Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

"What makes a women" NY Times article

215 replies

iisme · 08/06/2015 10:30

Nothing very new here but it expresses most of my feelings around the trans debates very clearly and well. I want to put it on Facebook but I know it will kick off a shit-storm and I'm not sure I have the strength ...

mobile.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/opinion/sunday/what-makes-a-woman.html?referrer=&_r=0

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
YonicScrewdriver · 24/06/2015 08:06

Nymia, my understanding is that not all trans people have hormone therapy and that some look to enter single sex spaces regardless of this.

QueenStromba · 24/06/2015 08:24

Nymia89 uses the same user name on their tumblr account if anyone would like to check out how well they actually pass.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 24/06/2015 08:53

I had two minds about posting here in the first place, as usual you people staunchly ignore any kind of medical or societal standard. Its like banging ones head against a brick wall.

Oh, please... tell me about how someone with the science, I LOVE it when TW talk about science....

It's not about ignoring the societal standard either you really don't read anything do you? it's about fighting how that standard harms women everywhere. And the basis for that harm is biological. The fact that you don't understand that is the basis for my absolute knowledge that you are no woman.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 24/06/2015 09:22

Gods... that was in coherent!

Oh, please... tell me more about the science, I LOVE it when TW talk about science....

There, that's better!

CoteDAzur · 24/06/2015 12:47

"you people staunchly ignore any kind of medical or societal standard"

I'd like to hear about this "medical standard". There is medical standard of care. There are medical standards for fitness to drive. What medical standard are you talking about re transactivism?

You are male, with functional male genitals, facial hair, etc. You think you should be female & you say you "feel like a woman" (whatever that means). All of that makes you a transwoman. Are you under the impression that medical textbooks say otherwise? Do you really think that med school students learn "Whoever says he feels like a woman is a woman"?

As for "societal standard", I think you might need to get offline and reacquaint yourself with what the society at large really thinks. I invite you to conduct an informal opinion poll in a public park, for example. Ask 100 random people, young & old, men & women this question: "Am I am man or a woman?". Their answers will tell you where society stands on this issue.

CoteDAzur · 24/06/2015 12:48

Ask "Am I a man or a woman?", rather.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 24/06/2015 13:11

Maybe the medical standard refers to the psychiatric standard needed to diagnose the levels of dysphoria needed in order to be able to access SRS?

SRS is a long and complicated procedure and far too many MtT later ask for the surgery to be reversed. In order to save the NHS the huge expense, the patient has to convince several people that they are actually ill enough to warrant the kinds of surgery involved.

However, as so few MtT actually bother with SRS or even hormones now, when it seems to be enough to say "I feel like a woman" to expect everyone to suddenly treat you like one, the medical standard seems to have fallen by the wayside. Although you still have to wait 2 years, I believe, until you can have all your ID changed to reflect how you feel.

QueenStromba · 24/06/2015 17:21

Or maybe they're the same medical standards that sterilise sex-role variant children who have an 80% chance of just growing up to be gay.

laurierf · 25/06/2015 14:49

As I'm new to all this (only really realised that there was this conflict via reading a couple of threads on MN, having only joined MN recently), I took your point Nymia about looking at, say, a "sensationalist blog" and being influenced by it, and have done some more reading around the internet. It does seem to me that these extremist (twitter) transactivists are very few in number and are criticised by transpeople for alienating the very people who could be allies. It is very sad - I can see how and why it is alienating and prior to being exposed to it via this thread, I was very much of the "What?! Why would anyone have an issue with transpeople??!"

I found a quote from a radical feminist that I think seems to make some valid points: (apologies for going over old ground again for everyone else reading). What do you think Nymia (if you are still reading)?

"I am not an essentialist; I believe gender is a social construct – by which I mean masculinity, femininity, camp, butch, high femme or androgynous, for example. Sex describes the biological features of our bodies, such as genitalia, reproductive capacity and hormones. In patriarchy of course, sex equals rank and gender roles are used, promoted and policed so that sex rank is obvious and unequivocal.

I don’t believe gender is natural, fixed or innate, but made and not born. It is made by all the stereotypes around us about how men and women are supposed to look, act and dress. Everyone works hard at their gender, it does not come naturally. Men and women work to live up to narrow and impossible gender ideals; they diet and spend vast amounts on cosmetics and plastic surgery. In that way we are all performing gender, and it is difficult to say if anyone is a ‘real’ man or woman.

Therefore, I don’t believe that trans people are any less ‘real’ men and women than anyone else, and I don’t believe trans women are ‘men’. I respect self-definition and use the pronouns individuals identify as; I would never refer to trans women as ‘he’ or to trans men as ‘she’. I agree that women-only spaces should be open to all women, including trans women. However, I also respect the right of all oppressed groups to self-organise. For example, recently a mixed feminist conference in Manchester held a workshop on girlhood sexual abuse which was open only to women assigned female at birth. I do not think it was right that the conference was attacked as a result.

