There seems to be in-balance in the views expressed by feminists. Having " Googled " the subject I am now rather confused as to why there is so little debate about Trans-Men by feminists. Are feminists more accepting of Trans-Men ? Do they think of them as " the ultimate butch dike " ? and are not seen as a threat to their ideal world view ? Much like lesbians where; in the old days, considered more socially acceptable than gay men.
Paula, X.
I'm a feminist, hang with feminists and belong to feminist organizations. I have never heard a feminist say anything bad about trans men or trans people in general.
Feminism is equality and the only threats to it are those forces that would support inequality.
Quote from: RobynD on May 01, 2017, 01:04:19 PM
I'm a feminist, hang with feminists and belong to feminist organizations. I have never heard a feminist say anything bad about trans men or trans people in general.
Feminism is equality and the only threats to it are those forces that would support inequality.
Hi Robyn,
I think Paula is talking about that small group of feminists known as TERFs.
http://transadvocate.com/you-might-be-a-terf-if_n_10226.htm
Take care,
Paige :)
Thank you, Paige. Yes, that's it TERF's ? WTF !
Paula, X.
Thanks ! i had thought about that but to be truthful, i have never encountered one so i do hope they remain a small group. Their argument is so full of holes you could use it to strain things.
I haven't met any terf's personally except from a few online, and I've heard some of their thoughts on trans men as well as trans women over some time now. They're kind of a smaller branch of radical feminism, and quite detached from other kinds of feminism. As far as what I can gather from what I've heard, they in general think of trans men as "gender traitors" meaning as women who "betray" other members of their birth sex, and more or less join the patriarchy. But that they don't see trans men as threats to them (unlike how they see trans women), and some seem to also want to include trans men in women's only spaces and such. Many terf's seem to not believe in ->-bleeped-<- or dysphoria being real at all, so they see all trans people as their birth sexes, but like "lesser" versions... it's not very nice. I try to stay away from such conversations with them, it never leads anywhere good.
(I definitely do NOT agree with their opinions, but I find it interesting to learn about, maybe in a sense like morbid curiosity, just to clarify.)
Trans men are often erased by TERFs, from what I have seen. Either they are ignored and never acknowledged, or they are considered "fake trans" -- I've seen trans men dismissed as just "confused". Alternatively, like SeptagonScars, they may be seen as traitors, or people who just wanted to cheat their way out of the discrimination women face. Dysphoria and gender identity are usually not even considered part of the trans experience. They act like it is totally fetishistic or based solely on the need to intrude upon cis women's spaces.
Generally there is much less hatred directed towards them; trans women are moreso the focus of TERF bigotry.
I have also done some research into this branch of radical feminism (I prefer not to use the term "TERF" as I feel it is somewhat pejorative). Like all political views, it exists on a spectrum. Some have harsher views than others. I have interacted with some people online who are slightly left of moderate, but pretty far off from complete radicalism. They have been polite to me, all things considered. I found them to be reasonable people with some good questions and shared my experiences with them. They were mostly parents concerned about the very sudden rise in children being diagnosed with gender dysphoria, and concerned also with their own children coming out as trans. None of them seemed outright cruel. They were all cordial to me and allowed me space to share my perspective.
Many of them had daughters who were FTM who were either transitioning, or had identified as male briefly before desisting. The general belief among them had been that the stress of puberty and harsh gender roles for natal females was what was causing so many young women to have gender dysphoria. Whether or not this is true is, of course, a matter of conjecture. Like others have said, many of them saw FTM individuals as "giving up" on being women because of female patriarchal standards. They were concerned about the role that Asperger's Syndrome played in FTM identities, and use of gender-stereotypical behavior to determine if a person is truly "in the wrong body."
But this is just a small sliver of the entirety of feminism, which has about as many different branches and offshoots as Christianity. For the most part, feminists are fine with trans men.
I think these perspectives are good to take in (the more well-thought-out and reasonable ones, I mean) because it allows you to be confronted with those who disagree with you and understand where others are coming from. Empathy is like a lost art form. People get so caught up in their own views that they demonize entire groups of people without knowing their histories. They are still people, after all. Like you and me, they have people that they love in their life, they feel pain, and they fear uncertainty. This is why I don't say TERF, because it dismisses the very really questions that these people have with the utterance of that one word... "TERF." It's basically a slur to me.
Anyway, hope that answers your question lol
I don't care what acronym you use or don't you. Exclusionary feminism/masculinism is toxic. No one else has the right to determine the legitimacy of your identity.
Quote from: rmaddy on October 06, 2017, 10:46:14 PM
I don't care what acronym you use or don't you. Exclusionary feminism/masculinism is toxic. No one else has the right to determine the legitimacy of your identity.
I don't think I was asking anyone to care about my preferred terminology. I was just sharing my experience.
This thread is not the place for us to debate this, though. I was just answering the OP's question.
Thank you all very much for your replies.
I have an itch and is cis shaped. Cis women just seem to have an ability to simply forget about Trans man. Trans man do not appear to play any role in Feminism. They are simply ignored.
Cis Feminists loathe Trans women. Lesbians are no better.( As a lesbian, this is hard to take ) It's just a feeling I have that; like syphilis, Trans Women do not belong in any section of modern society. Same as it ever was...
Paula, X.
Well a feminist will likely have a live and let live mindset. Some may see it as a great thing for one to be themselves while others simply couldnt care either way. Many see that the gender spectrum is now being explored and many seem to like that.
The TERF on the other hand isnt much of a feminist in regards to wanting to empower women and be an equal in society. It is, in my opinion a very dangerous political identity. Here is a TERF in a nut shell:
- They like to play victim. Their belief appears to be that anyone who was born with a penis is inherently bad and them must forever feel ashamed about it. They also beleive that if you are born with a vagina and live forever as a cis female you are inherently a victim. Now, it is true sexism exists (ex, imagine if Hillary Clinton had a video of her bragging about grabbing men by the penis because she had money and power, people would lose their minds and she would have been lucky to even carry 3 states) but instead of trying to combat it through education and learning on what to do better they decide to make sob stories about themselves.
