Obsession with transwomen fetishises sex difference

[spannablue]

Just read on Twitter:

'The problem with patriarchy is not due to men having penises, it's due to the lie that this random feature of birth confers & signifies rank, power & domination. We must not collude in that by fetishising sex difference & aggrandizing genitals that happen to be on the outside.'

What do you think?

The smartest people I know (and I know some smart people) are of the opinion that almost any concept can be explained to almost anyone who is interested...*

And it is true. My undergrad phyics professor told us, we should not be intimidated by 'senior' scientists by their language, with all those special terms, the reality of it is that they just want to sound important and it could all be said in simpler terms, too, and if we wanted to become real good scientists, this is what we should do for ourselves, to really grasp the issues, instead of just parroting stuff.

I find it fascinating that there are female (I assume) posters who post posts such as these, who seem to be coming from the point of view that the only physical difference between men and women is whether you have a penis or not. For example, my husband is nearly a foot taller than me - the vast majority of men are half a foot or more taller and I’m average height for a woman. Do these women go round with their eyes shut or only ever see men sat down? I find it bonkers that what is right in front of your face can be ignored because it doesn’t fit in with some theory you like. It’s the opposite of intelligent thinking imho.

At that point I realized that the pomos are just a bunch of pompous prats who think they can get away with their second class sophistry by the tactic of verbose bullshitting.

I concur.

Bowlofbabelfish: Those who obfuscate? They either don't have it or they won't do it. A whole field that relies on obfuscation? Fishy

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." Stephen Hawking

I've said before that the purpose of language is to communicate ideas. If the language you use is so convoluted that you obscure ideas with it and make them harder to understand, you are cannibalising language for other motives.

Totally agree with your post GoldenWonderwall

the only physical difference between men and women is genitalia?

like fuck it is

and the idea that a woman could nod along with that. I seriously do not know how they do it

If the language you use is so convoluted that you obscure ideas with it...

...or expect people to consult a dictionary every few words 😜

Like the urban dictionary juells for your definition of womxn but not the oed for the definition of woman that’s ‘adult human female’ becuse that’s exclusionary Don’t know if that’s one of those contradictions of this topic?

bernard I’ve read countless posts hand wringing about how one can possibly identify who a man is, if he isn’t wearing man clothes, without being the genitalia police and I’m like Do people really go short hair, jeans & t shirt = man, anyone else = woman? I’m surprised the human race is so numerous when it appears huge amounts of people can’t identify a man or a woman unless a penis is in their face

the only physical difference between men and women is genitalia?

Dh is two inches shorter than me

Dh is appropriately 2 stone lighter me

Dh could slaugter me in a straight fight...even at our size differential he is much stronger than me

Ive come to the conclusion that a lot of people are very, very , very stupid!

as I think the OP is not coming back, moving onto a slightly different subject...

Barracker made a really interesting point up thread that she used to hang back from getting involved in FWR due to all the impenetrable language

I felt the same. And then the trans thing exploded It was jennifer james's crowd funder that really caught my eye). and suddenly people were saying things like 'women don't have dicks' that I could actually understand

i think that change in tone is a big part of the huge increase in traffic here

Word salad is a danger for everyone with an extensive vocab. I love twiddly bits of language, but I do always try and remember that there's no need to be multi-syllabic when a simple word will do. I can't remember who said it, but I like the saying "If you can't explain it to a child, you don't understand it yourself." Not that I am calling anyone here a child!! But I'm only educated officially to A-level myself (I did two years at uni, but didn't complete.)

The problem with academics (and I am one myself) is that not all academics are very bright, some just parrot stuff, and yet, particularly the less bright ones believe because they have a degree that they must be smarter than all those without a uni degree. Which is patently false, and by a long shot.

Funny enough, Lisa Muggeridge (whose youtube channel I have come to stalk in recent weeks, because I find her videos enlightening*) has a brand new video out there, and on this topic...

*I found some of what she said about women equality being rolled back by austerity rather abstract at first, but then she explained in one video about family courts, how people without money (way more often women than men) don't get paid for legal representation in family courts any more and so forth, and from there things started falling into place for me.

as I think the OP is not coming back, moving onto a slightly different subject...

I wonder what OP took from this thread. Probably nothing. Personally, I am so exasperated by the apparent inability of some folks to understand straightforward, provable facts that I am not great at engaging. I, frankly, just feel trolled by such posts.

I mean, if Barracker's pomo bear deconstruction parody did not get through, nothing will. Maybe the whole problem is really people mani(a)cally protecting a false identity, which makes them deaf and blind to material reality. Idk.

Oh god, I enjoyed that video. Thanks for posting. If I've learned anything in my time as a student, it's that a lot of academics lack any sense of humility and teachability. The people I respected the most were the ones who knew their field to an expert level and wanted to share their expertise, but had no accompanying arrogance, and were always learning and growing.

That's a basic decent human aim, surely.

If you want to see what fetishising sex actually looks like, take your teenage daughter out shopping in her school uniform and watch how men behave.

I wonder what OP took from this thread. Probably nothing

What was the OP expecting from this thread? It was an interesting thread but am unclear what its raison d'etre is.

What was the OP expecting from this thread?

yeah, I wondered that

if she was hoping to change minds, that was not the quote to pick, for reasons covered above

maybe she just wanted to talk, in which case good, that's what we're here for after all

i think we're so damn used to getting trolled that everyone looks like a troll now

What was the OP expecting from this thread?

Thinking of it, I believe OP wants to convert us. And in several threads. So yeah, maybe our message can't get through, because it isn't about listening for OP. Idk.

OP, wherever you are, never forget: 50% of the founding document of Queer theory are an apologia of paedophilia.

Well, yes. I am trying not to be hair-trigger about goadiness, and yes that's mainly for the lurkers, but also because it's perfectly possible for someone to come here with an opposing viewpoint, have their positions answered and change their mind.

It might be a painful and embarrassing path to walk, but I'm not about to Walk of shame GoT style their arse if they actually engage with things.

God knows it's a more hopeful place to be than the soul sappingly depressing place I do get to occasionally, where it seems that every single newbie is boasting about how little they give a shit about other women like they deserve a Nobel prize for being a selfish fucker.

Slight derail from the really interesting discussion that this thread has thrown up, but just wanted to say thank you to Kesstrel earlier on in the thread for flying the flag for me whilst I was away, and to say thank you to ohello for the cake and the apology!

I can see how you misread it ohello but as you saw, I was definitely quoting the twitterer Finn's opinion, not suggesting myself that I thought Posie should accept men in all spaces because she has a husband!

'Pedobear' is definitely NOT my name!

The problem with patriarchy is not due to men having penises, it's due to the lie that this random feature of birth confers & signifies rank, power & domination

If you've got a penis, you are a man. The random feature of being born a man confers and signifies rank, power and domination.

So it isn't a lie then, is it?

(Apols, will now RTFT.)

Are we not allowed to mention the name of the person who wrote the Tweet? I am so shocked. She is the person behind Feminism in London and someone I have huge respect for. What on earth has happened that a feminist could come out with a statement like that?