The Danish Girl

[whenohwhen]

Currently watching the Eddie Redmayne film The Danish Girl and am struggling with my feelings regarding transgender issues with reference to this particular film.
As a Feminist I felt I had pretty clear lines drawn regarding my own views on trans women.

Fwiw in a nutshell, I thought each to their own, live and let live. I, of course, had issue with the abuse of the system with reference to some male "self identification" as women to access vulnerable females. I also was horrified by young children undergoing gender reassignment treatment. I thought that children should be allowed to develop and mature before they were allowed to make such a decision.

Now, watching this film I'm not sure. I think I feel uncomfortable with transgender as a concept. I'd not really recognised it in myself before and it It feels exclusionary and uncomfortable. I don't like myself for it. But this story seems to have allowed me to recognise it.

As a woman I don't feel differently to a man on an intellectual, spiritual or any other plane. I just don't. I feel that if I wanted to marry a woman and wear traditionally male clothes and call myself Sam, I would and I could. I believe I am as worthy of power and money as every man and will assert that belief as necessary.
I also believe that men have the right to be vulnerable and feminine as men. I believe they should and could fulfil traditional female roles and have traditionally female sensibilities if that is their choice as men.

I don't think any person should feel uncomfortable enough in their own skin and genitalia to surgically change it. I think as a society we should support every single person to learn to view themselves as perfect just as they are, how they were created. Be that in a dress or a suit, they are accepted.

I must be missing something. But I just can't see why any person should feel so unworthy as they are that they would want to change something so fundamental about themselves. I get it in the period that this film was set, I keep thinking "thank goodness people wouldn't need to do that anymore", but they do.

My question is, why do some people find stories about narcissists and their "personal journeys" so moving? For me the trailer was enough, you could already tell it was going to be the tale of a selfish person destroying the lives of everyone around him spun as a brave and noble search for his inner truth. Why do some people eat that shit up? Do they just not see the narcissism? Do they admire it?

I think the problem is that a lot of people just don't see narcissism.

Smile, can you explain what you mean by “traditional female sensibilities”?

What I’m struggling to understand is what transwomen mean by “feeling like a woman”. They can’t mean being in possession of female bodies, because they don’t have female reproductive organs and hormones (certainly not at the start of their trans journey, if ever) and they don’t seem to mean fulfilling traditional female roles in society.

I don’t know what “feeling like a woman” means, but perhaps you can articulate it?

Does asking these questions make me a bigot?

Datun your post is excellent and expresses what I find hard to put into words.

@smilethoyourheartisbreaking

I'm confused why people think it's not possible to love people no matter their orientation.

Firstly I don't think anyone thinks that. And secondly transgenderism is not a sexual orientation.

Thirdly, 87% of trans-people have comorbid mental health issues, the highest of which is narcissism.

It's not speculation on my part. There are countless studies, easily googleable.

If you are unaware of this, I can understand how you would be offended by my post.

I, however, am not unaware of it.

Refusing to acknowledge these issues within the transgender movement is creating insurmountable difficulties in being able to address it.

It's not wrong, vile or unfair to analyse the reasons either for transgenderism in the first place, or why it is disadvantaging women.

And finally you have taken my 'even the nice ones' out of context.

Which was referring to this:

"And I don't see them taking on women's roles either. Usurping their position and taking reasserting their role as a man, maybe."

Gender dysphoria is not characterised by being dissatisfied with not being able to take on the actual roles of women.

It's rejection of (toxic) masculinity and male anatomy.

Any man can take on the roles of women. Gender dysphoria does not develop because they are precluded from that.

It's one thing to be offended, it's quite another to switch my points around in order to apply one description to a different point.

It's possible to love almost anyone, but not in the way that a marriage is based on. It's not possible to be sexually attracted to everyone.

I'm more sad that people are unable to see that loving relationships can exist no matter what sex or inter or trans people are

I dont think anyone believes that

Read "Eugenia" by Mark Tedeschi if you want a decent historical account of a transgender person's life.

It's always in my mind when I read these trans debates/discussions.

I read the book as part of book club, i was away when they discussed it so i dont know what the overall view of it was

Havent seen the film but its not the type of film i woukd watch

@smilethoyourheartisbreaking

Bigoted is as bigoted does?

Think about what you're saying and why you think that.

Narcissism is prevalent in people who have gender dysphoria and it is almost universal in men who have autogynephilia.

Its not an opinion. Facts can't be bigoted. If you feel as though saying them out loud makes someone sound bigoted, it's because your preconceived ideas don't fit with the facts.

In that light can you try and explain why it bothers you?

Not just have an emotional response. Which is understandable.

The "love conquers all, in fact it ought to conquer all, it certainly will conquer all if you genuinely love the person and not some superficial foibles they may have, and if it doesn't you're a heartless bitch who doesn't deserve this noble yet tortured man" trope in popular fiction is such an appalling form of gaslighting.

Not just in the case of starting what you thought was a heterosexual relationship and then finding yourself married to a transwoman (though the trans widows thread is pretty eye-opening), but more generally. Women are expected to subsume themselves totally into standing by their man/newly minted woman. Over and over again. Like Alma Mahler having to give up composing, as part of the terms of her marriage, because Gustav's ego couldn't cope with two composers in the marriage.

I'm sure there are cases where love conquers all. I'm pretty convinced there are far far more where the woman is being gas-lit into subsuming her own personality and needs under overwhelming pressure from society's "happily ever after" myth. And with trans being the current hot-button topic, and the left-wing press being totally, uncritically pro trans, the gas is turned right up to gasmark 9. It would take a very brave woman to walk away from her transitioning husband and say "this isn't working for me", knowing that all her friends will see her as the heartless bitch who didn't have enough love in her heart to stand by a helpless transwoman in the hour of her need.

I love my dad and my granny very much. Don't want to be married to either of them, though.

Women are people, not a support system for the other, more real people. We shouldn't be expected to stay in relationships that are making us unhappy, or to adjust to literally anything that a partner throws at us. If a woman is exclusively attracted to men, and her husband transitions, and you believe that that means that he has become a woman, why would you expect her to stay, if she's heterosexual?

Romantic relationships involve a quite specific form of love, and sometimes people in them do things that mean that the relationship no longer works for the other person. The other person is allowed to walk away when that happens, and if you try to guilt trip them into staying you're being very cruel.

@smilethoyourheartisbreaking

If you're interested in reading about this from the point of view of women who are married to, or divorced from, transwomen, here is a thread from women at the coalface.

The unvarnished experience, minus the spin of a moneymaking film.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3101834-trans-widows-escape-committee

I was struck by how clear the film was that he was getting sexual gratification from dressing in woman’s clothes. His treatment of her was awful.

Yes! My problem with the film was that it had been trailed as Lily being the most sympathetic character ever. How on earth was that selfish person sympathetic?! I honestly watched boggle-eyed. Now I realise that it was extremely honest about AGP, and perhaps even unintentionally subversive!

smile regarding the traditional female sensibilities comment it's important to keep it in context. This is what I said in my op

"I also believe that men have the right to be vulnerable and feminine as men. I believe they should and could fulfil traditional female roles and have traditionally female sensibilities if that is their choice as men."

For clarification I meant that in the time the film was set women were expected to behave/feel/act in a particular traditionally feminine, way (Arguably still are by some). Eddies character seemed to desire being viewed as such. I'm not agreeing with it, I'm not agreeing either that there should ever have been traditional female sensibilities, but there were and are.

I suspect that smile hasn't yet realised the 'support trans at all costs' paradox makes her a homophobe.

Smile, what's your opinion on lesbians? Are they awful mean women? Is their sexuality a fetishism or deviant? I'm wondering how far you're prepared to prioritise trans over everything.

Good article on exactly this smile and Hairy

thefederalist.com/2017/05/02/trans-activists-will-destroy-homosexual-rights/

I haven’t watched the film, I’ve been meaning to for ages though, although I suspect il have similar feeling to most of the postered here. It doesn’t sound from what I’ve read that the doctor was totally unethical and was taking advantage of his patients vulnerable state to justify his live experimentation.

I wonder how it was viewed and received from a trans perspective?

Well you don't, obviously.

Why don't you describe what your lines in the sand are? So we all know what we're talking about?

Pointless having a one-sided conversation where we don't know what your stance is?

Its hardly outing when we all use pseudonyms. In real life, lesbians and AGP widows are dealing with being called bigots to their face