"Solidarity for both trans rights and women's rights" by Janine Booth

[Edie]

This is happening. I have a couple of friends who are cis women with “masculine” traits such as being tall & slender (whilst also being quite feminine in their presentation); they get misgendered on a weekly basis & are now finding they’re being challenged over whether they’re in the right toilets much more frequently than before this was such a hot topic.

And yes, pretty much any time any one of my friends who are cis women engage in any online debate where they show support for trans people, they are assumed to be trans women.

It might seem like a bonkers comparison if you’ve not come across it before but it’s become a reality for butch women and gender nonconforming women.

It’s interesting how this could be lept on by either camp. I think you see it as proof of the damage terfs do? But others might see it as proof of the muddling that the trans ideology does, that women now must clarify that they’re not trans women.

 

[bimble]

[..] I suspect that the sense of gender I do have, such as it is, comes from others' reactions to me - and I don't have any reaction against that, so I don't have gender dysphoria.

Nah. Else i think you'd have to say that most women have gender dysphoria which surely can't be right. ?

 

[Edie]

I didn't know but i do believe you. That is fucking depressing. This whole thing seems to have made feminism implode on itself.

That’s not really surprising. Feminism has always been about fighting the systemic oppression of women based on sex determined differences to men. Take away that, by including men who feel like women as women, and it becomes meaningless. It’s one of the big reasons women are feeling under attack by this?

 

[Athos]

I was going to post this on the last thread but it got nuked and I decided to keep it. Is quite long but sort of relevent to this I think@

I'm finding it difficult to phrase this without it sounded provocative but would those questioning the idea of internal gender identity accept that their might be an external factor to gender, one that is probably entirely imposed and difficult to avoid, but which almost all people possess (or perform) to some degree nonetheless.

Presentation is obviously a part of this, does someone's wardrobe contain solely items which correspond to their assigned sex at birth, or a majority which do, or none which do. Does someone wear make up, or use perfume or aftershave, or gendered scented toiletries, what is their hair like? Do they use face creams, or other typically gendered products? Do they look like their assigned sex, or the opposite one or neither when they look in the mirror, and how much of this is down to their active choices of presentation rather than body shape or bone structure? Do they feel happy when they see themselves as a woman or man in the mirror or unhappy? How would they feel If someone mistook them for the sex different to their assigned sex - insulted, complimented or neutral? If someone went into their home how easy would it be for someone to tell what gender they were by the style of decoration they have or the possessions they own?

And this is all surface level stuff, there's a lot that is much harder to pin down such as is their body language typically male or female, what pronouns do they (and others) use to describe themselves, how do they feel about their sexual characteristics - do they like their genitals, are they repulsed by them, or simply neutral? How do they like to fuck, do they like to be penetrated or penetrate. If they are a man do they stand or sit to use the toilet? What would an analysis of their speech and vocabulary suggest? How would they feel if they looked in the mirror and had a hairy chest, or tits, or a cock or no cock, would it bother them at all if this wasn't synonymous with their assigned sex? Who are they in their dreams, are they always, never or sometimes the same gender (or sex) as their assigned sex? Would they like to change anything about their bodies to make themselves look more or less like the socially accepted version of their assigned sex? Does the thought having having a sex change, or taking testosterone or estrogen feel comforting or horrifying, or neutral?

To be clear I'm suggesting any of these things make a man a man or woman a woman, or that few answering these questions will fall into a typical gendered role for all of them. But if the answers to these questions (which I'm not expecting anyone to answer by the way) in the large tends towards one gender or the other then isn't that some form of gender identity, one that perhaps isn't necessarily felt, but it easily objectively observable? And for those who say they don't have a gender identity but present with a gendered identity surely the question is why play along? And if you do play along then is it really fair to criticise trans people for doing the same thing, albeit in my opinion in a slightly more subversive way?

I think that's a good post. And I agree with the central thrust of it, that individual trans people don't necessarily reinforce gender any more than some non-trans people (and so don't deserve criticism on that basis).

But I think it goes to highlight an important issue: the difficulty of addressing collective, externally imposed problems with individualistic, internally adopted solutions. And the talk of what makes a man or a woman implies its a static 'fact' rather than a social choice. A man or a woman can be whatever we (as a society, not individuals) choose it to be. Perhaps we should think less in terms of 'a woman is [a biological fremale/anyone who thinks they're a woman]', and more in terms of 'we choose to subscribe to [x] purposive definition of womanhood because...', and then make the case - the pros and cons of each. A mutual recognition that, whilst 'female' is a material reality, the extent to which it is (or isn't) synonymous with 'woman' is a political choice. Might get post some of the stuckness that comes from contradictory assertions of fact.

