Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
This:

...it's that too often 'being trans' (whatever that means) has been a way of re-stating and reifying deeply reactionary gender roles on the basis of some mysterious essence of 'woman'. Transitioning thus becomes not a way of challenging toxic patriarchal gender roles but merely an individualistic accommodation to those roles, part of which accommodation is ritual worship at the shrines of those gender roles one of which is the hyper-feminised woman.
 
My view is not that 'being trans is an individualistic attempt to escape socially created notions of gender' - it's that too often 'being trans' (whatever that means) has been a way of re-stating and reifying deeply reactionary gender roles on the basis of some mysterious essence of 'woman'. Transitioning thus becomes not a way of challenging toxic patriarchal gender roles but merely an individualistic accommodation to those roles, part of which accommodation is ritual worship at the shrines of those gender roles one of which is the hyper-feminised woman.
Should we be policing cis women to make sure that they (we) aren't presenting ourselves as hyper-feminised women?
 
Should we be policing cis women to make sure that they (we) aren't presenting ourselves as hyper-feminised women?

No ones talked about policing roles apart from you.

So, no.

But we should certainly critique those roles that we are all force fed by modern patriarchal capitalism, that seems to me obvious.

Large numbers of both men and women perform their gender roles with real intensity almost inevitably at a real cost to their humanity. The desire to preserve and maintain those roles makes people manipulable and neurotic.

Radical feminists did critique women who obsessively acted out hyper-female roles and of course they were roundly mocked for doing that (hairy armpits! euuww!). Do you think they were wrong?
 
That’s not what I said. Can you please answer the question? Thank you.
My response was in answer to your question. Of course it's not what you said, repeating what you said would be stupid. But the tenor of your post suggested to me that you do not believe them when trans people say about being in the wrong body.
 
‘Frauds and charlatans’ implies deliberate dishonesty. Which isn’t what I’m getting from miranda Yardley’s post, or from the critique of ‘feeling like a woman/man’ more generally.

It’s a philosophical question that really gets to the heart of the claim being made. Compare to Wittgenstein’s ‘beetle in the box’ or Nagel’s ‘how does it feel to be a bat’.
 
My response was in answer to your question. Of course it's not what you said, repeating what you said would be stupid. But the tenor of your post suggested to me that you do not believe them when trans people say about being in the wrong body.

I don’t think many do, in reality. It appears to have been a metaphor that’s evolved into a popular understanding of what it means to be trans. And the question remains, how can we possibly know we are the wrong sex? There’s no empirical evidence to suggest this either, the whole idea is so metaphysical.
 
It’s possible, you know, to support transgender people without affirming any delusion that males can be female. Interestingly, many trans people who otherwise vehemently disagree with me recognise that ‘trans women’ are male, where they and I differ is the concept of a ‘male woman’. Yes, in the case of CAIS women socialised as girls from birth. No, not anyone who transitions at a later point.

And no, I don’t think we should be transitioning children to meet a socialisation criteria: there’s nothing wrong with trying to support people in becoming comfortable in their own bodies.

I think with children, it is cruel and abusive to support the idea their personalities don’t match their bodies. Apart from anything else, it’s based on (often transient)cultural stereotypes:

Common Threads And Narratives of Transgender Children And What This Means For Our Lesbian And Gay Populations

James Cantor’s excellent piece on ‘trans kids’ and desistance:

Sexology Today!: Statistics faulty on how many trans- kids grow up to stay trans-?

Here’s a thorough critique of Serano’s piece. It’s a very well-reasoned piece of writing.

Is Julia Serano right that transwomen are female? – Marcus – Medium
Not had time to read the last piece yet, but the other two seem to miss a pretty major point, imo. Attending a Gender Identity Clinic does not mean the person is transgender, it means they are having issues with how their assigned gender reflects their actual lives. Attending a clinic doesn't make you trans any more than taking a pregnancy test makes you pregnant. Also, it should be noted that attending a clinic doesn't usually mean there is any medical intervention. As your own piece notes (after the quotes from the Daily bloody Mail) 'The Tavistock Clinic follows British guidelines, which suggest not introducing hormone blockers until the latter stages of puberty.' - nothing permanent is done to the child, except under extreme circumstances. So the myth of thousand of children undergoing treatments that they later regret is just that, a myth.

Many children at that age undergo all kinds of crises and confusions about their gender and their sexuality at that age, we all know that. Does it actually do any good to just go 'no, you are wrong, you were born a girl so you are one'? It didn't really have much (positive) effect when parents (and teachers etc) went 'no, you're wrong, you're not gay, you're just confused.' Surely as long as there is no physical harm done - as your quote referred to above agrees happens - then it is better to support the child in coming to terms with themselves themselves. The idea that there is a 'trans trend' forcing children to change their gender is as nonsensical as it was when the tories tried to ban "promoting homosexuality." It's about letting children be as autonomous as possible, and I think that is a good thing. And if they change their mind later, they change their mind later - what parent would ever think it was okay for their child to present as the opposite gender, but not to let them change their mind again? How many parents have ever said 'you slept with someone of the same gender once, so you can only sleep with people of the same gender from now on'?
 
Last edited:
No ones talked about policing roles apart from you.

So, no.

But we should certainly critique those roles that we are all force fed by modern patriarchal capitalism, that seems to me obvious.

Large numbers of both men and women perform their gender roles with real intensity almost inevitably at a real cost to their humanity. The desire to preserve and maintain those roles makes people manipulable and neurotic.

Radical feminists did critique women who obsessively acted out hyper-female roles and of course they were roundly mocked for doing that (hairy armpits! euuww!). Do you think they were wrong?
You didn't mention policing but you described it.

We don't insist that cis women challenge toxic gender roles with every moment of their very being; policing the way women dress isn't the way to go, would you not agree? Critiquing hyper-feminine roles is not synonymous with calling out individuals who adopt those roles.
 
It’s a philosophical question that really gets to the heart of the claim being made. Compare to Wittgenstein’s ‘beetle in the box’ or Nagel’s ‘how does it feel to be a bat’.
Yeh. And it comes down to, do you believe people when they say this? I'm happy enough in my body so I have no idea what, why or how people who find themselves in a body which doesn't match what they feel feel what they say they feel. I don't tho dismiss it because I don't myself understand it.
 
Yet what they will have in common it the material effect of having a female reproductive system, and the consequences of this. And this is something they will share with many other women across class and culture throughout the planet. They will share that experience, which is forever beyond the reach of ‘trans women’.
I am not sure what you mean by those experiences, you've already agreed that some females' reproductive system doesn't 'work' (they can't reproduce, have periods) so what is this universal experience? Is it across time too, btw, ie in pre-capitalist or even pre-paleolithic societies?


Jenner’s life and socialisation is different to every woman’s, because Jenner is male.
So it was similar to those small number of females who were raised and socialised as males, no?
 
You didn't mention policing but you described it.

We don't insist that cis women challenge toxic gender roles with every moment of their very being; policing the way women dress isn't the way to go, would you not agree? Critiquing hyper-feminine roles is not synonymous with calling out individuals who adopt those roles.

No you're absolutely wrong, I absolutely did not 'describe' it. On the contrary I have repeatedly stated that the point here is not to make any one individual or group 'responsible' or more responsible for taking on the gender bullshit in which we are mired.

I have literally never mentioned policing the way women dress, or even 'the way that women dress' fullstop. Where are you getting this stuff from?
 
Not had time to read the last piece yet, but the other two seem to miss a pretty major point, imo. Attending a Gender Identity Clinic does not mean the person is transgender, it means they are having issues with how their assigned gender reflects their actual lives. Attending a clinic doesn't make you trans any more than taking a pregnancy test makes you pregnant. Also, it should be noted that attending a clinic doesn't usually mean there is any medical intervention. As your own piece notes (after the quotes from the Daily bloody Mail) 'The Tavistock Clinic follows British guidelines, which suggest not introducing hormone blockers until the latter stages of puberty.' - nothing permanent is done to the child, except under extreme circumstances. So the myth of thousand of children undergoing treatments that they later regret is just that, a myth.

I think you missed the point of Cantor’s piece, in that left tomtheir own devices desistance is a common outcome. Medicalising transition early appears premature for that reason.

Furthermore affirmation of gender stereotypes seems weird given they’re cultural.

Many children at that age undergo all kinds of crises and confusions about their gender and their sexuality at that age, we all know that. Does it actually do any good to just go 'no, you are wrong, you were born a girl so you are one'? It didn't really have much (positive) effect when parents (and teachers etc) went 'no, you're wrong, you're not gay, you're just confused.' Surely as long as there is no physical harm done - as your quote referred to above agrees happens - then it is better to support the child in coming to terms with themselves themselves. The idea that there is a 'trans trend' forcing children to change their gender is as nonsensical as when the tories tried to ban the "promoting homosexuality." It's about letting children be as autonomous as possible, and I think that is a good thing. And if they change their mind later, they change their mind later - what parent would ever think it was okay for their child to present as the opposite gender, but not to let them change their mind again? How many parents have ever said 'you slept with someone of the same gender once, so you can only sleep with people of the same gender from now on'?

Again I think you miss the point, and this is not comparable to homosexuality. I notice also you talk about sleeping with ‘people of the same gender’. Surely you mean ‘sex’? Or does homosexuality mean nothing to you?

My point is, as ever, let kids be kids.
 
To paraphrase Joe Jackson, it’s ‘different for boys’. I think there’s a connection between the performed hyperfeminity in pornography and the motivations behind the transition of some transgender males.

Pornography And Autogynephilia In The Narratives Of Adult Transgender Males
That's a narrative that seems to make sense to those four people. I have no idea how many more (perhaps lots perhaps few). What does that tell us about the people who don't feel like that or describe their situation like that?
 
I am not sure what you mean by those experiences, you've already agreed that some females' reproductive system doesn't 'work' (they can't reproduce, have periods) so what is this universal experience? Is it across time too, btw, ie in pre-capitalist or even pre-paleolithic societies?

So it was similar to those small number of females who were raised and socialised as males, no?

You seem to be acting obtuse on purpose. The vast majority of women will share that experience which Jenner never would.
 
That's a narrative that seems to make sense to those four people. I have no idea how many more (perhaps lots perhaps few). What does that tell us about the people who don't feel like that or describe their situation like that?

This isn’t a general theory, and I know for a fact that at least three of those individuals disagree with my interpretation (even though I use their own words).

What does seem to be the case is that transgender individuals fall into two groups: homosexual and non-homosexual. And the latter have an autogynephilic history. And that’s okay as long as we are honest about it. Indeed, honestly means these trans males could have happier and more fulfilling lives, gained through self knowledge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom