Is the phrase TERF really all that bad (or inaccurate)?

[pressureofaname]

This is something I’ve been thinking about recently and I wondered what views others had.

Obviously TERF is intended as, and is used as, a slur. But if you break it down and apply some critical thinking it seems to me actually helpful to use TERF as the way into an interesting discussion with people who aren’t (yet) gender critical as follows:

The big question is what feminists want to exclude transpeople from. Take the example of a transwoman who retains male genitalia, presents as male, and just woke up this morning and decided they were a woman. Would I exclude that person from a tube train? A dinner party? My place of employment? Absolutely not.

Would I exclude them from the female changing room in Topshop? Probably, yes.

Then you need to think about what “trans” means. Is there a distinction in the Topshop changing room example between people who have lived as trans for years and have a GRC and people who present as male and self-id’d that morning? Potentially so.

So yes, I am trans exclusionary in some circumstances, but by no means in all.

I do realise that this sort of critical thinking is going to be lost on the unthinking TWAW believers, but I think it might be worth a go with those who are not yet a lost cause, and it certainly makes me feel less offended about the term TERF.

The ‘no terfs’ signs are usually because the trans community tend to see ‘terfs’ as the biggest threat to their ‘rights’

Well, if the parliamentary committee gets it legislative way and the Fair Cop campaign succeeds in making CPS/RPC "hate" guidelines equally serve all constituencies, Pride is going to have to have a rethink on allowing these signs.

Perhaps this is another area where they might like to try to get ahead of the law as the extremist genderists and their lobby groups like to say?

I'll hold my breath on that one.

I have seen lesbians (who are only interested in cunty women) started as being the definition of terf, on the net, a fair bit.

Yes, as had I. And I wondered whether that was the case, back when they started to normalise the “No TERFs” messages. It would hardly be a surprise would it? Shifting the meaning of words is commonly used in gaslighting.

What us? Protesting against lesbians who refuse to validate us at Pride? No, no, no, silly women! We’re just protesting against TERFs. It just means trans exclusionary radical feminists. Nothing to do with lesbians at all. How silly you’re being even to have that thought.

TERF is a misnomer though.

Radical and GC feminists do include trans men in their thoughts and campaigning.

Because trans men are biological women.

Some GNC lesbians are de transitioned after being confused by the ideology that the rad and GC feminists campaign against.

It's just the bio menz that are being left out and that pisses them off.

So, ergo, it is a slur.

goingdeepinthesky

You sound like my dad insisting that it is okay to call people paki's because it is a descriptive term as they come from pakistan

That’s made me think. I find “paki” hugely offensive and I would say the reason it’s not just “descriptive” is partly that it’s deliberately shortened to be mocking (which I guess is an equivalent of turning “TERF” into an acronym) but more the intent with which it’s known to be used. So actually it’s a good parallel and I’m wondering why I find paki so much worse than TERF.

The inspiration for this thread is actually that I was called a TERF recently by a friend in a fairly lighthearted way - we were talking about politics, she said “oh, pressure would totally be a terf” and I laughed it off and said “well I’m certainly not woke”. And then the next morning I wondered whether actually what I should have done is said something along the lines of my op and that might have been a good way into a GC discussion.

What us? Protesting against lesbians who refuse to validate us at Pride? No, no, no, silly women! We’re just protesting against TERFs. It just means trans exclusionary radical feminists. Nothing to do with lesbians at all. How silly you’re being even to have that thought.

I would call that “dog whistling” I think Anyoldprion - like right wingers signalling to the racists in their ranks while retaining plausible deniability to everyone else

Sounds like your thinking is influenced by you not minding being called a TERF. Well, I doubt many of us would, because we know what it really means. (There are posters with TERF or PERF in their NNs.) That doesn't in any way make it an ok term though.

Yes, maybe you should have taken that as an opportunity to delve more with your friend, but it wouldn't necessarily have had to focus on 'terf'.

I didn’t know what dog whistling meant, so thanks. But it’s also classic gaslighting. The lesbians know full well that they’re being targeted, but as soon as they retaliate, the gaslighter reacts with outrage.

Transactivists Look at them those awful lesbians. They’re attacking us. Here at OUR place. And we didn’t provoke them.

Rest of world. Yes, that does look a bit off.

The big question is what feminists want to exclude transpeople from

I'm not a feminist academic but I see that Radical Feminism centres the female in the belief that the female population is oppressed because of their female bodies and should be protected and supported on this basis. It doesn't "exclude" anyone; it just has this specific job to do.

The Feminine trans population are not threatened by female infanticide, or selective abortion, restrictive abortion or maternity rights, period poverty etc. Trans Activists don't want to hear about these issues because they are naturally "excluded" from them, and they throw a big spanner in their claim of affinity with da wimmin. I presume this is why they want to exclude the issues from debate by giving them a transphobic twist and labelling those who advocate for women on a biological basis, "transphobes".

Personally I think they know that RadFems hold the key that will open up others to their delusion and they hope that labelling them Bigots and transphobes will stop people from listening to them.

Of course TERF is also a handy insult for those that don't accept their ideology and aren't RadFems and it makes even less sense in this context.

I was also going to use the "paki" example - it's not so much the meaning of the word that's the problem as the way it's used. And "Terf" is very much used as hate speech.

But then again, language usage is complicated. There was a time when it would have been describing someone as "queer" would have been very offensive, but it's a word that has been reclaimed by gay people who now use it quite happy. I also know gc feminists who say things like "X is very Terfy" or "Y has been Terfing all over the place." It's done in a jokey way - even if you wouldn't use it to describe yourself, there are contexts when it's quite funny.

In terms of its accuracy, the vast majority of people now described as "Terfs" couldn't be described as "radical feminists".

For me, it's people feeling enabled in calling women cunt/bitch/whore/slut (all the golden oldies!) all while being woke/progressive and on the 'right side of history'

And that's why I object to it.

Misogyny is as misogyny does, including internalised misogyny.

Just my tuppence worth, of course.

gc feminists who say things like "X is very Terfy" or "Y has been Terfing all over the place."

Saw someone using terven (or might have been turven) as an insult on Twitter and it looked as though lots of women thought it sounded cool!

Second wave feminism is a movement for the liberation of women under patriarchy. Its focus is female. To complain that it excludes men is like complaining that a vegetarian restaurant doesn't serve steak.

Radical feminism is not trans exclusionary. Transmen are included in feminism because they're female. However it is male exclusionary. Transwomen have no place in radical feminism not because they're trans but because they're male.

To call someone a trans exclusive radical feminist is pretty silly. It's the equivalent of accusing a feminist of not focusing on males, to which my immediate response is "And?"

So the term is nonsensical. In itself it's not insulting, it's just pointless.

However it's become a misogynistic slur, and has been recognised by Parliament, Twitter etc as such. It's used as a synonym for bitch or cunt. It's used to silence and dehumanise disobedient women. Its use on social media is frequently accompanied by violent rhetoric.

And the truth is that there countless women (and men) who don't believe that TWAW and see the risks and incoherence of the ideology who wouldn't describe themselves as any kind of feminist.

The use of this slur illustrates the profound misogyny at the root of trans ideology. This war on women has, sadly, shown up just how precarious our rights are.

I’d be happy with MERF, as to me feminism includes TM.

T**F is used as a slur but I never react to it. It’s losing any power as it’s so easy to get called one!

I'll just add, I was really happy when Justine Mumsnet made the decision to ban "Terf" and "cis" and "Tim/Tif" etc. It was a really smart move.

Name calling is counter productive and basically very immature. I wish Twitter would do the same.

Ooh fab prawn, may I copy and paste for future rants discussions?!

Lots weren’t DpWm there were 2 full threads on here a few weeks ago because people wanted to be ‘allowed’ use TIM instead of trans woman.

I’ve been called a ‘TERF’ by certain people and a ‘TRA’ by others so to me the words can’t really mean much, but when it’s accompanied by vitriol that’s when it matters I suppose.

TERF is a problem as it is used in a negative way. Queer has been reclaimed, but I don't think it is used by people who are not part of that community same goes for the word that used to be used to describe black people it is not acceptable for a white person to use, but ok for black people which is in my mind is good that these communities reclaimed the words and turned them to be more positive/neutral. Although being called a TERF wouldn't bother me as I don't think it is a true description I think it probably should as just now it does not have good associations and is trying to encourage people to believe that the only people holding GC views have extreme beliefs and therefore is only representative of a small proportion of the population.

but when it’s accompanied by vitriol that’s when it matters I suppose

Vitriol in whose perception, Early? Does eye of the beholder count for women, too?

As PPs have said, would you say the same about the P word? What about the N word? If not, why not?

Are you going to question anyone else who’s said the same as me lang or do you just enjoy targeting me across the boards?

In your examples, I don’t like either word. And when I hear young black (mainly men) calling each other the N word, I always call them out on it, but I don’t find it racist when they’re not saying it to discriminate. If it’s said as an insult or accompanied by vitriol then yes there’s a problem.

Blimey. Thank you, NeurotrashWarrior. Of course you can. I'm very flattered.

Vitriol in whose perception? Who's judging the level of vitriol in your scenario?

I specifically said to me now I need to justify my own specific examples of what I see as vitriol?

Your opinion depends on your own perception, despite what some people try and force, we don’t actually all have to think the same at all times.

It's pretty reductive and therefore makes it easier to dismiss a really complex position. I think it ultimately comes down to intention.

Careful with an answer like that signify!!

You now must justify exactly what you mean by intention who decides what the intention was? Would you say that in xyz circumstance? If not, why not? Can woman decide the intention? What is the right intention in your scenario? 🙄

While we’re taking part in question time lang, why were you so keen to get MNHQ to allow everyone to use the word ‘TERF’ when you thought this would allow you to use the word TIM (trans identified male as opposed to transwoman) but now appear to have changed your tune when the thread is relating to TERF specifically?