We are a group of individuals and collectives writing in to speak with you about your inclusion of Nandini Krishnan on the panel Queer Scapes: The Written Word. We understand that you may have invited Krishnan a long time ago, maybe since before the launch of Invisible Men but since the launch there has been a sustained critique by Trans Men of the work.
Several people have spoke out against the book, and there are serious accusations of conversations being published without consent, of interviews being presented in inaccurate context. The book is also criticised for transphobia, misgendering, Hindu saffronising and caste bigotry. These are claims from the men who are subjects in the book, and not just an outside perspective.
1. For details on research misconduct, please read this FirstPost article and see the embedded video: Six people whose words appear in the book are speaking out here. https://t.co/VOXVfRaBy1
2. A direct response from Gee Semmalar on his reading of the book: https://t.co/c3ucPsy5ut Gee lists ten reasons why the book has caused offended in the trans masculine community.
3. In the North East, the book was burned by her subjects in protest. Here is a concise write up on the oppressive saffronising that shuts out Manipuri culture, by Heigrujam Elizabeth: https://t.co/z6VZeBiMSX
4. Jamal Siddiqui is a subject of Krishnan’s book and he has some thoughts: https://t.co/gpEL781NYM. He speaks both about being re-written from the Hindu lens, and also about the pain and dysphoria caused by the book, which ostensibly is about supporting trans men.
5. Karthik Bittu Kondaia was also a subject of the book, and they also have some thoughts: https://t.co/NYvwiicUYh. Bittu’s piece looks closely at Krishnan’s language and gender politics, and highlights piece by piece where Krishnan’s work is harmful.
6. Here is the site Trans Men Speak For Themselves, which started to collect critique of the book Invisible Men: https://t.co/gCKX7NuAJ0. There are more links and references in there, and hopefully you will find it educational and useful. In the future we hope we can help it evolve beyond this one book so that we’re not wasting time fighting this losing battle.
We don’t want to have some sort of call out performance here. You’ve probably had Krishnan booked for a long time. The queer community was also looking forward to this book. But since the launch we have had time to re-evaluate. Why are fests not doing that same re-evaluation? Why are the voices of the trans community, raised in protest against this book, being ignored? Why are they ignored SO MUCH that Krishnan is invited to your panels but these men are not?
If Nandini Krishnan is invited to your panels to speak about the LGBT community please do not pretend you are not complicit in her offensive, transphobic, casteist and classist work.
We would like you to disinvite Krishnan, or at least put one or more of the men who are critiquing her work on the panel to face her. Krishnan has refused to appear on panels where these men will be, because she does not wish to face their legitimate anger. Krishnan’s privilege has meant that she appears at art and literature fests where she is lauded as a gender justice champion and as a gender expert, though the marginal community she misrepresents is crying out against her.
It is somewhat ludicrous that we have reached out to you on other platforms and you have not responded or made any changes. It is disappointing that we had to reach out at all. Please take a stand against privileged misconduct. Don’t enable more of the same. Don’t give this misgendering voice a platform. Give it to someone who can use it to actually educate and share something authentic.
***UPDATE***
Reply Form Kala Ghoda
Trans Men Speak's Response :
Hello,
Thank you for your response.
You are right that Nandini Krishnan is not representative of trans men. She is also not a member of the queer community. As Sukhdeep mentioned, she is on your panel because she wrote a book *about* trans men, and we have shown you several examples of why that book is problematic at best and maliciously conducted at worst. Why does she get to be on your panel about queer writing if she cannot write about queerness in a non-phobic manner? What is the reason for her to be on your panel?
The basic principles of free speech allow Krishnan to say whatever she wants. But freedom of speech has never meant freedom from consequences or response. Freedom of speech is also not the same as giving phobic speech a platform. We are not asking governments to ban the book. We are asking you to not give her a platform to use her free speech to commit further linguistic assaults and attacks on the personhood of these men.
You also had time, a lot of time, to change this panel. Shobhna Kumar knew about the criticism of the book. If you have little time to do things politely now, that is also your responsibility.
Our requests were for Krishnan to be disinvited, or a trans man (one of the many who have spoken up!) to be invited to the panel, to talk about when writing goes wrong. Krishnan clearly does not understand or want to admit the ethical political and linguistic violence she has commited against us.
When talking about transgender people, do centre transgender people in the conversation. Or listen to us, rather than speak over us or around us. Don't have these conversations without us. 'Nothing about us, without us.'
Don't request us to be in the audience for conversations about us which perpetrate the same violence and erasure that we face in everyday life. We have fought for too long for us to take this as this moment. Your panel, ironically is complicit in further invisiblising trans men.
Comments