Cont: Trans Women are not Women 4

[TurkeysGhost]

Trans-activism looms a lot larger in society than do transsexuals themselves. It's not about how many people actually are in this situation. It's about the degree to which a vocal minority of activists will end up controlling the narrative about this and punishing those who question it.

I don't have to be in the tiny minority of people who are reevaluating their sexuality now that their partner is transitioning. I can be in the vast majority of people who identify as homosexual or heterosexual, and still be subject to cancellation attacks by openly adhering to that view.

Forgive me if I'm not losing any sleep over the fear of being cancelled for being straight. Trans panic screeds just don't scare me.

 

[theprestige]

Way to dismiss the experiences of lesbian women as "no big deal".

Seriously, why is it that the experiences of females are so frequently dismissed as unimportant and not a big deal? They're so often deemed "not representative" with no proof whatsoever when they don't conform to what a male believes the reality ought to be.

I think the hard truth is that if you want your lesbian experiences to be taken seriously, you have to become a man first.

 

[theprestige]

Forgive me if I'm not losing any sleep over the fear of being cancelled for being straight. Trans panic screeds just don't scare me.

Nothing to forgive. There's no sin in not thinking my prediction will come to pass. I for one am content to wait and see if I'm right or if I'm wrong. If I turn out to be right, maybe we can talk then.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Here you go again, trying to elide the fact that TERF ideology is a minority.

These lesbian women trying to gin up trans panic do not speak for all lesbian women. Why do you keep insisting on silencing women by trying to elide lesbian women who support trans rights?

Let's walk this back.

Lesbian women get called bigots and vagina fetishists and harassed because they don't want to have penises in their vaginas. They believe that their sexual attraction to the opposite sex is valid. They resist being pressured to submit to penetration by male genitalia from male-bodied people who identify as women. They speak out about being pressured and harassed and mistreated.

You say "They are TERFs trying to stir up trans panic"

Yes, there are plenty of lesbians who support trans rights - including many of the ones who don't think they should be required to have penises inside of them in order to show support.

Why don't you have even one word of sympathy and compassion for those lesbians? Why do you seem to imply that the behavior of those transwomen, even if they are a minority, is acceptable? Your position on this suggests that you feel it is acceptable for a male-bodied transwoman to pressure a cis-lesbian into allowing them to put their lady-penis inside of them, and to call them bigots and terfs and to deride them if they don't... but it's NOT acceptable for a cis-lesbian to define her own ******* sexual boundaries?

 

[Emily's Cat]

I think the hard truth is that if you want your lesbian experiences to be taken seriously, you have to become a man first.

This is ever the burden that females must bear...

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think the hard truth is that if you want your lesbian experiences to be taken seriously, you have to become a man first.

Or not be a TERF.

Over the past two months, 12 editors and publishers from eight of the most prominent lesbian publications in the U.S., Canada, Australia and the U.K. have signed on to a joint statement titled “Not in our name” condemning the idea of “lesbian erasure,” viewed by many LGBTQ activists as anti-transgender.

“DIVA, Curve, Autostraddle, LOTL, Tagg, Lez Spread The Word, DapperQ and GO Magazine believe that trans women are women and that trans people belong in our community,” the statement reads. “We do not think supporting trans women erases our lesbian identities; rather we are enriched by trans friends and lovers, parents, children, colleagues and siblings.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/pro-lesbian-or-trans-exclusionary-old-animosities-boil-public-view-n958456

If you care about lesbian voices, listen to lesbian women who are deeply offended that bigotry is being done supposedly on their behalf.

TERF bigotry against trans people is not the majority view of queer people or lesbian women.

 

[Emily's Cat]

TERF bigotry against trans people is not the majority view of queer people or lesbian women.

How the holey zebus crispy is it "TERF bigotry" for lesbians to refuse to have penises inserted into their vaginas, and to feel that they shouldn't be harassed and labeled as bigots for defining their own sexual orientation and boundaries?

If you care about lesbian voices, support the lesbians who don't think they should have to submit to a good shtupping in order to avoid being mistreated as "vagina fetishists"!

 

[Ziggurat]

How the holey zebus crispy is it "TERF bigotry" for lesbians to refuse to have penises inserted into their vaginas, and to feel that they shouldn't be harassed and labeled as bigots for defining their own sexual orientation and boundaries?

That's the motte. The bailey is the "lesbian erasure". He's retreated to the bailey for now, but the motte is still there.

 

[d4m10n]

How the holey zebus crispy is it "TERF bigotry" for lesbians to refuse to have penises inserted into their vaginas, and to feel that they shouldn't be harassed and labeled as bigots for defining their own sexual orientation and boundaries?

I'm afraid ST may've missed the receipts posted by Louden Wilde upthread:

https://lesbian-rights-nz.org/shame-receipts/

Sort of begs the question: Is this sort of sexuality shaming the activist fringe or is it the activist vanguard?

