Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

[Sea Star]

AuntiStella Why should you or anyone else 'entirely fit into female' ? I have no idea what that even means to be honest unless it means being happy to conform to every attribute and behaviour that our patriarchal society has pushed onto the category of other things that is defined as "feminine".
I (cis woman) have massive issues with 'female roles' in terms of what I have been taught to understand them to be and am kind of glad to hear it if you do too.

I absolutely do have issues with "female roles". I feel them being imposed on me from outside same as any woman. I'm just learning how I fit into all this though. At first I was just so pleased to have transitioned that I didn't think too much about that side of things. But 4 years in reality starts to bite.
I think I don't know entirely what I mean. The feelings I have about myself now are mostly free of dysphoria and so, unchartered territory.
The cis women in my life are pretty much all very strong, very outspoken, independent, way more confident than I am and I am learning so much, being inspired so much, by them. I think I'm just trying to say, now that I've escaped being a man, and those constraints on me, I'm just starting to think about myself in terms that a cis person would, though, it's all new and confusing at the moment, but I have the best people around me to guide me through it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

The idea that females "feel" a certain way and have a gender identity or "type of female brain" is a load of misogynist fucking shite IMO and you all know it.

It's so sad seeing it repeated as a thing on this forum.

It's the very notion that kept women from having the vote, and the increasing pink/blue genderisation of kids is going to be a huge fucking problem.

View attachment 115689

It's part of the same old conservatism and misogyny that has held women back for so long, no wonder it's the Tories heading this, and no wonder female children are increasingly becoming disphoric (as I was). No one likes being shoved into boxes.

The question "what is gender" (outside of ouf sex - which is observable, and which despite denial DOES exist- and is the cause of sexism) is a fucking valid one to ask seeing affects mainly women, and any proposed legislation will affect mainly women - who are already marginalised - with regard to current sex based protections.

No one seems to be able to define what "feeling like a woman" or having a "female gender identity" actually is without being circular or sexist (and I'm still waiting for an answer after two years of asking... It's like radio silence). So that these debates are being shut down by the left is surprising. Or maybe it isn't, maybe they are being shut down because they have no actual answers and are afraid of an "emperors new clothes moment". Who knows. No one, because no one is allowed to ask without threats of violence, accusations of bigotry or now, it seems ACTUAL violence.

Certainly no one is willing to answer.

Why should we be legislating for something no one is willing to discuss?

And do we really believe that the Conservative government under Maria Millier as equalities minister has anyone's best interests at heart? I mean ffs she constantly votes for anti - women and anti gay legislation. Does that not ring ANY alarm bells?

Meanwhile a 60 year old female is beaten by an apparent male but it's a-ok cos that bitch deserved it, and that male identifies as a woman so it isn't male violence, material analysis of the roots of opression (like wot Marx does) are no longer acceptable in left wing politics, and women should just believe they have a gender identity without asking what that even means.

Fucking ridiculous.

Regarding material analysis of the roots of oppression, few politicians (professional or otherwise) will go there, because that would involve analysis of how class intersects with identity and gender, and how they interact to cause specific effects. Analysis of male violence has come some way, but it's still partially excused in society and (worse) within the criminal justice system. Sadly, analysis of male violence has seldom included a class analysis, apart from a few isolated research projects down the years, so it's impossible to get at those roots.

 

[Sea Star]

And the threat they comprise, by and large, is verbal violence, NOT killing.

It's more than that. Many of them work with men, they feed the discourse that men use to attack us, they have media influence that we dont, that they use to try to roll back our rights, with some success. they doxx trans people and allies - which means some, not yet out, could end up on the street or being driven to suicide. They campaign to have us excluded from lgbt spaces, from homeless shelters,, from rape crisis shelters - they campaign to put vulnerable trans women in harm's way. I posted above a history of actual violence carried out by TERFs against trans women and cis women who support us. So no. The threat is real.

 

[Sea Star]

Regarding material analysis of the roots of oppression, few politicians (professional or otherwise) will go there, because that would involve analysis of how class intersects with identity and gender, and how they interact to cause specific effects. Analysis of male violence has come some way, but it's still partially excused in society and (worse) within the criminal justice system. Sadly, analysis of male violence has seldom included a class analysis, apart from a few isolated research projects down the years, so it's impossible to get at those roots.

This has nothing to do with male violence

 

[lazythursday]

I used to have a very similar attitude to some on this thread - a bit of a discomfort about trans people, based on a belief that transitioning is helping to encourage the notion of binary fixed genders, with a view along the lines of 'why oh why can't they just be a really really feminine man or a really really masculine woman and avoid all this surgery nonsense' - but then over a period of years I watched someone go through transition and grow into the person they wanted to be and become much stronger and happy and confident, and I realised I perhaps should stop thinking I know what's best for people. And they've also been on the receiving end of a lot of prejudice - from men and women, some of it using the kind of TERF arguments and language. I just can't see how this group of people (transwomen, no-one ever seems bothered by transmen) can retain much in the way of male privilege given their everyday experiences.

The other thing I just can't get my head around about the TERF argument is that it seems completely contradictory. On the one hand, we should break down the artificial construct of gender... on the other we should build a wall around what it is to be a woman and police that line aggressively. I just don't get that, and so many of the arguments against acceptance from feminists, left and right seem to mirror those made against gay people a generation ago. Especially this whole 'it's all a middle class distraction from real politics' shit. Finally... I'm not a big fan of many of the practices and ways of thinking that have stemmed from identity politics - but clearly it's possible to be guarded against some of the excesses of that (mostly online?) culture and still be firmly in favour of trans rights. Some contributors to this thread seem to think being a socialist and being in favour of trans rights are mutually exclusive.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I used to have a very similar attitude to some on this thread - a bit of a discomfort about trans people, based on a belief that transitioning is helping to encourage the notion of binary fixed genders, with a view along the lines of 'why oh why can't they just be a really really feminine man or a really really masculine woman and avoid all this surgery nonsense' - but then over a period of years I watched someone go through transition and grow into the person they wanted to be and become much stronger and happy and confident, and I realised I perhaps should stop thinking I know what's best for people. And they've also been on the receiving end of a lot of prejudice - from men and women, some of it using the kind of TERF arguments and language. I just can't see how this group of people (transwomen, no-one ever seems bothered by transmen) can retain much in the way of male privilege given their everyday experiences.

The other thing I just can't get my head around about the TERF argument is that it seems completely contradictory. On the one hand, we should break down the artificial construct of gender... on the other we should build a wall around what it is to be a woman and police that line aggressively. I just don't get that, and so many of the arguments against acceptance from feminists, left and right seem to mirror those made against gay people a generation ago. Especially this whole 'it's all a middle class distraction from real politics' shit. Finally... I'm not a big fan of many of the practices and ways of thinking that have stemmed from identity politics - but clearly it's possible to be guarded against some of the excesses of that (mostly online?) culture and still be firmly in favour of trans rights. Some contributors to this thread seem to think being a socialist and being in favour of trans rights are mutually exclusive.

Only to the extent that identities transcend class. It's possible to be a Marxist feminist, for example.

 

[ViolentPanda]

And yet I've been called a TERF before for having a materialist marxist philosophical standpoint. Funny that. It's almost like it's a thought terminating cliché. A bit like "SJW".

Unfortunately there will always be idiots and lazy thinkers who are not intellectually-equipped to debate, so use such clichés to shut down debate. It's as pathetic in public life as it is in a playground. These are labels you can expand to include anyone you don't agree with.

 

[Sea Star]

In this area (if not many others tbh) I have an optimistic feeling that things will get better a couple of generations down the line, when all this stuff that right now is so new that the language is still being formed when it gets metabolised and becomes just part of life, maybe in a couple of decades people will look back at this historical period with a sort of pity and some affection.

I saw the future in Ian M Banks books

Yeah, at some point in the future this is all going to seem rather strange to people, like looking back to some archaic religious dispute in 1463.

