Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sure, but it's not just this issue. I just don't think I have anything in common with most people who call themselves socialists any more.
Then the state and all it's agent saboteurs, who come in many different disguises has defeated you. Surely you can see through the systems shit.
 
Jesus. Do you actually know any people who are sixty? I bloody dare you to call them elderly to their face.
Using diversionary tactics to justify an assault on a 60 year old female? It does not wash with anybody. You will have to try much harder and come up with another random excuse or just concede the fact the assault was not acceptable ...end of!
 
Then the state and all it's agent saboteurs, who come in many different disguises has defeated you. Surely you can see through the systems shit.

Bollocks.

This isn't the State or agent provocateurs.

We (and I'm hesitant to use that word now) have done this to ourselves.

I'm with Geri on this one, though maybe for differing reasons.
 
We've learned that it's all down to genes. Or Hormones. Or Marxist dialectical deconstructionist reconstructionist dialectical immaterial venerial dialecticism. Or society being way too hung up on labels man.

But what we've learned above all is that everyone's an expert apart from actual trans people, who are all just talking nonsense.
Funny, because from this side it seems that everyone's allowed to discuss what makes a woman except, you know, actual women.
 
There are a few points I would like to address. Ive been following this thread since yesterday.
Firstly, whilst reading this thread I kept thinking of Fight Club because I think that some women see trans women like Marla Singer, ie someone who lies about who they are and plays up their suffering in order to attend support groups. The whole argument about wimmins only spaces- spaces cis women can discuss problems only cis women experience (*cough and trans men and non binary folk) is a daft one imo because where are all the trans women insisting they attend meetings about miscarriage or endometriosis? etc. Nobody is stopping or picketting or intruding on such meetings so it's a disingenuous argument. It's also a smokescreen really because as this thread (and any other thread on the internet that mentions trans people shows) some cis women (and actually it's many) do not accept trans women as 'real women' and they see them as men, fake and predators invading wimmins spaces. Let's be clear and honest about that. Let's also be clear on what a slur that is to trans women. To be made out to be liars, to constantly have their identity scrutinised, judged and dismissed is incredibly stigmatising even if it doesn't go as far as making out their transitions sole purpose was to trick straight men and gain access to women in order to control or assault them. This entire rhetoric built on fear and ignorance is, whether you like it or not, the rhetoric of transphobia. It can and does lead to street harassment, hate crimes, the murder of trans women and contributes to high suicide rates. Clearly transphobia is not solely a women's issue, but I do believe that feminists need to take responsibility for the part they play in its proliferation. How on earth is shouting at trans women and conflating them with men's rights activists helping anyone? It's absurd and extremely harmful.

My second point concerns cis people attempting to explain away trans identities by likening trans boys to confused female 'Tom boys' or self loathing lesbians. I know we all try to make sense of the world through our narrow lenses of experience but guess what, if you aren't trans then you can't fully relate. I can't fully relate as a cis woman either which is why I listen to those whose experience trumps my own. In exactly the same way that as white people we can't fully appreciate the effect if institutionalised racism so should be paying attention to the lived experience of POC.
Your stories of defying gender norms yet reaching a level of acceptance of your body or gender identity, are they supposed to rouse a cheer for how you've overcome adversity and not fallen down the wrong path to confused transdom? If only everyone could be so enlightened and self accepting then we could do away with all this confusing trans stuff and avoid unnecessary surgeries right? How about asking trans and non binary people about that? :rolleyes:
How do we create an atmosphere where these kinds of conversations can actually happen and education can occur? Personally I think it's when we stop letting fear make us shout our confusion & assumptions in trans people's faces. We don't listen attentively when we are merely waiting for our turn to speak. And we can't learn from or support those that we 'other' and exclude from our spaces.
 
Bollocks.

This isn't the State or agent provocateurs.

We (and I'm hesitant to use that word now) have done this to ourselves.

I'm with Geri on this one, though maybe for differing reasons.
I am not quite sure what you think we have done to ourselves but whatever it is you can share it if you want.
 
The root confusion is down to the pernicious aspects of post-modernism. The intellectual confusion behind the toxic-id politics we've seen on this thread is idealism. As FabricLiveBaby! put it:



SWPers defending the "no platform for rad fems" campaigners have lost site of their scientific materialism. That's beyond dispute. From the point of view of sexual politics, they're likely unreconstructed males as well, which I grant is a significant issue in its own right.

Toxic-ID politics is the result.
Oh dear. Except flb's argument is wrong, an overly simplistic misunderstanding of materialism/idealism.

