Guest post: The claims tend not to stand up to scrutiny
Originally a comment by Acolyte of Sagan on A history of oppressing a marginalized group.
Which of the following would most likely have a genuine claim of being oppressed?
a) A male-bodied, female-identifying person being told that, no, you cannot take a role of rape counselor to women and girls at this rape crisis centre. Women and girls tend not to want to share the most intimate details of their abuse with any stranger, but more-so with a male-bodied stranger. They are also understandably likely have a fear of male-bodied people, but fear and trust do not tend to go hand-in-hand, and a counselor must have the trust of the person being counseled in order to be effective.
b) Women and girls being told that, yes, they must accept a male-bodied, female-identifying person as their rape counselor at this rape crisis centre. It doesn’t matter that they’re unwilling to share intimate details of their abuse with a male-bodied stranger, and may not trust a male-bodied counselor sufficiently to be able to recieve effective counseling, because that attitude is just bigotry and genital hang-ups; they are the problem, not the male-bodied person wanting to counsel them when they’re at their most vulnerable.
Same question.
a) A male-bodied, female-identifying person being told that, no, you do not qualify for a place at this refuge for women suffering domestic abuse. There is a strict no men policy in place here because the women we shelter are, in general, scared to be in close proximity to men and this refuge is a safe-space for abused women.
b) Women fleeing domestic abuse being told that they must share this shelter with male-bodied people despite being scared to be in close proximity to men, and if they don’t accept that condition they must go elsewhere.
Karellen, your initial post equated trans people with women and with people of colour, but there is no equivalence between trans people and the latter two groups. Both women and people of colour are biologically and physically women and/or people of colour. Their status as women or people of colour are undeniable, well-defined and provable facts. A persons’ sex or colour is clearly identifiable at birth and is neither reliant on nor changeable by an individual’s sense of self. Transgender is solely a personal, psychological phenomenon, its existence being totally reliant on the individual’s sense of self and liable to change as the individual’s sense of self changes over time.
To conflate transgender people with women and with people of colour is a disingenuous tactic in the same vein as the conflation of transgender and intersex by the use of ‘assigned at birth’. It is only a superficially convincing argument, one that falls apart as soon as one gives it more than superficial thought.
Just as with religion, there’s a very good reason why trans activists do not welcome discussion and debate over their claims, demanding straightforward compliance instead, and that reason is that the claims tend not to stand up to scrutiny.
well put.
I also don’t understand any of the arguments given that you can be a woman if you’re male bodied, but you can’t identify as a different race or age. Actually I can’t remember any arguments other than to ask that question just means you’re racist and a terf. But if identifying as black when you’re white is extreme cultural misappropriation how come identifying as a woman when you’re a man isnt?
Because intersex people exist. Therefore male and female are social constructs invented by colonial imperialists. QED
so hard to keep up with the rules.
Wait. Interracial people exist, too. So…what happens then?
‘But if identifying as black when you’re white is extreme cultural misappropriation how come identifying as a woman when you’re a man isnt?’
One answer I’ve heard is that ‘black people have a unique culture and women don’t’, (presumably from a man), which provides a fascinating insight into men’s opinion of women.
Tangentially, the only time I ever really got angry at a student in a classroom setting (I used to be one of those ‘there are no stupid questions’ people–lately I’ve been changing my attitude toward that, though hopefully not my encouragement of students to speak up and share in class) was when one young man announced that Africa/Africans had no indigenous culture.
we have a culture of silence, I’d argue.
Apologies for lack of link, but I’m exhausted and couldn’t work it out in five minutes of googling. it’s been a long day. this may lift you up a bit.
https://www.scotsman.com/transsexuals-tell-msps-that-act-changes-could-have-horrific-impact-on-women-1-4912495
That’s a gross overgeneralisation of what I was saying. The only point I made was that I believe that trans people, like women and people of colour, do actually experience abuse, discrimination and oppression, due to that facet of who they are.
You could replace “transgender” with “homosexuality” and “self” with “attraction” there and the paragraph would be just as valid. Does that mean you think that homoophobia wasn’t really a thing, or are you saying that trans people should just try not being trans?
