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. 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.

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. )

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.