Feminism at odds with the trans movement

Carlos Orange

Samaris wrote: »

Clothes doth make the man, according to the old saying, but I see no reason why a bloke shouldn't wear a dress if he damn well likes. That only women wear dresses is entirely a social construct.

I don't see any real problem (women wear mens clothing after all) but it seems to have some people worried.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/will-smiths-son-as-the-new-face-of-louis-vuitton-womenswear-might-seem-progressive-but-its-a6797461.html

One eyed Jack

Samaris wrote: »

Clothes doth make the man, according to the old saying, but I see no reason why a bloke shouldn't wear a dress if he damn well likes. That only women wear dresses is entirely a social construct.

Because most men know they look ridiculous in a dress. Rory O' Neill immediately springs to mind.

Uncertain who the "we're" is there; I'm assuming you're not a trans Thai prostitute! But I suspect that's far more down to culture - the Thai sex tourist trade is outrageously big over there. I think as an overall thing, suggesting that the majority of trans people are prostitutes is as much of a false statistic from a very limited/biased sample as saying that most gay people or most straight people are prostitutes. The two things aren't inherently related.

I suspect that was an autocorrect fail, meant to say were, but autocorrected to we're

I don't think though that melissa was suggesting the majority of trans people are prostitutes, I think she was just relating what experience she had of trans people, and it's a known phenomenon in Thailand where young men will undergo gender reassignment surgery and engage in prostitution to provide for their families. I'd agree though that I wouldn't relate the reasons for Thai men undergoing gender reassignment to the reasons why men in the West undergo gender reassignment surgery. Economically speaking, the two couldn't be more diverse worlds apart.

ceadaoin.

psinno wrote: »

I don't see any real problem (women wear mens clothing after all) but it seems to have some people worried.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/will-smiths-son-as-the-new-face-of-louis-vuitton-womenswear-might-seem-progressive-but-its-a6797461.html

I can't decide if that article is meant to be a joke or not.

When you get out of bed in the morning the most important thing you have to do all day is tell the world what your gender is, because from that, everything else flows. You may think that your job is to be an office supervisor or a stockbroker or police officer but these are all human constructs. Deep down your real job is to reproduce, and showing other humans your gender is the first step on that path

So, to help make it plain for anyone to see which gender you are, you put on a uniform. Men put on trousers and have men’s haircuts, and women put on dresses and skirts, feminine tops and tights and women’s shoes to show their femininity and declare to the world that they are female

What if a woman wears trousers? Is she suddenly going to be mistaken for a man?

One eyed Jack

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I can't decide if that article is meant to be a joke or not.



What if a woman wears trousers? Is she suddenly going to be mistaken for a man?

The author of that piece appears to be transgender themselves, which possibly explains why they have some odd ideas about gender expression and so on.

Eugene Norman

So back to this.

steddyeddy wrote: »

I'm starting to lose track of these groups and what they stand for.

I was watching Newsnight a few nights back and I seen a segment dealing with transgender people. The segment highlighted the fact that some transgender people feel they should not be asked to put down gender on official documents. The interesting part for me is the feminist writer Sarah Ditum's attitudes towards the assignment of genders. She seems to want to protect the labeling of genders lest we forget how much men oppress women. First of all I don't think it's fair to use blanket terms like "men oppress women" like Sarah does in the video and secondly I think there's a disturbing trend whereby some feminists are getting annoyed that some trans people identify as women.

I think these groups should go back to being about equality and not whatever they're up to now. In case people think this is a feminism hating thread I'm a supporter of equality as people might notice by now. I just don't believe blaming other demographics is the way forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mnui7OqawSM

What's strange to me is how much much of the feminist movement, which was historically anti-drag for instance, rolled over when the American academic cult of identity politics invented its newest privilege ( someday they'll get around to American privilege) and decided that women weren't as oppressed as men who dressed up as women, but instead had "cis-privilege".The longstanding non- American feminist movement was immediately put out to pasture. Greer,Burchhill, etc.

