I know this has been done to death... transactivism v feminism

[Lo24]

I know, I know...

It's just no matter what I read or who I talk to I still can't find an answer that makes sense to me.

I'm happy for anyone to be whoever they want. I don't believe the blue brain/pink brain crap (science doesn't support it) but I still support anyone who feels they need to transionition (fully or otherwise).

It seems so awful that (amoung other human rights violations) Trump is removing laws that protect trans kids. But the argument (the only one I see thrown over the Internet, bashing radical feminists) is the idea anyone who feels like a woman is one, whether or not they transion in any form.

I have 4 young girls. I don't want them left at risk because teachers can not challenge boys who follow them into the toilets because that would be transphobia. If they ever have to (god forbid) access female prisons, dv shelters, psychiatric hospital I want them to have protected female only space.

Yet mention this to transactivists and it's transphobic and makes me a radical feminist. I don't particularly care about the rad fem argument that trans renforces general roles, or that it's body dismorphia and should be treatment by mental health professionals, I don't care for Germaine Greer's stance on the 'issue'. So I don't have a radical stance on this. I just don't want female rights protection eroded. I'm sure any trans person who has transioned in some form won't pose a risk, but if anyone who terms themselves a woman must be allowed access to female only spaces then that protects predatory men from being challenged also. But I can't say that or I get accused of accusing trans people of being predators. Ahhh!!!!

Anyone know the answer? Is there any form or transgender activism that recognises that eroding female protections doesn't help trans women either? Or any literature by anyone trans that gives a better argument than the 'everyone who says they are a woman is one and if you don't agree you are a bigot' line of thought. Help!

Maid I don't doubt that it is important to recognise that gender is imposed based on biological sex. FGM happens to iron and women, and not males, because of abusive of power over their biological sex.

I grew up in care. From 10 onwards anyways. Because of the abuse that happened to me prior. Which happened because I was born female.

But I also think what a woman is is something that women take and redefine in so many different ways all the time, and allways have. So I guess I'm not used to an easily set definition. Certainly my running away and climbing trees and fighting and living in tracksuits and being loud and impulsive and entitled never made any of the professionals who oversaw my case think I was really a boy.

Girls and women

Women can define their roles/expectations/awards ceremony dress as they see fit. Assuming their society and culture allows them to. 'Woman' should have no definition.

Females have a fanny (of some kind, at birth). Probably ovaries. Make some eggs. Any of the above.

The assigned at birth thing bothers me as well because it makes so many daft assumptions - that having a doctor at a birth is universal, that sexing humans is some complex procedure, rather than being what happens at a typical birth in human history, i.e. two women take a look at a baby's genitals and say it's a girl or it's a boy because in the vast vast majority of cases it's obvious.

I am probably on much more of the transphobic end of the spectrum than most as I believe being transgender is a cultural response to a divided, sexist society, or in some cases a survivor's response to abuse or suffering. Completely legitimate in those forms and to be supported in adults in terms of helping people survive in ways that don't hurt anyone else, but in no way a change of sex, and not a way to exclude others.

Is this the fourth or fifth wave of feminism? Probably not, as it feels remarkably similar to the others, when again and again women are literally pushed back onto our arses.

OP - as in its society's the construct those roles, often patriarchy, and assign to female gender, as opposed to the idea that world wide and through out history a role of woman has allways been set.

Yes, I know that. But what you said was
I don't think there is a set definition of women either, it's certainly not biological sex because there are other cultures ... etc.

My point is, there IS a set definition of woman, and it IS based on biology. The cultures you refer to are not evidence against this. They are evidence for it - they assign gender roles based on physical sex characteristics. Doesnt matter what those roles are, the point is that there is a distinction based on SEX.

YY bbcnewsrave.

Because of the abuse that happened to me prior. Which happened because I was born female.

But I also think what a woman is is something that women take and redefine in so many different ways all the time, and allways have. So I guess I'm not used to an easily set definition.

You are female. You are an adult. This means that you are a woman.

Anything else is personality, interests, the way youve been encouraged to behave, etc etc.

But the definition of woman is, and should remain - adult human female.

I'm sorry about what you've been through

Bbc ok fair enough. I was just meaning it's not a set roll like we see in western society's world over, or historically. There are matriarchal communities, so different definition of women. And not all cultures have dinstinct roles based on sex, there are some tribes where it's more interchangeable and no value is attached to any role.

But 'woman' is gender role, it's constructed by whatever society we are born in, female is biological sex. The two are connected but the definition isn't that limited to biological sex. And I don't need you to be sorry, that's a somewhat patronising little pat on the head.

And ofcourse there's survivors who are multipul. Which I guess many don't come across first hand but I have due to my past and work. They may have the body of a female but have identities that are male as well as female, girls as well as boys, and some have alters that have no gender- all despite the body remaining female and society terming them a woman.

Anyways I have to go to sleep, my pain Meds are full on and I'm back to limping around at work tomorrow. So thanks for the reading suggestions and goodnight

I thought woman was the name for an adult female human?
Then there are women's roles which are changeable depending on society but that's not the same as women.

But many of the meaningful commonalities of being a woman are based on our biology, not gender. Or expectations around that. And most of the socialisation that women receive is founded in our roles as the sex and reproductive class, however that differs across space and time.

I wasn't trying to be patronising, I was trying to express that I am genuinely sorry you have been through abuse.

I am also aware of multiples. Doesn't stop someone being a man or a woman in reality.

Don't patronise me by assuming I am too thick to understand the concept of gender roles, or that different societies have different gender roles, or more relaxed ones. I'd like us to aim for a society without gender roles.

The fact that gender roles are not innate is exactly why transgender claims of men being women (and vice versa) don't stand up to scrutiny. Men, by definition, cannot be women. Unless you try to define woman as something other than a biological reality.

It's interesting, as my immediate reaction to much of this thread as a 21 year old, is complete shock that many of you would have these views. And I would bet that the majority of my friends and other people my age would react the same way. I'm not meaning to offend in saying that, just that it is interesting there is such a division of opinion, seemingly with the under 21's as I would not dare to say anything against trans rights to friends of mine, as I would no doubt be dubbed a transphobe.

Many people I know would equate critiquing trans people in toilets according to their chosen gender, to disagreeing with same-sex relationships or gay rights. Again, just commenting on the passion that many younger people feel towards protecting trans rights. Perhaps that is to do with the increasing fear of being seen as a bigot, but I wonder what trans rights will look like in 10, 15, 30 years, as the people around me seem to think it will go the same way as gay rights, in that it won't be a big deal in years to come, it will just be accepted that your gender is determined by your brain, rather than your genitals.

Many people I know would equate critiquing trans people in toilets according to their chosen gender, to disagreeing with same-sex relationships or gay rights

Why though? That sounds a bit of a lazy comparison, just like they couldn't be arsed to think about it particularly deeply. It's quite a lot more complex, but people don't do themselves any favours when they can't put forward an argument on its own merits but have to appropriate other people's. That, I think is why they're so much in favour of censoring any challenge to their views. Because in a fair debate they would be out of their depth.

I would not dare to say anything against trans rights to friends of mine, as I would no doubt be dubbed a transphobe.

Not having a pop, but do you think that this is a good thing?

Cos that doesnt sound like debate

Dear user1479, thank you for providing the perspective of a 21 year old, in this environment it is essential to hear voices from across the age continuum. I think some people of my age group (late 50's) do find the concept of "trans" as being difficult to comprehend as historically it has only affected a tiny proportion of people but seemingly overnight it has exploded "centre stage" and has taken many people unawares. I have tried to find out as much as possible about this high profile phenomenon as it seems to be in the media on an almost daily basis and sadly see intolerance on both sides of the debate. It seems time for an open and honest discussion to allay concerns without fear of being attacked, rebuked or subjected to disturbing comments.

User1479, speaking as a lesbian, I'd say that elements of the trans movement are distinctly misogynistic and homophobic. If anything they're pushing gay rights backwards.

Lesbians are receiving abuse for being attracted to our own sex and not being interested in penises. Regardless of how the penis owners identify, this is part of a long-standing tradition of lesbophobic rape culture.

Gender nonconforming children who would probably have developed into gay adults post-puberty are being put on prostate cancer drugs with horrible side effects so that their brains and bodies never go through the changes that would have probably reconciled them to their bodies. Instead it's on to cross-sex hormones and a life on medication. But hey, at least they're not gay.

As for gender being determined by your brain... Gender is a thoroughly misogynistic concept full of stereotypes, and the idea of pink & blue brains is just as bad. I'm a lesbian working in IT who isn't interested in kids, likes to work out and isn't bad at DIY. Does that mean I have a man brain?

I'm a woman because of my biological sex. That's it.

My view is that gender is determined by your culture and your upbringing, not your brain and definitely not your genitals. Performing masculinity or femininity is something you do within a culture, for cultural reasons IMO.

But I agree user that it's good for people like me, in my little liberal bubble, to suddenly find myself arguing against change and wanting a conservative approach on this issue. I'm not a radical any more, oh no! Except apparently I am a radical, I'm a TERF. Thanks TAs, that makes me sound a lot more exciting than I really am.

User1479, I'm genuinely curious about how your young friends deal with the reality of women and men being biologically different in ways other than genitals - specifically, women's lower muscle mass and strength in general, and periods/ child bearing. What about men getting prostate v women getting breast cancer too, as an example? Those are not simply some airy-fairy concept of gender - those are real differences that lead to real, practical and different needs between biological male and females.

How do they propose that the different needs of women be addressed?All I've heard is that they want those practical needs to vanish in favour of their emotional ones.

"it is interesting there is such a division of opinion, seemingly with the under 21's as I would not dare to say anything against trans rights to friends of mine, as I would no doubt be dubbed a transphobe."
I've been thinking about that, and why it might be. I think there are many reasons, none of them overwhelming on their own, but together forming a perfect storm.

I am in my fifties now, and I can remember when I was younger my general reluctance to challenge authority. A mix of faith in my 'elders and betters' having more knowledge than me on which to base their ideas, a lack of confidence on my own part, the prevailing culture of deferring to authority and expertise. 'Authority' looked solid and dependable against my uncertain and faltering individuality. I was in my thirties before I had the confidence in my own knowledge to challenge the 'prevailing wisdom'. Transactivists have successfully positioned themselves as the authority here.

Then there's the digital divide. A sweeping generalisation, but I think younger people are more likely to get their news online via their phone whilst I still have a newspaper habit. Fake news and opinion masquerading as news is a bit more convincing online, newspapers are a bit more careful else the libel court beckons. Add in the echo chamber effect (people only connecting to attitudes akin to their own) and you get people being exposed to a narrower range of input online, which reinforces the message and suggests that there really isn't any other messages to listen to.

Then there's the fear of being labelled a bigot. Only my personal opinion, but I think I was a lot more concerned by other people's opinions of me when I was younger. Nowadays - not so much. This one is particularly important. For comparison, consider the Rotherham child abuse case. Those in authority were more concerned that they would be accused of racism, than they were about the terrible things happening to the children. So, they ignored the abuse and threw the children under the bus, but hey, nobody could accuse them or racism. Transphobism is the new racism - nobody wants to be accused of it. Hence the transactivists throwing the term around anytime their agenda is questioned, frightening people out of asking questions.

There are more factors adding their own pressures. but this could end up a massively long post, so I'll leave it there. Suffice to say, I think it is human nature that the young will accept the transactivist line at face value more easily, whilst an old cynic like myself will be inclined to ask questions and work out that if x then y will lead to z, and z worries me.

Great post, Where.

Yep, great post where