TERF

What Flora said.

kim MRAs tell us all the time that the fact that some men are treated badly by other men proves there is no male privilege. Women are co-opted into promoting the same message by trans activists. No matter how badly a man is treated by other men and how little he feels he has benefitted from patriarchy, there are women who have been trained to prioritise his feelings and who will do so, even to the extent of agreeing that he is the mostest oppressedest. It's gaslighting.

Kim147.

I am very sorry that you have had such a hard life and have to deal with so much. I really am.

And I am sorry if my politics and what is important to me hurts your feelings. I really am.

I am sorry that you are dealing with self-hate and I hope you manage to find peace and happiness.

But I cannot lie about what I believe, and lay my politics and commitment to women's rights aside because that would hurt me.

Personally, the use of the words man and male privilege when discussing transwomen is upsetting and basically if you use it, you believe transwomen are really men who are full of male privilege and entitlement.

That's your right. But to me, it's silencing and designed to be upsetting and offensive. Just like the word and use of TERF rightly upsets and silences people.

Kim147, I have used man and male privilege on this thread so I guess you are referring to me here.

Actually, I don't use those terms in order to upset and cause offense. I use them because I believe that a male bodied person who has been socialized as a male bodied person and who acts like someone who has been socialized as a male bodied person, to be a man. Because in my value system, world view and lived experience, that is what a man is. The fact that these male bodied persons are policing my language and demanding that I change it, only confirms what I believe. Male bodied persons' feelings are not more important than female bodied persons' feelings.

I see transwomen acting with male privilege all the time, I see them acting entitled all the time - are you saying that I am not allowed to talk about that, using the appropriate language, because to do so can hurt male bodied persons' feelings? Because that is what it sounds like - I am being asked to put male bodied feelings above female bodied feelings and reality. And I'm struggling to see why I would do that - why would I as a feminist, prioritize male bodied issues when the whole of my movement is based on prioritizing female bodied issues?

I suppose I could do it to be nice, to be kind to male bodied persons, to act feminine and defer to male bodied humans, to act the way is expected of female bodied persons - that they submit to male bodied persons and prioritize their feelings and wishes. But I don't want to - because it is too important to me.

I will not defer to male bodied persons telling me what language and tone I may use when discussing how male bodied persons oppress female bodied persons. I will not have my language policed when discussing how male bodied persons infringe on female bodied persons boundaries and space or tell female bodied persons what to think or what they may believe or what language they may use to talk about their oppression. I will not lie about my female bodied person's reality in order to protect male bodied people's feelings.

You can Butler the answer to how a body can have a penis but be female: she argue that gender is a surface effect, a performance of a bodily style that comes into being specifically through the performance and does not exist as an inherent originate inside the body of the performer. The designation of that body "as" male.or.female at birth is the basis on which that individual comes to know and embody the bodily style that is expected of them. Iyswim, I'm distracted while writing this.

buffy I certainly do know you to appreciate subtleties and be reasonable sorry for coming over too strong in my last post.

briar some trans activists view male and female as social constructs and therefore believe that there is no such thing as a male body. It's worth bearing in mind that a significant number of transwomen have not had surgery (maybe the majority) and don't intend to have it. The do not want their bodies characterised as male.

Yes I got it and answered but I'm really tired right now and should probably not discuss anything serious.

I'm asking because I wrote "male-bodied people" earlier as it was relevant to that discussion about changing rooms, thinking it was a correct and neutral description.

buffy how does one give ground on the notion that women are entitled to meet on the terms they determine? I'm not trying to goad but I think it's too easy to say both sides are digging in or both sides are equally responsible for name calling and abusive behaviour. There are lots of false equivalence drawn (e.g. That identifying people as men or male is the same as calling a woman a TERF or saying there is equal silencing on both sides). Is giving ground on issues like this desirable?

OK I get "man" but why is male bad when it's only a simple biological description of the type of body?

I'm not really sure what the point of shared dialogue would be. Although we might all call ourselves feminists, there are issues on which we are diametrically opposed. It's like saying Labour and the Tories should attempt dialogue. As when says! it is almost impossible to have dialogue on unrelated issues such as prostitution once someone has been labelled a TERF eg Julie Bindel. Even craven apologies and capitulation are not enough to "rehabilitate" women who have fallen.