Lesbian Fears vs Trans Rights: An Honest Expository
TS-SI
By Maureen Hennessey   
21 June, 2011


http://www.ts-si.org/guest-columns/30700-lesbian-fears-vs-trans-rights-an-honest-expository


Given the loose definition of who is covered by the transgender umbrella, accommodation protections are feared by these Lesbians, with the spectre of the occasional crossdresser who is "alice" today or a "misogynistic *sshole gay drag queen" demanding to enter and being entitled to enter the showers or locker rooms.

A clear understanding of who is or is not protected by accommodation laws would be helpful to them; open ended "gender identity or expression" coverage is objectionable to them. Some of them are opposed to changing the gender marker on the driver's licenses' of male-genitaled people for this reason as well.

also at PHB w 100+ comments http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/19478/lesbian-fears-vs-trans-rights-an-honest-expository

There is a disgusting amount of classism present here.  Not all girls have the funding to allow them to go through SRS (or HRT even), so it's just absolutely unacceptable to view genitalia as a criteria for being allowed to change the gender marker.  This is just good old-fashioned biological essentialism.

" There does not seem to be any realistic attempt at dialogue or reconciliation by the components of the trans community visible to their eyes, only a struggle for dominance that more than a few Lesbians have described as alpha male behaviour * "

The radical feminists have been using this argument since the early seventies.   Transwomen are damned if they do and damned if they don't.    Any sort of display of self-respect, self-confidence shown by a transwoman is very likely to be labelled 'alpha male behaviour'.   In contrast so-called meek, timid, putting the wishes of others before your own,  stereotypical ' female ' behaviour is equally derided by many lesbian activists.  Transwomen who go along to get along may well be accused of being 'what a man thinks a woman should be like'.    Radical feminists like Mary Daly and Janice Raymond have written saying that transwomen want access to, in their words, 'womyn-only' places in order to do two things (1) Steal female energy, the implication of this is that transwomen don't have any female energy of their own and have to take it vampire like.   (2) Act as agents of the patriarchal system and suppress female anger, power, and consciouness.     Julia Serrano writes that  the radical feminists and political lesbians emphasis on the possession of male anatomy actively downplays transwomens' sense of being female.     Secondly, reducing a person to their body part(s) is ironic given the fact that feminists have fought for years for women to be seen as more that just possessing certain body and anatomical parts!



* underlining mine.

Quote from: EmilyElizabeth on June 29, 2011, 04:25:52 PM
There is a disgusting amount of classism present here.  Not all girls have the funding to allow them to go through SRS (or HRT even), so it's just absolutely unacceptable to view genitalia as a criteria for being allowed to change the gender marker.  This is just good old-fashioned biological essentialism.

and that is precisely where I have to exit the conversation/debate.  Call it classist if you will, but quite frankly, I am in the camp of not wanting male genitalia in my locker room or sauna...

You will probably find that radical feminists and political lesbians are not much more accepting of post-ops.  The standard line from these people is that post-ops still possess 'male energy' and furthermore they seek entry into women-born spaces to take-over and and commandeer that space - like typical men -  and undermine womyn-born womyn's consciouness raising and justified anger at patriarchal society.   We all know that the major and minor feminists as well as many sociologists consider mtf transsexuals as being in their words 'the uncle-Toms of gender'.

nm, I'm backing out of this topic as well.

Take care everyone.

For these people 'male energy' is always negative, boorish, aggressive, unloving, anti-family, anti-child, anti-women, anti-foreigners, unspiritual, greedy, materialistic, impatient  and intolerant.   By contrast 'female energy' is always loving, empathetic, nuturing, empowering, balanced, sustainable, enriching, non-acquisitive,  non-greedy, sympathetic and tolerant. 






   

Every time I read this piece again, I can't help but think the author wants to write another.

Or am I being a little one sided.

QuoteLittle girls learn to flirt with their fathers. You know, kiss daddy good night and that sort of business.

Germain Greer

I think you are right Spacial, it really didn't seem to reach any sort of conclusion.  I was looking for a few more paragraphs myself.

I am also wondering what this so called "male energy" is.  Is it kinetic, chemical, potential, electrical?Or is it  just psychobabble, used when one is unable to formulate a rational, defensible argument?

Karen.

Quote from: Ann Onymous on June 29, 2011, 09:28:24 PM
and that is precisely where I have to exit the conversation/debate.  Call it classist if you will, but quite frankly, I am in the camp of not wanting male genitalia in my locker room or sauna...

I fail too see how a woman who is likely chemicaly castrated or like me actually castrated can pose a danger to any other woman with her basicaly non functioning penis.

I am not aware of very many transwomen out there who are even phyicaly capable of penetrating a woman in the heat of passion let alone rape a woman.

Quote from: cynthialee on June 30, 2011, 09:54:40 AM
I fail too see how a woman who is likely chemicaly castrated or like me actually castrated can pose a danger to any other woman with her basicaly non functioning penis.

I am not aware of very many transwomen out there who are even phyicaly capable of penetrating a woman in the heat of passion let alone rape a woman.

Is it not sufficient to simply hold an opinion that I don't like anything other than a vagina in my sauna or locker-room?  It has nothing to do with 'danger' or even a perception of such...and that is something that the pre and non-op's never seem to grasp.  But again, the experiences of the post-op (which in this case mirror that of probably most [if not all] natal women) get shoved aside by the non-operative persons...

Quote from: Ann Onymous on June 30, 2011, 11:16:16 AM
Is it not sufficient to simply hold an opinion that I don't like anything other than a vagina in my sauna or locker-room?  It has nothing to do with 'danger' or even a perception of such...

Would you be able to say what you think it does have to do with, for you? I'm interested. No obligation, only if you're willing to say.

Personaly the few times I ussed a public shower in the ladies locker room I ussed a single person shower with a curtain. When I changed I changed either in a single person curtained changing stall or in a toilet stall. The entire time I was there I was painfully aware of my anatomy and took extreme care to not expose my genitals.
It would seem to me that this would be pretty much standard fare with the preop crowd who are mostly ashamed and mortified they have male privates.
Honestly, how many dicks are waving about in the womens locker rooms that this is even an issue?

I don't like anything other than a vagina in my sauna or locker-room?

Should men's rooms be penis or out?

Quote from: cynthialee on June 30, 2011, 11:47:43 AM
Personaly the few times I ussed a public shower in the ladies locker room I ussed a single person shower with a curtain. When I changed I changed either in a single person curtained changing stall or in a toilet stall.

sounds like the only logical solution to me. how could anyone want to expose a woman to the men's locker room anyway? it's only fair to have a curtained shower or changing stall for the ones who don't want their full naked body seen by others/strangers, and in the sauna you could just hide those unwanted parts with a towel. i wish women were more protective of each other and tried to find good working solutions, instead of constantly discussing whom to send to the wolves next, like some feminists and lesbian activists seem to do

Quote from: tekla on June 30, 2011, 12:18:20 PM
I don't like anything other than a vagina in my sauna or locker-room?

Should men's rooms be penis or out?

LOL

The policy some seem to be advocateing will result in FTM in the ladies rooms. Gendered laws do not go only one way. If you ban the dreaded penis from the womens facilities you will end up banning vaginas from the mens facilities.
Now who here would like to see some of our macho FTM brothers in the womens room due to a technicality of genitals?

If you ban the dreaded penis from the womens facilities you will end up banning vaginas from the mens facilities.

It's the status quo ante  - We'll go through all sorts of bending, revising and such and then toss in the towel,and let things go back to the way it's been,   

It's just an issue of sex vs. gender, and in the end sex will win because it's the easiest.

Quote from: tekla on June 30, 2011, 12:41:37 PM
It's just an issue of sex vs. gender, and in the end sex will win because it's the easiest.

i strongly believe in thought over matter. gender will win in the end, and science will help us make it happen

society might be a little more difficult to convince though

The thing that boggles my mind is how everyone took this "letter" at face value. I mean come on. This turd is a page right out of Dobson's playbook! If you want my opinion, the trans community has been trolled. Hard.

First of all, if Maura's as old as she claims to be, she cannot have missed the irony here. Seriously! How many times did she have to sit through letters just like this?  How many "concerned women" was she forced to take seriously, all claiming to support gay rights, but all claiming to just not feel safe showering with lesbians? How many times has she endure through cutting-edge "science" proving that lesbians are much more masculine and aggressive than normal women, and that they're much more prone to violence, harassment, and rape?

This letter's no different. You've got your shadowy group of "concerned women" who are all for trans rights, but they have some "concerns"... Like always, it goes without saying that such concerns deserve equal billing with other people's rights. Like always, it goes without saying that they have the sole power to determine who gets to go to the bathroom to begin with. You've got your fears for their safety, and your logical proof of how trans women are much more dangerous than "normal women".

They even threw in the requisite irony of soi-disant feminists expressing their belief in the power of the almighty penis. An organ so powerful, that it erases and dominates all of womanhood. An organ so powerful, that it brainwashes all that possess it and gives them the insatiable urge to abuse people. An organ so powerful, that even a testosterone-starved, weakened female penis is a grave threat to all in the vicinity.

I have to give them credit, though. They are bold. In one breath, the women feel perfectly at ease ridiculing the trans community's strife, and they're only too happy to tell us all about it. In another, they express how scared they are of trans women, so much so that they have to stay underground lest they suffer reprisal from the all-powerful trans mafia. I think that, more than anything should have tipped people off.

Honestly, the only thing this letter is missing are some anecdotes! I feel cheated, honestly. A letter like this needs to have at least one anecdote about how "this one time this woman I knew" went to the bathroom and got raped by an actual man in a dress, and how he got off scot free because gender identity/expression protections for public accommodations somehow does away with all penalty for sexual assault...