Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Urban v's the Commentariat

I agree 100%.
Worth noting that while I find a lot of this online 'activism' on both sides absolutely awful and actively harmful from what little I know of it, none of the trans people I have met in real life have had these views or behaved in a way that I would consider misogynist at all whereas I have met a handful of people with very dodgy views towards trans people though tbf none of them feminist AFAIK.
 
Yep, important to distinguish between different groups within the trans community of course but some of the loudest m-t-f trans activists look basically the same as super-reactionary mra types to me, just with breast transplants added. It's very hard to know what proportion of the trans world these people speak for but they have very successfully appropriated liberationist equality language in pursuit of a very unliberationary and reactionary worldview and I think that has confused quite a few well-meaning people into automatically supporting them, or allowing them to set an agenda unopposed.



there's a point where i have learnt to look at some of the language in terms of my own understanding of the language i use. I make a statement about the dangers of sexual assault by men, should I have to add the qualifier every single fucking time that of course I know not all men are rapists. and when a transperson complains about getting a raw deal from society, it dosen't need me piping up and saying i'm not transphobic and making the discussion about me, not transphobia. but some of the language used can make that very difficult.

but....

having seen the difference between the loudest activists and some of the transpeople i've had more considered discussions with, i'm inclined to believe the situation is similar to that of feminism. the majority of the people who are self appointed feminist role models and campaign leaders do not represent anyone other than themselves or small loud factions. they don't really seem to have much in common with either my views or the majority of feminists I know. I don't think it takes me much of a leap of the imagination to realise that many of the people who have got the ability to make the most people listen to them are the people that have the status to do so and perhaps face the lowest levels of discrimination on other factors.
 
I don't think I've ever seen anything from a "trans activist" that reminds me of MRAs. I've seen some stupid or ill-considered things from trans activists, just as I've seen stupid or ill-considered arguments from every other group of people, but nothing that puts me in mind of the peculiar MRA outlook. MRAness generally has a certain level of obliviousness to the reality of gendered oppression as a prerequisite, and while trans activists may in many cases have views on gender that I might not entirely agree with, they rarely have the option of being oblivious in quite that way.
 
Also fuck the people who come into work sick and make everyone else ill, do no work, stay sick for ages and brag about how they come into work sick while "pussies" take the time off to get better.
There's a nasty chest infection currently going round our office because someone caught it from his children and came into work with it. Several people have had to get antibiotics for it, and at least two of us are immunosuppressed to some degree :mad:

We have one of those policies with a Bradford factor threshold.
 
There's a nasty chest infection currently going round our office because someone caught it from his children and came into work with it. Several people have had to get antibiotics for it, and at least two of us are immunosuppressed to some degree :mad:

We have one of those policies with a Bradford factor threshold.

are you safe from that? can you call time off from that part of your disability, cause immunosupression makes it harder for you/
 
Thats where the terf types get it wrong because while I think some of what they say is based on actual concerns (kids being forced into gender roles and that, 'transgender children' in the states who dont conform to stereotyped gender norms being prescribed hormones at younger and younger ages, the breastfeeding/discrimination thing, the whole myth of 'male/female brains') they demonise people who have issues with gender identity, or say their all self hating lesbians etc, rather than to look at why this is happening and the social roots of gender dysphoria or gender roles etc (if indeed there are any). it isn't just that all trans women are sexual predators trying to get access to womens spaces. as with iran forcing gay men into this surgery, there are areas of the world where the idea of innate gender etc has been used to stigmatise and medicalise homosexuality. imo trans people must have the right to transition and they must have the right to appropriate medical care, but it would be nice to live in the world where 'a man' didnt have to wear certain clothes and carry out certain behaviours and 'a woman' didnt have to do likewise.

I'm a gender non conforming woman in many ways and it does disturb me that in certain parts of the us were i to be growing up now i might well be encouraged to transition because im not interested in a lot of stereotypically girly thing. I think the idea that mens and womens brains are fundamentally different is a dangerous idea and i think this is where a lot of the anxiety is coming from. But rather than simply attacking this what the cathy brennan type terfs seem to be doing is saying that all trans women are rapists for wanting to go in a girls bathroom etc whereas if someone is living as a women and has had the surgery or even if they havent, it may be very dangerous to use a mens bathroom. What i have also noticed them doing is saying that all women are equally oppressed everywhere in the world whereas this is simply not the case. The situation of a middle class feminist in the uk is very different to a woman living under ISIS or even a working class woman. (ETA: but there is where the whole 'cis privilege' thing is bollocks because its demonstratably untrue that a) all trans women are underprivileged against all women born women - id rather be a pre op trans woman, even a closeted one, living under ISIS for example - and that gender roles automatically privilege them over trans women - and b) that the latter as a whole have caused the situation where trans people are persecuted etc to come about.)

However, I think in some ways the situation of women in the west has fundamentally changed in some ways in the last 70 years because of capitalism but to read some of the terf stuff we might as well all be living in the 1500s.
 
