EDTA: The "last" post no longer exists. It was a fairly oblivious attempt to see "both sides of the story" after reading a comment thread on IBTP where cisgendered rad fems, not for the first or last time, try to force trans women to legitimize their claims to womanhood. Unsurprisingly I was very ignorant and favored the cis point of view more. As soon as I realized that, I had a massive guilt attack and deleted the post in order to "save face", even though I had no commenters and barely any readers at the time.
I'm starting to feel ill at ease with my last post. It seems like what I said could sound like, "cis women and trans women are just different, so they need to be separated".
I think, in the scope of feminism, there can and absolutely should be room for issues other than those of cis women. When I rethink what I said, it sounds awfully privileged to think there should be places for cis women and cis women alone to discuss only their problems, when women should be attending to the problems of all women.
The first comparison that came to mind over this issue is white feminists and feminists of color. I could easily understand why black women would want black women-only spaces if they're used to white women coming in and dominating the conversation and dismissing racism.
But in this case, it's cis women who are privileged over trans women, so it's more like men making men-only clubs.
As I stated in my last post, it's the problem of viewing trans women as coming from "the enemy camp".
If white women became black women, would they be allowed in black woman only circles? Would they have started experiencing racism immediately after the transition and thus be aware? How much experience is enough experience to make them eligible for inclusion?
And what if they fit in with neither race- they didn't feel like white women, but black women were wary of them because of their former privilege?
(Is it even appropriate for me to be asking this?)
As before, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue. But I'm leaning away from the idea of cis-only spaces the more I think about it.
Because, really, what power do trans women have in cis only spaces? If they silence other women, if they dismiss their experiences, if they behave the way cis women fear they will behave, isn't it simple enough to simply exclude them once they've proven themselves incapable of carrying on discussion, rather than pre-emptively excluding them under the assumption that they will behave that way?
And though trans women are not considered "real" women by the patriarchy, they are given "feminized" status, the way gay men are. Is not transphobia directed at trans women a form of misogyny? And isn't that what trans women and cis women have in common in this world?
Yes, I think I'm decided on this issue. I believe there should be no cis-only spaces.
Additional note: What I meant in my last post was that gender itself was genderless, though that doesn't make much more sense. Because of course sex is genderless.
-------------------------------------
Here's a brief note by renowned Satanist Diane Vera addressing homosexual and transgender people. I appreciate the welcoming stance taken here, but think a better point would be that Satanists need to align themselves with other people who are marginalized by the Judeo-Christian patriarchy, and promote such right-thinking acceptance among pre-existing Satanists who may not precisely be neo-Nazis.
I'm starting to feel ill at ease with my last post. It seems like what I said could sound like, "cis women and trans women are just different, so they need to be separated".
I think, in the scope of feminism, there can and absolutely should be room for issues other than those of cis women. When I rethink what I said, it sounds awfully privileged to think there should be places for cis women and cis women alone to discuss only their problems, when women should be attending to the problems of all women.
The first comparison that came to mind over this issue is white feminists and feminists of color. I could easily understand why black women would want black women-only spaces if they're used to white women coming in and dominating the conversation and dismissing racism.
But in this case, it's cis women who are privileged over trans women, so it's more like men making men-only clubs.
As I stated in my last post, it's the problem of viewing trans women as coming from "the enemy camp".
If white women became black women, would they be allowed in black woman only circles? Would they have started experiencing racism immediately after the transition and thus be aware? How much experience is enough experience to make them eligible for inclusion?
And what if they fit in with neither race- they didn't feel like white women, but black women were wary of them because of their former privilege?
(Is it even appropriate for me to be asking this?)
As before, I'm not sure where I stand on this issue. But I'm leaning away from the idea of cis-only spaces the more I think about it.
Because, really, what power do trans women have in cis only spaces? If they silence other women, if they dismiss their experiences, if they behave the way cis women fear they will behave, isn't it simple enough to simply exclude them once they've proven themselves incapable of carrying on discussion, rather than pre-emptively excluding them under the assumption that they will behave that way?
And though trans women are not considered "real" women by the patriarchy, they are given "feminized" status, the way gay men are. Is not transphobia directed at trans women a form of misogyny? And isn't that what trans women and cis women have in common in this world?
Yes, I think I'm decided on this issue. I believe there should be no cis-only spaces.
Additional note: What I meant in my last post was that gender itself was genderless, though that doesn't make much more sense. Because of course sex is genderless.
-------------------------------------
Here's a brief note by renowned Satanist Diane Vera addressing homosexual and transgender people. I appreciate the welcoming stance taken here, but think a better point would be that Satanists need to align themselves with other people who are marginalized by the Judeo-Christian patriarchy, and promote such right-thinking acceptance among pre-existing Satanists who may not precisely be neo-Nazis.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please see the commenting guidelines before posting. Failure to follow the guidelines will result in a deleted comment without response.