Anti-FGM campaigner Hibo Wardere comes under attack

Hibo Wardere is so dedicated and inspirational and her work is so very important. I think this was the right response from her, she doesn't need to waste her time being distracted by bad faith posters.

I did think that the trans man who asked for more inclusive language deserved a better response than "Not interested bye"

Sorry, can I just get this straight?

A trans man, who has no experience of FGM, comes at Hibo Wardere talking about what makes them feel 'distressed, invalidated and alienated' and 'inclusivity' when she is talking about little girls who have had their genitals mutilated? And is not happy because Hibo refers to those girls as 'girls'?

I think 'Not interested, bye' was a perfect response, in fact I think it was very restrained!

I'm starting to think that narcissism is an entry requirement for trans. Everything has to be about them. Everything.

WTF?!

I guess it's too bad when material reality does not align with your personal ideology.

Which would probably be my "better response" if by "better" you mean "longer".

I did think that the trans man who asked for more inclusive language deserved a better response than "Not interested bye"

I don't. I think they had a damn fucking nerve. Not everything is about their luxury beliefs. Like little girls having their genitals cut and sewn up due to oppressive patriarchal ideas about women, for instance.

What kind of person reads about a little girl having her clitoris cut out and thinks 'Yes but what about me'?

Hibo

“When she talks about women, she’s explicitly referring to biology... the very definition of transphobic.”

Ok well I genuinely believe that most of humanity is transphobic if that is the definition. I don’t get how this is different than blasphemy? I believe the word woman is about biology, is it the same as saying I believe there is no proof that gods are real? Is being transphobic akin to being a heathen. So transphobia genuinely has nothing to do with fear or hatred or any kind of ill wishing towards trans people it is simply not accepting the trans view of the world, being an unbeliever? The sin is simply not believing.

for Hibo, she should not be faced with this aggravation from ideologues for simply fighting to save other children from the pain and suffering which she endured as a child and still endures.

I'd always assumed that those targeting Hibo were the extreme end of online activists that most people (including trans activists) are embarrassed by. Yet it appears I am (yet again) wrong.

A powerful "political" movement embedded in our government, universities, the NHS, the legal system etc with the evident power to shape those institutions to their own advantage decides to target a woman of colour trying to protect young girls from FGM - some of the most powerless in multiple societies. Shame on them.

As is often said on these boards, when someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.

I read Hibo’s account of what happened to her aged 6 - it is utterly heartbreaking and horrifying that anyone could do that to a young child - let alone criticise someone who is trying to stop it happening to other young girls.

Dadjoke please could you read some of the accounts from victims of FGM that Hibo writes about. It happens to babies and young girls.

These young girls don’t have any opportunity to identify their way out of this barbaric practice.

It is nothing to do with trans people. You are clearly not as interested in FGM issues as you are in trans issues. Allow Hibo to focus on the FGM and you can do you.

DadJoke

"When she talks about women, she's explicitly referring to biology, as do most posters here - it's trans exclusionary, the very definition of transphobic."

Biology denier, you are probably a flat earther as well.

Didn't proofread in my rage.
Them!

I'm sitting here feeling utterly heartbroken about what is happening to these little girls, coupled with outright fury that trans activists are trying to make even this about them?

When she talks about women, she's explicitly referring to biology, as do most posters here - it's trans exclusionary, the very definition of transphobic.

On what basis do the victims of FGM get chosen for those things to happen to them? Do people ask them how they identify before deciding whether the remove their clitoris or sew their labia together? Or are they chosen on the basis of their biologically female body?

Sheesh!!!

[quote DadJoke]@Notoriouslynotnotious

I don't think a campaigner against genital mutiliation should exactly be target number one for people who want language which is inclusive trans men. There are many better causes, and more transphobic individuals. Likewise, it surprises me that GC feminists spend so much of their time and energy against a tiny group of marginalised people, when there are other, more important issues to address.

Yes, it's trans exclusionary women rather than trans exlusionary men who get more attacked, and misogyny is at play there.[/quote]
I'm exactly with Hibo in that tweet you have screenshotted. She campaigns for victims of FGM, why would she be interested in pussyfooting around language in case if offends someone, she knows this only happens to females, to women and girls?

It's not her job to placate or validate the feelings of these people. That's not her issue, she is getting on with what she does and if people don't like the way she speaks about it then that is just tough shit.

Girls and women who have had their genitals mutilated know it has absolutely fuck all with how they 'identify'.

Argh, this has really pissed me off!

When she talks about women, she's explicitly referring to biology, as do most posters here - it's trans exclusionary, the very definition of transphobic.

OK, so biology is also now transphobic. Got it.

Back in the real world, the clitorises of little girls are cut off with razor blades in service of a grim ideology around female purity.

Hibo

she's clearly quite transphobic, yes

Hate to be the one to say it, but different people have different causes they are interested in. Lack of interest is not phobic.
We cannot all be fretting all the time about people's gender/trans angst.
A calm civility is all that's needed generally.

She's clearly slightly transphobic, yes

A million times over women speaking about their needs is not transphobic. Trying to dominate and control what women say is problematic.

I did think that the trans man who asked for more inclusive language deserved a better response than "Not interested bye"

Why?

Who does that person think they are to try to control the way an FGM survivor speaks about it?

Why should Wardere take the time to explain what should be obvious to anyone with a little bit of empathy? That's time that she could spend campaigning or taking a well-deserved rest.

And we all know that any explanation would never, ever be good enough anyway. TRAs would just keep demanding more and more, keep telling her she was wrong, and as long as FGM keeps happening she's always going to be far too busy to get into discussions about what people who have no experience of FGM need her to say so they can feel "validated".

An ideology that celebrates surgical removal of healthy body parts is fundamentally incompatible with safeguarding legislation to prevent girls from being subjected to FGM.

www.womenarehuman.com/trans-activists-protest-bi-partisan-bill-to-protect-girls-from-barbaric-practice-of-female-genital-mutilation/

Thankfully the Wyoming Bill passed.

@gardenbird48

You are calling a woman who campaigns against Female Genital Mutilation transphobic because she will not agree to dilute her message and confuse people by referring to FGM victims as individuals with a cervix so as not to upset people who are female but don't wish to be referred to as such but are extremely unlikely ever to be a victim of FGM.

She's clearly slightly transphobic, yes. She has never said "it's because I don't want to dilute my message that I don't want to include trans men." When she talks about women, she's explicitly referring to biology, as do most posters here - it's trans exclusionary, the very definition of transphobic.

Her views are mild compared with the typical level of transphobia here and amongst the reactionary and religious right. She is doing good work, and I think it's misplaced to call her on this when there are so many more worthy targets. It's entirely possible to be a great fighter for a good cause and still have blind spots.

I did think that the trans man who asked for more inclusive language deserved a better response than "Not interested bye"

I don't think a campaigner against genital mutiliation should exactly be target number one for people who want language which is inclusive trans men. There are many better causes, and more transphobic individuals.

You are calling a woman who campaigns against Female Genital Mutilation transphobic because she will not agree to dilute her message and confuse people by referring to FGM victims as individuals with a cervix so as not to upset people who are female but don't wish to be referred to as such but are extremely unlikely ever to be a victim of FGM.

Ok.

Or in other words not every trans person tries to dominate and control women via a very stringent and damaging ideology, that behaviour is limited to a very vocal minority.