I get people don’t read articles, but at least read the automated blurb…
Full paragraph:
Leaked audio from a Miss Universe board meeting recorded one of the international beauty pageant’s co-owners saying that “women from nontraditional backgrounds” — including transgender women — can be included in the competition but “cannot win.” The co-owner recorded in the audio, a trans woman, said her words were “maliciously” edited, leading to them being taken out of context.
Like, it’s entirely possible she just meant the judges likely wouldn’t award the top prize to a competitor who was trans.
Like, is anyone surprised the type of people who judge beauty pagents are sexist and these things are essentially just ratings of who they want to sleep with?
Is anyone truly thinking these are anything else in 2024?
And a trans co-owner would be a target for something like this for lots of the same reasons.
Take the few minutes and read the article if you want to have an opinion.
Or at least read the bit at the end about why she decided to buy her stake in it:
In August 2023, Jakrajutatip told LGBTQ Nation’s Greg Owen that she was partly inspired to buy the organization after seeing Spanish contestant Ángela Ponce compete in Thailand in 2018. Transgender women have been allowed to compete in the pageant since 2012, but Ponce was the first openly transgender contestant in the pageant’s history.
“I was in the front row,” Jakrajutatip recalled. “She was the first trans woman walking on the stage in the final competition. She came on this stage, she cried. She talked in the video, ‘I did not come here to win. I just wanted to come here to convince everyone that yes, we can do it. There are trans women. And trans women, we are women.’ I cried. I stood up and I applaud her a lot, to the point, like, ‘Oh my goodness, this is it, I’ve been to the full circle moment. And this is my next move. Yes. My next move.’”
and these things are essentially just ratings of who they want to sleep with?
It’s not that simple. If it were that simple, a trans woman would have already won. After all, trans women were banned from Miss Italy because they have an “unfair advantage”
Jakrajutatip appears to agree, saying, “We can have real-size beauty, the contestant. Very big size … [But] we’ll have to control the audience [lest] they vote all for the big size.”
I haven’t seen the video, so I can’t really tell from text what the tone is, but these words are pretty damning, and I’m curious what context they could be in that they would seem ok. It doesn’t sound to me like she’s saying the likelihood is low, it sounds like she’s saying “if you don’t fit our definition, we don’t want you to win.”
Just ban plastic surgery from the contestants.
How would they know?
While I would never wish for a trans woman to have to endure that kind of environment, I’d love to see a trans woman take that as a challenge and go win just to make the “you can always tell” crowd lose their minds. Unfortunately it would probably be super dangerous considering how violent people can get when they discover they can’t always tell, so it’s probably a horrible idea. But a person can dream.
A trans woman made the comment and says it was maliciously edited…
miss uterus
Fuck pageants, but also extra fuck this one
“Universe”
Well obviously a trans woman can’t win. Earthlings are so basic, they can’t possibly beat the other species out there. You should see the three-breasted Hor’gas of Celtron IV, ain’t no earth woman ever winning against that.
(Aliens don’t identify as women because womanhood is a human social construct)
Having xx chromosomes and being cis is a social construct?
I’ll bite. Biological sex is real. When people say gender is a social construct they’re talking about everything that (traditionally) gets attached to being biologically female/male. Acceptable clothing, behaviour etc. Those are social constructs and if you disagree you likely haven’t thought about it hard enough. Different cultures put different expectations on gender so good luck trying to find any gender expectations that apply to all of them.
Framing gender as social construct is not the same as telling you masculinity or femininity don’t exist, or that you shouldn’t embody those traits if you want. It’s simply pointing out that our ideas on gender are social fabrications that feel real because of how ingrained they are into our culture and upbringing.
Being cis and embodying traditionally male/female traits is perfectly acceptable and nobody wants you to stop doing that. This conversation is about saying hey, not everyone feels comfortable with traditional gender constructs and that’s ok too.
Gender existed long before chromosomes were discovered.
I agree with you but this doesn’t exactly counter their point. The scientific explanation for sex was not discovered until recently but the biological differences have been obvious since the dawn of time. Gender is a social construct yes, but it’s framed around real biological differences and ignoring that is… idk. Confusing and kind of irresponsible? The social constructs we’ve formed are heavily influenced by the biological differences between the sexes and you can’t just wave that away and expect people to understand what you’re saying.
Talking about gender being a social construct is honestly pretty mind bending, even if you are entering the conversation 100% open minded.
Gender is the idea that different sexes should have different appearances, clothing, roles, tasks, etc.
For example women have long hair, wear make up and dresses. If a man did that they would be breaking gender norms. None of those 3 behaviors are biological. Another society could have those 3 things reversed and be otherwise identical.
The fact gender is a social construct isn’t that complicated.
Well, for starters, I’m not contradicting their point, I’m confirming it. The use of “cis” or “trans” in terms of gender and the knowledge of chromosomes are recent social constructions. The confusion seems to be in what is actually meant by “social construction”.
For example, you keep saying “biological differences” without prepending the word “stereotypical” in such a way that leads me to believe that you still think of sex as a pair of essential categories.
Gender is a social construct, yes, but Sex is a set of simplified generalizations about multiple highly complex and frequently interrelated phenomena that cannot be reduced to anatomy or chromosomes alone.
Ignoring the fact that these generalizations about sex are mere stereotypes to which many people do not conform is much more irresponsible than insufficiently explaining the social construction of gender.
Yes. Being cis is when your socially constructed gender identity aligns with your socially constructed assigned gender at birth. Being cis is a coincidence of constructs.
Note that someone could have XX chromosomes and be cis, and identify as a man, thanks to SRY gene crossover. He has XX chromosomes, but he was born with a penis, so society called him a man and he happened to agree. So having XX chromosomes and being cis definitely isn’t the same as being a woman, even if being cis weren’t a social construct.
actual groomers:
Anytime I hear/read “pageant,” I just think of Zap singing, “there it is…”
Today I learned there is still a miss universe pageant. I guess saying shit like this will get the stupid fucking thing some attention.
They’ve probably already had a trans winner, they just didn’t know it.
