Can someone explain the feminism - transgender clash...

[Puffinity]

...in a calm, non-ranty and non-sweary manner? Until very recently, my line of thinking was 'There are some men who feel like women (and vice versa). Fortunately, we are now open-minded enough as a society to accept this, and these people can have a sex change. Their bodies will then resemble their identity more closely and they will be happier for it.' Because of this, I was quite shocked at how anti-trans some feminists are. I am inclined to think there is more to it, and it is not as straightforward a question as it may seem. Can someone explain the issue in a bit more detail to me? I obviously understand the annoyance over banning the use of the word 'clitoris' for being offensive to transwomen (MtF) and could understand why some biological women (not sure what the correct lingo is) have problems allowing transwomen (MtF) who still have a penis into women-only (safe) spaces. But how many transwomen get upset over the use of words like clitoris and uterus? Surely most would just be relieved to have addressed their gender dysphoria and would want to get on with life? And how many transwomen (MtF) decide to keep their penis? Wouldn't it be wrong to exclude transwomen (MtF) from women-only activities? Shouldn't biological women who consider themselves feminists have some sympathy for other groups that are not treated equally in society? I am not trying to create a really heated debate, these are genuine questions I have. Having them answered will help me have a more informed opinion on the matter, which does seem to crop up more and more. Your views would be much appreciated!

Another issue is the gradual inclusion of males in women's sport. And you end up with this

dailyheadlines.net/archives/36200

And this - beggars belief. It's possible that the Olympics will see female records being broken by men. Makes an utter mockery of women's sport.

m.theage.com.au/sport/olympics/rio-2016/rio-olympics-2016-why-transgender-issues-could-dominate-the-games-20160605-gpbx24.html

Chickpeas, the author of that article in The Age is wrong to describe Semenya as transgender. I forget which condition she has that has caused her heightened testosterone levels but she hasn't transitioned from man to woman therefore she isn't trans. Intersex people are not equivalent to trans people as that author seems to think.

Castor Semenya is transgender? I thought she was a woman with an intersex condition.

X-post. It beggars belief that a professor of sports science wouldn't know the difference. Is it being erased for political reasons?

It's an Australian publication, Countess - I wonder if the terms are used differently there (I often think that discussions re trans would be easier if the word for sex didn't mean both XX/XY and shagging)

I wonder where Joanna Harper, who is using intersex correctly, gets the number of 5/8 possible intersex women in the final - I assume this is based on known national team members.

Ah I see.... Thanks for clarifying.

I live in a smallish city and work with and mix in circles which are largely middle class, liberals and don't know any trans people let alone "a lot".

Perhaps they just decided to be trans when they heard about this group?

I've only seen any transpeople at LadyQueer*Fest, but wouldn't be surprised if some men had already noticed how claiming trans status enables them to invade women's spaces.

I'm fairly new to the whole trans debate. From what i see on line - it seems that some of the perhaps young but more vocal trans activists, especially trans women - don't really like women or at least women who aren't prepared to adhere 100% to their version of what gender and sex is and basically what a woman is.

I used to buy the whole born in the wrong body thing - I guess because I felt sorry for them and I try to be really tolerant and open minded. They seemed so harmless and a bit pathetic. Now they feel strong - a diffent voice and agenda has come forth - and much of it seems aggressive and anti women. The whole transwomen in sports drew my attention. I just can't lie anymore to spare some poor sods feelings. I don't think a man can change sex and become a woman. I won't let any religious person force me to believe in God and religion and this seems to fall into a similar faith based belief system. It all just doesn't make sense and sounds like a huge delusion. I resent these men telling me that they are more important than women and have to come first - with everything damaging to women and girls that this will bring.

Then I started reading how trans people don't like the fact that non trans people generally want nothing to do with them sexually and romantically - I think many of them are angry and feel rejected and realise that even though people seem supportive - when it comes down to the crunch - they are rejected and viewed as freaks to a degree. There is a lot of anger out there.

Then I happened upon assigned male's FB page with some of the most awful and pathetic cartoons which shows exactly where the more aggressive trans activists are coming from.

Hey Bambambini, head on over to the General Trans thread - we're mostly gender critical but some have stronger feelings than others. I'm quite new to everything too. And I also try to be tolerant and open minded but I've had my eyes opened to what's actually going in some sectors of the transactivist community. The death and rape threats that we are supposed to believe are coming from other "women" are chilling. And the inability of other liberals to see another side to the debate is also worrying, believing that any criticism is transphobia, even from people who are behind the rights of transpeople to live a life free from violence and discrimination.

So loads to discuss!

OP, not all feminists are anti trans. Liberal feminists and Queer feminists tend to be inclusive and sympathetic of trans and non binary people. Radical feminism not so much. The FWR forum on Mumsnet is predominantly Radical feminist.

I actually am not sure that you can argue that liberal feminists tend to be inclusive and sympathetic of trans* and non-binary people. Liberal feminism is about equality of opportunity, regardless of sex, through law, policy, equal opportunities etc.

This does not necessarily translate into 'there is nothing wrong with men deciding that they feel like women and are women', because as posters above have already said, MtT have already certain privileges in society. Accessing women's 'safe' spaces simply amplifies that sense of privilege, it doesn't create a level playing field.

For what it is worth, I am cultural feminist in many ways, and I share many of the views expressed on this thread.

I actually am not sure that you can argue that liberal feminists tend to be inclusive and sympathetic of trans and non-binary people. Liberal feminism is about equality of opportunity, regardless of sex, through law, policy, equal opportunities etc.*

It's not that being a liberal feminist automatically has to lead to this stance, but we can observe that it often goes hand in hand.

If you mean neoliberal, identity politics feminism, yes, I would agree Vestal. But I would see that as a different historical phenomenon and different from classical liberal feminism.

Liberal feminism is the oldest and most well established strand of feminism. It suits trans activism and sympathetic adherents to claim its support. But the kind of commodified and consumable view of womanhood the trans movement endorses and fights for is a very neoliberal model. It is nothing to do with women's equal rights and opportunity, rather it erodes those rights and narrows opportunities.

Nonetheless, I would be curious to know what first wave feminists thought of cross-dressing and living as a woman, such as it happened then.

How is liberal feminism the oldest kind of feminism?

We're talking feminism before Emma Goldman and Sylvia Pankhurst then. Who were the first feminists?

Who were the first feminists?

Very probaly we do not know who they were.

And then there's the question where feminism starts. Is a woman a feminist when she thinks feminist thoughts, or when she takes feminist actions, or when she write feminist theory?

Fair point, I was thinking Mary Wollstonecraft but of course, that is taking a modernist, Western perspective - but given that feminism is a modern concept (posts enlightenment), I think it is possibly anachronistic to try and evidence it earlier, but I am happy to be corrected.

Nonetheless, I stand by my contention that (re-phrasing) more well-established, longer existing classical liberal feminism is distinct from neoliberal identity politics feminism. Trans activists might reasonably claim support from the latter, but I question whether evoking the former is appropriate, or whether it simply lends legitimacy to the trans position.

Post-Enlightenment that should have said!

I think the distinction between neoliberalism identity politics liberal feminism and traditional liberal feminism is a really useful one. Currently what I am seeing is liberal feminists who strongly disagree with the identity politics tendency moving in their droves towards radfem - led groups and discussions but not quite fitting in with every aspect. Maybe what we're seeing now is not so much a new split between radfems and libfems, as it has sometimes appeared, but between different strands in liberal feminism.

Thanks Cocoa - was not meant as a criticism, just wondering which feminists you had in mind.

'Liberal' in general use seems to mean person who is not conservative in political terms.

I agree that identity politics has very little to do with a liberal feminist tradition (which I would see as rights based and getting changes in law).

It seems to me that liberal politics (in the philosophical sense) should be perfectly placed to find a workable set of compromises. The distinction between the private and public sphere (believe whatever you like about your own gender identity, but don't require others to share those beliefs), the mechanisms liberalism has for resolving clashes of rights, such as Mill's positive and negative liberties (to deal with situations like pre-op trans people in communal changing rooms) should offer a framework to think seriously about these things.

I think Countess' point upthread that the problem is that many people conflate liberalism and neo-liberal extreme individualism is spot-on as a diagnosis of the problem just right. Liberal has come to mean (in a lot of people's minds) "tolerance of everything in sight to the point where even well reasoned and polite criticism of someone else's views is construed as an act of violence." Which presumably would have Mill and Rawls turning in their graves!

(Which isn't to say liberalism is a magic bullet - there are for instance very interesting and challenging radical feminist critiques of the way liberalism relies on a distinction between private and public spheres, and the problem that this all too often leads to a private sphere within which women are simultaneously confined, silenced and oppressed).

I'm posting here because this is where some of the most honest questions are. This in particular is where the state of men saying they are women in sports has reached.

86% of TIMs retain genitalia

There seems to be 2 groups within TIMs - the opportunist and the serious.

The opportunists like to be the "first of" - first TIM wrestler in female category, Jenner being first TIM media construct, first UK media TIM etc etc This group also includes AGP males - those whose sexual entitlement knows no bounds plus who get off on wearing women's clothes, voyeurism of women and girls including upskirting and other predatory behaviour. AGP offences are serious "gateway" crimes that lead onto the more violent criminality of rape etc. Many in the "first of" subgroup also seem to share many common behaviours and attitudes with the latter, particularly lack of empathy for the harm and distress their male entitlement causes. These attitudes are also seen in MRAs. MRA attitudes are prevalent in males who harm females i.e. DV.

The latter group are what I would call transexual and cross-dressers- have always been around and don't want to take anything away from women - they are happy to blend in on the whole and lead a quiet life. This group seem to identify with gender dysphoria and seek treatment and generally have a more considered attitude both to their transition and the seriousness of it plus towards women as a whole.

These 2 categories mirror the split in males - i.e. there are the predatory entitled type that do most of the harm to women (20-30%) and the remainder are happily co-exist alongside women. There is no way to tell them apart at first glance. The former is why single sex spaces were necessary in the first place - because they don't contain their excesses and make life unsafe for women in shared spaces, particularly where women are vulnerable. These types are predators so when they see a wounded or vulnerable animal they move in for the kill rather than leaving it alone. They hunt and harass smaller species e.g. like a cat stalking a mouse or a man with a woman.

YOure talking about transsexuals.

Transgender aren’t transsexuals. Transgender have completely taken over LGBT and only male transgender at that. They are loud - gaslighting and calling ppl who question names. They are entitled and demand. Quite obvious ppl ain’t gonna roll over and take it.