No, it can go wrong and people are born in the wrong body, but in terms of boundaries in my opinion you are what ever you are born with until you have them changed.
I don't know if there's an operation that will change what reproductive organs you have. Until there is, I don't see any reason why they can't be seen as a woman.
but it should be done with an eye to creating a future where were all truly blind to race, sex, and sexuality....
I don't see feminists fighting on behalf of men.
I don't see feminists fighting to ban male circumcision
I don't see feminists fighting to open shelters for men who have been battered by their spouse.
I don't see feminists trying to change the rape law so that it includes female rape of men.
I see feminists going to colleges and spreading this myth of rape culture as if it is fact.
I see feminists demonize men.
I see feminists laugh at men when a man comes to them with a real problem.
I have absolutely no experience of a trans person. And for that I've no idea how I would act if i were about to embark on a one night stand with a man who then told me beforehand he used to be a woman....
To be honest, I think I'd run a mile.
I don't mean any offence to any transgendered posters out there but to me it wouldn't be something I'd understand.
I don't see feminists fighting on behalf of men.
I don't see feminists fighting to ban male circumcision
I don't see feminists fighting to open shelters for men who have been battered by their spouse.
I see feminists going to colleges and spreading this myth of rape culture as if it is fact.
I see feminists demonize men.
I see feminists laugh at men when a man comes to them with a real problem.
This is one of the big problems with feminism and identity politics. When someone's entire ideology is based on the assumption that they are part of an 'oppressed' group within society, it is difficult for them to accept the possibility that people outside of this group may, in fact, be more 'oppressed' than they are. It then becomes a war for the title of 'biggest victim'.
Are they mutually exclusive things? isnt high time we left the old boundaries behind.
That's what feminism is. if not, dont yesterdays feminists become tommorows sexists?
No. If they're sexist then they're not feminist.
See this is what i mean feminists claim to be for both genders but only focus on female issues.
Did you remove the " Why would they fight for anything to do with men? " or did Skyclaw add it?
I have lost count of how many times I have seen feminists claim that there is no need for men's rights groups as feminists are fighting for their rights too. May be that's why he thinks they " would fight for anything to do with men".
Did you remove the " Why would they fight for anything to do with men? " or did Skyclaw add it?
I have lost count of how many times I have seen feminists claim that there is no need for men's rights groups as feminists are fighting for their rights too. May be that's why he thinks they " would fight for anything to do with men".
Did you remove the " Why would they fight for anything to do with men? " or did Skyclaw add it?
I have lost count of how many times I have seen feminists claim that there is no need for men's rights groups as feminists are fighting for their rights too. May be that's why he thinks they " would fight for anything to do with men".
I removed it because I realised that quite a few feminists might not think like that.
In practice everyone knows that trans women are not identical to women, but if you don’t want to be called a TERF you must deny the differences as far as possible. For feminists this has become a particular problem: any discussion of experiences which are not shared by trans women because they were not born with female bodies is liable to be denounced as ‘trans-exclusionary’. That was the reason why a US women’s college recently announced it would be discontinuing its annual performance of The Vagina Monologues: it’s exclusionary to talk about vaginas when some women do not have one. Last year a trans activist on Twitter denounced feminist campaigns against FGM as ‘cissexist’. Discussions of menstruation, pregnancy and abortion rights are all regularly interrupted by the same complaint.
Another thing we are supposed to deny is the differences that now exist among self-identified trans women. The category has broadened over time to encompass more biologically male individuals who have not modified their bodies, and who in some cases do not live permanently as women, but alternate between male and female identities. Their status as women is based on a combination of performative declarations that they are women, and surface features of ‘gender presentation’ like the names they use and the clothes they wear. Nevertheless, they invoke the ‘trans women are women’ principle: if you identify as female then you are female, and should be treated as such by others. In some circles it is considered transphobic for women to question the presence of people with openly displayed male sexual organs in spaces like communal female changing rooms, or for lesbian women to refuse to recognise those people as potential sexual partners (a resistance sometimes referred to as ‘the cotton ceiling’, a phrase which smacks of misogyny and male entitlement). It isn’t just radical feminists who find this problematic: some trans women do too. Is that really just irrational bigotry?
