TERF

[ReallyFuckingFedUp]

So I have seen this expression a lot lately... and TERF gets thown out a lot when feminists are discussing things that are only capable of affecting biologically female women.

And I just can't get my head around it tbh. I don't think feminism should exclude people I think it helps everyone. I get really upset when white feminists forget about WOC or Lesbians, or other minority groups because the point of feminism is to make women's lives better. SO if there an issue that is unique to black women (for example) it is still all of our issue and should be dealt with by all feminist.

So if trans women want in on feminism why do they think can exclude the majority of women by saying we can't discuss our issues? And if trans people want to be accepted and have their rights championed by feminism is that fair since the majority of feminists aren't also suffering those same problems? Is it not a huge double standard?

Abortion rights and prenatal care and contraceptive health, vaginal rape. Are these things off the table now for feminism?

Am I getting it wrong, missing something? It feels to me like male privilege, telling women what they can and can't talk about..and doing so in a way where they actually feel guilty as though they have done something wrong.

I remember that this word was used on that thread where people thought women should be ok with male-bodied people in our changing rooms. It definitely sounded like a slur.

What subtle slurs Kim?

I'm not a trans woman and I don't engage very much with those politics as I'm not that interested in them, so I may be missing something completely obvious to you.

kim in what way can the word "man" be used to discuss issues that would not be considered a slur? Or are we. It allowed to utter that word when discussing issues of gender and how gender affects women?

It's certainly hard to debate gender issues if we can't use the word "man" I don't see it as remotely comparable with "TERF" or accusations of racism.

It is a common tactic by trans activists to demand that women repeat the mantra "transwomen are women" before any discussion can take place and, of course, the validity of that mantra is not permitted to be discussed without accusations of transphobia.

I'm not really sure what the point of shared dialogue would be. Although we might all call ourselves feminists, there are issues on which we are diametrically opposed. It's like saying Labour and the Tories should attempt dialogue. As when says! it is almost impossible to have dialogue on unrelated issues such as prostitution once someone has been labelled a TERF eg Julie Bindel. Even craven apologies and capitulation are not enough to "rehabilitate" women who have fallen.

OK I get "man" but why is male bad when it's only a simple biological description of the type of body?

buffy how does one give ground on the notion that women are entitled to meet on the terms they determine? I'm not trying to goad but I think it's too easy to say both sides are digging in or both sides are equally responsible for name calling and abusive behaviour. There are lots of false equivalence drawn (e.g. That identifying people as men or male is the same as calling a woman a TERF or saying there is equal silencing on both sides). Is giving ground on issues like this desirable?

I'm asking because I wrote "male-bodied people" earlier as it was relevant to that discussion about changing rooms, thinking it was a correct and neutral description.

Yes I got it and answered but I'm really tired right now and should probably not discuss anything serious.

buffy I certainly do know you to appreciate subtleties and be reasonable sorry for coming over too strong in my last post.

briar some trans activists view male and female as social constructs and therefore believe that there is no such thing as a male body. It's worth bearing in mind that a significant number of transwomen have not had surgery (maybe the majority) and don't intend to have it. The do not want their bodies characterised as male.