WTF India Willoughby Racist tweet

I'd certainly agree transactivists should knock off calling black women a subset off women in a false equivalence to transwomen who they claim are a subset of women but aren't.

Seems a bit off not to listen to them when they are talking.

Also it is possible to listen to someone and not agree with them. I am listening to you but I do not agree that I should change my language based on the argument that you have offered.

Black women (IIRC in this thread too?) have asked people not to refer to them in that way. Isn't that enough?

It's not enough. People make demands of us all the time. If would be impossible to comply with all of them. It is not enough for someone to ask something and expect everyone else to go along with it no questions or critical thinking allowed.

@BatCheeseIsFine thank you for articulating it better.

^ The person India, not the country, before some Monitor reports me for writing off a whole country...

I think the take-home point here is that India is disgustingly racist.

i don’t know about black women asking not be called a subset, but maybe this is in the context of the TW comparison? If not, and they just don’t want to be called a subset, well - they are, just like white women are and every other female group as explained by PPs. But maybe because of the “sub” part it’s been misunderstood and so will end up being replaced by another word. Like withinset or something.

It’s also not insulting to apply mathematical terms to groups of people. If no one did that, how would they be able to use statistics to understand trends, populations and people’s needs and so on?

For example women who need a smear are a subset of women, we need to understand that subset, how many there are and how best to communicate with them. Talking about “subsets” is just part of analysing groups. It’s no more insulting than Vern diagrams.

The word “subset” is not the problem, it’s saying that TW are a subset of women in the same way that black women are that is the problem. A) because they are not - black women are women, trans women are not. And b) because choosing black women for that comparison is racist. If TW are comparable to black women, that’s suggesting black women are like transwomen I.e. not actually female. It’s also dubious to pick black women for this comparison because it shows an assumption that white or non-black women are the default woman and black women are “other”. And this is when TRAs are always insinuating that GC people are all white and there’s a “white feminism” that doesn’t allow black women in, which is bollocks. Loads of black and Asian and other women all over the world are both leading and grassroots feminists and always have been. The whole point of feminism is that it’s about all female people and the persecution and discrimination we all face. But as ever, genderists project.

I can actually see how people think “subset” might be derogatory or insulting - like subnormal, suboptimal, substandard etc. it’s not at all, it just means a group within a larger group. But if gender ideologues thought it meant a lesser kind of women, they wouldn’t say it about TW.

still maybe it will change in meaning and become a proscribed word.

We are not doing maths. We don't need to classify women as mathematical objects!
What a weird fixation!

we aren't just talking about this conversation. We are talking about wider conversations. Black women (IIRC in this thread too?) have asked people not to refer to them in that way. Isn't that enough? Seems a bit off not to listen to them when they are talking.

I'd like the posters who object to "subset" to explain what they think the word means, because we are clearly talking past each other.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_(mathematics)

All of them or just a ....um...

I said 'White women are a relatively small subsection of women.', before this strand of the discussion took hold. We'll probably get told off by someone if we reframe discussions of the use of the word 'subset' and similar in those terms too.

.

"Don't use the word subset even in its correct context because it is offensive, but I am not going to provide alternative wording that will not cause offence".

Got it.

Look I'm not black so I'm not going to speak for black women. I have seen that they have asked us not to call them a subset of women.

You do you.

Mumsnet is like a real life version of Taboo at times.

It really is. Who'd have thought that "subset" would be one of the words assigned to the dustbin of history.

Also if black women are the only women who are no longer a subset of women isn't that rather othering?

Every time a MTF Transitioner (thanks for new description) gets called out, they always revert to aggression and misogyny. It happens every time. So, basically, they act like a horrible man.

Mumsnet is like a real life version of Taboo at times.

What synonym for subset would you prefer us to use? Category?

What term is acceptable when talking about a particular section of adult human females? (I'm assuming 'subsection' is also out.)

I've had it with language control and people telling me what language I should use. If people want to identify out of various categories that's fine but they really can't expect other people to disregard the well established and inoffensive meanings of words to please them. Language is how we communicate. How else can you have a conversation about subsets of groups?

I see it on twitter a lot and on here sometimes. And it's fine, i don't want to make people uncomfortable. If i consistently saw "green eyed women" and "white women" (especially the white women one) are a subset of women, it would be a bit, meh. But i have seen enough people ask us not to.

As for 'cis'. The argument is the same. I don't want people calling me a 'cis' woman because it indicates there are other types of women. There are women and there are trans women. But there are no cis women. And i expect people to respect me when i ask them not to.

Are there really many many black women who object to being classed as a subset of women? I didn’t realise this was a thing.

It’s not really like “cis” though is it? “Cis” requires a person to “identify” with the “sex assigned at birth” which just doesn’t apply to many people. Being a subset of a group isn’t an identity thing.

mathematically, of course, the word subset is fine.

But many many many black women have asked us not to refer to them in that way. And i think that we ought to respect that. In the same way i reject being referred to with the 'cis' epithet.

People only seem to see racism though, ,(good that they can see see and be horrified by!) if you point out transphobic stuff though you get responses like (ridiculous, everything's transphobic nowadays!)

the difference being "why does a 57 year old trans woman need tampons?" is not a transphobic question is it? Break it down if it is. How is it racist?
You could take out "trans" and it's still a valid question. "why does a 57 year old woman need tampons?". It's hardly ageist, is it?

saying using transwomen instead of trans women isn't transphobic. But it is claimed it is.

Asking why trans women can't use a 3rd space then everyone has the space they want isn't a transphobic question. And yet the TRAs claim it is.

Saying that the dictionary definition of a woman is "adult human female" isn't transphobic. TRAs will claim otherwise.

Bearded, besuited chap using the female toilets is told "this is the ladies" and answers that they identify as female and that's transphobic. HOW ARE WE SUPPOED TO TELL.

ad infinitum

So yes, the TRAs do claim things are transphobic which aren't.

Of course white women are a subset of women (because not all women are white).

Black women are a subset of women (because not all women are black).

Asian women are a subset of women (because not all women are Asian).

Curly-haired women are a subset of women (because not all women have curly hair).

Women with degrees are a subset of women (because not all women have degrees).

However, all of the above are women because they are adult human females. We can break that down further:

A junior human female is a girl, so not a 'woman'.
A non-human adult female might be a ewe or a doe or a hen or something else, depending on the non-animal species involved, so not a 'woman'.
An adult human male is a man so not a 'woman'.

Girls are not a subset of women (because they are not adult) but they are a subset of 'females'.

Transwomen are adult and human but not female. (If they were female, they would not be trans.) Therefore, transwomen are not a subset of women.

Transmen on the other hand are adult, human and female and so are a subset of women.

These statements are not racist or transphobic, they are just biological facts.

She didn't equate the two though.
Just pointing out racism, and transphobia.
People only seem to see racism though, ,(good that they can see see and be horrified by!) if you point out transphobic stuff though you get responses like (ridiculous, everything's transphobic nowadays!)

One person asked a reasonable question but missed out a space between the words transgender (trans) and woman.

The other person, in response, called her a 'talentless, bigoted black woman who wouldn't be anywhere without woke.

Not the same at all.

And just now IW has doubled down on those comments on latest twitter post:

Right: Attention hippy trans ✌️and those in the US who have no idea what they’re talking about re my exchange with a Right Wing bigot who happens to be black. Back off. You’re missing the point. Had my fill.#Block
1:59 am · 30 Nov 2022
·Twitter for iPhone