I appreciate "let us enjoy it in fiction", but I also don't think it's good to set a precedent of "to be happy, a trans woman must be X, Y, and Z", you know?
Without being ridiculous - and I do ask this as a question, not a statement posed as one - but by this measure, wouldn't any happy relationship a transperson was involved in automatically set a precedent that you 'must be x, y and z' to be happy, regardless of what 'x, y and z' were?
No. I see the point you're trying to make, but given that various media has very set parameters for what trans portrayals are (which is changing, albeit, slowly), there is very little variance. Were there more variety, the precedent wouldn't be as painfully obvious. For example, there are standard portrayals of cis relationships too, but there's enough variety in them that I can't put them in two solid categories.
To the general ether: I'm not trying to beat a dead horse here, and I'm not trying to start fights. I'm merely stating my opinion on a portrayal I find slightly bothersome. I am still a fan of the comic and Jeph's writing and art in general. However, I AM a part of the group he is portraying with Claire, and I feel justified stating any misgivings I may have. I don't mean to make people defensive about it--giving a critique does not mean I'm saying the comic is bad, or that Claire herself is a terrible character.
1. Nobody that I saw was getting defensive, if they were then we'd step in because you weren't being an instigator. Many of us as mods criticise the comic for all sorts of reasons, many far less valid than yours in particular, and I'm pretty sure Jeph himself welcomes these discussions when they remain civil, or at the bare minimum is used to them by nature of having been putting this comic online for over a decade.
2. As a member of that group you refer to, your opinion carries significant weight in a which mine, as a member of LGBTQI but still cis male, does not, which is why we value your insight on matters such as this.
3. In response to your answer to my particular question, I do see your point - quite frankly as someone relatively new to all the concepts of trans in general (I've only really known about any of it for three to four years, more or less since my return to this forum in late 2012), I see barely any portrayals of trans people in the media, even though they are increasing every day as best as I can see it. All I was thinking was a response to something our very own ZoeB posted a while back when Claire and Marten first began as a couple, in which Zoe's argument in favour of their relationship running smoothly was that this would be the only example she knew of for a cis/trans relationship running smoothly in the media, and so however that was going it was still a step in the right direction. For me, and I know we are a LONG way away from this, the ideal would be simply that transfolk were so accepted that it doesn't
need to be a storyline focus, it simply
is, and that's cool, as is any kind of loving, legal relationship.
In fairness, I apply that principle to all sorts of different minority things. One of my favourite things about an old animated series called Home Movies was that the main character had a younger, mixed-race, adopted sister. The adoption and her racial background were acknowledged perhaps once in four seasons that I remember, and never featured in a storyline. It was simply a fact of their family that she was adopted and mixed race, and that was fine. It didn't NEED to be a storyline. And I loved that because too often people in real life, and especially in the media, become only what they are instead of who they are. Everything has to be a storyline rather than merely a character trait that is just accepted and then doesn't require in-depth acknowledgement.
Poll
Author
Topic: WCDT Strips 3216 to 3220 (9th to 13th May 2016) (Read 54119 times)