Glamour magazine has named Caitlin Jenner “Woman of the Year.” And I call bullshit.

I hardly know where to begin in this clusternut of ridiculousness.

I suppose we could start where many women are all agog: that by putting a transgender woman on the pedestal, one who has lived her entire life publicly and outwardly as a man until, oh, say, April of this very year, one may be suggesting that the ideal woman is actually a man. That they could be even better at being women than a woman.

In no way would I suggest that the struggle transgender people face isn’t real. But let’s face it. She was living as a man, not a woman, until 6 months ago. A woman in hiding as a man, perhaps, but as far as the universe is concerned, she was a he, and treated with all the benefits that come along with being a rich white man for the better part of 65 years.

So you have to kind of admit that there’s some basis to their complaint. But let’s put all that to one side and make it not an issue, just for a moment.

Let’s look at Jenner-the-person, not Jenner-the-private-parts. After all, the whole idea of woman of the year is that this person is an upstanding bastion of womanhood (or apparently at least an upstanding human being). A role model for women on how to achieve and behave…

Indeed, let’s look at what Jenner has done this year for humanity. This year, she went on the Ellen DeGeneres show and said she was a ‘traditionalist’ on the subject of marriage. So clearly she’s not a great voice for the women in the LGBTQ. This year, she was in a wreck that killed a woman (and to be fair, though they were originally going to bring her up on manslaughter charges, they’ve since dropped them). Sure, she has done a great deal to promote the actual subject of being transgender, despite strong criticism from some that she’s marginalizing them even further, but there’s a lot of people who say when it comes to her standing for any sort women’s issues, it’s more apples and oranges.

Here’s the thing: you can be a feminist, Cait. I don’t mind male or formerly male feminists at all. When men speak in defense of women’s rights, the unfortunate truth is that (like with white privilege when dealing with racial issues) the man’s voice in support of us speaks louder than our voices speak alone. But while you may be a woman inside, let’s be honest here for a minute. You’ve never had to worry about the concerns that weigh on most women’s minds. Things like someone controlling your reproductive rights. You’ve never worried about pay gap. You’ve never had to deal with someone questioning your ability to have a career and be a mother. I don’t mind you speaking out. But do you and I really speak from the same place?

Other than coming out as a woman, what have you done, Cait? How are you somehow more woman of the year material than women who have worked overseas fighting Ebola, fought cancers, who have stood up for women’s rights, or achieved remarkable things? How can you be ahead of Supreme Court Justices like RBG or our maybe first woman President? How can you be ahead of just about any woman who has been a woman for more than a year?

Sorry Glamour, but I don’t think Caitlyn Jenner should be Woman of the Year. Are we really so hard up for a candidate that your top choice is someone who spent the first four months of the year as a man? 

To put it plainly, it’s bullshit. Maybe next time you should do some research instead of watching a K-dash marathon.

Author

An amazing collection of bright women who somehow manage to work, play, parent and survive and write blog posts all at the same time. We are the BLUNTmoms, always honest, always direct and surprising hilarious.

12 Comments

  1. I couldn’t give my really opinion yesterday because this blog post made me beyond pissed and I even woke up miserable because of it.

    Let me put into perspective how this post makes me feel by putting my trans husband in Caitlin’s shoes for this post. By the way this is written, if my husband was up for father of the year or even husband of the year, he couldn’t win because he was assigned female at birth (please note wording there ?) that he doesn’t know what it’s really like to be a dad or husband because of who he is when in fact he’s a better dad/husband than so many others out there! I get it, she probably shouldn’t be Woman of the Year but the approach as to why is just ridiculous. And I’m sorry but she no longer has white male privilege, she now faces clear (as written in this post!) discrimination for being trans! As many trans have to fear for their lives while using washrooms or even walking down the street with their partner, she will now have to face all the hate this world has because she doesn’t fit the “norm”! So no she’s never faced issues that many woman have but she will face her own. By saying she’s not actually a woman (and in turn that my husband is not actually a man) is the exact reason we need people like her in the spotlight to enlighten the world that they are true to themselves finally.

    I’m disappointed this was the route this post was written and have lost a little respect for bluntmoms but hey they write blunt posts so they achieved what they wanted. I just may not read or follow them for a while until I calm down about the transphobia here.

    • I didn’t read it as being against ‘trans’ but as being against Caitlyn Jenner. I don’t have any problem with a transgender woman being named woman of the year (nor does the author…I asked) as long as that individual has done something to advance the cause of womanhood. It sounds like your husband is a pretty damn amazing man and trust me when I say this, if he gets named Husband or Man of the Year, I will be the first to write a post in his honour. But someone who doesn’t do a whole lot more than star in a reality show, who stands against equality opportunity marriages and, as far as I have seen, hasn’t done anything to actually advance the arguments against women, doesn’t get my vote. Someone who has shown up and done all the things, exactly like your spouse obviously has done, would get my vote. Does that make sense?

      • David O'Garr Reply

        The writer of this piece sounds like she has a problem with a transgender woman being named woman of the year, since she framed her actual valid criticisms of why Jenner isn’t deserving of this, or any award really, with several statements that continued to remind the reader that Jenner was assigned male at birth. In fact, her second last statement reminded the reader that she only came out this year. Not to mention the picture chosen to go with this article, is also suppose to remind the reader that she didn’t always ‘pass’ as a woman.

        If you don’t see how this is transphobic. . . well that’s problematic. Because essentially it reinforces a stigma that any given trans person must pass in order to be taken seriously.

