JK Rowling article

[DrDreReturns]

Interesting read. I know it's from a Conservative site but it seems only the right are gender critical at the moment.

www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2022/03/profile-j-k-rowling-striving-to-stop-starmer-nailing-his-colours-to-the-fence-on-trans.html

I am actually horrified that we have a poster who seems to absolutely not understand that telling lesbian that they are transphobic for refusing to have sex with a male, a transitioned male, is not coercive in nature.

That calling a lesbian transphobic is not pressuring lesbians to 'do dick' to avoid being called or thought that. Because many lesbians are dependant on their groups for support and friendships. And that labelling a lesbian a 'transphobe', even making that connection in their mind, could mean that lesbian being ostracised from their support group.

And this poster cannot see how that would be coercive? And how homophobic that is.

I am not surprised, but there it is. Well done!

I have heard of cultures which do have genders beyond the strict binary we have in the west, and perhaps people belonging to those do run into these kind of issues. I am not a member of those cultures, so wouldn't want to opine on their experiences myself however.

Traditionally they identify out of the binary to a third category. In Samoa their name even indicates that they don't believe they change sex, eg fa' afafine means " in the manner of - Fa'a + woman - fafine"

But here we see these other cultures being appropriated by activists for their own purposes. Of course, we have seen this time and time again. As I said already, there is some really tired old trope being wheeled out on this thread.

Same old, same old.

I also doubt that cultures which have third genders would treat the other two genders as gender identities. They are likely to be biological sex categories, while the third one may or may not be so.

The question I have always had in my mind about the nonbinary identity in the Western context is to try to figure out what the gender roles for it might be. My guess is that it is assumed to be an escape from gender roles while leaving others with the same old troubles, but I am not sure.

Interesting article here:

Instructing lesbian women on how to 'unlearn all that nasty transphobia' and learn how to have lesbian sex with a biological male.

www.allure.com/story/guide-to-sex-with-trans-women-for-cis-women

(clue: it's absolutely all 100% about the male person, their feelings, wishes, needs, pleasure....)

I'll leave aside the forcible assigning of the label 'cis' which many females find offensive.

Artichokeleaves, your point reminds me of the idea of sex as something that women own and should share when demanded. Incels actually use that a lot, i.e., they believe that heterosexual biological females are a sexual resource and that resource should be more widely available, perhaps on demand, to any incel who desires heterosexual sex.

And your comment also makes me wonder if trans women who identify as Lesbians have sex with other trans women who identify as Lesbians, and if that is not the case, are there articles guiding them to the proper behaviour?

Finally, I wonder if there are any reverse articles, guiding trans women about how to have sex with cis women.

@nepeta

Elaine Fuchs:

So the definition of 'man' in your view is purely social? And there is, actually, then no word for a person who belongs to the sex which typically (but not always) produces sperm or at least is on the path towards that? And health advice on, say, prostate cancer should not be directed at men but at 'prostate-havers'? Condom advertising should be directed at 'ejaculators' and not men?

That would be inclusive language as there are people who have prostate and penises but do not have male identity.

Okay. What would change if we go along with that definition? How would you explain, to give one example, the initial subjugation of people who have ovaries and so on by people who have prostates? Or the treatment of 'vulva people' in Afghanistan?

Let's say we somehow manage not to just get rid of all names for the female sex but actually all names for biological sex altogether. Why would we then even need such terms as 'women' and 'men?' After all, they were created to either refer to biologically female and male adult people or the way societies required them to behave and the characteristics societies required them to have.

I don't quite see how that world would work. It would not dismantle what some call 'patriarchy', and it would leave us few weapons to fight against the subjugation of people who do belong to the sex which typically (but not always) produces ova, because we couldn't talk about it properly. Indeed, I think it would make 'patriarchy' stronger, because once 'women' lacks material basis, something else will be used in the place of that basis, and that will be sexist stereotypes.

Then I have questions about the concept of gender identity. I don't possess an abstract gender identity in that I don't feel particularly female most of the time and never when I am alone. I am a human being and an individual but I also have a biologically female body, and that body is the reason why I have been discriminated against and sexually assaulted. I need to have a name for myself, and your definition does erase my particular gender identity, because it erases so many of my actual life experiences.

My feminism has always been aimed toward erasing the gendered boxes. What you suggest seems to strengthen their borders but at the same time make it harder to improve the lot of people belonging to the sex which typically (but not always) produces ova. And the people who make the lot of that group worse do not use your definitions are are very unlikely to ever begin to use them.

Yes, I would say my definition there is purely social. (I think that the definition of 'male' is more flexible and depends on context (like lots of other words), in my definition above I meant it socially also).

I would probably phrase it as "people with prostate" haha. To be honest, while I'm very much for inclusive language, I do agree that there's a balance to be struck with making sure messaging is able to be understood by everyone. I'm no expert on how many people with prostates know they have a prostate, so I'm not able to say exactly what the right balance is. Similar arguments probably go for health messenging in other languages. Medical messaging is difficult! Trans women taking feminizing hormones change their risk profile for prostate and breast cancer! In general I lean towards inclusive language, but I'm no zealot.

For female genital mutilation, I have no trouble calling it that. And I would still describe "prostate on ovary" subjugation as the patriarchy. If you mean specifically biologically based oppression, one could always try to be more specific, like reproductive oppression I suppose.

I don't think it would be possible to erase language for gendered classes without first getting rid of any sex/gender based oppression and stereotypes. And to be clear, I'm not fighting to get rid of the word "woman"!

There is no doubt that women suffer sex based oppression, but I would argue that gender (i.e. the gendered way society and individuals interact) is also a principle axis of oppression.

As an example, some cis women don't have periods, but they might still suffer from stigma around menstruation. Infertile women (cis or trans) might still be denied employment because an employer (mistakenly) believes they could go off and get pregnant, this clearly isn't based on biology, but rather preconceived notions of the "risks of employing women" (just to be clear, I absolutely believe this type of discrimination is wrong!). I'm not denying the biological roots of this discriminatory behaviour, mind.

In terms of gender based oppression, trans women have a lot in common with cis women, and I think it's worthwhile to include them in the "but not always" box of women [who may or may not produce ova], and worthwhile including them in your feminism. I do honestly think that an identity based answer to "what is a woman" is more consistent than anything biologically based, even if it does tread on some people's preconceived notions of womanhood.

I just want to reiterate how much I (and every person I know fighting for trans rights) wants to dismantle the patriarchy and end gender (and sex) based discrimination.

Sorry that this ended up being a little rambly (and maybe the examples I picked weren't the best), I'm starting to feel a little unwell so will take a break for some time. I'm pleased that you're engaging, thank you. If I lose this thread and don't respond, please DM me, I have enjoyed thinking about this.

Sorry I didn't address your points about gender identity, I would sincerely like to read and answer more fully at a later date. I am also sorry to hear about you being discriminated against and assaulted, truly nobody deserves that.

@nepeta

Artichokeleaves, your point reminds me of the idea of sex as something that women own and should share when demanded. Incels actually use that a lot, i.e., they believe that heterosexual biological females are a sexual resource and that resource should be more widely available, perhaps on demand, to any incel who desires heterosexual sex.

And your comment also makes me wonder if trans women who identify as Lesbians have sex with other trans women who identify as Lesbians, and if that is not the case, are there articles guiding them to the proper behaviour?

Finally, I wonder if there are any reverse articles, guiding trans women about how to have sex with cis women.

I have read (I wish I hadn't) stuff on women 'gatekeeping their vaginas'. Yes, I know the idea you mention, that there is a need and right of male people to female bodies that females should not be entitled to unreasonably withhold that.

The same incel theorists also dislike the idea of being expected to pay for this and theorise that there should be compulsion upon females so that they cannot unreasonably deny this to males.

A strong stomach is required to read around the subject; the dehumanising of females and the misogyny is quite hard going.

Oh dear.

That article is by AC Valens. Here's a sample of Valens' social media activity.

Trigger warning: rape of "cis women", singling out gender-critical feminists.

Screenshot

the yr is 2028. the united soviets of america have emerged, run by groups of 12 to 14 trans woman who all initiate breeding facilities where we hive five each other while spitroasting cis women. we call it the gender crit wet pussy carousel (now with less respectability politics)

What was that about abortion rights being rolled back? Personally, seeing American male transitioners fantasise about women being gang raped into pregnancy doesn't make me think, "ah, these people really care about women having reproductive rights".

Elaine, how about you?

I do honestly think that an identity based answer to "what is a woman" is more consistent than anything biologically based

Appreciated as an answer. But I believe the opposite: that the biological split between the sexes is a real and unavoidable and very salient thing, more so than the 'identity' one.

FFS!! purgatory I remember that tweet. That is truly dire!

Thank you for your answer, Elaine Fuchs. I think it is more complicated, because once biological sex is detached from 'women and girls', the gender identity approach replaces those terms with 'people' when talking about sex-based oppression, to be inclusive towards trans men and nonbinary people with female bodies (but at the same time erasing embodied female identities altogether).

This de-fangs feminism almost entirely, in my view, because fighting against sex-based oppression does require being able to name its victims.

