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)

I meant, what percentage of the 98% of sex offenders are trans?

Kim, yes. Its prejudice and ignorance dressed up as concern. You can care about several different issues at once, and the assertion that she(gen) is "protecting and speaking for the interests of vulnerable women" is a red herring. I, as a survivor and mh problem sufferer, could be classed as a vulnerable woman. But I'm not being spoken for. I think kritiq's analogy is spot on.

Ps, I am sorry, this thread must be very hurtful. I don't always agree with you, but you don't deseve this at all. Noone does.

"Look at it this way. Say 5% of men are sex offenders."

Can I just interject and say that the percentage of men who are sex offenders I imagine (and sincerely hope) is waaaaaaaaay lower than 5% otherwise that would mean one man in twenty is.

"Does that mean that 5% of transsexual MTFs are therefore sex offenders? If so - why?"

I feel that this is going down a route that -might suggest I believe transitioning increases any likelihood of any offending. I want to make it clear I doubt transitioning has an bearing on this.

I suppose, I don't know why transitioning would make someone less likely to offend (I know actual amputation of the penis makes certain acts impossible, but I am thinking more broadly than rape or those MTFs who do amputate the penis), unless we concede that offending is entirely 'bodily driven'- in that it is testosterone and having a penis that makes men offend, rather than male-entitlement, rape culture and impunity.

"Or looking at it a different way - say 1% of women are shoplifters. Does that mean 1% of middle class women are therefore shoplifters?"

I find this analogy hard to understand. Are you saying that middle-class women, because they are less likely to have economic necessity or addiction are less likely to shoplift?

"Or do you think that by the very nature of being trans, that is far more unlikely that trans people will be sex offenders?"

I don't know why the very nature of being trans means someone is less likely to be an offender. I genuinely don't. If that's true, does it mean that FTMs are also less likely to be offenders than the general population too? Or does their transitioning mean they are more likely to offend than women who don't transition?

Obviously this is all speculation, but either way there's a lot of assumptions about transpeople - so it is open to questioning.

FoodUnit I guess because part of rape culture is the "dehumanising" of women and someone who themselves feel that they should be a woman is more likely to view women as equal humans.

I think the argument is that just because a group as a whole is 5% anything does not mean that each and every of its sub-groups is also 5% anything.

"The assumption is in the character of transpeople compared to a typical man. I think you might find the character is very different to a typical man. I use the "shoplifter" analogy as a way that you can give a statistic for a general group but when you look at the groups within the group, the statistics vary widely. E.G. People have car crashes. Men are more likely to have a car crash. But within that group, 18 -21 year old men are much more likely to have a car crash. I bet you could even analyse that group and find a specific group who have a really high chance of having a car crash."

I suppose I don't know what a 'typical man' is like, or how transwomen are more like a 'typical woman'. I agree it is possible that there are traits common to MTFs. But without stats it is presumption, not self-evident that the patterns of offending would be lower in MTFs (or higher in FTMs).

Unless there are stats?

Actually, I don't think we can assume the patterns of offending would be lower, higher or the same.

EldritchCleavage "I think the argument is that just because a group as a whole is 5% anything does not mean that each and every of its sub-groups is also 5% anything."

Yes, I get that, but if the percentage changes according to sub-group there will be concrete reason for this uneven distribution. It is an assumption to pre-empt the pattern of unevenness without evidence or a hypothesis. But kim147 gives a hypothesis here:

"I think you are ignoring the actual personality of MTFs compared to an "average" man. Especially the personality of someone who is transitioning."

I suppose I don't actually see much difference in the personalities myself -I'm not saying that to be cruel- I've not really seen it, but maybe I can't spot something subtly different from the 'average man' that might be more obvious to other people.

"Well you seemed very confident in your statement. Are you going to withdraw it or stand by it?"

Which statement are you referring to?

Ah no, I still have my doubts. sorry

"Do you know anyone who is transitioning?"

My familiarity with transpeople is only through the workplace and online, I don't know any transpeople intimately. The people I do know intimately tend to be not 'gender-typical' so I find it hard to ascertain what the 'average woman' or 'average man' is like. Though I see behaviours of male entitlement in all the men I know, no matter how fluffy and sweet they are, and I see flashes of conditioned self-negation in women, no matter how strident or bold they are. But I don't believe these traits are innate, they strike me as obviously conditioned rather than integral to their personalities.

It seems to me that FoodUnit you don't believe that transpeople exist, and refuse to look at any evidence that they do.

You seem determined to maintain the male/female divide as somehow sacred, whilst also simplifying it down to anatomy, something easily altered.

Consider why the male/female dichotomy is so important to you? You seem reluctant to recognise the idea of a 'typical' man or woman, yet insist that the two are totally different.

If feminism's aim is for society to recognise that men and women are different, and to ensure that things are set up to cater for both sexes' needs, then how do transpeople threaten this?

The only explanation I can find is that you assume that trans are intentionally trying to erode women's rights, which I cannot find any evidence of at all. I see no reason at all to exclude mtf trans from any women-only space, it's not something you can have grey areas for IMO. To transition sex is legal, to insult a transperson is hate speech, so how can you decide that you will ignore all of this? It is so, so few people and itis heartbreaking to think that you will not allow them to be fully recognised as women despite their being legally so, when your reasons include that they might sexually assault another woman. How insulting. You have no evidence to show that it is even a remote possibility.

Btw I have realised you are the only person taking the opposite stance on this thread now FU so I applaud your tenacity if not your views.

HoopDePoop "You seem determined to maintain the male/female divide as somehow sacred, whilst also simplifying it down to anatomy, something easily altered."

I think 'sacred' has very different connotations to the way I am arguing. I rationally see that humans are reproductively dimorphic species where a structural oppression of one sex by the other has become established.

Also anatomy is not something easily altered! It is through brutal and invasive surgery that you can at best mimic the appearance of the opposite sex, but it has the consequence of leaving you unable to reproduce - infertility.

"Btw I have realised you are the only person taking the opposite stance on this thread now FU so I applaud your tenacity if not your views."

I haven't been on MN 'trans* threads' before, but this one caught me by stealth - it was in the title.