Recommend me a book!

[RibenaBerry]

Right, reading these boards recently has given me a bit of a kick up the arse on my feminist principles. I've done a bit of 'light' reading in the area (think The Beauty Myth as a teenager) but think I need something a bit more serious without being so weighty I never pick it up. I'd rather have something published in, say, the last 15 years than any of the 'classics'.

Any ideas?

It's funny, I didn't even know I was a feminist until this section opened up on MN a few months ago

Now I find I'm a raging activist.

"I thought radical feminism - all feminism really - was supposed to be about breaking down the gender binary and deconstructing gender. How can we do that if we're so biologically essentialist"

Yes, feminsts are trying to deconstruct gender. Trans-gender males OTOH are trying to reinforce the status quo by saying if you have XYZ attributes, you must therefore be a woman.
Sex is immutable. You either do or don't have a Y chromozome. Whatever you do to your body, however you operate on it, does not change that. Biologically we are essentialist because those of us with XX bear children.
Historically those who bore children have been oppressed due to the contructs of gender (a societal construct). Feminists are trying deparately to break down these gender contructs and free women from their constraints.

transgender is different from transexual (or do I mean trans-sexual - there's a difference apparently).

transgender takes in men who identify as female but haven't had an op.

I don't have a problem with transgender people identifying however they want as long as I don't have to agree that they are what they say there are.

for me the problem comes as I think it does for some transgender people too actually) with agreeing that the op is a defining thing that changes your sex in law.

that is where the power of the patriarchy comes in. This was the issue with the fellow at Newnham who had had a sex change. The college would never have admitted her as a fellow if she was merely someone who identified as a woman and lived as a woman - it was only because she had actually had an operation and hence presumably had a female birth certificate (though she was not from the UK originally so not sure about that) that the Principal and whoever else made the decision felt that they had to count her as a woman for the purposes of interpreting the college statutes.

and incidentally the pressure on people who want a sex change seems to come from the medical establishment to behave in a certain way - someone I know who wants a sex change seems to feel she has to display as many signals of femininity to the psychiatrist as possible in order to be taken seriously. Which rather cuts down her possibilities for breaking down gender divisions in a way that she (and feminists) might prefer.

I don't have anything against transgendered people. They can do what they want with their bodies etc. as far as I'm concerned. I wish them a a long and happy life and would hope they didn't suffer discrimination for being trans-gendered.

But why not just be 'trans gender'?

They believe they're not men, but they aren't women, so why not be something else.
That would do more to break down gender boundaries than attempting to hop straight into our pigeon hole.

I am pro-"mainstream female" feminism, pro-transfeminism, pro-women and pro-transsexual. They are not contradictory statements. I am pro-transsexual because it is the most satisfactory way I know in patriarchal society to prevent some wonderful human beings killing themselves. Transgendered people have the human right to life.

The feminism section of MumsNet has only been going for a few months. Many of the women who debate on the feminism threads are new to feminism, even in its mainstream form. These women are feeling their way with female-related issues such as being raised from birth as a girl, mother-father-daughter family dynamics, female contraception, pregnancy, childbirth, rape leading to unwanted pregnancy/abortion and non-rape abortion. I don't see the relevance of transfeminism to these issues.

Many mainstream feminists here are not ready to explore transfeminism yet. Remember that this thread was started by a self-confessed beginner in feminism who was looking for introductory texts. Transfeminist books are not introductory texts for feminists. Most are niche-market, transgender-people's-own-reading-list/gender studies degree material.

I wonder what reaction mainstream female feminists receive when they log onto transgender discussion forums and start discussing the female feminist issues I have already listed? I doubt that there is much discussion of the mainstream female issues. I suspect most of the discussion on transfeminism websites is about the injustices transgendered people face in their struggle to persuade society to recognise transsexuals as the sex they define themselves to be. If transgender people are prepared to struggle for the equality they want, then good luck to them. Fight the fight and I'll help! Other feminsists in the thread see it differently, choosing to prioritise their struggle for the females in their family, female friends and the three billion other females around the world. Is that transphobic?

Transsexuals are not vulnerable in employment because they are "women", they are discriminated against because they are transgender. They are another group that the Patriarchy are oppressing, but mostly in different ways.

I think the feminists who contribute to the feminism section are, by and large, a pretty tolerant bunch. I wonder how transfeminism would go down in the "Am I Being Unreasonable?" threads! Lapses in standards of decorum might be due to a lack of understanding and vocabulary. Insults and swearing are filling in gaps in understanding of the transgender issues, which have themselves been more aggressively presented than could have been the case.

Mainstream "female" feminism has been trying to get itself heard by male-dominated society for centuries. For much of that time, feminists have been struggling against the invasion of "women's space" by men. Some feminists here have seen the introduction of transfeminism into this thread as yet another invasion by a male agenda, in a troll-ish manner. It is unrealistic to expect people to understand transfeminism in a matter of minutes.

sethstarkaddersmum, wrote "transexual (or do I mean trans-sexual - there's a difference apparently)"

The correct spelling is transsexual.

SweetDreamerGirl - feminism should include trans women because it's for women and trans women are women. Therefore it automatically pertains to them.

"Transsexuals are not vulnerable in employment because they are "women", they are discriminated against because they are transgender."

That's a pretty transphobic statement in itself, because a) trans women are vulnerable because they are women and they are trans, and b) because it implies that all trans women are automatically 'readable' as being trans.

Also you're not very pro-trans if you keep misgendering and third-gendering trans women.

I didn't say feminism excludes trans women.

Can I remind you that transgender, transsexual and transfeminism are different things, with some overlap.

