Guardian vulvas...

Why does calling a project about vulvas ‘Womanhood’ imply that sex equals gender though? It’s quite literally about the biological sex-based reality of being a woman.

The transwoman participating seems to have her head screwed on with a sensible take on the situation - she’s fine with being a transwoman with a neovagina, and as a gender critical feminist I’m absolutely fine with that too, brava to her.

That actually brought a tear to my eye, simple dignity and acceptance that she is not a woman and why it matters to women to acknowledge that.

It made me sad because she really wishes she could have been a woman (for whatever reason) and she knows this is as close as she’s ever going to get.

You couldn’t get much further from that “IT’S MA’AM!” video than her balanced, deferential approach. Happy to use she/her for someone like this.

There was a explicit warning on the penis article too.

I thought it was really good, I found it fascinating and educational. And then wondered what mine looks like!

I then like the fact the TW says she makes no claim to having a womanhood.

Properly got the hump,tho, over the interviewer asking the author if she thought the title 'womanhood'is appropriate cos trans...

Me too.

Can you just let the photographer talk about her photos of 100 fannies without hand wringing about whether her use of the name 'womanhood' was appropriate.

Never more appropriate I should say!

“I ask Dodsworth if it feels right to call a project about vulvas Womanhood, since it implies that sex equals gender”

Quoth interviewer.

I thought in this context it was great to include a trans woman and I was very interested in what she had to say. I’m very pleased that the operation worked out for her and I think it looks very realistic.

Someone linked to the me and my penis article above. That worked out rather less well for that trans man. He said he has just had a lot of “unhealthy rejection”. I feel very sad for him.

Being a cynic where the Graun is concerned, I wondered if they were playing the long game here. Most people hear TW and think this kind of sensible pragmatist is what is meant. The lady dicks and LMs are lost on most. Which then makes feminists into the screeching harpies, because why would any reasonable woman have a problem with this?

I would be happy not to have seen any of them.

I’m not featured, by the way! Just realised how that could be read Just the idea of vulvas being so dangerous they need a warning.

The bit that irked me was the cover ‘warning’ about the vulvic imagery- never knew my old girl was so dangerous!

Thought the neo-vulva looked pretty darned good and the transwoman’s views were balanced, honest and respectful.

It’s not like a dick where you see it every day

I never seen my own 😂😂

Was gr2t article
How different we all look

Holy crow!

To be fair though, like others have said, the transwoman featured sounds like a good'un to be honest.

I had never seen a neo vagina either. Interesting.

Yeah
Th3 person was dead clear that they wasn’t a woman.
Tha5 was cool

I wish more TW would speak like the one in the article. Candid, clear, accepting of reality.

I rather suspect they would never have referred to their "lady dick" either!

I found this fascinating.

At first I too was thinking, oh here we go.

The TW has made a big point doing this. In the guardian. And I can't help suspecting she's deliberately participated in order to make that point; that they're not a woman, their biology is different, and they can't claim to be a woman.

The 'not female' moment for me was the torso photo not the close up, and that's how I felt about the penis shoot too. It's more than just the genital plastic surgery, it's the whole body shape being different. Looks like an interesting project and I liked the way that the photographer talks about it. I remember feeling like that about the penis equivalent, but now I'm wondering if the Guardian interviewer had an issue with that being called 'Manhood' and rather suspecting not. Having said that there are some quite non woke references in the article, in particular the idea that 'front holes' as a description is harmful.

“I’m a transwoman, and that’s fine by me.” It’s fine by me too. That actually brought a tear to my eye, simple dignity and acceptance that she is not a woman and why it matters to women to acknowledge that.

Any TRAs reading here? She gets it, why can’t you?

I just finished reading the article and came here to find the thread. They tackled the whole female = vagina issue in the write up and a liked what the TW said about her vagina. I think she was a valid inclusion and had a good point to make.

I was fine with the transwoman being included because she was completely honest about who she was and her difference.

She was a transwoman. I can live with that

To be honest I would not have been able to pick out the trans person by looking at them all. Maybe I need glasses but it doesn’t look that unrealistic and, as the gallery shows, everyone looks different.

I like what the transwoman had to say! And feel absolutely fine about the picture/story being included.

(And I'm a totally GC feminist)