TransActive: Ticked Off Transsexual Women

Just when you thought it was safe to go back to the movies there comes a film such a giant step backward for the transgender community, it disheartens one we may ever achieve social acceptance within the next generation of transwomen. For those of you not acquainted with the stink surrounding the latest cinematic bashing of transwomen, Ticked-Off Trannys with Knives — also known as “TOTWK” or “TOT” on the raging online discussion boards — prepare to hold your noses as we descend into crass commercial exploitation, disingenuous defense tactics, divisive gender politics and the potential fracturing of not only the LGB and T rift finally healing since the 2007 ENDA sellout by the “Human” Rights Campaign but also division underneath the trans umbrella.

Those of you know don’t about the latest execrable parody of transwomen that is Ticked Off Trannys with Knives, prepare to throw up into your mouth. Billed as a comedy-slash-thriller-slash-“transploitation” movie, TOTWK purports to follow in the tradition of 1970s exploitation films such as  Foxy Brown and I Spit on Your Grave. The five lead “tranny” characters in TOTWK are brutally attacked by a group of men; two do not survive the attack but the surviving three seek violent revenge on their attackers. Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) states, “the film is a pastiche of graphic violence and horror movie clichés, with a few scenes of campy humor.”

GLAAD goes on to point out, “by casting transgender women in some roles, and by citing the murders of Angie Zapata and Jorge Mercado in the trailer, [director] Israel Luna has attempted to place his film squarely within a transgender narrative. . . However, while some of the actors in the film identify as transgender, the characters are written as drag queens, ‘performing’ femininity in a way that is completely artificial. The very names of these over-the-top female caricatures (Emma Grashun, Rachel Slurr, et al.) drive this point home.

“Because of its positioning as a transgender film, viewers unfamiliar with the lives of transgender women will likely leave this film with the impression that transgender women are ridiculous caricatures of ‘real women.’ It demeans actual transgender women who struggle for acceptance and respect in their day-to-day lives and to be valued for their contributions to our society.”

One wouldn’t be surprised to see a straight, gender-normative (noncrossdressing) man produce a film like TOTWK, however director Luna identifies as a bisexual man who purports to care about the transgender community. So why would one of those whom we might hope produce a film that moved beyond exploiting our community fail miserably to do so? Could it be because he cared more about making money than serving the greater good of the LGBT community?

In the words of Bugs Bunny, “Nyeahhhhhh — could be!”

Erica Andrews as Emma Grashun

What’s really galling is the mixed messages from both Luna and his supporters. In a queerty.com blog dated January 22^nd, 2010, we get mixed messages between two adjacent paragraphs. “It will take independent media makers like Mr. Luna to elevate trans-issues from drag stages and talk shows into the national discourse,” concludes one paragraph, suggesting the intent of the film is to “elevate” trans-issues.

Yet the very next paragraph begins with “‘I don’t consider myself an advocate. I’m not really a protester or anything like that,’ Luna says. ‘All of my films feature comedy, even my horror films—that’s just my personality.’ He sought to make an entertaining, marketable movie rather an accurate depiction of transgender people that would speaks for the entire community.”

So which is it? How can he be a “media maker” trying “to elevate trans-issues from drag stages and talk shows into the national discourse” and yet not be a protester or advocate? In a queerty.com blog that appeared two months later, the writer noted, “it’s obvious that Luna set out to make a Tarrantino-esque horror-slasher fantasy with comic elements (not a serious or ‘depressing’ drama, in his words, like Boys Don’t Cry). He might also suggest that if transfolk want to see a movie with a more realistic depiction of trans-issues, they should make their own movie.”

Jenna Skyy as Tipper Sommore

Amazingly both the director and his supporters, mostly gay men and transwomen with roots in the drag community, try to paint this exploitation film as some sort of empowerment of transgender women. Said prolific supporter “Grace Alexis” of critics of TOTWK, “If you people had a clue you would realize this movie is about GIVING power to Trans woman by giving them a fictional opportunity at getting back to all of those who have harmed our community.” This is a person who clearly does fit the accepted definition of Transgender.

Therein lies a downside of the double-edged sword that is the sociopolitical concept of the transgender umbrella encompassing everything from the most “deep-stealth” post-operative transsexual woman to weekend crossdressers and everything in between. Such a dizzyingly diverse demographic has a multitude of attitudes, opinions and practical concerns, and not all of them coincide all of the time.

Acclaimed trans actress and showgirl Alexandra Billings defended the film on a blog entry pasted to a Facebook discussion thread. She stated in her concluding paragraph, “Before we start silencing people, let’s get past our own prejudice, and remember where and by whom this whole movement was started: By a bunch of Trans people in big wigs and sequins in a local New York bar.”

To which I replied:

Willam Belli as Rachel Slurr

No, that was how the GAY PRIDE movement started. Stop conflating Trans History with Gay History. You say you’re “sick and tired of our community being portrayed as victims, or hookers right after you admit we are “doctors, lawyers, housewives, entertainers, construction workers, policemen, and authors.”

So please tell me how yet ANOTHER portrayal of us as over the top drag performers will help inform anyone outside the trans community that we are doctors, lawyers, housewives, entertainers, construction workers, policemen, and authors. Tell us how this image will HELP our community when trans inclusion in ENDA comes up for another debate? Just what we need: voters and politicians thinking of garish caricatures of women (with knives) demanding bathroom rights, because that’s how it will be painted.

I do understand how your emergence from the gay/drag world colors your perception, but we are far more than that community. We are far more than the crass, uncomplicated, verbose and flamboyant creatures than Luna splashes all over the screen, so sorry I don’t buy your “I am Tranny Hear Me Roar” defense. It might be empowering to you, but it’s a setback to everyone who isn’t represented by these characters.

One of the other vociferous supporters, a gay man who’s a member of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence — who make appearances at parties and other events in nuns’ habited and garish makeup — also can’t understand the outrage. I replied that the day he starts going to work in full face and nun’s habit he will have a leg to stand on in this argument. I noted that I went full time as Christine twenty years ago. Even dressed modestly (in office wear and reasonable makeup) I still caught abuse going to and from work, and this was in “liberal” and “accepting” San Francisco.

Kelexis Davenport as Pinky La'Trimm

What none of these supporters seem to understand is that this movie perpetuates the ossified stereotypes of transwomen as overdone caricatures of women and as drag performers. It makes us look partly responsible for the violence that befalls us. Even queerty.com blogger Daniel Villarreal admits in his March 26th article, “Luna’s film is arguably the most mainstream depiction of transfolk yet and whether his transwomen are heroic vigilantes or not, they’re still just Ticked-Off Trannies With Knives. It’s hardly flattering, and I worry along with [trans blogger Autumn] Sandeen that its immediate effect will be causing deeper resentment between the LGB and T communities despite his efforts to empower the latter.”

So do I. The huge betrayal of the trans community by the HRC in 2007 over ENDA helped drive a massive wedge between LGB and those members of the trans community who view that alliance at best with suspicion, who did not take heart that 350 LGBT organizations did condemn the HRC’s sellout.

Now here we are two and a half years later and here’s an exploitation film that holds high a drag stereotype that many T-women decry as perpetuating a flamboyant image that helps keep us excluded from ENDA, among other things. Instead of banding together to help pass ENDA, repeal DOMA and DADT, we’re infighting over a film that even queerty.com admits, “[Luna] sought to make an entertaining, marketable movie rather an accurate depiction of transgender people that would speak for the entire community.” Is fracturing the LGBT to defend an exploiting piece of “art” worth it?

We do have one minor victory in this, so far. Luna has removed reference to the tragic, real life hate crimes against Angie Zapata and Jorge Mercado from the trailer of the film, so he’s no longer exploiting actual dead trans people to promote this film, however the film’s greatest problem is still it exploits us in the abstract with its stereotypes.

To me the most lamentable thing is that this film wouldn’t have caused half the controversy had the directors of the highly prestigious Tribeca Film Festival decided to feature it. By doing so — which they apparently did because the film features a couple of actual transwomen in leading roles — it elevated the film’s prestige far more than it deserves. So when this film finds distribution, which it is more likely to do with the Tribeca seal of approval, it may well be sometime appearing at a theater near you — or at least — go straight to DVD and occasionally make art house runs as a “cult” film.

What that means is it will have that lauded Tribeca seal on the posters and the DVD box legitimizing it, which means that future filmmakers may just copycat it hoping to strike festival gold. (Thank you so much, Tribeca.) We’ve just been shoved at least one giant step backward, so be prepared to debate this with all the level-headed, logical passion you can muster. I hope I’ve given you some worthwhile talking points so far.

Christine Beatty is a transsexual author and journalist, a longtime activist and musician. Formerly from San Francisco, where she co-founded the rock group Glamazon in 1994, she now resides in Los Angeles. Her personal web page is at www.glamazon.net.

Category: Transgender Opinion