You are saying trans women are women. Fine. I did not mention that one way or the other. Patriarchy discriminates against trans women. I don't think I have. In what way do I "keep misgendering and third-gendering trans women" as you put it?

Stating 'women and trans women' and the like is putting trans women in a third gender i.e. "not quite men or women". The quote from you I mentioned, was implying that trans women aren't discriminated against for being women; quite simply, they are.

Also, "choosing to prioritise their struggle for the females in their family, female friends and the three billion other females around the world. Is that transphobic" implies that trans women aren't female, which again, they are.

Can you link to a basic reader on transgender stuff please, knowledgeable ones.

I don't like the implication that I'm anything-phobic just cos I missed a meeting.

from GhostLove.
quoting my earlier post "Transsexuals are not vulnerable in employment because they are "women", they are discriminated against because they are transgender."
GhostLove wrote,
"That's a pretty transphobic statement in itself, because a) trans women are vulnerable because they are women and they are trans, and b) because it implies that all trans women are automatically 'readable' as being trans."

I doesn't imply to me what you say it implies to you.

You wrote "trans women are vulnerable because they are women and they are trans".

Isn't that a bit of third-gendering by you?

Before I go any further I give notice that that I shall be using the terms "trans-women" and "female-born-women", merely as a convenient shorthand for two different paths to second-class status in this patriarchal world. It is not intended to "other" or "mis-gender" or imply superiority of or disrespect to one or other.

The bulk of my post was linked to female issues that are impossible for trans-women to experience. I'm sorry, but unfortunately it is not in my power or yours to change human biology to enable trans-women to experience those things, however much I, you or they want. That makes trans-women "other" only for those aspects of women's experience and those aspect of feminism. In other respects, I embrace trans-women. Feminism is a broad church and I don't think I have devalued trans-women's experiences. I also don't take offence at not being a member of every sub-group of feminism. There are only so many hours in my day. How about you? What are you doing for transfeminism other writing a few sentences accusing others of being transphobic?

Referring to my original post, can you tell me how valued are female-born-women feminists in the transfeminism camp? Trans-women have experiences which are valid but not those that I referred to explicitly. Did I really express my thoughts so badly that you didn't understand that?

On the specific sentence you have quoted back at me, I was thinking of employers who can and do terminate the employment of trans-women because they are trans and not because they are women. It happens! It's a transfeminism issue that female-born-women are unable to share. Employers see medical histories and CVs etc. that tragically expose the person as a trans-woman, absolutely nothing to do with being "readable" in any physical sense. Employers will look for any excuse and that is a vulnerability for trans-women. Sorry, but I didn't put that tool in the armoury of the Patriarchy and hereby swear that I've never used it, nor will I! I was merely trying to draw attention to the situation. If you think it implies transphobia, thanks for giving me your definition of transphobia. I apologise for falling foul of your definition, which was unknown to me when I wrote the post. It was definitely NOT intended to be transphobic.

Just because two people are physically incapable of sharing experiences does not make them phobic of each other. How does one draw a conclusion to the contary?

My experience of feminism has been to engage with those sub-groups in feminism to which I am linked by my personal experience. I fully recognise that there is common ground between trans-women and female-born women. Should I be outraged that not everyone shares my particular interests within feminism's many "sub"-isms? What outrages me is the fact that not every single human being on this planet is a feminist of any description!

I'll say this one more time, I am "pro trans-women".

From GhostLove, "Also, "choosing to prioritise their struggle for the females in their family, female friends and the three billion other females around the world. Is that transphobic" implies that trans women aren't female, which again, they are."

Can we have your definition of "female" too please?

SweetDreamerGirl
The terminology you are looking for is Cis and Trans.

A woman who doesn't have a uterus isn't a woman? A woman that can't reproduce isn't a woman?

GhostLove, are you able/prepared to discuss something with somebody who is trying their best to discuss issues, without shouting them down as transphobic or any other phobic? How constructive do you regard that approach? I hate falling foul of your definitions of transphobia and female. What ground are you going to leave under my feet?

What's Cis?

from GhostLove, "The terminology you are looking for is Cis and Trans.

A woman who doesn't have a uterus isn't a woman? A woman that can't reproduce isn't a woman?"

I'm still waiting for your definition of female. Was that supposed to be it?

Sorry, cannot compute. I can't cope with this - you win! Happy?

Btw, Ghostlove is a blogger for The F-Word and very well respected within internet feminism and elsewhere. You really should utilise (and value) her knowledge and experiences. I know I do.

NB - there is no hyphen in trans woman. Like white woman, lesbian woman etc.

wastingaway - the link you want is this one: birdofparadox.wordpress.com/ Look at the links down the right hand side - there are some to 101 posts which you can read first and also links to lots of other blogs.

wastingaway - I obviously meant the links on the left hand side

wastingaway - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender

SweetDreamerGirl - that was me not Ghostlove that you are quoting.

earwicga, wrote "NB - there is no hyphen in trans woman. Like white woman, lesbian woman etc."

I know that. Thanks for sparing me the "NB" on "female-born-women" doesn't have a hyphen either. I know that too. Funny, that didn't seem to bother you at all. I was using the hyphens for emphasis only. Get a grip!!!

Your glowing recommendation of GhostLove has been noted.

Hmmm... I'll read a little more. I'm aware I sound very blunt, but then that's how we understand things...

When and who 'decided' that trans-women were women or female?

And doesn't the cis feminist penchant for cutting their hair short and leaving their skin bare, and not doing only 'traditional' feminine things contrast starkly with the definition of gender identity disorder?

Not wanting to be confrontational, just want to understand.