        For what it’s worth, I agree with a lot of what this writer said, how she framed it though? Was really really awful. Caitlyn Jenner is very problematic, off the top of my head I can think of two trans women who would be more deserving of something like this, Laverne Cox and Sophie Campbell, as both have done amazing things for not only their community, but for everyone. But the way this writer has written this, it makes me feel she would rip either of them a part if was them who were named ‘Woman of the year’. And if that’s not what the writer means? Or tried to convey, then she needs a good editor.

      • Lynn, the fact that the post discusses Caitlin’s genitals at all is the issue. I notice that the sentence about “cosmetic surgery” versus “sex reassignment surgery” has been taken out – I assume that’s in response to the statements made on Facebook about the transphobia in this post – but that alteration has not been acknowledged on the site. However the statements “Let’s look at Jenner-the-person, not Jenner-the-private-parts,” and, “I don’t mind male or formerly male feminists at all,” both of which refer to Caitlin’s genitals and previously assigned gender and imply that she is undeserving of the title because she is not a “true” woman.

        The fact that Bluntmoms has chosen to run a photo of Caitlin pre-transition when there are so many post-transition photos of Caitlin available is also a form of transphobia, similar to deadnaming (using a trans* person’s former name) or misgendering (using a trans* person’s formerly assigned gender).

        But when it comes down to it, it’s not about what I think or what you think. When you have someone like Aimee with *lived experience* coming to you and saying, “This is hurtful,” you don’t try to justify it. You listen, you apologize, and you say, “What can I do to fix it?”

        • We use Bigstock photo for our stock imagery, and while they had lots and lots of photos of Bruce and the Kardashians, but unfortunately they had no pictures of Caitlyn. Since paying hundreds of dollars for a one-use photo of her from Getty didn’t seem practical and using other images would be intellectual property theft, we figured that using an editorial photo that had a backdrop that clearly put the timeline before her announced transition would be acceptable as a substitute, as it is still an acknowledged part of her life. There was no other reasoning to it or offense intended to either her or the trans community.

          As far as the genital issue goes, you’re right, there was discussion about genitalia, but not exactly the way you think. The author had been referring to other articles in the news that were freaking out about , including the feminist Germaine Greer, who was making a big stink about Jenner’s biology, which is why she said it wasn’t about her private parts. The original link in the text got cut, but you can see some of Greer’s commentary on the subject here (she was frickin nasty). (http://nypost.com/2015/10/26/theres-a-feminist-civil-war-brewing-over-caitlyn-jenner/)

          The author was supportive of Caitlyn’s coming out, and was not intending to insult anybody in the trans community. If insult to the trans community was perceived, she is sorry, as this was definitely not her intention. This was strictly about Jenner and media politics.

          P.S. the author is pissed about Reese being on the list, too.

          • Anne, I read the post several times before it was edited this afternoon to remove the paragraph referring to Caitlyn’s having had cosmetic surgery but “not yet” having had “sex reassignment” surgery, which then went on to make a comment along the lines of “I don’t even want to think about what goes on in the bedroom.” If BLUNTmoms stands behind this post as originally written, why was that removed? And if not, why are you defending it?

            As I already stated, this is not about the author’s intentions, or your explanation. This is about what a trans person, or a person who has shared in a trans person’s experience is telling you. The wife of a trans person has told you that this post is transphobic and hurtful. You don’t get to tell her she’s wrong because you (or the author) didn’t mean it to be.

          • David O'Garr

            If the issue isn’t with her being trans, if there is absolutely no problem with it, then why did the author keep bringing it up?

            The photo would be easy enough to forgive, if Caitlyn’s transition wasn’t brought up several times throughout the article as a way to discredit her.

  2. Karyn, I agree with your point that a photo of Caitlyn pre transition versus post is unfortunate. I don’t think this was conscious. Unfortunately, this piece is addressing one issue while raising another and seems to be caught between a rock and a hard place. From a Trans perspective, the wording could have been more respectful to her. She may have only been out as a woman for six months but she has lived in her heart as one far longer. This needs to be acknowledged. That said, this piece is about woman of the year. The author’s issue at Blunt Moms is that there are women who have lived and worked their entire lives and careers as women, endured sexism and faced that and overcome it to do things that maybe merit the award in a larger scale. Cecile Richards of Planned Parenthood or Ruth Bader Ginsburg cone to mind.

  3. How about some you guys stop focusing so much on the transgender part of the article and more about the fact that this person hasn’t done much to speak for women and should likely be in jail for manslaughter. I don’t think any person like that should be woman/man/alien/ or purple people eater of the year.

  4. Putting aside for a moment the disgusting message this post actually sends to trans people still yet struggling to find the courage to come out – that, of course, being “even if you do transition, we’ll never accept you as a woman because you had the crap luck to be born in a time when you couldn’t come out young in life for fear of being killed by bigots so you never got the ‘full woman’ experience”:

    How is it that, with all the disparities touted up about the prejudice women face, the OP just seems to take for granted that Glamour magazine should be taken as an authority worthy of choosing “Woman of the Year”? Letting THAT pass unquestioned is a decision I’d rather debate. Who they picked is pretty irrelevant compared to your tacit agreement that a woman’s contribution to society should be judged by Glamour.

  5. Setting aside the issue of caitlyn Jenner, I don’t get why people are thinking an apology is in order for the story. Are we no longer allowed to express personal opinions? If we do, do we have to apologize for having them if not everyone agrees? Come on, folks, I could say the grass is green and I’m sure at least a few people would decide I was wrong, because opinions are like…. Well, you know. Go ahead, bluntmoms, express your disparate opinions- it’s what stirs the mind and heart, and personally helps me find topics to rail at the hubby and kids about.

Write A Comment

Pin It