean returning to an abusive fundamentalist culture and rejecting family of origin, one member of which has declared a fatwa on him? (actual client I saw. he was gay, not a cross-dresser, but the “getting caught” thing and all other details was pretty much the same).

How about if it’s Joe Schmo the single, lonely, Dilbertesque white-collar cube rat?

I’m not sure why this would make a difference. In all cases, you’ve got someone opting to remain closeted because it allows him to occupy, however dishonestly, a more secure position. In pure abstract terms, almost all of us have this option to one degree or another in one way or another.

>the Passion of the Secret Vagina.

HA!!!

>On a personal level, it means that I can fight the system, but that I have to remain conscious of the ways in which it currently rewards me.

Sure. I guess what I’m trying to say though, is: we’ve all got our blind spots. God knows Orwell did (sexism not being the least of them). And yet he’s a writer I keep turning back to for inspiration, again and again; I think that in many ways he was far more gifted with self-insight than a lot of current political voices, even ones I may identify a lot more with more on a demographic level.

How about if it’s Joe Schmo the single, lonely, Dilbertesque white-collar cube rat?

I mean, I kind of feel like we’re getting back into the whole “trumps” business, here. In absolutely no way was I trying to compare some straight dude’s personal angst with what it’s like to be an FTM in this homophobic, transphobic, sexist culture. At the same time I don’t think that the mere fact of mentioning that there might be some suffering going on there, too, takes away from anyone else’s. Yeah?

I’m not trying to create a hierarchy of suffering, but to distinguish between two different problems: life in a poisonous hierarchy that damages us all as people (which damage transcends the disparities set up within that system), and having a low position in that hierarchy. I mean, the straight dude is damaged and cheated, but he is also protected. There’s also the difference between being closeted (e.g. as a cross-dresser) and being narrowly privileged (e.g. as a real-live panty-rejectin’ heterosexual dude).

I got the sense–and see a whole lot–that a false equivalence was at play in the comments thread. Admittedly, some of my sensitivity has to do with in-community interactions I’ve had with ftms who refuse to admit that they are currently in a different place from yer average dyke. I call it the Passion of the Secret Vagina. It makes my teeth itch.

but to get back to the Orwell thing for just a second: yes, that’s true, he never ceased to be a white Englishman. None of us really cease to be who we are, in certain respects. So what does that mean, though, to you?

On a personal level, it means that I can fight the system, but that I have to remain conscious of the ways in which it currently rewards me.

So let’s back up a step. Let’s say instead of talking about Joe McCarthy, we’re talking about Joe Schmo the construction worker. Married, kids, very manly and “normal” to all outward appearances. Well respected in his church and community. has probably about the standard amount of unconscious sexist attitude (and so on). probably apolitical for the sake of this, doesn’t vote. On nights when the wife and kids are away, he locks the door, pulls down the blinds, dresses up in wife’s clothing and masturbates to orgasm. Is very careful to wash everything and put it back where he found it; if anyone should find out, there is an excellent chance he’d lose everything he had: wife, kids, job, community, church for sure. Joe is dimly aware that he’s not terribly happy, but he doesn’t really have time or energy to give it much more coherent thought than that. Reaction to Joe?