Violence Against Women

[EatsBrainsAndLeaves]

Just been reading this blog post which talks about women who Transition as violence against women. I agree with her.

[Warning from MNHQ - this contains graphic images]

dirtywhiteboi67.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/transition-violence-against-women.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheDirtFromDirt+(The+dirt+from+Dirt)

To your three points.

1. that is your opinion. As I have not researched this thoroughly, I am holding off deciding one way or another. Give me evidence of this being true

2. this is indeed a problem, but should be sorted out with the individual. And I would question how often this issue comes up

3. I think most of us would object to a life-changing decision being made on behalf of a 5yo - including that actually weakens your argument, imo

Eats can you point me to the case(s) in the US where children are being diagnosed at 5 on the basis of toys played with?

I found this article on googling which talks about girls stating that they were boys from a young age, but nothing about it being based on toys.

m.washingtonpost.com/local/transgender-at-five-tylers-story-leads-to-outpouring-of-other-stories/2012/05/21/gIQAQ9VRgU_story.html

Eats, with respect, I have seen many who describe themselves as radical feminists and "trans exclusive" claiming that most trans women do not "pass." It's not a term only used by transgendered people.

BTW nope, nowt you're saying is the least bit convincing, and I suspect you are citing "evidence" of various dubious provenance - something that's easy to do with t'interwebs.

But, if faith is more important than fact . . .

Oh yes, and you said above "It is blindingly obvious most of the time of a man who has transitioned to a "woman" is a man. You can see it in the shape and size of their body, their voice, the shape of the face, etc."

Any thoughts then on the surreptitiously taken photo posted by some dumbass Reddit member of Balpreet Kaur, aiming to poke fun at her "masculine" appearance? Would you say it is "blindingly obvious" from the photo that she has been identified as female from birth?

One of my High School English teachers had a very, very deep voice. I can hear it in my mind now. On the phone, she was almost always mistaken for a man. So is voice really such a reliable indicator whether one is male or female?

My former boss, female, was 6 ft 2 inches. A male colleague who recently retired would have stretched to make 5 ft 2 inches. So - possibly not the sex they claimed to be?

Just plain silly, and hypocritical, imho.

KRITIQ, her response was kick-ass, I loved it. And I thought Original Dumbo Reddit poster was pretty sincere in his belated realisation of his Dumbohood and his apology too.

EBAL I'm curious about your thoughts on people born with male and female genitalia. Should they be allowed to use public toilets and rape support centres?

KRITIQ, you know, recently, in every one of your posts that I read you take a pop at radical feminists.

In fact I tend to skim over your posts nowadays because of it.

Imagine if I were to give my (negative) opinion on sex positive feminists or socialist feminists every time I posted. And imagine if I were to do it in an authoritative and 'I'm an old hand at this' sort of way. I find it rude and divisive and I'm not sure what you are hoping to achieve.

I disagree with what you claim about radical feminist analysis of trans issues. Trans women are not a 'unifying pariah' the analysis is a lettle more sophisticated than that - I suspect that you are familiar with radical analysis of the subject so I'm at why you should choose to misrepresent it.

It's interesting that Beachcomber says she doesn't understand the idea of feminism being a "journey," that it is something you either accept, chapter and verse, or you don't (and therefore have no right to call yourself a genuine feminist.) The approach makes me think of some fundamentalist Christian denominations that insist the only way to salvation is to follow their creed without deviation.

Then onto this - firstly, could you please not speak about me as though I'm not here. It is othering and marginalising to talk about someone in the third person rather than address them in the usual manner. I'm on the thread Kritiq.

Secondly, why are you speaking for me and claiming I have said things that I have not? If you don't understand what I mean why don't you ask me to clarify rather than giving your own (incorrect and twisted) strawman version of what I posted. You have made a load of crap up and are now trying to pretend that I said it. Please quote where I say on the thread that one is not a genuine feminist if you don't accept ideas chapter and verse .

Thirdly, comparing a person to religious or fundamentalist groups as a marginalising and othering technique is as old as the hills. It is also a thoroughly unpleasant way to go about having a feminist discussion IMO. (Especially when the views you are claiming to be fundamentalist were never actually expressed by the person you are attacking but made up by you in order to attack.)

It's also interesting that there seems to be the suggestion from Eats and Beachcomber on this thread at least, that having that "faith" in the ideals of radical feminism is more important than having evidence to substantiate what you believe.

Here we go again. You are claiming I have said things I have not and are attributing opinions I do not hold, in order to present me to others as irrational and of blind faith rather than rational, analytical and capable of critical thought.

In fact the majority of your post is a long winded personal attack.

I had to point out to you the other day that you were claiming people had said things they had not, on another thread. And so I'm asking you to refrain from doing this to me again and to either stick to what I actually say or leave me alone.

Oh, look, here is what I actually said

Beachcomber Mon 01-Oct-12 19:39:22

Well, Pan. Are you really trying to understand what I'm saying?

I think Feminism belongs to all women.

It belongs to poor women, defavourised women, illiterate women, women as a group.

There doesn't need to be a journey or book reading or debating on MN to get women's issues.

For some women, it may be a journey or a learning curve. For other women it is obvious and as plain as the nose on their face (often because such women have been shat on good and hard by patriarchal society).

