Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Is this woman a transphobe?

But what was being discussed was the claim that trans people are an ideology which consists of a "quasi-religious belief in a gendered soul separate from a biological reality". Apart from being nonsense on all kinds of levels that suggests that to be trans is not an authentic part of the human experience but a set of beliefs, that could be discarded and can therefore be dismissed. It's saying being trans in itself is an ideology, not what political demands might flow from that.

As a comparison you might say that believing same sex relationships should be legally treated on an equal footing with heterosexual relationships is an ideology, although I wouldn't personally I'd call it a political demand. But to suggest that same sex attraction is ideological in itself is both incorrect and homophobic just as saying experiencing a gender identity which is discordant with the sex assigned at birth is ideological is incorrect and transphobic.
That someone assigned male at birth believes they are a woman isn't ideological. But the question of how society should respond to that belief clearly can be.
 
..
Or, should people just keep quiet and hope for the best?
My understanding was that a couple of trans women who posted on Urban have actually left because of the constant threads, I won't mention names because I am a little unsure now, but that can't be right?

My feeling on subjects like these is I make a point and then, point made I find little reason to go back and repeat myself, but this doesn't seem a feeling shared in this topic.
 
I've changed my views on these issues because of threads on here. Don't like to post as I realise I don't have answers and as a CIS male my opinions aren't that relevant.
Perhaps I also feel my opinions are not that relevant also.
 
Whose opinions are relevant if yours arent?

Surely we are all in the same society. We want to build a better world. Thats why these debates go on and on.. people view them (rightly) as a pressing issue of the day. And ignoring them and their issues feeds into the hands of the right wing and neo-facists that are organising around these precise issues.

It's sad that we have lost so many posters to rows and debates over trans stuff. But there has been a huge change too in thought on here.... things have changed. People have changed. I think my views have changed... not fully but somewhat.

I am also frustrated and unclear which is why I am drawn back to these threads. I studied sociology and philosophy and I cant help but be fascinated by the ethical issues and the various "extreme examples" that get brought up. Because like it or not they do matter. What to do with trans women who rape women is a valid debate for social policy. Extreme and rare situations are how laws are made. How minds are changed. If everything was so easy and simple there would be no point in debating it at all.
 
My sympathies have moved as well, but I am not wholeheartedly on one side or the other. (Actually I think the issue is so complex and multi-layered that there are far more than just two sides). But what really pisses me off is how accusations of bigotry, transphobia and prejudice are so routinely thrown around, both on 'trans' threads and elsewhere, quite casually. I don't always agree with Edie by any means, but her latest intervention on here should not have been met with such hostility. It addresses an aspect of the discussion which has not been satisfactorily dealt with, albeit an extreme example. Anyone who reads Urban regularly will know Eddie as a compassionate individual who should be taken seriously, even when disagreeing with her.
 
My sympathies have moved as well, but I am not wholeheartedly on one side or the other. (Actually I think the issue is so complex and multi-layered that there are far more than just two sides). But what really pisses me off is how accusations of bigotry, transphobia and prejudice are so routinely thrown around, both on 'trans' threads and elsewhere, quite casually. I don't always agree with Edie by any means, but her latest intervention on here should not have been met with such hostility. It addresses an aspect of the discussion which has not been satisfactorily dealt with, albeit an extreme example. Anyone who reads Urban regularly will know Eddie as a compassionate individual who should be taken seriously, even when disagreeing with her.
This is a very important point. And as well as what you point out, accusations of misogyny and grooming are routinely thrown around in response to anyone saying anything in defence of trans people. In general, there does seem to be an attitude of "Either you're with us or them, and if you don't 100% agree with us at all times you're a BAD person!!!" This is not a topic where you can think in absolutes.
 
The answer to the initial questions is yes.

It's interesting watching the society's growing pains. Some people have the flexibility of mind to move on with the world that has changed since their childhood, others do not and will be dragged along with the changing world kicking and screaming. I'm glad trans people are getting some rights in our society at last, I'm sorry it took so long.
 
Whose opinions are relevant if yours arent?

Surely we are all in the same society. We want to build a better world. Thats why these debates go on and on.. people view them (rightly) as a pressing issue of the day. And ignoring them and their issues feeds into the hands of the right wing and neo-facists that are organising around these precise issues.