So largely British and Australian feminists were suddenly deemed old fashioned and thrown on the scrap heap - American feminism triumphant;, it pays to have the backing of the largest army, the biggest economy and the dominant culture if you aspire to being a modern radical

c_man

Eugene Norman wrote: »

(someday they'll get around to American privilege)

Never happen. Look you just don't know how good a white boy living in Donbass has it compared to a woman from an upper middle class American background. Sure he has to live in a war torn region with fuk all chance of a decent outcome but she has had four years of college gender and ethnic studies which prove he should be ashamed of the treatment of African Americans and women 9000 km from where he lives. He has the world on a platter whereas she will have to endure manspreading on the subway.

ceadaoin.

StewartGriffin wrote: »

After reading recently that many feminists regarded a male pornstar James Deen who specialises in female humiliation and rape scenes as a feminist, I have to admit I don't know what's going on any more.

He has recently been accused of actual rape by a number of female porn actresses. I wonder what those feminist supporters are saying now? In general though I always thought feminists were anti porn?

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think it's deeper than man hating. Some feminists like the one in the video seem to think women should be protected from men. I don't agree with that at all. Some of the strongest people I've known have been women.

Sometimes women do need protecting from some men though. That's not man hating. For example, I dont think that convicted rapist Davina Ayrton should be housed in a female prison just because she now identifies as a woman. She is not receiving any hormonal or surgical treatment so would pose a threat to women in jail yet there are people campaigning for this. Do you not agree that women should be protected from a rapist by not being forced to share a space with him?

Eugene Norman

c_man wrote: »

Never happen. Look you just don't know how good a white boy living in Donbass has it compared to a woman from an upper middle class American background. Sure he has to live in a war torn region with fuk all chance of a decent outcome but she has had four years of college gender and ethnic studies which prove he should be ashamed of the treatment of African Americans and women 9000 km from where he lives. He has the world on a platter whereas she will have to endure manspreading on the subway.

Or like oppressed American feminist Jessica Valenti who saw on a bus that time a man with a Twitter feed with an all male feed. At least the visible bit. He didn't follow one woman.

#everydaysexism

Luckily enough her country had only invaded 3 or 4 middle eastern states for no reason that year so need for her to bother her arse opining on that.

melissak

PucaMama wrote: »

Are you suggesting trans people are prostitutes or that there are none in Ireland?

No. I am suggesting that the ladies I met and chatted with in Thailand were prostitutes and that i have never encountered a trans person in Ireland. I have never met a brain surgeon either but I don't cast doubt on their existence.

melissak

ceadaoin. wrote: »

He has recently been accused of actual rape by a number of female porn actresses. I wonder what those feminist supporters are saying now? In general though I always thought feminists were anti porn?



Sometimes women do need protecting from some men though. That's not man hating. For example, I dont think that convicted rapist Davina Ayrton should be housed in a female prison just because she now identifies as a woman. She is not receiving any hormonal or surgical treatment so would pose a threat to women in jail yet there are people campaigning for this. Do you not agree that women should be protected from a rapist by not being forced to share a space with him?

Is that true, about the rapist? Fcuked up world if that person is put in female prison. Maybe they need seperate trans units in prisons.

steddyeddy

ceadaoin. wrote: »

He has recently been accused of actual rape by a number of female porn actresses. I wonder what those feminist supporters are saying now? In general though I always thought feminists were anti porn?



Sometimes women do need protecting from some men though. That's not man hating. For example, I dont think that convicted rapist Davina Ayrton should be housed in a female prison just because she now identifies as a woman. She is not receiving any hormonal or surgical treatment so would pose a threat to women in jail yet there are people campaigning for this. Do you not agree that women should be protected from a rapist by not being forced to share a space with him?

I think people should be separated from the people they pose a threat to. It's that simple.

melissak

Samaris wrote: »

I agree that the visible parts of both have swung towards the extreme edge, yeah. I just suspect that in both cases there's a quieter and somewhat bemused majority that don't particularly associate their own political ideas with the extremists using their label. I also agree as regards the campus politics (at least in the examples that have been waved around of late in the media), and that'll hit a peak and then shrivel again as a majority decide there's quite a lot of cosmetic surface bollocks being spoken in the name of X, Y or Z ideals. It's just a shame that the real issues get drowned out by (the loud) people making a big deal of petty stuff and back away from getting their teeth into what matters.


