This is bullshit thread #3

YY Ego and Helen

And it is sunny! Catch it whilst it lasts!

Exactly statistically.

Now I really am off into RL....

I think the whole point of the Spartacus thread was that we - women- are being pushed to call everyone who says they identify as a woman, a woman. We're not being pushed to call them transwomem but to call them women and say that they are women just like biological women. And if it comes down to a binary decision between man or woman then biology wins

Why not call an MTT a transman rather than a transwoman? If they are moving away from being men, that would be more accurate than "transwoman".

Let's say for the sake of argument that I agree with this (actually I do but I'm in a tiny, tiny monority of MTT's). How on earth do we get there?

Calling MTT's women (or even transwomen) is offensive to some women.
Calling MTT's men (or transmen) is offensive to MTT's.

Why should women be the ones that give ground? They shouldn't.
Why should MTT's? Because they are men and part of the oppressor class so suck it up. Only they don't believe that. They have been told that they aren't men over and over again by helathcare professionals, support groups, friends, the media and liberal feminists.

So whilst I totally agree that this shouldn't be women's issue and shouldn't be a feminist issue. Whilst I agree that MTT are (despite how hurtful it is for many to accept) a subset of men, I can't see how we get there.

Transwoman and transman are terms that people understand. Sure they need refining and we need people to understand what that actually mean but I can't see how we can suddenly flip the two words. I also see why we shouldn't flip or devalue what the word woman means.

I'd accept either label but it's not as simple as that.

I want to see it. I want to support it. I want to be part of it. I can see the end goal but have no idea how we get there.

Slight X-post there

The real world beckons. Just a few thoughts.

It's great to not be the only TW posting on here. It makes a nice change.

It's also great that the debate has been civilised - it's hard posting some personal stuff about your issues on here and I am wary. But I do think it's important.

I do get many of the issues. I have been on here a long time and I do listen and understand. I hope that in return, people can at least try and understand at least some of the issues TW face.

I do understand how the debate has moved and 'self identifying' - along with all the gender stuff and 'I feel like a woman' is not helping. I got flamed on a trans thread on another forum for asking what people meant by that. It's not one of the things you ask.

But the RL world beckons. It's sunny outside

I have to go out and do RL stuff!!

Darn it, me too! Probably just as well.

I have to go out and do RL stuff!! .

So many ways of looking at this! I disagree fundamentally with Oscar.

Transwomen are not women.
Legally, many trans women are women.

Humans are sexually dimorphic
This is true according to the organising principles by which humans have chosen to interpret biological observations. Historically, this organising principle had the aim of differentiating between men and women in order to control women's sexuality and fertility.

It has be one rule across the board, which means that if 'she' is to be used of any MTT the sentence 'this woman committed rape with her penis' has to be acceptable and meaningful.
Yes, it is meaningful. Moreover, it relies on a locally determined legal understanding of rape. In Canada, for example, there is no crime of rape. So in Canada you'd have to charge the same person with sexual assault.

And why the focus on willies?
Because of the conceptual history of one particular form of sexual assault in which a woman could be impregnated by a man who was not her husband. Historically, this was considered a crime against her husband (or her father, if she was unmarried) rather than against the woman herself.

It's not ok for anyone to rape anyone else. But the way we understand rape is a product of history and culture, and changes according to place and time.

The way we understand sex is also a product of history and culture and changes according to place and time.

Yes, I will call MTT transwomen, but as humans are sexually dimorphic and transwomen are not women, they are a subset of men. I will not deny this and I will not lie about this. And I will not be forced to do otherwise.

I have reservations about using any descriptor containing the word 'woman' though, as I can see that this is the thin end of the wedge, and bang you end up in the mess we are in. The 'women' part of it gets emphasised linguistically, and then we have two groups of women. Again. No.

But - why is this my problem to accommodate? Why is MTT hurt more important than women's?

Why not call an MTT a transman rather than a transwoman? If they are moving away from being men, that would be more accurate than "transwoman".

I find it horrible for PL to be described as a woman and called "she

And that pretty much sums up the debate. I am sure there is some middle ground here.

YY Oscar I find it horrible for PL to be described as a woman and called "she".

Ego if you disagree with Danielle Muscato, then why?

I agree with him. If PL Is a woman, so is he. If PL should be called 'she' then so should DM. And AD. And all of them.

although my post just now does address why I call PL a man and he

Why can't you call Pl a transwomen?

You just said that you'd be happy to have men, women, transwomen and transmen.

Would you be happy calling a transwomen a transwomen rather than a man?

What about this bit Oscar?

Ego - cross- post, although my post just now does address why I call PL a man and he.

Why is doing so horrible?
Why is it not horrible to women to say that PL is a woman? Why is this appropriation of womanhood, denial of biological reality, and reduction of womanhood to not having nadgers and the performance of patriarchy approved femininity not horrible?

When MTT say they are women, real actual womanhood is diminished. Why does that not matter? Why is it up to me to accommodate this? Redefine myself? Should I actually be grateful for the descriptor 'cis' in that is still permits me a way to distinguish myself from these other women, women who are women just as much as I am?

Why is this on me and not on you? (group you, not you personally)

Again. Chucking it back onto (mostly) women to accommodate through language. This is still male privilege

You do know that there are transmen who ask to be called 'he'. Why are you ignoring their requests to be called 'he' - they have never had male privilege but still expect to be called 'he'.

If it 'others' them, that is their problem to sort out, not mine to pussyfoot around, lying to make people feel better about themselves.

Sure, I'd never follow someone around all day singing a newly versed 'You'e a Bloke' song. That's because I'm not a twat. But I'm not going to lie and say, yes you are she and yes you are a woman.

The question is not why shouldn't I do this. The question is rather - why should this be asked/required of me?

Again. Chucking it back onto (mostly) women to accommodate through language. This is still male privilege.

It actually fucking hurts, angers and enrages me when I see 'she' used of MTT. Why is my hurt, anger and rage (and fear - a lot of fear for teh real and seen ramifications of this) less than the hurt experienced by MTT at this 'othering'? Why is the latter bigotry and an act of violence? Why is the appropriate of language not considered to be violent? Why?

Answer: male privilege.

Butchering yourself to become something scientifically impossible is just so sad to me. I hate that anyone has to do that

With due respect - have you read anything on here about gender dysphoria and the relief that surgery has?

To describe life changing surgery as butchery and mutilation when you don't know the relief it brings is pretty ignorant. There was a lot of discussion on the last thread about surgery.

So, do I call Helen 'he' up until November, then tactfully ask if the chop has happened and if it has use 'she'? How does that work? That's a pretty horrible way of going about things

What about Paris Lees and others? You've called them 'he' and 'blokes' on the Spartacus thread? I think that's pretty horrible.

I don't know how to describe myself except as an individual person with my own needs, issues and concerns who is just trying to get by in a society that is still coming to terms with people like me.

This is a salient point.

I believe that some TA have lumped transpeople together and decided that the world needs to change for this giant, one-brained hive of people instead of individuals with different wants, needs, ideas, and lives.

I admit that I still have no idea how one could feel like a woman without being heavily influenced by gender stereotyping but as Helen said up thread: we can think it's terrible to be influenced but we still are.

If I am being totally honest, I would much rather see a person be able to live the way he/she wants without having to pick a gender.

Butchering yourself to become something scientifically impossible is just so sad to me. I hate that anyone has to do that.

Transwomen are not women. Humans are sexually dimorphic, therefore transwomen are a subset of men. Invoking the individual vs class distinction, whilst on an individual level I may make a decision as an individual to use a MTT's preferred pronoun, on a class level they remain 'he' and it is accurate to refer to them as such. And, as such, I reserve the right to use my language accurately to refer to any or all MTT as 'he'.

As MTT are not women, they are not entitled to access women's protected spaces, or stuff that is earmarked for women - whether that is college places, grant money, or women's sports. They should not be counted as women when looking at issues of equality, education, crime, or health. The issue of discrimination MTT face and any risks from male violence needs to be tackled separately and it is not the business of feminism to deal with this. Whilst individual women may choose to be involved with this (and I would certainly support this) it is not the business of women as a class to make this right for MTT. It is neither necessary, nor honest, for MTT to claim they are women in order to secure the rights due to them nor the safety from violence that should be guaranteed them.

Calling any individual MTT 'she' is very often the thin end of the wedge. Starts with a pronoun, goes on to using the word 'woman' or 'girl', and then after a short while, bang. You're in the mess we are currently in.

My personal latitude re pronoun use is actually irrelevant. It has be one rule across the board, which means that if 'she' is to be used of any MTT the sentence 'this woman committed rape with her penis' has to be acceptable and meaningful. (I consider that if any MTT is a woman, then all must be, including eg Danielle Muscato, but if you prefer to cling to the notion that only those who have had 'bottom surgery' are deserving of 'she', then the meaningful and accurate sentence needs to be 'a woman committed rape with the penis that she used to have'. Still meaningless.)

And why the focus on willies? How is this fair? Helen alluded to the fact that surgery is booked for November. I like Helen and want to be accommodating. So, do I call Helen 'he' up until November, then tactfully ask if the chop has happened and if it has use 'she'? How does that work? That's a pretty horrible way of going about things. And anyway, I thought we had decided that a woman is not simply a bloke minus the nadgers. In that respect I think TA are correct - it's all or none. I say it's none, they say it's all.

I don't know how to describe myself except as an individual person with my own needs, issues and concerns who is just trying to get by in a society that is still coming to terms with people like me.

f a TW doesn't want to be called a man then that's fine

Great. I would never call myself that.

Most of the time, I never have to describe myself. But I do what I do to get by and survive life with my head down and without making a fuss.

Other trans won't because it feels that it others them

But they are other, that's the point. Other isn't bad. It's just different. If a TW doesn't want to be called a man then that's fine, but he's not a woman either. So is other by default?

So what is wrong with:Women,Men,Transwomen,Transmen

How does that relate to your thread calling transwomen men? You seem to want to call transwomen men. Blokes. He. And you have clearly said you will describe us as that?

Have you changed your mind? Would you be happy calling a transwomen a transwomen rather than a man? Would you call them 'he'?