Queerburgh?
Now there’s a profound question.
Will Boystown become Queerville, Legacy Street, New Town or Spectrumville?
Spectrumville??
But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Boystown? What the hell is that? I thought it was some corny movie about Catholic priests with a deep interest in boys.
Under pressure from a Change.org petition that complains about the gendered nature of the name Boystown, particularly in the context of local incidents of sexism, racism and transphobia, business leaders in Chicago’s most prominent LGBTQ neighborhood have begun the process of considering a name change.
Oh, that’s what it is. Seems confused. Why Boystown if it’s for L as well as G?
More than 900 people have signed a Change.org petition calling on the Northalsted Business Alliance to stop marketing the neighborhood as Boystown. Introduced two weeks ago, the petition says that “systemic transphobia, racism, and sexism have plagued our neighborhood for decades, and it begins at the top, with the all-male board of the Northalsted Business Alliance. It begins with the BOYSTOWN signs down our street announcing that this neighborhood is ‘for the boys.’”
Why does the petition put “transphobia” first? Why is everyone so confused?
Anyway, I think they should change the name to Spectrum Regis.
Man, why call it Louisville if it’s for people who aren’t named Louis? Such anti-non-Louisian bigotry.
“Why does the petition put “transphobia” first? Why is everyone so confused?”
Because trans people are the most special and most oppressed, duh.
…
But really, how on earth is that transphobic? If trans boys are boys – TBAB – then they are included per their wish, and if TGAG, then trans girls are excluded per their wish. It seems the petitioners consider the name Boystown to be anti-TBAB. Somehow.
Seriously. Why New York and not New Doncaster? Why Nashville and not Pittsville? Why Pittsburgh and not Nashburgh? Why Bath and not Shower? Why Oxford and not Goatford?
This all needs to be rethought.
You say that all facetiously, but I bet I could find an academic article seriously arguing the point.
Indeed. It’s facetiously but the serious kind.
Facerious?
Seritious?
Depressing?
Check check and check.
First they came for the lesbians. But I was not a lesbian, so…
What’s next? Are they going to go after Chinatown? Is it insufficiently welcoming to those of rounded eye?
The day that lesbians need transgender types, who have hounded lesbian bars out of existence with their insistence on “girl dick,” to stand up for them…
So now they’re coming for Boys’ Town. Not my cup of tea, but f’chrissakes let the boys have their town.
Some history, here–Boystown isn’t an official name, though the city recognizes the neighborhood with markers and such. Rather, the area (within the boundaries of the ‘official’ neighborhood of Lakeview) became dubbed that following the city’s first Gay Pride parade, back in the 70s. The local business association then decided in the 90s to just go with it, and mounted a marketing campaign using the name. (The petition being talked about in the story gets that part of the history wrong, of course, thinking the name was apparently created by the Northalsted Business Alliance out of whole cloth.)
So, yes, there’s a sexist bias in the name–mainly because at that point in the gay rights movement, most controversy centered around gay men (with all the usual homophobic stereotypes), and most media coverage and debate really kind of ignored lesbians entirely. And of course, in the next decade, we had the AIDS crisis, which, again, focused attention mostly on the men, because that’s where the disease hit hardest. So, yeah–“Boystown”.
Now, here’s the thing–this isn’t like a sports team or street sign or school building. The business council can’t change the name, any more than it created the name in the first place. Even if they change the name in city documents and markers, the area will continue to be called Boystown by both residents and tourists (and it gets a lot of tourists). Hell, there’s still a lot of us who refer to “Marshall Fields” and “Sears Tower”–long since renamed Macy’s and Willis Tower, respectively. And those were changes made by the actual owners of the buildings–an unofficial nickname isn’t going to go anywhere, especially from a change.org petition with 1500 petitions (that’s their goal).
By the by–yes, the neighborhood, which is one of the city’s more upscale areas, is racist as fuck. Hell, at the time the area was getting the name Boystown, Chicago was still ranked as one of the most heavily segregated cities in the country, and it wouldn’t surprise me to find a similar designation today. Black gay men visiting the area are often hassled and overpoliced, because ‘black man = scary” is embedded into much of Chicago’s mindset. And no, black lesbians aren’t as hostilely treated, because again, the stereotypes focus mostly on black men.
