Billy Bragg's 'sexuality' - is 'trans' a sexuality?

The majority are currently backing away at max speed from the 'fact' that has been pushed for ages that people can and do change sex.

'identify as female' etc is going fast.

As usual. When a statement of truth for recitation becomes widely seen as ??? then a new direction is implemented quickly.

The goalposts are constantly jumping about, along with a sincere denial that the previous position was never the case.

There is, as anyone who's actually thought this through has realised, absolutely no way at all to separate out a sufficient degree of transition from no transition at all, nor to gatekeep which males enter female spaces. If it's any one at all then it's all. The End. (for females)

Exactly. I don't use the word "transitioned" because it's not universally understood to have one meaning, it's therefore obfuscatory and confusing, probably by design. I also don't make any distinction between the motivations or legitimacy of males in female spaces. There should be none.

It is, I think, an example of the Dunning Kruger effect. Trans women observe female people from the outside - how we live, how society treats us, what "everyone knows" about us - but believe their knowledge of what it is to actually BE a woman is just as complete as that of someone who is one.

Undoubtedly the same goes the other way, and the things I believe I know about what it is to be a trans woman are flawed and superficial. The difference is that I am not trying to insist that my conception of a trans woman overrides her own, only that her conception of womanhood should not override mine.

I really really wish that gender ideology had not gone down this route of demanding that TWAW and TMAM. I think we could learn lot and support each other very well if we were only free to acknowledge we are not the same thing. I wish I could have those open conversations with trans people about how the world looks from behind their eyes vs mine, but we cannot do that as long as I have to pretend there is no difference between us other than transphobia.

It's ironic that in insisting we are the same, genderists force us to focus on and highlight our differences, whereas if they allowed us to be different and where necessary separate without issue, we would most likely be coming together around our similarities.

[quote abitofadvice1234]**@Artichokeleaves* and @ArabellaScott*

Just saw the article you were referencing. I thought by “male trans woman” you were saying just, well, any trans woman. Now I see that (I think?) you meant untransitioned.

Yeah that person shouldn’t have been there.[/quote]
So special privileges for even more special people within the special group? Not Stonewall's acceptance without exception then?

The person whether transitioned or not should not have been there, full stop, the end. This should have been a single sex space for females only. Other spaces and services are provided within the organisation for TW whatever their state of transition.

Women want and are entitled to female only spaces that are free from any and all males, to deny them that is misogynistic, discriminatory and in a number of circumstances downright dangerous.

Women were not put on this earth to be your validation tools, human shields or collateral damage, we are not some subhuman support creature we are human, we are entitled to our rights, we are entitled to be treated equally under the law.

I thought by “male trans woman” you were saying just, well, any trans woman. Now I see that (I think?) you meant untransitioned.

Yeah that person shouldn’t have been there.

Do we have another transitioned male gatekeeping 'womanhood' then? Like we don't see this almost daily on this board. Transitioned males who fully believe they 'pass' but agree that others who don't should not be allowed to enter female spaces. Like THEY have somehow earned the right to enter female spaces themselves in any way rather than just taking that entitlement for themselves.

I really cannot believe how often we see it. In fact, I think I have just seen in on another thread last night from a transitioned male that doesn't pass at all. Still pointing out though that 'passing privilege' is alive and well.

That the extreme hypocrisy behind that gatekeeping seems to be ignored, or simply not seen is something to behold though. That requires some degree of self-focus and that in itself is quite telling as it is certainly not the case with female socialisation.

Thank you Arabella, this turned into a very enlightening thread again.

To be honest @abitofadvice1234 is another example of what my learning experience on these boards have taught me.

I used to feel so very sorry for struggling transwomen. And I used to think that I personally would be happy to share certain single sex spaces with them but that I couldn’t speak for all women.

But is is always the same. Here is yet another poster who is so full of their own tragic story that there isn’t an iota of empathy for what biological women are going through.

So convinced that they have a special right to enter any female place they want that they don’t stop to think about other traumatised women for a second. In fact, they are rude about them.

This makes me feel that I am not perceived as a real person. This might be a bit of a newsflash but almost every single woman has experienced sexual harassment or assaults. Some have absolutely horrific experiences. And guess what, the majority of the people who are pushed into prostitution are biologically female.

Female socialisation tells us to emphasise deeply with any suffering person and try to alleviate this suffering. But women need to wake up to the fact that in most cases this empathy only goes one way.

Anyone who feels that their trauma trumps any trauma of any biological woman and that they have a superior right of access is pushing the boundaries of the most vulnerable in society.

And I don’t want to share any single sex space at all, not even a communal toilet with single cubicles with them.

And yes, it has to be law.

