I had some sort of realisation (probably not a huge one) while reading an article on feministing written by a trans about how transwomen are erased from people’s sexual preferences towards women and transmen (because life is all about sexual access, after all; at least to males), that it is useful to think of gender identity as the attempt for people to add yet another layer to humanity. To help illustrate this I have decided to use imagery provided by Trident for their Trident Layers product.

Image

Now, I did not define what was meant by Gender for each side because according to the Gender folks, both sexes can have any gender identity that they want. That said, when we look at each side we are able to discern that each side has being Human and having a Gender in common. They also have having a Sex in common, but each sex is different.

Now, the reason Trident layers and this image is so great for showing what the trans Gender folks are trying to do is reflected in the order as well as what the two sides have in common. Although the difference between the sexes is important (specifically for sex-based protection), it is often used in order to cover up the fact that both are still human. The Gender layer attempts to mask sex-based differences while adding a layer which is actually still completely shared between the two sexes. Since it has no actual definitions and is supposedly shared equally amongst the sexes, it results in a lot of cross-talk and tripping over one’s speech when used to justify things, such as why lesbians should be into transwoman peen.

In essence, the Gender layer looks like the Human layer, and both sexes are Human, so as long as they can cover up that pesky sex layer with enough Genderspeak then there are no longer any meaningful differences between peen and vagina, as long as they say there’s not. As in the article, you can see the reality that women and trans men both have vaginas, whereas transwomen have peen, being completely ignored for the sake of this cover up.

I have spent ages lately doing tonnes of introspection and trying to figure out some of the core components behind radical feminism. I shall share these here. Feel free to add to or refute anything, of course.

Radical feminists are extremely critical of males because they understand at a primal level the things which males are “supposed to do” with females. This is partially biologically reconstructed, but mostly societally enforced. This level of awareness brings with it criticism of how males interact with females and strong opinions and introspections on these behaviours. Although the results of this introspection may slightly differ between radical feminists based on sexual orientation, these perceptions and criticisms are very real and extremely important for both making women aware of possible things to expect from men and even making men aware of things they should or should not do.

Along with this, radical feminists are also blatantly aware of the reality of male violence against females. Radical feminists do not resort to victim blaming tactics or other misogynist, perpetrator-enabling tactics. Radical feminists approach the problem at a basal level, seeing the reality of male entitlement and propensity for aggression and violence, and how males harm females.

Radical feminists are extremely critical of trans women because they do not share the biological experience of being female that most of all women share (exceptions are XY and XXY females with various complications, although these exceptions are typically not part of the trans experience and thus still different), yet trans activists work to conflate gender and sex by saying that trans people must change their bodies because they are too feminine or masculine, and thus reinforce stereotypes of femininity for female born people. Trans also claim that their innate feelings and abstract ideas are what defines a woman, even if female born women say otherwise.

This conflict is not resolved at any sort of objective, basal level as radical feminists can do with biology, and thus radical feminists must be and remain trans critical. Not to mention the reality that some trans people have no intention to even change their hormonal make up (which is a large part of why males are more likely to show aggression with physical violence, and the driver of male sexual behaviour) or genitals, making them 100% male and thus bringing in worries of the criticisms of males.

Radical feminists are also critical of the society and interactions within it which enable the negative aspects of the things criticised. That being, a society which encourages male violence and aggression, while discouraging females from participating in certain occupations or activities due to negative stereotyping. Radical feminists must be and remain critical, along with as much of the population as possible, if this is ever to change and be corrected. Radical feminists are not around to bully anyone, but to make sure a balance forms between sex lines (not gender lines, as gender is a current problem) and females no longer need to fear male violence and harassment, or unequal opportunities.

Many times radical feminists, lesbians, other women, and probably carpets and puppies as well are accused of being “transphobic.” However, what does it actually mean? Is there one particular aspect of trans people we are to be scared of in general which superscedes the others?

Because in this case, I probably am transphobic because I am scared of the impact trans people will have on invisibilising sex-based work discrimination when they get a job in a male-dominated field as male, then switch sexes to get counted as female in equality statistics which a business can lean on, only then to be thought of by others as having enough male DNA and experience to get the job in the first place. (See Another Issue with Trans)

I am probably transphobic if it means being scared of how they empower the idea of traditional gender expressions to the point of making it a reason for transition. That being, since they were “too feminine,” they must actually be women. (See Issue with Trans Women)

I probably am transphobic if it means worrying about the impact which trans men will have on the identities of butch and other non-feminine-conforming women in the future; women who would normally have no desire to be male yet may be turned to this idea due to it becoming such a popular social path, as to almost be as popular for deviant FAAB women as intense femininity is for straight FAAB women.

However, the onus is on the trans people who shout that I am “transphobic” to calm my fears through their actions, not yell that I am transphobic, and do nothing to actually prevent the issues that they actively are causing. I am not bigoted; I am concerned.

http://twanzphobic.wordpress.com/2011/06/08/tootsie-of-the-week-natasha/

This months old post brings up yet another important way in which trans politics harms FAAB liberation from stereotyping, subjugation and workplace discrimination.

Speaking of male privilege, which Gray kept along with his dick:

Miss Gray, who is now a full-time consultant engineer, is keen to help others who may be hiding their true nature away.

Great, another tranz proxy. A male-dominated profession, and his place will count in the Equality Statistics as “female”, once again hiding the inequality that FAABs face in the workplace.

And that’s not the only problem with this either. See, the people (mostly men) working alongside Gray may do well to refer to Gray with female pronouns and such, but theywill still always keep in mind that Gray is/was male. As such, to them someone who is female bodied will still not be seen as a viable candidate for this job because the one who has it had the mind of a male when they learned it.

So in turn, this reinforces the idea that there is shit which female bodied people cannot do, along with already creating yet another false statistic since the individual got this job as a male, no matter what happened after the job was acquired.

I was thinking after all the events and thoughts of the day, and I wanted to try making a clear and concise reason as to why trans women pose a threat to females. Not the possible physical threat, but the one caused by their appropriation of “female styled” identity.

If tl;dr, read the bold.

The issue is that you (emperical) move throughout your life, collecting thoughts and ideas about what you perceive to define “woman,” “girl,” and “female.” This is from an external perspective because even if you feel like a woman, you still have no idea what it means to be and live as a female. Thus you often encompass ideals imposed by men onto women such as subservience, certain clothing choices and perceived material preferences.

This is dangerous to female liberation because it undermines the reality that females are full human beings, fully capable of acting, wearing and in general, being whatever they want. Carrying on male ideals of women as you were socialised to like and saw from the outside is not helpful to us.

Likely I am now transphobic for posting this, but I don’t stand to give a fuck in this regard.

Reposting this from my trumblr so it stays visible longer in case I flood my tumblr at some point.

bugbrennan:

Hi. All of the idiots saying “OMG sex with a trans women doesn’t have to mean penetration!”

First of all, gross.

Second of all, here’s the thing. Lesbians don’t like dick. We don’t want to be around it, whether it is “penetrating” or not. YOU SOUND EXACTLY LIKE HETEROSEXUAL MEN WHO SAY THINGS…

It absolutely astounds me how people cannot get such simple concepts, so I am reblogging this and have bolded and intalicised a rather important bit of information. If this it tl;dr just read the bolded section below.

Furthermore, a trans person ignoring their own biological reality in favour of daisy decorated delusions is not only being idiotic towards other people but also hurting their own cause.

Perhaps not all trans people are like my friend I mentioned on the one post I have actually made on my wordpress blog, http://cynicalcynthia.wordpress.com/2012/03/23/confusion-repulsion/. However, it would seem to mean that when it comes to transsexual people who think their body is the wrong sex and who wish to change that, they would be less inclined to do stupid shit like call a penis female and more likely to push the medical world towards doing more research into giving them the possibility of having fully female or male organs in the future.

Delusions that a penis is female and a body with a fully in tact penis and testicles can be female if someone thinks it is does not help people who like females to want your body, nor does it get the medical community moving to do things to actually help you.

So really this whole Cotton Ceiling debacle not only downplays lesbians’ desires for other female bodied people, but also the desires of transsexual people to have a body of their supposedly correct sex.

Outside of this of a bit socially retarded as it seems to ignore the basics mechanics of relationships, being an attraction between two individuals, not a compound incident involving perceived societal tendencies involving complicated social dynamics. So if you look like a dude and a lesbian does not want you, it is not because she is afraid of social backlash or transmisogynist, it is because you look like a dude. Simple as.

You can call that shallow, but even if such an argument held up it does not matter because her individual preferences did not include you and no consensual relationship could possibly form. Such is reality; get the fuck over it.

I may elaborate more on this concept in the future, but for now I have no plans in the works to really do so.

For now, although I tend to side with radical feminists on most issues, I saw something which threw me off; a quote from Germaine Greer in regards to trans women.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2012/03/14/in-photos-germaine-greer-glitter-bombed-for-trans-comments/

No so-called sex-change has ever begged for a uterus-and-ovaries transplant; if uterus-and-ovaries transplants were made mandatory for wannabe women they would disappear overnight. The insistence that man-made women be accepted as women is the institutional expression of the mistaken conviction that women are defective males.

I have no idea where she gets this idea, as a trans person very close to me would give their entire being if such a thing was possible; let alone mandatory. In a world where science had moved it to the luxury of being mandatory, she’d likely be the happiest being alive. The only reason she does not beg is its impossibility with current medical technology.

Perhaps other trans people who I don’t know think this way, or perhaps Greer has fallen out of step with the reality that we can only think and conclude with our own ideas by default and we must ask others of theirs directly to ever know them. Regardless, how this idea came to pass, it confuses me based on what I know through the person I know. Perhaps with all the ideas and ideals we form, we sometimes lose sight of the people behind them.

I am not sure down which path I intend to walk this blog, and thus no content is here yet. Stay tuned for population with random stuff, likely dedicated to various drama around the Internet.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.