I know a couple of each. Abandoned the radical feminists to it, because it wasn't worth my aggro. Neither of the trans people I know were Irish, but they just seem to quietly get on with their lives like everyone else.


Clothes doth make the man, according to the old saying, but I see no reason why a bloke shouldn't wear a dress if he damn well likes. That only women wear dresses is entirely a social construct.


Uncertain who the "we're" is there; I'm assuming you're not a trans Thai prostitute! But I suspect that's far more down to culture - the Thai sex tourist trade is outrageously big over there. I think as an overall thing, suggesting that the majority of trans people are prostitutes is as much of a false statistic from a very limited/biased sample as saying that most gay people or most straight people are prostitutes. The two things aren't inherently related.

Sorry meant they were. Not we're. Again I didn't say anything except these were the only trans people I ever encountered.

steddyeddy

melissak wrote: »

Is that true, about the rapist? Fcuked up world if that person is put in female prison. Maybe they need seperate trans units in prisons.

No they don't. That's the point. Trans people see themselves as either male or female, not separate.

ceadaoin.

steddyeddy wrote: »

No they don't. That's the point. Trans people see themselves as either male or female, not separate.

Do you think a trans man would be safe in a male prison? I don't.

I think transgender units, separated into men and women is the way to ensure everyone's safety. Italy have already built a such a prison.

melissak

steddyeddy wrote: »

No they don't. That's the point. Trans people see themselves as either male or female, not separate.

A rapist, especially one that still has a functioning penis in a female prisoN?No.

Lemming

speedboatchase wrote: »

Cisgender feminists will remain adamant that rape culture and unconscious gender bias are the most crucial issues facing women today, while trans activists (who, let’s be honest, have probably faced far fewer unwanted advances) will maintain that being allowed into the women’s restroom is the civil rights issue of the age.

We're well past the first few pages where the quoted comment above is from, but just wanted to add this little nugget; the reality is quite the opposite for trans folk to what most folk might believe. They are in order of magnitudes more likely to be subjected to violent assault/violent sexual assault/murder than about any other sub-group one might care to find. Statistics released by the US government from ... I think it was 2012 or 2013 show trans folk to make up the highest percentage of female sexual assault victims and the least number of "survivors" of female sexual assault. The numbers are highest for etnhic minority victims. And all those figures despite the report also noting the extreme difficulty in linking these assaults directly with transphobia, thus the numbers are in fact likely to be far, far worse.

Of course, all of the above doesn't sit with the "narrative" (for varying cynical reasons) so gets conveniently ignored or the likes of Greer et al. smear the victims with contempt.


Edit: Report on hate violence 2012, taken from the US Office for Victims of Crime section on Transgender sexual assault. Page 21 has some appalling numbers in it.

73.1% of all homicide victims in 2012 were people of color, yet LGBTQ and HIV-affected people of color only represented 53% of total survivors and victims. The overwhelming majority of homicide victims were Black and African American (53.8%), 15.4% of victims were Latin@, 11.5% of victims were White, and 3.85% of victims were Native American. More than half (61.5%) of victims were women, many of whom identified as transgender women. 53.8% of total victims were transgender women, yet transgender survivors and victims only represent 10.5% of total reports to NCAVP.

Highlighted bits are my emphasis.

ceadaoin.

Lemming wrote: »

We're well past the first few pages where the quoted comment above is from, but just wanted to add this little nugget; the reality is quite the opposite for trans folk to what most folk might believe. They are in order of magnitudes more likely to be subjected to violent assault/violent sexual assault/murder than about any other sub-group one might care to find. Statistics released by the US government from ... I think it was 2012 or 2013 show trans folk to make up the highest percentage of female sexual assault victims and the least number of "survivors" of female sexual assault. The numbers are highest for etnhic minority victims. And all those figures despite the report also noting the extreme difficulty in linking these assaults directly with transphobia, thus the numbers are in fact likely to be far, far worse.

