Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Transgender is it just me that is totally perplexed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
it's a crude measure and it doesn't hold true in all circumstances - i remember seeing small guys physically taunted and bullied by heftier girls at school but knowing they couldn't hit back, 'cos of convention... but the reason the taboo is there is because of a generalised disparity in strength.

also spanglechick - i don't think the concern is only there for domestic/sexual abuse. people are pretty angsty about blokes fighting with women in pubs like they might do with other men. understandably.

But why. Why is that angst there with fighting women, and not little blokes?

The reason is patriarchy. Patriarchy is always a problem, even when it superficially advantages women. Treat women (but not skinny blokes) like delicate blossom, fragile and sacred... and you heap on them a whole load of indiscriminate baggage, a lot of which is actively detrimental (appropriate careers etc). The answer is not "yay, punch women", btw. The answer is "no! Don't punch anyone."
 
But why. Why is that angst there with fighting women, and not little blokes?

The reason is patriarchy. Patriarchy is always a problem, even when it superficially advantages women. Treat women (but not skinny blokes) like delicate blossom, fragile and sacred... and you heap on them a whole load of indiscriminate baggage, a lot of which is actively detrimental (appropriate careers etc). The answer is not "yay, punch women", btw. The answer is "no! Don't punch anyone."
Fair point. I still have a deep unease about the idea specifically of hitting women, though. Can't help it. It's not a feeling that can be rationalised away.
 
Last edited:
I think it's something to do with strength, tbf.

I'm very uneasy with the idea of hitting a woman, and nobody has condoned this woman being punched, despite what DU is claiming.
If you take it as an issue about the incident, the violence full stop, I think its more than not condoning, it needs to be described as a shitty little attack (regardless of her taking pictures). Particularly as Tara Wood announced she was going to fuck up some terfs beforehand. And I say that as someone with a lot more sympathy for trans activists than radfems.
 
If you take it as an issue about the incident, the violence full stop, I think its more than not condoning, it needs to be described as a shitty little attack (regardless of her taking pictures). Particularly as Tara Wood announced she was going to fuck up some terfs beforehand. And I say that as someone with a lot more sympathy for trans activists than radfems.
I would have agreed before I saw the footage again. Tara Wood waded in to help her mate, and left as soon as she had helped her mate. That said, I agree that the tweet does not look good. In fact it looks very bad and it does make it sound like she was looking for trouble.
 
But why. Why is that angst there with fighting women, and not little blokes?

The reason is patriarchy. Patriarchy is always a problem, even when it superficially advantages women. Treat women (but not skinny blokes) like delicate blossom, fragile and sacred... and you heap on them a whole load of indiscriminate baggage, a lot of which is actively detrimental (appropriate careers etc). The answer is not "yay, punch women", btw. The answer is "no! Don't punch anyone."

I do agree with you... but in practice - where it does end up happening - I think the general disparity in strength makes it worse in most practical scenarios... in a way which I think will always be kind of 'obvious' for most people however advanced a civilization we develop.

And back on point, in this particular scenario, I don't know of any other kind of situation in which this would have been defended by people on the left - but the identification as a woman aspect somehow creates a blindside where the issue would otherwise, definitely be flagged.

I also think that the very same reasoning is regularly used to paper over the frankly terrible behaviour of Identity-politics activists of all kinds (i.e. I'm oppressed, therefore it's Ok for me to physically attack/verbally abuse/be excessively rude to/try to socially atomize 'X' who isn't).
 
I would have agreed before I saw the footage again. Tara Wood waded in to help her mate, and left as soon as she had helped her mate. That said, I agree that the tweet does not look good. In fact it looks very bad and it does make it sound like she was looking for trouble.
I'm not sure I got all the detail from the clip linked in the op. But still, I'm not sure that MM did much wrong in terms of the scuffly-fighty things that followed - and didn't initiate anything. Like I say, I'm just thinking about it as a series of events. Bottom line, is it's still somebody running in to twat someone 30 years her senior.
 
Bottom line, is it's still somebody running in to twat someone 30 years her senior.
Yep. I agree. It was a level of violence that wasn't necessary or justified. It wasn't a random act of violence though. It had a purpose, which was to free her mate.
 
who was trying to steal the camera
Yes. That certainly appears to be the case. I think destroy her camera is probably more accurate.

ETA:

Mind you afterwards, they said that she had lost her memory card but not the camera. So they may very well only have been trying to take the memory card in order to get rid of the photos she'd just taken. That's consistent with the way they were struggling.
 
Last edited:
What perplexes me is people who give a shit about transgenderism, what could possibly motivate anyone to feel antipathy towards people over that?

What DOES interest me however is the correlation between people who describe themselves as being on the left but who are actively hostile to socialism on the one hand and who are transphobic on the other. Seems to go together as a package very frequently!
 
What perplexes me is people who give a shit about transgenderism, what could possibly motivate anyone to feel antipathy towards people over that?
Spot on. We could set out all sorts of twisted 'reasons' people might have for being transphobic, but there's just that personal level of how the fuck do you end up hating/fearing someone on the grounds of their gender identity. :(
 
Sorry but that's a load of bollocks. How is using the phrase 'women born women' transphobic/violent? I'm not the same as a trans woman and I disagree with pretending that I am. It's Emperor's New Clothes stuff this. Trans people completely deserve a peaceful life left to get on with whatever makes them feel happy and I don't hate or fear them but I object to being violently suppressed if I question some of the ideology.
 
Do TERFS call themselves TERFS? Is this a thing, then? Seems a weird sort of thing to (ahem) fight for? (out of touch).
 
Physical strength is a starting point, but doesn't hold water as a binary approach. I'm a cis woman but I'm hefty. I reckon I could take a skinny bloke in a fight. If a trans woman has had hormonal treatment since the onset of puberty, is it ok for her to hit a woman? What about small bilked getting hit by big blokes? Is that as bad? What about if the attacker has got a really bad earache and as a result their balance is off?

I started hormone replacement at 45. After two years I attended a construction industry course. The team i was with were 50-50 male-female. We had to lug about heavy items including metal sheets and scaffolding. That was the moment where i found that an item that a 25 year man can lift reasonably easily (with one arm) - and something that i would have been able to lift at one point - was suddenly so heavy i couldn't even budge it. Not an inch. Two of the women there managed to lift it a bit. I was suddenly the third strongest woman at an event. I don;t think people realise what hormones do to muscle mass.

And even before that i was a useless fighter - and had been physically intimidated by women a few times in my life if you can believe that. I know a 6 foot woman at work who would probably be able to take me in a fight. I say probably - almost certainly.
 
It's a term of abuse I think.
it isn't.

Here's a referenced history of the term.


coined by cis women who identified as radical feminists to distance themselves from the trans excluding kind.

It was not meant to be insulting. It was meant to be a deliberately technically neutral description of an activist grouping. I notice that since TERF has gone out into the wild, many people seem to use trans-exclusive rather than trans-exclusionary or trans-excluding, and I think that leads to some exploitable ambiguity. It is possible to interpret trans-exclusive as “exclusively talks about trans* issues” (which could quite rightly be considered a slam on the rest of their feminism), while trans-exclusionary is more specific that their exclusion of trans* voices and bodies from being considered women/feminists is the point.
 
TERFs is abusive. TERF is a slur documents the many creative ways that women who question trans ideology (note: not violently) are verbally attacked.

It's not violence though because words are not violence. Punching people in the face is violence
What boggles me about that kind of material is the hatred displayed towards women by people who want to be accepted as one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom