Friends suggesting transphobia and misogyny both rooted in policing gender roles

[Pyjamatimenow]

Friend of mine has posted on her social media ( a very long detailed post) that basically trans rights are women’s rights and that what she sees as transphobia is akin to people who ‘punish’ women who don’t fit into gender stereotypes, don’t get married, don’t look ‘feminine’, don’t have children…Says she’s a feminist and defends the rights of trans women to live safely etc …whatever that means. Cis women mentioned several times. I don’t normally comment on these kinds of things on FB but struggling with this particular post! If I were to say something what would you say?

No one is suggesting the sexes are determined by personality traits.

I think that's exactly what you're suggesting. You want us to treat as women anyone with feminine traits.

No one is suggesting the sexes are determined by personality traits. But they are distinguished on a group level by behavioural differences

You should certainly suggest this argument to Stella Creasey or Zac Polanski.

ETA: wrong quote - that was to Bailey not Sheep

Well, you seem to be very ignorant.

“Womanface” is derived from “blackface”.
Which, as I hope you know, is the practice of white actors/musicians “blacking up” in order to parody black performers.

“Womanface” is widely used to mean when a man puts on a parody of female presentation - exaggerated make up, big tits, tarty clothes, long hair and hair accessories.

They both contain the implication of presenting as something you are not in a parodic way.

Not as ignorant as you given you don't understand the association to stereotypes.

In the United States, the practice of blackface became a popular entertainment during the 19th century into the 20th. It contributed to the spread of racial stereotypes such as "Jim Crow", the "happy-go-lucky darky on the plantation", and "Zip Coon" also known as the "dandified coon"

That is still the bit I struggle with - even if gender identity is a belief protected in law. As a society we are still allowed to have single sex spaces. They are 2 separate things. We can split society in any way we choose. We could seperate spaces solely by age if we chose, we could separate by hair colour. We can do anything in society we so please - there just needs to be a rule. As a society we have chosen sex to be rule so I don’t understand why gender even comes into it or personality traits or whether you have had cosmetic surgery or whether your spirit is masculine or feminine. The rule is simply sex. No further discussion is needed.

Older women using more makeup than they used when they were younger is about ageism. Like older men making the choice between hair dye or a preemptive head shave, or growing a beard to shroud a sagging jawline. It's much less effort to look good when you are young. Sad but true.

Exactly.

Single sex spaces are exactly that - spaces reserved for members of a certain SEX.

Gender has nothing to do with it. So waffling on about gender this or stereotypes and psychology that is a pointless waste of time.

I was replying to your post in which you claimed to have posted a link to evidence that large numbers of trans people were victims of violent crimes.

I said your 'evidence' was no such thing, and now you're saying I should just go and look for the evidence myself, even though it might not even exist.

If you have evidence, post a link. Otherwise I will simply assume it doesn't exist.

Thankfully the police are no longer recording 'non crime hate incidents'.

In Scotland they are

The idea men can do things and women mustn’t try and guess their motive is stunning naive. Women spend our lives guessing the motive of men. Our survival depends on it.

There is an assumption being made which I find curious. Is there in fact any actual evidence (as opposed to internet scuttlebutt) that JK Rowling has had a facelift, or even botox treatment? I haven't actually seen any: lots of speculation, and use of the word speculation, no hard fact. Citation needed? (I mean actual evidence, as opposed to wild and whirling words full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.)

I don't see that it matters a toss whether she has or hasn't, but I do find the personal vilification significant of a particular, rather ugly mindset.

And "one woman had a facelift therefore all women are hypocritical about male standards of femininity" seems essentially very silly indeed as an argument to propound.

What makes you think I don’t understand the link to stereotypes?

That’s completely obvious. In fact, I even used the word “parody” a number of times.

But what it does mean is that sneering at older women for having plastic surgery is NOTHING to do with the word “Womanface”.

As I have noted before, you do seem to have some very muddled up ideas.

What a waste of time. Can’t think straight, can’t express ideas with clarity, a fuck ton of whatabouteryand strawmanning.

It's never a waste of time to assist Genderists get their thinking clearly laid out for all to see😃

Never cites a source for allegations, and has a Humpty Dumpty attitude to what words mean.

Pigeons are pretty though, and their courtship dances are very entertaining.

