I need to publicly verbalize two things:
(1) My personal response to that article I posted
(2) My response to the vengeful comments the article has received

Of the 38 total responses my re-publishing of the article has received, over a dozen people responded with vengeance and four consider this man a "sicko". (One person even expressed a thought that Pedro actually beat his 'step-son' for some other reason, not due to perceived femininity... even though that was what he said the reason was.)  I find these responses disheartening, misguided, and dangerous.   Every person who comments saying that he is a "sick, twisted man" is denying the fact that our entire society needs to be held accountable for the fact that this happened.  Every person who says "He will get what is coming to him in the end" is perpetuating the very cycle of violence that got us here in the first place.  Every person who denies the fact that male femininity is a perceived to be a real threat gives power to the people who hold that belief. And none of this is okay.

I loved the article.  I loved that it brought the issue full-circle in a way so many other articles like it fail to.  It wasn't just about this man, but the society that created him.  It gave thought to the messages that shaped him, whether they came from his own family or society.... Somewhere he got the idea that the worst thing his son could do was act 'like a girl'.  And somewhere he got the idea that violence was acceptable.  And somewhere he lost all things good and true and pure and his responsibility as a 'step-father' to show love and care and compassion to this weak little child that depends on him to survive, grow, live, love.  Fucked up? Yes.  Unique? No.

It's not that I lack compassion (for this boy and his family), because I think this whole entire thing is sick.  A baby boy was beaten to death.  This really happened.  And that's sick.  But the truth is, THIS HAPPENS.  Mom doesn't want Joey so mom strangles Joey, throws him in a dumpster, suffocates him- we hear about this all the time.  We hear about John murdering Alex and John going to jail for life, but we don't really blink because Alex is an adult and this kind of thing happens all the time.  A child's life is more precious than an adult's life?  An innocent adult is somehow less innocent than a child?  (Children are innocent by default, everyone says, and I don't disagree, but *more* innocent?) VIOLENCE IS VIOLENCE IS VIOLENCE AND IT IS NOT OKAY AND IT IS NOT OKAY THAT **AS A SOCIETY** WE DON'T DO MORE TO DISCOURAGE IT.  And getting angry and saying "He deserves what is coming to him!" + "There should be no mercy for people like this [...] Give him death by beating while he is tied up so that he could see what it’s like to be absolutely defenseless." + "I think Mr. Jones is going to get some fast lessons in how to act 'feminine' in prison. [...] I do hope this wretched excuse for a man gets everything that's rightly coming to him. " -- These are VIOLENT reactions!  They are vengeful!  And vengeance is inherently violent.  You honestly think you are better than Pedro, because you, for whatever reason, have enough of a handle on your anger to not physically murder another person?  No.

it keeps going through my mind that (note: none of the following EXCUSES pedro for what he did, or is meant to show compassion toward a perpetrator of violence) it's possible Pedro really regrets that he did this; he meant to see the kid 'man up', not kill him. (Of course, it is incredibly naive to think that punching a baby is going to 'toughen him up' and make him more masculine.)  The scenario as it plays out in my mind is that Pedro had a really awful life.  Maybe his dad beat him.  Maybe he was molested and he thinks it happened because he was too feminine at some age.  Maybe one of his parents raised him to believe that the worst thing a person can be is homosexual or, worse, was exposed to a violent homophobia which he internalized.  It is RARE in our society to be raised in a gay-positive, trans-positive household.  More often than not something like this is the case.  Especially among the poor, due to the correlations between education and economic affluence (poor people tend to be less educated/ more ignorant) and in religious fundamentalism.  And then he ALSO grew up in a culture that equates masculinity and violence... and we're SURPRISED this happened? Really??

