Can you be a fully trans inclusive feminist?

[Imdunfer]

Inspired from another thread where it was out of place so I brought it here.

Someone seemed to claim that it was possible to be both be a feminist and to be trans inclusive, where by trans inclusive they mean males in women's spaces and shortlists (the attitude to sport wasn't stated).

I don't believe that you can truly be both, do you?

Oh come on, being pregnant is only something that happens to women. Fenale women, whatever they choose to identify as. And there is a universal female experience, being born female. And the equivalent for men.

I didn't know that about the threading, makes sense though. Around 16:03 yesterday and then from 19:30 on, then. Again I'm not expecting anyone to read them, but to your point.

And pregnancy is a universal women's issue, whether it's trying not to be pregnant, wanting to be pregnant, being pregnant, having been pregnant, or not being pregnant and wondering why and finding out. Find me a woman who hasn't experienced one of those.

How do people know they are “cis”? What is a gender identity? How does e, without using sexist outdated stereotypes, know what a woman or a man is if it’s not biology?

Is this an experience? If we don't remember it, does it shape us in any way? Because if you say being female means nothing else but the sense of being in a female body, then some trans woman experience a form of that, in a very disorienting way, which is why they're dysphoric since the body is wrong. This is also why people who are cis (like me as well) don't necessarily perceive "gender", because you never get challenged, so you just get to be you. Which is the thing everyone wants.

Being female is a universal woman experience. Perhaps the only universal experience.

We live it every day. They do not. They have no idea hence their guff about periods etc. They may want to, they may dislike the bodies they have, but they do not experience at all, and even with plastic surgery they never will. And you know that.

It sounds a bit like whichever silly woman it was who had a nose job because she didn't want her baby to have a big nose.

Because when people refer to me as she, a woman, a lady, a daughter, a wife etc., I recognize myself in it and yes, that's some of the things I am. I perceive my female body and even though I of course can be at odds with my body, feel awkward, uncomfortable, depending on the situation, I like it - it's mine. Trans people do not feel that.

@totino “Because if you say being female means nothing else but the sense of being in a female body,”

What is this ‘sense’ of being in a female body?
I know my body is female as I was born a girl, went through female puberty, pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding, all of which are unique to females.

These are factual words that reference someone’s sex. There is nothing offensive about them at all.

If people have an issue with being referred to as their sex, then they need to get therapy to cope with that. It’s not up to the rest of us to overturn society norms to accommodate their inability to deal with reality.

The tragic irony is that if you just keep "man" and "woman" as simple sex labels, misgendering is not a possibility.

It is only when you decide "man" and "woman" are personality labels that you create the risk of "misgendering".

Do you see? It is trans people's idea that "man" or "woman" can be something other than the body in the first place that creates the problems they complain about.

Put bluntly, it's only their own sexist projections about how other people feel that makes them feel they are not the right sex for their sex. They literally invent the problem for themselves by insisting sex mean more than it actually does.

Female people exist. Being pregnant is something only available to female people. While not all female people can or will become pregnant, nevertheless you can broadly define female people as people who one cannot say for certain will never be pregnant based on a simple visual check at birth. And everything else, the gender, the social differences - those all follow from that.

It makes no sense at all to say we need a label, and separate spaces, and protected rights, for people who feel a certain undefined way that not only can we not agree on but we cant even agree everyone feels it, but we don't need a label for the half of humanity that is physically female.

If we actually somehow really didn't have the word "woman" meaning adult human female, if we were really in a world where the word had never existed, we'd have invented it pretty damn quickly!

It's only because we are in a world where the word does exist, where we do all understand it but are supposed to pretend we think it means something else (while having the original meaning hanging around in the background to underpin that new defintion) that Generists have the luxury of pretending they don't think we need to recognise the two sexes in law, language or society.

No, being female means being IN a female body. A male can never know what it is like to be female and vice versa.

Red/green colourblind people absolutely truthfully and genuinely canot differentiate between red and green. Their truth, their reality, is that those separate colours do not exist.

Nevertheless, those separate colours do exist. And we haven't agreed to pretend they don't to relieve distress and confusion in the colourblind. We haven't got rid of the word Green and called it TransRed instead.

Well then they need therapy to cope with that don’t they?

and reproductive freedom is for everyone who can get pregnant.

Women?

And do women who 'can't get pregnant' somehow escape the impact of their society's attitude towards contraception and abortion and pronatalist policies? Do you think employers know they 'can't get pregnant' and consider them to be more reliable? If they have years of fertility treatment, is it not a very different procedure to that undergone by men?

Since most people are cis, it's not incorrect to say that these are primarily women's issues

I'd argue that using Stonewall definitions most people are trans. I think it's quite unusual to really define one's identity in terms of masculinity and femininity. I'll give you Pete Hegseth.

But do you really think that identifying as something other than 'cis' means that women don't need sex specific rights?

Why would you be resistant to recognising that women need sex specific rights?

Sorry this still doesn’t make sense. I’m not disagreeing with your definition of echo chamber at all.

I’m saying that to declare a platform ‘an echo chamber’, one would have to go and look at what is said on the platform in order to make that judgement.

You can’t possibly have spent any time on those ‘platforms’ that you declared to be echo chambers. (Because they don’t exist).

Your confusion over this point is baffling to me.

It makes no sense at all to say we need a label, and separate spaces, and protected rights, for people who feel a certain undefined way that not only can we not agree on but we cant even agree everyone feels it

Unless you are writing a dystopian YA novel.

I get that you personally don't see the issue in insisting that a pregnant woman can be a man.

Most of the world, however would think your belief was the height of lunacy, since there is no more definitive proof of being female than to have a body which is developing a new human life.

I read your first one and said 'come again'.

Your reasoning just seems to be 'fuck it, anyone can be anything and nobody should care'.

I cannot work out why you would think a man for example who discovers he is a woman as soon as he is arrested for rape, should be put into the female prison. Can you just try explaining for those of us with teeny tiny brains? Why would you not just think 'hang on a minute, this doesn't seem legit'?

Ah yes, rapid onset prison dysphoria.

For me this is page 8.

For me too but it could be page 16 or page 1.

Its pagination identification is in the eye of the beholder, not itself. Remind you of anything?

Since I don't think there's an "universal woman experience" or an "universal man experience",

We agree 100% on that.

Which is why the only way to define who is male and who is female, as opposed to who anyone (including the person themselves) thinks is male and thinks is female, is by reference to genetics.

If you don't believe this to be true, please describe what makes a woman without any reference to any gender stereotypes or any physical attributes which can be found in the normal distribution overlap between males and females.

But I reaslise the groundhog day roundabout is spinning up again and about to whip me around once more. I think I'll jump off this time, though I may post links to previous go-rounds as my arguments haven't changed, and IMO have not to date been effectively countered.

@Imdunfer whatever happens in the rest of it, this was a great thread through the first 25 pages or so, and if there are comments to make on the original question I will jump back in for that.

You are here excluding all the people who identify as trans but don't describe themselves as feeling dysphoric.