Of course, all of the above doesn't sit with the "narrative" (for varying cynical reasons) so gets conveniently ignored or the likes of Greer et al. smear the victims with contempt.

Do you have a link to that report?

Edit: doesn't matter, Found it

Lemming

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Do you have a link to that report?

Edit: doesn't matter, Found it

Edited my post above with the relevant report & page number

One eyed Jack

steddyeddy wrote: »

No they don't. That's the point. Trans people see themselves as either male or female, not separate.

Some people who are transgender see themselves as either male or female, but the trans person in the video in your opening post was making the point that because they do not see themselves as either gender, it can often be frustrating for them to fill out forms which commonly only use binary gender selection.

(I guess now you can understand why I just gave up on the whole identity politics, it's a hot-bed of narcissism)

Jimoslimos

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What larger movement though? I don't think anyone can even be sure what feminism means any more as it means so many different things to so many different people.

Well females making up 50% of the world's population it isn't difficult to see why feminism is so diverse and why it is near impossible to find one common idealogy.

IMO feminists and the trans movement (and perhaps also LGB) have only ever really shared one goal in common, that is highlighting and stopping violence and discrimination against members in their communities.

However this is where the similarities end. Both groups seek to achieve their aims in polar opposite ways.

Feminists have (traditionally) been against (or wary) of any system that would pigeon-hole them by sex or gender - since this is what has been used historically to discriminate against them. Voting rights, equal employment opportunities, FGM, sexual violence, marital rape. Being treated differently is what has led to many of these problems.

Transgender people on the other hand actively campaign to be treated differently, according to their chosen gender.

I'd side with the feminists on this one, not to say there isn't worthwhile issues on the trans side that should be addressed, violence being a primary one. However I can see why feminists would be irked that their biology appears to be reduced down to fake tits and hormones and the need to use female-only bathrooms and have F printed on their passport/driving licences.

PucaMama

melissak wrote: »

No. I am suggesting that the ladies I met and chatted with in Thailand were prostitutes and that i have never encountered a trans person in Ireland. I have never met a brain surgeon either but I don't cast doubt on their existence.

There are loads of trans people in Ireland. You are comparing two very different cultures.

King George VI

suicide_circus wrote: »

If gender is fluid how are people sure that they should be the other gender?

Gender fluidity is nonsense.

I remember when people were sane and there were only two genders. Man or woman. You were one or the other. That was it and that was grand. Then it became more acceptable to change to the other gender if you didn't like the one you were born in, or more so felt like deep down you were the other. You did the ol' hormone switcharoo and felt better and no harm was done. Good times.

Now it seems people are changing gender whenever they feel like it. You can't identify as a woman one day and then a man the next. Pick one. Only one. If you don't feel part of any gender, or constantly feel like one then the other, you're mentally ill and require therapy.

Even worse are those that "identify" as things that aren't even genders. and cis? Don't even start with that ****e.

tritium

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Well females making up 50% of the world's population it isn't difficult to see why feminism is so diverse and why it is near impossible to find one common idealogy.

IMO feminists and the trans movement (and perhaps also LGB) have only ever really shared one goal in common, that is highlighting and stopping violence and discrimination against members in their communities.

However this is where the similarities end. Both groups seek to achieve their aims in polar opposite ways.

Feminists have (traditionally) been against (or wary) of any system that would pigeon-hole them by sex or gender - since this is what has been used historically to discriminate against them. Voting rights, equal employment opportunities, FGM, sexual violence, marital rape. Being treated differently is what has led to many of these problems.

Transgender people on the other hand actively campaign to be treated differently, according to their chosen gender.

I'd side with the feminists on this one, not to say there isn't worthwhile issues on the trans side that should be addressed, violence being a primary one. However I can see why feminists would be irked that their biology appears to be reduced down to fake tits and hormones and the need to use female-only bathrooms and have F printed on their passport/driving licences.

