Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Consquences of self-identification

1000 replies

MrsKCastle · 17/09/2016 14:37

Sorry if this has already been done. I've been doing a lot of thinking about current trans thinking in the media.

As far as I understand it, this is the predominant view:
Anyone can be man or woman, male, female or neither. It doesn't depend on your genes, appearance or potential ability to hear young. What's important is how you identify. We should always treat people as they identify, with regard to how we speak about and treat them, and what spaces/roles we allow them to access.

What I'm interested in, is how this self-identification will or could change society. I'd love to hear your thoughts as I think it will help me to get things straight in my head.

So far I'm thinking:
No more single-sex schools
No more single-sex hospital wards
No more single-sex clubs, whether that's Brownies or exclusive golf clubs
Anyone can apply for any scholarship or award, regardless of sex

What else?

OP posts:
WitchingHour666 · 28/09/2016 09:06

Although these two categories of men; fetishists and gay men have different motives. It is the ideology itself that is misogynistic i.e. Man likes to perfom female sex role, man is: non man. Man is castrated, man is: non man. Females are seen as non men ourselves, because male is considered the default human being. So it is considered acceptable that these men define themselves as "women". Hence we have the greens and others actually calling us "non men" and lumping all and sundry under the category woman. Women have fought for decades to get away from the claim that we are just "non men".

Therefore, I believe it is important to that we do not fall into this trap of trying to placate them. By saying there is such a thing, as "true trans", or referring to them as she etc. By doing so we are accepting that males can become females (girls/women) under certain circumstances. And we prop up the ideology that says females are "non men". All this "misgendering" is nonsense, we can see which sex role a man is performing. Pronouns denote biological sex, what these men are really saying when then scream about "misgendering" is we are miss-sexing them, and we are not. The ones who make the most noise about this are usually late transing Mtt's, for obvious reasons.

Females are never really considered males (men), when they "trans", TA's try to use Ftt's as examples in order to further their cause, but they are not accepted as men. Even if they were, what message would that send to girls/women? You can only be viewed as human if you declare yourself male (boy/man), everyone else is just "non man/male". Trans has not existed historically, unless you are into historical revisionism. Many people have historically resisted sex roles, but that does not make them "trans". "Trans" is a product of its time, and will be remembered similarly to eugenics era, that it closely resembles.

The ideology needs to be uprooted and discarded, that means opposing it in it's entirety, and replacing it. The young are already replacing pomo, neolib economics with socialism. Even if they are not aware that is what they are doing. We now need to replace queer theory/ pomo with a strong class based feminism, which means we must be firm.

PoldarksBreeches · 28/09/2016 09:23

Miley Cyrus is a perfect example of a young woman performing a type of femininity (oversexualised, sex positive) and thinking she's transgressing societal norms whilst acting out a specific facet of patriarchal female oppression.

Felascloak · 28/09/2016 09:34

I tried to think of a way to say that poldarks well done!

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 28/09/2016 09:44

Yes, Poldarks, I can't believe anyone would put Miley Cyrus forward as GNC. She's just a typical pop artist, exploiting her looks for fame and money. Don't blame her, but she's no iconoclast.

FreshwaterSelkie · 28/09/2016 10:32

Fabulous posts, witching!

I am completely baffled at the concept of Miley Cyrus being GNC. She's the very illustration of someone locked into the approved patriarchal expression of sexuality for public consumption by a young attractive woman. There is absolutely NOTHING transgressive, progressive or non comformist about her. Sheesh.

SomeDyke · 28/09/2016 11:49

"There is absolutely NOTHING transgressive, progressive or non comformist about her. "
How can you say that! After all, she identifies as pansexual, and once had a buzz cut and grew her underarm hair! What more do you want!Shock

FreshwaterSelkie · 28/09/2016 14:30

I'm hard to please, I know Grin

venusinscorpio · 28/09/2016 14:39

Pansphobia! I'm reporting.

GarlicMist · 28/09/2016 15:13

More applause for Witching Crown

YY to Miley Cyrus, WTF?!

Monkey, I too welcome the advent or resurgence of gender non-conformity, especially among boys & men, while maintaining biological sex. Regarding the kid on the bus - your child knew, where you didn't, because of Pavlovian conditioning. You were admiring his hair and general feminine presentation. DC hasn't yet been conditioned that way.

Our conditioning was roundly proven by the accidental world-wide experiment that was Jessica Rabbit. Gorgeous, wasn't she? Sexy as hell! She was a fucking cartoon rabbit. The artists didn't even try to anthropomorphise her appearance beyond giving her 'sexiness' triggers like an exaggerated hour-glass figure, eyelashes & lippy and a sinuous walk. I often find myself going "Wow! She's gorgeous!" at some random woman on TV, only to realise a split second later that she really isn't; I was just reacting to her hair and over-tight dress.

GerundTheBehemoth · 28/09/2016 15:47

Jessica Rabbit was a cartoon human, not a rabbit! She was completely ridiculous though.

GarlicMist · 28/09/2016 15:57

Good lord, so she was! I should have looked instead of relying on memory Confused Oh, well ... ignore that bit and stick with the conditioned triggers, please Blush

venusinscorpio · 28/09/2016 15:59

Are you thinking of the Cadburys Caramel Bunny? Wink

WankingMonkey · 28/09/2016 16:10

I remember watching that film when I was a kid and telling my dad when I grew up I wanted to be just like jessica..she seemed perfect. I am talking when I was maybe 12/13 ish

Though I did not aspire to fuck rabbits.

