I don't really know what to make of it but I watched the first episode of I am Cait last night. One thing that occurs to me is that people seem to like to rub it in to Kris Jenner. I have seen a lot of tweets about how Cait is a better looking woman than Kris.
I don't know how to not have some confusion about this topic however, Dont get me wrong I accept that Bruce has the right to become Caitlyn as that's who he/she thinks she really is or whatever. I'm not a Republican and don't think the law needs to prevent transgender folks from living their identity-what ever exactly it is.
But it is confusing. For instance he told Diane Sawyer in his interview when she asked him if he will date men now and he replied 'No, I've never been gay.'
But if he's now a woman then doesn't a woman dating another woman make her gay? But the reply of the transgender community is that your gender is a function not of your genitals but of your brain. In a way this makes sense-I've always felt that intelligence is gendered and that there is a gender aspect of intelligence-some knowledge is masculine knowledge some is feminine.
Still, are you telling me that heterosexual men are bigots if they refuse to date a transgender woman in the way that you would call a white man racist for saying he doesn't date black women?
And yet Cait remains his daughters' father? Correct? I don't believe 'she' wants them to see her as another mother.
What s more, I have have to say again Kris Jenner and to a lesser extent the Kardashian clan has really kind of been treated like crap. It kind of makes you think that even men who decide they are women get treated better than natural born women-even among natural born women.
"The premiere episode of I Am Cait, on E!, represented both the most-anticipated reality-TV premiere in years, and the one that was anticipated with the largest aggregate of good feelings. Even defenders of the reality genre will admit that most reality series get their thrills from the unflattering angle, whether that angle depicts a newcomer voted off early or an established star exposing a whole new banal tragedy. But the Caitlyn Jenner story—that of the former Olympian and Keeping Up With the Kardashians star who announced earlier this year she had long identified as a woman—was depicted with an abundance of good taste by E! The show made its mark, in its premiere episode, with its willingness to risk boring the viewer."
http://time.com/3969498/i-am-cait-caitlyn-jenner/
So in a way I am Cait is not reality tv but something real on tv? But I like reality tv better, that's the whole point.
Meanwhile, I'm glad to see the girls pushing back at Cait a little for throwing Kris under the bus. I've never really liked Kris either but I do think that Cait is being a bit one-sided in how she remembers things.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/khloe-kim-kardashian-reveal-anger-6145605
In my last post I talked about the meaning of my new blog title Last Men and OverMen. I can't help but think that making gender itself merely an option is what you would expect from the Last Men.
On the other hand, what the Trans community actually is saying is that gender is not optional that it is something deep and fundamental. So what would it make of another cultural cross current: early education schools that ban the use of any gender pronouns whatsoever?
It might seem that this trend and the Trans trend conflict but do they really? Why do I get the sense that they're all part and parcel of the same agenda which is to decenter and hystericize masculinity?
Sometimes I do kind of thing that I am Cait is the fitting conclusion to The Kardashians-though I've always been a huge Kardashian fan. Masculinity is now impossible. It is now no more possible than to believe in God or metaphysics to believe in masculinity.
P.S. A lot of people I know think last night's episode was boring and in a way it was-as it's clearly anti reality tv. Yet I found it fascinating as it pertains to current social evolution which I always try to keep up with.
I don't know how to not have some confusion about this topic however, Dont get me wrong I accept that Bruce has the right to become Caitlyn as that's who he/she thinks she really is or whatever. I'm not a Republican and don't think the law needs to prevent transgender folks from living their identity-what ever exactly it is.
But it is confusing. For instance he told Diane Sawyer in his interview when she asked him if he will date men now and he replied 'No, I've never been gay.'
But if he's now a woman then doesn't a woman dating another woman make her gay? But the reply of the transgender community is that your gender is a function not of your genitals but of your brain. In a way this makes sense-I've always felt that intelligence is gendered and that there is a gender aspect of intelligence-some knowledge is masculine knowledge some is feminine.
Still, are you telling me that heterosexual men are bigots if they refuse to date a transgender woman in the way that you would call a white man racist for saying he doesn't date black women?
And yet Cait remains his daughters' father? Correct? I don't believe 'she' wants them to see her as another mother.
What s more, I have have to say again Kris Jenner and to a lesser extent the Kardashian clan has really kind of been treated like crap. It kind of makes you think that even men who decide they are women get treated better than natural born women-even among natural born women.
"The premiere episode of I Am Cait, on E!, represented both the most-anticipated reality-TV premiere in years, and the one that was anticipated with the largest aggregate of good feelings. Even defenders of the reality genre will admit that most reality series get their thrills from the unflattering angle, whether that angle depicts a newcomer voted off early or an established star exposing a whole new banal tragedy. But the Caitlyn Jenner story—that of the former Olympian and Keeping Up With the Kardashians star who announced earlier this year she had long identified as a woman—was depicted with an abundance of good taste by E! The show made its mark, in its premiere episode, with its willingness to risk boring the viewer."
http://time.com/3969498/i-am-cait-caitlyn-jenner/
So in a way I am Cait is not reality tv but something real on tv? But I like reality tv better, that's the whole point.
Meanwhile, I'm glad to see the girls pushing back at Cait a little for throwing Kris under the bus. I've never really liked Kris either but I do think that Cait is being a bit one-sided in how she remembers things.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-news/khloe-kim-kardashian-reveal-anger-6145605
In my last post I talked about the meaning of my new blog title Last Men and OverMen. I can't help but think that making gender itself merely an option is what you would expect from the Last Men.
On the other hand, what the Trans community actually is saying is that gender is not optional that it is something deep and fundamental. So what would it make of another cultural cross current: early education schools that ban the use of any gender pronouns whatsoever?
It might seem that this trend and the Trans trend conflict but do they really? Why do I get the sense that they're all part and parcel of the same agenda which is to decenter and hystericize masculinity?
Sometimes I do kind of thing that I am Cait is the fitting conclusion to The Kardashians-though I've always been a huge Kardashian fan. Masculinity is now impossible. It is now no more possible than to believe in God or metaphysics to believe in masculinity.
P.S. A lot of people I know think last night's episode was boring and in a way it was-as it's clearly anti reality tv. Yet I found it fascinating as it pertains to current social evolution which I always try to keep up with.
No comments:
Post a Comment