Guilty Feminist: minefields

biscuit, for me the difference is whether trans people are refugees or colonists.

I understand why people want to refugee out of gender roles - I get why men would want to exit toxic masculinity when they don't feel it fits them. I get why women would want to run away from the strictures of female sex role stereotypes. I get the refugee. And I am happy to stand by them and help them, as they ought to be standing by me. The first rule of the refugee should be: if you want to identify as as women, start by identifying with women. People who get this are allies.

But the colonists, I won't tolerate. The ones who want to tell women what being a woman is, the ones who want to tell us about female penises and male lesbians, the ones who push us ever deeper into the boxes of gender roles because it suits them that the boxes exist, they just want to jump from one to the other, and make all the women in the "woman" box budge up and accommodate...those people, I will fight.

Yes it was uncomfortable wasn't it, cordelia. Really hard to listen to.

I agree, the dynamics are different with trans women guests on.

Though there have been previous podcasts, for example recently when she had two black women on and was talking about white privilege, when I've felt the same sort of vibe. She deliberately gets people on whose voices aren't necessarily heard so much, and she tries to really listen to their perspective and lets them challenge her own thinking. So she does defer to them, and apologises a lot. I guess from DFW the attitude is the same. I feel from the trans women it's less reciprocal maybe? At the same time in the minefields podcast they talked about trans people desperately trying to get their voices heard at the moment, and maybe that's just a stage the general public discourse is at.

I found it very hard, without any visual cues, to not just hear Ruebs as a man. And I don't think that's just down to her voice, but I'm not sure.

I thought it was interesting what Ruebs was saying about trans women often wearing very gendered stereotypical feminine clothes, particularly to start with, as it's their way of saying 'this is the tribe I belong to'. The way she explained that was helpful to me.

Ahh... it's so confusing... I like the inclusive and kind approach. I've never had an issue with an individual trans woman. And I feel like trans people are rebelling against the same shitty patriarchal system and ridiculous gender stereotypes that I am! So we should have a lot in common. But I also want to be able to talk about women's issues, and women's biology, and for that to be ok.

I've still got half of it to listen to but my heart sank when Reubs started denying female biology as trans exclusitory.

I wonder why Deborah thought she had to edit and modify her language? Its her podcast and her body parts. Did she mean on this podcast, or in everyday life?

I will try to listen to the podcast.

In fact, I find overall that the podcast has a different feel when they have a MTT guest. For a start, the MTT guests that they have had on, always sound to me like men talking. Without any visual clues the register of their voices makes me think man, the way they frame there speech, which is often very much as a pronouncement to a room full of eager listeners that they are keen to educate, makes me thing man, and the way the other female presenter react to them also subtly seems to imply its a man talking. Very much a sense that they (the other, female, presenters) need to give way to the point that the MTT guests are making even if that point does not completely fit into the wider discussion.

This probably just reflect my own ingrained prejudices and I might well be over thinking it.

Yes i am glad they did the episode too.

The other thing that struck me was that I thought Reubs was a scientist? Then later was like "biology shmology" or something when Deborah asked about having a female penis. And something like if you "feel" or want to call your vagina male/penis female that's all fine. I know that's a trans thing but when you're in the field of science? I just thought you'd be less likely to pick and choose what facts to disregard.

I found the part where DFW was talking about naming body parts quite uncomfortable listening biscuitbadger. It was almost like she was pleading on behalf of half the population for permission to name our own body parts and Reubs was not going to grant it.

Sofia (whose comedy I love) is younger and an intersectional feminist I think.

The Guilty Feminist facebook community used to be somewhere people could talk about feminism, not just the podcast. It was the first place I'd ever come across intersectional feminists en masse.

It was a very hostile place. This particular bunch seemed incapable of actually having a debate. It was all about people with trenchant views calling other people out for saying things the wrong way or telling people who were perceived to be more privileged to STFU in not so many words.

The fighting got out of hand and it looked like Sofie tried really, really try to make it a place where feminists could come and talk without the fighting. She was exasperated at all the fighting. She seemed to spend a lot of time recruiting and setting up new moderators. Then they had some kind of disagreement I think.

They had to admit defeat and pull the plug on the it in the end. Within days of the new moderators starting, the whole thing got shut down. Deborah came in and turned off commenting and turned it back into a simply a promotional place for the podcast.

It was a real eye opener, I'd never seen how intersectional "debates" happened before. Not much debating of actual subjects, lots of calling each other out and people getting upset.