Last edited:
are you safe from that? can you call time off from that part of your disability, cause immunosupression makes it harder for you/
Anything related to my disability doesn't get counted but I had to do the research and the union had to present it to them to get it taken up. Non-disability related illness is recorded in the usual way.
 
Anything related to my disability doesn't get counted but I had to do the research and the union had to present it to them to get it taken up. Non-disability related illness is recorded in the usual way.

Almost all my days off are related to a single known condition so I don't get penalised (there was no quibble about this - I think my employer must be nicer than most).

I don't think it's fair that someone would get penalised for being ill if it were a bunch of single illnesses of unknown cause, though. It's weasly way of using numbers to accuse someone of taking the piss.
 
I think some radical feminists dont take into account the changes in the labour market that mean that women increasingly are involved in top level management etc (although nowhere near the scale of men) and the expectation that w/c women are both expected to work long hours and be bread winners and look after children and the traditional role women have always had. And working class womens work doing things like commercial surrogacy for wealthy westerners in the third world or cleaning people's houses, terfs on the lines of cathy brennan (a payday loan lawyer) or the ones who do some of those transphobic blogs don't have a good deal to say about it. The other thing is the trend towards diagnosing increased numbers of very young children with gender identity issues and the pressure some younger lesbians and gay men are now describing to transition has also coincided with increased medicalisation and pathologisation of other conditions as well. (Dont expect any understanding from employers about this though.

I haven't seen any attempts by terfs to bring this into their analysis at all. It's all women are oppressed by men without acknowledging the fact it is increasingly women doing that oppression and making these decisions. And the fact the increased roll back of womens rights, abortion rights and so on and the move back to the enforcement of gender roles is taking place at a time when other social protections are being comprehensively dismantled. No no its just men being cunts as usual.

I've got a lot of sympathy towards the anti psychiatry movement and the idea that many mental health conditions are caused by social factors and therefore shouldn't always be treated with medical means. It's not implausible that a society that sets a great store by how men and women should act could at least contribute to the development of gender dysphoria in some people, shit ive sometimes wished i could be a man so i could be treated in a certain way, have more respect given to my opinions etc, i usually avoid talking about feminism and my experiences online for this reason.

So no not a conspiracy against lesbians and women's spaces although there are some very nasty misogynists in that movement who seem to be very vocal in using this language to set the agenda as co-op says. And there are terf types that say all sex sith a man is rape because we are socialised into compulsory heterosexuality which is very similar to the 'sheeple' arguments imo. Feminism used to be about a systematic analysis of women's oppression rather than identy politics which is why these debates are so depressing. Because there is a lot that could be worked together on i think. :(
 
Almost all my days off are related to a single known condition so I don't get penalised (there was no quibble about this - I think my employer must be nicer than most).

I don't think it's fair that someone would get penalised for being ill if it were a bunch of single illnesses of unknown cause, though. It's weasly way of using numbers to accuse someone of taking the piss.

I have known of cases where someone had an accident in work. They were off long term, on several occasions due to the effects of the accident and were sacked. As the council followed their sickness procedure it was deemed to be legally ok. Those who had the accidents and were sacked won compensation for the accident. The law is an arse regarding sickness in work.
I am glad for you that your employer is reasonable with you...there is no reason for them to be otherwise but it don't seem stop many other employers of being unreasonable as fuck.
 
think that's true but there is also a culture of "if your face fits" that has re-emerged in council's. Some are allowed to "work from home" so they are never off sick while others never get that option and it is purely dependent on if your face fits.
The same is true in schools (I work in one) ... they have become mini fiefdoms for ego maniacs...if you are liked you get whatever you want but if not they harass the fuck out of you.
In my previous school (when the deputy was made the new head 6 months before the old head retired) in a 9 month period a premises manager, an office worker, a nursery worker, the Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator, 6 teachers and 4 teaching assistants (including me) all left...14 staff left which was about half the total school staff.
In my current school we have a similar situation (with the added joy of an Executive Head) and so far we have lost 7 staff since july...there are many others actively looking for work.
Sickness is part of the bullying culture in work
 
having seen the difference between the loudest activists and some of the transpeople i've had more considered discussions with, i'm inclined to believe the situation is similar to that of feminism. the majority of the people who are self appointed feminist role models and campaign leaders do not represent anyone other than themselves or small loud factions. they don't really seem to have much in common with either my views or the majority of feminists I know. I don't think it takes me much of a leap of the imagination to realise that many of the people who have got the ability to make the most people listen to them are the people that have the status to do so and perhaps face the lowest levels of discrimination on other factors.

I agree totally - the "mtf trans vs radical feminist" thing is really just sections of both those groupings attacking each other and it seems unlikely to me that they are very representative sections since the positions taken on both sides seem aggressively provocative to me. I think your point that the loudest voices are disproportionately likely to be high-status ones is precisely why this kind of debate is tricky to understand for outsiders who are leftish/liberalish; the language used in the argument is so often the language of the liberationist wing of the left, yet harnessed to ideological positions that are anything but radical. But they are often the loudest voices in public debate, maybe just because a good shouty row is more fascinating than anything more measured and so that's what gets publicised.
 
