The Thin Pink Line

Oh, I so have to comment on this one, lol!

Having seen the outfit in question via news reports I have to say:

1) It's not something I, as a PTA mom, would have chosen to wear to a city council meeting. But having said that,

2) I sincerely doubt any genetic girl would have gotten a complaint from the same exact outfit, and

3) Since the alleged SUBSTANCE of the complaint had to do with how it impacted on the children present, I must question...exactly what harm did it do to those kids to see this gender variant person dressed in slightly racy attire?

If those kids are anything like my kids they went "huh" and promptly moved on with their little lives. Diversity lesson learned.

So yeah, I guess I think it was Stu's own darn business what to wear, and those who made an issue out of it were the ones REALLY causing trouble.

Terrific post Vanessa - thanks. I want to largely echo Lady E's comments too. But in fairness, I believe a good number of genetic girls would have received press grief if they wore the same outfit. Imagine if our Secretary of State showed up in a halter top. Much howling and questioning of judgement would ensue.

Not long ago I remember questioning how much the dignity of office was preserved after seeing a picture of George W wearing crocs and socks out front of the White House.

Setting appropriate dressing is important in the public space. And as casual and open minded a place as Silverton undoubtedly is, I suspect that residents want to see good judgement reflected in the appearance of their leaders, TG or not....

There is far too much space in the news for sad sensationalism that reflects poorly not only on CD/TG's but also on communities like Silverton that embrace change like this at their ballot boxes....

I can't say that I would wear a "sexy" outfit to such a function. The old saying goes "know your audience". It's like bringing a six-pack of beer in a cooler to such a function. It just isn't proper.

Anyone, tg/tv/cd, or anyone else for that matter, should dress for the occasion. I'm sure she could have worn a knee length skirt and a sensible top and still had complaints, but, at least the lurid, racy, sexy, attention getting attire would not have been an issue.

She does the rest of us little good in the court of public opinion.

Kathy

I couldn't help but to respond on a local news channel's website, one that transmits also in Silverton, Oregon.

Here's what I said:

______________________________________________

People complain about this confusing children, people complain that Stu is transgendered, people complain about his attire, people complain just to complain.

Regardless of what you all "THINK", this is what it honestly boils down to.

1.) Appropriate attire for the occasion. Was what the the Mayor of Silverton wearing inappropriate for the venue of being around kids? Yes. He could have worn something more appropriate. And while I disagree with his sentiments that he can wear whatever he wants, the truth is we all are entitled to wear what we want regardless of what our opinions are of each other. However, wearing something I have seen described as racy, revealing to young kids I find totally inappropriate for the occasion.

And while there is no honest dress code for people like him, common sense should have went off like a tsunami warning in his head.

2.) It should not matter what someone's sexuality is, and it should never be an issue to begin with. It is not a determining factor in the job that they do. However, in Stu's case, it actually deepens certain facets of that culture in such a way that it actually hurts people like him. It deepens the stereotyping that people like him already receive. Transgenderism is a difficult thing in and of itself without people like Stu deepening that stereotyping.

3.) The Pacific NW is known for it's liberalness and openmindedness. And while this is a good thing, we certainly do not need public officials blackening the eyes of those who look up to such a person. The transgendered community is also outraged at Stu for his lack of common sense. I'm outraged at him for hurting a group of individuals who identify with him.

4.) There is already enough hatred in the world, enough stereotyping and violence against individuals like Stu. We do not need someone in public office who is going to deepen the very feelings that cause people harm, such as violence.

5.) There is a difference between physical gender and mental gender. Please attempt to learn the difference. As most people identify with their physical gender, there is a small number of people (transsexuals) who identify with their mental gender. We're all different for a reason, you and myself included. However. to admonish transsexuals, you are also admonishing yourself. You identify with the sex you were born with and transsexuals identify with their mental selves. This is seriously a two way street.

Being a born gender you are in congruency with your mental gender. However, for transsexuals, they are a born gender and a different mental gender which creates an incongruity. Where this relates is to the "MENTAL" genders. Identifying with your mental gender is the same for transsexuals.

Remembering, the body is not the whole and entire person. The body is the 1 component of what the rest is made up of. There is still heart, soul and mind. You cannot base gender on only 1 component of a person. Yes, they may have a component containing the sexual organs of the individual, but like I have mentioned, it's only 1 component of the entire individual.

Keep this in mind when you choose to respond.
______________________________________________

The ladies who replied have it right, and I can't add anything profound on top of what's been said; just to agree.

No question, Stu Rasmussen has stepped way over the line on what's appropriate for the occasion. It's hard to believe this is something he does not understand. And that's the hard part I have about his behaviour. By needlessly calling attention to himself, and surely understanding he'd get some complaints and bad press for so doing, he is setting back the progress all of us have been making toward public acceptance.

Is it all that hard for any and all of us to present ourselves as reasonable folk who want and need to fit in with and become accepted by mainstream society?

Is it asking too much of people like Stu to consider the PR damage they can create - - for all the rest of us - - and instead to try to fit in to the occasion, regardless of which gender they need to present themselves as?

Daisy

This is a very interesting situation. I feel I might have a bit of a different viewpoint about this being that I'm an older TS.

Bottom line for me, we have to pick and choose out battles and our rights. Did the mayor have the right to wear the outfit? Yes, but putting it bluntly where the hell was his common sense?

Just because we have the right to do something doesn't mean it's a right choice. Regardless of who or what we are we do have a responsibility to the community. I know that's not popular in this "I'll do what I want world" but it's a fine pink line that we walk, especially being tansgendered and the mayor on top of it all.

"A wink is as good as a not to a blind horse". My grandma!

Lori

Back in the 1990's, and early aught's, miniskirts were in fashion. Hemlines have gone down a bit since then, but you still see some women wearing miniskirts. Not very often, but I still see it, and I still see ads for miniskirts and dresses in the fashion press.

Halter tops are a bit of a perennial. They are also quite difficult to wear. Not technically difficult, but on the wrong body they tend to look a little awkward.

If a woman had turned up wearing the same thing, and it looked good on her - she would not be subject to complaints. (I'll grant that someone would be offended. But someone is always offended when it comes to fashion.) If a woman who couldn't wear a miniskirt and halter top turned up, people would look and wonder if she looked in the mirror before leaving the house. But I sincerely doubt anyone would lodge a complaint - because no one wants to be seen dictating what a woman can wear. Except the aforementioned who would be upset if a woman turned up in anything except a burkha, or whatever the north west equivalent would be... 🙂

If Stu Rasmussen turned up in a miniskirt and halter top - and it looked good on him, I doubt anyone would complain. Unfortunately, his only sin here is that he couldn't carry off his outfit with panache and style. It looked a little awkward on him.

Coupled with the fact that it was a youth event, and some prudes alarm bells went off. After all - the youth of our land need protecting against any and all diversity. Except the diversity we want them to understand, and perhaps even tolerate. [Taking tongue out of cheek...]

The complaint against Stu Rasmussen is more about anti-transgender and anti-Stu Rasmussen sentiment than it is about his fashion sense. It's also meaningless - he faces no reprimand. He can't be fined for his fashion sense. He can't even be mildly told off! Someone can say "we didn't like you wearing that", but that's all. Even the prospect of a censure is meaningless - no one can remove him from office because of his attire. It might hurt him politically, but I doubt that's a frightening prospect - those who were against him because of what he wears are not likely to grow up because of this. And those who support him will likely perceive it as the bigoted witch-hunt it really is.

Was it inappropriate? No. Could he have worn something that looked better on him? Oh, I'm absolutely certain of that. The only thing wrong with his outfit was that he couldn't wear it with the panache some can. If that's a crime, then we'd better start locking up the population. A lack of sartorial elegance is not a crime.

Carolyn Ann

Oops. I didn't notice a couple of grammatical mistooks.

"prudes" should read prudes'.

LC (Little Cat; she's a cat... 🙂 ) practically destroyed the apostrophe key on my laptop when she decided it looked like a nice toy.

I should also point out that I do not consider anyone except the guy making the complaint a prude. He's obviously a bigoted prude.

The hyphen at "After all – the youth ...." shouldn't be there. It should be a comma. As should the one in "...halter top – and it looked ...". Terrible habit, and one I'm trying to break.

Carolyn Ann