QT/Trans: Trans women say feminism and women's rights should include ALL women, and this means anyone who identifies as a woman. But 99% of women are cis. Why then do trans women not care about the history and rights of 99% of women?

submitted by [deleted] from self.GCdebatesQT

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]usehername 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Some people think intersectionality is the "oppression Olympics" or a competition to see who is most oppressed. But that's just an internet myth

I think you're misunderstanding. I don't think that, nor do I know anyone who does, though I and others I know criticize "oppression olympics" because people really do attempt to compete to see who is most oppressed. I have never confused that with intersectionality, nor have I ever seen anyone else do so. The majority of articles there aren't about the intersections between womanhood and other minority classes. They're about other minority groups. For example, in the "Fem 101" section, the vast majority of articles aren't about feminism at all. There are also articles on the site about racism and disability, without mention of its intersection with woman/girlhood.

[–]GenderbenderShe/her/hers 1 insightful - 6 fun1 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Some articles do talk about how certain oppressions intersect, like what not to say to a mixed race woman, or how racism and rape culture work in similar ways. But you're right, most articles only focus on one topic. I'll admit I don't like many of their articles, like when they say food and yoga is cultural appropriation or we need to stop hating on sociopaths. I do wish sometimes they could be more specific in what allies can do. But I have to give them credit for some things.

  1. They always use racially-diverse stock images for their articles. For instance, in an article about disability, they had a photo of a Mongolian woman using sign language. You won't find this kind of representation on most American media.

  2. They're open to criticism. They posted an article about what employers can do to help food insecure employees, such as by changing the language around food insecurity. People criticized the article and pointed out the only thing employers can do to help food insecure employees is to pay their employees better. Everyday Feminism removed the article, admitted they were wrong and apologized. There are other instances when they were open to accountability.

  3. They talk about all kinds of oppressions, which affect women too. I am a disabled woman. Ableism affects me.

  4. The staff for their site are diverse, and they also believe in paying livable wages to their staff.

So those are the positive things about them. Also, anyone who is competing to see who is the most oppressed is doing intersectionality wrong. Intersectionality does not mean people get to silence certain issues just because they're more oppressed. But that's not something I see often enough that it's worth discussing.