During the debate on the Observer letter, a man who had finally grasped what the trans v TERF dispute was about tweeted (I paraphrase for his own protection): ‘So, you’re saying we have to pretend to believe lies to be nice. Like saying I think cats can fly’. To avoid giving offence to a minority group — or to avoid persecution by its most extreme and vocal members — it’s as if we have all agreed to live in a fantasy world where reality is whatever certain people say it is. My penis is female. It is exclusionary for feminists to talk about female bodies. Cats can fly. Ignorance is knowledge.
its not fantasy to treat people as theyd like to be treat
I don't think that's what it's saying. Maybe I've misread it but my understanding is that they're saying it's 'fantasy' to pretend that trans & biological women are exactly the same.
I'm totally accepting of trans people but it's obvious that there are areas where we have different concerns. I wouldn't say that biological women talking about gynaecological issues is ' trans exclusionary' any more than trans people talking about transition would be 'cis exclusionary', because, you know....biology.
In practice everyone knows that trans women are not identical to women, but if you don’t want to be called a TERF you must deny the differences as far as possible. For feminists this has become a particular problem: any discussion of experiences which are not shared by trans women because they were not born with female bodies is liable to be denounced as ‘trans-exclusionary’. That was the reason why a US women’s college recently announced it would be discontinuing its annual performance of The Vagina Monologues: it’s exclusionary to talk about vaginas when some women do not have one. Last year a trans activist on Twitter denounced feminist campaigns against FGM as ‘cissexist’. Discussions of menstruation, pregnancy and abortion rights are all regularly interrupted by the same complaint.
Another thing we are supposed to deny is the differences that now exist among self-identified trans women. The category has broadened over time to encompass more biologically male individuals who have not modified their bodies, and who in some cases do not live permanently as women, but alternate between male and female identities. Their status as women is based on a combination of performative declarations that they are women, and surface features of ‘gender presentation’ like the names they use and the clothes they wear. Nevertheless, they invoke the ‘trans women are women’ principle: if you identify as female then you are female, and should be treated as such by others. In some circles it is considered transphobic for women to question the presence of people with openly displayed male sexual organs in spaces like communal female changing rooms, or for lesbian women to refuse to recognise those people as potential sexual partners (a resistance sometimes referred to as ‘the cotton ceiling’, a phrase which smacks of misogyny and male entitlement). It isn’t just radical feminists who find this problematic: some trans women do too. Is that really just irrational bigotry?
During the debate on the Observer letter, a man who had finally grasped what the trans v TERF dispute was about tweeted (I paraphrase for his own protection): ‘So, you’re saying we have to pretend to believe lies to be nice. Like saying I think cats can fly’. To avoid giving offence to a minority group — or to avoid persecution by its most extreme and vocal members — it’s as if we have all agreed to live in a fantasy world where reality is whatever certain people say it is. My penis is female. It is exclusionary for feminists to talk about female bodies. Cats can fly. Ignorance is knowledge.
Very interesting Electra - and yes it isn't a simple debate, but I do find the extreme positions being taken by both side incredibly tedious. There is so much important work to do to gain acceptance for trans people and tackle the inequality between the sexes that still exists that some of the arguments seem very self-foot-shooting to me. Much like some of the arguments when I was younger between radical feminists and the more 'practical' feminists (like myself). It all seems to be about labels and details when the real issue, for me, is the prejudice and inequality that damage the lives of individuals.
This comes as no surprise to me as I first knew of a case of transphobia involving Germaine Greer & her fellow colleague who happened to be a transexual way back in the 90s. It had been reported in the Observer newspaper which I read at the time. Ms Greer had opposed her colleague getting the job in a college. I can't recall if Ms Greer was also in the running too. I remember being both shocked & surprised at Ms Greer's hostile & unsympathetic attitude towards her colleague.
