Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What's baffling is just how conservative and archaic that kind of definition is...like decades of feminist struggle/activity hasn't happened :confused:

I don't accept your implied premise that Miranda Yardley attempted to define any individual's womanhood with reference to their reproductive capacity; it was a (clumsily expressed) attempt to make the point that it's ridiculous to deny biology. (And I think the dismissal of spanglechick's question was out of order.)

However, much of feminism recognises that the basis of the unequal treatment of women as a group is their general characteristic of child-bearing (and men's desire to control the same), regardless of specific exceptions amongst individuals within the group.

Recognising the material reality of female biology isn't at odds with feminism per se.
 
However, much of feminism recognises that the basis of the unequal treatment of women as a group is their general characteristic of child-bearing (and men's desire to control the same), regardless of specific exceptions amongst individuals within the group.

Miranda Yardley 's remark was not directed at women in general though was it? It was a personal dig, and one which explicitly reinforced the notion of womanhood as a reproductive class.
 
There are many points, and I've read all of yours in this thread, picked on a few, watched other people getting their teeth into the others. In many cases I've nothing to add or hope for far more voices to listen to that arent mine or yours.

Also if we are doing recent forum thread history lessons, I will point out that one of the reasons I've been especially abrupt with you today is that you misgendered Roz. And I posted the following tweet by Roz in this thread many pages ago, sometime in November I think. I find the phenomenon very depressing and your justifications for your actions dont help me think any differently about that. Thats the real problem I have with your stance, it works for you but it cant even offer the modern basic standard of politeness towards trans people, let alone better lives for people. So its shit in my book.

If I were more concerned with trans rights than womens rights, then I'm not convinced I'd even be interested in this thread in recent months. But I am exceptionally interested in both. All sorts of food for thought and interesting points have been raised and although sometimes the complex realities can be overwhelmed with extreme positions and even acts of violence, I do feel I understand better some of the risks people are concerned with. I'm pretty disgusted with the rate of progress in terms of womens rights, equality, safety, freedom from sexual violence, coercion and abuse, and the same for every other sort of human that ends up a victim. It's very difficult when one groups rights are seen to clash with anothers, its important to look at the details of this stuff but also to consider the myraid ways humans are drawn towards seeing things in terms of differences rather than similarities, conflict and competition, dogma and baggage.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. It seems to me much of the objections are around pronouns, yet the real-world effect of there being a rights conflict between women and 'trans women' (males who are claiming rights as women) is not just overlooked but we are told there is no such rights conflict. This really is the fundamental problem of the moment: at what point does a 'trans woman' accrue rights 'as a woman', if at all? And how broad and deep do those rights apply?

If the observance of personal pronouns is an obligation, again how far does this go? Are we telling women that no matter what, anyone who self-defines as a woman is part of their group? Does it apply to this person?

This Trans Woman Kept Her Beard And Couldn't Be Happier

I'm sorry that you don't like my stance on pronouns. Personally, I find it rather strange that it has now become an act of political rebellion to refer to an adult human male as a man. If trans people find pronouns distressing and triggering, goodness knows how they'll cope with the brutality of surgery and regular dilation.
 
Miranda Yardley 's remark was not directed at women in general though was it? It was a personal dig, and one which explicitly reinforced the notion of womanhood as a reproductive class.

Which remark? The original one, or the response to spanglechick? My post you've quoted was addressing what appears to be Rutita1's interpretation of the former; I've already said the latter was out of order.
 
Recognising the material reality of female biology isn't at odds with feminism per se.

The recognition of the importance of female biology is something a lot of feminists are fighting for, because much of the vector of transgender culture seeks to erase this. Feminists view the way female biology is instrumentalised against women as the basis of women's oppression.
 
The recognition of the importance of female biology is something a lot of feminists are fighting for, because much of the vector of transgender culture seeks to erase this. Feminists view the way female biology is instrumentalised against women as the basis of women's oppression.

That's certainly one school of thought within feminism, though there are others.
 
The recognition of the importance of female biology is something a lot of feminists are fighting for, because much of the vector of transgender culture seeks to erase this. Feminists view the way female biology is instrumentalised against women as the basis of women's oppression.

...and how would you position your dismissal and accusation of derailing to spanglechick within feminist struggles against oppression?
 
...and how would you position your dismissal and accusation of trolling to spanglechick within feminist struggles against oppression?

It was a derail, a position was attributed to me which I did not claim.

It's interesting that the overall message I'm getting from people here is "listen to and support trans people... but not Miranda Yardley".
 
I think you'll find across the board that feminists fight for bodily autonomy and reproductive rights, including but not limited to access to birth control, abortion and protection from sexual violence.
i'm not interested in what you think i'll find.

i'm interested in what the feminists who aren't in your 'a lot' think.
 