I am upset that everyone wants to get angry at Pedro.  I am upset that everyone wants to look at this toddler's death as an act of a single immoral individual, a sicko, a monster, a bad guy... because looking at the situation this way allows us to separate ourselves from what happened just enough to see all the ways in which we are better. We love children, life, gay people, [whatever]; we would never murder a child -- So we have nothing to do with this, right?  Let us not acknowledge the role of our institutions: this society, our school systems, our churches, the families we are brought up in, the families we will soon form and raise our own children in.  Let's not give thought to these things.  No.  Pedro was a sick man, a demon, and we are all angels.  No.  It is inaccurate, irresponsible, and, ultimately, pernicious to write this off as 'just a bad crazy man' and ignore the ugly social underpinnings that made his rationale possible.  To make this story SOLELY about Pedro is a great great great injustice.  And I am appalled.

What does it say about us, that this happened?  It says that we have embedded misogyny so deep within our culture that we no longer recognize it.  I don't even have it in me to be angry anymore.  I am just sad.  I want to cry.  How can I get you to see that we as a society CREATE 'monsters' like Pedro?  The value we place in masculinity and maleness, our disdain for male femininity, our hatred towards homosexuals and gender variance, the way we think vengeance is acceptable, the way we equate masculinity and dominance.... this is what I was hoping to get people to see.  And this, people fail to see. 

To respond with vengeance...

 

---

Important disclaimers- I understand that this individual is on trial, not society; that this man--with his own two hands--killed a baby; that he is ultimately responsible and needs to be held accountable and needs to take personal responsibility for what happened.  I understand ALL of that.  In no way is what he did acceptable.  He is a perpetrator of violence and he is going to serve for it (behind the bars of our deeply, deeply flawed prison system).  All I am saying is, getting upset with HIM doesn't change ANYTHING.  Families are broken up every day due to bigotry.  Relationships are ruined.  Trust is shattered.  Lives are destroyed.  Due to bigotry.  Due to carelessness.  Due to ignorance.  We can't stop at being upset with Pedro.  We have to DO something with our anger.

 

Do you think gender is divinely sacred (innate), autonomous (self-chosen), or environmental (based on society)? - and what observations lead you to this conclusion?

as with most things in life, gender would probably be best approached fairly holistically. the properties of the gender system can't be determined or explained by its component parts alone; the system as a whole determines how the parts behave. people get into this frame of mind that if it's biological it's only biological, if it's environmental it's strictly environmental -- when it really is a combination of factors. any one answer will sound extreme because it disqualifies the presence and importance of the others. is it really that radical to support the most logical answer that maybe it's not just one thing? and maybe that is why it's so complex and there is so much controversy over it? the more variables there are the more open to change it is, and there is less control over it, and i think that scares people a little. it's easy to blame it on environmental factors, or say that it's innate. that being said, there are strong indications that it truly is all three -- with case studies of various intersex children raised outside their chromosomal or hormonal gender, or the story of david reimer (born male but raised female due to a botched circumcision) where this individuals are deeply upset by their incorrect gender categorization, you'd think that gender is innate. but with the cases of other intersex children raised outside their chromosomal or hormonal gender yet content in their gender identity, you'd think that gender is socially constructed. even for most cisgender (non-trans) people, gender is arguably social, as every day individuals perform gender in accordance to their environment (women shave their legs because it's attractive, men bulk up at the gym, etc.) the question may be of internal gender identity vs social presentation of identity -- the former is most important to the individual while the latter is most important to all social perceptions of the individual. which is innate, which is socially constructed? i think within all of us there is a sort of balancing act between acting in accordance to our own gender identity and the social expectations for our gender, which leads to gender being autonomous, because the choice exists in the extent an individual wants to perform gender. once again, speaking about intersex people, as opposed to trans people, there exists this desire in many individuals to identify outside male/female -- many intersex people feel that, due to not being anatomically male or female they should not have to identify as male or female, but rather intersex. is it not fair for trans people to do the same, to wish to identify as transgender as opposed to male or female? gender may be all three (innate, autonomous and environmental), but that doesn't answer the question of how many genders exist, or how gender should be performed. my question to you is, how innate is gender presentation? consider: anatomy has nothing to do with fashion.


formspring.me/tangiblethreads