Secondly no one has defended 'no platforming' rad fems, that's just a lie repeated by a couple of idiots/bigots. If you are not going to be honest, what would be the point of a 'wider' debate?
 
Last edited:
Funny, because from this side it seems that everyone's allowed to discuss what makes a woman except, you know, actual women.

Sounds like you've already made your mind up about who is what and who isn't, so why would you want to discuss it?
 
The way I've started to see this debate is to move it on a bit to - if we are to have a legal position that gender is a choice based on self identification, what are the consequences?

I don't know the answers. But one of the questions I would ask is do people need protection from the opposite sex. For example, I think in most sports at the top level they do. Biological males at that level will always have a strength advantage over biological females. So some demarcation or protection is necesarry.
I think that extends to other areas too. The physical strength difference between the majority of biological males and females is too significant to ignore. The risk of abuse is too great for it not be addressed I think.

How do we deal with that issue?
 
Using diversionary tactics to justify an assault on a 60 year old female? It does not wash with anybody. You will have to try much harder and come up with another random excuse or just concede the fact the assault was not acceptable ...end of!

Fuck off! What the original post did was give away the shitty pernicious attitudes about women and age.

The response was about that - your misrepresentation of spanglechick's response speaks volumes about you, and how you engage in debate.
 
Last edited:
There are a few points I would like to address. Ive been following this thread since yesterday.
Firstly, whilst reading this thread I kept thinking of Fight Club because I think that some women see trans women like Marla Singer, ie someone who lies about who they are and plays up their suffering in order to attend support groups. The whole argument about wimmins only spaces- spaces cis women can discuss problems only cis women experience (*cough and trans men and non binary folk) is a daft one imo because where are all the trans women insisting they attend meetings about miscarriage or endometriosis? etc. Nobody is stopping or picketting or intruding on such meetings so it's a disingenuous argument. It's also a smokescreen really because as this thread (and any other thread on the internet that mentions trans people shows) some cis women (and actually it's many) do not accept trans women as 'real women' and they see them as men, fake and predators invading wimmins spaces. Let's be clear and honest about that. Let's also be clear on what a slur that is to trans women. To be made out to be liars, to constantly have their identity scrutinised, judged and dismissed is incredibly stigmatising even if it doesn't go as far as making out their transitions sole purpose was to trick straight men and gain access to women in order to control or assault them. This entire rhetoric built on fear and ignorance is, whether you like it or not, the rhetoric of transphobia. It can and does lead to street harassment, hate crimes, the murder of trans women and contributes to high suicide rates. Clearly transphobia is not solely a women's issue, but I do believe that feminists need to take responsibility for the part they play in its proliferation. How on earth is shouting at trans women and conflating them with men's rights activists helping anyone? It's absurd and extremely harmful.

My second point concerns cis people attempting to explain away trans identities by likening trans boys to confused female 'Tom boys' or self loathing lesbians. I know we all try to make sense of the world through our narrow lenses of experience but guess what, if you aren't trans then you can't fully relate. I can't fully relate as a cis woman either which is why I listen to those whose experience trumps my own. In exactly the same way that as white people we can't fully appreciate the effect if institutionalised racism so should be paying attention to the lived experience of POC.
Your stories of defying gender norms yet reaching a level of acceptance of your body or gender identity, are they supposed to rouse a cheer for how you've overcome adversity and not fallen down the wrong path to confused transdom? If only everyone could be so enlightened and self accepting then we could do away with all this confusing trans stuff and avoid unnecessary surgeries right? How about asking trans and non binary people about that? :rolleyes:
How do we create an atmosphere where these kinds of conversations can actually happen and education can occur? Personally I think it's when we stop letting fear make us shout our confusion & assumptions in trans people's faces. We don't listen attentively when we are merely waiting for our turn to speak. And we can't learn from or support those that we 'other' and exclude from our spaces.
Well said.
 
Using diversionary tactics to justify an assault on a 60 year old female? It does not wash with anybody. You will have to try much harder and come up with another random excuse or just concede the fact the assault was not acceptable ...end of!
I cba to do so, but if I cared to I could post up many condemnations of this attack I have made myself on this thread. I'll do it again, just for you: this assault was not acceptable.

This is because I believe punching people in the head is a bad thing. I don't need to make out that the person assaulted was some frail little old dear in order to be at odds with it.

People who have exaggerated her frailty (as they have by calling her "elderly") are clearly seeking to use emotive language to exaggerate the harm done. Isn't it enough to say "a middle aged activist was punched in the head"...? Isn't that bad enough?
 
