My two cents...I'm going against the grain here. In my experience, there are a fair number of drag queens who are TG. I've known several who were actually TS and had transitioned, apart from not having SRS. I think it's important that we realize that drag queens CAN be TG and not to assume that they aren't just because they perform onstage.

I actually think that it must be harder for TGs to be drag queens than it would be for male performers who are simply entertainers. I think I feel this way because I see drag queens as a male point-of-view of what a female performer is. Therefore, it seems to me that a real TG girl would find it more difficult than a male.

I have had conversations with my friend Terry, who is a gay man about this. Both of us are of the same mind regarding trans girls specifically as drag queens. Both of us think it rather a "cheat". Drag queens are supposed to be males, or at least individuals with male shaped bodies. I've always thought that drag queens with breast implants or taking HRT or both was sort of missing the point. I'd never ever appear as a drag queen but I have friends who want me to. They just don't get it, that it would be strange and I think, wrong. If I was EVER going to perform like that, I'd have to be a drag king, not queen. After all, I'm a female, not a male.

Z

PS- Penny, as someone who lost her apartment because having a TS around, well according to them, my low morals somehow endangered everyone in the complex. So....I feel ya sis.

Hi all,

This post is a reaction to two recent posts in other threads which this post doesn't seem to fit in with:

The Gender Society Forums / Hormone City / estradiol
Marsha said:
"The drag queen shows or female impersonators have an enormous following. Are they just being themselves or are they trying to be someone or something else? I guess they fall under the broad definition of transgender, but I'm not sure where exactly. I have a hard time believing a transsexual, someone who internally believes they are the other gender, wants to be a comedic stage act. I could be wrong and I may get blasted with names of successful female impersonator stage acts."

and

The Gender Society Forums / General Forum / Famous Trans People
Katie listed Ru Paul as a Famous Trans Person.

I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, the following is strictly my personal opinion based on being part of the TG scene for more than three and a half decades. Please, no one, take offense - it's not aimed at anyone personally.

I would argue that the vast majority of Drag Queens are not TG. I leave a bit of quibble room because in the spectrum of gender, almost anything is possible.

Over the years I've know quite a number of DQs and none of them were TG, at least by my definition. They were all gay (or at least bi with a strong preference for males) and did not see themselves as "female" or "feminine". (I'm not saying that being gay prevents you from being TG...) Either for fun or profit, they were making broad fun of females and femininity. None of them wanted to be female, they wanted to be outrageous and/or make a living.

In my life, I owned a motorcycle shop and later was an IT manager at a huge telecommunications corporation and I was TG. You could name virtually any other profession and find a few TGs in it. I suspect that DQs are the same - a small minority may be TG.

The only example I know of a DQ being TG was one of the contestants on Ru Paul's Drag Race last season, Sonique, who revealed in the end of season follow up show that she was TS and transitioning.

I can't say anything about Female Impersonators/Illusionists because I've never met one personally. I suspect that more of them are TG since they are trying to present and idealized image of females. But that's just a guess.

So what do you think?

Best,
Melody

I suppose there is a broad spectrum of people. But I suspect there would be a higher percentage of CDr or TGr people in a group of drag queens than there would be in say a group of bakers or bricklayers. I mean getting paid for wearing frocks sounds pretty good if you like wearing frocks.

Personally if I could make a living out of being flambouant (wonder if that is the root of the term 'flaming') I would probably do so and then slip into something more conservative for the drive home.

I'd also guess that the precentage of transgender people is probably pretty consistant no matter the career choice.

I'm with you on this Melody, I don't think most drag queens are TG. I believe they are role playing more than they are expressing their female side. I could have used the word feminine but I intentionally did not because the fact is there are feminine men and masculine women that are 100% heterosexual. I believe drag queens are gay guys that dress as women to highlight their submissive side in a gay relationship. The only thing that makes them come under TG definitions is that their appearance crosses genders, but in my opinion being transgender is a mental state where the individual has inner feelings of being female that they choose to express, mtf of course.

I was trying to be nice in what I had said which you quoted. I said they fit somewhere on the TG spectrum as to not alienate anyone. I don't really think anyone who identifies as a drag queen would come here anyways............intentionally. I think there are individuals here that maybe identify as TG, but a proper description might just be a drag queen. I would call the other TG gal at our church, who comes looking like a whore, a drag queen based on what she talks about which is the drag shows at the clubs and her x rated life with various guys.

What is interesting is that for the most part MTF TGs have FTM TG counterparts, however you might see the term drag king, but the reality is you are unlikely to find a female counterpart to a drag queen. You can argue that butch lesbians are maybe drag kings but I think they are more the equivalent to a flamboyant gay guy and they won't argue that they are male inside.

I do have a friend that is FTM and he is incredible. He is on testosterone medication and has the facial hair and everything. Looks fantastic in my opinion. And what a warm hearted individual. He has expressed very similar experiences and fears that transitioning MTF TSs go through. I'm only mentioning that because there is a clear distinction how he sees himself as a guy, not a lesbian.

Hugs,
Marsha

P.S. I don't think there is anything wrong with being a drag queen. If that floats your boat, have at it.

Hiya everyone who has shown interest in this thread.

I'm going to be a bit of a devil and throw a spanner, or bra strap as the case may be, into this debate lol.

My answer to the question "Are Drag Queens really TGs?" is that it really isnt any of my business unless an individual who performs a Drag Queen act announces if they are TG or not and wishes to discuss it. After all, Drag Queens have the freedom to state the nature of their individuality just as anyone else and as we do too. We fight everyday for our own liberty but if we dont observe the same for others we could be in danger of hypocrisy.

Sorry to be such a killjoy lol.

Hugs
Penny
x

Ermm Penny, rereading all the comments I could not find where anyone here has said anything bad about drag queens or anyone else. Labels exist and always will exist. Sure it would be nice if everyone was luvy dubby to everyone else but that is a pipe dream. People are different and it should not be a big deal to identify the differences. That has absolutely nothing to do with labeling people good or bad. AND, who says they can't have opinions about us. You are sounding like you are in favor of thought police. Telling people they can't have an opinion of us or anyone else isn't going to help anything in the acceptance department.
Hugs,
Marsha

Marsha,
You may feel offended by what I am about to say - but,

1) I saw nothing in what Penny said that even remotely resembles her being in favor of thought police.
2) I have, however, noticed that you have a tendency to show condescension towards anything (or anyone) that does not fully agree with your position regarding "gender related" matters.
... none of us are "pure laine" in this world ...

Doanna

------------------------------------------
"and my needs entwined like ribbons of light...and I came through the doorway...some where... in the night"

My opinion on Drag Queens is that there not TG and I find them an embaresment to the TG community, I find this so because they are out there with there big hair and over done makeup acting like fools (not all but most) and this is what people see and in turn they think all TG,TS,TV,and CD dress and act this way (I'm sorry but this is true we live in a steriotipical world.) I dont have anything wrong with DG'S but I just dont see them as Transgendered I see them more as artists.

I've known 1 that did it as a way to support herself. Yes she is a TS.

Doanna, I am against anyone who says you should not express your opinion. I see that as thought police. I have no problem with you or Penny, or anyone else for that matter expressing their opinion. I definitely didn't say what I said because of dislike for Penny, I consider her a good friend. It just happens on this topic I have a very different view which opens it up for healthy debate.
Hugs,
Marsha

Hiya Marsha,
I think I made a bad job of explaining the point I was attempting to deliver. I will try again.

A drag queen is a job not an individuals trait. I mean someone would say "I work as a drag queen" as apposed to saying they are gay or transgendered. Therefore someone who is a drag queen may or may not be transgendered, the two are completely dislocated. To ask the question "Are drag queens TGs?" is the same as asking "Are brick layers TGs?"

Putting that aside for a moment. Who are we to decide if another individual is TG or not? All I am saying is that the freedom of self determination means we cant go round telling others if they are TG/TV/TS or whatever. For arguments sake, it would be the same as everyone you meet saying you are just a bloke in a frock.

Maybe a more suitable question to ask would be, are transgendered people more likely than any other type of individual to perform a drag queen stage act?

or

Do drag queen stage acts help or damage the trans community?

Love
Penny
x

Marsha,

I agree with your sentiment that everyone should have the freedom to express their opinion. However, some opinions can be construed as hateful and is a crime to express. It is a crime to tell a M2F transperson they are just a bloke in a frock, infact, it is a crime to tell a M2F transperson that they are male for which they can be arrested. It is also a crime to express the opinion that the WW2 holocaust never happened.

Penny
x

I personally think for the majority, it is just a job, and there are all walks in there. Including, as Christine already noted, women pretending to be men pretending to be women!

Like in all walks of life, every area of the gender spectrum is likely to be in there. The only difference being that they hold a position which enables them to express themselves. unlike, for example, the aforementioned bricklayers............

Unless you're a lumberjack! Cue music............

