Terrified of regressive modern feminism

[TRHR]

By saying "you can't be a woman if you're born without a vagina, and if you're born with a vagina you must be a woman" you're making reproductive organs the defining and most important characteristic of being a woman. This attitude was used to oppress women for centuries. We were baby makers only, and hormonal and chromosomal differences were used to say that we were too "emotional " for public life, education and jobs. Only over the last 100 or so years have our minds and emotions been rightfully recognised as just as important as our vaginas. GC is now going back to seeing our sex organs as our most important identifier and as a feminist and a young woman this really scares me. It is playing right into the traditional patriarchy, is sexist, regressive and oppressive. The fact its being done in the name of 'feminism ' terrifies me. The recent historic implications of insisting women are defined by their bodies scares me. These views are still held by conservative (often religion based) communities and we've all seen how easy it is for these groups to gain power - feminists shouldn't be helping them justify their attitudes or behaviour.

If you've seen/read the Handmaid's Tale you'll know what attitudes I'm afraid of. GCs ironically tell TRAs they are 'handmaids' when actually it is their attitude that has historically led to the oppression that Attwood (who is trans inclusive) bases her books on.

Gender is not a set of stereotypes - it's an identity based on culture, history, society , psychology and often (but not always) sex. It's far more freeing than "vagina = woman" and takes account of each of us as individuals not just bodies, which is what feminism up until now has fought for.
As an example, many trans women don't wear "girly " clothes, they identify as "masculine/butch" lesbians. Many trans men still like wearing make up and dresses e.g. in drag.
Many people would say the world shouldn't be defined as 'male / female' at all. But it always has done, that won't be changed in our lifetime. So seen as that is our social structure, it's oppressive to police how people choose to move through life under this structure based on bodies.
Thanks for reading this far and if I get one extra person to consider the harm that GC is doing, especially to young women of child bearing age, it'll be worth the condescension and vitriol that this post will inevitably receive.

Most women want to free ourselves and other women from the unfair and unscientific prejudices of patriarchy.

But it is attitudes and values that are the problem. Women and men are different but there is no intrinsic reason to treat women as inferior, that attitude prevails because men have used strength and violence to gain power and dominance and made up whatever nonsense they liked to keep women down. But you can’t free yourself and other women from those attitudes by pretending biology and material reality does not exist.

To do that would be to have a delusion.

You know how people say "oh I'm colour blind, I don't see colour me" and are all proud of themselves and how progressive they are while negating the lived experience of people of colour who know that race is a significant factor on how they have to negotiate their way through life?

You know how these "colour blind" people aren't actually progressive, and almost certainly extremely privileged not to have to think about and recognise race, or lying to themselves?

That's you when you pretend that sex doesn't matter, that you don't see sex, when you ignore women who are telling you that the way they live their lives involves negotiating with the lived experience of having a sexed body.

Christ how embarrassing for you OP.

This is like my youthful "not like the other girl" phase.

As an example, many trans women don't wear "girly " clothes, they identify as "masculine/butch" lesbians. Many trans men still like wearing make up and dresses e.g. in drag.

People wear clothes, its very restrictive and regressive to assign such rigid meanings and identities to sartorial choices.

I think this is a perfect example of the mnhq confirmation that it doesn't seek to stop or remove threads which deliberately set out to be goady. It may be timely to remind posters that engaging with those who may not be here in good faith rarely ends well for anyone. If you find yourself frustrated with responses, walk away before guidelines are breached.

Are you posting on behalf of Nonsuch lgbtq soc?

it's oppressive to police how people choose to move through life under this structure based on bodies

Yes. Yes, it is. In every situation except where the bodies share real characteristics which affect how they move through life (real or perceived reproductive capacity, physical size and strength, etc). Then it is oppressive to deny that those things are a factor. Men and women have different needs, because and only because of their physical differences. Where those are irrelevant, why would you treat them differently? That would be sexism.

Is this another "plop and go" thread?

No that's bollocks, sorry.

Think that if you want, but the reason women need single sex spaces is due to their sex, and gynaecological needs are one of a myriad of things.

You're young, it clearly hasn't affected you yet.

Wait till you're being discriminated against due to pregnancy, menopause or just experiencing sexism in the work place and then tell me it's not about our physical sex.

Today I've have discussions in two online groups of friends about issues getting support for peri menopause and by proxy the lack of research into female medical issues. As well as pregnancy and conditions affected by pregnancy or that pregnancy affects.

Read invisible women to start.

Who are GCs?

Feminism centres females. It's so simple.

I really dislike the use of terrified here.

I had a friend. She was of childbearing age. She went to the doctor because she knew something was wrong. She was dismissed, perhaps because of sexism, women's voices are often ignored due to sexism. She tried two more times. No one listened to her. Something was wrong. On the fourth time she was diagnosed with stage four breast cancer. She was terrified. She fought it. She lost.
If women weren't routinely ignored regarding their health she'd still be alive and her two kids would have their mum.

The word terrified is appropriate for what happened to her. Others like Jade Goody have highlighted how sexism in medicine has left women terrified. Terrified is a useful word to describe women fleeing domestic violence,girls fearing fgm, victims of rape.
It's not a word to be bandied around because someone disagrees with your ideology and life outlook.

