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

Is it actually possible to be a feminist and completely embrace trans rights?

430 replies

BertrandRussell · 02/09/2016 10:14

Because I am beginning to think that i will never be able to say anything about trans issues without being accused of being transphobic.

It seems to me that in some cases trans rights are just incompatible with women's rights. Obviously then, someone has to step aside- and if I want the ones stepping aside to be transwomen then I am being, I suppose, transphobic.

So has the time come for feminists to say to trans women "I support you to live the life you want to. I will stand up to and with you against people who abuse you and are violent to you. I will call you what you want to be called. I will defend your employment rights, your right to housing and any other "social" service. I will defend your right to appropriate medical treatment. In fact, I will defend you and support you in anything up to the point where your rights conflict with and take precedence over the rights of women. From that point, my allegiance is with women.

If this causes you to call me transphobic so be it. I will continue to support you up to that point regardless."

OP posts:
VashtaNerada · 06/09/2016 23:18

Haven't read whole thread but yes you can campaign for women's rights and trans rights. A patriarchal society harms women but also harms others who don't don't fit into the tiny group of elite who seem to have all the power. Women, trans people, people of colour, disabled people etc all deserve equal access to services and the right to be free from violence.

There are definitely contentious issues such as women-only spaces, but aside from a few crazies on the Internet, most women and most trans people I know are reasonable and able to find the right solution in individual circumstances. I know plenty of trans people (both transmen and transwomen) who challenge sexism and plenty of feminists who are trans allies. Generally one marginalised group sympathises with another.

BertrandRussell · 06/09/2016 23:26

"most women and most trans people I know are reasonable and able to find the right solution in individual circumstances"

Could you give me some examples?

OP posts:
VashtaNerada · 06/09/2016 23:35

Bertrand I just meant transwomen who appreciate why others might be uncomfortable with them joining, say, a group for female rape survivors. Or workplaces where trans people use toilets of their choosing and nobody bats an eyelid because they know that person and aren't threatened by them. I'm not denying there is a debate to be had over prisons etc, just that the debate doesn't completely stop you from fighting for basic rights for both groups. There are many, many areas of equal rights outside of those conversations.

BertrandRussell · 06/09/2016 23:40

"just that the debate doesn't completely stop you from fighting for basic rights for both groups."

But that is the point of my thread. Yes of course transpeople should have "basic rights" No question about that. This thread is about what happens when those rights conflict with the rights of women.

OP posts:
Felascloak · 06/09/2016 23:45

See I read berts OP as full support the current trans movement ie a woman us anyone who says they are a woman. That's how I interpret "fully embrace trans rights".
The vast majority of posters on here and other threads have said we a sympathetic and support trans people's rights to live and present as they wish free from violence and discrimination. That's not the same thing as agreeing that they are the sex they identify with though.

VashtaNerada · 06/09/2016 23:50

Ah yes sorry, re-read OP and saw it asks if you can completely embrace trans rights. I suppose it depends on that definition - if it means everything a trans person has ever asked for then definitely not. There's some horrible stuff out there telling people who they can and can't be attracted to which is clearly ridiculous. And I'm on the fence with issues such as prisons which probably needs to be a case by case decision. But generally speaking I've always been comfortable campaigning for both.

Blistory · 07/09/2016 00:24

As much as I'm trying to avoid the whole transwomen as potential threat argument, as an employer it worries me that I am going to be forced to discriminate. I think I currently would do so if I had to.

I like the idea that we could rely on transwomen to be sensitive and to remove themselves from situations where their involvement could trample over the rights of others and I think that largely this is what has been happening. The rise of transactivism means that we can no longer rely on goodwill and need to legislate for this.

At the moment, legally if someone has a GRC I don't need to know that as an employer and would therefore assume that a same sex request by a service user could simply be met by some one who I think is the same sex. There may be no sign for me as an employer that someone is trans but by virtue of the GRC, I can take comfort that their intentions have been discussed with doctors, therapists, that they are hugely committed to their transition and that they are not simply a cross dressing male who feels like a woman that day. So although the law as it currently stands doesn't give women any protection re requests for same sex providers, the process of the GRC lessens the risk somewhat. I assume that any transwomen HCP would be sensitive and remove themselves from a situation where it was clear that a patient wanted a same sex HCP.

Allowing a GRC to be issued simply upon request removes the reassurance that it currently affords us.

If someone doesn't have a GRC at the moment, I wouldn't send a transwomen to a service user who requested a female member of staff. This is legal but transphobic. My service user is happy but my employee who is trans feels they have been discriminated against. As an employer am I really being asked to decide who suffers the least discrimination when the reality is that there is simply no way for me to avoid discriminating against someone ?

There can't be a winner so the question is who loses the least ? Surely it has to be the transwomen ? Or are we really going to allow ourselves to get into a situation whereby women can be potentially deceived into consenting to be touched or examined. I would have said a couple of years ago that the law simply has to come down in favour of allowing us to protect our bodily integrity but I have very little faith that this will remain the case.

