I’m sure that almost every radical feminist, at one time or another, started out by being sympathetic towards trans women.
Trapped in an unforgiving patriarchy that demands strict adherence to masculinity and femininity, some males are caught out, and are unable to tow the masculine line, leading them to inevitably experience “gender dysphoria”.
Unable to act out the masculine pantomime, unable to identify with other males, this small group of vulnerable men reach the conclusion that if they are not men, then they must be… the furthest thing possible from a man…which in male eyes, is a woman.
But why the certainty, when they don’t actually know what it’s like to be a woman? And why is it always so easy to spot a trans woman online even when they are trying their very best to write “like a woman”?
The answer is simple: To patriarchal consciousness, women, XX females, have no definition, or identity, beyond that which patriarchy allows. They do not exist, except in relation to men. What men believe women to be (Feminine Other) is what women are .
This is the male view.
Often overlooked, of course, is that all women suffer from gender dysphoria to varying degrees. It is supremely difficult to be born female in a patriarchy.
If ,that is, females in a female-loathing world are allowed to be born at all.
Western Journalism Center/FreeRepublic, September 29, 1997.) Farah referred to the gendercide [of females] as “the biggest single holocaust in human history.” Over the millenia, countless female girls have been killed because they were born female. Today, sex selective abortions are always biased against girls. Female-loathing patriarchies wish to eliminate as many females as possible, as efficiently as possible. Ultra-sound is enabling them to achieve this end. It is not just a historical phenomenon. Every year thousands of girl humans do not come into existence because they were XX females at the moment of conception.
Trans women- men who believe they are women- do not fit into this equation. It is possible that the only reason they are walking about on this earth is because they had the privilege of possessing a Y chromosome.
Trans activists often cite (and exaggerated the numbers of) the miniscule number of intersex people in order to muddy the waters by claiming there is a continuum of sex. This is not true. It is a lie. You are firmly in one box or the other; you cannot become a member of the opposite sex, and you cannot become intersex for that matter. Trans women, of course, are not intersex. Intersex has nothing whatsoever to do with trans.
Whichever hairstyle you wear, however well you can “do” femininity, whatever you allow the medical system of the rich world to do to your body, nothing can alter your chromosomal make-up, which will remain the same until you die, or even beyond death and decomposition: archeologists uncovering the remains of a body hundreds of years from now will know for certain whether or not that particular person was a woman in life, simply by investigating their bone structure and DNA.
Trans feminism is only ever about trans women; it does not address the biological reality of XX born women i.e females. For they can never be female; they can never possess the XX chromosomes; they are not identified from birth as girls or treated as having the potential to give birth. It is this potential, this possibility, of being able to create a baby which is at the root of female oppression by men (copyright FactCheckMe), the root of misogyny if you will.
Women, of course, are the Other beyond all Others. Males are quick to identify with males of other races before ever identifying with women. Paradoxically, the patriarchy does in fact identify with trans women over born women, which is why they have created laws that favour trans women without even asking the 50% of the population who actually are women.
Only in feminist utopia would a tiny group of women be able to get laws passed in the way trans women have managed to. Over a hundred years of feminism and born women are still battling with the patriarchy to get the most basic laws passed concerning rape and abortion. Can you see the trans-privilege here? Because I can.
The might of the trans lobby, and the relative ease with which laws are passed in their favour (at the expense of women) proves that your average trans woman- a member of a tiny minority- has a disproportionate, inordinate, amount of power compared to your average woman.
From Aristotle to Freud, women have been “Other”, the negative, the hologram, the non-male, the penisless persons, as Dworkin succinctly noted:
“The female is a female by virtue of a certain lack of qualities,” said Aristotle; “we should regard the female nature as afflicted with a natural defectiveness.” And St. Thomas for his part pronounced woman to be “an imperfect man,” all “incidental” being . . .
Thus, humanity is male and man defines woman not in herself but as relative to him; she is not regarded as an autonomous being. 1.”