I do not agree with the term ‘cis’ and do not use it. It suggests that all non-trans people are gender normative Stepford wives, which is far from the case. I do not get read as a woman in many daily interactions and experience harassment and violence as a result. I do not have the privilege of not being questioned about my sex and gender in the street, in passport control or in interactions with health services. I also do not believe that being categorised as female in a patriarchal world can ever be seen as a privilege, and the facts of sexual violence, marginalisation and poverty bear that out."

Beachcomber · 27/06/2015 13:15

Our recent visitor's posts highlight the problem with the Gender Recognition Act 2004.

MTT people can get an official piece of paper which declares their sex as female.

And they take this piece of paper with a lovely shiny F on it and think that it means something real. The piece of paper is validation and that is picked up and run with to the extent that it means more to many people than actual concrete biological reality.

So we get;

Woman = someone who has a piece of paper that says they are female.

Female = someone who feels like a woman (whatever that is)

Biology, reality, chromosomes, ovaries, wombs, vaginas, and all the rest of it = at best irrelevant and at worst essentialist exclusionary bigotry to even mention them.

It's crazy. And very wrong.

Beachcomber · 27/06/2015 13:29

My ID says female, by law I use the female bathrooms etc, good luck arguing otherwise.

It was this bit that stimulated my above response.

The Gender Recognition Act of 2004 was a hugely significant piece of legislation but it was passed without public debate or information of the reality of its significance.

Some feminists were on the ball (mostly radfems) and they were very unhappy with it and said so but of course they weren't listened to and were not on the radar of the average woman.

Now this is all coming to public light and a lot of women who never had much of an opinion about trans issues other than 'live and let live' are now going 'hold on a minute, can you run that by me again'. But it is too late for us, the act has been passed.

laurierf · 27/06/2015 13:46

I guess I've just posted this on the other thread but I hold my hand up here too:

a lot of women who never had much of an opinion about trans issues other than 'live and let live' are now going 'hold on a minute, can you run that by me again'

Yes, that's me. I don't read feminist press and I don't go on twitter or tumblr or anything like that. I'm absolutely baffled. I see that other people on MN think this is terrible transphobia on behalf of feminists… but this is surely problematic for everyone not just women? Of course I think 'live and let live'… but I don't see that everyone is being 'let live' if they're being called out on even very basic things such as saying "male-bodied" or that a homosexual relationship will not result in pregnancy.

vesuvia · 27/06/2015 16:44

Nymia89 wrote - "My ID says female, by law I use the female bathrooms etc, good luck arguing otherwise."

Beachcomber wrote - "MTT people can get an official piece of paper which declares their sex as female. And they take this piece of paper with a lovely shiny F on it and think that it means something real. The piece of paper is validation and that is picked up and run with to the extent that it means more to many people than actual concrete biological reality."

Government documentation issued to transwomen is only a pseudo-compassionate, no-skin-of-our-nose gesture towards transwomen by governments including the UK Government.

The UK Government still keeps its permanent record of a transwoman's maleness on their original birth certificate. They cross-reference this original "male" birth certificate with a new bit of paper, which says "female", that they give to the transwoman. (It's similar to the cross-referencing of people who change their name by deed poll. The government doesn't forget a person's old name, it just lets a namechanger use their new name).

The UK Government giving "female" documentation to transwomen is intended as a practical tool to minimise distress and embarrassment in various everday life situations. It does not mean that the government believes transwomen were female from birth or female now. It does, however, encourage many transwomen to believe that the government supports them unreservedly about being female, perhaps the ultimate validation for many, which I think is implied by Nymia89's comment. I think governnents are being disingenuous about transwomen. Patriarchy doesn't really like transwomen. It just finds them useful, for now.

vesuvia · 27/06/2015 18:36

Patriarchy does like transgenderism's opposition to radical feminism, so patriarchy uses transgenderism in the backlash against radical feminism's opposition to socially-constructed oppressive gender roles, as in "my enemy's enemy is my friend".

Beachcomber · 27/06/2015 18:57

Yes, totally agree with you vesuvia.

It is a mixture of misogyny, homophobia, gender policing and men's rights which have given traction to trans politics. I don't believe that there is much more to it than that and it is a dishonest position. As you say it comes at little cost to those that count and it is women and women's rights that bear the cost, along with many transgender people themselves. So far so patriarchal. There is nothing progressive going on here no matter how many trendy pomo queer theorists might think they are on the cutting edge of gender. Most of 'em haven't actually figured out what gender is as they are so busy pontificating about identifies and discourses and all manner of other neoliberal Newspeak.

The transing of lesbian women, gay men and minors is deeply disturbing and needs examining by some kind of independent medical ethics body.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread