Is this woman a transphobe?

[editor]

 

[bimble]

Does there have to be an explanation for transgenderism?

I'm going to have to think on this a bit. Maybe if I didn't want - or feel entitled somehow - to Understand it then everything would be easier to just accept. At the same time, when everyone is required to redefine basic words, and when there's a big medical aspect, and surgeries and all that, it doesn't seem all that odd to want to understand what being trans actually is. But I can live with the not understanding.

 

[Knotted]

Back in January, Contrapoints had some interesting takes on these questions (bigotry and understanding trans issues). Worth a look if you have an hour to spare. Quirky presentation, but worth persevering with:

I actually think this Contrapoints video might be more useful to the immediate debate. It's about non-binary trans but the second half does go into an open dialogue about what it means to be trans and concludes that it's really difficult to put a nail on it. "Man born in a woman's body" (or vice versa) is just the easiest way to explain it, rather than some deep truth. Or at least that's my cis take on it.

And this is what I don't like about the gender critical movement. They're talking about a group of people who didn't choose to be the way they are, doing the best they can and accusing them of various sins such as enforcing gender stereotypes. It's literally prejudice - pre-judging.

 

[Knotted]

When it comes to gay people, no one really seems to care any more, and that seems to have come along with increased tolerance.

One thing that is different with trans issues is that there may be requirements for interventions that come with significant risks. The medical model is limited here, but when talking about “treatments”, questions of aetiology become pertinent. There is a responsibility to minimise harms.

Yes OK.

 

[Knotted]

I'm going to have to think on this a bit. Maybe if I didn't want - or feel entitled somehow - to Understand it then everything would be easier to just accept. At the same time, when everyone is required to redefine basic words, and when there's a big medical aspect, and surgeries and all that, it doesn't seem all that odd to want to understand what being trans actually is. But I can live with the not understanding.

I think it's great to want to understand, just you might not get a simple, satisfying answer. Also there's difference and even vicious infighting about what it means to be trans. Try that video I suggested above.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I actually think this Contrapoints video might be more useful to the immediate debate. It's about non-binary trans but the second half does go into an open dialogue about what it means to be trans and concludes that it's really difficult to put a nail on it. "Man born in a woman's body" (or vice versa) is just the easiest way to explain it, rather than some deep truth. Or at least that's my cis take on it.

And this is what I don't like about the gender critical movement. They're talking about a group of people who didn't choose to be the way they are, doing the best they can and accusing them of various sins such as enforcing gender stereotypes. It's literally prejudice - pre-judging.

I agree that it is completely unfair to lay that accusation at the door of trans people. I think it's less unfair to lay it at the door of organisations that promote particular conceptions of gender, such as Mermaids. I think they do reenforce gender stereotypes.

 

[bimble]

I reckon if we laid down our weapons for just a moment, everybody would be able to understand that it's not without difficulty when you find people saying stuff along the lines of I know i am a woman because i loved dolls, and lipstick, and am terrible at maths, etc.
It's that sort of thing that i think has unintentionally caused a lot of ire. I know this is not all trans women, i do know.

Knotted movie-length video is too long, I can't sit still that long even for a psychological thriller.

 

[Border Reiver]

Does there have to be an explanation for transgenderism?

No. But the OP talked about transphobia and linked it to a Twitter ban.

No one has tried to define transphobe yet. I do not use that term seeing it as toxic.

 

[belboid]

I agree that it is completely unfair to lay that accusation at the door of trans people. I think it's less unfair to lay it at the door of organisations that promote particular conceptions of gender, such as Mermaids. I think they do reenforce gender stereotypes.

and the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter I assume then - considering it refused women with DM's, skinheads and those who looked 'too male.'

 

[SpackleFrog]

An illustrative scenario is one where a friend's child is into stuff that is traditionally associated with the other biological sex. In the olden days, that child would be encouraged not to do that. The girl would be discouraged from playing with guns or the boy would be discouraged from playing with make-up. Of course this kind of attitude is sadly still not confined to the past. But the feminist (and, just generally living in the 21st century) approach would be to let the child do as they will, and not have their options determined by their sex any more than they necessarily are by biological reality. However - the worry might be that we are moving to a situation where the child's preferences are taken to indicate that there should be serious consideration of them transitioning.

Now, I'm sure you will tell me that this is one of those "this doesn't actually happen very often at all" scenarios and I accept that to an extent, in particular to the extent that probably in the vast majority of cases the child is not encouraged to transition, along with the possibility that there might be some cases where choosing to transition is in fact in the best interests of the child. But this is a scenario that I've watched come up for real, in two separate cases.

Is that what you're worried about then? That if a boy plays with a doll people will tell them they are trans and they need to transition?

 

[Border Reiver]

Seals And Sealions are different animals..

 

[editor]

Seals And Sealions are different animals..

But with a balancing ball in common.

 

[Border Reiver]

and the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter I assume then - considering it refused women with DM's, skinheads and those who looked 'too male.'

When I was in Nurse training in the seventies a visit was arranged to visit a shelter. They refused to accommodate male nurses in their invitation. The set chose to refuse the visit.

 

[Knotted]

Knotted movie-length video is too long, I can't sit still that long even for a psychological thriller.

The video I suggested is 34 minutes and you only need to watch the last 20 minutes. But fair enough if videos don't suit you.

 

[Athos]

and the Vancouver Rape Relief and Women's Shelter I assume then - considering it refused women with DM's, skinheads and those who looked 'too male.'

Did that happen? I'm not denying it, btw, just don't think I've heard that particular allegation before. Do you have a source, please?

 

[Border Reiver]

But with a balancing ball in common.

Seals tend to balance balls, sealioning is about talking balls.

 

[Athos]

When I was in Nurse training in the seventies a visit was arranged to visit a shelter. They refused to accommodate male nurses in their invitation. The set chose to refuse the visit.

You sure showed them, eh? Well done.

 

[SpackleFrog]

I'm going to have to think on this a bit. Maybe if I didn't want - or feel entitled somehow - to Understand it then everything would be easier to just accept. At the same time, when everyone is required to redefine basic words, and when there's a big medical aspect, and surgeries and all that, it doesn't seem all that odd to want to understand what being trans actually is. But I can live with the not understanding.

I might regret this but I hope I don't...

One thing that made it a lot easier for me to understand was discovering that not all, in fact not even most trans people want to have gender reassignment surgery - that it isn't about trying to change their physical sex for most people. Before, I'd always had concerns about people undergoing medical treatment and surgery too rashly and I therefore worried about the process of people transitioning. Once I learnt that for many/most trans people it doesn't involve life altering surgery, and that it was more about the role and behaviour they wanted to be allowed to embrace in their lives, it made it a lot simpler. And it also made it make sense why doctors shouldn't necessarily be involved in trans peoples decisions and that being trans shouldn't automatically be seen as a medical issue.

I know posters have said that things are different now and gender roles are not so strictly policed. I think this is wishful thinking. For the mass of society gender roles are still very strictly policed indeed - and even more so in some cultures than others.

Maybe it is harder for those who have fought against gender stereotypes for decades to understand/accept. That could make sense. Of course, it would also make sense that the boomer rad fems of the 1970's and '80's can't get their head around trans rights because they've always been reactionary biological essentialists...

 

[A380]

Glad to see your pinniped perspicacity is better than whoever captioned that video.

 

[smokedout]

littlebabyjesus

I agree that it is completely unfair to lay that accusation at the door of trans people. I think it's less unfair to lay it at the door of organisations that promote particular conceptions of gender, such as Mermaids. I think they do reenforce gender stereotypes.

Can you point to where on their website Mermaids reinforce gender stereotypes? Like most charities Mermaids are hardly radicals, and they are not trans led, but I suspect your opinion of them has been guided by gender critical sources rather than an analysis of what Mermaids actually promote.

Are you going to answer this btw

Is Posie Parker transphobic?

 

[bimble]

the boomer rad fems of the 1970's and '80's can't get their head around trans rights because they've always been reactionary biological essentialists...

i dont think you know very much about the history of feminism.

 

[SpackleFrog]

i dont think you know very much about the history of feminism.

And this is why I shouldn't have engaged with you.

 

[bimble]

And this is why I shouldn't have engaged with you.

Oh no.

 

[hitmouse]

Oh snap, I was literally just about to say...

Maybe it is harder for those who have fought against gender stereotypes for decades to understand/accept. That could make sense. Of course, it would also make sense that the boomer rad fems of the 1970's and '80's can't get their head around trans rights because they've always been reactionary biological essentialists...

As much as I disagree with second-wave radical feminism, it's not the framework I use to explain the world and so on, but I do think a lot of the original radfems were better than the crap that lays claim to their legacy today. Consider Dworkin, for example: Andrea Dworkin Was a Trans Ally

 

[Santino]

Of course, it would also make sense that the boomer rad fems of the 1970's and '80's can't get their head around trans rights because they've always been reactionary biological essentialists...

This is the opposite of true.

 

[SpackleFrog]

Oh snap, I was literally just about to say...

As much as I disagree with second-wave radical feminism, it's not the framework I use to explain the world and so on, but I do think a lot of the original radfems were better than the crap that lays claim to their legacy today. Consider Dworkin, for example: Andrea Dworkin Was a Trans Ally

Yeah thats a fair point, but still you can see the roots of it - sex class oppression, every fuck is a rape etc. Once you've decided sex is the primary basis of oppression then its not far to go to deny trans women are women.

 

[SpackleFrog]

This is the opposite of true.

It might be a crass generalisation, but its not the opposite of true. That was a strong trend within that historical period.

 

[Santino]

It might be a crass generalisation, but its not the opposite of true. That was a strong trend within that historical period.

Whether or not it was a 'strong trend', it's false to say that 2nd wave feminism is about biological essentialism. Do you accept that?

 

[teuchter]

Is that what you're worried about then? That if a boy plays with a doll people will tell them they are trans and they need to transition?

Trying to ignore the attempt to trivialise the concern by reducing the thing to "boy plays with dolls"...

I would be very worried about a boy who plays with a doll being told that if he wants to play with dolls, well that's fine, but the thing is that society expects girls to play with dolls, and therefore maybe he should consider living his life not as a boy who likes to play with dolls, but as a girl. Because that's kind of what this implies:

I know posters have said that things are different now and gender roles are not so strictly policed. I think this is wishful thinking. For the mass of society gender roles are still very strictly policed indeed - and even more so in some cultures than others.

Maybe it is harder for those who have fought against gender stereotypes for decades to understand/accept. That could make sense. Of course, it would also make sense that the boomer rad fems of the 1970's and '80's can't get their head around trans rights because they've always been reactionary biological essentialists...

 

[bimble]

sex class oppression

Does this not exist in your understanding of the world?
I know you’re not engaging with me anymore but honestly have no idea how you can live on the same planet as me and think that this isn’t a thing, that people are wrong to imagine it is.