'Passing' trans

[SavetheVees]

Namechanged due to ~controversy~

I understand the anti self-ID issue. However, what I don't understand is how single-sex spaces can be policed by appearances alone? I have seen many threads where people speak about 'male bodies' - which is clear in the case of trans people who haven't actually made any effort to transition (incredibly rare in my experience - of course there are high profile examples)

This just really confuses me because I know quite a few trans people, including being a vague acquaintance to Tara Wood (I don't condone her actions so lets not go there), and in many cases, especially where hormones and surgery are involved, it is not really possible to tell they are trans. I first met Tara before she 'came out' as trans and the first time I saw her after the transition, I failed to realise it was the same person I had met before, and thought she was absolutely stunning. I was actually a bit envious of how effortlessly feminine she looked. I also know 'butch' presenting women, who despite being biologically female, are not feminine in the stereotypical-appearance way, and are often mistaken as men. I ALSO know women who have PCOS etc etc and have facial hair, who would be mortified to be accused of being biologically male when accessing single-sex spaces, even though they have a characteristic perceived to be 'male'.

So how would this be managed and policed? If you saw someone you knew to be trans accessing a women's changing room, despite them 'passing' as female visually - would you challenge them? What if someone was truly androgynous - would you challenge them? Would you expect someone else to? Surely there is no way on earth that we should be mandated to carry ID cards with details of our genitalia printed on them, or even worse expected to flash our privates at a changing room attendant in order to gain entry?! These sound far, far more intrusive and offensive to me than having a wee in a cubicle next to someone with a penis.

just to reiterate - I completely understand the ideological values of single sex spaces etc and protecting women from violent and voyeuristic men, however I struggle to understand how these spaces can be policed to avoid "be-penised" bodies without 1) being ineffective and 2) not offending biological vagina-owners who do not fit feminine stereotypes as effectively as trans folk do

[thebewilderness]

Demands for equality always are. It invariably reads and sounds better than it lives.

[Ereshkigal]

During the backlash the dictionary definition was changed to claim feminism is about equality, but that is the strategy of the oppressor to center himself in womens lives and even in the movement to be liberated from him.

It's been a markedly effective strategy sadly.

[thebewilderness]

However, the author makes no comment about transwomen, we cannot conclude that they consider transwomen to be men, like sex-essentialists do.
We can, because we read and listen to her and have done so for years. She is quite explicit.

Feminism is the political movement for the liberation of women. During the backlash the dictionary definition was changed to claim feminism is about equality, but that is the strategy of the oppressor to center himself in womens lives and even in the movement to be liberated from him.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." Anatole France pseudonym for Jacques Anatole Thibault (1844-1924)
I think anyone can easily see how this emphasis on equality for men has proven to be a problem for women.

[EnthusiasmIsDisturbed]

This is why there has to be men, women and unisex options

Paris Lees is wrong when Paris said that we have been sharing changing rooms/toilets with transwomen (I can’t speak for men) without noticing. I have it has only been on a few occasions (maybe I haven’t noticed all) and I didn’t feel I could challenge them, I didn’t want to embarrass them or be confrontational being female I have been socialized to be accepting despite me being uncomfortable. But why should I have been put in this position

I don’t want to upset a transwomen and point out they don’t pass I don’t want to hurt anyone but I do feel I have the right to feel safe and comfortable. A man being in certain situations no matter how pretty their dress is will make me feel wary when I should be feeling absolutely safe

[sapphireflower]

It's interesting also that when talking about biology being the root of women's oppression, that's also the case for trans and intersex people, albeit in a different way.

LangCLeg, the video clip was also excellent.

"It's about how structures make certain identities the consequence of, the vehicle for vulnerability"

In terms of trans people those structures would be a minority group in a society who are not trans. It would be the marginalisation and erasure of trans people and their histories. It would be the appropriation of trans people and their narratives by non trans people. The erasure and oppression by other minority groups who don't want to be associated with trans people. The value that western culture places on procreation and its importance in relationships. It would be the way that religion is used as a vehicle against trans people (and sexual minorities). These established structures rail against the emancipation of trans people because they want to keep their status and power. And, from the position of power, structurally supported by existing structures, being anti-trans is an abuse of that power.

[Ereshkigal]

All this waffle about "sex essentialism" is an attempt to shift the Overton window to a point where the idea that biological sex exists and a basic part of how humans classify each other, how we determine who has access to which spaces etc. is seen as just one perspective out of many, and no more valid than the idea that gender should be how we make that basic classification.

Yes you've nailed it. Its an effective tactic though.

[LangCleg]

Feminists are allowed to focus on the needs and concerns of women, and attempting to use intersectionality as a stick to beat us into submission with is an insult to Crenshaw, whose theory and framework you're twisting to fit an agenda that she did not share.

Hear, hear.

[AngryAttackKittens]

All this waffle about "sex essentialism" is an attempt to shift the Overton window to a point where the idea that biological sex exists and a basic part of how humans classify each other, how we determine who has access to which spaces etc. is seen as just one perspective out of many, and no more valid than the idea that gender should be how we make that basic classification. I reject this attempt to impose a postmodern (and possibly transhumanist) perspective and reiterate the point made earlier than women's biology is the root of why we're discriminated against and are not given equal rights to men. In crude Marxist terms, we are the means of production that men have attempted to seize and control for millennia. For this reason women and transwomen are fundamentally different groups with different needs, concerns, etc.