But it might take longer than a couple of decades. I'm braced for the long haul tbh. It's better than it was but then we hit a wall and it goes a bit backwards, and so forth.

I'm really interested in what happened in Germany just before Hitler came to power, where transgender was starting to reach acceptance wth a thoroughly scientific approach. We've probably surpassed that now, and with different, less nuts and bolts approaches, but back then the Nazis used trans to prove how debauched German society was. I see plenty of people trying to do the same now, scarily.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Only to the extent that identities transcend class. It's possible to be a Marxist feminist, for example.

It's possible to be a trans anything, no? You can be a trans capitalist or a trans communist or a trans person with no coherent political views at all. That's the lesson I take, and it's why I think class analysis of gender roles such as we've had on this thread is both valid and interesting, and perhaps missing the point when brought up in relation to this particular issue. Sexual orientation isn't a class issue, fundamentally, it's an issue of human diversity, and I think the same will ultimately come to be thought regarding transgender.

 

[Mungy]

I'm fortunate that I live in a trans-friendly bubble. The shit that goes on outside of it makes me angry. People are just so bloody intolerant of people who are different from them. It's women who have hurt me the most in real life and online since transition. I'm baffled by this because, well in my naivety, I thought women were the epitome of solidarity - just like I thought the left was somehow unified by ideology. I realise that putting people, principles, ideologies on a pedestal means they will fail to live up to the impossibility of my expectations. It doesn't help though.

I know this ain't my support group, just coming out quietly to urban as trans on a trans related thread that has some hostility on it, showing once again my poor choices, naivety and complete disregard for my safety

 

[Sea Star]

I'm fortunate that I live in a trans-friendly bubble. The shit that goes on outside of it makes me angry. People are just so bloody intolerant of people who are different from them. It's women who have hurt me the most in real life and online since transition. I'm baffled by this because, well in my naivety, I thought women were the epitome of solidarity - just like I thought the left was somehow unified by ideology. I realise that putting people, principles, ideologies on a pedestal means they will fail to live up to the impossibility of my expectations. It doesn't help though.

I know this ain't my support group, just coming out quietly to urban as trans on a trans related thread that has some hostility on it, showing once again my poor choices, naivety and complete disregard for my safety

Is this you coming out on urban? Aww. Congratulations! I'm glad to have been here when it happened?

 

[trashpony]

The other thing I just can't get my head around about the TERF argument is that it seems completely contradictory. On the one hand, we should break down the artificial construct of gender... on the other we should build a wall around what it is to be a woman and police that line aggressively.

You've misunderstood the argument. Their argument is that biological sex is immutable and is what oppresses women - it's the reason we are cut, raped, sold and enslaved.

Gender is merely the trappings that are socially constructed around each sex eg masculinity and femininity.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

It's possible to be a trans anything, no? You can be a trans capitalist or a trans communist or a trans person with no coherent political views at all. That's the lesson I take, and it's why I think class analysis of gender roles such as we've had on this thread is both valid and interesting, and perhaps missing the point when brought up in relation to this particular issue. Sexual orientation isn't a class issue, fundamentally, it's an issue of human diversity, and I think the same will ultimately come to be thought regarding transgender.

The problem with identity politics (someone suggested earlier this should be for another thread) is that ultimately it plays along with the status quo rather than challenging it. Neoliberalism loves when politics becomes about the expression and rights of the individual rather than the class. It can accommodate awarding equality on these terms which results in having diversity spread up the hierarchical ladder and economic gaps actually increase whilst this apparent awarding equality is happening.

Malik has written loads on this and is far more articulate than I, what with him being of the educated class and me being a lowly tradesman. He's definitely worth a read for anyone not aware of the various critiques.

 

[pengaleng]

yeah, I read some things but none of the arguments grabbed me so I got nothing to add here

 

[lazythursday]

The problem with identity politics (someone suggested earlier this should be for another thread) is that ultimately it plays along with the status quo rather than challenging it. Neoliberalism loves when politics becomes about the expression and rights of the individual rather than the class. It can accommodate awarding equality on these terms which results in having diversity spread up the hierarchical ladder and economic gaps actually increase whilst this apparent awarding equality is happening.

