What we lose if we can't define our class/caste

[twicemummy1]

I keep getting asked "why do you bring trans into everything" when trans is about toilets and dresses.

So I want to say, By losing the definition of woman, we lose the right to define women as a class ( or some prefer caste)

Why does this matter?

Feminists identified women's oppression as having a biological root. And it was understood that we have a common identity based on a common oppression. We knew that the decisions that governed our lives were made by people "not like us". One group/class of people decided that other people were not allowed to vote. Some people could work in government, get books published etc and others weren't allowed. Women understood that there were commonalities between those who could and those who couldn't. And through an understanding of our common oppression we were able to fight for our rights.

What we never envisaged was that those who governed us could simply remove the definition of woman so that it could be asserted that , yes, bad things happen to some people but nobody knows why, and nobody can define why it happens to those and not these. Abortion is no longer a woman's issue, because men can get pregnant too, and lots of men agree that abortion isn't important. Women won't need access to resources like family allowance because men get pregnant too, and men think the money is better spent on building bridges and highways.

We've lost our ability to declare that a woman has been wronged, and why she has been wronged, like in the case of the woman on the other thread who was ordered to have a state enforced abortion. I don't know if this was the right thing to do or not, but I know she is in the predicament she's in because she's a woman whereas we're told that no, there's no pattern, random things just happen to random people and nobody knows why.

I absolutely reserve the right to hold onto the language I need to name women's oppression, to keep the tools of analysis I need to understand precisely how and why women are being oppressed. And I reserve the right to acknowledge and identify women as a class. Before we lose all the rights our grandmothers fought for.

Trans is about a lot more than toilets.

My daughter is disabled and loses her right to dignity. She wants a female carer for personal care and there are now no guarantees that the woman caring for her will not, in fact, be male.

Her dignity is not yours to give away thank you very much! This is the hill I die on.

If it was simply about toilets the campaign would be for a third space.

It bears mentioning again, it is about validation of feelings. Women should not be used to validate another persons identity.

*@MangoesAreMyFavourite
*
Her dignity is not yours to give away

My argument is for your daughter and I am profoundly anti trans. Is there anything in my post you didn't understand, or have I misunderstood who this comment was directed to?

Sorry, I wasn't clear. It was a general statement - not directed at you.

I agree with you - if we cannot name ourselves, we are tied up in linguistic knots and say what we want, neither know what someone else is saying.

My daughter was due to go on NCS last year. They made a big thing of rooms/dorms being segregated, girls are away from the boys but it's all based on self-id. So what do their words even mean??!!

What do we lose?

Everything.

You have to hand it to the blokes though, that was a smart bit of politicking right there. I never saw it coming.

Uppity women wanting more stuff? We’ll just change the definition of woman so blokes can be women too. That way all their stuff is our stuff too.

Patriarchy has had a couple of millennia to get going and hasn’t it learned some tricks.

@Agrona It is about validation certainly. But I don't think many women have also thought through the further repercussions. It affects every single aspect of women's lives, such as the ability to insist on a female carer for a disabled daughter.
But it also prevents us from legislating on behalf of women. So for example when it comes to prostitution, it hurts women as a class, and bolsters men. It's necessary to keep a lot of women poor and disenfranchised so that there is a steady stream of women who end up porn and prostitution. Poverty is feminized. Like Dworkin said, every woman is one man away from welfare. By which she meant if a woman can no longer stand her boss, or her husband/partner, or both, she's only one step away from welfare, or even prostitution.

Like Dworkin said, every woman is one man away from welfare. By which she meant if a woman can no longer stand her boss, or her husband/partner, or both, she's only one step away from welfare, or even prostitution

What a ridiculous comment. If a woman, or a man for that matter, can't stand his or her boss, they can do what grownup people have been doing for time immemorial- find another job.

Men are defining away our very existence, saying it is literally immaterial. That's as fundamental an attack on women as you can get.

OP,

I agree with you. The pushing of boundaries, the silencing of dissent, the removal of sex based rights, the push for perversions to become acceptable is all part of the same cloth.

How long before the rights of women are ignored?

Oh, wait. It is already happening.

@MangoesAreMyFavourite Yes it's absolutely about the ability to name our oppression. I won't stand for anyone fucking with language, trying to muddy the waters. A he can never be a she. A woman was recently ordered by a judge to call her rapist "she". I argued on the forced abortion thread that any government that cannot answer the simple question of "what is a woman?" can no longer be regarded as a legitimate government . The state decides which women have the capacity to become mothers and forces abortions upon those who are deemed below par, and we're supposed to just assume their judgements made about women's capabilities are accurate?
Why should I believe any government assessment of a woman's ability to mother when the very same state is saying women cannot be defined in law because biology isn't real.

*@DancelikeEmmaGoldman

*You have to hand it to the blokes though, that was a smart bit of politicking right there. I never saw it coming.

Uppity women wanting more stuff? We’ll just change the definition of woman so blokes can be women too. That way all their stuff is our stuff too.

Patriarchy has had a couple of millennia to get going and hasn’t it learned some tricks.*

God I totally agree

Like Dworkin said, every woman is one man away from welfare. By which she meant if a woman can no longer stand her boss, or her husband/partner, or both, she's only one step away from welfare, or even prostitution

Plenty of women, indeed the majority, manage to leave relationships without either ending up on benefits (although why exactly you and Dworkin have a problem with benefits being available to a woman who needs them to leave a relationship seems peculiar) or ending up in prostitution.

Here's a link to Maya Forestater's letter where she explains to her colleagues, why we need a name - hiyamaya.net/2019/03/27/dear-feminists-of-the-tax-justice-network/

Sorry - It's Maya Forstater. I spelled her name wrong.

@MangoesAreMyFavourite

That was excellent, thank you for sharing

Maya Forestater argues compellingly for why we need a name.

I'm not sure what we should be called, nothing is jumping out at me. Any suggestions welcome

Feminists sometimes change woman to womon or womyn because they don't like that it has "men" in it.

But "women" has a nice solid feel to it so when it's all said and done, I'd be happy sticking with that.

I completely agree with your OP. I also was on the forced abortion thread and I understand why posters told you "this is not about trans". The situation is fucked up enough without making it about trans issues.

We need to stand our ground. Anything new will be colonised too.
They claim fo be women, girls, female, they claim to get period pains, menopause etc. Any new name will be immediately under siege.

@YourSarcasmIsDripping
That's why I started this thread. My concern that women can no longer defend the rights of vulnerable women like the one of that thread, because we are being written out of law as a class, is disparagingly referred to as an "obsession with trans issues".

My assertion stands: that a state which cannot even define what a woman is, has no business getting involved in women's issues to the extent that it can make decisions about whether or not a woman should have an abortion.

This constant belittling of feminists who understand how trans law impacts on our ability to legislate on behalf of women, or to dispute a particular ruling by a court, needs to stop here in the feminist section of mumsnet.

The person who started that thread posted it in the feminist topics, meaning she wanted a feminist point of view. Not a neutral point of view, not a mainstream point of view, but a feminist one.