GC (or even QT): Are trans men included in radical feminism?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I didn’t say anything about feminists needing to use preferred pronouns. I said i find no fault in not using preferred pronouns. All I said was that if a transman wants to be in a feminist space they should be allowed to, but that they can’t expect anyone to uphold their ideology or use male pronouns. I assumed Peaking meant the tm felt unwelcome in general, not just over pronouns.

Eta- maybe my last paragraph was confusing, in no way did I mean “welcoming” to translate to using male pronouns. I mean that if a tm wants to speak up about a female rights issue they should be heard, if they want to participate in a feminist setting they should be welcomed because they are female, but they will probably not feel welcome no matter what because the other women there may not feel obligated to refer to them as they wish.

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Sloane, sorry if I came off as disagreeable or argumentative. I was really just trying to amplify the position that feminists like me would take.

Peaking told an anecdote about a trans-identified female person who after identifying as the opposite sex tried to remain involved in "feminist activism advocacy"

but felt like he wasn’t welcomed as much anymore and used to get upset because he would be misgendered.

And you responded by saying

I don’t know why people would be rude to them, that’s odd to me. I could see people refusing to use male pronouns and that bothering them enough to not want to be in that environment.

Which sounded like you were saying that even though you understand why feminists would refuse to use male pronouns for female person, it would still be "rude" of us to do so, and therefore it's understandable that females who identify as men would "not to want to be" around women who are so "rude."

The rest of your comment seemed IMO to be suggesting that a main focus of feminism and feminist activism should be about "welcoming," "validating" and creating opportunities to be "heard and welcomed" for female people who have decided to base their core "identities" and build their whole lives on denying that they are female. Look at how many times you've used some variation of the word "welcome" in your two comments.

You seem to think feminism is a social club whose main purpose is to provide all female people - even those who reject their sex, embrace the most regressively sexist ideas and see males as superior to females - feel that they are included, that they belong, that they are welcome, and that they will always be heard. When some of us see it as a political movement that advocates for the rights and advancement of female people based on a critical analysis, and strong rejection, of the sexism, sex stereotypes, sex roles and sex-class hierarchy that trans-identified people buy into and perpetuate.

Sorry, perhaps I am just too over-sensitive from constantly hearing bunk like "feminism is for everyone" and "if your feminism doesn't include (or center) transwomen, it's not feminism," but I strongly disagree that feminism and feminists have a duty to roll out the welcome mat for all trans-identified females simply because they are female. I will include what's happening with such persons in feminist analysis, I will lobby for their safety and wellbeing, and I will advocate for their interests where those interests dovetail with the interests of the rest of the female sex. But I'm not gonna go out of my way to "welcome" all such persons in feminism and feminist activism - coz while I know some trans-identified females who are decent people and for women's rights, I've also met some who are amongst the most misogynistic, authoritarian, anti-feminist people I've ever come across. And nowadays many of these woman-hating female people are actively working to remove the rights and provisions that women of older generations fought hard to obtain and build.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think you misinterpreted what I was saying.

The “and” in peaking’s comment made me think that the transman being referred to was made to feel unwelcome in general, in addition to the pronoun thing. What I’m saying is that transmen are still female, and if they want to speak out about female rights they should be able to. They are still affected by female issues.

“The rest of your comment seemed IMO to be suggesting that a main focus of feminism and feminist activism should be about "welcoming," "validating" and creating opportunities to be "heard and welcomed" for female people who have decided to base their core "identities" and build their whole lives on denying that they are female. Look at how many times you've used some variation of the word "welcome" in your two comments“

...or my comment was specifically about a specific transman that someone was mentioning and not feminism as a whole... it’s a huge leap to say that I think welcoming transmen is a focal point of feminism. Again- transmen are female. They still have to deal with female issues. I literally said we shouldn’t have to accommodate their ideology or pronouns. The topic was literally about a trans man feeling unwelcome- I don’t think they should automatically be excluded from feminist discussions. That doesn’t mean I think that people should put them on a pedestal or alter the way they speak for their benefit. It also doesn’t mean I think we should bend over backwards to make them feel welcome. It only means I don’t think we should exclude them or dismiss them if they aren’t pushing trans rhetoric on us and are indeed there to support female rights.

“You seem to think feminism is a social club whose main purpose is to provide all female people - even those who reject their sex, embrace the most regressively sexist ideas and see males as superior to females - feel that they are included, that they belong, that they are welcome, and that they will always be heard.”

Please explain how my comments say that? Particularly when the first thing I said on this post is that we support transmen as females, but aren’t obligated to support them as trans? I said nothing about them always being heard- I said when the subject is actual feminism they shouldn’t be automatically dismissed.

“When some of us see it as a political movement that advocates for the rights and advancement of female people based on a critical analysis, and strong rejection, of the sexism, sex stereotypes, sex roles and sex-class hierarchy that trans-identified people buy into and perpetuate.“

So you think that a transman can’t support equal pay, or a woman’s right to choose? Or be against fgm? Do you.., do you not realize that transmen are female people, and that that’s why we’re even discussing including them in the first place?

“Sorry, perhaps I am just too over-sensitive from constantly hearing bunk like "feminism is for everyone" and "if your feminism doesn't include (or center) transwomen, it's not feminism,”

... transmen are not transwomen. Transmen are females. I said nothing about transwomen. In fact I literally said that feminism that centers or includes transwomen is not feminism at all, but go off I guess.

“but I strongly disagree that feminism and feminists have a duty to roll out the welcome mat for all trans-identified females simply because they are female“

Again- I literally said we don’t have to accommodate transmen. I said we don’t have to support their ideology. Someone mentioned a specific person, who they said was actually a feminist, and I said if they are indeed a feminist they shouldn’t have been excluded for being trans, but that none of the other women in that situation should be expected to censor their speaking for them. In fact, I also said that I could understand a transman feeling unwelcome specifically because we don’t adjust for them...

“I will lobby for their safety and wellbeing, and I will advocate for their interests where those interests dovetail with the interests of the rest of the female sex. But I'm not gonna go out of my way to "welcome" all such persons in feminism and feminist activism”

And I didn’t say you or anyone needed to roll out a welcome mat for them. You can’t automatically know that a transman is qt or really thinks they are a man. There are TW in this sub who readily acknowledge their sex and there are some who are gc. Why does that possibility not extend to transmen? If a transman wants to fight for female rights, and can respect that not every feminist is going to speak or think in a way that favors trans people, but still wants to fight for our rights, I’m not going to turn them away, didn’t say you couldn’t.

“ - coz while I know some trans-identified females who are decent people and for women's rights, I've also met some who are amongst the most misogynistic, authoritarian, anti-feminist people I've ever come across.”

And I said nothing about including those types of transmen. Once again- peaking and I were specifically discussing a feminist who happened to be trans. I didn’t say shit about qt/tra type transmen.

“And nowadays many of these woman-hating female people are actively working to remove the rights and provisions that women of older generations fought hard to obtain and build.“

I think out of the three of us, you’re actually the only one who was even talking about those people. Peaking and I were discussing a transman who was actually a feminist.

[–]loveSloaneDebate King 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Also- rude doesn’t mean refusal to use pronouns. Rude could mean dismissing another female automatically just because they’re trans, before you know what they are there for, before you even know what they actually believe. Rude could mean being generally mean or nasty to someone, when there’s no need. What I’m saying is that there’s no need or reason to be genuinely rude. And I could understand a transman choosing to not be in an environment where their sense of identity isn’t affirmed. Those are two separate thoughts. Just because I think that it’s okay to not use preferred pronouns doesn’t mean that I think a transman would want to stay in a space that is full of people who refuse. That doesn’t mean I think the refusal itself is rude- it means I understand that pronouns matter a lot to some trans people, regardless of what I think about it, and it makes sense that someone who thinks that’s important would remove themselves from an environment where people aren’t willing to accommodate them. I don’t have to agree with someone’s mentality to understand that response. And in no way am I faulting anyone for refusal or saying the refusal is rude in and of itself.

[–]peakingatthemomentTranssexual (natal male), HSTS 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Peaking told an anecdote about a trans-identified female person who after identifying as the opposite sex tried to remain involved in "feminist activism advocacy"

It was supposed to say “feminist activism and advocacy.” My comments always have typos. ☹️

[–]MarkTwainiac 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't even notice the missing "and." Typos are no biggie. We all make them, and it's very hard for all of us to spot the ones we make ourselves. Which is why in the old days print publications and publishers used to employ copy editors as well as proofreaders - two separate jobs.