Can we have a 'back-to-basics' thread about trans issue please?

I can also recommend the "Gender : A Wider Lens" podcast with Stella O'Malley and Sasha Ayad.

It's a really interesting discussion on the whole issue from a psychological point of view, with some interesting interviews as well.

'However - isn't this meant to make the language inclusive to trans men? If we as feminists want to include all female people then is there an argument for using this language in certain specific contexts?'

You cannot assume the gender of anyone.

So if it's eg people with vaginas who are being subject to a thing, you can't say women (as that includes transwomen) and you can't say women and trans men for the same reason. Cis women, trans men and non binary people who are female (actually I don't think you could say that last bit) would be no good as you can't assume all the females who aren't trans men or non binary are cis.

So in any situation where you are referring to cunty people (usage started years ago as a tongue in cheek point) you would need to use people with vaginas (which is ironically not that far from calling us cunty people).

Hibari answered the question clearly.

The use of people with vaginas sometimes and women (but meaning people with vaginas) other times by the same orgs makes me really angry.

Where is the clarity and consistency? People are expected to assume what sort of women are being referred to by the context which means different people will take different meanings from the same text.

So no people with vaginas and yes we need words to replace female woman girl if they now include people with penises which they seem to.

I have several Transwomen friends and am still totally puzzled by it all. All of them were 'men' for a large part of their lives, and now seem to view their own 'womanhood' in terms of equality and being 'feminine'. Most of the time this doesn't really bother me, but I am left puzzled.

I don't believe there is such a thing as an exclusively 'female' brain. No-one has been able to explain to me exactly how such a thing could be defined. I certainly don't think it's to do with nurturing or liking pink! Indeed, I share many of the so-called 'male' characteristics e.g. spatial and technical skills, etc., but I still consider myself as a woman, because that's how society has treated me. I'm old enough to remember actual legal discrimination on the basis that I have different body parts. .

My real worry is that this polarisation is setting equality backward, as the focus moves further towards differentiation on the basis of perceived differences. Surely, the key to equality is treating everyone as uniquely themselves, without discriminating on the basis of different body parts or feelings? The only exception being where physically weaker humans (mostly natal women) are at physical risk from larger and angrier males.

To a certain extent that may just be my personality as I tend to see all sides of things and find it hard to come down on a side.

I feel the same, and have come to realise that a key tactic of the TRAs is to send out the message that there are only 2 options in this debate- you are either pro trans rights (which means agreeing that TWAW for all purposes and based on self ID) or transphobic.

The resources etc on here have been really helpful to me in unpicking this. It is perfectly possible to be support both trans rights and women's rights- but to do so you first need to acknowledge that they are not the same.

Why aren't they asking why? Why are there so many children with gender dysphoria? What's causing it? If the doctors are the end point, and are just reacting to demand, who, exactly, is telling these youngsters that accessing irreversible medical treatment is the answer to their dreams?

Very much this ^^ Especially in our own circumstances.

But I think this issue needs to be approached from 2 sides - the teenagers suffering from gender dysphoria, their belief that medical and surgical intervention is the cure; the adults (mostly mtf as far as I can see) who transition and do not embrace surgical intervention or even cross sex hormones in some cases.

For me, those 2 groups are possibly motivated by very different issues. Or maybe 10 or 20 years ago, in a different time, those adults would also have been reaching for puberty blockers and elective surgeries? Who knows.

The impact on women's rights though is the same, we need our words and spaces.

This is important, it was linked on an another thread and I've just read it. A thorough investigation by a trans person into the trans murder figures, which are often touted as indicative of an epidemic of transphobic violence and used to justify silencing and dismissing women's concerns:

www.queermajority.com/currents/tdor-trans-death-and-trans-life

You're welcome, HopeClearwater. It is an excellent and sobering documentary. I recommend watching all four parts.

@EdgeOfACoin I just want to record my thanks for that video link.

Yes indeed. If, as Hiberi thinks, the word woman doesn't relate to biology, the the categories will be 'people with a vagina' for what we call women and 'people with a penis' or people with a neovagina' for transwomen.

It will.

the use of the word "screech" is revealing of the view that women are not allowed to speak, on this, probably not on anything really in your opinion

Quite. So much internalised misogyny.

