theelectricagora.com/2019/03/01/some-things-to-keep-in-mind-when-engaging-with-the-gender-identity-debate/
I was introduced to this article on twitter and its very well argued. Even more surprising was the discussion which was of a (relatively) high calibre. One comment is worth noting:
"Excellent article, but I have to take issue with this:
“Depending on the context, ‘Man’ and ‘Woman’ are commonly used both to indicate sex and to indicate gender, so it makes perfect sense to say that a trans woman is a woman in one sense, but not in another, and that a trans man is a man in one sense, but not in another.”
There is no evidence that a man who adopts feminine appearance norms takes on the gender ‘woman’. If we understand ‘gender’ to mean ‘sex roles’, then lipstick, dresses, long hair etc are only a tiny sliver of that, and the most superficial aspect, too.
First and most obviously, when men take on the markers of superficial femininity, they are not treated like women. They are treated like feminine-presenting males. Which sometimes involves discrimination and even violence, but the point is it remains a male experience. To truly be treated like a woman by society, a ‘trans woman’ would have to pass as female, which the vast majority do not. Adult male bone structure and musculature is almost impossible to disguise with lipstick and a low-cut dress, nor can it be mitigated by hormones or surgery, and even the very few who do ‘pass’ are usually understood to be ‘trans’ (i.e., male) by others around them, which by definition means they aren’t being treated as female, and thus avoid the sexist expectation that they are supposed to put everyone else’s needs before their own. (There’s a reason that in the trans debate only one group of ‘women’ is constantly being guilt-tripped into giving up their boundaries and always told to be kind and compassionate, and funnily enough, its never the penis-having ones.)
Cross-culturally, ‘gender’ for women primarily means being expected to nurture others at one’s own expense: taking on most of the housework, doing most of the child care and elder care. This ‘nurturing’ role shapes every aspect of female existence: sexism means that women (and girls) exist not as individuals but in relation to others, our bodies, our labour, our very selves are believed to exist for the use of others. We are perceived to lack both inherent worth or any defensible boundaries. Indeed, the abusive term T.. (trans exclusionary radical feminist) expresses this logic perfectly: it implies that women have no right to ‘exclude’ men from anything – that everything about us, even our ontological existence itself, ought to be open to men to claim.
I cannot see any evidence that these sex roles are applied to feminine-presenting men, nor have I seen any ‘trans women’ show the slightest interest in taking on THIS aspect of femininity, except as part of a sexual fantasy (submissive maid, etc). In every article or blog I’ve read about a man who wants to live his ‘true self’ as a ‘woman’, I’ve yet to hear of how he expressed that true self by taking on most of the housework or child care. It’s always about clothes, make-up and fantasising about getting ‘fucked like a girl’.
In short, when people try to argue of transgender males that ‘they’re women (sex role) but not female (sex)’, they are wrong. Not only are they reducing ‘woman’ to feminine sex roles, which is sexist in itself, they are reducing the complex and lifelong impact of those sex roles to feminine appearance norms."
I know the argument has been said on here before but I like the way it is framed