I don't know that I feel comfortable with their mention of trans people. It's meant to be an example of the "norm-flouting" nature of gay marriage.
I think it's hard to write an article about a magazine which was created to cater to the differences between gay marriage and straight marriage without having that article coming across as either emphasizing or downplaying those differences, or both (as I think the article ended up doing, and as I am probably pretty sure the magazine itself does). I don't like that trans people were mentioned as norm-flouters, and I don't like that trans-ness was located as a queer issue at all. But I am happy that trans people were mentioned, and would have been upset if they weren't. It's kind of a weird headspace to be in.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-07-16 04:10 pm (UTC)I think it's hard to write an article about a magazine which was created to cater to the differences between gay marriage and straight marriage without having that article coming across as either emphasizing or downplaying those differences, or both (as I think the article ended up doing, and as I am probably pretty sure the magazine itself does). I don't like that trans people were mentioned as norm-flouters, and I don't like that trans-ness was located as a queer issue at all. But I am happy that trans people were mentioned, and would have been upset if they weren't. It's kind of a weird headspace to be in.