What “all feminists must recognize”
This time we have to start with the title, whether a sub chose it or not.
Trans women are victims of misogyny, too – and all feminists must recognize this
No. There is no such “must.” Trans women are male people, and there is no “must” that commands feminists to extend their feminism to men. No. All trans activists must stop trying to bully feminist women into changing the subject to men. No.
The subtitle is also bad.
Some feminists claim misogyny targets only those who have female sex features (ovaries, vaginas and uteruses). We should be alarmed by this view.
No. We should be alarmed by the spectacle of people telling us men can be women, and the Guardian publishing them.
[S]ome feminists claim that misogyny targets only those who have female sex features ( such as ovaries, vaginas and uteruses). For these feminists – sometimes called “trans-exclusionary” feminists – trans women’s interests are none of their concern. Feminism, they say, is for people who are victims of misogyny, and anyone without female sex features cannot be a victim of misogyny.
We should be alarmed by these views. Feminism’s history displays a pattern of (mostly white, non-disabled and financially stable) women deploying claims about difference to justify ignoring the needs of women of color, disabled women and working-class women. The exclusion of trans women risks becoming the latest manifestation of this terrible pattern.
No it doesn’t. That’s a crude caricature. It’s fair to say that many feminists have focused on women like themselves and overlooked women less like themselves, and thus that feminists who had better access to the media thanks to their class and race didn’t always do a good job of remembering to use that access to include women of color, disabled women, working-class women, lesbians, immigrants, and so on. It’s not fair to say that those feminists systematically argued in favor of “ignoring the needs of women of color, disabled women and working-class women.”
It’s true that feminism now includes explicit arguments justifying claims that men are not women, but that’s radically different from mythical arguments justifying claims that working class women are not women or that women of color are not women. I don’t believe that anyone ever argued those last two items, while some insubordinate feminists do argue the first one. But what are we supposed to do? Working class women and women of color and immigrant women and lesbians are in fact women, but trans women are men who “identify as” women. There’s a great gulf between the two sets.
I do think it’s true that misogyny is part of why trans women are subject to high levels of violence (if not as high as the wilder claims suggest). I also think all this could have gone differently, but I differ from Robin Demroff in thinking that misogyny is a huge part of why it didn’t. To spell it out, I think way too many trans women are themselves intensely misogynist, and that’s why the whole “inclusion” thing hasn’t worked out.
Oh, come on, OB! Next you’ll tell me that Georgia and Alabama are targeting women for having ovaries, vaginas, and uteri.
Oh wait, bad example.
Um, of course it only targets females – misogyny is the name for those prejudices / biases / hostility enacted against the female sex. Analogously, anti-semitism is the name for those prejudices / biases / hostility enacted against those of jewish ancestry, yet imagine the ridicule if some idiot had said “Some jews claim that anti-semitism targets only those tho have jewish ethnicity or cultural markers (jewfro, hook nose, surnames such as Cohen, Goldstein etc.). We should be alarmed by this view.”
But we don’t see any such thing happening with any other axis of prejudice to weaken the efforts of those fighting against it; it only happens with feminism. Females, i.e. women and girls, are being told they cannot describe and label the various forces acting against them or even themselves, and only women are being told this.
Exactly. If it were a trend that affected all subordinated groups it wouldn’t feel quite so…pointed. But it’s not, so it does.
And of course, it’s totally misrepresenting the fact that athough there have been people saying that say, Disabled women aren’t *really* women, not like the others, those people have tended to be male (or male-aligned). It’s saying that of course dudes don’t want a “defective” trophy/incubator/servant, because they don’t fulfill their “purpose”… Same with those who have denegrated Women of Colour, and so on.
It’s not actual Feminists who are saying those things. Might be a few Third-Wavers, like the women who got fed up with me pointing out that their amazing event was inaccessible to anyone without a wealthy husband to pay for all the demands they were making of potential attendees, but not the women who are really doing the work!
Ought to be closer to the top. The distress of legitimate transfolk, especially trans women, is a real thing. Too bad that fear and anger distort thinking to the point that the TRA fringe has hijacked these emotions into a misogynist rage at women, especially lesbians.
Young trans women are NOT being beaten and assaulted by lesbians. Homeless trans teens have NOT been rejected by their Lesbian parents. All that rage, directed in entirely the wrong direction.
Why especially trans women? Why, always, especially trans women?