Nepeta your point reminds me of the idea of sex as something that women own and should share when demanded. Incels actually use that a lot, i.e., they believe that heterosexual biological females are a sexual resource and that resource should be more widely available, perhaps on demand, to any incel who desires heterosexual sex.

I've been thinking that there is an underlying attitude on this thread and others that sex is something females as a class owe to males, and that lesbians are shirking doing their share.

It's quite interesting to see this on the same thread where it's implied that self-ID would be acceptable when people* apply for disability benefits and access arrangements. Why can't women self-ID as congenitally unable to provide sex to male people and have that accepted? I mean, that's free; it's not like women are asking the government to give them Lesbian Living Benefit or asking the local council to make Lesbian Living Adaptations to their houses.

*is the issue that when we say "disabled people", some readers visualise men and want men to be given what they ask for?

Oh no.... too many 'nots'. I hate posting on small screens.

I am actually horrified that we have a poster who seems to absolutely not understand that telling lesbian that they are transphobic for refusing to have sex with a male, a transitioned male, is not coercive in nature.

Should of course be:

I am actually horrified that we have a poster who seems to absolutely not understand that telling lesbian that they are transphobic for refusing to have sex with a male, a transitioned male, is very coercive in nature.

Wow Purgatory.

Jolly articles encouraging homosexual women to learn to provide sexual pleasure to male people, and openly shared corrective rape and abuse fantasies to punish the women who won't provide themselves willingly.

Let's talk about the respect for females shown in both this person's writings, and how the one links to the other?

“ElaineFuchs

I find it very concerning that the gender critical movement is so closely aligned with people wishing to roll back abortion rights, promote misogynistic viewpoints and homophobia.

I don't think that every GC believes in this things of course, but there is a worrying overlap.

(full disclaimer, I am not GC”

This is not America.
If you did a survey here you’d find there is by no means the overlap you imagine.

Perhaps even in America there is a large section where there is no overlap. Indeed some Evangelical Christians like transing away the gay.

@Artichokeleaves

Wow Purgatory.

Jolly articles encouraging homosexual women to learn to provide sexual pleasure to male people, and openly shared corrective rape and abuse fantasies to punish the women who won't provide themselves willingly.

Let's talk about the respect for females shown in both this person's writings, and how the one links to the other?

Here's a screenshot of showing the follow up tweets.

TME person stands for "trans-misogyny exempt person". This is a word for women, who are classed as privileged because they don't experience discrimination for being transwomen.

Valens describes women this way while joking about participating in one of the oldest forms of oppression of women there is: rape and forced impregnanation. Valens has what is called "a breeding kink" - that is, Valens fantasises sexually about being forced into pregnancy and birth, or forcing others.

Is this an attitude typical of those who can be trusted to fight for American women's rights to abortion? Valens has no empathy with women. As I've discussed on another thread this week, women are kidnapped and raped, so human traffickers can sell the babies.

In terms of gender based oppression, trans women have a lot in common with cis women,

They really don't. Transwomen may face some discrimination, I'm sure. That is based on their being 'trans' or gender non conforming, in some cases perhaps homophobia.

Transwomen are only going to face 'gender based oppression' in the same way women do if they are perceived as female, and in almost all cases, it's pretty easy to tell someone is male.

The other ways that women face oppression are to do with our biology, which transwomen do not share. Women are the sex that bear children, experience pregnancy, birth & menopause. All of these things are where the patriarchy really fucking hits you hard. It's a bit hard to convey just what the impact is unless you've experienced it.

Julia Serano, author of Whipping Girl, has voiced similar sentiments.

I don't trust people, who find the idea of being oppressed and raped sexually arousing, to work on my behalf.

The American Samoan football association understands that fa'afafine are male as there has been a fa'afafine player on their male football team. Western Samoan female weightlifters have also been particularly impacted by the trans weightlifter from NZ. Samoan culture very much understands that there are two sexes which should be segregated in sport for safety and fairness.

Sorry that this ended up being a little rambly (and maybe the examples I picked weren't the best),

That's because your arguments rely on illogic, and that can be difficult to maintain.

I'm starting to feel a little unwell so will take a break for some time.

I hope it is nothing you said

I'm pleased that you're engaging, thank you

Patronising much?

And you can't lose a thread. Click in Threads I'm On and there you go! Threads you have posted on!

I have a funny story for you. Here is Part 1

Part 2

Further to my explanation that TME stands for "trans misogyny exempt", here is someone explaining what it means to be affected by trans misogyny.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Further to my explanation that TME stands for "trans misogyny exempt", here is someone explaining what it means to be affected by trans misogyny.

Oh! I hadn't realised it was that Alexis!

And wtaf! Why are people entertaining this bullshit?