Tweet
An Alternate View of Sky€™s View of Ladyboys
I€™ve delayed posting this for some time because nearly everyone who has posted seemed to love the series; surely my contrary view was mistaken. Well, enough time has passed and I haven€™t changed my mind, so here goes. I watched all six hour-long episodes and thought them professionally videotaped, but that€™s about it. The approach seemed sympathetic, but for me it was Disneyesque, a cartoon lacking in depth and perspective and connection to reality. The Thai ladyboy was not placed in a worldwide, historical, and cultural context---which isn€™t as dull as that makes it sound---and just saying they are women born in men€™s bodies is not only simplistic, it€™s wrong. And€¦cutting away to Scott and David and their ladyboys romping in the surf or cuddling beneath a palm tree every time you get close to revealing something uncomfortable is dishonest.
I was also seriously annoyed by so much attention being paid to the beauty contests and cabaret shows. Yes, they are an interesting phenomenon---drawing more coverage by local media than the Miss Thailand competitions---but Sky kept going back and back, in episode after episode, drooling over the fact that the performers could lip-synch to Lady Gaga and then get all that money in tips posing with the customers afterward. As if that MEANT something. It does mean something, of course, but Sky was not applauding, it was condescending.
That was what bothered me most---the faux happy face put on ladyboys: isn€™t it wonderful that they have rich Caucasian men taking them out of the bars and buying clothes and bars for them (thus returning them to a bar) and isn€™t it nice that one got elected to public office and became €œthe most famous ladyboy in Thailand€ and isn€™t it even nicer that an airline no one ever heard of hired a few to be flight attendants (solely for the publicity)? How, exactly, did each of these things happen? Who suffered and who fucked who to make it occur? Nothing wrong with that, mind you, but Sky made it look like someone waved a magic wand. (No pun intended.)
A ladyboy I€™ve spent considerable time with over a period of about four years---the one who€™s helped me most with the book I€™m slowly working on---told me, €œEvery ladyboy has a sad story.€ Not according to Sky. Yes, Miss Nigeria said she could be stoned to death back €œhome€ in Africa, but she lived in the US, as did Miss Cuba, who grew up in California. Why didn€™t the Sky team ask why that contestant from Chicago spent £60,000 on surgery (including the removal of four ribs!); there€™s a sad story for you. Why didn€™t Sky interview my friends at Cascade and Casanova? Sky€™s take on ladyboys was like what Julia Roberts in PRETTY LADY was to whoring. Take her off the street, buy her a nice dress and escort her to a party and that makes everything alright, makes the whore an improved person, right? When I saw that movie, I wanted to shove Cinderella€™s glass slipper up Richard Gere€™s middle-aged ass.
I also felt cheated when it came to Sky€™s not revealing that which was foremost in every viewer€™s mind: the ladyboy penis. Even the BBC some years ago in a terrific documentary about the Indian hijras had the guts to show what one of those people looked like, close-up, after having her cock crudely amputated (the only word to use; several bleed to death every year). In Sky€™s six hours there was never more than a hint of cock on show: small, limp and inside a bikini, a quick glimpse that they returned to several times, as if to say, €œOh, wow! Isn€™t it amazing! So gorgeous and they have cocks, too!€ Oh, yeah? This isn€™t radio; show me!
You can watch these programs on YouTube, but a much better documentary can be seen there called GIRLFRIEND FOR SALE. It follows two young Thai women and a ladyboy into the sex trade and it tells the truth. I never cried once while watching the Sky series. I can€™t say that about this one.
P.S. to Sky: It€™s pronounced PAH-tee-yuh. Not puh-TAI-yuh.
I€™ve delayed posting this for some time because nearly everyone who has posted seemed to love the series; surely my contrary view was mistaken. Well, enough time has passed and I haven€™t changed my mind, so here goes. I watched all six hour-long episodes and thought them professionally videotaped, but that€™s about it. The approach seemed sympathetic, but for me it was Disneyesque, a cartoon lacking in depth and perspective and connection to reality. The Thai ladyboy was not placed in a worldwide, historical, and cultural context---which isn€™t as dull as that makes it sound---and just saying they are women born in men€™s bodies is not only simplistic, it€™s wrong. And€¦cutting away to Scott and David and their ladyboys romping in the surf or cuddling beneath a palm tree every time you get close to revealing something uncomfortable is dishonest.
I was also seriously annoyed by so much attention being paid to the beauty contests and cabaret shows. Yes, they are an interesting phenomenon---drawing more coverage by local media than the Miss Thailand competitions---but Sky kept going back and back, in episode after episode, drooling over the fact that the performers could lip-synch to Lady Gaga and then get all that money in tips posing with the customers afterward. As if that MEANT something. It does mean something, of course, but Sky was not applauding, it was condescending.
That was what bothered me most---the faux happy face put on ladyboys: isn€™t it wonderful that they have rich Caucasian men taking them out of the bars and buying clothes and bars for them (thus returning them to a bar) and isn€™t it nice that one got elected to public office and became €œthe most famous ladyboy in Thailand€ and isn€™t it even nicer that an airline no one ever heard of hired a few to be flight attendants (solely for the publicity)? How, exactly, did each of these things happen? Who suffered and who fucked who to make it occur? Nothing wrong with that, mind you, but Sky made it look like someone waved a magic wand. (No pun intended.)
A ladyboy I€™ve spent considerable time with over a period of about four years---the one who€™s helped me most with the book I€™m slowly working on---told me, €œEvery ladyboy has a sad story.€ Not according to Sky. Yes, Miss Nigeria said she could be stoned to death back €œhome€ in Africa, but she lived in the US, as did Miss Cuba, who grew up in California. Why didn€™t the Sky team ask why that contestant from Chicago spent £60,000 on surgery (including the removal of four ribs!); there€™s a sad story for you. Why didn€™t Sky interview my friends at Cascade and Casanova? Sky€™s take on ladyboys was like what Julia Roberts in PRETTY LADY was to whoring. Take her off the street, buy her a nice dress and escort her to a party and that makes everything alright, makes the whore an improved person, right? When I saw that movie, I wanted to shove Cinderella€™s glass slipper up Richard Gere€™s middle-aged ass.
I also felt cheated when it came to Sky€™s not revealing that which was foremost in every viewer€™s mind: the ladyboy penis. Even the BBC some years ago in a terrific documentary about the Indian hijras had the guts to show what one of those people looked like, close-up, after having her cock crudely amputated (the only word to use; several bleed to death every year). In Sky€™s six hours there was never more than a hint of cock on show: small, limp and inside a bikini, a quick glimpse that they returned to several times, as if to say, €œOh, wow! Isn€™t it amazing! So gorgeous and they have cocks, too!€ Oh, yeah? This isn€™t radio; show me!
You can watch these programs on YouTube, but a much better documentary can be seen there called GIRLFRIEND FOR SALE. It follows two young Thai women and a ladyboy into the sex trade and it tells the truth. I never cried once while watching the Sky series. I can€™t say that about this one.
P.S. to Sky: It€™s pronounced PAH-tee-yuh. Not puh-TAI-yuh.
Comment