I think it's been destruction tested by all this that males will not respect or consider female needs or rights out of choice, good will, sisterhood or anything else, regardless of how they identify. There have to be strong, unbreakable boundaries that prevent males simply taking everything and ruling everything. Since females trying to talk about their needs, to reason with males focused on their own wishes and feelings and interests, don't even succeed in being static on those males' radar. They just don't see females as real people, they are utterly unable to listen or understand the female experience as it's just plain not relevant to them and their interests. It's proven over and over again in real time on these threads.

The whole idea of 'asking' buys into this ongoing and phenomenally misogynistic belief that female rights, services, spaces, are something belonging to males that they might gift a few bits out to females if they're good girls. Sometimes. But only of course if it suits males at the time. Like single sex spaces.

Which we could have until male people wanted to come into them.

There is, as anyone who's actually thought this through has realised, absolutely no way at all to separate out a sufficient degree of transition from no transition at all, nor to gatekeep which males enter female spaces. If it's any one at all then it's all. The End. (for females)

And as Arabella says, for some women, that single one lovely wholly transitioned TW is still male and will still exclude them from women's services or indeed any services at all. Hence the issue mentioned on several threads today where male service users have access to a male group, a trans group, AND a mixed sex women's group and can take their preferred choice. Women get one option only with no choice, and any who find the mixed sex women's group inaccesible get refused any service.

It's male supremacism. I'm not up for it. I'm not supporting this total lack of ability to see female people as equally human, take the slightest interest in their lives or voices or needs, while stripping out their provision to male benefit and patting the heads of the little sillies who don't see their lives should be revolving around their betters.

Who in this position would?

Trans people are welcome to do and be and access whatever services they like, have all the services, have a lovely time, go crack on. The only interest I have is that female people get equal access, consideration and parts of the world that male people haven't ripped away from them because they feel more important and more entitled.

That's nothing to do with being trans, that's to do with being exceptionally bloody sexist.

@Artichokeleaves and @ArabellaScott

Just saw the article you were referencing. I thought by “male trans woman” you were saying just, well, any trans woman. Now I see that (I think?) you meant untransitioned.

Yeah that person shouldn’t have been there.

So given that I suppose the position of so many LGB+ people is more understandable for the males at least.

Their understanding is putting on a frock. Their experience tells them.Gay men. No threat to women. This is persecution again.

Women understanding. Due to experience and I suspect reading news about sex offences against women more. And things that have happened to friends. Man women's stuff esp places where men not around. Warning bells. Likely creepy perve. Danger.

That at least explains a big part of the total disagreement. For some.

Oh and meant to say.

Gay men > men in 'women's' clothes in their experience = gay, no threat to women, seen as particularly bad to police when gay illegal.

Natural part of their movement, the fight for rights.

Creepy men who wank at schoolgirls in parks, while wearing knickers. Perves who steal women's underwear, get a sexual kick out of sniffing, wearing. Putting knickers on and having a wank. Men who commit serious sex offences and take the victims knickers. That sort of stuff.

Those men have got to be heterosexual or the vast majority.

Men in general including gay men likely won't have that on their radar at all.

Agree-

The men who sometimes/ often donned dresses for drag, were transsexual gay men... etc who were gay and it has been for a long time a thing here at least, part of gay culture.

Obviously in gay 'community' because they were gay. Given that men adopting aspects of appearance that are coded feminine IE female. Doing that has been considered evidence of homosexuality for yonks. Being Christ caught in a frock in years gone by often big consequences. And still all over the world.

The other part is back to... Bio sex and enforced sex role.

Heterosexual men in general are freaked out by the by the idea of male/male penetrative sex. In particular being penetrated. That tramples a massive part of gender role. Men do the penetrating. And see it as a dominant act. Women are penetrated. Dominated, they submit.

You can see this very clearly in multiple everyday things.

For het men the idea of a man being penetrated with another man's penis is an outrage. For the one doing the penetration it's not as bad. Any hole a goal etc. All that nasty stuff.. For other man he's seen as taking the female role. A man who does that is the antithesis of what it means to be a man in a fundamental way. Allowing himself to submit, to be dominated.

I some info about a country earlier and their law said caught sex, penetrator gets lashes I think it was. Other man gets prison and I think maybe death penalty.

And so a man dressed in women's clothes? Taken as a pointer that they enjoy the submissive role in sex. An affront.

^^

The above is all about the way men (some/many) think.

Not my views in any way.

First line should say, is was because they were understood to be gay men.

I think the inclusion of transexuals in peoples minds in relation to homosexuality is because a lot of male transexuals were understood to be gay men who were presenting as women. It was their homosexuality that was the common denominator. Drag might also have contributed to that perception, no one really thought gay men in drag had a female identity in the way a woman did. It was a performer identity, like Ziggy Stardust.

