Dead naming and the perversion/erasure of women's history

[CaptSkippy]

For those who are no familiar with the term, "dead naming" refers to the use an old (usually first) name trans-people used to have before they transitioned and took on a new name. It will surprise no one that trans-women get most upset about this an cry bigotry if an old name is used or even alluded to.

But recently I have begun to see the consequences of the widely accepted taboo on these names in full effect, although it should surprise no one that this was going to happen and I think in fact many feminists have been warning us for years (if not decades).

I like to watch videos online about feminist debates and feminists lectures. Some Youtube channels are devoted solely to that purpose. A particular interest of mine is the topic of women's history and how it has been largely left out of the history books.

However, sometimes I will see a speaker or panelist and get a strong impression I am looking at a trans-woman. This is usually brought on by a very distinct masculine mannerism or shape of face.
Sometimes my suspiscions are confirmed when a speaker had access to certain male institutions that were untill recent decades off-limits to women, but are now known as the first women in such an institution (such as Jenner). However, often times Google will tell me nothing, due to the taboo on the subject. If it's not about sports or other male only fields, I can't find anything at all.

I often wonder if I am just paranoid and seeing trans-women where there are none. What galls me is that I can't tell. I can't research it. I can't know who were the first women doing exactly what, due to our exclusion from history books and now I also can't tell sometimes, because we have to accept supposedly former men as "female" pioneers.

Am I unreasonable to be suspicious of certain feminist-minded speakers or I am letting my paranoia getting the better of me?

Well put, this is why we need to keep up the fight.

I thought deadnaming was using the former name in an ongoing social context? I wouldn't deadname anyone whom I know. You cannot actually erase a former name for legal purposes no matter why it was changed eg birth certificates, exam certificates, etc. So, the historical name will always be somewhere. Everyone is entitled to call themselves whatever they like (subject to fraudulent intent, trademarks, etc) and deed polls do not actually have to be enrolled. Gender isn't relevant to a deed poll.

I think you are being paranoid, yes.

I can't understand why people are so scared of trans-women in the first place. I've tried to understand that point of view by reading what is discussed on the feminism forum here, and it all seems completely irrational to me.

I think by sticking to particularly YouTube channels you've probably got stuck in an echo chamber which isn't particularly healthy for you.

I don’t think you are being paranoid. Women and women’s achievements are being erased from history, or even never recorded in the first place.
I am angry that men are being recorded as the first «woman» to achieve something, as it means that the first real woman to do so will receive no accolade.
And I am not scared of transwomen either

It’s not paranoia, previous identities are hidden/ erased online.

YANBU
Whether or not it has happened recently, it is happening now. And the history books will be distorted. It’s happening everywhere - Bunce and 2 other males, who appeared on the FT 2018 top 100 women’s list for example.

Caitlyn Jenner's wiki page has right there: (born William Bruce Jenner)

Multigloves
It isn’t about being scared of trans women. It’s about biological female attainment and what is accessible to natal females.

It's not in an online capacity that worries me the most, it's when it comes to criminal records checks.

They had a go with Anne Lister but sanity prevailed and her Blue Plaque now says Lesbian and Diarist (first off it declared her a "gender nonconforming entrepreneur" which is the kind of erasure the OP is talking about).

The first name they use is usually a giveaway

What I mentioned above is just one example. I know that Jenner's Wikipedia page is the exception, as is Jenner who is very vocal about the whole thing.

In the example above I took the erasure and obfuscation of women's history and women's contributions to modern society. Because we making a distinction between women and trans-women is taboo and talking about someone's transition or life before transition is taboo, we now face even greater difficulties in recovering the missing pieces of women's contributions to history.

I am more angry about this than scared. I really want to know what my foremothers did, exactly. I have spend years trying to figure it, but in the name of inclusivity, this has now been made even more difficult and previous efforts have in some cases been undone.

That's why I want to know the background of current contributors to feminist progress.

OP, don't you know that you can't possibly address such topics; it may offend someone 😱

sarcasm for anyone that can't tell

I don't have anything in particular to add to your original point, but I'm glad to see that there are still people who feel comfortable bringing up 'controversial' topics. A few colleagues and I were discussing this just yesterday; that social media and society in general seems to be full of people attacking and trying to shut down the opinions of folk who dare to bring up certain topics ie trans issues and who don't have a 'woke' opinion on said topics.

There is the other thing where historical women are being relabeled as trans men if they did things outside the gender norms of their time. In other words, if women did good things that weren't in their very restricted sphere, they were probably really men.

Sexist much.

Sorry my post ignored the dead naming part of the OP. Attempted erasure remains relevant.

Yes, I've seen that too. It's very disrespectful to label a woman a "man", just because she refused to abide by gender norms of her time.

YABU and a bit paranoid. You're also minunderstanding the term.

Deadnaming is when people deliberatly continue to use someone's former name pre-transition in a social context.

For example a grandparent insisting on calling a grandchild Simon when they are now legally known as Samantha. It understandably causes quite a bit of upset to the person involved. It is not about pretending the previous name never existed. It's just being courteous surely. I changed my name after marriage and I prefer to go by my married surname now. You may get the odd slip up from someone who hasn't seen me in a while, but if someone deliberately kept using my maiden name in social contexts and refused to acknowledge that I changed it I would find it pretty disrespectful and upsetting.

I agree with @FlibbertyGiblets on the Anne Lister plaque. I get frustrated when people attempt to diagnose long dead notable figures with a range of things, based on modern norms. XYZ was dyslexic (with no proof of the former, because they lived 200 years ago). ABC had bipolar disorder (based on a few patchy descriptions in scandal sheets from the 18th Century, but with no other info about what else was going on). There are historical figures we do have extensive information on, or where useful evidence was kept (the madness of King George III probably being porphyria. Which is based on noted symptoms and descriptions of his bowel habits).

But that's not a specific trans issue? Just poor historiography?

Why are so many men who gained their power/money/qualifactions as men, being lauded as first woman to/richest or most successful woman in etc

The point of recognising the achievements of women was a. To give an assist in a world where women were barred from certain things or had more of a struggle to get them and b. As a role model to girls.

What is the point if they are male? The story then is men are always better than women whatever gender id they prefer.

Take the magazine article about first female team to (produce/direct?) a successful film trilogy. Someone said what about the wackowski (sp) sisters and the matrix, the article was changed. I can't see how this is positive.

They could be first trans people to do it. That would make more sense. But they made the films as men, in a notoriously male dominated industry. To give them the title of first women to do it stinks imo.

Yes you're being paranoid.

Yes you are being unreasonable.

You're also misunderstanding what dead naming means.

Thread full of wrong, but I expect nothing less of your type.

You would agree then that the wackowski sisters should be recognised as the first females to direct a successful Hollywood trilogy?

Is there not millions of places on the internet you can go just to be offended??? I don’t get the fascination with a certain subsection of Mumsnet being so frothing about anything slightly related to “trans”...I’m guessing it’s all older people cis my teens could t give a shit

Oh and CIS was a Freudian slip, before you accuse me of anything else.

It's not in an online capacity that worries me the most, it's when it comes to criminal records checks

You don't think the Government have thought about that already?

You are being paranoid and ridiculous. People can choose what name they want to be called.