Why can't I claim I'm black or disabled, but can claim I'm a bloke?

[SirChenjins]

I'm none of the above btw...

I realise that sounds flippant and I genuinely don't mean it to be. Can someone please explain in simple terms (I'm still very much learning about the whole gender issue so realise I should probably know this) why I can't claim to be any of the other protected characteristics (and rightly so - because I'm not) but somehow we've got to a stage where I can call myself Mr Dave and everyone is expected to go along with it? Are we likely to see more cases of people challenging the other protected characteristics as time goes on?

It's not at all problematic to ask the questions you have. Such a striking comparison between the treatment of men who claim to be women and anyone who claims to be another race. I've never heard of an abled person claiming to be disabled in this way, I can't imagine they'd get very far.

Not sure how you're using black/disabled people as an anchor or rhetorical device, hopefully someone can explain that.

I agree. It's more than ridiculous.

I doubt OP would've gotten pushback if it was phrased this way - she wouldn't be singling out any particular group, especially the group in a less privileged position than the group she's in.

But instead of derailing and going over this 'misunderstanding' again and again (because I've said my piece and done with it), we can continue with this line of thought (if we so please).

@DojaPhat @WillBeAbsolutelyFine neither of you sanctimonious holier than thou individuals have actually addressed the point though which is why is it praised when a man identifies as a woman, but unacceptable for a white / able bodied person to identify as black / disabled?

It's the typical rhetoric there is so much of on the left, instead of actually addressing the point there's a lot of theatrical hand wringing over how dare you say this or that.

I also just hate this moralistic attitude like sorry but who are either of you to tell people on here what questions they should be asking and OMG the tone is so heavily judgmental

You sound weird and pressed. You may want to head off to bed before you implode.

I bet once you read one or two words, you were blinded to all the other ones I've been writing in agreement with the OP. I didnt even bring up this line of conversation but got caught in it because I responded to a part of someone's post.

Anyone who starts talking about "the left", name-calling and assuming nonsense because someone stated an opinion they disgree with is already not too bright.

There was a guy who wanted to have his age officially changed as his doctor had confirmed he was pretty much the equivalent to most men of that age in terms of health. I remember wondering if he was making a point.

I also just hate this moralistic attitude like sorry but who are either of you to tell people on here what questions they should be asking and OMG the tone is so heavily judgmental

I agree with you here. This forum is an excellent space for white women. There aren't (generally speaking) many similar online spaces which allow for some of the discussions which are had here. You wouldn't join a circus and start persecuting the clowns for wearing a red nose so I can completely see that this space is not for women like me. That's not neccesarily a bad thing either - I said in a previous post that this thread would be perfect reading for young Black feminists struggling to get their head around certain things.

White women? No one here has declared their ethnicity. You are being very presumptious in order to justify your own racism.

Are you suggesting that the majority of women on mumsnet could actually be WOC?

Odd that they felt the need for a Black Mumsnetters sub forum if so.

Exactly. This is an excellent space for women (adult females) of all races.

The OP raised an interesting question, stop turning it into a Black Women vs White Women quarrel, that would please the TRAs no end.

Ethnicity, unlike sex, is not binary. Not just black and white.

Some people are not benefited by their "protected characteristics"

It's privilege and blind spots that some don't see this, and use those particular "protected characteristics" to make points about others being able to identify into their own "protected characteristics" they do benefit from and make points about keeping themselves "protected"

I don't believe on this thread it's malicious though

I find this such a weird question because it's fairly obvious and comparing apples with oranges. I can understand why someone might 'feel' they are a different sex or sexuality. You can 'feel' an ethnicity (unless you perhaps grew up in that environment in which case fair enough), and you can't 'feel' disabled that one's pretty obvious.

That was meant to say "can't feel" ethnicity

The audacity and of comparing Black Women to White Male Born Privilege in a dress. They can take off the dress and be a man again if they do choose - we can't ever be White and benefit from that privilege.

Did OP come back by the way or was this just a dog-whistle to call out those who want to talk about Black women, and then play the fool?

I don't believe most are that bothered about Transwomen or, this thread would mostly be about Transwomen. It isn't. Point-scoring off Black Women is lame. It denotes lack of understanding, integrity and focus. & and is exactly why Transwomen will walk all over you. You are off-putting and will never garner the support of women en-masse. & you need to.

If you really want to mobilise against Self-ID then focus. Shut up about Black Women, we aren't the ones trampling on your rights. Get your head straight. Talk about Self-ID and how you'll respond to latest developments.

