TWAW

[Billi77]

Thought it might be an idea to start a thread for women who support TWAW. I understand ‘Feminism chat’ should also include us and give us our own space?

@HH160bpm

I’m no longer prepared to concede an inch let alone the word for our sex class because it is not recognised as a concession. It is expected. Women are vilified for not immediately handing over every single thing that belongs to women while saying thank you for this opportunity and apologising for ever having them. Not doing so is treated as harmful, entitled and as a hostile act. We used to be nice, it’s hard not to be when we are socialised from birth to put others first. Who puts women first? Who even considers women? Women. That’s the end of the list. Words matter. Women are saying no.

Yes, this is now my position too. The goodwill I had has been used up.

"Never set yourself on fire to keep someone else warm" is a lesson women are taught in the abuse recovery community. It puts our lifetime of social conditioning in sharp focus.

Nelle

If you are ok giving up the word woman, are you also happy with the redefinition of lesbian?

I am sure you will have read about the cotton ceiling. Do you believe that it is homophobic to declare that women (in the female sense of the word not the inclusive sense) can no longer be same sex attracted? That they must now accept penises if they belong to transwomen.

This is yet another effect of giving up words that actually have established meanings and particularly those with legal ramifications.

No one has ever made you stop using the gendered language though, surely?

Did you see the JK Rowling thread yesterday and the link to the twitter feed? On that (with some mention on the thread) a BAME woman told JK she has frequently been accused of leveraging her trauma of FGM which is transphobic. Her tweets and replies are there to read.

Her talking about something appalling done to her body by a male led belief that female sexuality must be controlled, female sexual pleasure is wrong, and purity of females is essential, is framed as transphobic. As near as I can understand, this is because it implies that female/woman is a biological reality, which is seen as exclusive and bigoted, and FGM cannot happen to biologically male people so it is hurtful and excluding to suggest that this is a female thing.

Which means talking about it, sharing experiences of it between females, seeking to protect little girls from it- becomes impossible to do, because the presence of this discussion and need for females is too hurtful to people born male who in reality will never be remotely affected by it.

Additionally, do you have a suggestion on we now collect statistics on women crimes, health or anything if they are able to be ‘just women’?

You have obviously thought a lot about it and I would be interested in how you separate out transwomens crimes that reflect the male patterns of behaviour for example.

It was generally working Ok, then the activists upped the ante

Because they're power-hungry narcissists. Nothing will ever satisfy them.

If FGM is reframed to 'forced GM' to remove reference to female as too insensitive/exclusive, and also equated then with circumcision, it hides the facts females need front and centre:

• this only happens to biological females - they cannot identify out of it. This does not happen to biological males.
• part of the oppression females face in the world is because of their reproductive biology being seen as something males control: their sexual pleasure, their purity, their marriageability. This does not happen to biological males.

Why should females have to hide this reality and lessen and dilute the outrage of it and the need to overcome it, because a small percentage of the population find reference to biological sex or classification by sex too offensive?

You may want to link this to Rachel McKinnon's comments (can't remember if they were on radio or in an article, others will know the source) that homosexual females formerly known as lesbians, needed to 'learn to cope' with sex with biological males who identified as lesbians. Again implying that females should not feel entitled to enjoy sex and it is not about their pleasure or their equality of need and reciprocation: it's a social duty that should be provided as owed to males even if unpleasant to them. This is actually spoken, by a public figure, as if this is a sane thing to say about female people. It's Victorian to Medieval in where it places female people's equality and even equal humanity.

Do you see the problems yet?

This is a bit out of date now but i still think it's the best thing for people who believe twaw and don't understand the alternative. View point. The fact is your view is 'Terfy' if you see issue with the prison system, sports etc it doesn't tally with normal transactivism, stonewall etc

www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/02/are-you-now-or-have-you-ever-been-terf

It’s a bit like offering someone a sweet from a bag. Expected behaviour is that the person being offered takes one or two and says thank you. It’s not expected to have the whole bag ripped out your hand while being screamed at to apologise for having sweets and forced to agree they belonged to the other person all along.

Rachel McKinnon who also encouraged trans children to skype her and look for their glitter family (on Mother’s Day)? Safeguarding 0, Predators 1.
Who told cis women to ‘die in a grease fire?)
Who is still employed as a lecturer in a university and still represents her country in Masters FEMALE cycling whilst campaigning for rules regarding testosterone limits to be removed as they disadvantage males competing in female sports?
That Rach? Now known as Veronica Ivy?
Yeah she’s so vulnerable. Needs women to budge over and centre her at all costs.

@HH160bpm

It’s a bit like offering someone a sweet from a bag. Expected behaviour is that the person being offered takes one or two and says thank you. It’s not expected to have the whole bag ripped out your hand while being screamed at to apologise for having sweets and forced to agree they belonged to the other person all along.

Oh you’ve met Rach.

These are some of the comments Jana Cornel, a black woman who is a survivor of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), received when she tweeted in response to JKR's earlier tweet thread:

Perhaps the way you are phrasing it or what you compare it to is actually transphobic, even unintentionally, and then it's simply a matter of rephrasing without taking the correction personally.

I've just seen your screenshots. So it's term 'f' in the terminology that is being disputed? I've only heard it referred to as fgm but maybe a new terminology can be used?

You could also just call it, you know, unconsentual genital mutilation.....

I'm not trying to hide that fact at all. I'm just saying theres ways to say it without being transphobic, so if you're being called transphobic for what you are saying perhaps the issue is uh, what you're saying

You can talk about the body part being mutilated. Not all people with a clitoris or labia identify as girls. Not all girls have a clitoris or labia. The genitals do not make the female. Implying that they do is transphobic.

"Feeeeemmmmaalllleeessss"

And "biological women" "should understand the fights of" trans humans are "not meant to threat biological women's" rights.

call it vaginal mutilation? literally what is hard about that lmao

You true are misguided. And I see you cannot find the words or way to express you pain or point of view. This ignorant persons view point aint' it!

Mostly these comments were from young white women. Much Black Lives Matter.

Jana's tweet:

twitter.com/RadfemJana/status/1269389904175419392?s=20

Honestly, Jana's twitter is one of the few I miss interacting with after deleting my account. Her dignity is inspiring.

@Nellle :

I'm finding myself a bit homeless in this conversation

It's possible to love JK Rowling, but believe that her essay contributes to a terrifying climate for trans women.

How is what JK Rowling said contributing to a terrifying climate for transwomen?

Do you not think that the rape, death threats and exhortations for JKR to choke on a lady dick are terrifying for women?

It's possible to believe that a debate about women's spaces is valid, but using Karen White as an argument contributes to violence against trans women.

How and who are the people being violent to transwomen?

It's possible to believe TWAW, but believe trans women shouldn't be able to compete in cis women's sport.

No such thing as cis, and no it is blatantly obvious that if you believe TWAW then women's sports are open to TW to the complete and utter detriment of women.

It's possible to understand science, sex and chromosomes, but still say TWAW.

No, it isn't it's contradictory.

Someone might (will) ask what I mean by this. I know we can't change chromosomes, but I believe trans women are women (and trans men are men). This is because language has power and everyone has the right to own their own identity and how they label themselves. Does it mean they were born female? NO. Does it mean the debate about women's spaces and sport should be silenced? NO. Does it mean that in a medical/scientific setting their birth sex is irrelevant and should be erased? NO.

And yet I am not allowed my own identity, I am a woman an adult human female, why should I have that stripped from me?

But can we call TWW? Fucking yes. Why the hell not? Maybe if we gave up a bit of language, we wouldn't have to give up all the rest? Surely, we want to align ourselves as allies with the 99.99% of trans people who pose zero threat and sympathise with the legitimate feminist debate. Maybe if we could all be women together, we could move the debate along and come to some solutions?

And there we have it, women must give up our language and our identity to assuage the feelings, desires and wants of MEN. I am saying an unequivocal NO. My identity and the language I use to describe myself is not yours or anyone elses to take or give away.

The way Jana is spoken to there makes me feel physically sick.

These will be young women who pride themselves on their socially just superiority and harangue others to be kind, inclusive, to care about equality and diversity.

This guy:

Do you not think that the rape, death threats and exhortations for JKR to choke on a lady dick are terrifying for women?

Quite I'm trying to be polite to those posters new to FWR who've come to ineptly challenge us, and to patiently explain our position to them, but am finding it rather hard.

These will be young women who pride themselves on their socially just superiority and harangue others to be kind, inclusive, to care about equality and diversity.

Yes, I imagine they do.

It's possible to believe that a debate about women's spaces is valid, but using Karen White as an argument contributes to violence against trans women.

I've seen it all now. It was women who were raped and assaulted by White. But talking about that harm and wanting to prevent it happening again is a bad thing according to you.

Karen White is what happens when you support self ID. We said a case like that would happen and we were told 'it was too much trouble for men to bother'.

When you say that anyone can transition without exception no debate, you include predators. And its women who are harmed as a result.

It's possible to believe that a debate about women's spaces is valid, but using Karen White as an argument contributes to violence against trans women.