Karellen, of course homophobia is a real thing, and so is transphobia, I’m not denying that. However, as far as I’m aware the original LGB movement was solely about gaining the same basic rights as straight people, starting with the decriminalisation of homosexuality and on to ensuring that they recieve the same benefits and protections in law that everybody else recieves. If trans activists were content to have those same goals – which under current laws they actually do have – there wouldn’t be the problems that exist. Unfortunately, unlike the LGB movement, the trans activists are demanding that non-trans people, including LGB people, actually lose certain rights and protections in order to accommodate them, and are labelling any and all attempts by people to protect those rights as acts of transphobia, and claim to be oppressed when told no, women will not accept male-bodied people in their safe spaces, will not allow male-bodied people to dominate women’s sports; that people will not be forced to accept the impossible claims that men are women and women are men and some are both or neither (the rare intersex condition notwithstanding), that genitalia and sex are not inextricably linked, that men can be lesbians and that lesbians (the traditional kind) and straight men are bigots if they refuse to consider having sex with male-bodied people who identify as women.
@AOS #8:
Well, OK. Looks like we are on the same side then, because it appears that there are a few people in this thread, and the thread this guest post came from, who are – unless I’ve read them incorrectly – denying the existence of transphobia. Or, you know, claiming that making comparisons between different types of oppression to make the point that one type of oppression even exists is somehow inherently “equating” those groups or “disingenuous”.
No you cannot replace “gender” with homosexuality and I’m very tired of hearing that. We homosexuals are not under a delusion about our bodies, our “genders,” our sex, or our sexuality.
And we have never tried to imposed by legal force in anyone else’s protected space, or to deny rights to others.
Leave us out of your political argumentation. You’re simply wrong.
Karellen, what do you mean by “oppression”?
I’ll say it—the existence of “transphobia” is vastly over-stated. We all know that bigotry and violence against women *and people who break gender stereotypes* is common, and that it’s men dishing it out.
But what we call “transphobia” is often not an irrational fear, but a perfectly legitimate negative reaction. To what?
—Narcissistic/Borderline Personality disorders, which are rife in “trans” identifying people. Selfish, overbearing histrionics.
—Bullying people who refuse to allow men into women’s changing rooms
—Bullying people who make “mistakes” about “my pronouns”
—Campaigning to eliminate women’s rights to single sex accommodations in rape shelters, change rooms, and more
—Bullying lesbians into sleeping with men
—Bullying gay men into considering “trans men” to be real men and sexual partners.
All of that is called “transphobia”. Bull shit. Those concerns are all real for me. It’s nothing to do with a “phobia”.
It’s a rational, normal, ordinary aversion to people who pose political, emotional, and sometimes physical threats. This is normal. You can’t tell people like me we’re bigots because we refuse to say the Emperor is wearing clothes.
In 2019, when someone comes at me “presenting as trans” intensely and first, that’s a warning sign. Not a phobia. A rational choice to disengage from a representative of a class of people known to be dishonest and disputatious *at absolute charitable best*.
Josh – do you think that’s typical of trans people in general, or of trans “activists” on social media? I’ve been operating on the surmise that trans “activists” on social media actually don’t represent trans people in general, but I don’t in fact know how typical they are.
Trans “activists” on social media are mostly, as a class, assholes.
Ophelia—I can’t say, which is the reason why I’m not willing to individually interview each member of the class “trans.” It’s why I have my guard up by default.
Because the only trans people I seem to interact with—and this is true for a lot of people we know—are those who engage in these behaviors. And when other trans people come along and say, “But that’s not all of us,” that’s the only action these trans people take. Their only priority, it seems, is to say “not me not me not me.” In short, their only worry is how they are perceived, not whether their “brothers and sisters” are guilty of abusing others.
If that’s the nice, normal, average trans person, it doesn’t give me any more confidence than I had before.
But I think this is a crucial question that needs to be asked: Why are we treating “most trans people are just normal and not disputatious” as the null hypothesis? What evidence have we been given that this is the case? What can we point to that demonstrates that this is the best, most reasonable prior assumption?