You do realise that about half the issues you mention receive either far more visibility for women victims(fgm, violence and sexual violence) or have been vastly more class than gender discriminatory (voting) throughout history right?....

Notwithstanding, what right exactly do (some) feminists have to take issue with an alternative view of biology when it seems to have a pretty solid scientific basis? Could it be more that one of the keystones of their ideology- gender as a social construct-very much gets discredited by that view of gender?

Your use of the terms 'fake tits and hormones' is a pretty huge understatement of what trans people go through BTW.

nokia69

One eyed Jack wrote: »

(I guess now you can understand why I just gave up on the whole identity politics, it's a hot-bed of narcissism)

When did this happen Jackie

you are a feminist as far as I can see, is that not identity politics

ancapailldorcha

Johnny Carson wrote: »

I remember when people were sane and there were only two genders. Man or woman. You were one or the other. That was it and that was grand. Then it became more acceptable to change to the other gender if you didn't like the one you were born in, or more so felt like deep down you were the other. You did the ol' hormone switcharoo and felt better and no harm was done. Good times.

I'd have no time for the "non-binary" and "genderfluid" types myself. However, I doubt that people undergo surgical procedures on a whim so I'm firmly convinced that anyone who's transgender has had to come to terms with the sort of stuff someone like me couldn't even begin to fathom.

Tigger

melissak wrote: »

A rapist, especially one that still has a functioning penis in a female prisoN?No.

They are hardly going to be able to rape in prison with the guards and stuff

nokia69

Tigger wrote: »

They are hardly going to be able to rape in prison with the guards and stuff

wow, you never heard of prison rape, its so common in the US that some people claim there are more male rape victims than female in the US

Might not be a problem in Ireland, womens prisons are more like hotels than prison, the inmates have keys to their own "cells" its a joke

steddyeddy

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Well females making up 50% of the world's population it isn't difficult to see why feminism is so diverse and why it is near impossible to find one common idealogy.

IMO feminists and the trans movement (and perhaps also LGB) have only ever really shared one goal in common, that is highlighting and stopping violence and discrimination against members in their communities.

However this is where the similarities end. Both groups seek to achieve their aims in polar opposite ways.

Feminists have (traditionally) been against (or wary) of any system that would pigeon-hole them by sex or gender - since this is what has been used historically to discriminate against them. Voting rights, equal employment opportunities, FGM, sexual violence, marital rape. Being treated differently is what has led to many of these problems.

Transgender people on the other hand actively campaign to be treated differently, according to their chosen gender.

I'd side with the feminists on this one, not to say there isn't worthwhile issues on the trans side that should be addressed, violence being a primary one. However I can see why feminists would be irked that their biology appears to be reduced down to fake tits and hormones and the need to use female-only bathrooms and have F printed on their passport/driving licences.

Actually both groups claim to support equality.

Tigger

nokia69 wrote: »

wow, you never heard of prison rape, its so common in the US that some people claim there are more male rape victims than female in the US

Might not be a problem in Ireland, womens prisons are more like hotels than prison, the inmates have keys to their own "cells" its a joke

That's my point
It's ok for men to be at risk of rape while in the custody of the state but not women

e_e

Saipanne wrote: »

But, when her ideas are challenged she (Anita) plays the victim, saying that she is the victim of abuse.

Do you not see that this is the bull**** dichotomy her critics reactionary idiots have set up though? Either she's harassed into silence so they've won or she keeps on speaking as they yell "professional victim!!!!" louder. It's a pure silencing tactic to downplay harassment (as in revealing home addresses, harassing family members, swatting, rape threats, death threats) and nothing else.

I love the accusations of con artist too. As if a con artist would ask for money, use said money to produce the content they said they would (no complaints from the people who backed her btw) and then start a charity being such a Machiavellian that they hang around in the public eye for years on end while dealing with and managing to fool the FBI. It's such conspiracy theory nonsense.

You don't even have to like Anita Sarkeesian (I think her stuff is kinda trite) to see that the backlash against her is completely childish and disproportionate to what is actually being said and done.