Men with AGP weren't nearly as visible and not all clinics would even allow them to transition. I wonder too if they weren't rarer at that time, given that it was expected they have full medical transition. They would be more likely to function as transvestites which was often kept private.

So it was the commonality of their sexuality that was the connection.

Cross dressing has at least in UK has been a part of gay 'scene' for years. Not everyone likes it but drag etc is definitely a think. Not cross dressing for sexual reasons but still wearing 'women's' clothes.

Old school trans-sexuals were often gay men. Males who were gay = part of gay population.

That's why the T was included. For gay men, whether it was their thing or not. Plenty men in some kind of dresses etc.

And so it would have seemed almost a given that males wearing dresses etc were part of that group.

Bottom line is that it's all gone arse about face.

It's based in the stereotypes. The princess prince stuff.

Women fancy men. Women like dresses and girls nights in. Being attractive to men is very important. You wait for the Prince. He chooses you. You flirt and simper and like cake. Etc.

Men fancy women. Men are big and strong. Men attract women with things like money, being funny, being persistent. Looks are less important. Men are above frivolous things that women like. They are natural leaders and women tend to demurr (SP?) to them.

Etc etc.

They all come from constructed roles. At population level, all over the world and whatever the norms. They do not fit many people at all really. And the whole lot? Very rare.

And they stem from the thing that leads to it all. Sex and sexuality.

Putting the (varying) roles as the key rather than what it all stems from- sex and sexuality. Is back to front.

Sorry for essay!

If a person is homosexual then there are still roles/ stereotypes. I don't have deep knowledge at all. And of course where came from is a mix. Decades ago and probably around the world various signals were/ are adopted to subtly signal homosexuality.

In the end any norms for lesbians/ gay men stem from the sexuality. They are constructed just like for heterosexual people. There are variations to express aspects of yourself but it's all constructed.

It all flows from bio sex, and sexuality.

Because it's all constructed and enforced across the board.

The constructions are based on things that in the end suit men way more than women in general.

Some men and some women find it all quite easy to get along with, feel comfy with this.

Of course loads don't.

This is all feminist stuff and has been for yonks.

Just catching up.

ABIT thanks for your posts. It's really interesting to read posts like yours which are thoughtful and provoke discussion even if there a disagreements.

I have always agreed with you on sexuality being a key, one of if not the most important parts of enforced gender roles. I don't tend to get much agreement when I mention it and understand why but to me it's clear.

Heterosexuality is massive in sex role. Pushed like mad and constantly from tiny.

The beautiful princess gets saved by the handsome prince and they get married and happily ever after.

The enormous amount of entertainment from across history having boy meets girl as Central or secondary or even just there because that's what's done.

I mean. Romeo and Juliet. Plenty of ancient Greek legends. (Not great at history there will be countless!). Indiana Jones.. Star wars. The constant bollocks male pleasing idea that the man who is weird, hopeless, incapable of communication, is a sex pest/ minor sex offender. Or just a total sexist arsehole who treats her like shit... Etc etc.

And he gets the way out of his League gorgeous woman every time. Or realises that the quiet best friend who's in love with him is the one for him.

I mean it's endless.

Heterosexual.
Having a partner is imperative and it's fine for men to do all sorts of shit to get the girl.
And she always falls for this utter dick.
Man is pretty much always pursuer and woman is hassled until bizarrely thinks he's the one.

So yes it's a huge part of gender role and feeds into so much from male female dynamics, attire, different roles etc.

That's where we part though I think.

I’m sorry to get pithy. That woman is probably struggling quite a bit and it was uncalled for me to be rude about it. She’s probably having an incredibly hard time getting through the process and any roadblock in the process to accessing resources for trauma recovery can be heartbreaking. I should have had more empathy in the moment. She deserves it.

The woman in question should NOT have to have an incredibly hard time to access a single sex rape crisis service ffs. How big of you to admit you should have had empathy for her, it speaks volumes that you didn't.

This is what your gender ideology agenda leads to - no spaces that are single sex for women, none. The exclusion of women at their most vulnerable and when they are in the most danger, slow hand clap, how very fucking progressive, how very fucking great for women.

abit several people, me included, shared sympathy for your abuse. It didn't go unheard or unrecognised.

What you have failed to do in your educating females is listen to or take on board anything they have to say. You see your visit here as to give females food for thought and enlighten them; they have no food for thought to give you. And your posts are very much centred all around you.

You keep explaining your part in the group known as women. However I wish you had more time and empathy for other women, in the same way you require it from other women and reproach them for not providing you with what you feel is enough of it. You force team with them, but you don't see them as equal to you and their voices are not of interest. Their needs and issues are not of interest. You don't want to know or engage.

Yes. It's been food for thought. It always is.