-A TERF really does seem to have a selective paranoia that trans-women are there to sexually attack a cis-woman or are trying to somehow destroy the female gender with our privileged... ?......I know it is confusing mindset, but somehow us transitioning to being women on the outside too is hurting cis-women whereas to a TERF a trans-man is not looked at as evil but still looked at in a negative view, that they are transitioning only because society told them too and they are traitors and cowards. Yup, that is really how they think.
-TERFS also tend to have a very funny way of breaking the gender binary. It is ok if you are AMAB and like feminine things and such, however the idea of HRT or look and present in a manner that does not still have your birth gender sticking out is still a big issue for them to lose their collective minds, or to say anything that could allow one to truly identify with the gender they are is thrown out the door. Estrogen is a god sent for me that has worked better for me then any anti-depression or what not. A TERF's opinion is that if I need medication to control dysphoria then it should not be the stuff that does work (hrt) but a host of anti-psychotics or anti-depressants, the stuff that never worked for this. But they do not care or see it that way, instead they would rather me be medicated with pills to make me a zombie male then a happy female all the while telling me all about my ''privilege'' I never asked to have in the first place.
-TERFS tend to be very nasty and at times hyprocritcal. Example one is a lady named Cathy Brennan. She has such a powerful hatred of trans people that she will dox a trans people regardless of age, yes both adults and kids basically to make their lives harder. All in the name of hating while patting herself on the back for, well Idk. I have yet to see her do anything at all to make life great for women, but plenty of awful to make life for trans people miserable. Example 2 is a girl (?) I went to school with years ago. Just less then 2 years ago she told me plans of wanting to transition to living as a male as she felt that way her whole life and ect. Then earilier this year she was calling me and all trans people mental cases and how she is ''comfortable'' living as a female then giving me a lecture that basically summed up the TERF mindset ''If I can find a way to live in birth gender then so can you''. I am unsure if this will last because upon becoming a self described radical TERF she seems more hateful and miserable then ever when we chatted. But granted that is her cross to carry as I could care less if she did become male or if she got ran over by a bus, she means nothing to me now.
To sum it up, a TERF is someone who uses their gender as a card to state that they are and always will be a victim and if we do not adhere to their mindset we are all anti-women. Whereas I think we should do more to empower women and do so by not blaming males for everything. Granted, if a man attacks, , discriminates or sexually over powers a female (like rape, or cat calling) they need to be called out and shamed yes, among other things to happen to them. But in a terfs mind anyone with a penis or born with one is bad. Basically, the TERF mindset is a mindset made of concession and a victim mentality while not doing a damn thing to make equality happen or to break down the binary more so people can find their true-selves.
Thank you very much, SailorMars1994. Very informative and educational :)
Maybe they just need to get out more ::)
Paula, X.
There have been women's groups that accept trans men while excluding trans women. The best know example would be Michfest. I don't bring that up intending flamebait, it's just a fact that the organizer established a DADT policy regarding trans women (i.e. if you passed you got in so long as you didn't tell anyone you were trans).
As weird as this seems, I think there was an underlying logic. At the time (probably still today) many trans men had been part of the lesbian community and as such there were personal ties and trust. I've known some lesbian organizations that started out open to self-identified women that later excluded trans women while accepting trans men.
It's all good. The mainstream of feminism today is intersectional and consider us to be allies.
SadieBlake: Yes, I would say that, too add, intersectional feminists seem to be very inclusive of both trans men and trans women. However I don't agree with them on much of anything, but that's beside the point. There are a lot of different sub-sections of feminism and as far as I know, most of them seem to be at least okay with trans people if not much more, with the exception of terf's.
Allie24: I'm aware that the term "terf" is not well liked, and I've heard some being more okay with being referred to as "gender critical feminists". I'm okay with either/any term as long as it gets the point across. Also, I didn't mean that one shouldn't talk to them about their views, I was merely giving a slight warning cause quite many trans people who have tried that have only left the conversation feeling devastated or at least emotionally drained, myself included. But of course that's very individual and it's up to everyone to do as they please.
Hi Paula,
I recently found an article in the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy that, in part, considers the issue you have raised about Transmen - specifically as it relates to a perceived difference between Butch women and Transmen, and feminist views on the subject. The article is called "Feminist Perspectives on Trans Issues", and can be found:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-trans/#PhenTransEmb
It is quite a long article and a very interesting read, but the section in question is subtitled "7. Butch/FTM Border Wars and Border Zone Dwellers".
The article raises some other interesting questions, and I'm considering discussing these and my own queries in another post, but I'm not sure which topic section to post under, (here in 'Politics' or elsewhere,) because, as I see it, while the issues do have social and political ramifications, they're mainly concerned with how we think about ourselves and others.
:)
Quote from: paula lesley on May 01, 2017, 08:46:20 AM
There seems to be in-balance in the views expressed by feminists. Having " Googled " the subject I am now rather confused as to why there is so little debate about Trans-Men by feminists. Are feminists more accepting of Trans-Men ? Do they think of them as " the ultimate butch dike " ? and are not seen as a threat to their ideal world view ? Much like lesbians where; in the old days, considered more socially acceptable than gay men.
Yes, it's very interesting that a movement that is apparently about equality has little to say about the transman, aside from the ever-vocal TERFs, that is. But I will hazard a guess - being a transman is considered to be a step up the ladder toward more automatic and guaranteed privilege than they once had (I disagree), and yet they share the female's direct experience in their past and so they cannot quite be lumped in with the majority of "men" or maleness in general whom are currently the main target or enemy figure of feminists.
I can't say what they are thinking or feeling - but given my experiences with certain female-favouring or feminist family members, the reaction to transition is largely silence and/or being ignored, and my hunch is that this is the treatment afforded to one who leaves the "sisterhood" of women - the automatic sort of bonding women tend to share with each other and the prevalent preference they seem to have for the company of their own sex. You are obviously no longer one of them, nor obviously desire to be, but they know you know what they know about women and femaleness, too. I think this makes some of them rather uncomfortable.