This diseased view of woman as the negative of man, “female by virtue of a certain lack of qualities,” infects the whole of culture. It is the cancer in the gut of every political and economic system, of every social institution. It is the rot which spoils all human relationships, infests all human psychological reality, and destroys the very fiber of human identity. ”
This pathological view of female negativity has been enforced on our flesh for thousands of years. The savage mutilation of the female body, undertaken to distinguish us absolutely from men, has occurred on a massive scale. For instance, in China, for one thousand years, women’s feet were reduced to stumps through footbinding. When a girl was seven or eight years old, her feet were washed in alum, a chemical that causes shrinkage. Then, all toes but the big toes were bent into the soles of her feet and bandaged as tightly as possible. This procedure was repeated over and over again for approximately three years. The girl, in agony, was forced to walk on her feet. Hard calluses formed; toenails grew into the skin; the feet were pus-filled and bloody; circulation was virtually stopped; often the big toes fell off. The ideal foot was three inches of smelly, rotting flesh. Men were positive and women were negative because men could walk and women could not. Men were strong and women were weak because men could walk and women could not. Men were independent and women were dependent because men could walk and women could not. Men were virile because women were crippled ”
Which brings us to the term “cis”. Cis defines women, yet again, in relation to men… this time in relation to trans women. It’s not original. Defining women in relation to groups of men is over a thousand years old. Moreover it is preposterous to state that women are “comfortable in the gender assigned to them at birth” , which is the definition of “cis”. This thinking, by default, displays ignorance of women’s reality.
In China a hobbled woman was the epitome of femininity, because that is what made men feel masculine. It rendered her “other” because her role was to reflect men as twice their actual size (Woolf)
But the main point here is that: there was no way out for women.
How many trans women held their hands up in China and admitted they were women? None. No man’s foot was ever bound. Men don’t attempt to become women in cultures where no human being would want to be a woman.
How many trans women have furthered the women’s movement by using their male body to act on behalf of women, infiltrating the patriarchy via a ninja stealth movement in order to wrest control from the men? None.
And this is a problem. Because trans activists insists that trans feminism is somehow good for women, or even that it IS feminism! When in truth it has done nothing for the women who live in the biological reality of being female.
What it has done is yoke the strength of the women’s movement, just as left-wing liberal men did during the sixties when they wanted unfetered access to women’s vaginas, just like capitalist conglomerates did when they convinced women that consumerism and smoking was connected to women’s liberation. These three movements: trans, left-wing liberalism, and conservative capitalism have one thing in common. While they run contrary to women’s liberation they cannily convince women of the opposite!
Why is anyone surprised? This is what men do. They cherry pick the parts of feminism that they like and dump the rest.Trans feminism is an “I’m allright Jack” movement, if ever I saw one.
But back to Dworkin’s point. Whenever women exhibit a particular trait, it is filed under “negative” . As fashions change over time what may have traditionally been thought of as a female trait can become a male trait, in which case the culture will do an about turn and begin praising that very same mannerism/talent/idiosyncrasy as a positive. Historically, a clerk was a highly respected job; now female secretaries carry out the same work for a pittance. In Japan, mathematics is regarded as a female subject (book-keeping is women’s work) and women are seen as being more logical, whereas literature is given more prestige, and is largely the preserve of men… In the West it is exactly the opposite.
We need not look very far in order to understand why patriarchal institutions such as medicine and law are keen to embrace trans feminism. Under patriarchy better a mutilated “woman” than a “queer” man. Better to force women into accepting non-masculine males, than to force men to accept these males as their own kind. Women, being the negative other, represent the catch-all sex for any male who does not adhere to the masculine norm. FTMs are a red herring insofar as transsexuals are overwhelmingly MTF. FTMs are often refused male status even after conforming to arbitrary medical procedures such as mastectomy , they can be oppressed and impregnated through their biology, and considering every woman suffers from gender dysphoria, it is hardly surprising that women wish to escape misogyny by transforming into men.
Therein lies the triple standard: 1) Men refuse to accept males as their own.
2) Women readily accept all females as their own and do not go around beating up their own kind for transgressing social norms, but we are now supposed to accept… any random male as a woman? 3) And men are not obliged to accept males as males?
Men now force women to accept men in women-only spaces, such as prisons. If a trans women, who still has his penis, murders and attempts rape, he can be put in a women’s prison to protect HIS human rights. WOmen’s right to be protected from a predatory male, counts for nothing.
Double, triple standards abound.
They can insist on working in rape crisis centres, a place where women should not even have to contemplate coming across a man, whether he believes he’s a woman or not. Even your average heterosexual male can understand his logic. How is it that a trans woman can’t? And this makes me angriest of all. Because when
men trans women insist on forcing their way into all-female spaces it is a feminist’s duty to become very suspicious.
This is the beginning of the erasure of women. But already, I suspect, it is more difficult than they thought it would be. Women are supposed to be compliant, pliant and soft. Why, they wonder, do we not roll over like dogs and accept their dictates? Why do we not embrace the laws that erase us? It is an abhorrence. It is against nature. Women are supposed to smile and nod when a law is passed enabling a man with a penis to call himself a woman. How DARE women try to define womanhood!!
I laugh in the face of the men who thought they could erase us without a fight.
“Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, Rage against the dying of the light” (Dylan Thomas)