Feminists are allowed to focus on the needs and concerns of women, and attempting to use intersectionality as a stick to beat us into submission with is an insult to Crenshaw, whose theory and framework you're twisting to fit an agenda that she did not share.

[Trousersdontmakemeaman]

sapphireflower is really tediously monotonous, no?

[therealposieparker]

Men never pass as women.... women, to the lesser eye, do pass as it's easy to assume someone with short hair and a moustache is male.

[Ereshkigal]

Trans identified males are not actually women, as women has a specific biological meaning which is addressed by feminism, so if they're not mentioned in a feminist discussion you can assume that their different issues are not considered relevant to it.

[RefuseToDenounceBiology]

I don't think they really do. Your eyes can be fooled but there's a part of you that isn't. You can't shake the feeling you were just talking to a woman. There must be a whole set of tiny cues that you are able to subconsciously put together.

[LangCleg]

However, the author makes no comment about transwomen, we cannot conclude that they consider transwomen to be men, like sex-essentialists do.

How can you even read that and not understand that Crenshaw is talking about legal frameworks around the sexed and racialised body and HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PENIS is completely beyond me.

But just to help you further, here she is explaining how her theory has been appropriated and misused by identifarians in a video:

[Ceinwen2]

Someone said earlier that no-one passes. Oh yes they do. And F to M s often find it easier, as once the hormones take effect the voice, rapid MPB, and stubble tend to overwhelm anything else. The answer to the statement " no-one passes" is " how can you know? ". Probably a lot depends on how long ago the individual "changed over".

[sapphireflower]

Havoc, how do I use patriarchal structures against women?

[sapphireflower]

@Langcleg, thanks for the paper, it was a very interesting read. I found it really illuminating, especially about how white feminism doesn't work for people of colour in America. Harmful tropes emerge and systems designed to protect women, don't work for some women and in some cases makes things worse. I could really relate to the struggle of the advocate for woman and her son who were turned away because of their intersecting needs.

" On one occasion when several women of color attended a meeting to discuss a special task force on women of color, the group debated all day over including the issue on the agenda. " - sounds very familiar!!

Really really good.

However, the author makes no comment about transwomen, we cannot conclude that they consider transwomen to be men, like sex-essentialists do.

[Havoc]

I don't see how anyone can be claim be very much against patriarchal structures, when they use patriarchal structures for their own benefit against women.

[sapphireflower]

@therealposieparker it breaks my heart to see how the persuit of capital gain oppresses people, tears apart countries, changes local agriculture, destroys habitats, pollutes the planet, leaves people starving, controls and oppresses the poor (sweatshops and the clothes industry). It's just so unjust, so unfair, so heartbreaking.

I wish I had an alternative that would work, I'm afraid I don't :( Sorry for the tangent to the op.

[LangCleg]

Intersectionality is a theory proposed about legal frameworks at the interface between sex and race. At no point did its author intend it to include males. You might find it useful, Sapphire. It's not a long paper and there's no pomo waffle to wade through. Just clarity of definition and purpose.

www.racialequitytools.org/resourcefiles/mapping-margins.pdf

[therealposieparker]

What's wrong with capitalism? What is the alternative?

[sapphireflower]

@ Theraginggirl
"But not to recognise that there is a biological basis to the oppression of women is to miss a big part of the picture."

Right, this is absolutely the case and you can see how things have panned out along the centuries based on women's biological functions, of course there's a place for sex based discourse. You can have sex based discourse and have an intersectional approach, I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.

I've actually got sucked into things having reached "peakte*f", to be honest, but I think it's important work too. It actually ties in with a lot of my work with people about empathy (when you talk about male socialisation I know exactly what you mean, it's like talking to a wall with some people!).

I'm very much socialist leaning too, massive dislike of capitalism, abuses of power, current patriarchal structures, non valuing of care work in general and any kind of -ism.

[therealposieparker]

Trans women don't pass. I know male, I can spot one a mile off. I am short and so the size thing is really important.

Fed up of pretending anyone passes, they don't.

[Ereshkigal]

I find the "sex-essentialist" phrase a bit loaded. Why would female centred feminism be considered inappropriate in any way? I think this is a big part of the problem. Feminism is by and for women and girls. It is the movement to liberate women from oppression. Intersectionality is about race, disability, social class and sexuality and acknowledging that these factors play into oppression in different ways. It's not about males. This IMO is not what it was intended for.

[sapphireflower]

@trousers... lots to read from the link. Yes I've read a bit from Yardley and Hayton, not the others. I read lots but I prefer journals, so it's nice to read a few articles. I've read gendertrender, gender crit blogs, some hooks, transfeminist perspectives, american christian perspectives, feminist articles, watched a few youtubers (although in general I find youtube a bit vapid) I'm much happier reading articles than books though!

I understand that you're being demonised, and also how and why there are disagreements and how and why talking about things is so difficult and upsetting for people on both sides of the arguments. I hope that there will be more discussion and more understanding for everyone's sake.

[Trousersdontmakemeaman]

Intersectionalism is another stick misused to beat women into submission.
Like privilegism.