In my own experience, women tend to find instinctual comfort in the knowledge that another person is also a woman; whether that's assumption that she will not be a threat, or that she will immediately understand certain topics or experiences, or perhaps share similar values based on those experiences means you can approach with a degree of confidence not found when your counterpart is a male. Also in my experience, transitioning to male in appearance is enough to cause people who know full well one's female past to begin to ignore it or dismiss its relevancy. It seems to have a powerful effect on others; even if they are hell-bent on fighting the idea you're a man to the end, they will still be swayed in part by what their eyes are telling them, and the subconscious effect that has upon their reactions can be surprising. Given this, it doesn't surprise me feminism doesn't have much to say about us. We were once a known quantity and understandable, but following transition the waters become murky? And so we are left alone to be that unquantifiable anomaly. A case of that, perhaps. Where there has been some vocal opposition from feminists, it is usually ideological in nature, again making me suspect that many feminists view maleness or masculinity as a problem, (or maybe just THE problem; ever since feminism decided to adopt the game plan that women are universally oppressed and therefore the oppressor
must be male... in contrast to its early days when it was more about winning the right to vote etc.) and it follows an 'apparent' woman who becomes a man has not only favored it but discarded the feminine completely for it. Would current feminism not naturally find itself at an ideological impasse with such a person?
I've not actually heard many views on trans men from feminists, more on trans women than men. I know some TERFs don't like us because they see us taking the 'easy way out' or something by becoming men and not embracing being a woman blah blah blah. Obviously people talking like that don't know anything about being trans in general. The disgusting hate and ignorance towards trans women is blatant regarding TERFs and some feminists whilst trans guys are mostly ignored and forgotten about.
From what I heard about Trans men from feminists, the majority of them were TERFs or/and butch sapphics who believed trans men were masculine women wounded by the sexist society who didn't accept to suffer misogyny. Anyway, that's big bull->-bleeped-<-, guys.
Anyway... feminism usually ignores trans people and so the reproductive rights of trans men are very obscure.
Also it's funny that some trans men reproduce sexism on women, anyway men are men.
Ya'll know what? This will probably sound like BS but what the hell is in a Label? TERF? I really don't keep up on all the terms and labels.
My whole point is, "Who cares?" If you are happy with who your are then screw anyone that tries to make you pissed off or feel bad and that even includes me. But I would never do that though. I don't want to use you though. I would never do that to you or anyone else.
I can't be a militant feminist because I love feminism too much. I love being a girl. I can not deny it.
OK so equal pay? Every job that I have had has been equal from Military to driving trucks to what my BF is and so on. Now MY employees make more than I do. I can dress in a skirt and answer my phone and dispatch them while in the AC or Heat while they are dealing with the weather and I pay them even ore than what I make per truck. And yes I have some LGBTs, women and men working for me and they all get paid equally.
But with all that aside, I don't thing militant feminist will ever view anyone as nothing more tha another feminist.
To me, trans men are men and nothing more or nothing less. Militant feminist may hate you but I don't. To me trans women are women and I personally embrace feminism and they hate me so... I don't care about that either.
So how about a Trans woman's view of Trans men? We are different than our born identities right? I love you guys. Never ever let anyone own you. That includes political parties, feminist or anyone else either, not even me. >:-)
Look if you are a man then you are a man. I am a woman and I am a woman. Yes there are non binaries but...
Look this may sound so messed up but forget about any groups. Be an individual and be you8r own self.
But just be you. No apologies and no regrets. You don't need a "herd" to keep you safe. That is all on you. But they will try to use you so don't let them.
Yes Jenn that's great until one of those groups starts making alliances like some feminists did with the religious right to attack pornography or sex work.
Today exclusionary feminism is relegated to a few voices but don't think those people don't get quoted by the likes of brietbart saying "see even these far left women agree with us"
My sister leaned terf positions long before it was an acronym and as a result we remain estranged 20 years later.
As we grow up male bodied we can't help but acquire male characteristics and tendencies. We generally tend to be more aggressive and outspoken. (I specifically say generally because, generally there are no absolutes)
Many women would call this "male energy". They often want to get away from it it. Having an, all natal women event, is often to do just this, get away from male energy. Trans women who come to a group of women and demand inclusion are exhibiting the very trait that these women are trying to get away from. Women generally don't demand to be included in groups. They work to be included. . . Transwomen seem to understand this and don't generally exhibit male energy.
Personally, I spent too, too many years having to play nice with men. I too dislike male energy and try my best to steer clear of them now. For this approach I have found OVERWHELMING support in the Lesbian community . . .
Quote from: Gail20 on October 24, 2017, 01:53:51 PM
As we grow up male bodied we can't help but acquire male characteristics and tendencies. We generally tend to be more aggressive and outspoken. (I specifically say generally because, generally there are no absolutes)
Many women would call this "male energy". They often want to get away from it it. Having an, all natal women event, is often to do just this, get away from male energy. Trans women who come to a group of women and demand inclusion are exhibiting the very trait that these women are trying to get away from. Women generally don't demand to be included in groups. They work to be included. . . Transwomen seem to understand this and don't generally exhibit male energy.
Personally, I spent too, too many years having to play nice with men. I too dislike male energy and try my best to steer clear of them now. For this approach I have found OVERWHELMING support in the Lesbian community . . .
Maybe, maybe not. I get sick and tired of this whole male energy and female energy thing. I think we are what we are.
Example: I was talking to a 47 year old MtF who was saying that growing up she hated video games but only played or watched it to be with the guys. So I guess back in the 1980s video games were considered more of a male thing. Today however I see the ratio of male and female playing videos quite equal. I may even argue the female gender may play more from my experience ;).. its a generational thing.
In addition, since coming out, I have found I can be more sweet and sensitive yet also highly outspoken and will stand my ground of needed. All these things came out when I came out as a woman. So I would argue that is MY female energy. And one I wish to keep!
Quote from: Gail20 on October 24, 2017, 01:53:51 PM
As we grow up male bodied we can't help but acquire male characteristics and tendencies. We generally tend to be more aggressive and outspoken. (I specifically say generally because, generally there are no absolutes)
Many women would call this "male energy". They often want to get away from it it. Having an, all natal women event, is often to do just this, get away from male energy. Trans women who come to a group of women and demand inclusion are exhibiting the very trait that these women are trying to get away from. Women generally don't demand to be included in groups. They work to be included. . . Transwomen seem to understand this and don't generally exhibit male energy.
Personally, I spent too, too many years having to play nice with men. I too dislike male energy and try my best to steer clear of them now. For this approach I have found OVERWHELMING support in the Lesbian community . . .