Can we not have a bit of consistancy from the ‘they/them’ pluralised pillocks?
That’s better. Now all they need to learn is how words work so they can avoid such basic errors as particularly transgender people of color, particularly women. Well, which group is particularly singled out for the special treatment?
Still, there may be some small comfort in seeing that for once women are deemed to be more oppressed than white transgender people. I bet Devlyns will get some flack for that deviation from the playbook if it gets noticed by the woke police..
As a bit of a grammar nerd, I get mildly incensed whenever I encounter the argument that singular ‘they’ has been in use for centuries. It hasn’t. An indeterminate ‘they’? Sure. Singular, though? GTFO.
I’d be willing to bet that Devlin(s) Camp uses ‘I/me’. Unless said person is in the habit of referring to everyone other than those being directly addressed with ‘they/them’, which would be a bit presumptuous, I feel.
And when did personal pronouns become proprietary of the person they described, anyway? I remember vaguely thinking this a few years ago, but the concept creep of pronouns now *belonging* to the person they describe, rather than being a mere categorisation like eye or skin colour, is…weird, innit? “My pronouns are X. Y, Z…” just doesn’t make any actual sense when you think about it for a minute, the way it’s been employed by the new hip wokesters and twitterati.
I think this instinct kept me from adopting the practice on what paltry few social media accounts I had, and partially kept me from falling down the rabbit hole, myself. Pronouns are simply not something one can possess in the same way one possesses a cell phone or a pair of pants (of the British or the American kind). We cannot let this commodification of a philosophical tool go unremarked upon as though it were normal or had always existed.
Acolyte, one can’t be sure to whom the Devlyns are referring. I wouldn’t assume that when the Devlyns say ‘particularly women,’ they are referring to actual women, or that when the Devlyns say ‘lesbians,’ that they are referring to actual lesbians, rather than straight men who “self-identify” as women. After all, it’s part of the Devlyns’ religion that there is no difference.
It’s not hard to imagine that the Devlyns were out one night with a gaggle of straight, lady-seeking TIMs in Boystown, and were not warmly welcomed, and that the Devlyns are now portraying this as hostility towards women and lesbians. It could be that there were actual women and lesbians involved, but I tend to doubt it.
I’m sure that any potential split of the alphabet soup is a sensitive area for the trans cult. The trans, who must be centered in all discourse, can’t bear the idea that they aren’t welcome in areas that were established by and for gay men and/or lesbians. It seems possible that some gay men might have a bone to pick with the trans cult: in aggressively going after children in school, the trans cult may be reducing the supply of fresh twinks and baby bears. Why should people who are destroying boys be welcomed in Boystown?
Let’s look at the next few sentences from the Devlyns:
Ah, you see, “transgender women.” So, not that I’m a connoisseur of gay bars or anything, but speaking of intersections, there are intersections of different problems when gay men try to have a space for gay men. And the “transgender women” intersect with that other group known as the “bachelorette party,” both perhaps in the category of “this is not a zoo for your entertainment, go away spectators.” As a dowdy and aging paterfamilias, I can fully understand why I would not be particularly welcome in some gay bars; I would totally bring down the neighborhood.
But then, it’s not part of my belief system that I must be centered in everything. I can accept that there are spaces that aren’t about me, where it might be rude to linger. In my limited experience, gay towns or neighborhoods have a wide range of venues, with different goals and reputations. It is only polite for me to verify that the venue I visit welcomes people like me. If what I want is a show, I should buy a ticket.
Papito, I was thinking exactly what you were thinking. When he (pardon me, “they”) said “particularly women”, that was inclusive only of transwomen. I think it was just sort of continuing the transgender people of color, particularly women, meaning transwomen of color, but since most TiMs seem to be incapable of coherent writing (possibly because their thinking is so muddled), it is completely unclear and might accidentally send the message that they care a fig about women who are women, and not only about women who are men in dresses.
Or, that confusion might be deliberate to stave off charges of being exclusive or misogynist. Probably not, though.