To be hurt and angry that DD told her prof her mum is a TERF and he sympathised

[Dahliadaily]

My DD is at a Russell group uni studying a masters following a 1st in humanities. I’m really proud of her obviously.
We were always really close. She cried for me throughout freshers’ week, relied on my tough love.

We differ respectfully on the trans issue. I am a feminist and a biology grad and believe in the reality of sex and the importance of single sex spaces, the rule of law.

We negotiate this ok and do keep talking. I’m sure that more unites us than separates us. We agree on prostitution for example. But not on the medicalisation of gender.

She is a lesbian. Has lots of gay non binary and trans friends. Her flatmate is a trans man. I’d never make a personal remark about any of them.

My other DD told me that uni DD has got close to a prof (male and gay - nothing sleazy) and told him I was a TERF. He responded “that must be really difficult for you”.

She’s an intelligent young woman, capable of forming her own views. But I can’t help being hurt by her comment and angry with the prof for siding with this idea that I’m difficult or even evil / unkind. It feels a bit like grooming.

TERF has always been a misnomer as transmen, being female, are not excluded. And it’s irrelevant as many people are labelled TERF that are quite clearly not feminists in any shape or form. Seem like it’s just you that’s hung up on the labels here and are trying to derail the thread but, you do you. 🤷🏻‍♀️

I think when you’ve had “terf” snarled and spat at you by misogynistic men and their female hangers on, you’re entitled to reclaim the slur regardless of whether you actually meet the definition of a radical feminist. These men don’t care whether you are or not, or about the “nuances” - if you are female and don’t 100% go along with them and validate them, you are a “TERF”.

X post with @GargoylesofBeelzebub

Well, radical feminism does have a lot to say about sex and gender, for one thing: one important aspect of this being that “gender” (or sex roles/sex stereotypes) is an integral part of women’s oppression under patriarchy. Sex roles or gender stereotypes are a means of controlling women’s sexed reality and lives, and naturalising their oppression. “Gender” functions like the “superstructure” in Marxist thought: it’s a way of obfuscating and maintaining control over the “base” (which instead of economic control of labour, is male control of women’s labour/bodies). Imagine men as the capitalists who harvest women’s (sexual and reproductive, as well as physical) labour as the workers, and that’s pretty close.

For radical feminism, a man who says he is a woman is like a capitalist who wants to play at being a worker whilst still enjoying his life of luxury. He’s an oppressor who wants to pretend he is oppressed without actually being so. Moreover, in the process, he also wants to claim that there is no distinction at all between capital and labour; and, in fact, the labourers are actually oppressing the capitalists by not recognising that he is suffering far more than they are; and that if the labourers organise to improve their working rights, that’s offensive to him because he’s actually enjoying playing at being poor.

He suggests that everyone is prevented from using the words “labourer” and “capitalist” so that nobody is able to articulate the difference in their positions. In the meantime, he dresses in rags during the day, eats no lunch, and says he is poor and starving — but can always go home at any time to his mansion, where he can enjoy all the comforts of capitalism that he has enjoyed all his life, and can still do if he so desires.

Now that’s a little fable for you; but hopefully it illustrates why radical feminism does not take well to the suggestion that biological sex doesn’t matter, and “gender” is a lovely costume that can be adopted at will. Moreover, radical feminism is pretty suspicious of the idea that people can “identify out” of their oppression by just pretending they are someone else. A bit as if our intruding capitalist above not only stopped all the labourers from organising to improve their rights, but also convinced a gullible subset of the very poorest ones that they could just think their way out of being labourers, by merely going around calling themselves capitalists (but still doing all the same menial labouring jobs as before).

So, you don't care about biological women's rights?

Cis-gender is made up speak.

Transwomen are men, and thus should never be included in the category of women.

They're not women though.

Do you include all men as women then, or just the confused ones?

They aren't, actually.

The saying in actual reality is MERF. Male Exclusionary.... We have no problems with females who identify as trans men so to say categorically we are "trans exclusionary" is wrong. The term is a symptom of people not understanding the issue from the female perspective. It's about preserving our identity and rights as the female sex. It's about excluding the male sex, however they identify, from spaces that are designed specifically to give the female sex space, security, safety, privacy and dignity. It is not about 'trans' per se. It never was. It's about Excluding Males.

Being Critical of Gender stereotypes is a left wing feminist thing. The right wing support gender stereotypes. The overwhelming majority of Gender Critical women are left wing. Fighting against gender stereotypes is what the left wing used to be about. Do you remember that?

And the Communist party in the UK who are on record as being 'terf' and supporting female only spaces.

Males are not a 'minority'. They are 50% of the population, and are the oppressor sex class. Wearing a dress doesn't change the Male Privilege of the ruling oppressor sex. And wanting female only spaces for rape survivors like me does not mean we automatically 'hate' males. Maybe try to think a little deeper than puddle depth.

And how the female sex is treated by the ruling oppressor sex. A measure of a civilised society is how we treat rape survivors and DV victims/survivors and their hard won rights to single sex spaces for not just safety but privacy and dignity. Any society that seek to systematically tear down hard won gains for the female sex to appease male feelings is not a safe or civilised or decent society.

So because you disagree with what is being said it is grooming, if they said what a wonderful mother you were and complimented you would that be grooming or does it only work one way?

My daughter would have defended me to the hilt if someone said that to her. I’d be worried too OP. This is just one comment but it’s from someone she looks up to, who is in a position of power. Not grooming as such, not yet, but more of it could be. Grooming takes many forms. Interfering with parent child relationships, even if the child is a young adult, using ideological personal beliefs could definitely be that. Other daughter is not “shit stirring” (revolting term), maybe she’s worried too.

I didn't know what it meant either. I don't live in a bubble but I'm not overly interested in trans rights or have any connection in my day to day life (other than DH once working with a trans woman) and occasionally reading posts on here.

Don't be disingenious. I think you understood what I meant but just in case...let them as in not necessarily telling them what I think about their beliefs.

Well said!

It's about the loss of your rights

Along with TERF.

And yet people use it.

Ok but that wasn't my point.

Saying ‘that must be difficult for you’ is a bland statement that doesn’t give away what you are thinking. He may not care much about trans issues (most people don’t) and was just trying to be nice.

Which is fine, up until the point where being coy about your beliefs leads you to be complicit in discrimination against other women.

And you really shouldn’t complain when women who are suffering disadvantage NOW take action to stop it & prevent it happening again.