 

[cullennz]

I'm afraid ST may've missed the receipts posted by Louden Wilde upthread:

https://lesbian-rights-nz.org/shame-receipts/

Sort of begs the question: Is this sort of sexuality shaming the activist fringe or is it the activist vanguard?

That is one of the odder Web pages I have seen.

Wouldn't want to sleep with any people featured as they are weirdos.

It would be easier if women, trans women and women who are lesbians just got together and sorted their **** out.

Not blaming dudes for your internal issues would probably make it easier

Forgive me my atrocious spelling from my wee phone keyboard.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

How the holey zebus crispy is it "TERF bigotry" for lesbians to refuse to have penises inserted into their vaginas, and to feel that they shouldn't be harassed and labeled as bigots for defining their own sexual orientation and boundaries?

If you care about lesbian voices, support the lesbians who don't think they should have to submit to a good shtupping in order to avoid being mistreated as "vagina fetishists"!

No, of course not. Trans extremists who insist that lesbians must sleep with trans women are also bigots, like TERF extremists.

Trying to smear all of the trans movement by the most extreme, absurd fringe is a classic tactic used by reactionaries. I would never claim that TERF extremists represent all of feminism or all of lesbian women, because they don't. I would also reject the idea that trans extremists like you describe are anything but a fringe, bigoted group that doesn't represent the whole. Just like the reactionaries of old that would smear all lesbians as those insisting that straight woman become political lesbians, TERF reactionaries insist that all trans people are lesbian erasing extremists.

The desperate nutpicking is just a pretext for the real goal of TERFs, which is to dismiss the legitimacy of trans existence. You know, bigot stuff.

 

[Rolfe]

Link please?

Try this. There are also newspaper articles, but this is the funniest.

https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-portillo-moments/

 

[Rolfe]

I think the next thing to fall under the axe of trans-activism is probably going to be the gay-straight distinction.

Elliot Paige's girlfriend probably doesn't think of herself as straight. Probably doesn't see her attraction to Elliot as a heterosexual attraction.

But that causes problems for the "man in every way that matters" narrative. So I bet that within the next year or so we're going to start seeing a pop culture push to deprecate the whole idea of binary sexual attraction. Anyone who declares themselves decidedly homosexual or heterosexual will be pressured to revise that to some form of non-binary or binary-agnostic sexual preference.

Caught between dismissing the truth of the FtM transition, and dismissing the truth of her own sexual attraction to women, I bet people like Elliot's girlfriend will be pressured to dismiss her own sexual attraction.

It'll probably go something like, "Elliot was a man all along, so you were attracted to a man all along, so your lesbianism was really something else all along. Agree or get canceled."

That has already happened. It's transphobic to exclude people from your dating pool on the basis of what actual sexual organs they have. It's fine to exclude anyone who doesn't claim to have the internal feelz of the sex you prefer, but not having the sexual organs shouldn't disqualify them and you're a bigot TERF if you won't date a transman/transwoman for that reason.

Yeah, this. I should have read on.

"In the next year or so"? It's already happening. Particularly among lesbians. Great new terms coined like "vagina fetishist" for lesbians who don't like dicks. And the "cotton ceiling" has already been around for a good while - where genitally intact transwomen lament not being able to "break through" the gussets on those lesbian's panties with their "female penis" and have penis-in-vagina lesbian sex.

 

[cullennz]

These whole fringe things are basically just weirdos on Twitter though.

Most normal people just go on with life and live in the real world.

Forgive me my atrocious spelling from my wee phone keyboard.

 

[theprestige]

These whole fringe things are basically just weirdos on Twitter though.

Most normal people just go on with life and live in the real world.

This isn't true though. Normal people going on with life and living in the real world have lost their jobs due to outrage from weirdos on Twitter.

My workplace has fully internalized the "pronouns" issue. You're viewed favorably if you publish your pronouns on internal comms channels. It would be a severely career-limiting maneuver to question this practice.

The whole point and goal of the weirdos on Twitter is to continue normalizing more and more of the weirdness, and continue aggressively silencing anyone who pushes back.

 

[TomB]

No, of course not. Trans extremists who insist that lesbians must sleep with trans women are also bigots, like TERF extremists.

Agree.

However, it seems like lesbians who push back against statements that they should be willing to date women with penises are often (always?) labeled as TERFs.

Do you find this acceptable? Is it acceptable to label lesbians who push back against the idea that they should date people with penises as TERFs based solely on that issue?

Because it often seems that disagreement with any idea put forth by any trans voice is sufficient to get one labeled as trans-phobic/TERF/anti-trans. I find that to be problematic. (More on that below.)

Are there voices in the trans movement who call out the people who call lesbians vagina fetishists for their anti-lesbian bigotry?

Trying to smear all of the trans movement by the most extreme, absurd fringe is a classic tactic used by reactionaries. I would never claim that TERF extremists represent all of feminism or all of lesbian women, because they don't. I would also reject the idea that trans extremists like you describe are anything but a fringe, bigoted group that doesn't represent the whole. Just like the reactionaries of old that would smear all lesbians as those insisting that straight woman become political lesbians, TERF reactionaries insist that all trans people are lesbian erasing extremists.

Agreed. I'm pretty sure that the majority of trans-women get that most lesbians are not attracted to penises. And it is unfair to characterize the whole group by the fringe.

On the other hand, when the loudest voices of your movement...the ones who draw the most attention, admittedly because they have the wildest ideas...are the fringe groups, that's detrimental to your movement. If you don't somehow counter those voices, they become your movement.

It's similar to what happens with political parties. If the radical fringe becomes the loudest voice with little challenge, that voice becomes the definition of the party.

I'll also point out that holding some what I believe you call "TERF ideas" does not make one a TERF. For example, if one believes that sports are segregated for reasons of biological differences rather than social/gender reasons, that does not make one anti-trans, transphobic or a TERF. It means that you disagree on an issue. Similarly, believing the term "woman" refers enough to biology that it is unnecessary to alter language referring to female health does not make one a TERF/bigot/etc. It means that you disagree on terminology.

The desperate nutpicking is just a pretext for the real goal of TERFs, which is to dismiss the legitimacy of trans existence. You know, bigot stuff.

Is it really?

If you hold the view you just outlined, you should be pretty selective about who you apply it to.

But the usage of the term has grown to be applied to people (particularly women) who disagree (or do not fully agree) with any idea put forth by the trans-rights movement. It's no longer used as a description of position but as a derogatory slur to shut down debate:

P1: Trans people should have the right to....
P2: I disagree. I think that circumstance X means that there have to be limits on ....
P1: Well, you're just a TERF.
P2: No I'm not!
P1: You hold TERF ideas, therefore you are a TERF.
P2: Wait, I support trans rights. I just think that in this one area...
P1: Yeah, that makes you a TERF.

See, it shuts down discussion about the particular positions of P1 and P2 and shifts the conversation to P2 defending their character instead. It's a great debate tactic, but a poor discussion tactic.

For that reason, I dislike it when the term is thrown around. It's also counterproductive. It doesn't shame someone to your side. It alienates them and pushes them to identify more with the radical TERFs you are opposed to.

 

[cullennz]

This isn't true though. Normal people going on with life and living in the real world have lost their jobs due to outrage from weirdos on Twitter.



My workplace has fully internalized the "pronouns" issue. You're viewed favorably if you publish your pronouns on internal comms channels. It would be a severely career-limiting maneuver to question this practice.



The whole point and goal of the weirdos on Twitter is to continue normalizing more and more of the weirdness, and continue aggressively silencing anyone who pushes back.

It is where I live. At least at the moment.

I work in a place with about 2000 employees.

If anyone actually put stupid stuff like chosen pronouns in an email signature they would rightfully have the **** taken out of them.

No one likes "Clingy. Precious"

Forgive me my atrocious spelling from my wee phone keyboard.

 

[Aber]

Tavistock has been giving experimental treatment to children, on the basis of diagnoses that don't control for other factors, and have NOT been continuing therapy and counseling for those children.

And got slammed by the court for not actually having any meaningful records of the experiments.

 

[Aber]

And Amnesty and Liberty jump in with their views on the recent Bell case:

There must be no further curbs to the bodily autonomy and determination of any young person, particularly young trans people and anyone who wants to access gender-specific health care.

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/amnesty-international-uk-and-liberty-joint-statement-puberty-blockers

They also seems to be trying to frame it as a threat to rules allowing under-16s access to contraception, although there doesn't seem to be anything in the judgement that would impact that.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Agree.

However, it seems like lesbians who push back against statements that they should be willing to date women with penises are often (always?) labeled as TERFs.

Do you find this acceptable? Is it acceptable to label lesbians who push back against the idea that they should date people with penises as TERFs based solely on that issue?

No, I don't believe I have done so. If any of my statements read that way, it's by error on my part.

Some of the linked organizations I've been talking about are about as explicitly TERF as they get, places like LGB (no T, intentionally) alliance. They take an explicitly TERF viewpoint, in that they are feminist, pro-queer people that specifically exclude trans people in that ideology that is otherwise very accepting. I refer to them as TERFs. Again, TERFs are only a small subset of the larger anti-trans community, and a rather small subset at that. The largest group of anti trans people is probably your run of the mill reactionary conservative, the type of person who is also likely anti-gay and anti-abortion, etc.

Because it often seems that disagreement with any idea put forth by any trans voice is sufficient to get one labeled as trans-phobic/TERF/anti-trans. I find that to be problematic. (More on that below.)

Are there voices in the trans movement who call out the people who call lesbians vagina fetishists for their anti-lesbian bigotry?

Agreed. I'm pretty sure that the majority of trans-women get that most lesbians are not attracted to penises. And it is unfair to characterize the whole group by the fringe.

On the other hand, when the loudest voices of your movement...the ones who draw the most attention, admittedly because they have the wildest ideas...are the fringe groups, that's detrimental to your movement. If you don't somehow counter those voices, they become your movement.

It's similar to what happens with political parties. If the radical fringe becomes the loudest voice with little challenge, that voice becomes the definition of the party.

Evidence of this usually seems to boil down to screenshots of nobodies on Twitter. The "receipts" linked in this thread seems to be just a bunch of Twitter cranks. Social media is chock full of extremely noisy fringe groups, including TERFs and anti-lebsian trans people like you describe.

Generally I wouldn't consider many of them worth much consideration. Unless I overlooked something, these fringe trans activists don't seem to have anything near the organization or reach of the TERF extremists. In the case of the Canadian TERF-run women's shelter, the group controlled a charity and was leading a campaign to challenge the now-passed pro-trans addition to Canadian civil rights law. They allowed their shelter to shut down rather than comply with trans-inclusive law. Or the more recent case of the UK TERFs advocating, successfully, for the state to prohibit trans-affirming medical care for consenting, under 16 year old patients. I'm not really seeing anything close to that level of power being wielded by the anti-lesbian trans extremists.

Is there anything equivalent from the anti-lebsian trans extremists you describe, or do they have little reach beyond their twitter screeds? You can see why I don't treat them as equally alarming, even if both are quite clearly bigoted in their ideology.


That's why I push back at the attempts for others on this thread to nutpick and try to smear all trans people by this fringe which, to my estimation, doesn't seem to amount to much more than twitter cranks harassing people on the web. That's repugnant, but doesn't really rise much above the general background level of bigotry that exists on social media and the wider web.

I wouldn't be surprised if many of the screenshotted examples are from accounts that are now banned from social media for violating anti-harassment policies. You won't see me bemoaning their absence, but there's no shortage of TERF defenders crying when bigoted trolls like Graham Linehan get the boot.

I'll also point out that holding some what I believe you call "TERF ideas" does not make one a TERF. For example, if one believes that sports are segregated for reasons of biological differences rather than social/gender reasons, that does not make one anti-trans, transphobic or a TERF. It means that you disagree on an issue. Similarly, believing the term "woman" refers enough to biology that it is unnecessary to alter language referring to female health does not make one a TERF/bigot/etc. It means that you disagree on terminology.


Is it really?

If you hold the view you just outlined, you should be pretty selective about who you apply it to.

But the usage of the term has grown to be applied to people (particularly women) who disagree (or do not fully agree) with any idea put forth by the trans-rights movement. It's no longer used as a description of position but as a derogatory slur to shut down debate:

P1: Trans people should have the right to....
P2: I disagree. I think that circumstance X means that there have to be limits on ....
P1: Well, you're just a TERF.
P2: No I'm not!
P1: You hold TERF ideas, therefore you are a TERF.
P2: Wait, I support trans rights. I just think that in this one area...
P1: Yeah, that makes you a TERF.

See, it shuts down discussion about the particular positions of P1 and P2 and shifts the conversation to P2 defending their character instead. It's a great debate tactic, but a poor discussion tactic.

For that reason, I dislike it when the term is thrown around. It's also counterproductive. It doesn't shame someone to your side. It alienates them and pushes them to identify more with the radical TERFs you are opposed to.

I don't think I've ever stated that anyone weighing in on the sex-segregated sports issue is a TERF. In fact, it's an issue that I'm still quite undecided myself and one that is quite tricky.

It is an issue in which the TERFs are very animated, as one small subset of those weighing in. I suspect they intend to use it as a wedge issue for the larger anti-trans agenda. Not all people opposing trans inclusion in sports are TERFs, but the TERFs are definitely very vocal on the issue.

People who want to engage on that issue is good faith should probably make it clear that bigots on their side are not welcome as allies. I would no sooner ally with a TERF on an issue than I would some fascist who happens to overlap in ideology about the evils of corporate power or whatever. Common cause with bigots always backfires.

Even if you think the TERFs hold the correct view on a certain issue, their broader, unwarranted animus towards trans people should be a dealbreaker.

With all that said, notice that none of this position will be received and interpreted in good faith by some here, specifically Emily Cat, who will insist with this blatantly bad faith claims of "men trying to silence women". I have yet to receive a meaningful response to my point that queer people, including lesbian women, are supportive of trans rights. EC will try to claim trans women are just men trying to silence "real" women, meanwhile lesbian women vehemently disagree with these TERFs extremists trying to advocate bigotry in their name.