to think Deborah Orr is stirring it nearly as much as Burchill, just less rudely?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

Guardian article:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/19/feminism-trans-women-female-enough

I have never heard anybody except antiquated misogynists make out that female gender identity is all about your reactions to tools used for housework, and male gender identity is all about your desire to play sport. And whatever else Orr is saying, she does seem to think that is a valid point to make about how men and women identify with their genders.

I can see this columnist is making interesting points about how she'd feel female even if her body wasn't there because it's inside her mind. But isn't it really fucking offensive to, well, everyone in this debate that she seems to think being transsexual is basically about not liking how society treats the gender you were born?

I mean seriously - I am gobsmacked:

'I have a memory of when I was very young. I remember trying to persuade myself that perhaps little girls grew up to become men, and little boys grew up to become women. Even at that age, I knew it was impossible, that of course it didn't work that way.

I know, too, exactly what inspired that strange wish. My father had bought my mother a new iron for her birthday, and my mother had been really upset.'

(Btw, this is not a thread about a thread, but if you were sensibly hiding under a rock last week and didn't hear about Julie Burchill kicking up a shitstorm and various other people kicking one up back, that's what this article was clearly prompted by.)

And she has been deliberatly provocative or obtuse with the "opressed" bit.

I've spent what, a week tops?, digging about in this, and not cos I needed research for a proper published article or anything. Even with that little background and reading I managed to become aware that the "Oppression Olympics" (aided and abetted by the "Priviledge Punch Up") is a two way (if not 12 way when you count all the inter sub-set fighting) street.

Yes, spot on.

This why I did wonder if it wasn't stirring a bit.

Maybe she was being accidentaly patronising ?

Possible that they said "Hey Debs, let's squeeze some more page views put of this FemVTrans bust up, do us a post JB peice"

And she did.

Does she normally write about this stuff or is it a bit off the beaten track for her ?

Mmm. Difficult to see how she could be that accidentally patronizing, you know? Because even if it's because she was oblivious to the debate and just cracked this one out in a hurry, that's still pretty patronizing because it's like she thinks this debate is so simple/trivial, she doesn't need to know much to judge what's going on.

I've not particularly noticed her as a poor writer before, TBH.

Definitely a bit off the beaten track. She does write about feminism occasionally but the tone always feels a bit wrong, in a similar way... essentially, she likes to criticise feminists but doesn't know enough about what she's criticising for her argument to make sense.

It's a shame as on a lot of other subject I actually really rate her.

Difficult to see how she could be that accidentally patronizing, you know?

Well, I'm thinking of the sexy thread on a similar terrain. The occasional poster was employing what looked knee jerky statements based on a "right on" kind of process. I don't think that was deliberate, just ...didn't like the implications of what was being said.

Ergo, DO might have gone for the simple , RadFems bad, Transgendered people Good....massive black and white view with an ill thought out and very superficial attempt to empathise, to strengthen own "right on" credentials and to bash out an article without straining the deadline.

And if she is a bit off feminists in general, that will have aded more filters.

On the other hand, the media does love the click based income from a good bun fight dragged out to the bitter end, so it could be absolutly deliberate.

With the opression bit she can't avoid pissing off the RadFems and with the "oh I know how you feel ---> please to see iron" bit I think she stands a good chance of utterly belittling the experience of growing up transgendered to the extent of causing offence.

shite article presumably written quickly to fill space rather than actually researched.

I don't know nearly enough about the whole trans thing to begin to understand what people in this position feel or why they feel the way they do. But one thing I do know is how much isn't known about gender and the brain - we really don't understand very much.

You can't make sweeping assertions about brain architecture and gender because there simply isn't the evidence to back them up. In terms of medical science, MRI scanners have only been around for a very short time, so there hasn't been enough research done. And it'll probably turn out to be far more complex than brain architecture alone anyway.

I do wonder, however, how someone 'knows' they are a woman (or a man) when they don't have a male or female body. I've always been female so never had to question why I feel female - I just am. How do you know you are female when your body says different?

How do you know you are female when your body says different?

I think for some people it is just as uncomplicated as it is for you and me.

Quite literally..."I just am"

What that means in terms of "what does being a woman mean/feel like" on an innate level I don't know. I can't climb into a transwoman's head and try on for size what "I am a woman" means to her, anymore than she can climb into my head and see what it means for me.