I've been trying to find any links to articles about trans-men (FtM transitioners) trying to gatecrash all-male meetings / gatherings, or loudly demanding access, and being denied or ejected. So far nothing.

Slightly off topic but not far off.
 
People who have exaggerated her frailty (as they have by calling her "elderly") are clearly seeking to use emotive language to exaggerate the harm done. Isn't it enough to say "a middle aged activist was punched in the head"...? Isn't that bad enough?

I agree 60 isn't elderly - but it isn't middle aged either. I referred to her as older.
 
I've been trying to find any links to articles about trans-men (FtM transitioners) trying to gatecrash all-male meetings / gatherings, or loudly demanding access, and being denied or ejected. So far nothing.

Slightly off topic but not far off.
Same as all those stories about trans women reverting to maleness in women's toilets, it just doesn't seem to happen. Funny that.
 
The way I've started to see this debate is to move it on a bit to - if we are to have a legal position that gender is a choice based on self identification, what are the consequences?

I don't know the answers. But one of the questions I would ask is do people need protection from the opposite sex. For example, I think in most sports at the top level they do. Biological males at that level will always have a strength advantage over biological females. So some demarcation or protection is necesarry.
I think that extends to other areas too. The physical strength difference between the majority of biological males and females is too significant to ignore. The risk of abuse is too great for it not be addressed I think.

How do we deal with that issue?
Weaker people need need protection from stronger people. ORRRRR... how about stronger people take responsibility for their own behaviour? I don't go round beating on children because I don't show physical violence to anyone - not because they are physically segregated from me.

I'm not really sure what you're proposing. Are you talking about prisons?
 
What i find interesting about this is the way that the radical feminists (and i am distinguishing between them and the socialist/marxist feminists) - the ones who helped bring ID politics into society, or the left at least - on the basis of either biological/sex or gender essentialism (and, it must be pointed out that it was usually in response to failings of state/society and the Official Labour Movement to recognise their existence never mind the problems they face) have now been out identity-politicked by a new set of people who have taken their underlying assumptions and ran with them.

They are challenging them on a formally anti-essentialist basis that's actually a series of fragmented essentialisms - in the same way that official top down state multi-culturalism is actually really multiple mono-cultures. And both of course posture towards a greater unity in their intersectional/multi-cultural titlings. The dialectic is truly at work here.

Makes me wonder what's in the post for the challengers a few years down the road. It's certainly not going to be class politics if this path is continued down. At least not from within - i think class politics is only going to do that from without.
 
Last edited:
Weaker people need need protection from stronger people. ORRRRR... how about stronger people take responsibility for their own behaviour? I don't go round beating on children because I don't show physical violence to anyone - not because they are physically segregated from me.

I'm not really sure what you're proposing. Are you talking about prisons?

I guess I'm saying we currently have areas where the sexes are separated. Sport as I mentioned. Toilets and showers etc. Are these separations necesarry or not? Is there a reason for the separation beyond it being simply an arbitrary one?

I'm not proposing things, I'm trying to learn.
 
Bollocks.

This isn't the State or agent provocateurs.

We (and I'm hesitant to use that word now) have done this to ourselves.

I'm with Geri on this one, though maybe for differing reasons.
Fairly sure the state/establishment adoption of ID politics has a fairly significant role in how it has become so dominant tbf.
 
Fairly sure the state/establishment adoption of ID politics has a fairly significant role in how it has become so dominant tbf.

Sure. They're encouraging all this. Uncritical adoption of social media as vehicle of choice also accelerates matters.
 
What i find interesting about this is the way that the radical feminists (and i am distinguishing between them and the socialist/marxist feminists) - the ones who helped bring ID politics into society, or the left at least - on the basis of either biological/sex or gender essentialism (and, it must be pointed out that it was usually in response to failings of state/society and the Official Labour Movement to recognise their existence never mind the problems they face) have now been out identity-politicked by a new set of people who have taken their underlying assumptions and ran with them. They are challenging them on a formally anti-essentialist basis that's actually a series of fragmented essentialisms - in the same way that official top down state multi-culturalism is actually really multiple mono-cultures. And both of course posture towards a greater unity in their intersectional/multi-cultural titlings. The dialectic is truly at work here. Makes me wonder what's in the post for the challengers a few years down the road. It's certainly not going to be class politics if this path is continued down. At least not from within - i think class politics is only going to do that from without.
Ignore me, I misread the last few lines.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom