tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post5196624718898491630..comments2024-03-13T11:14:26.768-04:00Comments on A Radical Profeminist: A Response to "Transphobic and Racially Confused" by Brandon Lacy Campos to Dirtywhiteboi67Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-65778056008243005012011-01-18T15:45:44.404-05:002011-01-18T15:45:44.404-05:00Hi Feminazi,
I'm not at all bothered by your ...Hi Feminazi,<br /><br />I'm not at all bothered by your complaints, and welcome them, in fact.<br /><br />Thanks for taking the time to point out what would make my posts more legible!<br /><br />An English teacher I'm not. lol<br /><br />I'm going to work on making things clearer, and after today--18 Jan 2011--if things are still wonky, please feel free to drop me another note, and let me know what's still confusing to you.<br /><br />Again, much appreciated!<br /><br />Cheers.<br /><br />JulianJulian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-5220895739352056232011-01-18T13:01:06.613-05:002011-01-18T13:01:06.613-05:00Not to hurt your feelings with my tactless complai...Not to hurt your feelings with my tactless complaints and requests Julian, but I find your posts require being read through the filter of a professional editor. Mainly because that /blockquote/ tag exists for a reason! :)<br /><br />It's really difficult for me to tell when you are quoting large passages written by someone else, and when you suddenly shift gears and begin your own reply to them. If Blogger doesn't enable the use of the /blockquote/ tag for some mysterious reason, then perhaps consider using another font size or color as a designation. <i>Something!</i><br /><br />Another structural practice which would benefit your readers -- and I can see how writers might get bored with this (but it does help to clarify a great deal) -- is to use the following format:<br /><br />John believes blah blah blah. It appears as if John believes blah blah blah. Yet, he ignores yadda yadda.<br /><br />Those are grammatical signals which indicate to the reader who-sez-what and who-disgrees-with-whom-regarding-X. I realize some writers prefer to leave those out, as they assume it makes the article too wordy or redundant, but frankly writers can't ever be TOO clear.<br /><br />You're actually quite awesome, and I suspect you'd have a LOT more readers if you made it easier for them to understand what you're trying to say. As it is, I have to read most of your posts imagining that my English teacher is interpreting and reformatting your article for me. Using a combination of blockquotes and "John said" would go a long way.<br /><br />The other problem, is your use of "you" as it is really not clear for me upon first reading if you are referring to all of your readers in general, or you are referring to one particular person. THIS is where the use of blockquotes would be most helpful. If the "you" followed a blockquote passage, then it would be obvious that you were referring to the other writer and not your audience.<br /><br />Humble apologies for my petty complaints, but again, making some simple changes would render your entire articles much easier to read. And you do indeed deserve a much wider audience.<br /><br />P.S. You don't have to make such a harsh and petty complaint public. :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-32417529825497039602011-01-11T20:35:53.388-05:002011-01-11T20:35:53.388-05:00Hey Brandon,
Thanks so very much for taking the t...Hey Brandon,<br /><br />Thanks so very much for taking the time to reply.<br /><br />Had you not, ironically, I might have just tossed this post, as I have been feeling worse and worse about how I engaged with you about this.<br /><br />I should have learned more about Dirtywhiteboi67, for one thing. (I knew nothing at all; I learned here from you that she's posted stuff to YouTube.) I should have learned more about you, for another.<br /><br />Anyway, I'm glad your words stand here as they do!<br /><br />I experience no disagreement with you at all. And I look forward to supporting your work in the future. My email is on the top right area of this blog. If there's anything TALP is doing that could use a bit more publicity, lemme know. I'm happy to post events and such. That's part of what this blog exists to do.Julian Realhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02933612851144914687noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6744114065733119575.post-20085878095642895332011-01-11T19:55:48.527-05:002011-01-11T19:55:48.527-05:00Dear Friend:
I can absolutely see the ways in whi...Dear Friend:<br /><br />I can absolutely see the ways in which my commentary can be seen as an exercise in male privilege, and the ways in which that is true, I apologize.<br /><br />Having said that, the issue at hand for me is not Dirtywhiteboi67's want/need/desire to have and have respected lesbian identified and lesbian only spaces. I support that absolutely.<br /><br />My issue exists in two levels: her blog regarding Audre Lorde and the Audre Lorde Project is not and cannot be separated from the rest of her transphobic rantings and ravings that are found on her blog as well as on YouTube. Her consistent and overt desire to shame, make invisible, and deny the right to their bodies and identities of trans folks is truly beyond the pale for me.<br /><br />The second is very much so about race versus gender, and it is unfortunate that this is one of those situations that, for me, comes down very much to one of those moments. Everything that I have read about, know about, feel about, seen about, learned about, and engaged about Audre Lorde is that she say herself in common struggle across identities, which, at the heart, is what I, as gay male that identifies as queer, sees as the power of queerness. Please not, I did not NAME Audre Lorde queer in my blog. In fact, I named her lesbian. I DO HOWEVER take extreme exception to a white person of any gender having any issue with people of color claiming one of our own, and in this instance, Audre Lorde was clear that she was a BLACK lesbian. As much as any figure can belong to a community, I claim and am proud to claim Audre as ours.<br /><br />And I stand by my statement with all of my hear...and I make it to all white people of any gender...YOU DO NOT NOW AND NEVER WILL HAVE THE RIGHT TO SPEAK OR DENY our right to our own elders. Period. Conflating this with gender is frankly a smokescreen. Back off of our elders. Back off of our community. You have the right to organize yourself in the way that best reflects who you are and what you believe, but when your desire to limit your world extends to attempting to SHAME, LIMIT, DEFINE, and otherwise silence other communities, you have over stepped your bounds.<br /><br />I deeply appreciate the spirit in which you initiated this conversation. I wish more people would do so, but here is where my humanity rises up and I am holding to it...this was not about a lesbian claiming a lesbian for lesbians. No one, not ALP, not anyone has or was limiting Dirtywhiteboi's or anyone else's claim to Audre as a lesbian, but in her post she CLEARLY attempted to deny OUR RIGHT to OUR ELDER and that, my conscientious friend, is something that raises a race rage and a history of white supremacy that makes effective dialogue nearly impossible, especially since it was done so willfully and with an intention to do harm. And yes, I believe she intentionally tries to do harm.Brandon Lacy Camposhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17309078871229264081noreply@blogger.com