A few years ago I attended, for two years running, London’s Reclaim The Night march, organised by London Feminist Network. It was an amazing march, full of an powerful pro-woman atmosphere. We marched through London to raise awareness of violence against women. However the year after, and each year since, I have not attended.
The reason for my non-attendance is fairly simple. Then, I knew nothing about trans people other than what the newspapers had told me. Cis privilege meant I had not considered or noticed that there were few, if any, trans women in attendance. Over the year after the second march I attended, I met several amazing trans people online, did a lot of reading of blogs by trans people and though I am far from a perfect ally, I started to try to think and speak about trans people and their place in feminism.
Feminism should, by default, include trans women. I’d go so far as to say that, as trans women are many, many times more likely to be raped, killed or discriminated against on the basis of their gender than cis women are, we cis feminists should not just be including them but making them central in our activism. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. We’ve long known that feminism as a movement is overwhelmingly white, able-bodied and middle class. It is also overwhelmingly cissexual.
While I spent that year learning, it came to my attention that the Reclaim The Night march that I had enjoyed so much, excluded trans women. If you email LFN, you will be told that of course trans women are welcome to attend. However, even after several years of repeated calls for that to be made clear and specific on the flyers and on the RTN website, no changes have been made. LFN’s repeated and continuous refusal to explicitly include trans women when they say ‘women-only’ is extremely problematic and shows a lot of cis privilege and cissexism.
I mean, it wouldn’t be hard, would it? After all these years of people talking to them about it, all they have to do is change the website so it says “cis and trans women only” or “self-identified women only”. A couple of words changing on a website, that’s all it needs. Clarification on the flyers that all women are welcome. But they steadfastly refuse to do so. The only conclusion that can be drawn from their reluctance, is that they don’t actually wish to state publicly that trans women are welcome, and the only conclusion to be drawn from that is that trans women are not in fact welcome by RTN’s organisers.
Considering that London Feminist Network spoke out and demonstrated in favour of outspoken transphobe Julie Bindel when she was given her Stonewall award, this is hardly surprising. I wonder how much that has to do with LFN’s refusal to explicitly include trans women. I also wonder how much of it has to do with the faction of transphobic “radfems” who would kick up a stink about “women only spaces” including all women, and LFN’s desire not to scare off these people.
This is where my disappointment in my fellow cis feminists comes in. Women I love, women I respect and who I consider friends, have continued to attend and will be attending this year’s Reclaim The Night in London, despite being made aware of the march’s transphobia and cissexism. I am disappointed, so disappointed, that they are still choosing to go. It seems to me to be a smack in the face to trans women. Many of the cis women I’ve spoken to who are attending, have said “But the march does so much good!” and “Well it’s important, of course it’s important… but I’d be missing out on so much if I didn’t go.”
So trans women are important to you, but not quite important enough for you to miss out on your night of female solidarity. I’m sorry, but that’s just not good enough. What you’re saying is that it’s more important for you to take a walk, organised by a network who blatantly don’t care about trans women, which implicitly excludes trans women, and that you’re not willing to put your money where your mouth is, so to speak, by boycotting the march.
LFN and the other organisers of RTN are not listening. And why on earth should they, when so many cis women, by attending, are telling them “I care about trans women, but not quite enough to miss your march”? They won’t listen unless we all take a stand. Every single one of us who gives a damn about the inclusion of trans women needs to boycott this march until its numbers dwindle so much that they have no choice but to listen and make the change that is so desperately needed. I’m taking that stand. Will you?
Cross-posted at The F Word.
Wow, usually this blog is good, but this “transphobic” crap is honestly just too much.
@berryblade: Why do you consider discussion about transphobia to be crap?
Why must an event throw any woman under a label such as trans? If the event is for women show up and support, that essay says nothing about trans women being discriminated against just that they aren’t being forced into a box labeled trans. What is a trans woman? Either you have it all or accept labels thrust onto you…. My drivers license says female not transitioned female…So why worry about where your invited?
