This is for topical issues effecting our fair world... you can quit snickering anytime. Note: It is the desire of the leadership of SFDebris Conglomerate that all posters maintain a civil and polite bearing in this forum, regardless of how you feel about any particular issue. Violators will be turned over to Captain Janeway for experimentation.
clearspira wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:08 pm
The majority of people are very territorial about their sex. Like race, like religion, it is a unifying factor that brings people together. And with transwomen, the argument from TERFs seems to be that you have not suffered like I have. ''You do not have periods, you do not get pregnant, therefore you do not know what it is like to be a woman'' is contradictory in that many naturally born women cannot have children or have periods. Are they ''less of a woman'' as a result? That is a problematic road to go down to say the least. And I would say that a transwoman who has managed to pass to a high degree would be at the same risk of rape or sexual harassment as any other woman so that does not fly either.
The proper theoretical construct is more along the lines of "you didn't grow up being caste into a role that's historically rooted in marginalization so our fight doesn't concern the likes of you." It can go so far to posit that one can not choose to be in a class of subjugation. Other people have cited that transexual operation is bodily appropriation of women; appropriation being a fun topic to delve into.
I think the clashes among radical feminists has to do more with forward thinking vs historically receptive understandings of social systems.
clearspira wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:08 pm
The majority of people are very territorial about their sex. Like race, like religion, it is a unifying factor that brings people together. And with transwomen, the argument from TERFs seems to be that you have not suffered like I have. ''You do not have periods, you do not get pregnant, therefore you do not know what it is like to be a woman'' is contradictory in that many naturally born women cannot have children or have periods. Are they ''less of a woman'' as a result? That is a problematic road to go down to say the least. And I would say that a transwoman who has managed to pass to a high degree would be at the same risk of rape or sexual harassment as any other woman so that does not fly either.
The proper theoretical construct is more along the lines of "you didn't grow up being caste into a role that's historically rooted in marginalization so our fight doesn't concern the likes of you." It can go so far to posit that one can not choose to be in a class of subjugation. Other people have cited that transexual operation is bodily appropriation of women; appropriation being a fun topic to delve into.
I think the clashes among radical feminists has to do more with forward thinking vs historically receptive understandings of social systems.
The flaw I see with this line of reasoning is that the amount of men who transition far outweighs the number of women that do. You would logically think that if there was any kind of deception on offer it would be the other way around (women fleeing from the oppressed class) as opposed to men masochistically trying to become second class citizens.
(I am by NO means educated on the reasons for this volume difference so I am sure there are good reasons, I just think it seems like a pretty massive flaw in this idea that people are choosing to be subjugated).
I think feminists who claim there is no difference between the sexes have a fundamental incompatibility with the idea that someone can identify as a woman or man. There would be nothing there to identify as.
To me, the whole "are trans people the sex/gender they identify with" is one of semantics and just comes down to individual opinions. Get a test that can objectively identify woman/man/female/male (and not just note similarities in brain structure or activity), get everyone to agree with those criteria, and you've got a reasonable answer. Otherwise, it's just a lot of people shouting at each other.
clearspira wrote: ↑Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:08 pm
The majority of people are very territorial about their sex. Like race, like religion, it is a unifying factor that brings people together. And with transwomen, the argument from TERFs seems to be that you have not suffered like I have. ''You do not have periods, you do not get pregnant, therefore you do not know what it is like to be a woman'' is contradictory in that many naturally born women cannot have children or have periods. Are they ''less of a woman'' as a result? That is a problematic road to go down to say the least. And I would say that a transwoman who has managed to pass to a high degree would be at the same risk of rape or sexual harassment as any other woman so that does not fly either.
The proper theoretical construct is more along the lines of "you didn't grow up being caste into a role that's historically rooted in marginalization so our fight doesn't concern the likes of you." It can go so far to posit that one can not choose to be in a class of subjugation. Other people have cited that transexual operation is bodily appropriation of women; appropriation being a fun topic to delve into.
I think the clashes among radical feminists has to do more with forward thinking vs historically receptive understandings of social systems.
The flaw I see with this line of reasoning is that the amount of men who transition far outweighs the number of women that do. You would logically think that if there was any kind of deception on offer it would be the other way around (women fleeing from the oppressed class) as opposed to men masochistically trying to become second class citizens.
(I am by NO means educated on the reasons for this volume difference so I am sure there are good reasons, I just think it seems like a pretty massive flaw in this idea that people are choosing to be subjugated).
The idea is more that, starting from birth, females adopt a socially constructed burden that they grow into; and that that doesn't go away by recognizing one's self a man, nor does it develop by recognizing as a woman.
So it's not really a matter of fraudulent identity but of qualification. It's not dissimilar from the basis of Nerdom where there is a developed condition that's characterized as distinct from the otherwise harmonious mainstream. Since there's no basis of a male's experience that qualifies them as part of the hegemone, then it's not a necessary construct for the hypothetical that's being contradicted.
As a transgender woman myself, it’s a rather complex and complicated issue to try an explain because each of us is different.
I don’t get the physical effects of Gender Dysphoria as strong as some others. I can’t stand my body hairs and feel uncomfortable looking in a mirror. Other people, such as another trans girl I’ve been crushing on, get physically ill.
Some of us desperately want to be able to have female reproductive organs, others are fine with our male equipment.
We run the gambit of sexuality.
The whole broad strokes on what it means to be trans just doesn’t work.
Makes sense really, everyone is different after all and whilst you can sometimes draw some reasonable generalisations they'll always be approximate at best when applied to any individual (well there might be someone who happens to exactly line up with them by chance). I don't think we should shy away from generalisations - there are often common factors and understanding them should help everyone, but instead keep our minds open to their inaccuracies.
Maybe I'm making the mistake that I've just pointed out above, but I think that it's broadly interesting at any rate to think that it's generally regarded as fairly usual these days for a woman to do anything that traditionally men did, including clothing (plenty of clothes where the only difference is a different cut for a differnt body shape) but rather less so the other way around.
I guess it's hard to empathise with something you don't feel directly yourself - I'm a 100% straight man in that regard, and looking at a naked man is the biggest turnoff imaginable, but the trick is to regard "well, that works for me, other things work for other people - including more than would just be regarded as a fetish - use your own desires to empathise with that even if you don't remotely share someone else's." Direct feelings mean I can understand wanting to wear women's clothing as a fetish (not admitted that before admittedlty! - knew I should stick to "don't post after drinking!"), which may mean it's not as hard for me as it is for some to extrapolate to a more fundamental position even though I don't share it.
It would be a dull world if we were all the same anyway.