For instance, I think it'd be really interesting if you and, say, Edie set out your respective definitions of 'woman', the assumptions implicit therein, the significance of any such definition, the pros and cons of choosing such a definition, and why you've chosen yours (as opposed to why it's 'THE TRUTH').

 

[bimble]

Interesting post that was smokedout and nothing i disagree with in it but - the sentence here is that really what you think? Because I thought you did feel that these things (gender identity) are what define man / woman?

[..] To be clear I'm suggesting any of these things make a man a man or woman a woman, or that few answering these questions will fall into a typical gendered role for all of them. But if the answers to these questions (which I'm not expecting anyone to answer by the way) in the large tends towards one gender or the other then isn't that some form of gender identity, one that perhaps isn't necessarily felt, but it easily objectively observable?

Also kind of highlights that if for any number of reasons a person isn't in a position to express themselves via consumer choice with regard to all this stuff

wear make up, or use perfume or aftershave, or gendered scented toiletries, what is their hair like? Do they use face creams, or other typically gendered products?

then what, their 'gender identity' is just what they're given or not a thing at all ?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Nah. Else i think you'd have to say that most women have gender dysphoria which surely can't be right. ?

It's very possible to experience unease about the performative aspects of gender but not to suffer from gender dysphoria, though. I think many, perhaps most, people are in this position to some extent.

We've touched only a little on the role of sexual attraction in this - because it's hard to discuss, I think - but that is the one area where I would recognise in me a strong desire to be seen by others to be of a particular gender. And that is an extremely powerful force, one that exists for men and women, hetero- and homosexual.

 

[Athos]

Interesting post that was smokedout and nothing i disagree with in it but - the sentence here is that really what you think? Because I thought you did feel that these things (gender identity) are what define man / woman?


Also kind of highlights that if for any number of reasons a person isn't in a position to express themselves via consumer choice with regard to all this stuff then what, their 'gender identity' is just what they're given or not a thing at all ?

Surely those things are gender presentation which may or may not be a consequence of 'gender identity' (rather than being 'gender identity' itself)?

It would be helpful if the proponents of a 'gender identity' model would fringe that term.

 

[iona]

Not got the time to get into this now, but just quickly before the thread moves on further -

I guess I think it might be better if that gender spectrum was just accepted more for what it was, as people who (for whatever reason), have more of a mix of gender typical attributes. Rather than try to change their physical characteristics with hormones or surgery, they were just a feminine man or a masculine woman or someone who was in between. And society changed to accept that, rather than the focus being on individuals to conform to gender roles. But maybe that’s pie in the sky.

Or maybe that is in fact where solidarity can be found between feminists and gender questioning people?

I’m not convinced I’m making sense tho, I’m more thinking out loud.

I think gender roles & the pressure to conform to them are bad for everyone and we'd be better off without them, but I don't see that as something that would lead to people no longer wanting or needing to transition.

Gender roles and physical characteristics aren't the same thing (although there is some crossover between those and gender presentation etc) and transition isn’t just about the former.

E2a agree re this as a basis for solidarity though

 

[Edie]

Not got the time to get into this now, but just quickly before the thread moves on further -

I think gender roles & the pressure to conform to them are bad for everyone and we'd be better off without them, but I don't see that as something that would lead to people no longer wanting or needing to transition.

Gender roles and physical characteristics aren't the same thing (although there is some crossover between those and gender presentation etc) and transition isn’t just about the former.

E2a agree re this as a basis for solidarity though

I see. So gender dysphoria refers much more to ‘wrong body’ [sex] than it does ‘wrong gender’?

Am I understanding you right? In that case, isn’t the old fashioned term transsexual better for those who transition.

No worries if this is all just too much of a ball ache to explain to me now.

 

[Athos]

... ball ache...

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I see. So gender dysphoria refers much more to ‘wrong body’ [sex] than it does ‘wrong gender’?

Am I understanding you right? In that case, isn’t the old fashioned term transsexual better for those who transition.

No worries if this is all just too much of a ball ache to explain to me now.

I think we're still hopelessly muddled in our use of the terms gender and sex, which is a large part of the problem and why people talk past one another.

 

[Athos]

I think we're still hopelessly muddled in our use of the terms gender and sex, which is a large part of the problem and why people talk past one another.

Yes. And the interchangeable use of 'gender' and 'gender identity'.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes. And the interchangeable use of 'gender' and 'gender identity'.

Very different things can end up being lumped together. There was a story doing the rounds in the papers a while back about a banker who presented as a man one day and a woman the next (stereotypically dressed in each case - he was very much a gender-conformist) and him talking about being trans and even speaking on behalf of trans people. Then you hear talk of gender-fluidity and a gender spectrum, and I'm not surprised when people react angrily to that when they have spent their whole lives attempting to strip the issue of its restrictive gender clothes to reveal the naked sex underneath.

 

[bimble]

Very different things can end up being lumped together. There was a story doing the rounds in the papers a while back about a banker who presented as a man one day and a woman the next (stereotypically dressed in each case - he was very much a gender-conformist) and him talking about being trans and even speaking on behalf of trans people. Then you hear talk of gender-fluidity and a gender spectrum, and I'm not surprised when people react angrily to that when they have spent their whole lives attempting to strip the issue of its restrictive gender clothes to reveal the naked sex underneath.

This person, who appears in 'female role model' lists and gets interviewed as spokesperson for gender equality and women in the workplace etc. Sorry i'm going to quote Yardley but exactly this:
Cross-dressing All The Way To The Top: Where All The Transvestites Have Gone. - Miranda Yardley

 

[littlebabyjesus]

This person, who appears in 'female role model' lists and gets interviewed as spokesperson for gender equality and women in the workplace etc. Sorry i'm going to quote Yardley but exactly this:
Cross-dressing All The Way To The Top: Where All The Transvestites Have Gone. - Miranda Yardley

Yes, that's the one. So I remembered it a little bit wrongly. He wasn't just speaking on behalf of trans people. He was speaking on behalf of women. Yardley is of course right on that one - it is intensely reactionary, not stripping the gender clothing from sex, but extracting the sex from underneath that clothing to leave just the hollowed-out gender.

 

[Edie]

Pips Bunce

Off you fuck you absolute cretin, you don’t get to speak for women and you don’t represent us in the boardroom or anywhere.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

He serves one purpose, perhaps. He provides something we can all agree on.

 

[bimble]

He serves one purpose, perhaps. He provides something we can all agree on.

Pips won the LGBT award for most inspirational leader last month..

 

[killer b]

The Natwest LGBT Awards, to give it it's full name. Other sponsors include PriceWaterhouseCoopers and erm MI5.

 

[elbows]

He serves one purpose, perhaps. He provides something we can all agree on.

I suspect it depends on whether people stick to a particular angle over this, or start expanding on it in some potentially problematic directions.

By this I mean that at times there can be a certain 'vanilla heterosexual, outsiders view of aspects of LGBT culture' which can be quite fair and sensible one minute, but still prone to stumble all over the lines and end up somewhere unpleasant very quickly, often without even realising.

I think it can be very difficult to navigate this properly. For example in a previous thread, one or a few people mentioned that they found drag queens offensive. No doubt there are a number of very sensible reasons for this that can be argued, and an exploration of the detail may also yield clues about how this also relates to their attitude towards trans people. But that doesnt mean its possible to do this without people saying very hurtful and unfair, ignorant things along the way. Tricky, very tricky.

 

[smokedout]

He serves one purpose, perhaps. He provides something we can all agree on.

Thank goodness we've found a suitable candidate where we can all express our rampant transphobia and not feel guilty about it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Thank goodness we've found a suitable candidate where we can all express our rampant transphobia and not feel guilty about it.

Yeah, that's what I meant.

Or maybe it is the fact that he presumes to talk for women or the damaging reactionary way that he reinforces stereotypes while purporting to break them.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I suspect it depends on whether people stick to a particular angle over this, or start expanding on it in some potentially problematic directions.

By this I mean that at times there can be a certain 'vanilla heterosexual, outsiders view of aspects of LGBT culture' which can be quite fair and sensible one minute, but still prone to stumble all over the lines and end up somewhere unpleasant very quickly, often without even realising.

I think it can be very difficult to navigate this properly. For example in a previous thread, one or a few people mentioned that they found drag queens offensive. No doubt there are a number of very sensible reasons for this that can be argued, and an exploration of the detail may also yield clues about how this also relates to their attitude towards trans people. But that doesnt mean its possible to do this without people saying very hurtful and unfair, ignorant things along the way. Tricky, very tricky.

Maybe. But there is a very clear line here. Compare and contrast Bunce with, say, Grayson Perry. Perry does not presume to speak for women or talk about having some special insight into women's issues because he dresses up in drag. He is very straightforward about it - he does it because he gets a sexual thrill from doing it, and that's that. Both are doing exactly the same thing, but Perry is on one side of the line and Bunce on the other.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Or maybe it is the fact that he presumes to talk for women or the damaging reactionary way that he reinforces stereotypes while purporting to break them.

It's that RIDICULOUS head tilting and hair flicking that does it for me. I don't know why I find it so rage inducing (edit: scrap that I do, it's just pure sexism). Does he do that on his "man days" or is it a woman special? I wonder

Maybe. But there is a very clear line here. Compare and contrast Bunce with, say, Grayson Perry.

I bloody love Grayson Perry.

 

[8ball]

Pips Bunce

Off you fuck you absolute cretin, you don’t get to speak for women and you don’t represent us in the boardroom or anywhere.

I'd never heard of this person up til now.

But ffs.

 

[Spymaster]

This person, who appears in 'female role model' lists and gets interviewed as spokesperson for gender equality and women in the workplace etc. Sorry i'm going to quote Yardley but exactly this:
Cross-dressing All The Way To The Top: Where All The Transvestites Have Gone. - Miranda Yardley

What toilet does he use at work on his lady days?

 

[elbows]

Maybe. But there is a very clear line here. Compare and contrast Bunce with, say, Grayson Perry. Perry does not presume to speak for women or talk about having some special insight into women's issues because he dresses up in drag. He is very straightforward about it - he does it because he gets a sexual thrill from doing it, and that's that. Both are doing exactly the same thing, but Perry is on one side of the line and Bunce on the other.

Yes but that isnt the line I was talking about. I do not seek to defend things Bunce says at all, I just fear some of the things that people tend to say when opportunities like this present themselves. Some do not stick to the central topic of why Bunces stance and behaviour is problematic to certain domains, and we will be 'treated' to all sorts of comments about Bunce that speak volumes about a range of other attitudes towards aspects of LGBT culture.

 

[smokedout]

Yeah, that's what I meant.

Or maybe it is the fact that he presumes to talk for women or the damaging reactionary way that he reinforces stereotypes while purporting to break them.

Does she reinforce gender stereotypes more or less than you? Or most of the women who work in the city and dress in a very similar way?

FWIW I think she has a bit of gall claiming to represent women, but perhaps that's a role she's beeen pushed into, the city is pretty conservative after all. I'd much rather she was advocating for people who are gender fluid.

But deliberately misgendering her, supporting Yardley's nonsense referencing the completely evidence free speculation of Lawrence that she has 'pair bonded' with her female self, assuming she's a fetishist, ignoring that the way she presents and identifies might be in part down to societal transphobia and misogyny (and the fact she has kids) and holding her to a higher standard of gender non conformity than anyone who isn't trans would be held to is precisely the shit you say you oppose. Until it gets a bit tricky and then it's all suddenly acceptable.

 

[bimble]

What toilet does he use at work on his lady days?

I don’t care about toilets but wonder if on woman days they make the tea and don’t talk over people in meetings.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Does she reinforce gender stereotypes more or less than you? Or most of the women who work in the city and dress in a very similar way?

FWIW I think she has a bit of gall claiming to represent women, but perhaps that's a role she's beeen pushed into, the city is pretty conservative after all. I'd much rather she was advocating for people who are gender fluid.

But deliberately misgendering her, supporting Yardley's nonsense referencing the completely evidence free speculation of Lawrence that she has 'pair bonded' with her female self, assuming she's a fetishist, ignoring that the way she presents and identifies might be in part down to societal transphobia and misogyny (and the fact she has kids) and holding her to a higher standard of gender non conformity than anyone who isn't trans would be held to is precisely the shit you say you oppose. Until it gets a bit tricky and then it's all suddenly acceptable.

A bit of a gall, or extremely revealing of massive ignorance and very damaging when that voice is listened to?

Anyhow, evidently I was wrong. We haven't found something we can all agree on.

I also don't think this is a clear-cut case of misgendering. I would call Divine 'he', for instance - it was clear that he was a transvestite man, not someone who wished to be regarded as a woman. Similarly here.