Just like
But…
But.
But why should a woman who campaigns against female genital mutilation have to “include” men who identify as women? However they identify, they can’t possibly experience FGM, so why should Hibo Wardere include them in her work? Her work is not personally relevant to them (even if they do have enough concern for others to care about the issue, which all too many trans women seem not to have), so what would be the point? Even if you buy into the whole trans women are women fantasy, they still don’t experience FGM, so can they really not just leave this one alone? Can their “allies” like Nora Imlau here leave this one alone?
And how can everyone “accept that trans women are women just like cis women” when in the case of FGM that is simply obviously false? Even if you buy into the whole woman’s brain in a man’s body fantasy, trans women are still not just like “cis” women in the sense of having the same kind of genitalia.
What a vast amount of time and attention and energy people are squandering on this absurd caricature of social justice, when they could be doing something useful.
Does it strike anyone else that there is something else going on here? If one accepts the assumption that trans women are women, then “affirmation” surgery is female genital mutation. Maybe the trans radicals get kind of itchy when that term comes up, and feel they have to protest something.
Trans women are excluded from her campaigning and messaging work because they are also excluded from fgm in the first place. They don’t face it, and so they are not included in the messaging of the campaigning against it, because they are not female.
But trans women aren’t women “just like” cis women, and they are well aware of it. If they weren’t, they would not be called trans, and they would not have invented the term cis.
@Papito:
Yes. If a boy is given puberty blockers at an early age, then proceeding to cross-sex hormones and “gender confirmation surgery,” they will most probably never orgasm. Their neo-vagina will not be large enough, and they will have to spend their lives painfully dilating their scar tissue in order to be able to present an adequate enough hole for their partner to pleasure themselves in. They’re unlikely to seek out any sex beyond that. We might count that as a transwoman’s form of FGM — but they never would. Not on those terms.
Same for women getting their vagina mutilated and replaced with a neo-penis. They wouldn’t even try to be included, though.
Ah, but you forget: circumcision is FGM… Checkmate feminists.
Ally Fogg’s admonition to MRAs that this was exclusively the problem of men and boys wasn’t heeded.
Or, to put it in a cruder way, TRAs are pissed off at campaigns against genital mutilation because that’s how you get trans people.
#$ BK
Unfair;in my view Ally Fogg trod a fine line between advocacy for male issues without joining in with the MRA arseholes that constantly clogged his comment threats.
The fact that women are forced to respond to this bullshit when they could be directing their efforts towards other necessary projects instead of having to fight rearguard actions to protect rights they thought they’d won already. Just like firefighters, whose job is already difficult and dangerous enough without the added distraction of false alarms and arson.
I think there’s more to it than that. I think that TAs cannot allow women to have anything for themselves. Third space bathroom provisions are not good enough. It’s access to female toilets or nothing. Rape and abuse shelters launched and run by and for women are expected to include TIMs. Again, no third space option is deemed acceptable. Why do the hard work of actually building up resources and institutions when you can force your way into those created by people whose identity you are now appropriating? Agreeing to a space for trans needs means admitting that TIMs are not actually women, and even though they are not, “forcing” them to admit this reality is apparently a non-starter. TIMs are to be “centered” in anything intended for women, or the righteous wrath of the woke is unleashed. Even LGB is not allowed to organize without the “T,” as such exclusion is “transphobic.” TIMs act as if they posess some sort of “All Access” pass that entitles them to glom onto whatever organization or entity that suits their fancy, demanding not only admittance, but redirection of the group’s mission to prioritize their needs above anyone elses’s, even at the expense ot that organization’s original base and target demographic (Hello Stonewall!). Resistance is Transphobic Violence.TIMs are not to be excluded by anyone from anything.
Ironically, it’s gender critical feminists in the UK, fighting the changes to the definition of “sex” being introduced to the Census, who are pointing out that the way this is being done will result in a loss of vitally important information that would be useful to the trans community. By making it impossible to tell how many trans people there are, it is impossible to track how they are faring when it comes to discrimination, employment, medical care, housing, etc. The pressure group that has succesfully orchestrated this back-room change in how the sex question is being asked, either did not think this through, or thought that being able to tick a box on the census offers is just too big a hit of “validation” and “affirmation” for AGPs to resist. Again, “inclusion” above all. This scorched earth policy of insisting on the primacy of validation, confirmation, and forcing others to share in their fantasy results in the rejection of genuine solutions that would actually benefit the health, safety, and well-being of trans people.
Next up…NAACPT?
[…] a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Just […]
There was a state in the US (Idaho, perhaps?) that tried to outlaw FGM and ran into opposition from trans rights activists who thought it would be used to stop “gender confirmation” surgeries. My recollection was that the proposed anti-FGM law was only for minors, which only added to my “huh?” reaction to the opposition, considering we’re TOLD (despite evidence to the contrary) that “gender confirmation” surgery is only for adults.
So I think the main opposition from TRAs stems from their apparently central aim: that nothing may hinder the trans cause, regardless of whether that thing is important, or even essential, for others (sports, bathrooms, lesbian clubs, single sex spaces, scholarships, words, laws, etc). Trans care about trans. Trans concerns are about trans. Other concerns about other things, if they conflict even tangentially with trans concerns, are to be opposed, and we all know, trans rights are not intersectional. Trans feel apparently fine with opposing anti FGM laws because it *might* be used to undermine children’s claims to genital surgeries. Which is frankly shocking.
@#6 Holms:
Not actually trying to criticize Fogg… I was fond of his writing. Just saying the new feMRAs didn’t pay attention.
“If everyone would just accept that [insert contested claim], no one would take issue.”
What a monumentally vacuous thing to say. I mean, it’s not wrong. It’s just tautological. If everyone agrees, then no one disagrees. Yes. Obviously. How long did it take you to realize that? All you’ve managed to say is that people disagree, you insufferable twit.
I was just thinking that I’m unaware of any high-profile, or even non high-profile, trans person who’s ever spoken or acted to help any group except trans, with the possible exception of people like Debbie Hayton and Miranda Yardley who seem to be supporting women’s sex-based rights. Can anyone think of any other examples? (This, obviously, stands in stark contrast with the ubiquity of women in various demographics who support all sorts of causes and groups that don’t benefit them directly.)
Surely not white women? You have to be kidding, right? Are you suggesting white women might support a cause or group that benefits someone other than white women? Boy, guest, you must be a TERFy western imperialist colonialist racist nationalist patriarchal…I think the list goes to infinity.
And yes, I think TERFy legitimately goes first on that list, since that is actually what these people care about, as guest suggested. The rest is just there to give their cause unearned credibility.
Yeah, come on, guest. Any cause that doesn’t centre the trans is no cause at all, and those traitors who support the non-causes are willfully causing real violence and harm – promoting genocide, actually – to the mostest oppressedest folx of all.
Those few trans people supporting non-trans non-causes are not really trans anyway, they’re just attention-seeking TINOs.
It would be scary how easy it is to get into that mindset if it wasn’t already plastered everywhere. Imitation is far easier than invention.
TINOs :)