Would be brill if we could though, cos then we could exchange notes and work out if and where any marked differences in terms "am a woman" occurred, or not.

But we'd need a lot of people doing it cos otherwise it wouldn't be scientific. (she says, about the entirely sci-fi concpet of climbing into somebody else's head)

Her columns are always rubbish. Below the main one she goes on to suggest that the sad death of the pedestrian in the helicopter accident is some sort of symbol of workers being oppressed by the rich people who can afford flats along the river. She is nuts.

I read what she wrote but I'm not sure what she said. Sounded a bit like they wanted somebody to say something on the subject but wanted them to say nothing that would upset anybody. I don't I'll be going out my way to read her column.

Loquace - true but I'm still puzzled. If someone is born in a man's body, how do they know what being a woman is?

A couple of friends of mine set up this site :Transpartners, aimed at partners of TG people. Have a peek.

(Hope it's working. I've just changed browsers and it's playing up a bit and all the pages are blank, but I think that's me.)

It's a pretty witless article all round. "If feminism is about anything, it's about helping others to feel as confident and supported as possible." Er, not really. I mean that would be nice and all, but women didn't chain themselves to railings because feminism was just a kind of cuddly group therapy.

If someone is born in a man's body, how do they know what being a woman is?

Well, I guess in the same way I saw boys and girl, identified with the girls, and less so with the boys in terms "we are tribe" then maybe a transgendered child would have a similar (but sort of opposite and more confusing for them) experience.

In the sense that they see that in term of expectations and physical features "sameness" when they look at boys and the obvious connection on that level, but in their "heart, soul" and mind they identify with girls in terms of "we are tribe".

Something like that perhaps ?

If someone is born in a man's body, how do they know what being a woman is?

Ohsorry, answered the question but not in the way you asked it.

Hope it's working

Working for me.

edam - I don't know how someone knows that their body is not aligned with their gender. I don't know that feeling, as I've always felt that I was in the right body. But I wouldn't deduce from my own experience that it therefore must be the same for everyone else.

I don't believe gender identity is simply nurture. It's a bit more complicated than that.

If there was no innate gender identity, why did David Reimer not accept his assigned gender? There was no way he could have known about that he was born with a penis, but lost it due to malpractice.

Well I've flicked through the sections and had a good look at the sections. Tiggy. Adimitedly I've only done a superficial read, and while I think it does a better job than some in terms of unintesionally creating a resource for couples that feels more about helping thr the husband cope and the wife supporting, it still feels like it is overly heavily focused on trans issues and not so much on and bombselled wives.

Even the few sections focused on the reeling wife have a strong whiff of working towards acceptance, turning away from her anger and betrayal and instead seeking to "work past" everything as the most obvious and best choice.

I come at this with prejudice, having had a freind go through this and having come under intense pressure from the people involved in a similar respuce to set herself aside in the name of not being a bigot. So maybe I'm reading things into to it.

But I would have liked to have seen sections on "what if you can't?" and how to divorce well in such a situation, especially if kids are involved.

Also a place/forum where women who can't cope, accept and go on can talk to other women who have walked that path and can support them. It seems more like a resource for couples who stay together, leaving the wives that can't somewhat out in the cold. And how can a "new discovery" wife get a full picture if she only hears the views of thempeople who chose to stay?

Otherwise it feels all a bit too one sided. Given that wives of trandgendered people in some studies have scored higher than average in terms of poor self esteem I feel an overly and overwelming focus NOT at all being on the wife is an issue.

But obviously accept I need to read the site more deeply before coming to a firm conclusion.

But just to illustrate why I can feel my hackles rising already

"He needs to understand why you feel as you do, the effect it's had on you, your fears and concerns about where you both go from here - and how can he do that if you're not communicating ?"

Maybe I'm the only one and it's my issue, but ....how come it's framed as her fault ?

It's just one example of several seemingly small and unimportant wordings, but I think it matters.

But will read more deeply with as open a mind as possible.

kim - I totally understand (I did wonder if maybe everyone would be commented out). Thanks for coming to say hi though. Sorry about shitty comments.

It is a husband and wife effort. I understand what you mean about what if you can't. I believe Relate changed their name because a managed separation is often better than an un-savable marriage. I'll pass on the comments.