also a million other characters, but i saw someone arguing silence of the lambs wasn’t transphobic the other day so that’s on my mind

    • Cromalin [she/her]@hexbear.netOPMEnglish
      49·
      5 months ago

      a couple points:

      • by this logic it is psychiatrists who get to decide who is or is not trans, not trans people themselves
      • the in-universe context does not erase a male actor standing in front of a mirror in a dress saying “would you fuck me? i’d fuck me.”
      • regardless of what the movie or book says buffalo bill is clearly a caricature of a trans woman. it doesn’t matter that they say buffalo bill isn’t trans, every cis person who watches the movie reads buffalo bill as trans except when they want to argue the movie isn’t transphobic
      • i can’t speak for every trans woman, but i can say with confidence that a whole lot of us were fucked up by this, both because of harassment and because of internalizing the and no amount of “oh actually buffalo bill is cis and just has a fetish” will fix that. in fact, in many cases it makes it worse! transphobes generally think ALL trans woman don’t exist and just have a fetish! the idea that cis people are out there trying to get srs and must be stopped, so we need to make double extra sure that everyone who wants gender affirming care is gatekept for months or years until the all-knowing medical community lays down judgement is transphobic

      regardless of if it was INTENDED to be transphobic it is undeniably incredibly transphobic, and both incredibly detrimental to public perceptions and damaging to self perception of transfem people

      • HexBroke [any, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
        13·
        5 months ago

        transphobes generally think ALL trans woman don’t exist and just have a fetish!

        zizek-theory
        sniffff ahkchooally, it is zee soopozed eksistence of vomen snifff that is a fettish

        • Cromalin [she/her]@hexbear.netOPMEnglish
          32·
          5 months ago

          why is it important that cis people not get srs? who cares? they mostly don’t want it, and if they do they should also be allowed to have it. who give a shit

          • someoneelse
            1·
            5 months ago

            Sorry, in the last point I meant to say I can’t be a judge on the process, since I don’t belong to the medical field. I hope it gets as good as possible, if that means to give surgery to anyone who asks for it, so be it, I don’t know enough to to decide.

            • AutomatedPossum [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
              15·
              5 months ago

              Sorry, in the last point I meant to say I can’t be a judge on the process, since I don’t belong to the medical field.

              Most people in the medical field know fuck all about trans people. That’s exactly the point here: Your ignorant cissie ass assumes that transphobic quacks who happen to have a degree from some clown college and still believe in pseudosciene that was debunked 20 years ago can make better judgments about our gender than us. That’s the reality of doctors making judgements about our transness instead of providing the care we request, and that very idea is transphobic to the core, you dumb fuck.

    • EllenKelly [comrade/them]@hexbear.netM
      31·
      5 months ago

      the character still perpetuates negative image of transgender people, the intent of the author is irrelevant.

      it’s literally an evil man dressing in womans clothing and killing women out of jealously. it’s basically the plot of Psycho

      it’s also heavily suggesting that a doctor is the only person who can determine if someone is transgender, and not the individual themself, which might have been the prominent scientific thought at the time, but it’s a slimey feeling now considering how many trans people are gatekept from transition and dismissed because they’re faking it

      • someoneelse
        1·
        5 months ago

        Yeah, that’s why I said that part. Also, a point that is stronger in the book might just be unnoticed in the film, which is what most people know.

        The part about the doctors is not that they determine being trans, but that sex reassignment surgery is not done on a whim and doctors have to be convinced that the person is trans and will not regret the decision at a later point. At least for me it gave a glimpse on the process and made a clear distinction: whatever he is or does has nothing to do with being trans.

        Even a good will from the author might completely backfire, so I can’t judge about the result. I just thought his intentions do count towards judging him, separated from the character he created.

          • yoink [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
            24·
            5 months ago

            good will arguments are always such a privileged take to me

            like, its incredibly important that we don’t judge the creator for the results of their work for some reason? like there’s this great need to make sure no one has the wrong idea about this particular person who just so happens to be more relatable to the commenter than the groups affected by their work? i genuinely don’t understand the motivation behind arguments like that other than because you want to re-assure yourself that if, in the future, you end up offending somebody or furthering the hurt of a minority group, you can wash your hands by saying you didn’t intend it

              • Cromalin [she/her]@hexbear.netOPMEnglish
                21·
                5 months ago

                no one has argued we should beat the author to death, and in fact you were the one who started defending his honor. i don’t know why you’re acting like we tried to cancel him. the final product is incredibly transphobic regardless of intent and quibbling about whether the author is a transphobic piece of shit or not (he was! it was the 80s, lots of people were!) is ignoring the actual issue at hand, which is the material harm caused by the book and its adaptation

                  • Cromalin [she/her]@hexbear.netOPMEnglish
                    24·
                    5 months ago

                    you started off by saying “oh in the original book the author said he wasn’t trans”, then acknowledged “now his character might still be detrimental to the perception of trans people,” but still only say it MIGHT cause problems and follow it up by further defending the author. you then ignore everyone talking about how buffalo bill not being trans doesn’t make it better and continue to defend the author despite the fact that you’re the only one who cares about the author

                    regardless of your intent all you’re doing is defending transphobia. just admit it’s transphobic and move on! it’s a 36 year old book, it doesn’t matter! stop trying to defend it when that’s exactly what the original post was about!!!

    • Riffraffintheroom [none/use name]@hexbear.netEnglish
      19·
      5 months ago

      They explicitly state that he’s not trans in the movie as well, but yes that movie was a lot of peoples first or only exposure to the idea of gender transition and that’s probably done a lot of harm.

      • AutomatedPossum [she/her]@hexbear.netEnglish
        12·
        5 months ago

        Explicitly claiming that a trans person isn’t trans, but instead has a weird fetish is already transphobic as fuck, it’s an integral part of what makes Silence of the Lambs the 20th century’s most transphobic work of art.