If this is all you have to be terrified about life has treated you very, very kindly.

Do you think it's because society only defined vagina havers as women that they were oppressed? Or do you think they were oppressed because they had vaginas, could reproduce, and are on average, physically less strong, that they were oppressed? It isn't just because someone sat down and connected the noun with the body parts that women have been exploited. How does saying that women have penises prevent the reproductive types from being oppressed because they can reproduce? It just means they can't coalesce around a word to describe themselves that has any meaning: it makes it harder for them to organise, to define their oppression and fight for their rights if they have no name. How exactly is believing that the males who like sparkles and dresses are actually female freeing us from gendered stereotypes? It just entrenches them further. Think a bit harder about this would you?

young women of child bearing age

What characteristics are shared by young women of child bearing age? Clue: it's not a gendered soul or what they wear. It's their bodily characteristics.

And why is 'of child bearing age' significant? Many women don't bear children. They're still women though.

By saying "you can't be a woman if you're born without a vagina, and if you're born with a vagina you must be a woman" you're making reproductive organs the defining and most important characteristic of being a woman

If being an adult human female is not what makes someone a woman what is the "important characteristic" that you would say all women do share?

This attitude was used to oppress women for centuries

When you use the word woman here you are referring to adult human females. That would have included all people who were observed to be female at birth, regardless of how they "identified".

OP, I am going to assume that you are young.

I started out like you in a very male dominated industry. I was the only junior woman in my team. My legs were commented on, my male peers weren’t . My knee was grouped by hands, under the table in meetings, my male peers weren’t.

After I had my children, my career stalled slightly, especially after I had a high risk pregnancy. Guess what, this didn’t happen to my male peers.

I couldn’t care less about what people wear or how they identify. I do know that one group of people is more vulnerable to sexual harassment and career stalling post pregnancy.

I also know that the same group above is reduced to “menstruators, birthing people and vagina havers in certain media. I am not doing this and I abhor this. I think the term is women.

Unfortunately the name “women” is appropriated by many male born people who believe that some inner “feeling” of womenhood is the key thing of being a woman. I disagree, not due to any gate keeping but more due to the need for a common name for everything that needs fighting for in terms of my sex.

I’m terrified that my daughter is facing a world where women’s rights are slowly being eroded because people are challenging basic biology.

So, where does your brand of feminism take us? First we lose the definition of woman. We would cease to exist as a class, and if we cease to exist we cant be protected under things like the equalities act.

So, differences in pay between men and women would no longer be important - and actually as a woman can be anyone, then there would be no way to actually monitor this - unless instead of men and women we talk about those with vaginas and those without - which you think is reductive and insulting. Bit of a quandry there.

But lets get to your nirvana. No one is defined by their bodies, anyone can be anything they chose, and something different for the weekend, should the fancy take them.

Would this
a) result in people with vaginas being paid the same as those without
or
b) result in a widening of the pay gape between penis havers and vagina havers because no-one is looking any more

How does this sit in your brand of feminism?

And given your username, I just want to empathise that feminists are absolutely not against trans rights. Of course trans people have rights but it is wrong, and particularly damaging to women, to say sex is irrelevant.

Also as the poster said above I wonder how old you are?

I certainly understand the impact of my biology following pregnancy, child birth, postnatal health needs, breastfeeding, career and child care juggling, menopause and period issues, oh and throughout my life casual (but often intimidating) sexist encounters.

OP, this exact same argument could be used about the word "female". And then, guess what, you are all of a sudden not able to talk about reproductive role at all and somehow human beings are not subject to the same biology as other mammals.

Being a woman is about reproductive role. It doesn't reduce women to that, because we are also human beings with all the variations found in human beings. It's true that to some extent women may share in the experience and culture that comes out of being human beings that share a particular reproductive role, but that is not defining. Any more than being black means you have to like certain things or be into black culture or anything else.

Funny you knew to come to a place called Mumsnet and a section about Feminism, to find a group of women, adult human females, to berate!

How did you do that? Stereotypes about MNers? About posters in FWR?

Every sentence in your OP presents a twisted version of what is actually posted here. ALmost as if you have to study us hard to be able to be quite so wholly manipulative of discussions here.

TRHR...!!!

And it isn't only when you have a baby. ALL women are treated as if they are not men, thus limiting their opportunities and safety. It's easy to forget that until fairly recently, women were legally less equal than men. Even now, a transwoman can join the Masons - I can't. In many parts of the world, this legal equality still doesn't exist.

You know when people say "I don't see colour!" in response to racism, and that's not productive or in anyway beneficial to ending systemic racial oppression? Same difference.

The increasing importance of pronouns and transgenderism means that gender stereotypes are being ever perpetuated, and a young girl who likes "boys" toys must be trans, because being female obviously dictates your tastes, fashion and value. That is what I would call regressive.

OP I’m afraid you have misunderstood a long and rich history of feminist writing which is simply not at all as you characterise it. This shows a lot of ignorance; and you ought to go away and actually read some feminism before you mischaracterise it in such reductive (and frankly wrong) ways.