Why as a Trans Woman, I am Conflicted About Dylan Mulvaney
And why, ultimately, it is all the media's fault
Today, I want to talk about trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney, and my very conflicted views about her. It goes like this: On one hand, I really don't think she is good representation for the trans community. She is way too controversial in her words and actions, and this reflects badly on the trans community. Most trans people just want to quietly live their lives, and don't want to be controversial. In particular, many women have voiced their discomfort with her Days of Girlhood song and the TikTok series before that, especially her stereotypical and one-dimensional portrayal of womanhood, but she doesn't appear to care about seriously addressing their concerns. This has only served to strengthen the gender critical feminists' attacks on the trans community, for example on how trans women supposedly don't behave like women, and don't care about the feelings and needs of women. Again, most trans people are not like that, and I'm worried that Mulvaney is giving the wrong impression here.
On the other hand, I also see how anti-trans forces, including right-wing culture warriors and gender critical fundamentalists, people who don't just have problems with certain demands of trans activists, but actually have a problem with the public existence and accommodation of trans identities per se, are using Mulvaney as a tool in their war against trans people. For example, when Bud Light made an ad with Mulvaney last year, right-wing influencers whipped up moral outrage, which led to a major boycott campaign. No matter what you think of Mulvaney, that whole campaign didn't seem to be justified, if we are to judge based on facts and logic. Some said that the outrage and boycott was about how Bud Light handled the whole thing, but that did not sound very convincing to me. I have seen the very ugly anti-trans sentiment associated with the outrage the boycott campaign generated, and I can tell you it was very ugly indeed. Given incidents like these, I have become reluctant to criticize Mulvaney. I simply do not wish to add to the strength of culture war movements that actually want to harm the trans community. (And any truly objective person would have to acknowledge that there really are people out there who want to harm trans people.)
I also recognize the role the media has played in putting people like me in this dilemma of whether to publicly criticize Mulvaney or not. It is the media's choice to elevate Mulvaney into one of the most visible trans people out there, and more importantly, it is also the media's choice not to elevate other more reasonable examples of trans representation. The media reports regularly on Mulvaney's latest drama, corporations like Bud Light invite her to do ad campaigns, and even celebrities like Lady Gaga have collaborated with Mulvaney on their social media. Almost no other trans person gets to have this level of visibility, even if they sincerely wanted to represent their community to the wider world. If there were more reasonable sounding and truly representative trans people in media representation, I wouldn't be so worried about Dylan Mulvaney. But sadly, there aren't. Thus Dylan Mulvaney is, like it or not, quite influential in shaping other people's perceptions of trans people. It is all the media's fault really.
Which is why I think we shouldn't blame Dylan Mulvaney for this situation. After all, as an individual, she has the right to do whatever she wants to, and is under no obligation to represent the trans community in a good light. Rather, we should blame the media for the way it chooses to cover trans issues. It is the media's addiction to the controversial over the reasonable that has harmed the reputation of trans people in the wider world. They need to be called out.
From my other newsletter:
Why Allowing More Freedom is Generally the Morally Better Choice
The main drivers of improvement are innovation and competition. This is clear to see when we are talking about technology. However, it also applies to matters of morality. If everyone just accepted slavery as part of life, it would never have been abolished. This demonstrates the importance of allowing enough freedom for innovation. On the other hand, if the anti-slavery message wasn't able to compete with those arguing for the then-status quo on an equal footing, it might not have won out, despite being objectively more sound. This demonstrates the importance of maintaining a fair playing field in the marketplace of ideas. Both of the aforementioned objectives would require free speech, free expression and freedom of conscience. It is freedom that both allows innovation, and allows fair competition in the marketplace of ideas. Therefore, ultimately it is freedom that allows morality to improve over time…
TaraElla is a singer-songwriter and author, who is the author of the Moral Libertarian Manifesto and the Moral Libertarian book series, which argue that liberalism is still the most moral and effective value system for the West.
She is also the author of The Trans Case Against Queer Theory and The TaraElla Story (her autobiography).