So, what is 'non gc' feminism?

[ArabellaScott]

Hello, all.

What does feminism that isn't about sex/gender look like?

What subjects does it investigate?

What aims does it have?

Would be good to hear from those who didn't feel able to post before.

"So many"... really? So many threads. How many exactly?? And there is more than enough goading from those who are pleased as punch to have been given their own space to debate and to have pushed other posters into a silo.

This thread was absolutely not goady, MotherOffCod, and I think it's pretty rude to keep framing it that way.

Given how much they value respect for women’s boundaries you’d think they might be more willing to respect this one.

This is the general feminist chat space, not some sort of walled safe space for posters who don't approve of women's sex based rights, and it's a valid question. Maybe scroll on by if you don't like the thread. Other people who disagree seem to have plenty to say, and that's great!

@picklemewalnuts it's called the Slavery Footprint slaveryfootprint.org/mobile2.html. I just tried to take it but it's being glitchy. Might just be my phone though

I also view 'women' broadly -- every race and nationality and yes, trans women as well.*

Well as the word woman encompasses females of every race and nationality how much broader can it be? What you mean is you also include male people who share nothing in common with the females of every race and nationality? Is this your concept of broadly.
As for not being comfortable with arguments based in biological essentialism, would you care to explain why ?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I read a lot about the recent scientific research into the spectrum of sex

As do many GC women on FWR, and you are overegging the pudding because it suits your personal view to do so.

In what way? My point that I'm comfortable with a fuzzy definition stands even if it is 0.0001% not 1%.

My agenda consists of the three things I originally outlined. I could work towards those either being GC or not GC.

There are lots of incredibly well-informed people on the board. I respect their views and I don't particularly want to start a fight with any of them. However, having read a lot of the threads, unrelated topics do often get derailed into being about definitions of womanhood. There being a space where that doesn't happen is a good thing in my view.

This thread sort of sums it up for me...

All the GC feminists here arguing that women’s rights activism is the most important thing in feminism for them... here’s the bit I don’t get...

When white supremacy results in the death of women of colour, disproportionate, egregious, ongoing, real world daily consequences of that system- a system that we could really have a big impact on changing and reshaping, taking the lead from our sisters of colour.

I have read THOUSANDS of posts and threads about the risks of trans-rights, but actual women are actually dying because of this other system, and it just doesn’t seem to register... at least not on the FWR board in the last 5 years. The odd thread here and there. Nothing like the avalanche of GC threads.

Of course you don’t just pick one fight, but I just don’t see posters who are so passionate about GC posting about real world consequences of WS on women of colour.

It’s like there’s a bonfire on the front lawn and a lot of people want to go look at the candle in the back garden.

To posters who said:
Because you live in a white area. Because you haven’t ever said a racist slur to anyone.

Saying I haven’t ever personally oppressed anyone is exactly like a man coming here and saying I haven’t raped anyone so what can I do about rape culture? And I’ve seen how that one goes down here.

[quote Waitwhat23]@picklemewalnuts it's called the Slavery Footprint slaveryfootprint.org/mobile2.html. I just tried to take it but it's being glitchy. Might just be my phone though[/quote]
I’ve tried to use it and it isn’t working for me either.
I would have thought this is more indicative of the western world’s reliance on the oppression of poorer countries rather than a specifically white people issue though. I’m happy to be corrected by someone who managed to get to the end.
Would people living in England with the same amount of children etc, and the only difference being their ethnicity, have vastly differing scores?

@picklemewalnuts
respect.international/slavery-footprint/

@deathbypostitnote

Theres a lot more to women's oppression than trans issues so it'll be nice to have a space that's clear to discuss them without getting lost in amongst all the trans threads.

It's that simple. No one's suggesting these issues have no intersection with trans et al, just that it would be nice and necessary to center different aspects as the GC crowd had become a bit suffocating. As Freeble has demonstrated, there are other important conversations to have. She isn't suggesting they have no bearing on GC issues, just that there was no space to do so as the conversation was relentlessly turned to focus on one thing only. Not that it wasn't relevant, but it wasn't the only aspect that was relevant.

No point expecting posters to explain how other issues have nothing to do with GC issues. They're not trying to suggest there's no connection. They'd just like to follow a train of thought that didn't center GC issues and wasn't talked over by the same group of posters.

Suffocating is a great word for how it’s felt, increasingly, for years, and it’s a huge relief to be finally getting a space that’s (intended to be) free from that lens and narrative.

I’ve longed for space to post without bracing for attack, insults, brigading and bullying, and to be able to express and discuss inclusive feminism without having to either tacitly condone hostility towards trans people or offer myself as tribute for a pile on.

Biological sex matters. It doesn't have to be determinative of identity. That is a human choice.

I would write a longer post on this but I don't see the point really, I know I won't change any minds here.

There is a long history of people using biological facts to uphold restrictive and exclusive social discourse and policies. I would like to see feminism do the opposite. I would like to see a big tent, 'more the merrier', let's all crush the patriarchy attitude. I don't want to police people's bodies and interrogate their bona fides.

You may disagree with all this and that's fine. I was just responding to the OP. I'm not going to try to change your minds. Let's just acknowledge that different feminists have different views but that does not stop us all working toward the same goal.

In what way? My point that I'm comfortable with a fuzzy definition stands even if it is 0.0001% not 1%.

The overwhelming majority of MTF trans people are average XY males. This is a red herring, it's used as a gotcha by transactivists. All people who have a disorder of sex development are either male or female even if this is ambiguous to the beholder, which is extremely rare in itself.

@AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken

It’s a product of white supremacy, a system which is currently upheld for the benefit of white people as a class

In the same way that the patriarchy can be upheld by men and women, but is primarily for the benefit of men.

There is an excellent podcast series called Seeing White which explores the history of Whiteness both as a racial grouping and also as a system of power.

White supremacy and patriarchy are like two sides of the same coin, but often white women fight one, while upholding the other and that is why feminism has to look at both systems if it is to succeed.

All the GC feminists here arguing that women’s rights activism is the most important thing in feminism for them... here’s the bit I don’t get...

Yes, you don't get it. You don't understand why it's important to have language and a movement to describe the specific oppression we experience because we are female. You want us to divert our attention to a focus you consider more important. Would you say this to trans people?

@Waitwhat23

I read a lot about the recent scientific research into the spectrum of sex and there's mounting evidence it's not entirely binary (approximately 1% of people have chromosomes that don't match to XX or XY).

Are you referring to DSDs here? Those with DSDs are genetically male or female, they just have a variance in sexual development. I think there might be one, exceedingly rare condition where this is not the case, but I don't think it would amount to 1% of the human population.

If there is research showing that humans are not a dimorphic species, then please post links, I'd be interested in reading it.

There's a book called the Spectrum of Sex. I don't claim to be an expert at all and I think 1%, is the widest definition.

Likewise, I'd happily read conclusive evidence that there isn't a spectrum.

What I don't get, Freebleweeble, is that you are dressing down other posters for not talking about issues that you feel are a priority. Yet... you haven't and won't start any threads about them anywhere.

[quote Freebleweeble]@AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken

It’s a product of white supremacy, a system which is currently upheld for the benefit of white people as a class

In the same way that the patriarchy can be upheld by men and women, but is primarily for the benefit of men.

There is an excellent podcast series called Seeing White which explores the history of Whiteness both as a racial grouping and also as a system of power.

White supremacy and patriarchy are like two sides of the same coin, but often white women fight one, while upholding the other and that is why feminism has to look at both systems if it is to succeed.[/quote]
Thank you for your reply. It’s really informative.
What about in countries that aren’t predominantly white but are affluent enough to exploit the same poorer countries?

Such as Singapore, Japan, Qatar etc.

@dreamingbohemian

What areas of feminism can be discussed and considered as being separate from being a female?

Those of you making these kinds of comments are being completely disingenuous. You're not fooling anybody.

It's not that complicated. I'm a feminist. I also have no problem with the idea that trans women are women. So as I go about my day, working in a male dominated industry, living in our patriarchy-shaped world, ranting about all the total bullshit that women have to put up constantly, I do not stop to obsess about trans issues. I don't agonise about other people's private anatomy. I care very deeply about the oppression of women and I simply don't care if someone was born a woman or decided to join us at a later date.

Look at all the things we should be focused on! Rape has been effectively decriminalised in this country, women are being killed and abused with impunity, women are suffering disproportionately in lockdown, young girls are being hyper-sexualised, I mean the list is endless. There is a serious problem with racism within the feminist community, something that (as this thread shows) a lot of white feminists really are not engaged with at all.

So these are some of the very serious matters it would be great to discuss without being dragged into the never-ending debate about who is or is not a woman.

I mean, who gave GC feminists the right to decide who a woman is? You are entitled to your opinion as are the rest of us. Personally I don't want my identity to be determined by my reproductive organs. I find the biological essentialism of GC feminism very disturbing and I want no part of it. But I am still a feminist, someone fighting back against misogyny and patriarchy every chance I get.

Well said Bohemian. Very well said, and I’m completely in agreement.

Personally I don't want my identity to be determined by my reproductive organs.

It’s not. It’s your sex.

Also you are more likely to be called something which refers to your body parts without GC feminism.

I’ve tried to use it and it isn’t working for me either.
I would have thought this is more indicative of the western world’s reliance on the oppression of poorer countries rather than a specifically white people issue though. I’m happy to be corrected by someone who managed to get to the end.

I got to the end but don't understand the meaning of it. So basically if you own 5 pairs of jeans you have slaves working for you? Isn't that mixing up people in Asian countries being exploited in sweat shops with racism and slavery? What if you buy from reputable clothes manufacturers? This is basically damned if you do anything. Weird tool and very offputting instead of highlighting an actual problem.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

In what way? My point that I'm comfortable with a fuzzy definition stands even if it is 0.0001% not 1%.

The overwhelming majority of MTF trans people are average XY males. This is a red herring, it's used as a gotcha by transactivists. All people who have a disorder of sex development are either male or female even if this is ambiguous to the beholder, which is extremely rare in itself.

Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm right. Don't think either of us will convince the other or either one of us have provided any proof.

Even if I'm wrong, there's no harm in me being able to have a conversation about the feminist issues that concern me without going back to first principles and debating what being a woman is.

I didn't post on the board before, as it didn't feel like an appropriate space to do so. I will post now, but will stop if threads get continually derailed.

I experience female socialisation and expectations, because I’m treated as a woman and expected to fill certain niches in society (which I think are often unreasonable), because I interact with a lot of the boxes marked as ‘woman’.

Males are not socialised into femininity though, they are not expected to be ‘kind’, empathetic and accommodating to others. Males are socialised in the exact opposite way, to be entitled, self centred, controlling, and to think only of themselves. If a male dresses in a feminine manner, or has medical intervention, the male socialisation doesn’t suddenly vanish.

I don’t think males who identify as women are treated like women, I think they are treated with the same priority over females as any other male, their desires and demands always seem to be met. Females are still expected to be ‘kind’, empathetic and accommodating to them, and put their desires above our own needs.

So I don’t see any benefits to females of including males in a movement supposedly for females, only detriment. The same as I wouldn’t see any benefits to including white people who identified as a different race, in anti-racism movements, only detriments.

Thank you @DifferentHair and @MotherOffCod : )

You don't want your identity to be determined by your reproductive organs... so you insist that to be a woman you have to have female reproductive organs?

Also agree with pp being born female (girl) and growing into an adult woman is not a identity, that is the whole problem. It is not an identity one can assume, like being a goth or a punk, the idea is frankly offensive in the extreme.