What Makes A Woman?

[MxJackMonroe]

Hi MNers,

A couple of days ago I did an informal webchat ...

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/2693127-Im-Jack-Monroe-Ask-me-anything

...and it seemed to go quite well. One of the questions that came up was 'What Is A Woman'?

I'm throwing this one open to the floor - as I am interested to hear your opinions on it.

Please try to not railroad the thread with trans-bashing; it is a wider question than that, so keep responses respectful please.

Jx

AskBasil, I think according to the author of that blog you linked to, transwomen will only too happy to do the wifework as they are, of course, better 'women' than real women and only too happy to help. Whether they are still happy to do it after a few years of mopping up sick, cleaning toilets and remembering someone else's mother's birthday I highly doubt.
Especially as they grew up as boys, expecting someone else (a real woman) to do all that stuff.

Not inherently politically oppressive but still with the potential to be oppressive, not optimal and often requiring medicalisation (menstruation, childbirth, menopause etc).

Agreed.
And I think medicalisation is another process in which men colonise women's bodily and biological experiences. So it's another reason (for me) to be wary of discourses of woman as simply a biological category.

I'm starting to kind of see where you're getting at wrench but surely it's semantics if we get rid of "woman" and keep "female"? We still have a construct to differentiate between classes of human and oppress the female one.
I can't see society being willing or able to get rid of biological sex as birthing children is so complicated.
I think it's better to stick to biological descriptors of man and woman, because it just means different plumbing. Would love to see all the gender bollocks gone though

I agree with Felascloak. The difference between woman and (presumably adult human) female biology is just semantics.

Arguing for female biology existing as a non politicised concept is not the same thing as saying sex could not exist as a category at all.

'Actually that makes me think of those male fantasies about germinating babies in artificial wombs so we no longer need women.

Men can become far more satisfactory women themselves. transsingleblog.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/make-love-with-transgender-females/

The only problem is, who is going to do the wifework?'

This raises the possibility of there being gender without sex (if they got rid of women entirely). Many of the humanoid robots that are being created certainly have an oppressive feminine gender expression without being biologically female.

Surely what is a woman and what makes a woman are two very different questions?

I've told this before (and I know it's just anecdotal, yadda yadda yadda), but I know a couple who are both trans, one Mtt and one ftt. Guess who does all the remembering birthdays etc...?
Which is weird, as her partner is the one who is 'psychologically' female.

JM really isn't interested in this any more, is she? I know she's had some issues recently as advertised on Twitter (where she's now moved on to other topics), but I can't help thinking she was hoping for more 'oooh, good question - I think it's because I liked playing with dolls and I'm very nurturing' vs 'I don't feel like a woman because I like wearing trousers not skirts' type discussion.

JM really isn't interested in this any more, is she? I know she's had some issues recently as advertised on Twitter (where she's now moved on to other topics), but I can't help thinking she was hoping for more 'oooh, good question - I think it's because I liked playing with dolls and I'm very nurturing' vs 'I don't feel like a woman because I like wearing trousers not skirts' type discussion.

It's all so odd.

First her deliberate misrepresentation in the guardian of mumsnet trans critical comments.

Then the self important announcement of her presence here, linked to on her Twitter account.

Then the posting of two threads (also linked to on Twitter) on here about herself and her gender identity. An attempt to control the discussion about what can be said in answer to her question about what makes a woman.

Seeming to be in agreement with the main substance of what most posters said on that thread about gender :)

But then disappearing from the thread when it becomes clear that she has no way of disputing the trans critical comments and still managing to sound rational. Backed into a corner of logic, if you like.

Fucking off and pretending it never happened. Continuing to post about trans issues on Twitter.

What was it all for?

It seems as though these days JM is possibly famous for being famous, but in a right-on lefty way rather than a traditional Katie price/Katie Hopkins reality tv way.

She keeps the media interested in her by talking about her gender identity, her sexuality, her veganism etc instead of boob jobs, pregnancies or outrageous statements about migrants.

But she is the product and she needs to sustain media interest in herself just as Price and Hopkins do, it's just a different demographic.

Perhaps this is what the mumsnet thing has been about. An attempt to engineer a confrontation that she could then use as a springboard for another article or interview - ie how she came on here to engage with her critics but was met with a barrage of transphobic abuse instead.

But obviously that didn't happen, most people have bent over backwards to be kind and respectful. So these discussions have been of limited use as far as publicity is concerned.

I could be way off the mark but can't think of any other explanation for the oddness.

I dunno seek, that would be a very infantile discussion. I assume someone who has made the decision to take artificial hormones has thought deeper than that. But tbh, I would have expected anyone who is taking artificial hormones and/or having their body surgically altered in this vein, to have solidified a strong opinion on what a woman and a man is, why they think they are the opposite and how they think medicalising themselves will help them achieve that.

It's terrifying and horrific that professional adults and care givers advocate this approach for children, without being able to answer 'what makes a woman'

I know it would be an infantile discussion!

I think you are being a bit harsh on JM. She posted some very personal stuff (fine if you are anonymous but I was worried she made herself vulnerable to negative attention from media)- I'm not going to repeat it but it wasn't 'I never liked dolls' type stuff. Some people have given lots of thought to gender issues over many decades and our opinions are therefore well considered. My feeling about JM, especially after reading what she posted here is that, although she has had the gut feeling we all have that gender is bollocks, she just hasn't had the time and opportunity to pursue this in any theoretical way. Fair enough it's not everyone's priority and she has been doing excellent work in other areas not to mention raising a child. It's a bit like my adult children, some of whom roll their eyes at me when I very gently challenge the trans activist line- they clearly think they are the first to see through gender stereotypes (if only they'd seen me in 1981 ).

Which is weird, as her partner is the one who is 'psychologically' female

Not weird at all. very expected actually.

This stuff has me so down especially now MNHQ are deleting 'transphobic' message such as saying there is no such thing as a female penis.

Does anyone have any ideas what we can actually do to fight back and protect what we (well, our ancestors) fought - and even died - so hard for?

I'm drawing a blank. I can't think of any possible way to get Joe Public to listen to the disturbing stats on violence/sexual assault and show them the really nasty transactivists (balanced with the intelligent ones) without being labelled transphobic!

How do we fight a battle if we aren't even allowed to say what the problem actually is??!

I despair.

I missed the face off the end of that Frey, it was intended as a comment!

Agree it (the whole thing - these JM threads, the deletions in the child abuser thread, and then all the other stuff on top) just makes me utterly despondent at the moment.

Perhaps this is what the mumsnet thing has been about. An attempt to engineer a confrontation that she could then use as a springboard for another article or interview - ie how she came on here to engage with her critics but was met with a barrage of transphobic abuse instead

That had occurred to me too.

What can be done to fight it?

www.gofundme.com/WoLF-vs-USA

Is anyone still out there to debate this with? I was finding this really interesting, to see several perspectives but also reading how so many people with differing opinions just 'know' they are right.

No. One 'side' offers a definition and evidence and references.

The other 'side', just knows

It isn't interesting; it's just depressing.

I think what I find interesting is that people have many different points of view ranging from radical feminism with no place for transwomen being treated as women for the purpose of conferring rights, through to live and let live - as long as it doesn't affect me.
I am concerned at the lack of intelligent and 'permissible' debate around how the law classifies trans people, treat them for legal and medical purposes whilst at the same time maintaining the rights women have won over many years, for women, not just for people who 'identify' as women.
Two issues are central to me. Can we as women stand with those who
identify as women to push for rights in various different areas? I believe we can. Transwomen are not women but face their own prejudice, harassment and violence from women, on an entirely different basis. I'm afraid that most people who commit fate crime or any other form of discrimination against transwomen are not committing against them because they are women - it's because they are not women, but seen as threatening the norm, as different.
I'm not suggesting we all see trans people as 'freaks' but unfortunately there are many who do.
I also do not know what is meant by 'identification as a woman'. In my head, I am torn between a feeling of great empathy for those who somehow feel in the wrong body and then feeling that I cannot empathise because I do not even understand that which I am being asked to empathise with.
There is also a huge part of me that wants a transwoman, at any stage of identifying or transitioning, to explain to me what it is you feel I should understand about you.
You are not, cannot, be a biological female, within the bounds of current medical science. What is it that you feel will change for you if for example, you classify yourself as a male presenting female but want the world, and the law in certain circumstances, to recognise you as a woman?
I think one of the expressions that has annoyed me most is that used by some (not all) of those who wish to live their lives completely as men, with beards etc (not that important) but claim some right to be accepted as women - 'expanding the band width' of what being a woman means.
What did I miss here? I have been busy having children and feel I have woken up in a place that has alien concepts to me, of conferring rights on such people (only examples) to share women's' safe spaces, compete against women in sport, win women's' awards.
Why? These people are not women in my view. They are transwomen, as a group deserving of their own protections, but not mine.
I lost a job due to having a baby, with post natal complications, including a hysterectomy, and my baby had additional needs. Not one transwoman can say that.

I cannot claim to have faced bullying for identifying as a gender I was not born to. My treatment at the hands of bullies doesn't mean I want or need to rely on the fast changing rights of transwomen to protect myself. We are different, with different needs and abilities, and different protections from harassment.

I am not with those who think transwomen are disgusting or a damaging parody of womankind. I want transwomen to feel free from fear. I also want them to understand my concern as a mother to 3 girls, that their protections and rights will suffer if the trans community won't face the difficult conversations I feel we need to have. It seems non-existent.
I have a friend who has just completed a PhD in 4th Wave Feminism. I asked to send me the best mix of literature she could on this whole topic. She said she thought I should read her thesis instead, or I would be looking at 650 pages of material that never really gets to the bottom of things.
Can any trans person please help me to understand? I want to get it, but I'm not sure I even understand what there is to get.

Badger, your post is very interesting, but it's covering a lot of stuff that this thread isn't really about.

Do you think that it would be worth starting a new thread about it? Not because there's anything wrong with posting on here, but just because not many people are posting on this thread.

I think that's because a. it is in feminist theory which people don't post in much, and b. maybe some people are worrying about why this thread was started and what posts on here might be used for.

You might get more posters responding to you (in the morning) and discussing the particular points raised by your post if you started a new thread in feminist chat.

I think to get Trans POV you are better off visiting Trans sites; there are not many trans people on MN

Kim is trans

And I think kim is fed up of being the representative of All Things Trans on mumsnet!
Miranda yardley and Helen Heaton are trans women who have written and blogged about their experiences of being trans and their views on gender. I think they are both great.