I think it's helpful to remember that the reason we have legislation to allow single sex facilities is that in general sex discrimination is not lawful.

If sex were just personality we wouldn't have that prohibition and no legislation would be required to have a masculine or feminine changing room.

Changing rooms for males and females, masculine and feminine are genders and not relevant.

This is a bit of a derail.
My ideas on how some esthetic preferences are dictated or not by the patriarchy has changed with time.
Just to make an example, when I was younger, I hated shaving my legs and I felt it was an imposition coming from society. Now that my legs are not that hairy anymore, I have a slight preference for shaved legs, for the smooth and tidier look – and I realise that I similarly prefer my DH beard shaved and a bit tidy, rather than too long.
I think that “patriarchy” is just one of the forces that drives esthetic and personal preferences.
We (females and males) generally tend to prefer symmetry.
In males and females, there’s a drive to look younger and to mitigate the signs of ageing.
Some aspects are linked to socio-economic status. For example, being tanned was associated with outdoor work and higher classes would avoid the sun and cover their skin with powder, now it’s the opposite, as being tanned is associated with leisure time. When sugar was an exotic luxury, black teeth became fashionable.
Long hair in males was associated with rebellion and freedom in the 60 and 70.
I speculate that, even in the most egalitarian society, there will be a tendency to accentuate some female and male characteristics – driven by sexual reproduction and the “necessity” to signal male or female for reproductive purposes.
With time, my view has become more nuanced and I recognise that we don’t all value the same things, and I stopped being judgemental of women that use a lot of make-up and are always put together, although it’s still not my style 😊

But it does make you associated to the class of Ingestive Hydration Mammals or 'drinker mammals' as common gendered personality inclinations are associated to one sex more than the other.

Ingestive Hydration Mammals- another good band name thanks.

I'm wearing a yellow shirt today. Does that make me associated to a class of lifeforms that includes the albino Burmese python, sunflowers, Brazilian footballers and the gold laced nudibranch?

But what it does mean is that sneering at older women for having plastic surgery is NOTHING to do with the word “Womanface”

An older lady of my acquaintance has had a little tweak behind her ears, on account of age and gravity make her lips permanently turned down at the edges.
This consequently made her look like a right miserable old bugger even when she'd had good news. Catching sight of herself in a mirror when she's out and about became quite depressing for her so she treated herself to the teeniest lift possible to do the job without looking as though she'd had surgery.

This wasn't to make her look like a woman, or more like a woman because she 'is' a woman. It wasn't to attract men certainly. It was to make her countenance and expression more cheerful and less morose and it has worked.

Sex categorisation is in essence is about distinguishing traits that includes both reproductive sex, secondary sex & behavioural traits. That's just a fact of what humans do in reality. I don't make the rules for social distinctions & categorisations society does.

Of course personally, how an individual person interprets sex distinction is upto their own subjective opinions that everyone is entitled to but they aren't entitled to tell others how to define themselves.

How society decides to treat different people is upto the utility in the circumstances involved for the prevailing culture. There's no definitive answer because different cultures often have different values for example Western countries have varying policies regarding how their society is structured.

I said no such thing about "large numbers". And the evidence is posted. That you are in denial even when evidence is in your face is on you.

If you seriously believe a 60 year old woman can have an un lined full face, snatched jaw line & pristine neck, technology has news for you.

And no there's no vilification in suggesting people have had 'work' done for their own personal pleasure. If you think this is vilifying then that's more a reflection on your views on cosmetic work than any one else’s.

"And "one woman had a facelift therefore all women are hypocritical about male standards of femininity" seems essentially very silly indeed as an argument to propound."

Well, that's not the argument being made.

Your link was in reply to this post:

Can you show us the statistics on the violence experienced by trans identified people as a direct result of their being trans? Because I don't believe it happens. There is the occasional very rare incident which is made much of, but it's nowhere near the scale of the systemic daily violence experienced by women for no other reason than that they are women.

You didn't make it clear which part of this post your link was supposed to be addressing, since you just posted the link without comment. I assumed you were attempting to show that large numbers of trans people were victims of violent crimes (which it doesn't in fact show).

What point were you trying to make by posting that link? It's not at all clear.

Again, the context of this discussion was the OP questioning that trans people experienced a safety risk & I provided the data that showed they were.

Your point of whether this rises to the level of violence women experience is irrelevant.