I've known so many natal females who exhibit this exact behavior. Physically, mentally and sexually aggressive natal females straight and gay. Just as aggressive as any males I ever knew. Starting fist fights, arguments... my partner (natal female) used to avoid a natal female lesbian who made her very uncomfortable with predatory sexual advances.
This seems to
actually be about what makes a "real" female. At it's core, doesnt it? Energy, behavior, socialization. Thats all secondary to the real question.
At the end of the day, what makes a "real" female and more importantly
who decides what makes a "real" female seems to be the real question. What I have seen and what I am hearing is that natal women gatekeep what is or is not a "real" female, specifically these exclusionary feminists want it to be them alone who decide.
Are natal females subjected to a litmus test of their energy before inclusion? Subjected to a test of who is natal female or not based wholly on their energy, it seems really unlikely such a test would be successful.
It seems to me, a transwoman feminist, to be a really dim and negatively anti-feminist view that woman cant be outspoken or aggressive. What is true is that, amongst men, they often lack the societal, political, etc power/privilege to wield it like men do or against men in any meaningful way. That question of who has power/privilege presents a problem to those exclusionary narratives since transgendered people tend to have less in this society generally.
This seems to come down to, for the exclusionary feminists, that: Transwomen are not real women and therefore exempt from inclusion. Transmen are not real men, and worse, are gender traitors to be exiled/excluded.
At what point is my energy approved for inclusion, if ever?
Honestly, I find it best for my own health, mental and physical, to just start doing my best to steer clear of cis-gendered people and their cis-gendered structures in general. It seems to be the only choice we're allowed.
Quote from: SadieBlake on October 24, 2017, 05:32:11 AM
Yes Jenn that's great until one of those groups starts making alliances like some feminists did with the religious right to attack pornography or sex work.
Today exclusionary feminism is relegated to a few voices but don't think those people don't get quoted by the likes of brietbart saying "see even these far left women agree with us"
My sister leaned terf positions long before it was an acronym and as a result we remain estranged 20 years later.
Look. Militant feminist hate femininity. We MTFs embrace femininity. We strive to be feminine and the more the better. Feminist hate this so naturally we are at odds with them. But it isn't about them but about you. I love smooth skin and smelling my hair and all the other work that goes with it.
Yeah well you have the far right and you also have the far left. Both are fringes because 80 to 90 percent are either center left or center right. And we are making progress.
So don't let one side or the other make you angry and bitter. They do not represent the "people" and the more militant you are and the less understanding and compassionate, the more they will reject you. Let them understand and be compassionate of ignorance and the more they will at least try. ???
Just some of my thoughts anyway.
Quote from: Jenntrans on October 24, 2017, 05:09:40 PM
Look. Militant feminist hate femininity. We MTFs embrace femininity. We strive to be feminine and the more the better. Feminist hate this so naturally we are at odds with them. But it isn't about them but about you.
Some militant feminists are anti-femme however that's more second wave feminism. Intersectional feminism which is the mainstream of the movement at this point is quite accepting and actually the more radical, the more accepting has been my experience.
Likewise some MTF women, not all, embrace a more feminine is always good affect. I am so glad to feel free to dress femme post op (it was always about the bulge before). I don't pass, most people are ok with that though also I'm virtually always misgendered by people I don't know. I knew this going in and so, so be it, I don't have time or space in my life to sweat passing.
The world is not black and white. I used terms like "generally' and "sometimes" in my post. You cannot generalize behavior for groups.
As for "male energy". Its a bundle of characteristics. Much of them are culture-based that have to be unlearned. Its stance and attitude, its a sense of entitlement, its baseless confidence, and many others. . . Certainly women sometimes share these characteristics, but even when they do, they are often tempered. But not always. . .
I've been on the board of directors of companies that are household words, I've played Division I sports in college (contact sports). One of my proudest moments though was after having a casual conversation with a guy at a party, he told one of my girlfriends, "Gail, doesn't have a male bone in her body" . . . I've killed off the male energy vibe. . .
I don't want to hijack this thread any further. This particular group of feminists are exclusionary to all transpeople and it centers around gatekeeping and judgment and its wrong.
this sums it up:
QuoteExclusionary feminism/masculinism is toxic. No one else has the right to determine the legitimacy of your identity.
Quote from: Gail20 on October 25, 2017, 02:15:14 PM
The world is not black and white. I used terms like "generally' and "sometimes" in my post. You cannot generalize behavior for groups.
To clarify, I'm just talking about these particular feminists and I just think its not really generalizing when its part of their laid out principles. I dont see this being an issue with intersectional/radical feminists.
QuoteAs for "male energy". Its a bundle of characteristics. Much of them are culture-based that have to be unlearned. Its stance and attitude, its a sense of entitlement, its baseless confidence, and many others. . . Certainly women sometimes share these characteristics, but even when they do, they are often tempered. But not always. . .
You're free to believe however you want, I'm not claiming otherwise. I just think this is dangerous thinking personally. Women and men are not unequal in reality. Women can do anything men can do. Individually I've seen nurturing, gentle, tempered, and maternal men and I've seen women rule with an iron fist and cruelty that rivals any man. Believing anything else is to believe in inequality of womens ability to be anything any other human can. The problem is that this isn't the case/belief societally. The only difference is that women lack the privilege/power to wield it like men do largely because of societal norms, classing, and force. Which can be ended.
Quote from: SadieBlake on October 25, 2017, 09:40:26 AM
Some militant feminists are anti-femme however that's more second wave feminism. Intersectional feminism which is the mainstream of the movement at this point is quite accepting and actually the more radical, the more accepting has been my experience.
Likewise some MTF women, not all, embrace a more feminine is always good affect. I am so glad to feel free to dress femme post op (it was always about the bulge before). I don't pass, most people are ok with that though also I'm virtually always misgendered by people I don't know. I knew this going in and so, so be it, I don't have time or space in my life to sweat passing.
Well I embrace feminism totally.
You are quite right but militant feminism probably should be renamed anti feminine. I mean I love everything about femininity from long hair to plucking and shaving to makeup to making my boyfriend wait on me to my earrings to my high heels to my dresses and skirts to all of the BS we have to go through. But it is not BS though. It makes us feel real.