I don’t see that we’ve been given any at all. I see no basis for assuming that. Particularly because of elision and conflation. 2019 “trans” people can’t even be rationally defined. It’s dysphoric lesbians, young women with trauma, CPTSD, Borderline Personality Disorder, and it’s also 50 year old heterosexual men, weekend married cross-dressers, and all manner of flashers and sexual boundary transgressors.
What coherent class is that? Yet the activists trade on our *prior, historical* emotional image of trans people. That is, the mostly harmless, very effeminate homosexual male who really does want to blend in.
That’s dishonest. It’s so brazen I can barely believe it.
I may be missing something, and if I am, I’m eager to see it. But I do not see any reason why we should assume “it’s only a small minority” is the null hypothesis. I think we’re collectively afraid of not being seen as nice, which is exactly why we’re in this position.
Shorter me: I don’t believe there exists a coherent class of “trans” for the reasons above. I think it’s a rhetorical trick to posit “class trans”. There is no epistemic or ontological category of “trans” that can coherently be shared by all the widely different types listed above who are labeled “trans”.
This is a con game, and con games are set up for the con, the grifter, and the abuser.
I think the reason I consider it at least possible is that not everyone spends a large amount of time on social media. I doubt it’s safe to extrapolate from the trans people we encounter on social media to trans people in general.
But maybe I’m wrong about that. If, for instance, the sudden surge in the numbers of trans people is because of social media and related trend-pushing-devices, then what we see on social media is what there is.
Acolyte of Sagan—-really good short piece. I’m sorry for hijacking the thread.
Right. But I don’t know how we can decide that, Ophelia, because of the class confusion. What is the class “trans”? We’re told it’s all of those differently situated people, but I don’t believe that’s a coherent class. So who, exactly, are we talking about when we assume “most trans are not like this”?
Same behavior pattern we see from liberal Christians, who seem more interested in telling us to quit using Christian as indicative of a class than of telling other Christians that they are being assholes.
In short, another piece of potential evidence that transism is becoming a religious-type belief. Dogmatic, not to be questioned, absolute truths handed down from on high sans evidence, and occasional peddling of weak evidence that has not been validated by repeated studies. Now the “not a real representative” defense.
If I can add to Josh’s excellent comments above: much of what I see being called “transphobia” is merely statement of fact that goes against the trans narrative in some way. Saying women are not men, or questioning the statistics, or referring to “male-bodied” people, all of these are called transphobia.
And then onlookers and “allies” become convinced that “transphobia” is everywhere so they ratchet up the allyhood, i.e. the shunning and punishment of dissenters, more than ever.
Joshua, #17, thank you, and you didn’t hijack the thread, you added to it.
Karellen, #9.
In your initial comment on Ophelia’s original post you gave three examples of groups who suffer oppression: people of colour, women, and trans people, and asked
I merely answered your question. By making those examples you were, whether you intended to or not, conflating the three groups and that is a common, dishonest tactic that is used because, as I said earlier, it is intended to make people see an equivalence where none actually exists. Sadly, it does exactly that because too many people accept claims at face value, especially when the claims are emotive.
Karellen @9, pointing out your reading incomprehension of the source material is not a denial of transphobia.
OK, I give.
When you find yourself arguing against half a dozen people whose thoughts and comments you’ve followed for… years now, who generally seem to be smarter and more insightful that you are, and you find yourself unable to convince them of something you believe – you really need to consider the idea that it is not they who are the ones suddenly being dumb for no discernable reason.
Heck, it’s not even like I think that most of the stuff I’m trying to contend with is wrong – it’s just that I don’t see how a lot of it is relevant to the point I think I’m trying to make. Like @AoS’s “who has a more genuine claim of being oppressed?” paragraphs – I don’t see how that even came up, I don’t think those kinds of questions are useful, I don’t think that those sorts of discussions are productive, and I’m just not interested in getting into that.
Maybe that’s the problem. It’s not that I’m arguing my point badly; it’s that I’m failing to properly explain what my point is. Of course my arguments won’t make sense if I can’t articulate what they’re in support of. Or to flip that idea on its head, I’m probably failing to understand the point that everyone else is trying to make.
You haven’t convinced me. But you’ve made me pause for thought. And I need a bit of time to walk away from this particular thread and come back to it when I’m ready to read it with fresh eyes. That’s just to say, don’t take my lack of further comments as me ignoring you, or not being grateful for your replies.
