To all of you trans ladies out there

submitted by AdmiralPangolin from (self.GenderCritical)

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

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Spikygrasspod 63 insightful - 1 fun63 insightful - 0 fun64 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

It's not bad faith. It's a carefully considered position. I think 'woman' refers to a sex, not a social expression. I used to be very interested in compromise, but I am rapidly losing patience as I see people deliberately using our polite lies--that men can be a kind of sort of women if they try--to justify female erasure and male entry into women's spaces. Look at Rachel McKinnon. He says he's a legal female, therefore he's female, therefore he belongs in women's sports. He's using a legal fiction designed to reduce people's discomfort with reality in order to intrude on something women have carved out in an attempt to create substantial equality of opportunity in a male centric society. Maybe little linguistic concealments would be appropriate in a different political climate. But the equivocation of people like McKinnon forces people like me to clarify. Only men can be transwomen. There is nothing wrong with being a man. But there is something very wrong with appropriating womanhood.

[–]jjdub7Gay Male Guest Commentator 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The difference is that both Rose and Blaire are males who've undergone SRS and openly acknowledge the reality of their 'identities', for lack of a better term. Both of them are homosexual (male-attracted) transexuals (the canonical "true" trans, if you will). They are not the adversaries you're looking for in this fight.

Rhys McKinnon, on the other hand, is a sexually-intact, fully-male-bodied person taking estrogen and calling himself a "female" as if that were his innate biological sex and viciously attacks anyone who does not precisely confirm to his worldview. Rhys wants to be able to re-write the rules to be allowed in female-only intimate spaces as a male-bodied person - i.e. locker rooms, (the spaces formerly known as) lesbian bars, the now-defunct Mich-fest, etc. - with no concern for how his presence as such may violate the millennia-old standards of human decency that we've operated on since the dawn of civilization.

One of these two ideologies is driven by a legitimate medical phenomenon and would like nothing more than to mind its own business; the other is driven by pure, unbridled narcissism and demands your participation and submission.

The former deserves a modicum of respect for trying, even if you can't see eye-to-eye with it given your own lived experience. The other should be castigated at every opportunity.

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

I don't see them as adversaries. I also don't think any amount of trying can make one female. I'm also worried that it's considered disrespectful to be honest about someone's sex, even when it's relevant to the conversation. But I guess I don't care what someone calls themselves as long as they aren't trying to undermine female separatism. Do Rose and Blaire demand access to women-only spaces?

[–]WrongToy 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Blaire White has said publicly many times that they are pre-op, and because they are they don't go into locker rooms.