I don't think I've ever seen anything from a "trans activist" that reminds me of MRAs. I've seen some stupid or ill-considered things from trans activists, just as I've seen stupid or ill-considered arguments from every other group of people, but nothing that puts me in mind of the peculiar MRA outlook. MRAness generally has a certain level of obliviousness to the reality of gendered oppression as a prerequisite, and while trans activists may in many cases have views on gender that I might not entirely agree with, they rarely have the option of being oblivious in quite that way.

Yes it was simplistic of me to lump the far end of the mtf trans spectrum with MRAs, because ideologically it is probably not coming from the same place, but some stuff I have read about from the States (with all the usual caveats about internet news) is pretty weird and disturbing, feminists being physically attacked and threatened at meetings, "Real Women have Dicks" + a large penis drawing graffitti sprayed on the walls outside a women-only festival which has a protest trans festival held outside it etc. This is almost the MO of an obsessive MRA.
 
I mean the violence that mtf trans people really suffer in reality is overwhelmingly carried out by men, just as the violence carried out against women is overwhelmingly carried out by men (and the violence against men, for that matter). For any trans activists to be targeting radical feminists first, seems strange to me. Why not target men or the issues surrounding men and violence?
 
Sickness is such an issue in work.
5 days or over in a 12 month period puts you on formal sickness procedures in my council (which is pretty much like most employers)
People are forced into work when ill due to fear of disciplinary action and make others ill...who in turn go to work.
The NHS say to stay at home when you have a bad cold so you do not spread it but that is just not possible.
Employers want to know your sickness over a 2 year period so one bout of the flu 18 months ago can and does cost people new jobs.
In years to come I can see that there will be medical research into the negative health implications of these policies.


Them, because of this, viruses, bugs, etc stay around much longer and eventually affect wider society, its a false economy.
 
Last edited:
There's probably similar thinking behind attacking a woman wearing a fur coat but not a leathered up biker.

Yep, that's an interesting one too because of course it has an apparent 'class' aspect because fur has all the connotations of wealth too, but why is it always a woman-wearing-a-fur-coat who has to be the target?
 
I'm afraid you have just summed up the spirit of the age.
It's worse than that at times. A lesson in the conjugation of adjectives: My children are freespirited and inspiringly creative; your children are boistrous, overimaginative, and could do with a little more hands on parenting; their children are obnoxious lawless lying brats.
 
ETA: but there is where the whole 'cis privilege' thing is bollocks because its demonstratably untrue that a) all trans women are underprivileged against all women born women

hmm, it's demonstrably untrue that all black men are underprivileged against all white men, that doesn't negate racism

id rather be a pre op trans woman, even a closeted one, living under ISIS for example

I think there's a strong causal relationship between the words closeted and living in that environment
 
Yep, that's an interesting one too because of course it has an apparent 'class' aspect because fur has all the connotations of wealth too, but why is it always a woman-wearing-a-fur-coat who has to be the target?
Because sexist assumptions remain about how likely a woman is to be able to injure you, compared to a man in the same situation?
 
Last edited:
I agree totally - the "mtf trans vs radical feminist" thing is really just sections of both those groupings attacking each other and it seems unlikely to me that they are very representative sections since the positions taken on both sides seem aggressively provocative to me. I think your point that the loudest voices are disproportionately likely to be high-status ones is precisely why this kind of debate is tricky to understand for outsiders who are leftish/liberalish; the language used in the argument is so often the language of the liberationist wing of the left, yet harnessed to ideological positions that are anything but radical. But they are often the loudest voices in public debate, maybe just because a good shouty row is more fascinating than anything more measured and so that's what gets publicised.

the other factor is that when it's the highest status voices speaking for the whole group, they are the ones who are least likely to have experienced multiple prejudices. they are not at one of those intersections. and I know what intersectionalism has turned into, but it was supposed to be about letting the people who had expereinced multiple prejudices speak about how to create a movement that attacked all of the multiple prejudices they expereinced. the black disabled lesbian of cliche fame was supposed to be the person who brought us together.

but what many of this lot have expereinced is morelikely to be about the single issue. they are less capable of understanding the multiple interlaced facets and they turn it into the hierarchy and that place where people look at oneupmanship over other groups in the search for attention and funding. now obviously, i don't think there's common ground in the terf wars, with their mutually opposed positions, but ti's fights like these that highlight th problems in single issue identity politics
 
Last edited:
I mean the violence that mtf trans people really suffer in reality is overwhelmingly carried out by men, just as the violence carried out against women is overwhelmingly carried out by men (and the violence against men, for that matter). For any trans activists to be targeting radical feminists first, seems strange to me. Why not target men or the issues surrounding men and violence?

google for some of the blogs listing the activities of cathy brennan if you want an answer to that. i'd suggest a stiff drink first. but whatever rhetoric the most vehement transactivists use. it pales in comparison to stunts like outing trans teens in coordination with anti gay groups

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cathy_Brennan seems to be a reasonable summary of what i've read elsewhere
 
Back
Top Bottom