Being silenced/feeling voiceless

[JeanneDeMontbaston]

Can we talk about this?

There were some amazing threads on here a few years ago, about rape and about 'small' sexual assaults, and I remember so many posters saying they'd suddenly found a way to talk about something that had shaped them as people. It seemed really powerful to me. But I was wondering if we're actually going backwards in terms of feeling able to speak up.

I was in a meeting yesterday, and noticing how some women (including me) do that classic 'I don't know if I'm saying this very well' kind of minimising of their own points. I was really struck that someone said 'I need to learn the language to say this' - as if she was being inarticulate, rather than as if people weren't bothering to listen to what she was saying (which was closer to the case).

I keep on feeling this way, especially about all the debates raging around gender identity issues - I just don't have the language to say what I want to say. I can't help feeling as if all of us who disagree are just miscommunicating. Does anyone else feel that? I don't feel as if I have the language to talk about what makes me feel hurt and upset by words like 'cis' - I think it's a real feeling, and I think it is related to sexual violence, but I don't feel very able to put it into words, especially outside MN.

Does anyone else feel like this?

Sorry, I misread your post. I thought you meant 'experience of a person with delusions'.

Back on the main theme, I wonder if the problem is that I just don't believe in gender. A person who feels that they have a 'gender identity' might finds that offensive. But I really, honestly, don't think there is a link between a person's mind and their sex beyond that which is socialised. So maybe it's not that I don't have the language, maybe I just fundamentally don't agree.

I can accept their belief in their own gender provided that they accept that I don't believe I have one.

Sorry I don't mean to sound cryptic. I should have name changed so I could explain better.

I mean that I've been in situations where activities are going on where you can talk to other women about whatever while doing the unrelated activity. And people talk in an ordinary way about all manner of things they are interested in. And sometimes they discuss what on here we would call trans activism, and how that is having a negative impact on them, and when they do the volume goes down to a whisper, and the conversations become private, not meant for the whole group to join in with, as if they shouldn't be questioning it or discussing it.

And I've not seen that with other topics, not even really sensitive ones like race, religion and ethnicity.

Oh, no, you're fine. TBH I probably shouldn't be posting this under my real name (not that JdeM is my real name, but it's my identifiable alias!). But I do think these conversations need to happen.

Interesting what you say. I have sometimes thought people could afford to be a bit more circumspect about discussing some issues of race/religion/ethnicity, so I can see both sides a bit. But, yes, I do think it's a topic people where there's one very common conversation (the one ego wanted to have), which is about talking about what it means to be trans. And other conversations around that worry people much more.

jessica "what is the difference between belief and delusion? I thought it was that belief had no evidence, but delusion had opposing evidence."

I think this is a fairly accurate.
"I am a woman"
"but you are male, you have xy chromosomes, testes and a penis"
" well I am not meant to have xy chromosomes, testes and a penis"
"but there is no intention or meant to in the definition of a male, the word male is simply the physical description of someone with xy chromosomes, testes and a penis and a woman has xx chromosomes, ovaries, womb and vulva/vagina"
"Well you better change the definition of woman to include me then"
This refutation of the evidence is a sign of delusion.

I did this, almond! I was explaining some of this to my friend in my own home, and dropped my voice because the window was open. I shocked myself, and have been trying to make up for it by sharing Miranda Yardley's posts on Facebook. Only one person 'likes' them but at least I am trying to un-silence myself!

I can accept [transpeople's] belief in their own gender provided that they accept that I don't believe I have one.

I'm with you on the second part, Jeanne, but not the first I'm afraid. It's good manners, afaics, to honour Caitlyn's new name and call her 'she'. I've never had a problem with that. I'm even happy to help her suss out the walking, talking & dressing side of things - and have done irl. But when she starts telling me she knows all about being a woman; that my feminism's wrong; that her previously masculine existence has no bearing on her womanhood - I do not accept her belief. She's a woman if she likes, but she's not part of the shared experience of 'being a woman' in our world.

And that's not even touching the matter of biological sex, which I do not accept is a coercively assigned gender. The midwife sexes a baby, s/he doesn't gender it. Everyone else does that.

almondcakes

Soz Garlick

People could definitely be more circumspect about ethnicity! Racist remarks have overtaken sexual harassment as the most common form of anti social behaviour I personally see happening on public transport.

But I am seeing a difference among people whose intention is not to offend, and the extent to which they feel able to talk about ethnicity and the extent to which they feel they can talk about gender in any way.

While part of that is that many young people have grown up writing essays about ethics around ethnicity and religion in RE and much more rarely around gender, I think a large part of not discussing gender is because of the trans debate.

I feel like discussion of issues facing women (and some of those issues are new for this generation) is on hiatus while this massive slanging match goes on over trans issues.

People keep making this 'wrong side of history' remark, but I don't think anyone wins in this debate. I don't see how trans women are ever going to get what they want. I don't see how it is possible for trans women and women to be seen as equally the norm by society. Because women are literally the norm that trans women are emulating. And I know that will sound offensive to some, but I can't think of a better way of putting it. I'm not trying to make a point that they are wrong. I just don't get it and perhaps someone can explain. It would be like if I said I wanted to be a piano player, but then argue I don't want people who can already play the piano to be viewed as normal piano players. Without them existing, what do I even mean by I want to be a piano player?

garlick, I didn't suggest you should accept those things?

I know transwomen who are perfectly ok with pointing out that they don't have lived experience as women and so on. I'm not sure why you think I would be arguing the contrary.

As for Jenner, I think there is something massively patronizing and contradictory about the way some people who think they are very pro-trans reacted to that Vanity Fair cover - it was all 'aww, she's so hot', which no way in hell they would have said about a woman that age who'd not been trans. It was bizarre.

almondcakes "It's good manners, afaics, to honour Caitlyn's new name and call her 'she'. I've never had a problem with that."

I used to think like that, but not any more. I don't think playing along with delusions out of 'good manners' is healthy- we betray ourselves when we do it. As I said upthread - it can cause ptsd. I dread to think of all the relatives, lovers and friends who are going to need serious therapy after being sucked in.

There is tremendous interest in finding out what 'mind' is and whether it really exists

Wow. If my mind exists, then I think it's on the verge of exploding in trying to take that news on...

Paw, I think you're replying to Garlick not me.

I'm extremely flattered to be mixed up with you, almond. I realise the feeling may not be mutual

I used to think like that, but not any more. I don't think playing along with delusions out of 'good manners' is healthy- we betray ourselves when we do it.

You make a strong point. I'm going to sleep on it.

Massive apologies both - I should be in bed and my contact lenses are misting over!

Sorry, Jeanne, I had no intention to dismiss your thoughts. My reaction was "hmm, can I do that?" so I replied in that vein. If I seemed not to have acknowledged you properly, I apologise.

Oh, no, not at all - I just wanted to clarify.

Anyway, I should say goodnight too - it's so late! How did that happen?!

Morning guys, I don't know if any of you have read this article by Miranda Yardley (a trans woman who is gender critical, and, apparently, staggeringly self-aware) but it describes the very essence of our problem - not just feeling silenced, but actually being silenced. Definitely worth a read www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/08/kellie-maloney-newsnight-and-debate-transgender-community-refused-have

Just realised that I addressed you all as "guys" instead of ladies...

Am getting a lot out of this debate. I wonder if at some point we'll be able to consolidate it into a movement of some sort... I'm probably dreaming though. The second you publicly state any opinion on this you're instantly silenced as a bigot. And threatened with rape. And violence. And doxxing. God... trans activism is basically just GamerGate in a badly fitting dress.

I wonder if we could try to meet a middle ground with the trans community by suggesting we approach the issue the same way society approaches religious tolerance. Atheism and Christianity are two ideologies opposing one another. Neither is completely provable (though one is more evidence-based than another), so both are classified as beliefs. People are free to believe whichever ideology they choose. Even if it contradicts someone else's entire world view and sense of self, you should be free to believe what you feel to be true and to state those beliefs without becoming a pariah. It is possible to debate against religion or atheism without being accused of hate speech.

Trans ideology seems to be a new sort of religious fundamentalism, and challenging it gets a fatwa put on your head. The fact that this is taking place under the guise of progressivism is bitterly ironic.

morning microferret
I wonder if we could try to meet a middle ground with the trans community by suggesting we approach the issue the same way society approaches religious tolerance

Yes, but importantly, one that separates between the 'church' and state. Because current trans 'fundamentalist' laws are being passed in the name of progress, which make it a very treacherous path to go down.

I wonder if at some point we'll be able to consolidate it into a movement of some sort... I'm probably dreaming though. The second you publicly state any opinion on this you're instantly silenced as a bigot. And threatened with rape. And violence. And doxxing.

I am coming to the conclusion, although this issue really concerns feminists, that because men (especially white, middle-class, etc males) are not being targeted by trans fundamentalists (probably because it is both too challenging to knock men down from their privileged position and also doesn't produce a delightful misogynist thrill, like terrorising and bullying 'dissenting women' into silence) that I think we should have a 'shield of white men' to hide behind, they have so much less to lose than us. I mean, look at how blunt men can be www.theblaze.com/contributions/calling-bruce-jenner-a-woman-is-an-insult-to-women/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons so different from all the tiptoeing around and treading on eggshells women have to do. These men can publish our anonymous words to get the debate going.

I know this is a radical idea and I am not sure if I am genuinely suggesting this or so angry about the injustice of it that I'm just being subversive.

from the balze article "After all, according to mainstream feminist wisdom, there is no such thing as a “female brain” or a “female soul” or “feeling like a female.” By the words of every liberal who has ever said anything on the subject of women’s rights in the past four decades, how you dress, look, think, and feel have nothing to do with your womanhood. Usually it would be offensive and sexist to accuse a woman of acting like, thinking like, or feeling like a woman."

now i am really really confused, this doesn't feel like a source i should be agreeing with

I like that article, Paw. He writes like the old me!

Having woken up in a more optimistic mood, I'm wondering if this may not be bad thing for feminism in due course. It's making us - or some of us? - think more deeply about what it means to be a woman: collectively, personally, pragmatically and existentially. This hasn't happened much since the 1970s and maybe it's overdue.

So - right back to your OP, Jeanne :) Are you feeling any differently since you wrote it?

"Usually it would be offensive and sexist to accuse a woman of acting like, thinking like, or feeling like a woman." - Is this the part that bothered you, 0x? I read it as an acknowledgement of women's personhood - that we are not, or shouldn't be, defined by gender.

He put it badly, but the remarks prompted thoughts in my mind of "Just like a woman!" (meaning silly) and "Women can't be scaffolders" type of thing. Not that calling a woman a woman would be insulting.

I really liked that article

I don't know how to phrase this but women complaining about trans activists can appear to be...ahhh fuckit I can't think of a word...mean, jealous, selfish, not wanting to share, TERFy....dunno

If men complain?????

Would it help to have more male allies on this...does it feel a bit more like coming to our rescue? Why does it seem to matter more if a man has thee problems with the extreme end of MTT

Do I have hand my feminist badge in now?