Oger tells “cis woman” to be careful
Oh look, more “cis white woman=bitch cunt whore,” this time from the proudly non-cis (but still white, which seems careless) Morgane Oger.
That cis white female pedestal you put yourself on is your cage.
Say what? We don’t put ourselves on it, and it’s not a pedestal.
We don’t put ourselves on it because we didn’t make ourselves either white or female, we were just born both. It’s not a pedestal because we are still objects of contempt or loathing or both.
Dear cis woman leveraging patriarchy for personal advantage, I beg you to be careful what you ask for.
Dear condescending man telling women what we are and what to say, I beg you to fuck off.
Do you see that these words come overwhelmingly from well-off white women who face few other barriers than their role in the patriarchy they uphold to not fall from their their place?
He includes a photo of Meghan Murphy to underline the point – oh yes Meghan Murphy rolling in the millions she makes from freelance writing and organizing.
He really wants everyone to agree that women are in fact not an oppressed class but a privileged dominant exploitative one…because we don’t agree that men like Oger are women just because they say they are. He thinks that white women don’t get to count as women because they are just too privilege, so they are cis women instead, which makes them oppressors. (Does Oger ever snarl like this about “cis black women”? Any bets?)
He rants about purity tests then captions a photo of Rowling with
Is that Super Rich Oppressed Writer, really dressing up transphobia as feminism?
Well, is that Super Male Oppressed Trans Laydee really dressing up misogyny as feminism? Yes, he is, and he’s an asshole.
When I read commentary like yours, I am reminded of all the times supremacist ideology like you are thoughtlessly amplifying with your words has resulted in immeasurable harm to whole communities because individuals wrap themselves around Purity and Supremacy to justify their exclusion of others on arbitrary grounds rather than on conduct or any other action.
Except that “exclusion” of men from the category “women” is not arbitrary grounds, any more than it’s arbitrary to exclude elephants from the category “insects” or grapes from the category “fish.” The words are human inventions but that doesn’t mean that what they name is either arbitrary or random.
I put Oger in the category “dim bulb.”
It’s still stunning to me that people with so little knowledge of and interest in women’s lives believe that they are women.
To me too.
They play women. It’s a game for them. For us, it isn’t a game, it’s a reality. And for all too many of us, a deadly reality.
And sorry for asking, but didn’t someone mention on this site once that Oger is wealthy? Oh, wait, but being white and wealthy doesn’t give you privilege, it’s being white, wealthy (or not wealthy), and being female. Right?
So do black women who don’t accept trans women as women miraculously become white Karens?
So, trans women ARE women (who happen to be trans), but women are cis-women. So the debate then becomes one between women and cis-women. nice way to other real women and centre the imposters in the house.
Waaay back in my teens I came to the realisation that I was terribly glad to have been born a male, despite there being some downsides. A bit later on I realised I was also glad to have been born white, tall and free from obvious disfigurement. I didn’t choose any of these things they just happened, just as each and every person is born with certain immutable traits that just are.
I do however get to choose not be an arsehole to people. A lesson TRA/MRA types seem to have missed.
I imagine most women would be delighted to be on a level playing field, let alone a pedestal. As a class, women seem to struggle to stay out of the oubliette.
iknklast #3
I hate to keep bringing Kiwi Farms up but go there and search Morgane and find out all about his interesting financial shenanigans — divorce, cheating tribe out of money, hiding money in a foundation, etc. Some of what he did may be legal under Canadian law but it is all kind of shady as far as I am concerned.
I think this demonstrates new heights of absurdity:
That’s right, a man is accusing a woman of leveraging patriarchy for advantage over him.
How long until this is what’s taught in “gender studies?”
There seems to be a lot of rhetoric about how being female is a ‘privilege’, and women are being ‘gatekeepers’ and ‘not allowing transwomen into the club’, and stuff about ‘purity’ etc.–which suggests that these men think, or pretend to think, that it’s really awesome to be a woman and it’s unjust and unreasonable to deny aspiring women their position in the women club. Which shows that a) they don’t actually know much about what it’s like to be a woman (presumably they think they get all the goodies of being a man, plus whatever goodies they think being a woman entails) and b) they probably think it’s awesome to be a woman because (they believe) it’s easier to get people to have sex with you.
@guest
It seems apparent that the TIMs do get to continue to exercise their male privilege over women. They even get to exercise it in a remarkably twisted fashion: out-shouting women with their claims that the women are exercising patriarchy over them.
No no, Ophelia, your doin it rong. You don’t get to put people in categories. But not excluding him from said category is of course all right; and saying that out loud must surely be all the better.
There’s no shame in being a trans woman, but why the apparent need to erase women — by calling us cis-women, menstruators, breast-feeders — as part of your process? Is it perhaps because you might be ashamed to call yourself a trans woman? Where’s the PRIDE in that??
Is it only *WERTs who harrass those having 2 X-chromosomes with the slur TERFs for holding different opinions?
(Women-Exclusionary Reactionary Trans)