Apologies for not being very concise but it's too late at night to be peering into a future where women end up existing only in the shadow of men all over again.

WitchingHour666 · 07/09/2016 06:47

I believe the answer is that a woman can not be a feminist that adds anything meaningful to women's liberation and still support trans ideology e.g. that males/men can become females/women in any shape, form or way. Such a woman would be a feminist in name only. The same as a woman who supports the sexual objectification of women through porn and prostitution would. Supporting things that harm females is not feminist, regardless of the reasons for doing so.

Trans ideology maintains that gender is a spectrum with masculinity and males/men at one end and femininity and females/women at the other. That everyone falls somewhere on this spectrum just by nature and personal preferences. That psychologically, spiritually, etc., a person can be partly or wholly the opposite sex depending where they fall on this spectrum.

Feminism on the other hand, since its conception, has acknowledged that men have two uses for women; as sexual objects they can use to gain pleasure from, and as mothers to their male heirs. That men have invented a way to insure that women perform these two roles by socialising girls into them. That the reason males imposed this socialisation onto females is because if there was not this social pressure on girls to conform most would not, as it is not in our interests to do so. Because conforming to it ensures male supremacy continues.

Feminists also realise that males invented religion to legitimise their insistence that women were created to serve men in these roles. Similarly, we also realise that men have invented pseudo science like 'brain sex', that our hormones cause us to perform the women's sex role etc., to prove that women are created to serve them in this way. Moreover, since trans ideology rejects that a role is forced onto females in order to keep us serving males. And instead maintains sex roles (gender) are innate and innocuous, a male who likes hobbies and clothes that are considered part of the females sex role is considered just as oppressed as a woman who conforms. In fact he is more oppressed, as he is 'born in the wrong body' and deserves women's sympathy. As women are not oppressed and considered inferior to men because we are born female, instead we are just devalued for having an innate desire to perform a submissive role.

Feminists explain that we if refuse to conform to the female sex role we are devalued even more by patriarchy, not less. e.g. if we refuse beauty rituals etc. Unlike males, who could conform to the male sex role and assume his place on top of the social hierarchy. We never have the option of being on top of the hierarchy, whether we conform or not. Those that believe in trans ideology claim if we don't like the female role and our inferior social status we must be trans ourselves and should transition.

For these reasons (and many more) trans ideology is directly opposed to feminism. I don't see the point in arguing about 'real trans' etc., like some do, the whole ideology is misogynistic and homophobic at the foundation level.

BertrandRussell · 07/09/2016 08:46

"But generally speaking I've always been comfortable campaigning for both."

I genuinely don't see how- once you get beyond a certain point. Because, as Blistory puts it so well, when you get to a conflict of rights, someone has to step aside- it's a matter of deciding who.

As an aside, it's interesting that you say you are happy campaigning for both. Women always seem to be expected to campaign for other people as well as themselves, don't they? Women can't say "Actually, my focus is women and girls" When I was young, women were expected to take on gay rights campaigns. Men expect us to build them refuges from domestic violence. And now we are being expected to take up the battle for trans rights. I suppose it's because we're so good at multi tasking........Hmm

OP posts:
Prawnofthepatriarchy · 07/09/2016 08:54

Well, that nailed it, Witching. Smile

I started off very live and let live but, as time has gone on and I've learned more, I now can't see any way in which trans activism and feminism can get along. The trans agenda is total nonsense. All we need to do is to give TAs enough opportunities to demonstrate this.

MephistoMarley · 07/09/2016 09:40

Fucking excellent post witching

ageingrunner · 07/09/2016 10:00

Brilliant post Witching. That sums it up. I wish there was some way round it, but there isn't, is there?

HemlockIsSpartacus · 07/09/2016 10:09

"Women always seem to be expected to campaign for other people as well as themselves, don't they?"

I've noticed that. It shows when you get campaigns about women's issues that have to shoehorn in something about trans rights, but you'll never get women's rights in a campaign about trans issues. We always have to be the ones to budge up and make room.

Blistory · 07/09/2016 11:13

I'm not so pessimistic about there not being a solution.

One of the problems as I see it is this need for transwomen to pass. The whole notion of 'being stealth' is really a deceit - whether that deceit is on themselves or the population at large is probably immaterial. If transwomen and transmen are going to measure their success by being invisible within society, how does society ever learn to tolerate their existence ? Hiding isn't acceptance and we, as a society, are deceiving transwomen by pretending that we accept them for what they say they are when, in reality, what we are saying is that we'll tolerate you as what you say you are but only if you conform.

If we could abandon the notion of gender roles would transwomen really need to hide ? Would there be harm in not passing or in being a gender critical transwoman ?