I felt bad for Sofie as it was obvious she really wanted it to work but she'd inadvertently released a monster!

No idea if this is typical but I can't see how the movement will sustain itself if it is.

I wonder if it pushed Sofie any closer to peak trans. A couple of years back she used to insist on gender neutral toilets at her venues so she certsinly used to be on board with the trans agenda.

I'm half way through listening to the episode, and finding it exhausting! Really interesting though.

I agree that Reubs didn't seem to be listening and taking points on very much, but there was at least an attempt to discuss and hear different perspectives in general, in a non-confrontational way, which is more than we usually see elsewhere.

I thought DFW sounded quite upset when she talked about having to edit mentions of her own body parts. I was glad she brought that up. Maybe the fact that a liberal, inclusive feminist has raised some concerns and questions, maybe this will mean that other similar minded women listening to the podcast will connect with that and question things too?

I like the starting point of inclusion/acceptance. I generally like to take this approach, and I am happy to with trans women too in principle. It would be easier if it wasn't for these points about adjusting language so much that 'cis' women's experiences and bodies become invisible or invalid.

I was listening to it yesterday and thinking about posting about how full of shit Reubs was.

CoCoCoconut

Yes, you're right. I've googled it again. It was meant to have ears, and the knitters wanted to see a sea of pink. But there was a definite reference to reclaiming the word pussy.

Haha I agree

Sofia went off to do her comedy tour.

I've always found it very odd that they have never really discussed how trans activism impacts on women's rights.

She left to pursue other projects I believe.

She did always strike me as being a bit vulnerable and unsure of herself- put a bit too much of that out there maybe? I'm much more comfortable with DFW's more robust approach- she really cracks me up. whereas with Sofi's humour, I always wondered "should I be laughing at this? she sounds like she's hurting"...

I've stopped listening, unfortunately as I enjoyed it early on. I find it references and includes men (not just MTT) too much.

As an aside, where did Sofie go?

They were always a reference to "grab 'em by the pussy," that's the reason why they had cats' ears. A play on cat / pussy.

I think they tried. There was a pretty impassioned speech by dfw about biology. I thought Leyla Hussein kept her cool in a way I couldn't have- how privileged do you have to be to complain FGM is exclusionary?! FFS.

I do like the podcast- but also have to lalala sometimes. There aren't many spaces for female voices like it. And it's usually funny.

PricklyBall

I have seen a different context. The person who first knitted the hats, made them pink, because 'girls' and wasn't expecting the pussy reference. It's probably lost in the mists of time, when exactly they came to signify a 'pussy'. But it happened fairly swiftly. So who knows?

But I completely agree that almost off the mark, they came to represent genitalia.

They weren't "subsequently dubbed", Datun, they were intended to be a reference to female genitalia all along, to remind people of Trump's infamous "grab them by the pussy" remark.

IrritatedUser1960

They were hats that women were buying online to wear to the women's March. They're actually just bright pink woollen hats with what looked like little ears. They were subsequently dubbed pussy hats.

One woman had a placard saying this pussy grabs back. So then the consensus was they actually referred to one's genitalia.

The connection being Trump's locker room boasting of how he grabs women by the 'pussy'.

Many transwomen found it exclusionary, because they don't have them (pussies, not hats). They felt it was transphobic, cissexist and bigoted.

Irritated it was just for the women's march I think.

Sorry did you say pussy hat? Who would wear a pussy hat?

Deborah did challenge that point and said Trump wouldn't be interested in grabbing a penis identifying as a pussy.

I couldn't listen to the male privilege episode all the way through, it was too irritating. I normally really enjoy the podcast, and just have to close my ears when they go all My Feminism Will Be For Everyone. I listen to it for the female voices, so I've no interest in it being representative of trans identifying males, and find the male voices a) off putting, and b) not very funny.

I haven't listened to the minefields episode yet - I am not sure I can give head space to a feminist podcast airing the idea that women should be told by a born male not to wear pussy hats because it results in hurt feelings from people who don't have vaginas for presidents to brag about grabbing? Come ON Deborah! Think about it!

The facebook group they used to have exploded over this issue. They put on a show and made much of the fact that they were offering support at the venue for people with anxiety or other mental health problems - very worthy and thoughtful. But they had also made the loos gender neutral, and when questioned on what that would mean for people whose anxiety was worsened by being made to share loos with males, Sofi Hagen suggested they'd be better off staying at home because bigots weren't welcome...it was a car crash.