GarlicMist · 28/09/2016 16:12

Dunno! Perhaps my poor tired brain has conflated every cartoonishly sexy 'bunny' I've ever seen into one ready reference? Much like those blokes who seemed to think they knew me because I was a tall, slim blonde and we're interchangeable Wink

WankingMonkey · 28/09/2016 16:17

God, haven't seen that for ages either just searched her and

img.wallpaperfolder.com/f/4DF4D0767946/top-jessica-rabbit.jpg

This was what I believed I should try to be when I grew up. Oh dear...

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 28/09/2016 16:23

Yes, Poldarks, I can't believe anyone would put Miley Cyrus forward as GNC. She's just a typical pop artist, exploiting her looks for fame and money. Don't blame her, but she's no iconoclast

Yes, except you can blame her for her idiotic behaviour.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 28/09/2016 16:27

During my times, it's been unthinkable for women to go to work without a full face of makeup - and shock horror if you left the house with wet hair instead of blowing & styling it!

Again, this is a huge exaggeration.

ErrolTheDragon · 28/09/2016 17:36

Depends on the job. Air 'hostesses' is the obvious example. Some jobs it's never applied (and then there's academia...). I think that was an inaccurate generalisation rather than an exaggeration.

zsazsagaboredom · 28/09/2016 18:09

Excellent, really, really interesting posts witching

In case anyone missed it (somehow I think you might have better things to do...) Miley Cyrus described herself as "genderfluid" last year.

As she has absolutely no history of exploiting her own body (by pushing further and further with overtly sexualised incarnations) nor of co opting Black culture (with inept, poorly executed "twerking" dance routines) for the obvious purposes of controversy, publicity-seeking, money and fame, I think we can safely assume that her self identification as gender fluid is 100% sincere... Hmm
What a feeble example.

zsazsagaboredom · 28/09/2016 18:10

Excellent, really, really interesting posts witching

In case anyone missed it (somehow I think you might have better things to do...) Miley Cyrus described herself as "genderfluid" last year.

As she has absolutely no history of exploiting her own body (by pushing further and further with overtly sexualised incarnations) nor of co opting Black culture (with inept, poorly executed "twerking" dance routines) for the obvious purposes of controversy, publicity-seeking, money and fame, I think we can safely assume that her self identification as gender fluid is 100% sincere... Hmm
What a feeble example.

zsazsagaboredom · 28/09/2016 18:26

Bugger.
Phone double posts.
Bad phone.

FirstShinyRobe · 28/09/2016 18:37

ATransMum, this phrase from your earlier post has been bugging me all day and I wondered if you'd unpack it a little.

^My peers were primarily girls and I went through all of those experiences alongside them^. Was it clumsy wording and you meant "I was alongside them whilst they went through those experiences"?

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer · 28/09/2016 18:38

errol

Dh was saying that when he started work all the women had to wear skirts in his firm

I was a bit gob smacked at that...but i dont know why because i usually wore skirts and all my uniforms came with a skirt or dress combo. So i wouldnt have noticed that this was a rule in my firm if you see what i mean

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 28/09/2016 19:58

No one is erasing bisexuals, Transmum, it's just that it's irrelevant to our discussion. What's important to women being asked to share sex-segregated space with transwomen is that many/most transwomen are sexually interested in women. It doesn't matter to us if they're also attracted to men. I understand a lot of AGP transwomen are bisexual, for fairly obvious reasons. They start off as straight cross-dressers, often married with kids, and then - post transition - see having sex with men as a powerful endorsement of their "womanhood". You see it discussed on r/asktransgender all the time.

Transwomen are, on average, taller, heavier, and very much stronger than women, and they, like other males, pose a potential physical and sexual threat to women, and at the same rate. That's why it matters to us. There's an absurd claim I've seen in far too many places that transwomen never commit sex or violent crimes against women, which is all too easy to disprove. When you write "I feel the bathroom debate is massively overplayed and is blatant fear mongering" you are erasing all the rapes and murders committed by transwomen, as well as all the smaller crimes: voyeurism, filming, using our possessions for the purpose of masturbation.

Of course, most transwomen - like most other males - are gentle souls who wouldn't hurt a fly, but the ones who will won't have it tattooed on their forehead. That's one of the reasons we have sex-segregated facilities in the first place. And when you say "There must be a balance between protecting women and giving them safe spaces and allowing trans women access to those spaces," I, and other feminists would disagree. Transwomen who pass doubtless use women-only spaces, and we wouldn't notice but, as a principle, no, males should not be in women's safe spaces regardless of how they identify. Very few transwomen do pass more than casual scrutiny, so there's that.

I was interested in your statement "I'm pansexual, which means I'm attracted to all genders." I haven't come across the concept of being attracted to a gender and find it hard to get my head round. I imagine you're sure you don't mean sex? People are normally attracted to a sex, i.e. lesbians are attracted to other women, not to gendered performance. Indeed a lot of those attracted to their own sex don't do gender much.

I'm not suggesting for a moment that you do this, but the argument I've seen from transactivists sexually attracted to women is that because lesbians are women who are sexually attracted to women they must therefore be open to relationships with anyone who adopts feminine gender roles regardless of their biological sex. Which is homophobic nonsense. But I would be interested to hear more on being attracted to all genders.

Sorry I'm asking questions on old posts, but I've not been at a proper keyboard for awhile, so couldn't cut n paste.

Prawnofthepatriarchy · 28/09/2016 20:04

About the makeup, Lasswi, I've come across it too, though not where I live now. It seems to be a feature in some parts of America, too. As for the not going out with dripping wet hair, I've done that - not being very appearance conscious - and you get a lot of disapproving looks. No one actually tarred and feathered me, but still... Shock

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.