“Pregnant Man Pregnant Again”, or, How I Lost Respect for CNN

“CNN – Your Most Trusted Name In News”, that’s their slogan.

I don’t want my “most trusted” news source to bash me, hurt me, depersonify me, insult me, laugh at me, try to humiliate me, or attempt to kick me down after all the things that I have been through just to live as who I am. I don’t want my “most trusted” news corporation to do this to anyone. I had wanted to refrain to from getting too personal in this post, but I don’t think I have a choice any longer. Jeanne Moos’ account insults me because I am me, there is nothing impersonal about that.

“CNN’s Jeanne Moos examines manliness and motherhood.” Otherwise known as “CNN’s Jeanne Moos makes a laughingstock out of the entire trans community and she and her co-workers should be ashamed.”

When I saw this, I was watching CNN’s live feed on their website and by the time I realized you could send feedback via a little “Your Voice” button, they were already onto a segment about Obama. Woops.

I’m not sure I need to explain why that video is so offensive. But if I must, I must do it in list form.

1. The tone of Jeanne Moos’ reporting is not that of an unbiased, impartial reporter – even if she is TV’s equivalent of a ‘columnist’, they should have mentioned that instead of setting it up as a news segment – but of a transphobic, dehumanizing, cissexist tyrant.

2. They do not show two sides of the story. In fact, when they do interview Thomas, they then follow the interview clip with people making tranphobic comments and bashing what he says.

3. I do not enjoy being called an ‘it’, I do not know anyone who does enjoy being called an ‘it’. Thomas’ has a name which is common and easy to use. Hell, if you can’t remember the whole thing, I’m sure he wouldn’t be too offended if you just said “Tom”. Now, if three letters are two hard for you (that’s okay, I’m not going to assume everyone is all that educated or articulate or literate) then you can even say ‘he’, it’s only two letters long and it’s an everyday word that I’m sure you’ve used at some point in your life. Thomas, he, his, him and possibly even Tom are all appropriate pronouns and names. A shortlist of innapropriate things: “Is it a boy? Is it a girl? No, not the baby! The one having the baby!” (followed by laughter, most of which comes from the host, Jeanne Moos), bringing up Thomas’ old name and announcing it like it’s something relevant, “Thomas Beatie, formerly Tracy Beatie is the subject of a Barbara Walters special, but what’s especially hard is knowing what to call it”, “…and had his breasts REMOVED!”, only showing people who are offensive and disrespectful and transphobic, by only showing one side of a story you are endorsing that side.

At this time, we’d like to invite and encourage you to submit a comment about what you think of CNN’s “Pregnant Man Is Pregnant Again” segment and ask that Jeanne Moos retracts her transphobic comments and makes a public appology on either CNN.com or CNN TV.

You can also mention that it’s estimated that every five hours an LGBT youth in the U.S. commits suicide and that Jeanne Moos is not helping.

The form is kind of complicated, but it is located here if you want to give it a shot yourself. If you’d like some assistance with this, here’s what a completed form would look like:

“This Isn’t Transphobia But…”

I know my post “Protest In Toronto” happened a while ago. I know the last comment was made on August 26. I know that it’s the end of the second week of September now. I know all of this, but I still believe that it is so necessary for me to rebutt some of the comments made on that post. Okay, all of them but one. 

I’ve spoken with one of the other authors of this blog and we both feel that we cannot let the comments just remain without making some sort of public rebuttal. So here goes.

For starters, I just needed to post this:

Shae’s Top 5 Most Hilariously Condescending and Contradictory Sentences (as taken from the comments and not in any particular order)

#1: “We are here for the safety and integrity of Homewood and Maitland Streets. We are dedicated to removing sex-trade from our neighbourhood, and restoring it to a peaceful and crime-free community.

WE RECOGNIZE THE RIGHTS OF ALL PEOPLE, AND THIS IS NOT DISCRIMINATORY AGAINST THE SEX-TRADE WORKERS OR TRANS-GENDER SEX-TRADE WORKERS (primarilyat this corner).”  I’m glad that everyone is going into this with their mind focused on safety, integrity, being non-discriminatory and recognizing rights and everything but…how can you say in one paragraph that you are dedicated to removing sex-trade from your neighbourhood, and in the next say that you’re not discriminating against sex-trade workers? In claiming to want to restore your neighbourhood’s ‘integrity’, ’safety’ and peacefulness by removing sex-trade and sex-trade workers from your streets, you are inherently saying that sex-trade workers have removed your neighbourhood’s integrity, safety and peacefulness to begin with. I don’t know how you could possibly rationalize this claim as non-descriminatory or how you could even begin to think you are recognizing the rights of sex-trade workers and transgendered individuals.

#2: “The sex-trade workers themselves are at constant risk from being picked up by johns that intend to do them harm.” I’m sure that the sex-trade workers in question really appreciate your concern, but it’s probably something they either think about often and understand. Every job has risks and sex-trade workers are constantly pounded with reminders of the danger they can be in. Unless you’re willing to remove the system of oppressions that have most likely caused the sex-trade workers working around the Homewood/Maitland area to turn to sex-trade, don’t lecture about the dangers of the sex-trade industry.

#3: “Sex workers are a very important and valued segment of society, and I would never venture to prevent it, but, it needs to be kept within an area that is not for families and schools.” Valued? Sex-trade workers are a valued member of society? Are you kidding…surely such a comment was made in jest? If sex trade workers were a “valued segment of society”, as you so kindly put it, they would not need to think about the danger your fellow resident commented about, they would not need to worry about being harrassed by people with flashlights while they tried to do their job. If sex-trade workers were truly a ‘valued’ segment of society, this debate would not be happening at all.

#3.5 (because this one is actually just a joke): “Having a crack deal take place on my front porch is simply not acceptable.” Stop making crack deals on your front porch and you won’t have a problem.

#4: “Transphobia is not part of the equation here. People are not afraid of trans gendered sex workers nor do they object to the lifestyle. …at the license plate of one of ‘her’ prospective johns.” Yes, transphobia is not a part of the equation here. Right…that’s why you put the pronoun ‘her’ in little quote marks. As if to allude that “we all know that ’she’ is actually a he,” as I’ve heard so many people say (though to be honest, they say the opposite about me). 

#5: “Also, the sex workers have told that that they have been here forwever and that we, the ‘gay condo yuppies’should either sell or get over it and put up with the trannies! The sex workers are trying to sabotage history since they HAVE NOT BEEN HERE FOREVER.” Oh my god! Somebody call the History Police!! The sex workers are trying to sabotage history!!!! Okay, so this one is actually my favourite. I’ve read it probably about a hundred times, and I still laugh every time. Also, since when were you allowed to call us trannies? Just because, you know, through all of your transphobic comments (though transphobia is not part of the equation here…) I kind of gather you’re not trans yourself…

Okay, so real rebuttals take more time. They’ll be coming along soon in another post. Possibly in a couple of days, hopefully tomorrow.