Peace.
Peace Karellen. No worries.
My sense is that the everyday trans people who just want to get on with their lives are being influenced by the activists into becoming more assholish and adopting more extreme positions, like biological sex denialism, or pathological “TERF” paranoia. So much of trans culture is centred around activism, the activists massively influence how trans people see themselves, how they construct their narratives about who they are in wider society, what kind of language and attitude is acceptable, etc. The trans zeitgeist is in the hands of the most attention-grabbing social media trans activists, who in turn are the most extreme and vitriolic, since that’s what triggers emotional reactions and harvests the most “likes” and “shares.”
I guess you could say it’s like Fox News but for transpeople.
Karellen, #24; be careful, with reasonable responses such as that you’re in danger of giving internet debates a good name :-)
I know that feeling all too well, usually from when I’m trying to articulate a point that’s more intuitive, that makes sense in my head but is hard to get down in a way that others understand.
By the way, the ‘most valid claim of oppression’ part of my initial comment wasn’t in response to anything you said. It was just a couple of examples of the ways that trans women have claimed to be oppressed and how, by flipping those claims on their heads, it can be seen how their claims fall apart, showing that what they are demanding is actually to be able to further oppress others by taking certain, hard-won rights away from them. To me, the current trans activism is no different from, for example, religious groups that demand legal protection from criticism and ridicule whilst also wanting the freedom to criticise and ridicule other religions, or those on the far-left who want to silence those who disagree with them (through no-platforming or social media storms) whilst remaining free to voice their own opinions. I find it hard to support any group who demand more rights than everybody else enjoys, or who want rights that strip others of theirs.
Karellen, thank you.
I think the problem, as Josh here and I on the previous post said, is that “trans people” is simply not a coherent category.
It’s certainly true that people can be cruel to trans-identified people, for no better reasons than that they’re different, or gender nonconforming, or perceived as “funny-looking”. So–if that’s what is meant by “transphobia,” sure.
But is it historical and systemic, in the sense that racism and sexism are historical and systemic?
Add in the fact that pretty much any disagreement with trans orthodoxy, even when offered in the goodest of good faith (see: Jesse Singal) gets called “transphobia”, and–you see the problem.
By the way, Karellen, I sort of regret that your name is in the post – I wanted to omit that bit for the guest post but couldn’t see how to do it without omitting the whole sentence, and the sentence was necessary to what followed. I considered replacing your name with an X but thought that would look silly and espionage-y, so gave it up – but anyway the intention wasn’t to gang up, I just like the post.
Karellen, I appreciate you reading and writing in good faith. For what it’s worth, I’ll write my personal takeaway (from 2-3 days of lurking on this thread, and the previous B&W thread, and the Twitter thread that prompted that thread):
• I can identify White/Black and Straight/LGB axes of oppression.
• I cannot identify a Cis/Trans axis of oppression.
In other words (maybe closer to how you see things), the bullying of non-conforming people is one thing (that I do see), but a Cis/Trans axis of oppression would be another thing (that I don’t see). I could elaborate, but others have already said what I would mean (e.g. Josh and Lady M.).
^ This is why I asked about what is meant by “oppression.” I don’t dispute that trans people face bullying and harassment, but I don’t think those are (or add up to) oppression. Oppression is larger and more systematic.
I think the more vocal and belligerent trans activists are as it were appropriating oppression.
Well, why not? They have already appropriated intersex, assigned at birth, body dysmorphia, woman, man……
“Appropriating oppression”. Seriously? I shudder to see people as well educated as some in this thread, so coldly and callously dismissing the plight of a severely oppressed minority. Irrespective of this rather silly piece of legislation, the merits of which are as dubious as it is irrelevant to the larger question of your brutal disregard for the human rights of those involved. Please not that this call for punitive immolation is (1) originating in a “Christian” nation and (2) on the heels of the actual 2016 immolation of a trans person in Turkey.
Where does the B&W crew stand now?