I doubt you will, however. All that privilege and still managing to be mediocre FFS.. try getting something done.

Even Alice Walker as a Black Woman openly announced solidarity with JK Rowling today.
WTF do you do, who do you lobby? Nobody I bet, because the White Male patriarchy that you uphold has you strangled.

Sure you can identify as disabled. It's a real issue where some people will even inflict harm on themselves. I mean it's probably difficult for most people to understand, but then so is gender dysphoria.

Quoting DeeCeeCherry:

"I don't believe most are that bothered about Transwomen or, this thread would mostly be about Transwomen. It isn't."

It's all about the trans issue. Let me repeat: it's all about the trans issue. That the example of black people is used, doesn't change the fact that the thread is all about the trans issue because it's bringing up the example in that context.

How people can get so worked up about straightforward use of an example I don't know.

Not true.
In my country we do have a trans-abled (? Spelling?) person. This person identifies as a different gender AND as a Wheel chair user despite having functioning legs.
The person has been in the news too- lauded by some, mocked by some I’m sure.

To me it is appalling. Only last year a double amputee was denied a disabled parking badge in Oslo because «they could shop at less congested times».
The other self-identifying prat got a wheel chair if I remember correctly. It really grates - also on those of us who are carers for people with real disabilities as we know how hard it can be to obtain help from the government.

I'm not sure about "you can't feel disabled". I have a disability - one of the potentially very nasty ones (MS). However, I don't "feel" disabled. I'm very lucky in that most of my symptoms are unpleasant rather than debilitating. I do have to make changes to my everyday way of life, but they're minor, and have become really normal to me now. So I am disabled, but if someone asked me if I was, I'd probably say no. Just like if someone asked me if I "feel" like a woman, I'd say no, I just am one.

Why can't I claim I'm black or disabled, but can claim I'm a bloke?

Putting aside the common-sense, if anodyne position that we should be encouraged to be happy in our own skins, and the obvious "because you're not", the answer is the bent and twisted logic of identity politics.

In this strange world, one cannot have an innate black soul but one can have an innate gendered soul. One is defined by skin colour as oppressor or oppressed. The oppressor is automatically defined by being white and cannot escape this by identifying otherwise.

However, the oppressor (male) can escape their class by identifying as the oppressed ("most marginalised") because of the innate gendered soul.

It is akin to mad political ideologies that have already swept through humanity and wreaked havoc in that it has a heirarchy of villains and victims, and tenets that can shift and even contradict each other as convenience permits - it is consistent in inconsistency. It also cannot be questioned without drawing accusations of being one of the "oppressors".

Ah, meant to also type:

In identity politics there is no "disabled soul" either. I rather suspect that the disabled are props to the identitarian.

Did OP come back by the way or was this just a dog-whistle to call out those who want to talk about Black women, and then play the fool?

Now I know you are being disingenuous.

Why can't I claim I'm black or disabled, but can claim I'm a bloke?

Because the world is set up by men's laws and religions for men's convenience.

@DojaPhat I think I get what you're saying. Only a white non- disabled person can say, why can't I identify as black or disabled. I think a better way to frame it and have an inclusive discussion is simply, what can we identify as that we are not and what are the motivations for doing so and the side effects for others. It would be interesting to hear all the real life examples e g people identifying as children, airline pilots, psychiatrists, Korean, animals, women - I've heard of all of these.

See, I'm not religious. I am not a Cartesian. I don't believe I am an immortal soul 'inhabiting' an earthly body. I am my body. My body is me.

Believing in 'a clash between your body and your nature' is a profoundly religious, unreal, magical way of thinking. To try to prop this up with word salad doesn't make it any less so. And to invoke 'scientists' in support of such a radically anti-scientific, magical worldview just doesn't work.

Quite.

Absolutely correct, they do. So, my question to you is this - why would I, as a white non-disabled woman choose to self-indentify into that? If we assume that those inhabiting the most privileged position in society are white males, why would they identity into a less privileged position of female to gain access to single sex spaces and services meant for women? Does it simply come down to the power of the patriarchy and a refusal to accept that any space and service is closed to them? However, if they announced ‘I’m now identifying as a black (or Asian or Native American or whatever) disabled woman’ the woman part of the self ID would be applauded (even though they aren’t women) and the other 2 would claims would (rightly) be offensive and challenged.

Now, if you could see past my inherent white malevolence and answer the actual question I’d be really grateful.