You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Gender Issues’ category.
Spotted this conversation illustrating the oft heard charge (and wonderful riposte) that radical feminists are all about the biological essentialism. As demonstrated below, being aware of scientific fact and material reality is quite reasonable. The nerve of these radical feminists not bowing and scraping to gender ideology that fundamentally ignores reality. :)
Radical Feminst: Why are women “people” and “vagina owners” and men are just “men”?
Genderist: “Bc there aren’t a bunch of cis men constantly trying to invalidate trans men and push them out of spaces, fam,,, anyways not all women have vaginas so?
Terfs just love to cry that they are reduced to their genitals and are more than just baby carriers but they then go around and say that trans women aren’t “real women” because of their genitals.
Way to be hypocrites, you dirty fucks”
Radical Feminist: Having a vagina is what makes me a woman. I am not /only/ a vagina. Does that make sense? I have female genitals and a female body, that’s why I am female. I am a female because of those things. I am not only a “vagina owner” or a “uterus bearer”, I am a woman.
Women have vaginas, we also have uteruses, a clitorus, XX chromosomes, we produce large gamates, we store fat a different way, our centre of balance is higher than males (due to the fact that if pregnant it prevents us from falling the fuck over) our skeletons are different to males, our breast tissue is different.
We don’t “reduce ourselves to our genitals” (we already have plenty of assholes doing that) but nor do we IGNORE that female genitals are different to males. They are PART of who we are, not ALL that we are.
I think you might be wasting your time talking to people, prolly men, who see no difference between having a vagina and being a vagina.
We can file this under ‘words have meanings’ and meanings are important.
Race: a system that organizes people based on melanin levels in the skin and place of origin (labeling varies, but physical differences exist between races)
These two are physical realities, in which people of some categories face oppression because of their presence in those categories. The term “black woman” says nothing about her beyond a basic physical appearance.
– – –
Gender: a collection of stereotypes placed upon individuals based on their sex (i.e., girls like pink and shopping, boys like blue and sports)
Transgender: the belief that one “feels” like the opposite sex
this is fundamentally impossible without the assumption that male and female minds are biologically wired to conform to gender (aka stereotypes) which is demonstrably untrue and incredibly sexist
Transracial: the belief that one “feels” like a different race
this is fundamentally impossible without the assumption that the minds of different races are biologically wired to conform to certain stereotypes, which is demonstrably untrue and incredibly racist
– – –
You cannot wear the identity of a marginalized person like a costume. Males are not female, white people are not black, and heterosexuals are not gay. All of these are obvious facts, and yet only the first seems to be considered radical.
This is an excerpt from Meghan Murphy’s manifesto posted on the Feminist Current titled : ‘We need to be braver’ — women challenge ‘gender identity’ and the silencing of feminist discourse.
““Cis” is another term that has been adopted by those who wish to see themselves or present themselves as progressive but that is rejected by radical feminists. “Cis,” we are told, means “a person whose self-identity conforms with the gender that corresponds to their biological sex.” Therefore, a “cis woman” would be a woman who identifies with femininity, which I most certainly do not, nor do many other women. I reject the notion of femininity and I therefore reject the notion that women who have femininity imposed on them are either privileged or are naturally inclined towards their subordinate status. “Cis” is a regressive term, as it pretends as though women somehow identify with their own oppression. Nonetheless, women who reject the term are labelled “transphobic” — yet another way feminist speech is shut down and the general questioning of gender politics is disallowed.”
The current state of gender politics makes raising objections against the trans-narrative dangerous for women. Any public narrative should be subject to scrutiny and critical analysis – shutting down dissenting voices is not progressive in any sense of the word.
I applaud Ms.Murphy’s stand on gender politics and strongly encourage people to read her website and support her in her struggle to defend the rights of women.
Smells like 1984…
“Identity has become the axis of so much university activism because, for all the radical posturing associated with it, identity politics does not threaten the established order of society. It promotes a moralistic and self-indulgent anti-politics, where a person’s use of language and the purity of their thinking matters more than confronting collectively the material conditions and social relations under which they are forced to live. It creates a simulation of political struggle – one that doesn’t merely fail to challenge the material inequality and unfreedom of late capitalism, but fundamentally aligns with the dynamics and interests of its atomised, spectacle-driven society. It is a perfect mirror of consumerism, playing-upon the individual’s desires for real freedom, only to perpetuate and prettify the conditions of their alienation.”
The following is an exchange on tumblr between littlepumkinprincess and auntiewanda. I have changed the formatting a bit for the sake of readability, but their words and ideas remain the same. Many of the arguments that occur between gender critical feminists and trans-advocates play out in this exchange. It is certainly not an exhaustive collection of all the point/counter-points that exist but rather it illustrates a cross-section of what many interactions happen to look like.
