Feminism at odds with the trans movement

PucaMama

Johnny Carson wrote: »

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.

So much ignorance in one post.

orubiru

e_e wrote: »

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.

My recent thoughts on this are that nobody is taking the whole thing particularly seriously.

Her most prominent "critics" seem genuinely excited every time she has a new video because it means a corresponding surge in views and donations for them too.

For every person who can't wait for the next FemFreq video there's someone who can't wait for the next Thundef00t response to the next FemFreq video. There are PLENTY of folks who watch both.

She participates in some pretty obvious goading of trolls. Maybe she always has. She stirs up the pot and the people on the internet have a good old time either "fighting" for Feminism or "fighting" against Feminism. The prominent "celebrities" on both sides make a bit of cash and it's allowed to die down for a while before it all gets cranked up again (we wouldn't want the audience to get bored/fatigued now, would we?). Sorry, I just have a very cynical view on all this.

People might like to imagine these crazy characters saying "these damn feminazis gonna take away our games" or "these misogynists trying to stop women from playing video games ever since Mario objectified the princess" but I am certain that so many of these "harassers" and "SJWs" are just in it "for the LOLZ". It's just entertainment to them. Pretty sh!tty entertainment no doubt but that's how some people like to spend their time.

Following on from that, I think the harassment is naturally going to be downplayed because we have no idea just who these harassers are. I think if we had CCTV footage or mugshots of certain individuals, from certain backgrounds, caught in the act of harassing her then we'd obviously be thinking "OK, these are the guys, we need to put an end to this". Really though, there must be a strong suspicion that a lot of these messages she is getting are coming from people who are not sincere or not an actual threat?

tritium

orubiru wrote: »

My recent thoughts on this are that nobody is taking the whole thing particularly seriously.

Her most prominent "critics" seem genuinely excited every time she has a new video because it means a corresponding surge in views and donations for them too.

For every person who can't wait for the next FemFreq video there's someone who can't wait for the next Thundef00t response to the next FemFreq video. There are PLENTY of folks who watch both.

She participates in some pretty obvious goading of trolls. Maybe she always has. She stirs up the pot and the people on the internet have a good old time either "fighting" for Feminism or "fighting" against Feminism. The prominent "celebrities" on both sides make a bit of cash and it's allowed to die down for a while before it all gets cranked up again (we wouldn't want the audience to get bored/fatigued now, would we?). Sorry, I just have a very cynical view on all this.

People might like to imagine these crazy characters saying "these damn feminazis gonna take away our games" or "these misogynists trying to stop women from playing video games ever since Mario objectified the princess" but I am certain that so many of these "harassers" and "SJWs" are just in it "for the LOLZ". It's just entertainment to them. Pretty sh!tty entertainment no doubt but that's how some people like to spend their time.

Following on from that, I think the harassment is naturally going to be downplayed because we have no idea just who these harassers are. I think if we had CCTV footage or mugshots of certain individuals, from certain backgrounds, caught in the act of harassing her then we'd obviously be thinking "OK, these are the guys, we need to put an end to this". Really though, there must be a strong suspicion that a lot of these messages she is getting are coming from people who are not sincere or not an actual threat?

Pretty much this^^^^ for every " Anita was harassed" there's a "harassment campaign to get Thunderf00t sacked", for every " speech cancelled due to death threats" there's a "dialled in hoax alert". They've all gotten pretty good at being victims at this stage- some of it justified, some of it milking the pot for a few extra YouTube views. Truth us they actually kind of need each other to stay relevant. Otherwise they reduce to crazy people pushing more and more radical ideas to try to get airtime-think Paul Elam or Valerie Solanas

kunst nugget

tritium wrote: »

Pretty much this^^^^ for every " Anita was harassed" there's a "harassment campaign to get Thunderf00t sacked", for every " speech cancelled due to death threats" there's a "dialled in hoax alert". They've all gotten pretty good at being victims at this stage- some of it justified, some of it milking the pot for a few extra YouTube views. Truth us they actually kind of need each other to stay relevant. Otherwise they reduce to crazy people pushing more and more radical ideas to try to get airtime-think Paul Elam or Valerie Solanas

Gamergate, for me, was nothing more than a bunch of youtubers attacking more established sites and media in order to elicit more subscribers and revenue for themselves and so it was a constant stream of hysteria about attacks on liberty to promote traffic to their channels.

King George VI

PucaMama wrote: »

So much ignorance in one post.

Ahh yeah sure but whaddaya gonna do huh. Such is real life. :rolleyes:

Just to be clear, gender fluidity is nonsense. I don't think transgender-ism is nonsense. That's a-ok.

orubiru

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

This is an inevitable situation when you start dealing with concepts like "intersectionality" and "privilege".

In a country like Ireland most people are pretty accepting but I still think that trans people face many challenges that people who identify as one of the two "vanilla" genders (?! Sorry, I don't know how to phrase that properly AT ALL) will simply never have to face.

Feminists will argue that Men have more Privilege than Women. I don't think you can reasonably argue that trans people have more "privilege" than women though. I think you could reasonably argue that society does not generally treat trans people fairly and that large sections of society do not respect trans people at all. Obviously, a rich trans-woman will still be more privileged that a homeless cis-woman, but if gender is the only differentiating factor then it is certainly more challenging to be trans.

For an Intersectional Feminist, with an obsession with "privilege", this can present an interesting problem. People can move along the Privilege Spectrum simply by choosing to redefine themselves.

If you are applying the concept of "privilege" to my situation right now then, to your average Intersectional Feminist, I am the most privileged of all. Straight White Cis Male, born into a society built especially for me.

What if one day I leave the closet and openly admit I am homosexual and, on top of that, start to openly identify myself as female? I have significantly changed my "privilege". Now that Straight White Cis Female who used to tell me all day long about my "privilege" has to STFU and listen because she is the privileged one now. She can't dismiss my lived experience! This will surely be annoying to her.

The feminists who knew me at 21 and told me how video games and movies were all made for me can't just turn around and say "well, I knew Orubella when she was 21 and she used to be a Straight White Male". No, they have to Check Their Privilege around me now. I can't imagine that they would do this without some objection and/or struggle.

When you decide to sort people into groups, and then assign a value to each of these groups based on oppression and privilege, there will always be people who are able to move between groups. If there is some kind of hierarchy at play where Group X has more privilege than Group Y and Group Y has more privilege than Group Z and everyone is encouraged to "Check Your Privilege" then people in Group Y are going to get a little bit annoyed when people from Group X are able to move to Group Z.

Of course, if we just saw people as individuals and treated each individual equally then this would never be an issue.

PucaMama

Johnny Carson wrote: »

Ahh yeah sure but whaddaya gonna do huh. Such is real life. :rolleyes:

Just to be clear, gender fluidity is nonsense. I don't think transgender-ism is nonsense. That's a-ok.

Well unlike the poster I quoted, I won't be so arrogant as to say that everyone I don't understand (or want to understand) is sick and needs psychiatric treatment.

Look at yourself, thinking you can decide which is legitimate and which isn't. As if it has anything to do with you. And I'm far from the most liberal person in reality.

Maguined

e_e wrote: »

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.

The problem is she did not produce the content anywhere close to the time lines she pledged. Her financial breakdown of the money spent is quite dubious and the actual content itself is extremely flimsy.

Here are two articles that highlight such concerns with her finances and content.

http://readwrite.com/2013/03/19/anita-sarkeesian-i-love-you-but-please-show-me-the-money

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2015/01/24/anita-sarkeesian-releases-kickstarter-breakdown-raised-440000-in-2014/

Her statement from her own kickstarter campaign page was

Creating these videos take a lot of time and money to produce. I will be researching and playing hundreds of titles from across the gaming industry (including some truly awful games that I wouldn’t wish upon anyone!). Your support will go towards production costs, equipment, games and downloadable content.

She failed to mention that the vast majority of all these funds was actually going into her own salary.

She fails to produce any evidence of her claims and instead only makes statements which contradicts actual studies with evidence already released. She claims she has to do research and record yet she used footage from other youtubers without acknowledgement. She has made demonstrably false claims about games.

Basically she has created very little actual content with some extremely questionable financing on the back of this kickstarter which is why she is labelled a con artist.

In no way do I support any harassment directed towards her but she definitely is deserving of every piece of criticism she receives as she has pocketed large sums of money to produce evidence lacking rants years behind her promised timelines.

King George VI

PucaMama wrote: »

Well unlike the poster I quoted, I won't be so arrogant as to say that everyone I don't understand (or want to understand) is sick and needs psychiatric treatment.

Look at yourself, thinking you can decide which is legitimate and which isn't. As if it has anything to do with you. And I'm far from the most liberal person in reality.

I never said everyone I don't understand needs psychiatric treatment. I said genderfluid people need psychiatric treatment and are not right in the head.

What kind of rational person changes gender at random intervals throughout the day? It's the equivalent of somebody identifying as a toaster in the morning, human in the afternoon and Pat Kenny in the evening.