I mean I don't want the hair under my arms or on my legs or anywhere else. >:-) I don't want thick unruly eyebrows and I don't want hairy legs. I love red nail polish and then coral or pink on both fingers and toes. I love hoop earrings and the bigger the better and the heavier the better but also drop down earrings too. I love make up and just feel normal as a woman. I may not be the most beautiful woman in the world but I am not the ugliest either. :-\
Quote from: katiekatt on October 26, 2017, 02:08:54 PM
You're free to believe however you want, I'm not claiming otherwise. I just think this is dangerous thinking personally. Women and men are not unequal in reality. Women can do anything men can do. Individually I've seen nurturing, gentle, tempered, and maternal men and I've seen women rule with an iron fist and cruelty that rivals any man. Believing anything else is to believe in inequality of womens ability to be anything any other human can. The problem is that this isn't the case/belief societally. The only difference is that women lack the privilege/power to wield it like men do largely because of societal norms, classing, and force. Which can be ended.
Herein lies a huge issue though. A lot of exclusionary feminists make their arguments against trans identities on the basis that the very qualities we claim to possess are not inherent but social constructs that can be possessed by males and females. So my question is, if there is truly no such things as inherently "male" or "female" behavior, then what are we left with? On what basis are our identities based? A large number of trans women come to the conclusion that they are trans via interest in femininity, and trans men via interest in masculinity. Does this make a large number of us sexist for drawing the conclusion that we are men/women because we like things stereotypical of men/women? Or is it that certain stereotypical behaviors are characteristics inherent to a large portion of the population, to varying degrees, and absent to a few?
In either situation you have exclusionary feminists. If there is scientific evidence backing brain sex differences, then they will argue against it because they will see such a discovery as retrograde and sexist. But if our identities are ethereal, intangible, and, in essence, merely ideological, then they will fight it because then we are deconstructing language, and thus, reality.
Not really sure where I was getting at with this. I guess the first was a question in regards to there being no such thing as inherently male/female personality traits (which, in my view, renders trans identities into unverifiable claims to being the opposite sex and, at worst, a response to the oppression of cross-sex behavior), and the latter being the inevitability of any idea to face opposition... I guess it doesn't really matter ultimately because you will always have nay-sayers. There are people who still claim that the earth is flat... Which brings me back to the topic at hand that being, it's a mixed bag. Feminism is as ideologically messy as Christianity. Even within the mainstream there is no unified belief system because everyone has different interpretations of what is considered sexist behavior. Ask any self-proclaimed feminist what they think of the presence of trans men, you'll get some answers that are the same, and others that are way out there.
Allie,
The science has been solid for quite some time that there are differences in male and female brains. It's true some people will misuse this information to either claim the science is bad because they don't like the implications or that they draw some silly conclusions extrapolating on the science. Because like feminism and religion, science is messy. It's the process of creative destruction of understanding because our understanding always falls short of reality and beliefs that our understandings mean anything are always fundamentally in error.
Quote from: Jenntrans on October 26, 2017, 02:32:40 PM
Well I embrace feminism totally.
You are quite right but militant feminism probably should be renamed anti feminine. I mean I love everything about femininity from long hair to plucking and shaving to makeup to making my boyfriend wait on me
Jenn if that's what you think I said, I'm, sorry I didn't express myself clearly enough.
I damned well know a lot of militant feminists and every single one of them is pro femme including the Butch women, trans men etc. Yes there are terfs out there, I'm lucky to only know one who happens to be my sister and since she's not an activist her views pretty much influence herself.
Here's everything I think it means to be feminist
Feminist: a person who believes in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.
No more, no less.
I will touch up on what my girl Sadie said. It is mainly that. Thing is the TERF's dont care. They will happily through out the non-binary-ish life where you can be as feminine or masculine as you wish (as long as you take a solid idenity with your birth gender) just as happily as they will team up with right wing religous folks like Walt Heyer who detranitioned and beleives that there is a difference between not only what a male and female is in gentics, but how they should act, live and think like. To them, it doesnt matter. No ryme or reason other then to dislike trans people because, many of them think that no matter your internal ques or life, if you are born XY you have a life of privliege the moment you come out of the womb and if you are XX you are a victim of society. If you are born XY and you were one of those kids who showed extreme signs of feminity and also idenified as a girl and as a result got bullied, abused or even sexually assulted they will still see you as a problem and that even if you faced all those issues you still have ''male'' previledge and you will never know ''real opression'' and if someone who was born XX and did nto face those issues and had a great life, well that XX girl is more of a victim then the other example I gave. TERF idelogy is based on the opression olympics. They complain and even target others but do nothing to help people rise up.
Quote from: Allie24 on October 26, 2017, 11:17:51 PM
Herein lies a huge issue though. A lot of exclusionary feminists make their arguments against trans identities on the basis that the very qualities we claim to possess are not inherent but social constructs that can be possessed by males and females. So my question is, if there is truly no such things as inherently "male" or "female" behavior, then what are we left with? On what basis are our identities based? A large number of trans women come to the conclusion that they are trans via interest in femininity, and trans men via interest in masculinity. Does this make a large number of us sexist for drawing the conclusion that we are men/women because we like things stereotypical of men/women? Or is it that certain stereotypical behaviors are characteristics inherent to a large portion of the population, to varying degrees, and absent to a few?
In either situation you have exclusionary feminists. If there is scientific evidence backing brain sex differences, then they will argue against it because they will see such a discovery as retrograde and sexist. But if our identities are ethereal, intangible, and, in essence, merely ideological, then they will fight it because then we are deconstructing language, and thus, reality.
Not really sure where I was getting at with this. I guess the first was a question in regards to there being no such thing as inherently male/female personality traits (which, in my view, renders trans identities into unverifiable claims to being the opposite sex and, at worst, a response to the oppression of cross-sex behavior), and the latter being the inevitability of any idea to face opposition... I guess it doesn't really matter ultimately because you will always have nay-sayers. There are people who still claim that the earth is flat... Which brings me back to the topic at hand that being, it's a mixed bag. Feminism is as ideologically messy as Christianity. Even within the mainstream there is no unified belief system because everyone has different interpretations of what is considered sexist behavior. Ask any self-proclaimed feminist what they think of the presence of trans men, you'll get some answers that are the same, and others that are way out there.