It's great when people want to learn about something and read and bolster their instincts. It isn't a requirement of feminism though.

kim - I dont have a tag team. Who are you referring to?

eleanor - depends on the bones they have. Actually if they have certain bones they can say if it is a man or woman.

Lesbians are biologically women as you know. They dont need surgery or hormones to try and "pass" as women. It is not comparable.

beach - Yes you know as well as I do that certain women here have run most of the radical feminists off the board. They are simply trying to get rid of teh few remaining ones. And they are not going to succeed!

As my mother in law always used to say, dont let the bastards get you down!

Beachcomber Mon 01-Oct-12 19:23:12
I'm also finding the concept of feminism as a 'journey' or something one has to 'learn' as very strange.

Women don't have to learn about women's issues - we live them and experience them. Feminism has never been an academic subject.

Of course there is brilliant feminist analysis, that puts into words in an incisive, trenchant and coherent manner what many of us experience and feel - and it is vital that women can read and use that analysis if they want to.

But you can have a strong 'handle' on feminism without ever having read any texts. Thank god.

A lot of the radicals I know, were always radicals, they didn't graduate to radical feminism. It was perfectly obvious to them before they even knew that that was what it was called.

here you go Beach, HTH

EBAL

Your posts on this thread put me in mind of Alex Jones of infowars. He continuously spits out "facts" with nothing to back them up simply because what he is spouting suits his political agenda. If you are going to make out you are an authority on these issues about real people with very real problems you could at least say either what your qualifications are or provide links so we can see whether what you are saying is based on valid research. If you don't you just come over as another internet crank like Alex Jones.
After all I could cut and paste plenty of information off the internet to "prove" that homosexuality is a treatable disease. The people who say such things are doing it not because it has an basis in facts but because it suits their particular agenda and as far as I'm concerned it's playing games with peoples lives.

Well it's not really very helpful Cuervo, no.

Because I didn't say the following in that post;

It's interesting that Beachcomber says she doesn't understand the idea of feminism being a "journey," that it is something you either accept, chapter and verse, or you don't (and therefore have no right to call yourself a genuine feminist.)

I am simply saying that I think it is a shame if women pick up the idea that you need to have gone on a journey/read lots/discussed lots/etc in order to understand feminist perspective. I find the idea that women don't understand their own issues without having done some book reading or 'journeying', elitist, snobbish and excluding.

Whatever. I can't really be arsed to engage in this sort of crap. Ciao.

I read it differently, thats the problem with words on a screen, I suppose.

There are political theories that criticise the construction of lesbian identity, I agree with some of them.

Analysing an identity is perfectly acceptable. If we refrain from talking about identities because of feelings we wouldnt be able to talk about basic feminism For example, oh no, dont talk about how coerced sex is rape because it might hurt a woman's feelings who justifies coerced sex to herself as normal sex.

Feelings are not an excuse to shut down political debate. If you find a discussion too difficult, then leave the thread.

Yes I am interested in discussing whether offering Trans surgery and hormones to women is violence against women. I think it clearly is violence against women and a particularly horrifying kind where vulnerable women themselves agree to the violence.

no, you have your beliefs and are immovable. you are dismissive of others' opinions, as evidenced on the patriarchy thread.

I dont wish to discuss with you anymore, and since you seem to live on FWR I shall be hiding these boards, which is a shame, because I find feminism fascinating, and have been growing and changing my views. but, i will not be steamrollered by you.

toodle-pip, have a nice life.

Well Beach, I'm sorry to hear that you feel this way, but that's your call. I set out as plainly as I could that my post represented my observations - nothing more, nothing less. I said plainly that I wasn't claiming any special authority or status, either. As an observation, I didn't address you or any other person specifically. If you interpret that as a snub to you, that certainly wasn't the intention. If you believe it was a personal attack, that wasn't my intention, either. If you are very concerned about that, please contact site management and they will decide whether it was or not.

You said that "in every one of your posts that I read you take a pop at radical feminists," which probably means you are only reading very few of my posts here then! :) You say that you now tend to skim over most of my posts. That's cool. It's probably a good idea to skip over posts one feels will be upsetting for them. This is only a virtual space, no one is forced to be here and not worth getting upset over the content.

*There are political theories that criticise the construction of lesbian identity, I agree with some of them.

Analysing an identity is perfectly acceptable. If we refrain from talking about identities because of feelings we wouldnt be able to talk about basic feminism For example, oh no, dont talk about how coerced sex is rape because it might hurt a woman's feelings who justifies coerced sex to herself as normal sex.

Feelings are not an excuse to shut down political debate. If you find a discussion too difficult, then leave the thread. *

Assuming that is aimed at me then I and others have asked for verifiable links that back up statements such as

"Research shows that after surgery self reported happiness goes up in the short term. But after 2 years self reported happiness and the level of suicides goes back to the level pre surgery"

Or that "Women usually transition very young"

If not the discussion is all based on smoke and mirrors.

The blog I linked to in the OP gives a lot of information. This blog also gives a lot of information. Some posts are opinion pieces and some are talking about research.

gendertrender.wordpress.com/

BTW I find people who say that Homosexuality is a disease and use dodgy "facts" to back it up offensive but then maybe that is just me.