Hours after the above post, this news (April 26 2019):
Armenian MPs call for trans activist to be burned alive after speech
https://www.indy100.com/…/trans-activist-speech-armenia-lilit-martirosyan-lgbt-parlia…
16 hours ago – Armenia’s first-ever registered transgender woman has faced calls to be burned alive by parliamentarians after she delivered a historic speech at the country’s national assembly. Lilit Martirosyan is the first member of the country’s LGBT+ community to take the parliamentary …
Armenian transgender LGBTQ issues: Death threats for Lilit Martirosyan
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/…/armenian-transgender…/3587012002/
8 hours ago – A transgender activist in Armenia says she’s faced death threats since she … Lilit Martirosyan attracted worldwide attention for her April 5 speech about the … That includes calls for her to be “burned alive,” according to The …
Oh, now I get it. A single transwoman in Armenia gets death threats, therefore rape crisis centres and womens’ refuges in America, Canada, the U.K., etc. must open their doors to all-comers as long as they identify the right way; women in sport must contend themselves with being perpetual runners-up to male-bodied athletes who claim to be women; we must all accept the claims that transwomen are really women, biological and physiological impossibilities aside. Thanks for clearing that up.
Get real. No-one here has a ‘brutal disregard’ for anybody’s human rights, and I defy you to quote one single example of what you accuse us of.
Example: The flat disqualification of the term “oppression”. How cruel. When a vulnerable population is singled out for such a disproportionately high rate of violence. You can google as well as I can and if the type, manner and severity of violence enacted upon transgender, transexual and in some cases non-binary and gender non-conforming persons is appalling. You know as well as I do that I need not do your research for you and your characterization of this one very recent example, which hit the international news wire just hours after the blog proprietress’ last post, as if it was isolated and atypical, is simply disingenuous. That said, I actually agree with many, perhaps most of your points. For instance, the qualification for being a sexual violence trauma counselor should not create an absolute right to be treated as the legal equivalent of a woman. But if a victim seeking counseling should so desire, they should be able to utilize the services of someone who is trans-whatever. Counselors get vetted on Yelp and other ratings sites. Some who are trans may actually be quite good, and sought after. Others, maybe not. Now I do concede that the absolute equivalence is not sustained under scrutiny, and transactivists or simple rank and file trans-sympathizers who push equivalence are on thin philosophical ice. On that, we agree, but the consequences of abstract parlor room debate should not aid and abet the oppressive level of violence. Nor should we get too worked up over terminology, of any kind, as categorization debates are often as relevant as medieval debate on angel-dancing on pinheads. Granted, some financially secure trans persons in developed metropolitan centers do well, but overall the term “oppression” is not unjustified underr any standard of “scrutinY”.As you are intelligent to know full well without need for further debate on the point. Cheers.
The “disproportionately high rate of violence” is a myth.
It’s worth noting that Armenia is rife with discrimination and attacks against gay and lesbian people as well as transgender. It’s also worth noting that it’s not exactly a bundle of joy being a women in Armenia either. Instead of being oppression targeted at Trans people, this is just more of the religiously based patriarchal bullshit that requires men to be men, women to be women, and everybody to adhere to strict codes of behaviour, dress and social roles.
Sure, trans people stand out and will be targets of abuse and worse. But so do gays, lesbians, feminists, atheists, and many others. While horrible, it’s not special treatment and it’s founded on precepts that are bitterly disputed by… feminists.
#35
When TRAs expand the definition of violence to include the doubting or refusal of their claims; when simply saying that transwomen are not not women is classed as violence; when an elderly woman carrying a camera is an act of violence; when refusing to date a transwoman on the grounds that the transwoman has a penis is an act of violence; when merely asking for evidence of their claims is an act of violence; when not wanting male-bodied people in female-only spaces is an act of violence: is it any wonder that TRAs claim that trans people are victims of more violence than any other group.
However, when those figures are adjusted to include only genuine acts of violence, the claims are shown to be, as Ophelia said in #36, and as Lady Mondegreen has pointed out many times here, a complete and utter myth.
And of course, Yelp and other rating sites are totally immune to false reviews by people or groups wanting to push their choice to the top, or do damage to the reputations of those they dislike.
Well, that’s the politest ‘shut up’ I’ve seen to date.
Rob, #37, well said.