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.

My experiences do not invalidate trans experiences.

The difference is that I see them as separate issues.

And women have had to fight for hundreds of years to have women’s issues recognised.

No way am I sitting quietly as they are pissed on.!

OP, you lost me when you said trans woman can identify (?!?) as a lesbian.

Just fuck off with that nonsense!

@GoingThruTheMotions

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.

I'm so sorry for your loss. I also lost a friend to breast cancer, her poor kids were just 3 and 7. They don't have their mum anymore, because her symptoms were minimised due to her sex and stereotypes.

Man in "terrified" of feminism shock.

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.

Those who are advocating for the removal of sex categories disregard the welfare of children and women. Many Safeguarding protections are based in recognition of sex based risks. These risks to women and children are not diminished by the removal of the categories, what is removed is the ability to identify the risk and mitigate it.

Id rather it was my vagina & ovaries than my lady brain and lipstick, that's backward. But isnt it our chromosomes that determine our sex anyway. And they express themselves in every single cell in our body, not just the vag.

Grrrrr I fell for it....

You have it wrong OP. We are now "reducing" women to their biology precisely BECAUSE we recognise that there are no other differences between men and women in terms of intelligence, ambition, personality, interests etc. In the past people thought that men and women were fundamentally different in nature, intellectual ability, personality, desires, temperament, interests as well as being different biologically. Now we realise that is bollocks.

So, what makes a woman a woman? Is it wanting to birth babies? Is it liking make up and glitter and rose? You say it's about culture, history, society and psychology. So is it wanting to participate in the activities that our cculture and society designate as for women (spa days anyone?) Is it wanting to be treated in the way that people of our sex have historically been treated (wait to be proposed to, stay at home baking)? Is it having a certain psychology?? Surely not!! You can be a woman and not want to participate in culture and society in designated ways, and you certainly need not have a particular psychological make up.

The only thing left is biology. Not because women are different to men but because for most (every?) Other trait there will be at least some women that overlap with at least some men.

You call it reducing women to biology, I call it freeing women from social / cultural / psychological / historical bullshit.

The oppression of women is based on sex. Not how we dress, not on our hair, the things we like, what car we drive, what we like to drink, are we dog or cat people, do we wear glasses....

SEX.

Pointing out that women's oppression is based on being the female sex is not encouraging of that oppression. If we cannot say it, we cannot fight it.

Neither is it transphobic. A transman may face issues because of their sex (which is still female) and/or their gender identity.

A transwoman may face issues because of their gender identity. Not sex though. But because they want to be treated as a woman in every single aspect, even being left out of discussions about female sex based oppression makes them upset or angry.

Then they call it transphobia, when it's nothing of the sort. Just because it's not including them, and centering them.

@babbaloushka she was an amazing woman. So direct, such a good outlook right to the end. I'm very angry this happens to women regularly.

It's horrible it happened to your friend too. Sorry for your loss. No child should experience such unnecessary loss.

I think it's really fucking privileged to characterise feeling terror in the way described in the op. So poorly thought through and disrespectful.

There's something about debate isn't there.

Would it be a reasonable debate to have regarding the colour of the sky?

Should we debate whether or not England is actually in France?

Should we debate the fact that it's potentially unfair that West Brom are not going to win the Premier League this season, even though they really really want to?

Why then should we debate the fact that human beings are either male or female?

Is this not a fact? Any more that the sky is blue, that England is not in France, or that sadly West Brom are not going to win the Premier League?

based on bodies. Oh! I missed that little gem!

We move through our lives inhabiting the body in which we were born. It is our touchstone, constant reference point, much loved, much hated, much taken for granted. Sometimes modified, often damaged by our choices.

Bodies are what we move through our world in. They are our constant companions, the earthly tether for our free ranging imaginations.

Sometimes though the imagination stretches its tether a little too far and the body loses contact... and we get threads and comments like this!

Only just twigged what TRHR stands for! d’oh!

@NecessaryScene1

as a feminist and a young woman this really scares me

Just stop being a woman then, and you'll be fine.

I find quite a bit of trans ideology shockingly regressive - reducing male and female to a set of stereotypes - what you wear, how you behave, how you appear, how you move, etc. The whole concept of a 'female mind' or a 'female soul' is tragic.

Females have female bodies. Their minds and souls are limitless in their diversity and ability. That is and always has been the feminist philosophy.

yeahbutnaw
The calibre of the replies here (most of which tell OP just to shut up) are extraordinary.

Rational debate definitely doesn't happen on this platform. No genuine response or refutation. Just blatant dismissal.

Transphobia rots the brain.

////

Can you point to where the transphobia on this thread is? Or is that just your contribution to the rational debate you talk of?

OP the Break it Down For Me thread is excellent, I'd recommend it to anyone wanting to know why this debate is such an important one.