Also the journalist/feminist Suzanne Moore joined in attacking the transexuals of course but Julie Burchill was much worse. Remember this?:
"Suzanne Moore, whom Prof Greer attacked in 1995 for her "hair bird's- nested all over the place, ****-me shoes and three fat inches of cleavage", admitted: "If Germaine attacked me for my writing, it would be far more worthy than to attack me for my shoes". The attack was in response to Ms Moore's comments on an inaccurate report that Prof Greer had a hysterectomy at 25. The latter told the Telegraph yesterday it was "stupid and hurtful" to suggest she didn't want kids. "It's pretty painful when you have spent a goodly part of your life struggling to have children, to have this young woman - who is lucky enough to have two children of her own - suddenly announce that I had myself hysterectomised at 25 because I didn't want kids. How could she be so stupid? I think that level of incomprehension is inexcusable in someone who calls herself a feminist."
Ms Greer, you could have been talking about yourself as well! >:(
I'm not sure if I agree with the word'phobic' as it means a fear of, the people labelled 'phobics' seem to be fuelled more by hatred. But these people aren't doing themselves any favours
Very interesting Electra - and yes it isn't a simple debate, but I do find the extreme positions being taken by both side incredibly tedious. There is so much important work to do to gain acceptance for trans people and tackle the inequality between the sexes that still exists that some of the arguments seem very self-foot-shooting to me. Much like some of the arguments when I was younger between radical feminists and the more 'practical' feminists (like myself). It all seems to be about labels and details when the real issue, for me, is the prejudice and inequality that damage the lives of individuals.
Yes, I absolutely agree with you. As per usual, the problems seem to be caused by extremists on both sides taking entrenched positions.
Can I just say....one thing that did strike me as unfair, is lesbians being labelled TERFs for not being sexually attracted to pre op trans women. Obviously, as a straight, biological female, it's not exactly my area of expertise & I'd be interested in your opinion.
I'm not sure if I agree with the word'phobic' as it means a fear of, the people labelled 'phobics' seem to be fuelled more by hatred. But these people aren't doing themselves any favours
Well, it also means 'aversion to' - and words change meaning over time. I think it is easier to accept that 'transphobic' (and other '-phobic' words) now means the aversion, dislike or even irrational hatred that some display towards trans people.
Comments
I don't know if there's an operation that will change what reproductive organs you have. Until there is, I don't see any reason why they can't be seen as a woman.
I don't see feminists fighting on behalf of men.
I don't see feminists fighting to ban male circumcision
I don't see feminists fighting to open shelters for men who have been battered by their spouse.
I don't see feminists trying to change the rape law so that it includes female rape of men.
I see feminists going to colleges and spreading this myth of rape culture as if it is fact.
I see feminists demonize men.
I see feminists laugh at men when a man comes to them with a real problem.
To be honest, I think I'd run a mile.
I don't mean any offence to any transgendered posters out there but to me it wouldn't be something I'd understand.
Feminists fight for equality for women.
Because feminists claim to be about equality to all.
Besides Women are equal so they can stop now.
See this is what i mean feminists claim to be for both genders but only focus on female issues.
I have lost count of how many times I have seen feminists claim that there is no need for men's rights groups as feminists are fighting for their rights too. May be that's why he thinks they " would fight for anything to do with men".
He removed it for whatever reason..
I removed it because I realised that quite a few feminists might not think like that.
It's not the same at all. Do you understand the definition of ambiguity?
Are you now or have you ever been a TERF?
The term TERF - "trans exclusionary radical feminist" has become internet shorthand for "transphobic bigot". The odd thing is that most people hold beliefs which could see them labelled a "TERF".
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf
In practice everyone knows that trans women are not identical to women, but if you don’t want to be called a TERF you must deny the differences as far as possible. For feminists this has become a particular problem: any discussion of experiences which are not shared by trans women because they were not born with female bodies is liable to be denounced as ‘trans-exclusionary’. That was the reason why a US women’s college recently announced it would be discontinuing its annual performance of The Vagina Monologues: it’s exclusionary to talk about vaginas when some women do not have one. Last year a trans activist on Twitter denounced feminist campaigns against FGM as ‘cissexist’. Discussions of menstruation, pregnancy and abortion rights are all regularly interrupted by the same complaint.