Discussions of this nature tend to be controversial, so a reminder here to please be civil and respectful in the comment section.
“I’m not advocating violence against TERF’s but I am saying y’all need to stop playing the victim when you’re named that because you treat transgender people like shit, you don’t need special treatment because people called you out on that.”
The criteria for “treating like shit” seems to be “not agreeing with”.
And by “not agreeing with” you mean misgendering them, mentally and physically abusing them, excluding them in feminism, denying them human rights.
Okay, saying to a transwoman “I don’t agree you’re a woman” is physical abuse how? And also mental abuse how? Being upset at someone doesn’t automatically mean they’re mentally abusing you.
I don’t exclude transgender people from feminism, I apply feminism to the concept the same way I do anything else, and it comes up sexist.
Also how is not agreeing with someone that they are a thing they demonstrably aren’t a human rights issue? And why does it seem to be a double standard for transgender people? Or is Rachel Dolezal being mentally abused and denied human rights when people say she’s not what she claims?
When you say a transwoman isn’t a woman this leads people to believe it’s a ‘man in disguise’ and they need to protect poor women from them! See: transgender bathroom issues. This is the same belief system that allows people to think that physical abuse is okay, and just because you’re not doing it yourself doesn’t mean you’re not advocating that system.
How is demanding equal rights for genders sexist? Seeing as they’re women, I don’t see how it’s sexist considering feminism is the equality of men and women.
Gender dysphoria has proven that trans people are what they say they are, so idk how you can even say demonstrably. It’s a human rights issue because they’re treated as lesser than: they’re getting murdered at large rates, for example. Rachel is not mentally ill, she does it to cheat a system that’s there to help people who need it. There’s no proven racial dysphoria. Transgender people are genuinely who they say they are. Not to mention many parents try to ‘fix’ it by forcing them to be who they don’t feel they are and it leads to depression and suicide. Even IF you don’t believe them why does that mean you get to treat them like shit? I’m just curious, like you seem to believe just because you don’t agree with their lifestyle means you get to treat them like that when they aren’t harming anyone by living that way. That’s the same shit pro lifers do.
> When you say a transwoman isn’t a woman this leads people to believe it’s a ‘man in disguise’ and they need to protect poor women from them! See: transgender bathroom issues.
The issue with codifying use of “preferred” bathrooms, changing facilities etc. into law is more if the only criteria for a biologically male person to gain access to a female designated facility is for him to say “I am a woman” you’re exposing women to increased risk of predators.
Such as in the Christopher Hambrook case where a serial rapist gained access to two women’s shelters for prolong periods of time and sexually assaulted two women (that we know of) and all he had to do was claim to be a transwoman and they could not legally turn him away.
Plenty of transwomen who “just need to pee” already do so, are in and out of the women’s restroom with no issue. Why the hell should a legal loophole be created for predators to exploit?
> This is the same belief system that allows people to think that physical abuse is okay,
That’s a pretty big leap in logic there.
> How is demanding equal rights for genders sexist? Seeing as they’re women, I don’t see how it’s sexist considering feminism is the equality of men and women.
Transgender is a sexist concept in that it that operates on the belief that the socially constructed gender roles for the sexes are inherent to the sexes.
> Gender dysphoria has proven that trans people are what they say they are
How? People sincerely believe things that aren’t true all the time.
> so idk how you can even say demonstrably
It’s pretty easy to prove which sex someone is.
> Rachel is not mentally ill, she does it to cheat a system that’s there to help people who need it
Rachel Dolezal claims she’s always felt like she’s black, ever since she was a child. She identifies as black, she says what she does isn’t blackface. She says whiteness doesn’t describe her. So is she mentally ill or is her identity authentic? I mean she managed to become head of a local NAACP branch before she was discovered to be transethnic.
> Not to mention many parents try to ‘fix’ it by forcing them to be who they don’t feel they are and it leads to depression and suicide.
And many parents try to “fix” it by only allowing their children to play with or wear things stereotypically associated with the opposite sex after they take their kid to a therapist who tells them their kid is actually the opposite sex in their brain, which is something completely unproven.
> I’m just curious, like you seem to believe just because you don’t agree with their lifestyle means you get to treat them like that when they aren’t harming anyone by living that way.
And what am I supposed to do? Lie about my viewpoint? Say “oh yes dear, you’re absolutely a woman, never mind you’re offending me with the stereotypical sexist ideas you have of what a woman even is.”