I find it interesting that even someone posting as TRHR contradicts themselves on what a woman is in their own post.

Ok so let’s say that woman no longer refers to humans who produce ova and say woman is anyone who identifies as a woman. Let’s ignore the problem of inherent circularity in that definition and say that’s right.
How do we make sure that those people who can become pregnant are not discriminated against for being pregnant?
How do I, as a doctor, decide if someone’s blood test results (and I review dozens every day) are abnormal or not when there can be a difference in normal values between people who produce ova and people who produce sperm and that getting it wrong can have serious consequences?
How do I know who I need to invite for smear tests or screening for aneurysms? If we don’t use sex or sex no longer means what it currently does what do I use?
Can you see that whatever word we use there are differences between those who produce ova and those who produce sperm? And we need a way of classifying those people accurately, quickly and within the context of medicine, safely to ensure the greatest benefit for the greatest number of people.
The problem comes not from the insistence that sex is real and important in the way we sometimes treat people but from the insistence that there are no differences at all if that is what an individual believes.

@andyoldlabour

Is this another "plop and go" thread?

Looks like it andy but at least they didn't leave their kitten out in the rain so thats a small mercy.

I know this is a goady plop and run, but for the lurkers:

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.

The anatomical differences between males and females are the defining characteristic of reproductive sex, yes.

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.

Yes, as you correctly point out, women's oppression is based on their sex. Incidentally, it's only been in the "last 100 or so years" that we've known about hormones and chromosomes, but the patriarchy has always been able to identify women.

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.

We're not going back to anything. Most people in the general public think "transgender" means the same as "post-op transsexual". i.e. Penis = man.
yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/07/16/where-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights

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.

As they say on Wikipedia: [citation needed]

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.

Conservative, religious communities also hold the view that grass is green. Should I disagree?

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.

And yet, your only example of this is a fictional book.

The term handmaiden predates The Handmaids Tale. Atwood also thinks that humans are the same as slugs, so I'm sure she's an expert on biology.

Gender is not a set of stereotypes - it's an identity based on culture, history, society , psychology and often (but not always) sex.

So, stereotypes, then.

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.

Feminism fights for women's liberation from male oppression, not some neoliberal "there's no such thing as society" nonsense.

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.

Your clothes have nothing to do with your sex and everything to do with socially imposed gender roles.

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.

Let me know when your biological father is pregnant with your sibling.

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.

We don't care how people move through life, that's not part of your sex. Wear what you want, just don't make false claims about your sex and insist everyone plays along. We just care about males claiming to be females, erasing the concept of sex entirely, and attacking anyone who might have reservations about abandoning material reality.

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.

I'm just going to have to re-quote this little gem:
especially to young women of child bearing age

You don't even believe in your own supposed viewpoint.

You've destroyed your own argument far more thoroughly than I ever could.

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.

Well, actually women were oppressed due to being born without a penis. There were the penis havers (men) and the penis have nots (women). The penis havers were bigger, stronger and not incapacitated by pregnancy and childbirth, so they oppressed the penis have nots.

Gender is not a set of stereotypes - it's an identity based on culture, history, society , psychology and often (but not always) sex.

Gender is an identity based on historical, cultural and societal stereotypes. No matter how you describe them gender identity, you end up using stereotypes.

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.

That’s not “freeing” because honestly a transwomen who identified as a butch lesbian is actually a heterosexual man? And a man cannot be a lesbian....so it is actually robbing lesbians and heterosexual men of their uniqueness to clump them together. While ignoring the fact that men have never been persecuted or killed for having consensual sex with women, but lesbians have.

Sorry but I believe your sex is defined by your chromosomes not by your genitals. If you want to dress like a man or a women, go for it, have sex with a man or a woman, go for it. What ever makes you happy, I don't care. I really don't, each to their own. But I do think if you are XX you are female and XY you're a bloke.

@yeahbutnaw

The calibre of the replies here (most of which tell OP just to shut up) are extraordinary.

Rational debate definitely doesn't happen on this platform. No genuine response or refutation. Just blatant dismissal.

Transphobia rots the brain.

And yet you come back and berate us with the same "My, but you are all so nasty" posts, time and time again!

You have never yet managed to offer a clear example of the blatant dismissal, lack of genuine responses or transphobia.

In fact the only person who doesn't engage, answer direct questions, add data to a thread is, well, erm, YOU!

As an example, many trans women don't wear "girly " clothes, they identify as "masculine/butch" lesbians.

And as a lesbian I have to inform you that bepenised people who are sexually attracted to women are called heterosexual men.

What on earth are you banging on about? Anyone can claim to be anything they want. It doesn’t make it true. Think genetics, biology, evolution, DNA etc etc. This is how we define men/women. Not whether they have a strap on or fake boobs.