It's sad that we have lost so many posters to rows and debates over trans stuff. But there has been a huge change too in thought on here.... things have changed. People have changed. I think my views have changed... not fully but somewhat.

I am also frustrated and unclear which is why I am drawn back to these threads. I studied sociology and philosophy and I cant help but be fascinated by the ethical issues and the various "extreme examples" that get brought up. Because like it or not they do matter. What to do with trans women who rape women is a valid debate for social policy. Extreme and rare situations are how laws are made. How minds are changed. If everything was so easy and simple there would be no point in debating it at all.

I think the question is how much we allow extreme cases to define general social conditions. Laws are technical solutions... They rely on reducing something to elementary, readily assessable categories. They can never be a full representation of wider social norms. The technical requirements of safety in women's prisons are something that can be debated, but they are a really fucking bad starting point for how we treat people in society more broadly, or where they fit into the messy world of human psychology. And the reality is that the practical solutions are likely pretty banal; risk assessments, stump up a bit of funding to increase segregated space, talk to prisoners about what they're comfortable with etc. They are probably things we should be doing anyway in women's prisons (and prisons more generally) anyway... They are not currently remotely safe places, regardless of whether there happen to be any trans inmates in them. In sum the social policy debate is there, but I don't think that's what we're engaging in.

I'll probably back out of this for now... Like you I'm still trying to work out whether I should engage with this, and to what extent. But I dunno, the trans people I see in real life are so different from the ciphers constructed by those that seek to categorise them. There is an injustice there, and it's hard to just leave it to others.
 
The answer to the initial questions is yes.

It's interesting watching the society's growing pains. Some people have the flexibility of mind to move on with the world that has changed since their childhood, others do not and will be dragged along with the changing world kicking and screaming. I'm glad trans people are getting some rights in our society at last, I'm sorry it took so long.
Do trans people have more rights, now?
 
Since when, the 60s? Of course.
No, the last 10 years or so. Because the law is the same but things seem to be getting harder for trans people. Trans women used women's toilets and you never really heard anyone complaining about it (probably because it happened without incident). But now someone's moaning about it every day in the papers and online
 
I don't understand Urban's obsession with Trans issues, there have been multiple bad tempered threads, surely everyone has said their piece multiple times by now, yet on they go?

It's not just Urban though, is it? Trans people (mainly trans women) have recently become a favoured punching bag for culture warriors and other shit-stirring malcontents in wider society. The biggest "threat" to cis women comes overwhelmingly from cis men, who have no need to engage in subterfuge in order to perpetrate abuse, or at least not the kind that involves them pretending to be trans women.
 
It's called "ideology" because unlike rejecting someone on the basis of race or sex, rejecting someone on ideological grounds is not generally seen as an inherently prejudiced thing to do. It's "fair game", especially if you can frame your rejection in terms of protecting the rights of the socially disadvantaged. It's an especially insidious sleight of hand when employed by bigots, because it allows them to cloak their rejection of people as a rejection of an ideology. Even if said ideology is a complete strawman.
What do you mean rejecting someone? Do you mean being unkind to them ? Or by “rejecting people” do you actually mean excluding people from the category called women either in thought or in certain circumstances.
The mess that’s been going on with this discussion in the world of sport is instructive I think, even if just by forcing an admission that it’s not all as simple as some would like it to be.
 
What do you mean rejecting someone? Do you mean being unkind to them ? Or by “rejecting people” do you actually mean excluding people from the category called women either in thought or in certain circumstances.
The mess that’s been going on with this discussion in the world of sport is instructive I think, even if just by forcing an admission that it’s not all as simple as some would like it to be.

Could be both or either to be honest. It really depends on the motivations of whoever's using "ideology" as the crux of their rejection.

As for sports in particular, I do wonder how that situation was being dealt with in the time before it got picked up as a hobby-horse by reactionaries who previously displayed no interest in womens' sports whatsoever.
 
No, the last 10 years or so. Because the law is the same but things seem to be getting harder for trans people. Trans women used women's toilets and you never really heard anyone complaining about it (probably because it happened without incident). But now someone's moaning about it every day in the papers and online

Well, if you read back, I was talking about a different time period. I know it's hard for trans people but I don't know if it's getting harder because I'm not aware of it having been measured. Maybe? Societal growth is a painful process, and a really slow one. I don't have the answers to how it can be managed better, I can merely commiserate with the trans folks caught up in this.
 
It’s not just on urban where insufferable hypocritical ‘progressives’ both endlessly use people with cognitive/mental impairments as a punching bag (although it’s all throughout this thread, and by the same posters on the ‘idiot’ freeman of the land thread). These oh so egalitarian types and also put a lot of effort into erasing the reality such people are already ‘put into camps’ (as we’ve seen on this thread and on the trans/peadophillia thread)

this behaviour, whilst you think you’re being really clever when you’re doing it, does two things. 1, it promotes an elitist, eugenist politics (and if you’ve been paying attention to Richard Spencer’s trajectory, he’s now saying pretty much the same things being said by the ‘left-wing’ eugenists on here, and 2, it is an absolute gift to the Kremlin etc backed conspiracists that progressives are so concerned about (when it suits that is). Progressives can continue to refuse to think about this, but they’re not making the world a better place with their ‘hur hur look at those idiots with their inflexibe minds and their, what was it NoXion ‘child-like level of reasoning ability, they’re not on our level hur hut’. You’re certainly not making things better for trans people are you?
 
It’s not just on urban where insufferable hypocritical ‘progressives’ both endlessly use people with cognitive/mental impairments as a punching bag (although it’s all throughout this thread, and by the same posters on the ‘idiot’ freeman of the land thread). These oh so egalitarian types and also put a lot of effort into erasing the reality such people are already ‘put into camps’ (as we’ve seen on this thread and on the trans/peadophillia thread)

this behaviour, whilst you think you’re being really clever when you’re doing it, does two things. 1, it promotes an elitist, eugenist politics (and if you’ve been paying attention to Richard Spencer’s trajectory, he’s now saying pretty much the same things being said by the ‘left-wing’ eugenists on here, and 2, it is an absolute gift to the Kremlin etc backed conspiracists that progressives are so concerned about (when it suits that is). Progressives can continue to refuse to think about this, but they’re not making the world a better place with their ‘hur hur look at those idiots with their inflexibe minds and their, what was it NoXion ‘child-like level of reasoning ability, they’re not on our level hur hut’. You’re certainly not making things better for trans people are you?

Whereas your pass-agg cross-thread beefing is just what's needed? I'll pass, thanks.
 
Yep, just don’t think about it Einsteins. Keep on being appalled by those bigots over there, whilst putting as much effort as you can into not thinking about your bigotry, or how you’re doing a ton of favours for the very people you’re appalled by. Serious flexibility of mind on display going on here
 
It is such a difficult one. I am a cis woman who genuinely has no worries or concerns about sharing a space like loos or changing rooms or a hospital ward with trans women, nor does trans women's presence in these places make me worry there is a serious chance a man will use this right in order to abuse me.

But then I have had an unusually positive life experience with men compared to a lot of women. I haven't been sexually assaulted, I've experienced only minor and very occasional harrassment, I've never felt constantly worried and watchful about men or felt like I have to make careful arrangements when travelling at night before the obvious sort of caution anyone should have etc

To me it seems that the chance that one will have the misfortune to run into a trans woman sexual abuser are infintessimally smaller than the chance you'll run into an abusive cis man. I'd presume most sexual assaults that happen in ladies' loos for example, involve a man just walking into some loos when he knows they won't be too busy, and assaulting a woman. He doesn't need to dress as a woman or pretend to be a trans woman to do that. Abusive men, sadly, have no shortage of opportunities to access women or children, so I don't see how passing as a woman is necessary to do that, plus being a 'respectable cis man' is sadly a much better defense position if you're caught.

At the same time I have no wish to bash women who have experience sexual assault over the heads with my 'logic', which is a favourite tactic of men sometimes. Like 'Look, you people affected by this issue cannot be objective about it like I am, because I have only observed it from afar, therefore I am right' and I could take that line of 'I'm not worried about men so I don't see why you are!' and that doesn't feel right either. But then maybe stats are they only thing we have to throw around here, and perhaps the important thing is that we don't scream invective at a woman who says 'Look, I want people to live their lives how they wish and I have nothing against trans women but I'm not comfortable with them in my spaces because I've survived abuse and you don't know the lengths men will go to in order to hurt women'. Yes, I know there are 'concern trolls' but there are a lot of women who genuinely feel that way, and men need to understand that and as a woman who's never been afraid of men it took me a while to understand that frankly.
 
Has anyone changed their tune as a result of others repeating theirs?
Not really. I've pretty much seen it as a toxic discussion that would only pit feminist against feminist, socialist against socialist, communist against communist, anarchist against anarchist, comrade against comrade, and anyone remotely progressive against other remotely progressive types. I've seen one previously revolutionary organisation utterly destroyed and others damaged by the discourse on this. I've thought it was toxic since witnessing the whole fucking mess and the levels of patent idiocy at the last London Anarchist Bookfair (the proper one) and I still think the same now.

I'm not one for conspiracies but if the State/boss class wanted to fuck up any resistance, then this subject would be their holy grail (the culture warriors know this and are happy to use it to their advantage).

My personal view of the issue itself is one of sympathy for the trans side but with enough understanding to see where the gender critical side is coming from and being able to at least acknowledge some of their concerns. I realise that position will be unsatisfactory for the most vocal on either side of the divide, who might label me as a TERF or hater of "real" women (and indeed they have).
 
I've seen a few things that have changed and coloured my views - both in terms of supporting trans people and understanding women who find difficulty in accepting trans women in what they see as women's safe spaces.

One was a statement that unlike most rights, trans rights can come into conflict with other rights, in this case the rights of women. I'm still not sure how true it is, but I think it is something worth bearing in mind when people bring up 'You wouldn't say that about black people's rights!' etc

Another was a trans woman talking about people asking about her medical transition and saying 'I did not become a woman - I have always been a woman'. That has never left me. I was always trans supportive, but I think that really shifted how I understood the profundity of trans identity. It's not about wanting to wear a pretty dress. It's not about 'changing' it's about 'being'.
 
It is such a difficult one. I am a cis woman who genuinely has no worries or concerns about sharing a space like loos or changing rooms or a hospital ward with trans women, nor does trans women's presence in these places make me worry there is a serious chance a man will use this right in order to abuse me.

But then I have had an unusually positive life experience with men compared to a lot of women. I haven't been sexually assaulted, I've experienced only minor and very occasional harrassment, I've never felt constantly worried and watchful about men or felt like I have to make careful arrangements when travelling at night before the obvious sort of caution anyone should have etc

To me it seems that the chance that one will have the misfortune to run into a trans woman sexual abuser are infintessimally smaller than the chance you'll run into an abusive cis man. I'd presume most sexual assaults that happen in ladies' loos for example, involve a man just walking into some loos when he knows they won't be too busy, and assaulting a woman. He doesn't need to dress as a woman or pretend to be a trans woman to do that. Abusive men, sadly, have no shortage of opportunities to access women or children, so I don't see how passing as a woman is necessary to do that, plus being a 'respectable cis man' is sadly a much better defense position if you're caught.

At the same time I have no wish to bash women who have experience sexual assault over the heads with my 'logic', which is a favourite tactic of men sometimes. Like 'Look, you people affected by this issue cannot be objective about it like I am, because I have only observed it from afar, therefore I am right' and I could take that line of 'I'm not worried about men so I don't see why you are!' and that doesn't feel right either. But then maybe stats are they only thing we have to throw around here, and perhaps the important thing is that we don't scream invective at a woman who says 'Look, I want people to live their lives how they wish and I have nothing against trans women but I'm not comfortable with them in my spaces because I've survived abuse and you don't know the lengths men will go to in order to hurt women'. Yes, I know there are 'concern trolls' but there are a lot of women who genuinely feel that way, and men need to understand that and as a woman who's never been afraid of men it took me a while to understand that frankly.
Thank you for your honesty Cloo. Most of the things you posted above about your own experience/lack of fear also apply to me, and like you, I've also had to remind myself that many women haven't been as fortunate. Actually, the lack of fear is what everyone should have the right to feel in an ideal world! But it's obviously not.

Regarding women's spaces, such as prisons, I think this should be looked at on a case by case basis. I do understand fears of bad actors taking advantage of self ID, and if, say, the prisoner in question is a sex offender who somehow didn't realise he was a trans woman until he was facing prison, then yes, of course there should be room to challenge that without the accusations of "Bigot!" It's just that, as you say, this is a rare scenario and not enough to justify painting all trans people as predators, because most are not. As with any group, you can get predators who happen to be trans, but the two things aren't connected.
 
Another was a trans woman talking about people asking about her medical transition and saying 'I did not become a woman - I have always been a woman'. That has never left me. I was always trans supportive, but I think that really shifted how I understood the profundity of trans identity. It's not about wanting to wear a pretty dress. It's not about 'changing' it's about 'being'.
That brings up another interesting point. One of the transphobic dogwhistles I see bandied about on Twitter is "men in dresses" and "trans men were just called tomboys when I was a kid". Interestingly, most of the trans women I know weren't into dolls or dresses as children, they were very much into the stereotypically boy things they were given, and still have traditionally male orientated interests now. Conversely, I'm a cis woman who was considered a tomboy as a child, and as an adult have been deemed "one of the lads" socially, but I'm still very much female, biologically and gender identity wise. It's not being a woman I have a problem with, it's the little boxes society tries to stick you in regardless of whether that's you, and have rebelled against a lot of that. But gender identity goes way deeper than that.
 
About the ‘it’s not changing it’s being’ thing..
When I watch this, or any of the hundreds that followed this one, I still don’t know whether it’s a joke or what.


If it started as a joke it’s not anymore- This person is now a seriously high profile spokesperson for trans rights, met the president and so on, and has numerous big companies whose products they’re paid to endorse / wear etc because of their massive following.
Is this really someone who is revealing their profound deeply felt gendered self and not someone having a laugh ? Am I a bad person for not being able to watch them without feeling like it’s just a mockery ? Probably.
 
I've stayed out of these threads for a couple of years I think, not so much because of any sense of restraint, more that I've realised how ill informed I am on a number of trans issues. In fact when I did chip in, my views were a bit all over the place. I'm chipping in now partly because, like Serge Forward it's been difficult, to say the least, watching the left process trans debates. But really, it's to make a single point that has been implied over the last couple of pages, but never seems to come centre stage.

As a kind of feminism 101, violence against women, and the fears and restrictions that create, come out of a patriarchal society, inequality, misogyny. And whilst those threats, the violence and all the limits that imposes on women's lives are not exactly the same for trans women and cis women, there is there a common problem - expressed in broad brush terms - a common enemy. There should there be scope for a common struggle and a society without male violence and misogyny. In that, I'm not making some naive 'why can we call work together point' and of course all kinds of trans and cis women's activists work in different and overalapping ways. It's just a sense of frustration.... how does we get beyond these repeating battles.. how does all this challenge actual power structures. A big part of this is about the left and the way it processes any debate, any claims for territory and ownership, but that's for another thread. And of course any frustrations I might have as a cis male will be so much more for those directly affected. :(
 
My sympathies have moved as well, but I am not wholeheartedly on one side or the other. (Actually I think the issue is so complex and multi-layered that there are far more than just two sides). But what really pisses me off is how accusations of bigotry, transphobia and prejudice are so routinely thrown around, both on 'trans' threads and elsewhere, quite casually. I don't always agree with Edie by any means, but her latest intervention on here should not have been met with such hostility. It addresses an aspect of the discussion which has not been satisfactorily dealt with, albeit an extreme example. Anyone who reads Urban regularly will know Eddie as a compassionate individual who should be taken seriously, even when disagreeing with her.

How has it not been satisfactorily dealt with? Both the Westminster and Scottish governments have said trans women accused of sexual offences will not be housed in the female prison estate. They very rarely were in any event and Bryson was only held in the women's estate for a weekend for assessment and was segregated so did not come into contact with other prisoners.

I've had many conversations with Edie about trans issues that have mostly remained in good faith. But I do not consider someone referring to something as deeply personal as gender dysphoria or discordant gender identity - for which there is a wealth of social, historical and biological evidence - as an ideology which consists of a "quasi-religious belief in a gendered soul separate from a biological reality". That doesn't feel compassionate from my perspective and in the context of her bumping an old thread to point out a trans woman had been convicted of rape does not strike me as benign.
 
Back
Top Bottom