Radfem2012 banning trans people

[allthegoodnamesweretaken]

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/25/radical-feminism-trans-radfem2012?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

Has anyone seen this? I don't really understand this bigotry against trans gendered people.
If we're trying to make the world a better and equal place through feminism, surely excluding people who also want to do this because of their genitals or the gender they assign themselves is going to make this impossible and is a bit hypocritical?

yes lrd is right. it matters that being a woman is a reality in its own right, not just a negative of being a male. I suspect that deep down, that discomfort with trans-gender mtf people claiming to be men, is related to that long history of misogynist denial of women's reality as full human beings. trans men claiming that they are women because they have had their penises inverted, is a denial of the reality of a vagina and by implication a denial of the reality of women as real, full human beings in their own right, not just impure, fucked up, wrong versions of men

What did you mean, then? You said before you hated masculinity so you tick the 'woman' box on forms.

I think you are blurring the difference between categorization and definition. They are different, aren't they?

To say 'this individual is not a man, she's a woman' is a statement to do with categorizing individuals.

To say 'I am a woman because I hate masculinity, therefore I choose non-masculinity, and that means being a woman' is not the same kind of statement at all.

If you define women in a positive way - ie., by saying women women have not what they lack - it is not offensive. If you define women as that which is not a man, yes, that's offensive, surely?

claiming to be women, sorry

What did you mean, then? You said before you hated masculinity so you tick the 'woman' box on forms

this is ridiculous!

I hate being over weight and unfit....doesnt make me Paula Radcliffe does it?!

kim, as it's a long thread ... this is the bit I meant, when you said:

'what pronoun do you call someone who no longer wants to be associated with men in anyway, who hates anything associated with manliness (and yes, I know that comes down to what is a man anyway?), who is self medicating, who has breasts, no testosterone? Is he a he, a she or some gender neutral pronoun?
[...]
I check female. Because there's no trans box. Why should there be a box anyway?

I hate being called he. I hate being called him. I hate being called lad. I hate anything to do with masculinity. I hate being expected to be like a real man.'

I understood you to be saying there should not be a 'box' for trans, just those for male and female - and that you self-identified as female on forms. But not because you associated being female with anything positive - in fact, you had little or nothing to say about what this female identity was. All you said was how you hated 'masculinity' and wanted to dissociate yourself from that.

Why does that desire to be non-masculine (which I think all feminists would agree is a valid desire and makes sense) mean you have to co-opt the definition of 'female' with this negative, man-hating stuff, though?

Apologies if I took so long typing that the thread has moved on.

"It's as if a radical-feminist conference is the last peak left unconquered, so it has to be done "because it's there". And some might say, that's actually a very male view of the world right from the start."

I think you've hit the nail on the head there TeiTetua (sorry for the drastic post snipping)

that is how it feels to me also proles

it feels really intrusive

In a general way, in an ideal sort of way, a person's sex shouldn't actually matter to anyone else (well, unless you are contemplating breeding a child with that person, in which case it's information you need...). I have got into trouble in the past over form-filling, for writing 'How is this relevant'? across the boxes requiring me to state whether I'm male or female. Because a lot of the time it ISN@T RELEVANT.

Yes, in an ideal world we'd expect medics to be well-informed about women's bodies and we'd expect legislation about pregnancy and abortion and so on to be fair and sensible.

Your example about children makes me think - these days, no-one I know say to a gay couple, 'now, you can't be parents can you - which one would be the mummy and which the daddy?' because we have thankfully accepted that you don't need to play a gender role to love a child. But we don't therefore also stop teaching the biology of reproduction.

Sorry, cross-posted. Kim, I can?t pretend to know what it?s like in your situation. But lots of women (and men) are in that sort of situation. Think about women who can?t go out of the house unless they?re covered, and with a male family member. That?s not just in Saudi, btw ? I grew up with women like that, they were my friends? mums and now some of them are my schoolfriends too.

If I ?could not be further from the truth?, I am sorry. But what do you want me to do? Do I just stay quiet when you say things that sound to me exactly like the misogynistic views of women?s bodies that have been used against women for centuries? Or do I try to work out what is going on, because here you are in pain, and here we are, and maybe we could find some kind of common ground?

'lack of ambition' kim?

I don?t think many people on here think it?s as simple as that men can?t be nurtured to have traits that our society considers ?feminine? ? surely, if we thought that, we?d essentially be admitting that men in our society were all, inevitably, masculine and women all, inevitably, feminine. Obviously loads of men have the qualities you suggest.

Don?t bother commenting, bejeezus ? don?t you know, you mustn?t object to something someone says that?s full of misogynistic stereotypes if they add the provisio ?don?t flame me? and acknowledge they?re deliberately propping up those stereotypes.

I do have sympathy for you kim

I have little to no interest in trans-issues, because they are not on my radar (at the moment!) and I have an array of ?issues? which are relevant to me

An individual can identify in any way that makes them happy/comfortable

But if that threatens mine or my dds right to female-only spaces, then I feel challenged and I will object

Don't recognise that list in myself.
Recognise it in my DH.
Lack of ambition? Jesus.

I can't believe that list. I'm really genuinely shocked.

"But if that threatens mine or my dds right to female-only spaces, then I feel challenged and I will object"

What would you do if your daughter came out to you as trans?

Interesting isn't it that there's all this hoo-ha about trans people being 'banned' from the event as if they are the ones who are being silenced. But whose voices are getting heard and whose are not?

The organisation that runs Conway Hall is a disgrace.

Absolutely outrageous. Yes Conway Hall has banned Sheila Jeffreys. Here's what she says:

"Criticism of the practice of transgenderism is being censored as a result of a campaign of vilification by transgender activists of anyone who does not accept the new orthodoxy on this issue. A recent Comment is free piece by the transgender activist Roz Kaveney, headlined "Radical feminists are acting like a cult", criticises a forthcoming radical feminist conference, at which I was to be a speaker, on the grounds that I and "my supporters" may be guilty of "hate speech" for our political criticism of this practice.

Though Kaveney's comments about me are comparatively mild in tone, the campaign by transgender activists in general is anything but. This particular campaign persuaded Conway Hall, the conference venue, to ban me from speaking on the grounds that I "foster hatred" and "actively discriminate". On being asked to account for this, Conway Hall appeared to compare me to "David Irving the holocaust denier". The proffered evidence consists of quotes from me arguing that transgender surgery should be considered a human rights violation ? hardly evidence of hate speech.

For several years there has been a concerted campaign via the internet and on the ground, to ensure that I, and any other persons who have criticised transgenderism, from any academic discipline, are not given opportunities to speak in public. I have not yet spoken in public about transgenderism, but do speak about religion and women's human rights, about pornography, and about beauty practices.

Whatever the topic of my presentation, and whether in Australia, the UK or the US, transgender activists bombard the organising group and the venue with emails accusing me of transhate, transphobia, hate speech, and seek to have me banned. On blogs, Facebook and Twitter they accuse me of wanting to "eliminate" transgendered persons, and they wish me dead. One activist has created an image of a pesticide can bearing a photo of me and the slogan "kills rad fems instantly". These activists threaten demonstrations and placards against me at any venue where I speak."

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/29/transgenderism-hate-speech?CMP=twt_gu

Funny how the people issuing death threats are the ones being bowed down to, whilst the person on the receiving end is being likened to a Holocaust denier. But that's the reversals of patriarchy for you.