Another thing we are supposed to deny is the differences that now exist among self-identified trans women. The category has broadened over time to encompass more biologically male individuals who have not modified their bodies, and who in some cases do not live permanently as women, but alternate between male and female identities. Their status as women is based on a combination of performative declarations that they are women, and surface features of ‘gender presentation’ like the names they use and the clothes they wear. Nevertheless, they invoke the ‘trans women are women’ principle: if you identify as female then you are female, and should be treated as such by others. In some circles it is considered transphobic for women to question the presence of people with openly displayed male sexual organs in spaces like communal female changing rooms, or for lesbian women to refuse to recognise those people as potential sexual partners (a resistance sometimes referred to as ‘the cotton ceiling’, a phrase which smacks of misogyny and male entitlement). It isn’t just radical feminists who find this problematic: some trans women do too. Is that really just irrational bigotry?
During the debate on the Observer letter, a man who had finally grasped what the trans v TERF dispute was about tweeted (I paraphrase for his own protection): ‘So, you’re saying we have to pretend to believe lies to be nice. Like saying I think cats can fly’. To avoid giving offence to a minority group — or to avoid persecution by its most extreme and vocal members — it’s as if we have all agreed to live in a fantasy world where reality is whatever certain people say it is. My penis is female. It is exclusionary for feminists to talk about female bodies. Cats can fly. Ignorance is knowledge.
Yes but I don't agree.
I don't think that's what it's saying. Maybe I've misread it but my understanding is that they're saying it's 'fantasy' to pretend that trans & biological women are exactly the same.
I'm totally accepting of trans people but it's obvious that there are areas where we have different concerns. I wouldn't say that biological women talking about gynaecological issues is ' trans exclusionary' any more than trans people talking about transition would be 'cis exclusionary', because, you know....biology.
Very interesting Electra - and yes it isn't a simple debate, but I do find the extreme positions being taken by both side incredibly tedious. There is so much important work to do to gain acceptance for trans people and tackle the inequality between the sexes that still exists that some of the arguments seem very self-foot-shooting to me. Much like some of the arguments when I was younger between radical feminists and the more 'practical' feminists (like myself). It all seems to be about labels and details when the real issue, for me, is the prejudice and inequality that damage the lives of individuals.
Also the journalist/feminist Suzanne Moore joined in attacking the transexuals of course but Julie Burchill was much worse. Remember this?:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2262373/Julie-Burchill-article-Observer-removes-content-website-issues-apology-Twitter-storm.html
How ironic is this? Anyone remember the feud involving Germaine Greer & Suzanne Moore?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/germaine-smacks-her-sisters-1072156.html
"Suzanne Moore, whom Prof Greer attacked in 1995 for her "hair bird's- nested all over the place, ****-me shoes and three fat inches of cleavage", admitted: "If Germaine attacked me for my writing, it would be far more worthy than to attack me for my shoes". The attack was in response to Ms Moore's comments on an inaccurate report that Prof Greer had a hysterectomy at 25. The latter told the Telegraph yesterday it was "stupid and hurtful" to suggest she didn't want kids. "It's pretty painful when you have spent a goodly part of your life struggling to have children, to have this young woman - who is lucky enough to have two children of her own - suddenly announce that I had myself hysterectomised at 25 because I didn't want kids. How could she be so stupid? I think that level of incomprehension is inexcusable in someone who calls herself a feminist."
Ms Greer, you could have been talking about yourself as well! >:(
But do carry on.
Yes, I absolutely agree with you. As per usual, the problems seem to be caused by extremists on both sides taking entrenched positions.
Can I just say....one thing that did strike me as unfair, is lesbians being labelled TERFs for not being sexually attracted to pre op trans women. Obviously, as a straight, biological female, it's not exactly my area of expertise & I'd be interested in your opinion.
Well, it also means 'aversion to' - and words change meaning over time. I think it is easier to accept that 'transphobic' (and other '-phobic' words) now means the aversion, dislike or even irrational hatred that some display towards trans people.