Yes. More or less people trash stereo types but... sometimes people are stereotypical of gender. I mean I have a closet full of shoes. I have and love makeup, nail polish, long hair and so on and that is stereotypical female. I pluck my brows and shave my legs and underarms and that is stereotypically female. I have both ears pierced and love wearing large hoops or drop downs and again stereotypical female.
I mean everyone seems to think stereotypes are a bad thing. All of my traits, likes and so on are stereotypically female and I can't help it. It is part of who I am. I mean I like bangs and they make me look feminine and actually serve a purpose of keeping my hair out of my eyes. But also feminine too.
So who you are is who you are and I could care less about stereotypes. If anyone wants to call me a stereotype then that is fine. I guess I am. ??? But I do like it though. >:-) I just hate body hair and short hair on my head and so on.
So no one don't worry about what anyone else or groups says because as long as you are happy and comfortable with who you are then that is all that matters. No one owns you and no one can tell you how to feel or express yourself. That is all on the individual person. So be unique.
Look there are a lot of guys that like trans women and some claim it and some won't. The porn industry is a good indicator of this. In real life, sex sells and that is true. Look at all the advertising, the porn business and all with an open mind and understanding of what it all means.
It is a double edged sword though. Or FTM brothers are accepted by men more than we are but we are desired by men more than they are and women think different than men and can more acceptably be lesbian than men can be considered gay. Then you have society in which why would a man want to be a "sissy"? Well all I can say it is who we are. No excuses from me. I am a sissy and a trans woman so whoever don't like it can kiss "IT".
I have been trashed as a ->-bleeped-<- by a lesbian in public and she didn't even know me. :P WTF? I think she was trying to make points with the men that worked there since it was in a shop. :-\ Two guys stood up for me and she was kicked out of the business.
Sexual desire is obvious and most would call me gay because I have a penis and like guys. Even LGBs say I am gay because I like guys but gender identity is way deeper than sexual desire. Self Identity is who we are and how we see ourselves. I am a woman. I have my own desires and wants from a man.
So what a feminist says about me don't make a rat's butt to me. How I think of myself though does and I will not ever be shamed of made to feel bad about it.
I cry. I cried for Las Vegas, NYC and I cried for Texas and over many things like that that has happened. I feel a lot too and stuff like this hurts.
Not to get political but politics will not save us, that is on us individually. No political party will swoop down magically and save your either and that goes for both parties.
But I will say again, Trans Men are men. Take someone like Buck Angel. I would rock his world. :embarrassed: :embarrassed:
Quote from: Allie24 on October 26, 2017, 11:17:51 PMNot really sure where I was getting at with this. I guess the first was a question in regards to there being no such thing as inherently male/female personality traits (which, in my view, renders trans identities into unverifiable claims to being the opposite sex and, at worst, a response to the oppression of cross-sex behavior), and the latter being the inevitability of any idea to face opposition... I guess it doesn't really matter ultimately because you will always have nay-sayers. There are people who still claim that the earth is flat... Which brings me back to the topic at hand that being, it's a mixed bag. Feminism is as ideologically messy as Christianity. Even within the mainstream there is no unified belief system because everyone has different interpretations of what is considered sexist behavior. Ask any self-proclaimed feminist what they think of the presence of trans men, you'll get some answers that are the same, and others that are way out there.
Let me clarify. In my opinion, i see it like this:
What makes humans wholly unique is they can choose who to be when it comes to ethical or unethical, violent and peaceful, all the basic human traits we share. Some of us, male or female, are born more aggressive and violent individually. On top of that societal norms influence our propensity for one trait or another based on culture. Over time we've created evolutionary changes. All of this together means we get different mixes of people and somewhat predictable societal norms. We are however, our identities, and that is not societal or an option. Transmen are men, transwomen are women, some of us are neither, some of us are fluid.
Based on what I have learned. Studies show women and mens brains differ. I bet agender and fluid peoples brains differ as well. Studies show transmen and transwomens brains better match the gender they identify as. Men and women... female/male ARE different. They do have their own behavioral tendencies. They do have differences.
We're all a mix of nature and nurture. It doesnt mean women have to never be aggressive or men must always be. We're rational creatures, male, female or whatever identity.
Societal constructs allow and even reward things like aggression to be wielded specifically by men with impunity. It's literally taught by media, school, and the home. For women, not so much. Unless of course in the service of men. It's madness, in either direction.
That error, from my view, further comes when people start acting like one identity or another is inherently less or less capable than another as if one or the others ability to reason is "less" or "more" than the other. When they try to class peoples value on the basis of identity as if they are "less" or "more".
Quote from: katiekatt on November 06, 2017, 09:27:23 PM
We're rational creatures...
No, we most certainly are not.
Quote from: rmaddy on November 07, 2017, 01:14:40 PM
No, we most certainly are not.
We're capable of rational thought is all I meant. To each their own, its just my belief.
Rationality has been used historically/theologically to create separation between us and the other animals. I certainly agree that we are capable of reason, but so is my dog, on occasion. Usually though, he just follows his appetites, just like the rest of us.
I'm a student of philosophy in a manner that the best I can muster here without hijacking any further is: I agree to disagree.
Quote from: rmaddy on November 07, 2017, 01:30:57 PM
Rationality has been used historically/theologically to create separation between us and the other animals. I certainly agree that we are capable of reason, but so is my dog, on occasion. Usually though, he just follows his appetites, just like the rest of us.
I totally agree Maddy especially when you said we are not rational creatures.
We are different than most animals yet we humans are still primates and capable of being rational but... that is the problem. We are still animals more or less with instinctual desires. When animals are hungry they eat or hunt to eat or sniff out food if an herbivore. We humans have a spiritual practice of fasting and that takes a lot of willpower to overcome the instinctual and physical hunger.
Like my last post and I was drinking a little too much Chablis when I wrote it yesterday, what makes a human being want to kill another human being? Yes I would if my life was in danger but not for revenge or anything else. Animals don't kill just to kill but humans do. Most animals kill to eat or for defense or to defend their own and so on. But they don't kill for the sake of ending a life knowingly or for revenge or for anything else other than defense and in the case of carnivores, food.