Malik has written loads on this and is far more articulate than I, what with him being of the educated class and me being a lowly tradesman. He's definitely worth a read for anyone not aware of the various critiques.

I totally get that neoliberalism has co-opted identity politics, and that politics based on identity alone is not ultimately useful in transforming society, but I don't think that it therefore follows that all fights for minority rights are 'playing along with the status quo'. You can be passionate about gay rights, or trans rights or whatever and campaign on those issues and also believe in fighting together as a class, surely?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I totally get that neoliberalism has co-opted identity politics, and that politics based on identity alone is not ultimately useful in transforming society, but I don't think that it therefore follows that all fights for minority rights are 'playing along with the status quo'. You can be passionate about gay rights, or trans rights or whatever and campaign on those issues and also believe in fighting together as a class, surely?

Of course. But I place them as secondary to class politics (which argues for equality to all) rather than being pleased that I now have a black manager and landlord.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I totally get that neoliberalism has co-opted identity politics, and that politics based on identity alone is not ultimately useful in transforming society, but I don't think that it therefore follows that all fights for minority rights are 'playing along with the status quo'. You can be passionate about gay rights, or trans rights or whatever and campaign on those issues and also believe in fighting together as a class, surely?

You absolutely can, but if you do that then you're not falling into the id-politics trap of only thinking about the rights of the minority group that may be your primary focus. eg, for instance, you may be a socialist trans rights activist, but that socialist bit is also important. Two bits: one the fight to have your group accepted within society, and two to care about what that society that you're finding a place in looks like. I agree with MM that the id politics trap can be only to focus on the first part of that - all too easy then for a middle-class-led id politics group to win rights and equality within their own class and achieve fuck all for anyone else.

 

[bimble]

You've misunderstood the argument. Their argument is that biological sex is immutable and is what oppresses women - it's the reason we are cut, raped, sold and enslaved.

Gender is merely the trappings that are socially constructed around each sex eg masculinity and femininity.

I think you've misunderstood, think the idea (from trans-excluding feminists) is not that "biological sex is what oppresses women" but that the patriarchal system we all live in is rooted in controlling the reproductive functions of women (not the same thing) so that people growing up with wombs and with socialisation as women under this system have a bunch of of stuff we've been given to deal with and conform to that we never chose - it's my understanding that some of the boundary policing is basically 'I never put my hand up for this shit and you don't get to join the subaltern group by fiat'.

 

[Treacle Toes]

Of course. But I place them as secondary to class politics (which argues for equality to all) rather than being pleased that I now have a black manager and landlord.

Having a black manager or landlord is pretty secondary on a experiential level isn't it? You seem to be making a vague point but I am not sure how that relates to you in any meaningful way. Some people need to put aspects of their identity and experience front and centre sometimes because it's necessary for a variety of reasons. If you don't, fine, but you not needing to shouldn't mean no one else should/can whilst also recognising the importance of a class based approach.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

You absolutely can, but if you do that then you're not falling into the id-politics trap of only thinking about the rights of the minority group that may be your primary focus. eg, for instance, you may be a socialist trans rights activist, but that socialist bit is also important. Two bits: one the fight to have your group accepted within society, and two to care about what that society that you're finding a place in looks like. I agree with MM that the id politics trap can be only to focus on the first part of that - all too easy then for a middle-class-led id politics group to win rights and equality within their own class and achieve fuck all for anyone else.

There's people who identify as feminists but not as socialists, for example, and sure I don't disagree with challenging how women are treated in society but they're not my comrades if they're only wanting to shape how liberal democracy looks.

 

[trashpony]

I think you've misunderstood, think the idea (from trans-excluding feminists) is not that "biological sex is what oppresses women" but that the patriarchal system we all live in is rooted in controlling the reproductive functions of women (not the same thing) so that people growing up with wombs and with socialisation as women under this system have a bunch of of stuff we've been given to deal with and conform to that we never chose - it's my understanding that some of the boundary policing is basically 'I never put my hand up for this shit and you did, you don't get to join the subaltern group by fiat'.

Apart from you adding unnecessary levels of complexity, I don't see how that's different from what I said. Women are oppressed by their biology. If you're not biologically female, you're not oppressed in that way.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Having a black manager or landlord is pretty secondary on a experiential level isn't it? You seem to being making a vague point but I am not sure how that relates to you in any meaningful way. Some people need to put aspects of their identity and experience front and centre sometimes because it;s necessary for a variety of reasons. If you don't, fine, but you not needing to shouldn't mean no one else should/can whilst also recognising the importance of a class based approach.

It isn't a vague point. I do have a black manager and a black landlord. Of course it's no different to having a white manager and white landlord but it represents how neoliberalism plays at being about equality.

 

[Treacle Toes]

It isn't a vague point. I do have a black manager and a black landlord. Of course it's no different to having a white manager and white landlord but it represents how neoliberalism plays at being about equality.

It was vague and now you have expanded a little Who said it is different in terms of the experience for you as the tenant or worker?

 

[Magnus McGinty]

It was vague and now you have expanded a little Who said it is different in terms of the experience for you as the tenant or worker?

It's how I see (maybe incorrectly?) the logical destination of identity driven politics.
Gay Pride sponsored by Barclays! Roll Eyes.

 

[bimble]

Apart from you adding unnecessary levels of complexity, I don't see how that's different from what I said. Women are oppressed by their biology. If you're not biologically female, you're not oppressed in that way.

Are you really oppressed by your biology ? I'm not particularly, i mean periods are annoying and all (and £2.50 for a packet of tampons ffs? ) and I wish i had better upper body strength but apart from that what I feel as painful and resent the effects of is the society i live in and its expectations of me as the category of person called woman, not from my body which just is what it is.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Are you really oppressed by your biology ? I'm not particularly, i mean periods are annoying and all (and £2.50 for a packet of tampons ffs? ) and I wish i had better upper body strength but apart from that what I feel as painful and resent the effects of is the society i live in and its expectations of me as the category of person called woman, not from my body which just is what it is.

Marxist feminists argue (correctly imo) that women take the brunt of unpaid work such as raising children (the next generation of workers who produce profit for the capital class) and caring for elderly relatives who are no longer productive in producing profit so have been thrown by the wayside etc.

 

[bimble]

Marxist feminists argue (correctly imo) that women take the brunt of unpaid work such as raising children (the next generation of workers who produce profit for the capital class) and caring for elderly relatives who are no longer productive in producing profit so have been thrown by the wayside etc.

Yes I've had a look at Marx on feminism. It's not about our bodies though its about society, nothing innate in our anatomy dooms us to unpaid labour according to him does it.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

There's people who identify as feminists but not as socialists, for example, and sure I don't disagree with challenging how women are treated in society but they're not my comrades if they're only wanting to shape how liberal democracy looks.

And you're right that just being id politics and nothing else - for instance the loathsome Women's Equality Party - means that you inevitably end up supporting and strengthening the power structures of the status quo.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Yes I've had a look at Marx on feminism. It's not about our bodies though its about society, nothing innate in our anatomy dooms us to unpaid labour according to him does it.

Authors such as Selma James are worth a read.

Sex, race and class - Selma James

 

[bimble]

Authors such as Selma James are worth a read.

Sex, race and class - Selma James

You linked to it so presumably you agree with where she's coming from when she says "How the working class will ultimately unite organizationally, we don't know. We do know that up to now many of us have been told to forget our own needs in some wider interest which was never wide enough to include us. And so we have learnt by bitter experience that nothing unified and revolutionary will be formed until each section of the exploited will have made its own autonomous power felt."
If so good, cos I got a different impression from you previously, as if all efforts on the part of particular oppressed groups were just detracting energy from where it should rightly be.