First GC post on FB shut down. Can I get your perspective, please?

[Feebeela]

Long time lurker on the Feminism chat board. I have learned a lot about the new gender politics and I am very grateful for my 'education'. I took the plunge tonight when a very dear friend based in the US posted an article about the menopause and uterus havers. Very respectfully, I said that I am a woman going through perimenopause not a "uterus haver". I was told that she was being inclusive as there are some men with uterus and some women do not. I pushed back and with respect argued that biology is not the same as gender and I was not comfortable being compelled now to call women uterus havers. The next post shut down the debate, I was told that gender was more than clothes, intersex, medical indicators etc. I love and respect my friend so agreed not to post on her feed.

She then posted this article and I wanted your take on it. I have been shut down because TWAW and it's not up to cis women to define a TW experiences. My head is in knots! Can I get your esteemed perspective please?

everydayfeminism.com/2015/10/trans-women-male-privilege/?fbclid=IwAR1fo9ZE7r9uMcK0NhdSy5cALSDgsiKcVXD4F5euZYE3MK5TmMg9PfhkWqw

I'm not going to give Everyday Feminism a click.

It's a junk site.

Your friend is an ass. She may think she is well-intentioned but she's still an ass.

Friends don't shut friends down.

There is nothing wrong with what you posted. It IS dehumanising to be called a uterus haver. It's on her if she chooses to use dehumanising language.

I think it's going to be easier for you to find a new "very, dear friend" than to try and counter any of that utter nonsense in that piece you linked to. If she believes that she's a lost cause.

Yep and it’s dehumanising and offensive for trans women to be telling women what women are. Your friend is a beaute.

it's not up to cis women to define a TW experiences

Just reverse that argument and there's your answer.

I would remove her from your Facebook

The very first point is that TWAW. If you disagree with that, the rest of the article is meaningless. So you could just keep saying you disagree. Even saying that has become a revolutionary act. Ask her to define what a woman is without reference to gender stereotypes and without rendering the term meaningless.

The hair analogy is interesting, because it’s using a physical characteristic as an example: if you’re blonde you’re blonde and to say otherwise is gaslighting. Why does that not apply to biological sex? If someone with a male body is sharing a changing room with women telling anyone who complains that they are a woman, is that not gaslighting too?

It also says that ‘cis’ Women have no right to define trans women’s identify, so why do trans women have the right to rename us ‘uterus havers’?

Honestly I’m not sure I’d bother with the friend herself, but you never know who else might be reading who hasn’t made up their mind yet.

I'd be tempted to say something like:
"We must have a different meaning of "woman" in the UK. Over here it refers to physical maturity, species and sex (adult human female), so it is purely a physical meaning. We use non-binary scales of feminine/masculine/neutral for gender. The US idea that there are two gender categories feels quite sexist when you're used to seeing it expressed on a scale."

But pragmatically, I don't think you can have this conversation with your friend via Facebook and expect a good outcome. It's a face-to-face conversation if you need to have it.

I think I'm well and truly in the minority here but I do see a point in trying not to refer to trans men as women. Which unfortunately leads to language-mangling like 'uterus-haver'. I know all the downsides to referring to (reducing to? No, it's just radfems that do that apparently) body parts like this and I don't think it's a good solution - I don't see what's wrong with 'women and trans men', for example. (Oh, actually I guess it doesn't include TW).

I wouldn't click on a link to Everyday Feminism if I wanted to keep my sanity though!

Uterus havers ffs.
What about all the WOMEN that go through immediate menopause after a hysterectomy?

I guess what I'm saying is for me, it wouldn't be the hill to die on.

What is it about people brought up as male like the writer of that linked article? Everything, everything, everything is about him/her/whatever.

'If I can't go to women's shelters, I'll be at risk of male violence.' Yes. And what about all the women whose risk of male violence you've just increased? Predators are capable of figuring out that dressing as women gets them in with their victims. That idea apparently whistles by about a hundred miles overhead. Women don't exist except as a means to an end. Exactly the way most men think. But his/her/whatever point is that by gum, he/she/etc was not socialized as male because girly.

Really? You certainly can't tell by the complete absence of any empathy.

What is it going to take for any of these TWAW characters to realize that something anything Is. Not. About. Them?

Nope, not reading a site that uses pejorative terms like TRF and neologisms like cs.

It's hard to comprehend how the simple words woman and women, so often used contemptuously and dismissively, have apparently been taken from us.

There's a very apposite post by "The Boxer Ceiling" fb page (reinstated, yay!) which refers to a tweet talking about being "cis gay" or "actually gay", because not all gay men are male (my paraphrasing)

Ridiculous.

'Havers' is such a crap word (except when pronounced 'hayvers' and meaning babbling on or wibbling about something).

How about 'women (and any transmen who still have a uterus)'?

What about all the WOMEN that go through immediate menopause after a hysterectomy?

Yup!

What am I? A former uterus haver going through menopause? Um, no, not signing up for that.

Ask if she realises that in her quest to be inclusive, she’s excluding women, and in this case, women for whom this is extremely relevant and important. I’m sure she wants to be helpful, or kind, so perhaps point out that she’s not being helpful or kind to hundreds of thousands of women?

You need backup from Magdalen Berns! Her video on Everyday Feminism is of my favourites.

"It’s Not Up to Cis People to Define Trans Women’s Experiences"

But somehow, trans activists see no problem with trans activists defining women's experiences. Or, deciding that they know that transwomen's experiences are the same as ours, without ever experiencing what it's like to be us. They may think they do. But they don't.

I agree. I would not give Everyday Feminism any clicks. I used to read it in a 'what is this car crash????' kind of way, but no more.

"It’s Not Up to Cis People to Define Trans Women’s Experiences"

It's not up to anyone else to define me or my experiences. It's not up to anyone else to rewrite my past or say that my reality is false. It's not up to anyone else to dictate my observations from my experience. It's not up to anyone else to tell me what to think and how to think.

My past is I had a brother not a sister. I grew up having that experience and others treating me as having a brother. My identity was formed and framed in a collective way - identity is not decided purely by individuals, it is also a collective thing.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_formation
Identities are formed on many levels, micro, meso, macro, and global. The micro level is self definition and relationship to people and issues as seen from a person or individual perspective. The meso level is where our identifies are viewed, formed, and questioned from our immediate communities and/or our families. Macro are the connections among and between individuals, issues, and groups as a view from a national perspective. Lastly, the global level is connections among and between individuals, issues, and groups from a worldwide perspective.

It is harmful to merely ignore the effect of individual identity being forced onto others. However it is done it has unintended consequences which can disrupt the identity of others, which in some cases can be harmful.

The most obvious example of this is the effect of a married man with children transitioning 'to a woman' and the woman is expected to identify as a lesbian and the children to refer to the father as 'Mum'.

The transwomans experience should not override the experience of those around them, nor should it dismiss the experience that a close relative has if a family member transitions because it also has an affect on the identity, freedom and emotional security / stability / self confidence of those closest to them.

The whole idea that women shouldn't define the experience of transwomen is based on the myth that the process of transition is a neutral one without real life effect on others.

This fallacy is why you cant just trot out this tripe without thinking.

The individual does not live in a vacuum. The individual has a family unit and community too and identity is relevant to multiple groups in different ways. It is multi level and complex, not simplistic and narcissistic.

Great post, RedToothBrush.

Your friend probably doesn't have a very clear idea what she thinks gender is. And I daresay if you asked her about what words she might use to talk about the female sex, as opposed to "uterus havers" she might be flummoxed. Because you would think that if she really believes that gender is separate you would still have words for sexual categories.

I have a friend who is very much like this. The conclusion I have come to is that she is probably not mentally capable of thinking through this ideology and it will only occur to her that her view is really just uncritical acceptance of bs once some really serious medical problems or abuses of some other kind emerge. Or the medical establishment as a whole reject the whole idea. In fact it's become clear to me, seeing her approach to this, that in fact this is how she understands all controversies and issues, in terms of what certain authorities tell her and her emotional response to it.

I don't engager her much on it now, it's pointless. I'll point out outright errors, like the time she posted a graph on "gender distribution" that actually had no data attached to it.

The article could say "women, transmen or female people of any gender, going through perimenopause"

Seeing as "women going through perimenopause" is distinct, and obviously different to "women with a penis".

That way they don't exclude women or reduce them to biology by referring to them as "uterus havers" which is just quite insulting really.
That would be inclusive.

It's been a day of disappointments, I was under the impression that everyday feminism had folded, sad news that it's still around.

Pope hilarious I agree with you. There are female people who don't accept the label woman, and they should be included in public health campaigns etc. But the word woman needs to be there as its the one which most people need to see, to reach the right people. But I rather suspect the downer on the word woman in these contexts is because tw don't want woman to mean 'the ones who give birth' or whatever.

Red toothbrush, thanks, good post.

Op it's difficult to know how to get through without knowing more about your friend, but I'm sure you can decide for yourself whether or not you want to cut off or lose your friend. It might be she hasn't thought it through, or that goose is right, or that she has thought it through and come to a different conclusion (though unlikely if everyday feminism is her source tbh). Let us know how it goes.