I'm not a transwoman so I don't know how important or essential it is to have others validate one's own beliefs but surely if transwomen could accept that women can respect their beliefs without accepting it themselves, we'd have a way to move forward ?

ageingrunner · 07/09/2016 11:32

If there isn't at least some attempt to pass (although it wouldn't be possible for the majority of tw imo), then what is the point? Surely you're then just a person wearing clothes more usually worn by people of the opposite sex? What makes someone "trans", apart from conforming to stereotypical dress and behaviours which are supposed to be for the opposite sex? I don't understand this, and nobody who is trans seems able to explain it

JeepersMcoy · 07/09/2016 11:53

Trans only makes sense while we have fixed gender roles and identities. If there was no differentiation based on gender then there would be nothing to transition from or to. You would just have men who liked to wear dresses and want drugs or surgery to change their bodies.

I sometimes wonder if it is the case that people who want to change their bodies have simply latched onto the gender thing as a way to explain (to others and themselves) something they don't know how to explain. Perhaps it is easier to say 'i want to be a woman' than it is to explain that you want to wear clothes that aren't the norm and you really don't want to have a dick, and you think you would like to have breasts. It is a short cut to get what they want and be accepted, but they have not considered or cared about the consequences of this narrative.

I don't know really, I am going a bit stream of consciousness now and may not make any sense. Blush

ArcheryAnnie · 07/09/2016 18:14

devilinmyshoes what I think it's very difficult to get across in this discussion is that most male-to-trans people do not transition. This was always true, back in the day (and the language was very different then, and anyway it was not an issue as 99% of gender nonconforming males who presented as "female" in some way did not actually claim to be biologically female) but it is even more true now. Most trans women will not have had SRS, and will still have a penis. Some will be taking hormones, or had electrolysis, but this does not mean they do not still have fully working male genitalia.

VashtaNerada · 07/09/2016 19:43

"Women always seem to be expected to campaign for other people as well as themselves, don't they?"
Excellent point! I do find that people often say 'haven't you got anything better to do?' when doing feministy stuff but then I equally get 'but what about women?' when doing LGB or T stuff.

Bumbledumb · 07/09/2016 19:44

Personally if I were trans, I doubt I would undergo surgery. It would cost a lot of money, and it is major and unnecessary surgery with all the attendant risks.

It is disturbing to see people who vehemently oppose any form of FGM, telling other people that they will only accept them as women if they totally mutilate their genitals.

ageingrunner · 07/09/2016 19:55

I don't think I would undergo surgery either, for the reasons you mention Bunbledum, but then if I didn't what about me would be trans? Wouldn't I just be a woman wearing clothes that men usually wear, or vice versa if I was a man?

ArcheryAnnie · 07/09/2016 22:11

Bumbledumb I don't think anyone should be in the awful position of requiring surgery or any other physical modification - and in fact it's feminists who are at the forefront of speaking about the harm to young female bodies by wearing binders, and so on. (And being told we are wrong to speak out so, despite the fact that many young women, who in the end detransition and don't identify as trans men or genderqueer after all, end up with deformed rib cages and damaged breast tissue.)

But if someone born with a male body who says they have dysphoria and will kill themselves if society doesn't accommodate their desire to be seen as 100% female, then proceeds to use that male body and those male genitals to have a perfectly ordinary physically male life (which for too many men includes abusing women with their male genitals) I will side-eye their claims to dysphoria.

HouseMouseQueen · 07/09/2016 22:15

When it comes to basic human rights, I can't see any feminist who would be against that.

However, that's not what we're talking about here.

We're talking about autogynephilic males who are 1) parodying women using the worst stereotypes 2) wanting access to our sacred spaces that we fought long and hard for 3) changing our very lexicon so that we are unable to speak about our conditions 4) changing laws in order to criminalize women and girls for speaking truth and a whole host of other things that mainly revolve around gaslighting us to deny our very realities as females.

So no. Transactivism is not compatible with our unique struggle precisely because what they're 'fighting' for, or should I say 'what they're demanding from women is a complete erasure of us and everything we built.

Never the twain shall meet.

WinchesterWoman · 07/09/2016 22:26

Nevada you mentioned upthread about trans using 'the toilets of their choosing and no one bats an eyelid'.

I bet the women just don't want to say anything. Avoid confrontation, be nice, please people, get away quick. I think you are kidding yourself.

HairyLittlePoet · 07/09/2016 22:28

It is disturbing to see people who vehemently oppose any form of FGM, telling other people that they will only accept them as women if they totally mutilate their genitals.

Many feminists don't see the issue as M2T SRS entry requirements into the woman club. SRS or not, people with male bodies can never be women. I can't condone the medical profession surgically removing healthy body parts with associated health risks, to treat a psychological condition (dysphoria). No other dysphoria is treated this way.

Bumbledumb · 07/09/2016 22:42

Wouldn't I just be a woman wearing clothes that men usually wear, or vice versa if I was a man?

Trans are not defined by the clothes they wear. It is a mental condition where a person believes that their physical sex is wrong. They dress as women or men because that is how they want to be perceived.

Swipe left for the next trending thread