Does GC feminism include trans men?

submitted by GenderbenderShe/her/hers from self.GCdebatesQT

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Speaking over means silencing them/ignoring them, and replacing their words with yours as the only true narrative, especially in official settings. Which we are not doing. They can say what they want about their experiences, and we can comment and share our opinions on the matter. That' s how I use it, at least.

It's not that different from saying "she's just hysterical".

OP has said it themselves that some of the things we say indeed happen. So no, it' s not the same at all, because "you' re hysterical" is used to demean our opinions, "you' re a selfhating lesbian and that' s why you have transitioned" is used to criticize their ideology more than them as people.

P. S.: that's the broadest possible application of included I can imagine. To that point its almost meaningless.

I have no idea what you mean with this.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Just because your movement isn't big enough to silence trans men does not mean that you guys aren't trying to speak over them. Let's just assume you guys were the dominant force. Then the dominant narrative would be, that trans men want to escape misogyny.

The argument of "im just sharing my opinion" is a tired one. Sure you can share it. Doesn't make it correct. If you want to create a narrative that does not reflect reality, then go ahead. But don't say you include those whose reality your narrative is not reflecting.

How do you know someone is a self hating lesbian and not a dysphoric dude?

If GCs include trans men, then the word includes has no meaning beyond a technicality.

[–]worried19 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

If GCs include trans men, then the word includes has no meaning beyond a technicality.

But if we include all female-born people, that means even the ones who don't want to be associated with us. What's the difference between GC including trans men and GC including conservative Republican Trump-loving women?

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The big difference is that, while if GC won conservative women would still exist trans men wouldn't.. We're talking about a group that sees the very existence of transsexualism as a human rights violation. It's not that trans men don't want to be associated with you.

[–]worried19 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

How do you figure that? GC is for gender abolition on the social level. No one that I've seen has proposed making it illegal for adults to have alterations done to their bodies. If there are people saying that hormones and surgeries should be outlawed, I definitely would not support it. If a woman can get breast implants, a trans man should be able to get a mastectomy, as long as both are of sound mind and intellectually capable of making that decision for themselves. I've never seen GC say they're against plastic surgery, except on minors.

We're talking about a group that sees the very existence of transsexualism as a human rights violation.

I mean, I don't see how it could be a human rights violation if we're talking about adults who are deciding for themselves. What's happening in Iran is a human rights violation because the poor people there are being threatened with violence and death. That's not happening in the Western world. There may be social pressure, but the state is not forcibly transitioning any adults.

[–]Porcelain_QuetzalTabby without Ears 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're not the majority of the GC movement. Or the vocal part that actually pushes for legislation infront of the UK parliament. That part can't possibly include any transsexual wether man or woman.

I'm not sure about the plastic surgery part. The issue is, that your movement is pushing the idea that trans people are delusional or forced [by the patriarchy]. This means, that no transsexual would be allowed surgery for transition. So if a movement say "surgery is okay as long as they are able to make the decision themselves" while at same time pushing that the people who seek them out aren't able to make that decision, seems dishonest. Please don't feel attacked. I doubt you think we are delusional. It's just that once looked at in the context of the movement the point looses a lot of weight.

[–]worried19 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I wouldn't say I'm necessarily part of any movement. I'm not an activist. All I do is write about this stuff online. I've never been presented with an opportunity to vote for or against anything related to transgender people.

Or the vocal part that actually pushes for legislation infront of the UK parliament. That part can't possibly include any transsexual wether man or woman.

I'm not in the UK. What legislation in particular are you thinking of? As far as I know, women in the UK are fighting to retain their right to single-sex spaces. I'm not aware of them trying to make it illegal for adults to access hormones or surgery. I haven't heard that they're against protected spaces for transsexual women, just that transsexual women may not belong in the same spaces as natal women.

The issue is, that your movement is pushing the idea that trans people are delusional or forced [by the patriarchy].

They're not delusional. They know what sex they are. They're just unhappy with it. I don't think anyone knows what causes sex dysphoria. It's like depression or anxiety. No one really knows what causes those either, but they're real, and they cause people distress. People shouldn't be discriminated against for having mental health issues, no matter what they are. The patriarchy hurts plenty of people, trans and non-trans alike. It doesn't mean that people shouldn't have the ability to control their own destiny. If people want to adopt the social roles of the opposite sex, then they should feel free to, with or without hormones or surgery.

This means, that no transsexual would be allowed surgery for transition. So if a movement say "surgery is okay as long as they are able to make the decision themselves" while at same time pushing that the people who seek them out aren't able to make that decision, seems dishonest.

That seems like a huge reach to me, and I don't think it's accurate of what GC believes. Trans people aren't mentally incompetent. They're adults who have perfectly normal brain function, reasoning skills, emotional maturity, etc. They can make their own medical decisions. To my way of thinking, if someone is a grown adult of sound mind and body, they can make a reasonably free choice on whether or not to pursue transition. I say reasonably because we are all influenced by society, but as free as it can be while living under a patriarchy. The government here is not going to threaten or force people to transition, unlike in Iran.