From the Swedish U turn link:

In the clinical setting we have become familiar with narratives, especially in younger children, resting almost entirely on the most superficial of signifiers: toys, activities, hair, clothes, a certain aesthetic upon which effectively the (self) diagnosis of trans is made, and a social role transition affected. Unfortunately these tropes are compounded and perpetuated by some “diversity” trainings delivered in schools.

genderreport.ca/the-swedish-u-turn-on-gender-transitioning/

So if we are talking about women and ‘slip’ to using biology, Shall we try it the other way.

Would people with simulated or replica body parts like to be called people with (insert neo/implant body part)? People who once had .....(insert body part), I don’t want to continue as I am very much against this style of labeling people. It is incredibly dehumanizing. But here we are.

I posted a link a while back to a group of male transitioners who were complaining about the term penis people or people with penises. Males of all genders don’t seem to like this dehumanisation and are getting vocal.

Yet, women are being pushed to accept it. To be kind.

I find wording like 'systematic rape of people with vaginas' to be extremely dehumanising.

Also simply crass to refer to women in this situation by the organ that identifies them as the ones to be raped, and the part of their body likely to be raped.

It seems utterly crass.

Hibari you say this wording is preferable. I note however that orgs who use this type of language in some circs still refer to women when this type of crime is the headline.

You say they are wrong to do so. Do you have any ideas why they use the language you say is correct in some places but not others?

Can you see at all why 'people with vaginas subject to systematic rape in x situation' is wording I find objectionable? At all?

I will NOT be referred to as a person with a vagina. How dehumanising. My genitals are part of my woman's body. I am a woman.

Person who has a vagina," seems to be slipping in as the easy call for that since modern society has concluded that not everyone with a vag is a woman and not every woman has a vag.

Of course everyone who as a vagina is a woman. Dear lord.

It's quite amazing that grown-up, presumably rational people, will dismiss chromosomes, reproductive characteristics and anatomy, instantly, in a heartbeat, as a sex marker, in favour of...an inexplicable feeling.

attempting to challenge the ideology, countering the baseless claims and holding proponents to account is very difficult. It's met with censorship, silencing and threats

Even asking questions is likely to meet with this response! Which is where 'no debate' kicked in. Luckily we seem to have started to get past the ridiculous idea that women aren't even allowed to discuss their own bodies, rights, experiences and lives.

Quite, Joody.

I would like to say for the record that referring to a woman as a 'person with a vagina' is grossly offensive.

I've seen that trans train documentary before. It's heartbreaking and enlightening in equal measure.

For me, it throws up far more questions than it answers.

The poor young woman who detransitioned berating herself for what she called her stupidity.

The doctor who kept shrugging his shoulders with a 'what were we meant to do whine. Constantly saying that if a patient is in crisis or hates their breasts, they have to operate, right?

Why aren't they asking why? Why are there so many children with gender dysphoria? What's causing it? If the doctors are the end point, and are just reacting to demand, who, exactly, is telling these youngsters that accessing irreversible medical treatment is the answer to their dreams?

Blame is swirling around the doctors, the parents and, unbelievably, the children. But the doctors say, what can we do? We are patient led. The parents say, no-one listens to them. And the child, now older, blames herself.

And OP, you will find, just like every other woman who tries, that attempting to challenge the ideology, countering the baseless claims and holding proponents to account is very difficult. It's met with censorship, silencing and threats.

But I, at least, am heartened by the fact that you are asking. It started as a trickle, but now it's a cascade of people demanding answers.

Don't stop asking.

To a certain extent that may just be my personality as I tend to see all sides of things and find it hard to come down on a side.

That's a good thing!

One thing I would watch closely: how does the trans rights lobby consider the position of girls and women? When someone brings up the prospect of an 11-year-old girl not wanting to get undressed in front of her classmate who had been considered a boy until yesterday, what steps do the TRAs take to see the girl's side? How do TRAs treat the situation of women who have been sexually abused and who wish to have intimate examinations carried out by a biological female? How much compassion do TRAs show for people like Keira Bell, and - crucially - what steps are they taking to ensure that the current cohort of transitioners are not going to regret transitioning further down the line?

Of course, it works both ways. You have to look at how GC women consider perspectives from the other side as well.

There's a good radio programme on BBC Sounds at the moment that isn't specifically about trans but has good info about male/female brains and uses sex, not gender, throughout. It's an episode of Crowdscience called Why Men Rule The World? And features Gina Rippon.
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w3cszv73

since modern society has concluded that not everyone with a vag is a woman and not every woman has a vag.

The second is true, the first is not. Everyone with a vagina is a woman. Whatever they choose to call themselves, however they express themselves. Woman just means adult human female.