Karen White is talked about because KW is an example of bad trans inclusive policy which does not consider the rights of women, which is exactly what we are challenging. Karen White is also frequently brought up because trans activists and trans allies say "but that never ever happens so your fears are unfounded". So women and the media are going to continue using Karen White as an example, and no emotional blackmail from people like you is going to stop that. It's as if you think that everything revolves around the interests of trans people. It does not.

Who's told you that? Neither me nor any woman I know has been told we can't call ourselves women

Exactly! Just because a few extremists on Twitter might say it (I wouldn't know, not seen it myself) doesn't mean you're not allowed to call yourself a woman anymore.
Of course you are.
You're no less a woman despite any hyperbolic posts on here telling women that they're not allowed to use the word woman anymore.

Regardless of who is "allowed" to say what, if the meaning of woman is changed, I can't call myself a woman any more simply because by that changed definition, "a person of any sex who identifies as an undefined set of womany things", I won't BE a woman.

cis-woman won't cut it - it means "an adult human female who identifies as an undefined set of womany things that are open to either sex" so it excludes the adult human females like me who currently define themselves as women but don't accept "the undefined womany stuff that's open to any sex" as the defining characteristic of woman, and it excludes transmen, female non-binary adults and female agender adults, who do not identify as cis but are and always will be adult human females.

I need a word that means "adult human female" , so I can fight for what an adult human female needs and what an adult human female can be.

Jana Cornel:
"the trauma that my mother and I suffered as well as millions of my sisters suffer is because of our sex not gender!!"

Morgane Oger:
"Actually, the trauma you suffered was because of your gender, because of a patriarchy's views about your physiology, and because the place where you lived at the time did not protect you from gender-based abuse.
Your leveraging your trauma to justify transphobia is unkind."

mobile.twitter.com/morganeogerbc/status/999699329089650688?lang=en

Telling women to shut up about abuse that happened and blaming their words for imaginary harm that did not happen to other people is a particularly nasty form of DARVO.

Re: Karen White, I'd like to point out the the feminists here were warning that A Very Bad Thing would happen if males were housed with women just because the males felt they were women for ages before Karen White's crimes. We were all horrified to proved right. So dismissing the case that we said would happen as a consequence of 'inclusive' policies, because you think it's a one off (it's not, btw, it's just the most high profile) is pretty tone deaf, really. Do we have to wait around for another high profile case, only to be Cassandra yet again? How many female victims meet the threshold to matter?

Ach. Another rl scenario. And I’ll be namechanging again afterwards, because, y’know, mortgage. Posted it on here before.
I work in student housing. We aren’t allowed to ask sex. Students declare gender and state if they want a single room or a shared room. We offer 3 gender options. M, F, U (undeclared). We deal with a LOT of international students with requirements wet religion/ culture.
If someone states they are female and want a shared room, I match them with someone else who stated they are female and wants to share. At no point in this process is it obvious to the vast majority of female students that ‘gender’ isn’t a polite term for ‘sex’ and that (if we don’t catch some other clue) they could end up in a tiny shared room with a male. Who is ‘female’ in his belief.
Of course, some of our trans students request a single room (and may provide a note to highlight they are trans to prioritize the request). We automatically give these students priority for singles (side note - one cohort realised this and all claimed to be trans to priority access our small pool of single stock).
All well and good so far.
The issue is when (when, not if, reasonably common) a trans student requests a shared room (because shared rooms are cheaper) and states their identified gender. In some instances we have clocked the situation (perhaps if they call in to make a deposit, when, sorry, ‘Faye’, it’s really obvious that you are not female) and have been able to avert a crisis by suddenly running out of share partners and allocating a single (or leaving an empty bed in a share.)
The trans student then gets a deal on their accommodation - they pay for a share and use a single.
Sometimes, we only find out after both students check in to their accommodation on arrival day. Usually because the distraught female turns up at the office in tears claiming she can’t share with (who? A woman? A transwoman? A male bodied individual who stated F as his gender on the form?) And that’s only if she’s brave enough to run the gauntlet of ‘transphobic bitch! Bigot!’
Look. I risk my job every time I prioritise a young female student’s right not to have to share a small bedroom with a male. I’m not allowed to ask sex. I have to hedge and work around and try to deconflict rights, because I know from bitter experience who is going to throw the mother of all tantrums and call in the wrath of every TRA on twitter, and who is going to be crying in the bathroom trying to summon the courage to ask for a different roomie.
Oh. Should also add we have mandatory trans training and that I had to grit my teeth and make a formal request to HR that they reinstate sex as a protected characteristic alongside gender in the updated harassment guidelines.
I don’t know about you Nellie, but I want my daughters to be able to choose their room mates based on sex. Not by their feels.
If you are interested, transmen always ask for a single and explain why. Transwomen don’t.