Radfem 2013 and the MRAs

Transgender women are women, they are not men. I'll repeat, it is bigoted to continue to refer to them as anything other than women. To allow transphobic speakers into a conference that should welcome ALL women is just wrong. It's like saying they can be discriminated against because they're the wrong type of woman.

Someone self identifies as a woman costs me nothing to accept them as a woman.

And I can pretty much guarantee that if you feel oppressed the transgender woman can tell you a few things about oppression. It appears this is the last bastion in societal bigotry, trans people are going through what gay people went through 30-40 years ago when people were discussing where they fitted in society.

Google the suicide and murder rates of trans people, shocking statistics.

Mini, what is wrong with the way it is defined already?

Yes, there are actual reasons, and they are compatible with equality.

In mixed-sex groups, women typically do not get so much time to speak or be heard. There are loads of studies to show that even when people - men and women - think they're being really careful to give women equal time and attention, they don't. They give more time and attention to men. This isn't always conscious, it's just how deep our conditioning is.

That's one reason.

Another reason is, as I understand it, that we will be able to discuss some ideas that lots of women wouldn't feel able to talk about if they were with men. So, it's about making a safe space for a vulnerable group, just as you would for any group you have a bit of human decency and compassion for.

This will help achieve equality, because it will help women to take themselves seriously and to think seriously about their wants and needs. I'm sure some women have no need of a woman-only space to do that, and they are very fortunate. But others aren't so lucky.

I know maybe redefine the RadFem conference.

Rather than "it's about how we attain equality"......instead......"its an escape from the fact that we don't"

Is there any actual reason why anybody should be excluded from attending?

Seriously?

Is Radfem about equality or pushing a particular group to the fore?

stick - but this is the issue.

Legally, you can be recognised as male if you identified as female at birth, or female if you were identified as male at birth.

A very small number of people are born with intersex conditions, for what it's worth - I'll note that because people always do in these debates, though transsexuals are not people who were born intersex, or not typically (it's very, very rare).

The legal situation, then, doesn't relate to whether you have XX chromosomes or what genitalia you have. It is possible also to have surgery that could give someone who was born with a penis something that looks more like a vagina, or vice versa.

Obviously, chromosomes are hidden, so some people would say, look, it doesn't matter what the genetic coding is, what matters is how you feel inside. Some people have a strong internal sense of their 'gender identity' and reckon they know inside whether they're male or female. Others don't have this. Others again - including lots of radical feminists - think even this internal sense of 'gender identity' might be the result of social conditioning.

Most of the time, obviously, it is perfectly possible to be respectful of whatever other people think, because 90% of the time there is absolutely no reason why anyone needs to insist 'well I shall use gender identity to categorise everyone as male or female', or 'well I shall use chromosomes'.

Occasionally, it starts to matter to some people. For me personally, I don't like to be labelled a 'ciswoman' because that qualifies 'woman' in a way I find othering and offensive. And I think it matters to be able to discuss issues to do with having a female reproductive system with other people who've grown up with a female reproductive system (and to me, that includes women who've since had hysterectomies, say, because I think their formative experience is the same). But now we're getting into the personal side of things.

They pre-fix woman with trans, maybe because we can't both take up the same space, why? because we are not the same. But why should I pre-fix woman with cis to appease their sense of fair play. It smacks of "I can't be just a woman, so neither can you. Thing is I never chose to be a woman, I just am, a stroke of luck or misfortune, take your pick.......but I am not asking other people to change their identity to make space for me.

Other than the fact that I refuse to be redefined by a system that has already defined me, whether I approve or not, I have no issue with trans.

It depends how you define woman. That is the point.

If you define 'woman' as 'someone of the female gender', you're talking about a concept radical feminists reject as being socially constructed (that is, gender). If you define woman as 'someone of the female sex', you're talking about something biological. Transwoman were not born female in sex, and their chromosomal makeup is not XX, and they do not have vaginas and ovaries. How much that matters is usually up to transwomen to think about for themselves and there is obviously a lot of variation in how people feel and what they want to do.

But to say that you believe gender is a social construct is not bigotry; it is a point of view.

"The only thing I see Cathy Brennan and other RadFems say (not all RadFems) is that a transwomen is not actually a female.
On a medical level, is that not correct?"

Well that's simply not true. I linked to her Twitter above, she's full of hate.

And transgender women are women, to deny that is bigoted. This is like listening to how gay people were treated 30 years ago, hopefully it won't take as long for things to change.

This has been discussed upthread - what did you reckon to that bit ofhte discussion?

Accusing people of being transphobic is just as much a personal attack as accusing them of being racist or sexist - it's not ok. And no, being a radical feminist does not mean you 'support transphobia'. It means you believe sex discrimination is the root problem in our society and you want women liberated from oppression.

And those in defense of RadFem have no problem with the transphobic speakers who are/were welcomed at the conference? Ok, maybe not all RadFems support this, but I wouldn't be supporting or attending anything that promoted bigotry or supported bigots. End of. Silence in situations like this is compliance, those against transphobia should be boycotting RadFem and making a noise that in this instance they are not representing your view.

Unfortunately, out there in the ether it's just looking like if you support RadFem you support transphobia.

Hi allecto.

Nice to 'see' you on here.

I agree with mrsr - the personal attacks on radical feminists are getting tedious and annoying. Would you really go around saying 'well, Malcolm X advocated violence therefore everyone involved in the civil rights movement must be violent! I bet that Martin Luther King is just the same!' No, you wouldn't. Because it would look ridiculous.

'Thanks for the details all. I am sure you realise that those of us who feel that having transphobic speakers is wrong and any attempt to exclude them is wrong will also be mailing the addresses given :D'

Absolutely, I'm on it right now. Also, I wonder if allecto is the allecto from radfem hub, seems likely.

Thanks for the details all. I am sure you realise that those of us who feel that having transphobic speakers is wrong and any attempt to exclude them is wrong will also be mailing the addresses given :D

Hey all,

This is my first time posting on mumsnet! Just thought I would pop in to clarify a few things. I quite enjoyed reading through the discussion here. And laughed out loud about the king Herod thing!!!

We have released a statement about our legal position... That it is completely within the law for female peoples to meet. You can read more here: sisterhoodispowerful.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/interim-legal-statement-by-radfem2013-organisers/

Also at this stage we are not giving up on holding the conference at the London Irish centre. We are asking for women to email the venue to support women's right to meet in peace and safety.

Contacts:
David Barlow
[email protected]
Philip Atkins
[email protected]

Thanks sisters,

Looks like you have some pretty good discussions in here. Will have to come visit when I have more time.

Given NotFluffy's use of misogynistic language I assume she does not identify as a feminist anyway, so I am not specially interested in her opinion about feminism.

So radfems are all bigoted cunts? How lovely.

Isn't it more fair to say that some radfems are bigoted? And (as stated copiously upthread) don't all share the same views of trans people?

Have a look at Cathy Brennan's Twitter, she is/was a booked speaker. She is a bigot, surely anyone with an ounce of decency would distance themselves.

twitter.com/bugbrennan

It's a conference not the neuremberg rally. Funnily enough there are speakers and delegates with a range of views and interests. They haven't signed up to a 20 point pledge of "we are radfems. This is what we believe".

Eugh. Another RadFem here, never made any personal comments towards or regarding trans people. Please stop tarring us all with the same brush as you have applied to a sample of internet nutters. Thanks.

Ooh let's see now... Have you seen some of the filth some of the trans activists spew about rad fems? I'd be distancing myself from that lot... etc.