Guardian article - gender critical.

[AssignedPerfectAtBirth]

amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/06/feminist-linda-bellos-women-trans-male-violence

Brilliant and important article. Kudos to the Guardian for printing

being made to think difficult thoughts is not the same as being harmed

Brilliantly put. Holding my breath for the comments being opened.

I loathe owen Jones however it is nothing to do with him being gay. It's not at all helpful or kind to make statements like that.

Terfing
"He winds me up more than Katie Hopkins does!"

Hadn't thought of it like that but actually I agree.

Whenever I'm reading one of those ridiculous Guardian articles giving a telling off to those having inferior thinking and views, in my head it's in the voice of Owen Jones.

I'm very taken with the phrase "a completely thick ninny".

The Twitter thread is illuminating. Two posters have posted graphs of murder rates for men, women and trans and there is total silence about the fact the trans one is lowest.

I don't think that was Juno Dawson - it was someone called Juno Roche who tweeted Jess about red lines?

The people murdering transwomen are men but it is feminists that all the hate is directed at. It is pure misogyny in action.

There is a comment from someone saying ‘my feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit’ - why are they shutting down a black feminist speaker, then?

Intersectional does not mean uncritical; it does not mean prioritising the needs of one group over another. It means, as I understand it, that all aspects of one’s identity need to be examined in order to understand privilege and discrimination, that it is not only one element which causes oppression.

So, a black feminist - race and sex intersect in the discrimination faced.

Thus, the trans* position is complicated by the very theory they hold up to support it - Intersectionality suggests multiple identities at play. Not only gender identity. Class, race, sexuality too. But then also if we talk about privilege, do we consider natal male privilege or do we consider the assumed feminine identity when considering transwomen? Talking about discrimination, why do the rights of an intact biological male body transitioning trump the rights of say, a Muslim woman regarding same sex spaces?

Surely, if we apply the politics of intersectional feminism, the debate should not be about one aspect of identity (gender) and it should not be about absolutes. That seems to me the opposite of how Intersectionality was intended to help understand inequalities.

Brilliant article

You have to accept as an article of faith that when it comes to intersectionality, trans trumps any other combination of characteristics. It's the law. If you disagree you are the worst person in the world.

You are right albadross, my mistake. Sorry.

@CocoaIsGone, Yeah, the vicious irony of 'intersectionality' being used in this way is really sickening. Kimberlee Crenshaw's piece on intersectionality was so good and insightful and had NOTHING to do with blocking Black Jewish lesbian feminists from speaking to the Establishment. (Cambridge!)

Except it sort of has, when you think about it. Many parts of her critique are arrestingly pertinent: where she talks through a Latina woman in fear for her life being denied access to a shelter because she couldn't participate in English language group therapy, she also subtly points up how "rights" and "support" can be used to exclude marginalised people. The language of harm and care is often used punitively and should always be examined.

It doesn't even make sense

"My feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit"

The inclusion of 'my' mean the statement can be countered with, 'yes your feminism is bullshit'.

(I link that for others who might not have read it btw.)

Zoll yes, that is precisely the point, that language of Intersectionality is being used to justify excluding already marginalised groups. You put it better than me. And yes to linking to the article by Crenshaw, thank you, I wonder how many people who use the term have actually read it.

I was thinking about intersectionality, and how I personally take into account the various axes of oppression/discrimination. I'm a woman, and have suffered discrimination and oppression on that basis. I'm also from an underprivileged background. But I'm also white, heterosexual and able-bodied. So my feminism needs to take account of the fact that a Black woman, a lesbian or a woman with disabilities may have less of a platform and different needs from my own. I understand and agree with all that.

The irony lies in the point at which intersectional feminism meets trans rights. As a feminist, I seek to support those who are oppressed because of their female biology. So, when I intersect that with trans rights, I want to support those who are trans and have female biology. In other words, the trans men. I genuinely do believe that trans guys need and deserve my support within feminism, but those are the very people who probably don't want it, as they don't accept that they are women. The ones who do want my support as a feminist are the ones who don't have female biology, and therefore won't be getting it.

That was tremendously garbled. I hope it made some sense.

The only trans guys I know go on Twitter shouting: "No feminism without intersectinality - Trans women are women.'

The central analysis of intersectionality is that humans import or recreate the existing society within liberation movements, as liberation movements are part of society, even as they aim to transform it. So within feminism we still had race and class dynamics. Within the labour movement we still had misogyny and racism and so on. So it's obvious that if we include men in feminism we will recreate the gender hierarchy.

And that's what has happened. That's what this is. It's really as simple as that, IMO.

What a splendidly clear way of expressing the problem.

Yes, thank you, Zoll - that idea has clarified loads for me.

Differentevery yes, and trans men are the ones demanding we alter the language of reproductive rights, obstetrics, women's health to affirm their "identity". By stating falsehoods like "not only women get pregnant". We're getting crapped on by both sides here, it's really depressing.

Just wondering how intersectionality should be applied to a 'feminist' such as Owen Jones?

Owen thinks his gayness trumps everything in his oppressed group status but fails to see his male privilege. It's actually bizarre how enormous his blind spot is.

cuir yes, depressing it most certainly is. :(

Cocoa can I tweet this amazing summary?

Intersectional does not mean uncritical; it does not mean prioritising the needs of one group over another. It means, as I understand it, that all aspects of one’s identity need to be examined in order to understand privilege and discrimination, that it is not only one element which causes oppression.