Lau2976

From my experience of TERF's, the additude tends to come from a belief that gender is somewhat defined by shared experiences, if someone was brought up androgynous for example their gender wouldn't be defined as woman or man because they haven't experienced either. Some believe that in a way transgenderism undermines what it means to be a specific gender because a transgendered person takes only the superficial aspects and sterotypes of a gender and applies them but the true aspects of gender, the intricate details of what really makes us a certain gender, can never be experienced by someone who hasn't always been that gender. They believe that pre or post op, a transgender person will always be transgendered or their previous gender.

A lot of the issues which arise between feminists and trans organisations centre around the idea of the shared occupation of single sex spaces. It is similar to the recent issue some people take with migration, yes many migrants are safe and aren't here maliciously but with no way to evaluate before a crime is committed should we take a chance? The arguments of terfs is much the same. It would be ridiculous to claim that men don't harm women, and that some haven't gone to extreme lengths to do so, terfs believe that we shouldn't take the chance of a trans person harming a woman in a single sex space.

PucaMama

Johnny Carson wrote: »

I never said everyone I don't understand needs psychiatric treatment. I said genderfluid people need psychiatric treatment and are not right in the head.

What kind of rational person changes gender at random intervals throughout the day? It's the equivalent of somebody identifying as a toaster in the morning, human in the afternoon and Pat Kenny in the evening.

No it's not "the equivalent" of that and you know it. It's someone doing what they want and it's nothing to do with you. It affects no one but themselves so stop trying to claim they are "not right in the head".

Clandestine

I don't have a problem with trans, gender-queer etc. people, but every person I've come across who fits under that umbrella never stops talking about it. Every conversation you have with them no matter the topic, it somehow gets pulled back to gender topics. They base their whole identity and personality around it... that's why people like me get annoyed with them.

steddyeddy

My response to TERFs would be why does gender matter? We shouldn't treat people differently because of it.

King George VI

PucaMama wrote: »

No it's not "the equivalent" of that and you know it. It's someone doing what they want and it's nothing to do with you. It affects no one but themselves so stop trying to claim they are "not right in the head".

Kind of is tbh. So it's perfectly normal for me to feel like/claim to be a boy one minute and then a woman a few hours later? Then switch back when I feel like it??? It's nonsense I think. Absolute codswallop and I will never not think this is a mental illness.*

*but then again I'm not a psychiatrist so what do I know :pac:

silverharp

steddyeddy wrote: »

My response to TERFs would be why does gender matter? We shouldn't treat people differently because of it.

It depends, in a meritocracy it shouldn't however in gender quota land it needs to be pointed out that not every imbalance needs to be fixed because the genders do not behave identically.

PucaMama

Clandestine wrote: »

I don't have a problem with trans, gender-queer etc. people, but every person I've come across who fits under that umbrella never stops talking about it. Every conversation you have with them no matter the topic, it somehow gets pulled back to gender topics. They base their whole identity and personality around it... that's why people like me get annoyed with them.

To be fair this is true of all the people I know myself who come under that umbrella as you say and it drives me crazy sometimes

PucaMama

Johnny Carson wrote: »

Kind of is tbh. So it's perfectly normal for me to feel like/claim to be a boy one minute and then a woman a few hours later? Then switch back when I feel like it??? It's nonsense I think. Absolute codswallop and I will never not think this is a mental illness.*

*but then again I'm not a psychiatrist so what do I know :pac:

If it made you happy, I wouldn't take it away from you

Kev W

Johnny Carson wrote: »

Kind of is tbh. So it's perfectly normal for me to feel like/claim to be a boy one minute and then a woman a few hours later?

No, because you're not genderfluid. It is perfectly normal for a genderfluid person, however.

Johnny Carson wrote: »

Then switch back when I feel like it??? It's nonsense I think.

Correct, that is nonsense. It has nothing to do with "feeling like it".

Johnny Carson wrote: »

Absolute codswallop and I will never not think this is a mental illness.

but then again I'm not a psychiatrist so what do I know

Very little, it appears.

seamus

Clandestine wrote: »

I don't have a problem with trans, gender-queer etc. people, but every person I've come across who fits under that umbrella never stops talking about it. Every conversation you have with them no matter the topic, it somehow gets pulled back to gender topics. They base their whole identity and personality around it... that's why people like me get annoyed with them.

But is that because you only ever come into contact with them about gender topics?

What I mean is, do you meet these people down the pub, or at technology conventions?

Or does it just so happen that you encounter trans people during relevant conversations.