Take the Vegas Shooter. Why kill people that haven't done anything to you or pose a threat to your life and so on? I was married once and my in-laws were asses but I never wish no harm on them in the possible case of the Texas Killer.
So you are so totally correct except that humans are capable of rational thought and reasoning but we are also impulsive more than we are instinctual.
I have a CCW and I carry a .380 all the time. If I am walking down the street and someone calls me a ->-bleeped-<- or she male, yes it will make me angry but no way they can kill me with words. So I would never pull it or even let the jackass/jackasses know I have it. I just walk away. Now if someone pulls a gun or knife on me or tries to carjack me then I will pull it and use it if need be. Where I live you can carry in your vehicle concealed or not within the vehicle but not on your person and I usually use the big brother to the .380, a Beretta 9mm with hollow points. If pulled over all I have to do is tell the cops first thing. They may run the numbers but usually they don't care too much.
I have property in the country and I carry there because of coyotes and my dogs. Then you have mountain lions which may attack and so on. Also a population of black bears but none of these animals makes me as nervous as going into downtown because all the other animals are predictable but humans are not.
But humans are capable of rational thought but unfortunately a lot don't use it. Some want to hurt or even kill others that are different, think differently, believe differently and so on than them. I have seen lionesses walking among what they may consider prey and did nothing because they were not hungry or hunting. So what animal is less rational than the others? I would say humans. And no, not everyone but some.
Quote from: rmaddy on November 07, 2017, 01:30:57 PM
Rationality has been used historically/theologically to create separation between us and the other animals. I certainly agree that we are capable of reason, but so is my dog, on occasion. Usually though, he just follows his appetites, just like the rest of us.
There is an important distinction to be made here in the distinction of rationality and higher reason... Just because we are rational beings, does not preclude that other animals are not as well. Many are quite rational. Are they able to reason in in a Cartesian abstract? No. (But that doesn't mean they will never be able to given a certain evolutionary path.) And this absolutely does create a separation between us and other animals, just as a platypus being an egg laying mammal separates it from other animals, or any other unique evolutionary feature does the same. But that doesn't mean we will always be separate or are separate in entirety (ie: we aren't
inherently separate), simply that we are separate for now in that one regard. Though this is a notably important regard insofar as it has led us to our current role in the world. (And I know that the platypus is not the only egg laying mammal, it was just an easy example that is relatively unique. ;D)
As for the issue of instinct/appetite... I would hold that following these things is entirely rational. Not always reasonable, but pretty much definitively rational. Self preservation, propagation of the species, and all that. (Example of not being reasonable even if rational: Eating the last of a seed bearing fruit that could have been planted to grow even more fruit long term. If you're hungry, eating it is rational. But the lack of foresight and long term planning make it unseasonable. Playing into the separation of humans from most animals, few if any would do anything but eat the piece of fruit outright. Agriculture isn't big with squirrels and badgers.)
In regards to issues such as the Vegas shooter Jenn mentioned... Well, we also have to remember that rationality and reasoning is subjective, and us being rational and reasonable beings does not exclude the possibility of damage to our cognition in some form. The truth is no one acts without a reason. No one. It's just sometimes an absolutely insane reason as per the standards of the majority, but rational and reasonable to the individual nonetheless. I recall a thought experiment that goes through a number of questions regarding justification being based in belief, things that overwhelmingly people agree to. It then turns it around with the example of a serial killer who believed he was killing those possessed by demons or who were alien lizard men or some such, and saving humanity by doing so. It often catches people in a philosophical quandary in which they believe action is justified by belief, but that the killer's actions are not justified by his beliefs. I personally don't buy into that line of thinking (I hold that a belief is justified, but that justification ends where someone else's sovereign beliefs begin), but it does illustrate the issue of subjective reasoning.
Quote from: Roll on November 07, 2017, 03:01:43 PM
There is an important distinction to be made here in the distinction of rationality and higher reason... Just because we are rational beings, does not preclude that other animals are not as well. Many are quite rational. Are they able to reason in in a Cartesian abstract? No. (But that doesn't mean they will never be able to given a certain evolutionary path.) And this absolutely does create a separation between us and other animals, just as a platypus being an egg laying mammal separates it from other animals, or any other unique evolutionary feature does the same. But that doesn't mean we will always be separate or are separate in entirety (ie: we aren't inherently separate), simply that we are separate for now in that one regard. Though this is a notably important regard insofar as it has led us to our current role in the world. (And I know that the platypus is not the only egg laying mammal, it was just an easy example that is relatively unique. ;D)
As for the issue of instinct/appetite... I would hold that following these things is entirely rational. Not always reasonable, but pretty much definitively rational. Self preservation, propagation of the species, and all that. (Example of not being reasonable even if rational: Eating the last of a seed bearing fruit that could have been planted to grow even more fruit long term. If you're hungry, eating it is rational. But the lack of foresight and long term planning make it unseasonable. Playing into the separation of humans from most animals, few if any would do anything but eat the piece of fruit outright. Agriculture isn't big with squirrels and badgers.)
In regards to issues such as the Vegas shooter Jenn mentioned... Well, we also have to remember that rationality and reasoning is subjective, and us being rational and reasonable beings does not exclude the possibility of damage to our cognition in some form. The truth is no one acts without a reason. No one. It's just sometimes an absolutely insane reason as per the standards of the majority, but rational and reasonable to the individual nonetheless. I recall a thought experiment that goes through a number of questions regarding justification being based in belief, things that overwhelmingly people agree to. It then turns it around with the example of a serial killer who believed he was killing those possessed by demons or who were alien lizard men or some such, and saving humanity by doing so. It often catches people in a philosophical quandary in which they believe action is justified by belief, but that the killer's actions are not justified by his beliefs. I personally don't buy into that line of thinking (I hold that a belief is justified, but that justification ends where someone else's sovereign beliefs begin), but it does illustrate the issue of subjective reasoning.
Yeah Roll but sometimes people are just totally insane. I do the psychology deal. Well more parapsychology than clinical psychology though. Blessed crosses work in some cases and some they do not. But believing a cross has been blessed is different than wanting to kill people for being "reptilian beings".
Subjective reasoning? I can't explain how blessed crosses work for some and don't work for others other than their faith that it will work. Living in a place that is supposedly haunted or has paranormal activity is appealing to some and don't even bother them and to others is does and sometimes to the point it effects them negatively psychologically.
What kind of psychological defect does it take to kill someone just for the sake of killing? I don't know the answers because I can't comprehend the mentality. But it could be some type of psychosis though. The reptilian theory would fall into that category. But reasoning would be asking yourself what threat do these people that may or may not be reptilians from another planet pose to me? I mean there is a saying that a sane person will always question their own sanity but an insane person is totally convinced they are sane.
I will tell you right now that I am crazy as hell. >:-) But I have fun and don't hurt anyone other than feelings maybe. :embarrassed:
But subjective or not, sometimes there are just evil people that want to hurt or kill others in our midst. The Vegas Shooter, The Texas Church shooter, Hitler. Mao and a lot of others. I think the possibility was always there. I mean the Texas murderer broke his own child's skull and the Vegas shooter treated his girlfriend like crap so... Maybe it was always there waiting to come out.
Quote from: Jenntrans on November 07, 2017, 03:36:57 PM
What kind of psychological defect does it take to kill someone just for the sake of killing? I don't know the answers because I can't comprehend the mentality.
Sadly, not that extreme of one in likely statistical terms. Many people (though I absolutely do not believe most people) are capable of killing or desire to kill someone just for the sake of killing, for any number of what are disturbingly logical reasons (this actually is one of those things that doesn't set us apart from many animals, who contrary to popular myth often do kill for fun). The bigger question may be what defect drives them to be willing to do so even though they will get caught/killed/etc. in the process, as those aforementioned many do not act on those desires because the desire isn't strong enough to be worth the risk.
QuoteBut subjective or not, sometimes there are just evil people that want to hurt or kill others in our midst. The Vegas Shooter, The Texas Church shooter, Hitler. Mao and a lot of others. I think the possibility was always there. I mean the Texas murderer broke his own child's skull and the Vegas shooter treated his girlfriend like crap so... Maybe it was always there waiting to come out.
I agree, and do definitively believe in evil. Unfortunately, rationality and reason have often been the justification, or rather excuse for true evil, and because of this evil has been able to be sold to the masses far more often than I find comfortable (ie: the legitimate Nazi electoral victories or popular support for the Soviet and Chinese revolutions).
Where I live you can carry in your vehicle concealed or not within the vehicle but not on your person and I usually use the big brother to the .380, a Beretta 9mm with hollow points. If pulled over all I have to do is tell the cops first thing. They may run the numbers but usually they don't care too much.
[/quote]
Unless you are black, in which case they shoot you as soon as you tell them. #philando
Quote from: rmaddy on November 07, 2017, 06:23:47 PM
Where I live you can carry in your vehicle concealed or not within the vehicle but not on your person and I usually use the big brother to the .380, a Beretta 9mm with hollow points. If pulled over all I have to do is tell the cops first thing. They may run the numbers but usually they don't care too much.
Unless you are black, in which case they shoot you as soon as you tell them. #philando
No I have seen the Videos. The cop should have asked where the weapon was before asking for ID and disarm him if necessary. And to be completely honest it is not a black or white thing. It is a thing of the cop wanting to get home to their family at the end of the shift. My BF is a cop and he does not trip out with CCW carriers. He does however get on guard if someone has a weapon in the vehicle without telling him first thing.
OK in today's times this is what you should do when pulled over by the cops. Find a safe place to pull over, roll down the window and put both hands on the wheel. If you have a CCW and carrying then tell them first thing and then ask them if they want to disarm you. A cop will not steel my weapon and if they think it is no big deal then request them to disarm you for their own comfort and peace of mind. If they say no problem then move slowly to get ID or whatever else. And Rookies are definitely prone to overreact so if the cop is a "slick sleeve" then just assume they are a rookie.
I don't know the whole Philando deal and I doubt you do too. The Jury knew and the Judge knew but I will tell you that when you go through the CCW classes they teach you exactly what to say and how to act to a Law Enforcement Official if stopped. I know from my BF that some cars he stops sometimes are possibly stolen vehicles. Even speeding he never knows who he is going to stop. I worry so much about him. :'( So I am on the other side. But he works mostly admin but every now and then on patrol. Thank god it is a small town but when he does I can't sleep or even function for worry. :(
My better half tells me that when a call comes over the radio that you never know. When he pulls someone over for speeding he never knows if they are just trying to get from point A to point B, stole the care or even robbed a bank with nothing to lose.
And yes there are plenty of LGBT cops. They are right up there with the rest of the statistics. I love him with all of my heart and I want him to wake me up after his shift in the middle of the night or cook supper or breakfast for him and so on. Pretty much I am a cop's wife so the other wives always invite me so... It is a different world. Some of my family is skeptical and so on. Some of my old friends are the same way because he is a cop but off duty he could care less about whatever. After all he is just human too. ;)
Mmmm... ???
Just a little off topic...
Paula, X.
I wouldn't worry to much about the online feminists as they tend to be faceless keyboard warriors. The feminists I encounter in day to day life have been alright or very supportive with Trans people. It's hard enough being Trans without reading negative comments from 1 or 2 bigots xx
Quote from: paula lesley on November 12, 2017, 09:32:39 AM
Mmmm... ???
Just a little off topic...
Paula, X.
Not really Paula. Philando Castille made a mistake of reaching for his wallet after he told the cop he had a weapon and could carry.
I am trans and have a CCW and I still had to go through all the classes and pay for them. The state don't charge me a fee because I can provide my DDform214.
but yeah you are right on second thought because that is way off topic but I do have to defend myself too.
But hardcore feminist will hate anyone and that includes trans women and trans men. Pretty much anyone other than militant feminist. Now there are feminist out there that will accept us as women and there are men out there that will accept trans men as men.
Maybe just maybe the militant feminist view of trans men are reflected because they don't contribute to their own agenda. But to me anyone that hates someone else because of who they are and trash them are lacking in their own identities and who they are. Maybe they are so deep in the "closet" that all they can express is anger and hatred.
As for me trans men and trans women along with cis men and cis women and LGBs are all individual people. The only thing that I can think of is envy that makes people hate and discredit others.
I hope this is sort of back on topic. ???