Nikki

Now that is really interesting Nicola how the NHS saw a distinction. And Penny I liked the way you changed your wording to it is basically a job that someone goes to. I see it as more than a job, maybe a special appearance. Our cultures are very different in subtle ways because here and for the most part around the world it is not a crime to say things like calling a MTF male. Personally I believe the police have better things to do than slap people on the wrist for that. I often believe Brits look to their laws in hopes that will make people accept them. I think maybe at best it keeps their mouths shut, but it does nothing for acceptance. Just a personal view.

And just to give everyone an idea of the southern U.S., I have never had anyone say anything derogatory in relationship to me being TS directly to me other than some insinuating talk from my old church pastor.

Hugs,
Marsha

I wanted to respond Marsha but it has taken me a while to find a suitable way to express myself. I find it difficult to accept any opinion you have about British society and culture as I expect you would about any opinion I have regarding US society and culture. A lot of people express opinions that have absolutely nothing to do with facts.
Much Love
Penny
x

Penny, I understand completely. However if the opinions are not expressed with the intention of getting a response, how is either to ever learn what the other may actually be experiencing? I think too often I or others may say something and it gets taken personally when the reality of it was to question what we read so we have the correct understanding. Instead of responding with "No, I don't think you understand, it is actually like this.....", but rather the response I hear is "How can you say such things?" Then I'm made out to be the bad gal which of all people you know I could really careless about at this point. I see it as a two way street, the UK gals are doing the same thing they accuse me of doing and they just don't recognize it because they have a different interpretation of what they are trying to convey. I think you UK gals just get way too defensive when anyone questions your laws and culture. It seems to be OK for you, but not for me.
Hugs,
Marsha

Marsha, what I was responding to was your reply to what Penny posted (below)

Penny posted,
"My answer to the question "Are Drag Queens really TGs?" is that it really isnt any of my business unless an individual who performs a Drag Queen act announces if they are TG or not and wishes to discuss it. After all, Drag Queens have the freedom to state the nature of their individuality just as anyone else and as we do too. We fight everyday for our own liberty but if we dont observe the same for others we could be in danger of hypocrisy. "

Marshas reply to Penny,
"Ermm Penny, rereading all the comments I could not find where anyone here has said anything bad about drag queens or anyone else. Labels exist and always will exist. Sure it would be nice if everyone was luvy dubby to everyone else but that is a pipe dream. People are different and it should not be a big deal to identify the differences. That has absolutely nothing to do with labeling people good or bad. AND, who says they can't have opinions about us. You are sounding like you are in favor of thought police. Telling people they can't have an opinion of us or anyone else isn't going to help anything in the acceptance department."

---------------------------------------

As I said, I see nothing in what Penny said that indicates she is in favor of thought police.
further,
I see nothing in what Penny said in her post that has anything that relates to "Telling people they can't have an opinion of us or anyone else isn't going to help anything in the acceptance department." or that " they can't have opinions about us."


Perhaps you read far too much into what Penny posted...

Hugs,
Doanna

------------------------------------------------------------

"and my needs entwined like ribbons of light...and I came through the doorway...some where... in the night"

Marsha huni, In this instance I’m not defending British laws or culture at all and I certainly not making you out to be a bad girl. I think you are a lovely person hugs x and I cherish our friendship. The point of my last post was that you expressed an opinion about British society that I found quite inaccurate and hence my statement that people often express factless opinions.

You made another statement "I think you UK gals just get way too defensive when anyone questions your laws and culture."

to which I ask...

Would that be more or less defensive than Americans defending their American way of life?

Marsha, we arent discussing the topic any more. How would you like to proceed?

love and hugs
Penny
x

Hi Doanna,
It is a little more difficult to reply to this now that we have discussed it more and additional information has come out giving a better understanding. Still reading what Penny originally had written hasn't really altered my thoughts on her original post. Saying it is none of our business unless the drag queen brings it up for discussion seems to me to say we can't talk about anything without someones permission. Hence, my term for it, thought police. Penny is quite right that we are concerned about our own rights, however I feel the statement taken literally, takes away the rights of others to express their opinion.

I think the point Penny was actually trying to make was if a person wants to call themselves a bowl of Jell-o, so be it. I don't have any problem at all with that. I think it is weird and feel I should be able to state my opinion, that's all.

Hugs,
Marsha

Hi Marsha,

Maybe the question should be asked, "Are Bowls of Jell-O really TGs?"

Best,
Melody

Hugs Penny, I hope you realize how I do highly respect you. I agree that Americans do the same thing and I am definitely guilty of doing it myself. However, I see that as a building block for discussion to reach a better understanding with no intentions of differences escalating to the controversy they far too often do here. I wish there was an easy answer.
Lots of hugs,
Marsha

Marsha,
Your last post about being a bowl of jell-o is very good and I agree. The point I was trying to convey is that although it is OK to think someone is a weirdo for wanting to be referred to as a bowl of jell-o. It is not OK to tell someone they are a weirdo for such and would be a crime of harassment and a section 5 public order offense (in the UK)...

http://en.wikipedia.org/w[...]istress

That law is simply to show that anti social behaviour is not acceptable and expressing particular opinions is anti social behaviour.

Here in the UK, I cannot speak for anyone else, freedom and liberty is allowing everyone the ability to live their lives exactly as they wish but it is not OK for anyone to interfere with anyone elses lives which includes expressing opinions in a public place which may cause offence.

I see it as respecting other human beings for their way of life regardless of how much I dont understand it or agree with it.
There are TV shows here that follow police in their duties and quite often see people getting arrested for section 5 public order offenses. Unfortunately the same shows show footage of american coppers getting shot when they make arrests, which I am sure is not an acurate portrayal of everyday life for american coppers, maybe you could express how it is. I agree with your statement that there is a cultural difference.

Marsha, do you see your freedom to express your opinion as ultimate? I mean, you can say what you like to whoever you like?

Also, this forum is a public place. There are lots of opinions made about other people who get offended. Lots of arguments ensue. Funny that! lol

Love
Penny
x

Penny, you asked

"Marsha, do you see your freedom to express your opinion as ultimate? I mean, you can say what you like to whoever you like?"

I believe the majority of people are good people with good intentions, therefore the opinions expressed by most fall well within the ethical realm. I think there are cases of opinions being said that should have not been said such as slanderous or derogatory speech. But too often I see people get all upset at something just because they don't agree with it. So to really answer your question, no I would not arbitrarily say anything I wanted to say to whoever. I have a set of moral values as does each of us that we use to control what we say. Do wrong things get said from time to time? Of course, but that shouldn't be the end of the world.
Hugs,
Marsha

Marsha,
Thats really nice what you said. Its nice to have a set of moral values that you look up to. However, not everyone has the same moral values and what is the proper way to deal with people who dont have the same moral values as you?

For example, if you were walking up the road and someone was pointing at you whilst chanting a mantra of "Pedo!", would you merrily continue walking in knowledge that it was their freedom to express their opinion?

It recently happened to me. I am suffering harassment from my neighbour at the moment and the police have given them an anti social behaviour order. If they break the law again they could face a 5 year custodial sentence. It makes me feel a lot better that my freedom and liberty has been protected.

If they are evicted my neighbours could be replaced with people whose moral values are that the right thing to do is chop my head off.

At least with the public order act, the law shows that everyone must put up with and tolerate people who they dont understand or disagree with, and allow them to live in peace.

Love
Penny
x

Marsha, I have really enjoyed this thread. An oportunity to express ourselves and understand the differences in our life's existence. Whatever I say it is only from my perspective. and Like wise for youhow fabby is it we have the freedom.

Thanks Penny, and although I may be blunt at times and say things others don't want to hear, I hope I have not stepped over the line and personally offended any individual. That would never be my intention.

But back to what you said, lol. You asked two questions in my opinion. First you asked if I would merrily walk away if some people were chanting "Pedo!" because it was their right to express their opinion. My answer to that would be based on the environment it was being said. You see, that would be slanderous speech here and especially someone calling you a pedophile amongst others could be sued for defamation of character. However if it was just a bunch of punk kids saying it where it did not matter, I would just keep on walking.

The second question I believe you are eluding to is if they continue to do it shouldn't something be done. Here in the U.S. that behavior would be considered harassment and a court order can be obtained to put an end to that or there would be fines or punishment. We don't need special laws to say you can't say bad things about this or that group. Opinions can be expressed but when they become more than that, there are remedies.

So you see we are actually very similar in dealing with this type of issue. I just happen to think that in the UK there is a propensity to legislate acceptance and my personal opinion is that is not the best approach. I believe in equal justice for all, not all religious people, not all white people, and not all transgendered people, but all people.

Hugs,
Marsha

Marsha, Everything you said makes complete sense and in interpretation is quite the same as Brit law but with different usage of words. The bit you said about you feel the UK attempts to legislate acceptance I disagree with. The bit you said that equal justice for all is exactly my perception of UK law. of course with the exception that the religious order have managed to keep.

I knew there was something I liked about you Penny. I appreciate the way you took your time to clarify and better understand what was actually being said here. As it turns out, we really are very similar. I just want you to know I am not against your protecting laws, my belief is we will gain better acceptance by being out in public setting a good example. I believe that is the opinion I have consistently conveyed while I have been at TW/GS.

As you already know, we have the same problem here in the U.S. with the extreme religious meddling in our laws.

Lots and lots of hugs for you,
Marsha

In my view a drag queen isn't a cross dresser. Drag queens are jokey figures, because they originally came straight from the theater. And drag queens are usually gay men.

I am a straight man, but love to dress as a woman. When I dress I seriously try to convey a natural look of a woman in her late 30s. I don't wear big boobs, or 10 inch heels, or massive false eyelashes.

Hi Steve,

Your comment is closer to what I had in mind when I started this thread. Most DQs are not dressing to express an inner femaleness, they are just a parody of of females, often trying to degrade them.

What I didn't think of was the true TG who is making a living by being a DQ. Can't say I ever met one, but I stand corrected since others have.

Maybe I should have phrased the question differently, "Are Drag Queens automatically TG?" I don't think the act of putting on the other gender's clothing makes one a transgendered person. But then, maybe some would say so...

Best,
Melody

Staying on-topic:

IMO, Most drag-queens are entertainers. It's a difficult job to do well. There are likely to be a few who are TG, perhaps a slightly elevated prevalence, above the typical.

Working as a drag queen has to beat working at a "She-male prostitute" to pay for your transition or just stay alive.

I've never been to or seen a DQ act however I have seen a few enjoying a few drinks with their friends in nightclubs and their comments are full of innuendoes, lewd suggestions and overtly flamboyant behaviour. I'm not particularly fond of their depiction because I find it disrespectful. Someone said that DQs are a parody of females, which I very much agree with, but how do uneducated people view DQs? Would I be ignorant to say that they see DQs as the same as any transgendered person? or is it more, they see all TGs as drag queens? I can only wonder at the reality. Also, it would be really nice to understand the views of someone who is a DQ or performs an act as one.

Maybe a DQ or someone who performs as act as one would find our thoughts and comments on this thread really offensive, I dont know!

Love
Penny
X

I was thinking of the application form for the post of Drag Queen.

Are you or have you ever been:

a. A tg

b. A tv

c . A tgtv

d. None of the above


Please tick appropriate box.

The primary TS looks down on the secondary TS who looks down on the TG who looks down on the CD/TV and all in turn look down on the She-male and the DQ/DK...................................................................this one will run and run............................

If you're trying to turn being TG/TS into some sort of exclusive society, hermetically sealed off from the rest of the T-world, then you might as well go and join/found your own religious sect . I can't help feeling that it's a bit sad, not to say arrogant, if the only way to accept and define yourself and your condition is by retreating into a form of 'Gated Community'. Just because groups like 'Womyn' exclude us is no justification for us to play the same game WITHIN the T-world.

Is it any business of ours to arbitrarily decide who is TG and who not? Admittedly I don't know any DQs, but I'm certainly not going to tell them where they do or do not belong. I would suspect the individual DQ knows perfectly well how he/she defines him/herself and where they find themselves on the great M-F sliding scale, and probably greets attempts by some TS' to introduce a 'Gender Bar' (remind you of anything?) with sad head shaking. Or do you really think DQs should have to sit in the 'back of the bus'?


ciao

Lynn H.

Very good words Lynn.

I would like to add that, for me, the "Transgender Ladder" you describe is something I initially heard a number of people mention when I first joined the community. Ever since, I have been telling people that we are all individuals and however we are comprised no one human being is more or less than another. Well, thats the drum I have been banging lol.

It frustrates me a lot when I hear people saying bad things about another because of the "type" of person they are. As I said in another thread how can the TG community expect the rest of the world not to be bigoted and prejudice when it is prevalent within our own ranks. I would much rather prefer to hear "I dont like this person because ... regardless of them being ..."

Much Love
Penny
x

Penny,
Hugs!
I have a bit to say about an earlier comment of yours (below) and has a lot to do with the differences between the UK and USA/Canada - on our approach to freedom of expression.

Your Comment,
"I agree with your sentiment that everyone should have the freedom to express their opinion. However, some opinions can be construed as hateful and is a crime to express. It is a crime to tell a M2F transperson they are just a bloke in a frock, infact, it is a crime to tell a M2F transperson that they are male for which they can be arrested. It is also a crime to express the opinion that the WW2 holocaust never happened. "
------------------------------------------------

We (USA/Canada) value our freedom of expression and are able to do so - without removing the rights of others to express theirs.
For example,
We are within our rights to "tell a M2F transperson they are just a bloke in a frock" ...if we want to - and it is not a crime!
We are within our rights to " tell a M2F transperson that they are male" ...if we want to - and it is not a crime!
We are within our rights to express our opinion of any person, to THAT person ...at any time - and it is not a crime!
That person is also able to express their opinion of us, to us ...at any time - and it is not a crime!
There are, however, limitations to what a person can say about another person (to the general public or via the media etc.)if it CAUSES other people to act negatively (or illegally) towards that person. The same is true if someone had said that about us.

In short, an expression of opinion exchanged between two people is completely Legal as long as it does not promote an illegal act, or encourage any person to act in an illegal (or prejudicial) manner towards either of the two people - or against any other person.

In effect, if someone tells me I am "just a bloke in a frock", I can turn to that person and say "you are just a F-G! and like to SCR-W SHEEP!". For that matter, I can tell that to him that first - and he has the right to tell me I am "just a bloke in a frock!"
Over here, a personal opinion does not have to be true - or Politically Correct!

The point I am making is, if it doesn't harm (or physically threaten) a person "Socially", Publicly, or "Financially" - it is not a crime!
We do not consider it a crime to have "our feelings are hurt" - even if what that person said to us is "Hateful" or "untrue." We also have the right to avoid (or ignore) that person for what they said - or to simply tell them they are "Full of SH-T!" to their face! Common "Decency" and Common "Courtesy" is up to the individual and not something that will ever be "Legislated" in North America.
In fact, we consider it a crime to interfere with the freedom one has, to express their personal opinion toward another person directly to THAT person.
One of the main "Truths" of the North American Society (the USA and Canada) is this freedom we have - the freedom from having "Big Brother" (or the "STATE") control "everything" we say to each other.
From what I have learned here, it would appear that the UK is turning into a "Big Brother" State.

------------------------------------------------------------------

"and my needs entwined, like ribbons of light...and I came through the doorway ...some where ...in the night"

Thank you Doanna! I tried to say something similar earlier in this thread and what ends up happening is you get gals from the UK saying you can't say that because it is illegal. They don't always understand that it is only illegal there, but not in the rest of the world. And like you have stated so well, our freedom to express ourselves and not have "Big Brother" tell us what we can and cannot say is far more important to us. I really liked your line "We do not consider it a crime to have "our feelings are hurt." Once again I call it legislating acceptance and I believe that will cause more resentment than acceptance.
Hugs,
Marsha

Doanna, love your post and thank you very much.

I would not say the UK is turning into a big brother state as we need to understand the differences in our culture and society.

In the UK, expressing an opinion is one thing but using derogatory and abusive names is ridicule and prejudice and it just isnt tolerated.

In the UK it is not acceptable for anyone to go round calling other people a faggot, twat, or any other abusive comments such as a "bloke in a frock". I understand that behaviour might be acceptable in North America but not here. The section 5 public order act is more a way to subdue abusive individuals in a situation that police are trying to quell. I wouldnt think for a moment the police would be running around trying to sort out cases of name calling. The police are involved in my case because I am continually receiving abuse from the same people and they have been given an ASBO (antisocial behaviour order) and if they persist they could face a 5 year custodial sentence for harassment.

If a police officer witnesses someone calling anyone an unnecessary derogatory abusive name the police officer will give them a good talking to, if the individual persists with the abuse they will be arrested under section 5. Having an opinion is one thing, how it is expressed is another.

In the UK it is as much a crime to psychologically harm someone as it is to physically harm someone. Our bodies are just a vessel, its what goes on in our minds that makes us the people we are. I would rather live in a society where I am safe from psychological harm than for everyone to have their freedom to psychologically harm.

Reading your post I will re-examine my expectations and speak to the abate officer assigned to my case but Im sure if I volleyed abuse back it would make my situation worse besides I wouldnt know how to. Im not the type of person to verbally abuse anyone let alone physically abuse and I need every help from the police to ensure I receive my entitlement of human rights.

In reality, 99% of people are very accepting, respecting and get long in society in relative harmony. There is a small number who are bigoted and who are very abusive, not just to people like me but everyone in general, as I gather. So where you might see the section 5 act as a big brother thing, in reality, its more a mechanism to give the police additional powers over people who are most likely to break other laws.

I think its just that our societies and culture are different.

Much love
Penny
x

Marsha,
I think from your posts and Doannas I have a better understanding of how things work in North America. Hopefully, you might have a better understanding of how things work in UK.

Marsha, you said "They don't always understand that it is only illegal there, but not in the rest of the world." - I think that sentence is more accurate if you had of said "They don't always understand that it is only illegal there, but not in USA. (or North America as the case may be)" - As I surmise you have as much knowledge of the law in others countries as I do.

I prefer debates which discuss facts. Expressing opinions often has nothing to do with facts. Thats why discussing religion and politics never result in a happy outcome.

OK, we have had a good discussion on our societies and how they differ in protecting peoples civil liberties and human rights.

Love
Penny
x

Actually Cristine no it is not a crime to call a black man a dirty nigger. It is not something that someone who has any concern for others might say, but nonetheless it is not illegal. Now if that is said while linked to an actual crime such as assault or robbery, then it becomes a hate crime, but the words on their own are not a crime.

Hugs Penny, there you go being literal again. My statement about the rest of the world was just a general statement, but if you think about it other than some of western Europe and a handful of developed nations scattered about, very few countries are tolerant in the least of TGs. Remember, the middle east does not even have homosexuals, lol. And African nations are outlawing and in some cases trying to make it a crime punishable by death for being homosexual. Consider yourself fortunate if you feel the laws of your country work in your favor.

Our laws in the U.S. are far from perfect when it comes to transgender or even homosexuality. We don't have same sex marriage, health and federal retirement benefits don't cover partners, and discrimination in housing and jobs is a problem for many. But in other ways many of us prosper and that cannot be ignored.

Hugs,
Marsha

Hiya Marsha,
Sorry for being so literal. Just shows that we need to be careful to ensure that everyone understands exactly what we mean.

I think it would be near impossible to have perfect laws. Plenty of people here in the UK say this is a police state. The thing I understand is that people all to often claim their humans rights are being taken away regardless of the fact that their actions, that the police are arresting them for, are taking away the human rights of others.

For example, a high street bank refused a Christian organisation membership to which they said it was against their human rights to refuse them. The banks corporate statement and ethical policy is they do not condone, support or offer services to any organisation that goes against human rights. The Christian organisation is well known for being Anti LBGT.

Heres a link to information about the Christian organisation, its a pretty gruesome read so beware lol...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w[...]ce_(UK)

I believe that laws are there to protect the majority of people who arent out to hurt anyone from the people who are.

Love
Penny
x

PS. I was at a gar bar on Saturday night. Two men were showing everyone their wedding rings. It made me feel that if other human beings can have their wishes respected then maybe so can mine. It made me feel all warm and fluffy inside to see people living without fear and oppression.

Penny,
hugs! (p.s I love your new picture)

A few points on what you posted,

1) “For example, a high street bank refused a Christian organization membership to which they said it was against their human rights to refuse them. The banks corporate statement and ethical policy is they do not condone, support or offer services to any organization that goes against human rights. The Christian organization is well known for being Anti LBGT.

Here a link to information about the Christian organization, it’s a pretty gruesome read so beware loll...
http://en.wikipedia.org/w[...]ce_(UK) "

<<<<my previous posting referred to individuals ‑ not organizations such as this Christian Organization. In the reference you gave, the organization had been giving out pamphlets to the general public ‑ which has nothing to do with a “one to one” expression of opinion ‑ which was the main point I had expressed in my earlier post.
Further, the Bank that refused them is not an individual and as such, does not possess Individual Human Rights ...neither does the Christian “Organization”
PS. I would support the Bank's decision. The Christian Organization also has a right to it's "Religious beliefs" and the people who belong to that Congregation also have a "Human Right" to adhere to those beliefs as well ‑ as long as their ACTIONS, with respect to those beliefs, remain "Entirely within that Organization/Congregation"

You also stated,
"The thing I understand is that people all to often claim their humans rights are being taken away regardless of the fact that their actions, that the police are arresting them for, are taking away the human rights of others."

<<<< a belief is not an action, and to deny any person in a Congregation the human right to adhere to their beliefs (as long as their ACTIONS, with respect to those beliefs remain "Entirely within that Organization/Congregation") would be denying THEM their human rights as well. One may find those religious beliefs "contrary" (or even repugnant) to our own beliefs, but of course, it is within our OWN human rights to disagree with their beliefs as well.
The shoe goes on the other foot!!

2) "In the UK it is not acceptable for anyone to go round calling other people a faggot, twitted, or any other abusive comments such as a "bloke in a frock". I understand that behavior might be acceptable in North America but not here. The section 5 public order act is more a way to subdue abusive individuals in a situation that police are trying to quell. I wouldn’t think for a moment the police would be running around trying to sort out cases of name calling. The police are involved in my case because I am continually receiving abuse from the same people and they have been given an ABO (antisocial behavior order) and if they persist they could face a 5 year custodial sentence for harassment.

If a police officer witnesses someone calling anyone an unnecessary derogatory abusive name the police officer will give them a good talking to, if the individual persists with the abuse they will be arrested under section 5. Having an opinion is one thing, how it is expressed is another. "

<<<< In North America it is not socially acceptable either, but it is not illegal unless you call them that in public with the intention of influencing other people to form the same opinion, to be slanderous, to intentionally intimidate, or to violate that persons personal peace. We have harassment laws here as well and they are intended to protect "civil liberties", Liberties, and the right a person has to enjoy "a peaceful existence". To deliberately seek out a person for the purpose of applying verbal abuse, disturbing their peace, cause psychological harm, cause public embarrassment or humiliation to that person is harassment.
As well, we have "restraining orders" and "peace bonds" here that can curtail that kind of activity ‑ e.g. for harassment, stalking, deliberate psychological harm, intimidation, and violating ones "personal peace". Violating a restraining order (or peace bond) is a criminal offence that can land you in jail, have you fined ... or both. Even witnesses to this illegal act can have a restraining order put in place against that person in order to ensure that their own personal peace is no longer violated. It would, however be limited to areas specific to the witness.
If a person who has been harassed seeks out the other person for the purpose of continuing the matter, that person can also be charged.

3)"Reading your post I will re‑examine my expectations and speak to the abate officer assigned to my case but Im sure if I volleyed abuse back it would make my situation worse besides I wouldn’t know how to. Im not the type of person to verbally abuse anyone let alone physically abuse and I need every help from the police to ensure I receive my entitlement of human rights."

<<<< here, if you volley abuse back, you tend to diminish the credibility of your legal position as well.

<<<< an interesting difference (perhaps it is not "just" a matter of semantics) between North America and the UK is the phrase you used ..."to ensure I receive my entitlement of human rights."
In North America, I could never seek "to ensure I receive my entitlement of human rights." because an entitlement, by it's very nature, is a "title" (much like a land title) that is "granted" to you. In North America, human rights are not granted ‑ they exist, are inherent, are a part of us, and can never be taken away.
For example, in the United States, social security is an entitlement program. The Government has granted "title" of that program to all the people of that Country ‑ The Program was introduced by the Government as a moral obligation to benefit the people of that Country ‑ and not as a human right.

*** What I have posted here was not intended to offend anyone - but rather, to point out some of the basic differences in these aforementioned Societies. I do not believe that either (or any) society is perfect.

---

"and my needs entwined, like ribbons of light...and I came through the doorway, some where... in the night"





------------------------------------------------------------

Doanna, another really good post which I thoroughly enjoyed reading.

There is some confusion which needs to be resolved.

I am a bit confused with the following statement...

"In North America it is not socially acceptable either, but it is not illegal unless you call them that in public with the intention of influencing other people to form the same opinion, to be slanderous, to intentionally intimidate, or to violate that persons personal peace."

The reason I am confused is because what you say is illegal is exactly what the section 5 public order act makes illegal. Calling a black man a dirty nigger is exactly intimidating and violating that person so would also fall under US harassment law (as explained by you in your statement.) I am confused because what I have been saying is illegal in UK you have been saying is not illegal in US then your statement goes on to say what is illegal in US, but it is exactly what I have been saying is illegal in UK.

My use of "entitlement of human rights" has not been understood in the way i intended. My usage of entitlement means a piece of the whole, maybe "fair share" would have been a better description. ie Someone’s fair share of human rights, not more than their fair share, not less than their fair share. Your statement "they exist, are inherent, are a part of us, and can never be taken away." - It would be lovely if that was the case however people have their human rights taken away by criminals everyday. It is the job of the police to ensure that everyone’s humans rights are protected.

In the UK businesses and organisations have exactly the same rights as humans so law is applied to business and organisations in exactly, or as similarly as possible. Thats why you might see a lot of protestors complaining that their human rights are being taken away when they are arrested. They are taking away the businesses and organisations right to sell goods and are influencing peoples opinions in a public place. It is the protestors who are the criminals and again, by your statement is exactly what US law is too (by interpretation if businesses in US are treated in law same as humans.)

If we keep clarifying our statements we will lose any confusion.

Much love
Penny
xxx

Guess I can't keep my mouth shut...
This thread seems to be going far afield (IMHO)
For a while it was the Marsha/Penny Show or visa versa.
Then it became legalize - no offense intended Crissie

Original question: Are Drag Queens really TGs?
The consensus appears to be "this is a too general a question" The whole spectrum of "Trans-Genderism" must be taken into consideration.
The job or performance status was mentioned. All DQs don't perform on stage. Some walk the streets - in large cities where most people ignore or accept "different" people.
I seriously doubt you would find a DQ in any small rural town - certainly not here in red neck country.

love and hugs to all
Gracie