To my knowledge I've only encountered one trans person. And I worked with him pretty often. It was never mentioned, never in work, never in the pub. He never even broached the topic of gender or equal rights.
The only reason I even became aware of it was because he used his personal email address to send me something for work and it had his original name on it.

King George VI

Kev W wrote: »

No, because you're not genderfluid. It is perfectly normal for a genderfluid person, however.

Good point. I haven't experienced it and will never understand it. Maybe I'm just old fashioned. Maybe again genderfluid people aren't normal. Not to me anyway. Brings up the whole what's normal" debate. Interesting.

Kev W wrote: »

Correct, that is nonsense. It has nothing to do with "feeling like it".

It has everything to do with feeling like it. Why do it then?

Kev W wrote: »

Very little, it appears.

Now now. Play nice, Kev.

Genderfluid just sounds like something you'd get just after an orgasm.

Jimoslimos

tritium wrote: »

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?

It really really doesn't, and please don't try link to brain scan (fMRI) quackery dressing itself up as real science.

tritium wrote: »

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

Crude perhaps, but I was trying to illustrate how limited their understanding of female biology is. Hormones are a lot more complex than male = testosterone / female = estrogen. In addition to secondary sex characteristics they have other functions, related to the reproductive organs (that are missing in transgender women) and the entire endocrine system .

ceadaoin.

TERF is a slur by the way and is used as synonymous with 'bigot'. Lots of women who disagree with some of trans agenda receive some pretty appalling and misogynistic abuse.

http://thenewbacklash.blogspot.com/p/7-swerf-and-terf.html

Can people please stop using really bad agenda pushing blogs and websites as a source of proof? It achieves nothing.

ceadaoin.

Deleted User wrote: »

Can people please stop using really bad agenda pushing blogs and websites as a source of proof? It achieves nothing.

If you're referring to my post, I was using it as an example of how the word TERF is used as there are lots of screenshots in one place.

Cis is used as an equally derogatory term by some. Here's a tip: there's assholes on both gender that like complaining for complaining sake. If we all just ignored them and carried on as normal, life would be much better for all of us.

tritium

ceadaoin. wrote: »

TERF is a slur by the way and is used as synonymous with 'bigot'. Lots of women who disagree with some of trans agenda receive some pretty appalling and misogynistic abuse.

http://thenewbacklash.blogspot.com/p/7-swerf-and-terf.html

Soneone should tell the relevant elements within feminism and the media that the word misogyny really shouldn't be thrown about like snuff at a wake with no apparent understanding as to its actual meaning.

For example someone telling a writer that their views on transgender make them a bigoted douche isn't an example of misogyny, its just an opinion of the writer. You are of course free to agree or disagree with that opinion.

Disagreeing with a particular feminist view is also not an example of misogyny, or indeed anti-feminism

In fact saying it is is a greater example of intolerance and little more than an emotionally charged attempt to shut down debate with the the equivalent of a two year saying someone called them names

ceadaoin.

Deleted User wrote: »

Cis is used as an equally derogatory term by some. Here's a tip: there's assholes on both gender that like complaining for complaining sake. If we all just ignored them and carried on as normal, life would be much better for all of us.

It's hard to ignore them when you are told that you are now to be called CIS. Or that as a woman, it's trans exclusive to discuss reproductive rights, to be referred to by professionals as a "birthing individual" rather than a "mother" or "pregnant woman." These things have all happened. Even talking about the fact that you have a vagina is deemed transphobic by some.

I'm all for people to identify how they want. I would never want anyone to face violence or discrimination because of that. It's disgusting that this happens. I just don't like the idea of what I am being redefined without my consent so that a vocal minority can feel better about themselves.

tritium

ceadaoin. wrote: »

It's hard to ignore them when you are told that you are now to be called CIS. Or that as a woman, it's trans exclusive to discuss reproductive rights, to be referred to by professionals as a "birthing individual" rather than a "mother" or "pregnant woman." These things have all happened. Even talking about the fact that you have a vagina is deemed transphobic by some.

I'm all for people to identify how they want. I would never want anyone to face violence or discrimination because of that. It's disgusting that this happens. I just don't like the idea of what I am being redefined without my consent so that a vocal minority can feel better about themselves.

Isn't that what most ideologies do though? Feminism, to take the comparitor for this particular thread, has plenty of form for this kind of linguistic nonsense, mainly but not exclusively from academic circles

steddyeddy

Addressing the privilege issue regarding my male status giving me an easier life than a female. It's ridiculous. Can't sum it up any other way until I see evidence to the contrary.