It seems like because you don't lay claim to being a woman Miranda Yardley some people see you as not authentically trans.
I'm curious did you always see things this way or did you at some point over the last 3 decades change your view and decide to reject the claim to female pronouns etc?
 
It was a derail, a position was attributed to me which I did not claim.
No it wasn't, it was a challenge/interrogation of your clumsy defining of 'womanhood'. You didn't think it through it seems and then offensively dismissed spanglechick when you could have simply taken her point on board and acknowledged it.

It's interesting that the overall message I'm getting from people here is "listen to and support trans people... but not Miranda Yardley".

You are not the only trans person on this thread. Do you agree with all other trans people? Is it imperative that everyone agrees with you about everything? :confused:
 
No it wasn't, it was a challenge/interrogation of your clumsy defining of 'womanhood'. You didn't think it through it seems and then offensively dismissed spanglechick when you could have simply taken her point on board and acknowledged it.

I did not define womanhood.

You are not the only trans person on this thread. Do you agree with all other trans people? Is it imperative that everyone agrees with you about everything? :confused:

from:@terrorizermir disagreement is good - Twitter Search
 
It seems like because you don't lay claim to being a woman Miranda Yardley some people see you as not authentically trans.
I'm curious did you always see things this way or did you at some point over the last 3 decades change your view and decide to reject the claim to female pronouns etc?

I for one have no interest in telling anyone whether they're trans or not. To do so would seem incompatible with supporting people's rights to express their gender identities as they see fit.
 
yet the real-world effect of there being a rights conflict between women and 'trans women' (males who are claiming rights as women) is not just overlooked but we are told there is no such rights conflict. This really is the fundamental problem of the moment: at what point does a 'trans woman' accrue rights 'as a woman', if at all? And how broad and deep do those rights apply?

Well I am not in the camp that instantly dismisses the idea of any rights conflict. There are some complex issues that could be made worse by oversimplifying things, and I certainly dont want womens rights or safety to be endangered.

However I still find the focus on conflict and competing rights to be alarming, and often conducted in a manner that seems quite far away from the spirit of human rights, safety and dignity in general. And certainly not conducive to gaining or preserving rights for any particular group or the whole.

If the observance of personal pronouns is an obligation, again how far does this go? Are we telling women that no matter what, anyone who self-defines as a woman is part of their group? Does it apply to this person?

This Trans Woman Kept Her Beard And Couldn't Be Happier

I'm sorry that you don't like my stance on pronouns. Personally, I find it rather strange that it has now become an act of political rebellion to refer to an adult human male as a man. If trans people find pronouns distressing and triggering, goodness knows how they'll cope with the brutality of surgery and regular dilation.

I dont think its an obligation, but I do think it involves issues of basic decency and respect, and without it there is no foundation to actually discuss things sensibly. Especially with people like you that often give the impression that this aspect is a crude tool used to ram your politics down their throats, gain points with your favoured group, and never mind the feelings of those who get caught up in this. Or worse, contrast their likely feelings in the wake of this stuff with all the other shit they will have to go through such as surgery, and make simply awful suggestions about their ability to cope with these other things if they cant put up with you being a shit troll. This is beyond rude, its pathetic and despicable.

Identity and a sense of group belonging is complicated, I get that. I can see why this poses issues for people who have a strong sense of belonging to a particular group, and a strong sense of what qualifies someone to be considered a member of that group. I also get that it isnt trans or feminists fault that this stuff exists or that humans get caught up in these areas. That doesnt mean I am going to cheer those who exploit this territory, or sit quietly whilst they dig trenches and fantasise about their role on the frontier.
 
It seems like because you don't lay claim to being a woman Miranda Yardley some people see you as not authentically trans.
I'm curious did you always see things this way or did you at some point over the last 3 decades change your view and decide to reject the claim to female pronouns etc?

I've never worried about pronouns, the whole centring of debate around these is a fairly recent thing, and this claim to language has now moved from pronouns, to 'woman' and now even 'female': we are now expected to refer to transgender males as 'female'. See, for example, India Willoughby in the current incarnation of Celebrity Big Brother.

Some thoughts: Why I Disavow ‘Woman’ And Am No Longer ‘Gender Critical’
 
It seems like because you don't lay claim to being a woman Miranda Yardley some people see you as not authentically trans.
Not sure where you've got that from. Mostly, I see MY posting up a variety of claims, backed by various sources, and other posters taking issue with those claims, and on occasion with the dodgy nature of the sources. My engagement with MY has been purely on this level, as has that of many others.
 
Not sure where you've got that from. Mostly, I see MY posting up a variety of claims, backed by various sources, and other posters taking issue with those claims, and on occasion with the dodgy nature of the sources. My engagement with MY has been purely on this level, as has that of many others.

Has anyone actually said that they don't take MY seriously because of their chosen pronouns/not laying claim to womanhood? Have I missed this? If not that accusation is all levels of shit-stirring bullshit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom