Genderbender

You can quote by putting a ">" before a paragraph. Saidit uses Reddit Formatting.

Debatable, and depends on what the feminist's definition of "rights" for women are. Is it female liberation? Is it separatism? Is it gender abolition? Is it post-genderism? And what are the methods used, and to what end? For example, many 3rd wavers are supportive of the legalization and normalization of sex work. 2nd wavers would say prostitution and pornography are a stronghold of the patriarchy. There is a fundamental disagreement in ideology there, and it is impossible for them both to be right simultaneously. Only one of them is actually fighting for women's rights.

For me, "rights" mean having the same equal opportunities and equal treatment. For instance, women not being fired for being pregnant, equal pay, ending rape and sexual harassment (which happens to men also). I support abolishing gender roles (such as "girl toys" and "boy toys") and gendered language. For instance, cousin is a gender neutral term, but aunt and uncle are not. I would like to use gender neutral terms. Mother and father will exclusively refer to reproductive roles, otherwise you can use the sex-neutral term parent. There will be no more foster mothers and foster fathers, just foster parents, as they were not involved in the conception of the child. You can tell me your parent is in the hospital. I would also eliminate he and she, and replace them with gender neutral pronouns in every language. I do support decriminalizing sex work, as criminalizing sex work only hurts the sex worker. Pimping however should always be a crime.

I support ending sex shaming. Women who are promiscuous or openly sexual are called whores, sluts, told they don't respect themselves, that they didn't have a daddy to tell them they're beautiful and they don't need male attention. Men who are openly promiscuous/sexual do not experience the same value judgements. There was a thread on the old GC sub criticizing J.Lo for doing a strip tease at the super bowl. They said rich, powerful women who do this are objectifying themselves and are victimizers, unlike the vast majority of strippers who are victims. First of all, if you find this objectifying, change the channel and don't strip tease. Second, it's rude to label someone a victim without their consent when no crime has been committed against them. Those women may or may not feel victimized. I have my criticisms of the mainstream porn industry, but it feels like GC is against any and all sexual entertainment by women. If men are seeing every women as sex objects, they need to be addressed, not the women.

The problem is that before transition, trans women are treated as male and actually benefit from the pay disparity in the workplace, not suffer from it. I do wonder if there have been any studies done on transitioned/passing trans women in the workplace and what the paygap is compared to cis women, that would be interesting to see.

I have heard from trans people that they were treated differently once they transitioned.

This is vague and subject to individual interpretation. What does that concretely look like, and what material objective can be pursued to achieve it? I've had conservative women tell me they feel most "equal" when they are subservient to their traditional husbands.

What I meant by being seen as competent is being taken seriously at work. For instance, not having men mansplain you, having your ideas taken seriously, not just taken seriously when a man says the same thing afterwards. Also people not assuming you're less competent because you're a woman, which is the reason women get paid less than men.

Prosecuting rape is not just a feminist issue because it affects everyone. However, I'm glad you brought up the topic of rape, because it disproportionately affects females by male perpetrators. And by ending sex-segregated spaces, there are loopholes which will allow predators to enter those spaces unquestioned. This is already becoming an problem with female prisons.

I agree that rape is a problem, but I think the solution is private spaces, not sex segregated spaces. For instance, locker rooms should have stalls anyway, because why do you need to see a strangers genitals, same sex or not? Rape was always a problem in female prisons. Women rape and sexually harass other women. It doesn’t get as much attention, but it happens.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are you referring to "slut shaming" or something else?

Yes, slut shaming.

This is great, these are important women's issues. However, abortion access and menstrual stigma are still priority too, ESPECIALLY in countries and cultures outside of the West. I have never seen trans women step up to the plate and fight with cis women to maintain these rights. Cis women are expected to fight for trans-specific issues, but trans women don't extend the same courtesy.

To an extent I agree.

In fact, it seems when they do talk about it, it's to say "stop calling them women's issues! you're making us feel left out" and center their feelings instead.

It's mainly trans men who insist you stop calling AFAB issues women's issues. It was a trans man who fought to remove the female symbol from Always products. It is trans men who insist you say "pregnant people".

At protests and marches for reproductive rights, pussy hats and uterus signs are branded as "TERF".

No. You are branded a TERF when you say things like "trans men aren't men" or "trans women aren't women", calling transgenderism misogyny, etc.

Why are cis women not allowed to talk about issues that affect their biology and 99% of women in general? If it affects 99% of women, it's a women's issue.

You are allowed to talk about those issues. Everyday Feminism and other social justice groups that are trans-supportive speak about these issues as well.

You're right, and this is my point. Title IX allowed for the establishment of sex-segregated spaces in schools and girls to be given their own sports etc. away from boys, by prohibiting sex discrimination. Prohibiting sex discrimination is what allows for girls to participate in opportunities that are equally afforded to boys. It applies to trans people too, you're correct, because trans people also have a sex.

Title IX does not require separate restrooms and locker rooms though. If schools built gender-neutral facilities, it would not violate Title IX.

Trans activists/feminists are deliberately trying to undo "on the basis of sex" by obfuscating sex and gender identity and render it meaningless.

I don't think using the term gender necessarily renders it meaningless. For instance the New York City Department of Education has Guidelines on Gender Inclusion. It states schools may not create gender-specific dress codes. If a school allows girls to wear skirts, they must allow boys to wear skirts. Schools can't require gender-specific attire for yearbook photos and graduation or other school-sponsored activities. Schools must also allow students to wear hairstyles regardless of gender.

As I stated in my original post, if anyone can identify into any gender or sex, then there is no reason to have any segregated spaces at all based on either gender OR sex.

The only area I support sex-segregated spaces is in sports.

Why were sex-segregated fought for in the first place, why was it necessary, why was it an achievement for women's rights? It is these questions that no QT has answered me, as I said in the OP, which is why I have a fundamental problem with their reasoning.

That's because previously spaces were male only with no substantial women's equivalent. Many of us would not mind gender-neutral spaces.