Are you not aware that cis feminists have recently gotten it so that trans women aren’t allowed in quite a few [cis]women-only spaces because “you transsexual people might upset the real women“, undermining the gender recognition act and setting the standard that it’s fine to take away trans rights? Because that doesn’t really scream “[cis] Feminism can be assumed to be trans friendly even if it doesn’t state it explicitly!” to me.
@berryblade,
You mean it’s crap that Anji admits to the existence of transphobia, I take it. You honestly sound like an MRA talking about sexism. It doesn’t affect you so it must not exist.
To berryblade: Cut the crap; she knows what she’s talking about.
To anji:Thank you for being truthful and honest. One more like you always helps.
I would appreciate if you read my blog, http://emilysvirtualrocket.blogspot.com. The blog is a virtual compendium of articles from newspapers, newsweeklies, and magazines, both popular and scholarly. The articles have a viewpoint toward transgender / transsexual news. If you like it, please put
“Emily’s virtual rocket “under the title commonly called
“Blogroll”. Thank you so much!
Sincerely,
Emily
What is your opinion about the trans women that attended reclaim the night march yesterday (27 nov 2010). Do you believe they have let trans women down ?
I attend reclaim the night with my 11 year old daughter. I believe it is ridiculous to encourage women not to attend reclaim the night. My daughter would actually like to walk the streets safely. I would not be offended if I was not included in an event for black women and I would not try to sabotage their event either as I respect that each group of women have very individual issues.
Women who have suffered the effects of patriarchy since birth have fought for many years to end violence against women, such comments undermine the struggle to end violence against women.
The unfortunate fact (not that I agree with it) is that trans women may have to initiate their own struggle against violence and may have to fight for many years for recognition of their rights just as we have and just as every marginalised groups have throughout history.
Why would the organisers of RTN add trans women to their publicity, do they individually list black women, disabled women etc on their literature? If trans women want to attend then they should attend.
In fighting between womens groups only undermines the cause, it encourages patriarchy and makes us all look stupid and petty.
Its ok to have individual opinions and discuss those opinions, but for the sake of women surely it would be better to show a united front in the face of male violence against women.
Katt’s response to this post was excellent, but I wanted to underscore one particular point she didn’t explicitly mention:
“trans women… may have to fight for many years for recognition of their rights just as we have”
Let’s look at the last part of that:
“Just as we have”
There’s an assumption underlying this (and it’s in the rest of the post too, but this is the best example), and that assumption is that trans women are fundamentally separate from cis women. Other. Them. This is the same deeply rooted cissexism that leads to the tacit exclusion of trans women from events like Reclaim the Night. Your argument rests on the idea that trans women are not really women, and that our voices have no place in your discussion.
There’s a cultural context you’re ignoring as well. When I see a space described as ‘women only’, I immediately get nervous. What assumptions underlie that statement? Was this group founded by someone from the “Womyn Born Womyn” crowd? Am I going to be kicked out if I go? Ridiculed? This is a common enough occurrence that it makes me uncomfortable in any such space, and I think that is true for many trans women.
“In fighting between womens groups only undermines the cause”
This is just apologism – “Keep a united front” is just an excuse to let people get away with bigoted bullshit.
HLC:
Of course not! That is an absurd statement.
If you are told “you’re not welcome at this event” what would be the point of boycotting? You’re already not welcome. If you attend anyway, that’s a powerful statement!
On the other hand, if you are told “your sister is not welcome at this event, but you are” then what does it say if you attend? It tells your sister that you don’t care about her, that you’d rather go to this event that excludes her.
Its great that you want your daughter to be able to walk the streets safely. I want that too. I also want my trans sisters to be able to walk the streets safely. They have as much right to be there, to be respected, as you and your daughter do.
If there was a history of white women being discriminated against by WoC then you might have a point. But it’s the other way around. White women have no right to enter spaces for WoC only because we are the oppressors.
Trans women since birth have suffered at the hands of the patriarchy, and are more likely to be killed or raped than cis women. Why don’t they count?
How exactly does asking for the struggle against VAW to include, and centre, trans women undermine it?
So what you’re saying is, trans women should just wait on the sidelines while cis women deal with their issues, and then maybe we’ll think about it? Or that the trans women already fighting patriarchy and transphobia have to do it in their own space away from cis women? Not sure how exactly further marginalising and already marginalised group helps the cause.
Disabled women are excluded. We are excluded when event organisers don’t specify if the area is accessible. We are excluded when event organisers don’t state that male carers are allowed to attend.
I support trans women attending 100%, but that doesn’t mean they will feel welcome.
Too many of these groups are run by transphobic feminists who see the presence of trans women as “invading” their space. Trans women who try to attend could be shunned, asked to leave, and otherwise discriminated against. This is not what anyone wants to happen on a night of fighting back and solidarity. Can you picture it, gearing up to go to this event, preparing yourself to fight for oppression, only to find that your sisters would rather shit on you just a little bit more.
This is why we need to specify, to make sure that everyone at the event knows that our trans sisters are welcome.
If standing up for the rights of my trans sisters makes me petty, then so be it.
Our trans sisters face more violence against them, they are more likely to be raped and beaten and murdered, and yet still some cis women claim they don’t belong at RTN.
I’d love to show a united front against male violence against women, but we can’t do that so long as our sisters are being told they aren’t good enough because they were born with penises.
As a transwoman, I just want to say thank you for taking a stand for us and using your blog to expose at least some of the cis-sexism present in supposedly feminist circles.
Sorry all
I forgot that Cisters are scum of the earth and are shit on the shoe of every marginalised group out there. Do forgive us for our existence !!!!!
I know, I know, I shouldn’t feed trolls.
But you’re illustrating privilege defensiveness so very clearly here, that I can’t help but take a moment and highlight it. Let’s use the word replacement exercise for a moment. Let’s say a man said:
“I forgot that men are scum of the earth and are shit on the shoe of every marginalised group out there. Do forgive us for our existence !!!!!”
What would your response be? Think about it. Your original comment is full of privileged observational bias, and this response is, what? An attempt to garner sympathy because being privileged is so very hard, and the Big Mean Oppressed Group is hurting your feelings by getting tired of being treated like shit?
Yeah, sorry about that. Except no, not sorry at all.
So, yeah, privilege check. I was willing to chalk your original post up to ignorance – to not having or having synthesized all of the relevant information. But privilege denial and apologism? That’s just depressing.
We all have some axes on which we are privileged (or at least, nearly all of us. And certainly everyone with access to the Internet). And we all (again, most of us) are oppressed along some axes. The important thing is accepting the axes where you are privileged and being careful to check yourself for bias there. In other words, not having a privilege-defending knee-jerk reaction when you are called out for something.
The fact that, in a Social Justice movement like Feminism, the group with the most privilege (white, able-bodied, middle-class+ cis women) has become the center of the conversation and remained there is unsurprising. After all, privilege grants them the power to take the spotlight and center it on themselves. However, that it is unsurprising will not stop me from demanding better.
Having privilege does not make you a bad person. Refusing to check your privilege is bad, getting defensive when people call you on privilege is bad, but having privilege itself does not make you evil.
I want to know where you got from the post or any of the responses to you “cisters are the scum of the earth!!!!”. Who was it that gave that impression? Was it Anji, who called out cis women who attend RTN despite the transphobia? Was it anna who called you on your treatment of trans women, as if they aren’t “real women”?
Was it me, who pointed out that our trans sisters face a disproportionate amount of violence directed against them, and deserve to be included and centred in our movement?
Where, in all of this, do you get the impression that cis women are evil and hated?
You say you are disabled, so allow me to use a less-than-perfect analogy. A blog post is written about how feminism typically excludes disabled women. Accommodations are not provided, pro-choice arguments frequently feature ableism, the environment is downright hostile to disabled women.
Then someone comes in, someone with abled privilege, and declares that we are being petty and in-fighting. That disabled women should take a back seat until it’s their turn. They claim “isn’t showing a united front better than giving you accommodations you need and treating you as a human being who deserves to be in this movement? After all, Real Women (who aren’t disabled) have fought hard, so you should have to as well”
And then, when questioned on this assumption, sie gets defensive and whines about how we are hurting hir feelings.
This is what you have done. You come in here with cis privilege and tell trans women that they need to take a back seat in the movement. You strongly imply that trans women are not Real Women, and that attending RTN is more important than being inclusive of our sisters.
And then when called on this behaviour, you immediately resort to meaningless rhetoric about how we’re calling cis women “scum of the earth”.
Step back, breathe deep, and check your privilege.
Also, I want to know what you mean by “cisters”. This is not a term I have come across before. Do you mean cis women? Why not say cis women?
I like the way you critisise about my privileged observational bias, its ironic that you dont even recognise your own (may be privileged) observational bias which to me flaws your whole argument and makes me truely distrust your whole motivation for your comments. Your assumption that I am white middle class able bodied is apparent in your post.
I dont need to justify myself or reveal personal information but on this occasion feel it slightly necessary to highlight your observational bias. I am actually not able bodied and am from the travelling community.
To continue the discussion I am intersted on your views on the 7 demands and how your response fits in your biased gorgios comments
I think, you are right in a sense as I do become defensive when insults are used as it is not necessary in discussion. I may not have had the privilege of education and may not be able to formulate my discussion in an appropriate way that describes my thoughts as well as those who have had the luxury of access to education.
I may be ignorant and uninformed, but have never experienced being excluded because of my epilepsy. (may be just from driving). It is only personal preference, but although no arrangements are in place for women specifically with epilepsy at RTN, I will still attend.
I do not feel any woman should take a back seat in the movement, we all have our own part to play. It seems from all of the discussions I have read that gender and feminism arguments are multi faceted no one group will ever hold the same view as another, so I am not saying that trans women are not real women. I am saying that as women we are all very different with different political view points and we all display our own “isms” and that we all have priviege in individual terms depending on whether we are trans, cis, educated , non educated, middle class, working class, white or Rommani. I wont spend my time undermining other groups just because I have experienced racism and let me tell you that I have experienced that from cis and trans women in terms of my race and level of education. I sometimes want my “own space” with other Romanni women, as do other groups of women, so could you tell me your thoughts on why Cis women should not be allowed to have this.
I dont demand that Gorgios women actually say gorgios when referring to themselves so why would I say cis when referring to my self. If you believe I should then you should also refer to yourself as gorgios (non rommani).
I feel i may soon have to refer to myself as a non educated, rommani, cis, hetrosexual, disabled, middleaged woman – its a bit of a mouthful.
I’m trying to believe that you are arguing in good faith, but it’s getting fairly difficult.
I have already explained to you why WoC can have spaces that white women cannot enter: because white women are the dominant group, the oppressor class.
Trans women are not the oppressor class, cis women are. Thus cis women can’t claim to need space away from trans women, but trans women might need space away from cis women.
No one has called you ignorant or uninformed. No one has insulted you. Where do you get this impression?
As far as exclusion based on disability: it can and does happen. I know someone who cannot got to RTN because they refuse to allow her carer to accompany her.
If you feel you need accommodations based on your epilepsy, you have a right to ask people fore them. No question. If, however, there is nothing preventing your from attending RTN due to disability, why bring it up?
I think a simple “Accomidations will be made to women with disabilities, enquire at…” is all that is needed on the fliers.
Also, no one has asked you to refer to yourself as cis, only that you acknowledge that you are. When discussing privilege I will certainly make the point that I am white and cis, and appear abled and appear straight (though I’m not). Because in social justice discussions, it is important for others to know where I’m coming from, to know where they can take my word and where they should defer to someone with more experience.
“I like the way you critisise about my privileged observational bias, its ironic that you dont even recognise your own”
No, I fully admit that I am biased. On issues involving race, class, disability, I have lived my entire life in a comfortable bubble of privilege, never *having* to think about these things. That doesn’t mean I am incapable of being aware that my privilege exists, and stopping to account for it whenever possible.
“Your assumption that I am white middle class able bodied is apparent in your post.”
Is it? I am having trouble seeing that in either of my previous posts. I assumed you were cisgender, and that’s the privilege I was referring to when talking about bias (because, after all, the topic at hand is a trans issue). The only time I mentioned white, middle-class, able-bodied women specifically was in my aside about Feminism in general – that was not directed at you, personally, but at Feminism as a movement. I apologize if my phrasing made it seem like that was directed at you.
I also invite you or anyone else following this dialogue to check my language for classism and ableism – if you have concerns with specific things that I said, especially if it seems like a personal attack based in bigotry, I would appreciate being told that.
“I sometimes want my “own space” with other Romanni women, as do other groups of women, so could you tell me your thoughts on why Cis women should not be allowed to have this.”
Because cis women are a privileged group. The reason that X-only spaces are so useful is that they allow a marginalized group to form a safe space from which they can work without concerns of bigotry from the oppressor group.
“I feel i may soon have to refer to myself as a non educated, rommani, cis, hetrosexual, disabled, middleaged woman – its a bit of a mouthful.”
Not at all. I simply refer to myself as a woman, and I try to own my privilege along a given axis when it is relevant. Of course, if someone asks me “tell me about yourself”, I will happily clarify that I am a white, pansexual, polyamorous, heathen trans woman of European descent who is able-bodied and middle class.
In order to be sufficiently “GLBT” and not at all Transphobic, some cis-sexual lesbians descend into self-parody
From The Magazine Project, a site originally LGBT until the creator let a Transphobe in as a co-editor:
The article was “Transwomen are merely castrated men”, whose author also wrote elsewhere about Transwomen and the Transgender Day of Remembrance:
The co-editor then methodically deleted almost all of the trans-supportive comments, several hundred of them. In her own words “All I could get away with”.
The next change was in the section regarding trans writers, one FtoM, the other MtoF
The new “about” page now says:
And the Terms and Conditions:
This whole dialogue reminds this female (trans) of other similar debates raging elsewhere, i.e., the DADT policy of the USA regarding the LBGT, and an also, the health care debate can be used as an analogy also I think.
The womens LRN, and the military’s DADT (don’t ask don’t tell)…I see no difference, it is the same bias’ and bigotry in both areas.
It is also is not too much of stretch to perceive it in the light of the health care debate…”who deserves health care”?
My opinion is that the LRN and the USA military position is the same, “don’t ask, don’t tell”…if you do, you will at least be given the shittiest least desired position on the totem pole. And, as far as health care goes, we all deserve equal health care.
Trans women are not asking for special rights…we are asking for equality.
Stumbled across your post and, while I agree with much of it, there is one nagging difficulty with your chosen stand. I think we would all agree that there are two equally important issues here; creating a safer environment for women to traverse freely without facing additional threats to their wellbeing at night, and ensuring that trans women are inclusively catered for by any organisation which promotes itself as being “for women”. I don’t think I could easily prioritise either of those things, but by asking women to boycott the march in order to champion an alternative cause, you are forcing a choice. Asking us to decide which cause matters most: safety or acceptance? I struggle with that.
I feel that rather than encouraging cis women to boycott, you should be encouraging trans women to attend. We live in a society which (often unfortunately) is driven by consumer feedback and demand, but here is an opportunity to use that to the advantage. If requests to change the wording on the leaflets have failed, then prove that the demand is there. By urging every sensible, compassionate woman to boycott, you risk doing nothing more than increasing the percentage of ignorant or prejudiced women who would remain on it – and all that would then do is reinforce the unwelcoming seperateness in the future.
The issues motivating the Reclaim the Night march affect cis and trans women alike, and so we should present a united front to tackle them! Bickering amongst ourselves – however we have come to self-identify as women – will not promote safety *or* acceptance.
All this energy would be far better spent being proactive, not reactive.
WHOO, blame the victims for what the oppressors are doing! No, the author of this post hasn’t asked cis women to make that choice, Reclaim the Night has.
Telling trans women to attend an event they may not be safe at, is telling them that they should give up their safety just to struggle for acceptance, possibly against a hostile crowd.
Why is it okay to encourage trans women to GIVE UP what little safety they have, but it’s not okay to tell cis women to boycott an event that is failing to fight for the safety of ALL WOMEN?
I don’t see how encouraging trans people to come is “blaming the victims”. I mean, if a trans woman doesn’t want to come, fine, but from my little experience in those kind of demonstrations (though it’s definitely not the same size) most trans women won’t feel legitimate to come if you don’t “encourage” them, even if they really want to come.
«Telling trans women to attend an event they may not be safe at, is telling them that they should give up their safety just to struggle for acceptance, possibly against a hostile crowd. »
Or you can tell them to come and organize a bit with your friends in order to make it safer for them.
«Why is it okay to encourage trans women to GIVE UP what little safety they have, but it’s not okay to tell cis women to boycott an event that is failing to fight for the safety of ALL WOMEN?»
But I don’t see how you can do that without in turn encouraging the trans women who are ready to come (if they have a few supportive allies to back them up) to either give up their participation or the little safety they could have had.
There’s something utterly revolting – and at the same time endlessly compelling – about watching the power struggles in the hierarchy of opression.
A feminist woman may not enter a space reserved for WoC, but woe betide a WoC who trespasses in the space marked out for disabled lesbians.
Divide and conquer, divide and conquer…
The old, patriarchal power structures are being copied and perpetuated by women who should know better…
This article is completely bogus… if there is actual discrimination against trans women then obviously that needs to be addressed but claiming that statements like “self-identified women” or “cis and trans women” are preferable to “women only” is transphobic in its implication that trans women aren’t “really women.” If an event says “women only” then by assumption it should include trans women.
In most cases, it would be racist to say that an event should advertise as “white AND PoC women only” because women, regardless of race, are women. Women, regardless of trans status, are women.
And about the “self-identified women” part, I must quote asher of tranarchism.org:
This co-opting of the language of self-identification is not only condescending, it completely missed the point.
Cis people seem to think that self-identification is only for trans folks. They don’t have to “identify” as men and women– they just ARE! Their gender isn’t “self-identified,” it’s “self-evident!”
What they fail to understand is that self identification is the only meaningful way to determine gender. Any other method is wholly dependent upon what that doctor said way back when we were still red, wrinkly, writhing, screaming newborn messes, completely unformed as individuals and without any identity at all to speak of, too bloody and scrunchy-faced to even be called cute. The fact is that cis people self-identify too– they just happen to agree with what the doctor said all those years ago. Anybody who answers the question of “are you a man?” or “are you a woman?” with “yes” has just self-identified.
I like that OP is trying to stand up for trans women. I like that the OP says that trans women should be central to the tenents of feminism. I don’t think this article has any legs to stand on and I think that while well-meaning, it is transphobic and trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. In the name of standing up for us, you are othering us and telling us we aren’t women.
In most cases, it would be racist to say that an event should advertise as “white AND PoC women only” because women, regardless of race, are women. Women, regardless of trans status, are women.
Yes, but there isn’t a large group of feminists trying to deny WoC their status of womanhood like there is with trans women. WoC are accepted, without question, as members of the female sex. Trans women are not, so it needs to be said to ensure they realise they are being included in ‘women-only’ – because ‘women-only’ has a long and ugly history of being used to mean ‘cis women only’.
This article is completely bogus… if there is actual discrimination against trans women then obviously that needs to be addressed… I don’t think this article has any legs to stand on
So you missed the part where I pointed out LFN’s support of transphobic pseudojournalist Julie Bindel and held that up as another reason not to support the events they produce until they explain themselves, then?
I think that while well-meaning, it is transphobic and trying to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. In the name of standing up for us, you are othering us and telling us we aren’t women.
Of all the trans women who have read this, and I know many online, you are the first to come up with this objection. In fact it is from trans women that I got education in “women-only” not being sufficient, and by trans women that I have been told that explicit, not implicit, inclusion of trans women is necessary. I’m not saying you’re not entitled to feel the way you feel, but ultimately I’m going to go with what the majority of the marginalised group in question are telling me they need.
Even if there is a need for this event to be more accepting of trans women, putting transphobic, othering language, isn’t the way to do it. I cringe every time I read an event that says anything about “self-identified women” because what that says to me is “we say this because we don’t think trans women are really women but we want to include them.” It triggers a shitload of internalised transphobia and makes me not want to go to the event. It makes me feel condescended to and makes me feel like a phony, a fake, a deceiver, a liar.
If you really want to make the event more accessible for trans women, fix the actual problem. Womens spaces shouldn’t need to advertise that they are trans friendly – any womens’ space that isn’t trans friendly needs change.
Plus the root of this – “women only” is problematic. What about femme genderqueer people? What about femme men? What about trans men without passing privilege? People of color of any gender – Not everyone who is unsafe at night is a woman. Reclaiming the night shouldn’t be a girl’s only club – it should be an alliance of a diverse array of people who have and do struggle with safety at night.
I agree to the objections concerning “self-identified”. I always felt it could sound a bit like “well, I don’t think you are really a woman but because I am polite I respect your self-definition and tolerate you in”.
But I don’t think expliciting inclusion of trans women necesarily needs to be othering. E.g. a small march I took part said something like “for dykes and women, whether we are trans or cis, whatever our sexualities, our skin colors, our culturs, our social classes”. I am not saying it’s perfect (and it’s probably badly translated anyway), but I think it allowed to explicit trans inclusion while not othering trans women the way “for cis and trans women” do ; and trying to emphasize it’s not only for white, middle class women doesn’t seem a lack of time either.
I like that long form a lot – it gives a feeling that they are intentionally embracing diversity rather than othering trans women
This is a tough one. In my mind, which I base mostly on my reality and my experiences with trans women, to me they ARE women, as they are to themselves and most of the world. I say most of the world because there are those whom the trans individual confide in and choose to share their experiences with.
Forgive me if I’m way off base, but it seems to me that the “trans” part plays its most significant role in helping trans people map out their journey to realizing themselves, strategies for managing associated struggles, and to connect with and support others who have shared that experience. Again, it seems to me that “trans” needn’t be used to draw a line between trans and cis. Everyone arrived at womanhood via their own unique path, the point is everyone arrived. Some woman navigated the waters of depression in order to live to be here now. Some battled breast cancer. Some have overcome alcohol and drug abuse. Some have had to make the trans journey to be here to participate in women’s culture today. Each instance of adversity has lent itself to the beautiful diversity that makes up the whole, but need not be used to fracture women into pockets of trans, cis, alcoholics, cancer survivors, etc.
Though I will say these individuals (and their supporters) with transphobic agendas have seriously missed the boat. It sounds as if somewhere along the way they completely forgot or somehow confused or compromised the values inherent to the movement. When the marginalized begin to marginalize it’s time for some serious reflection, something I was very impressed to have come across in this article. Thanks for sharing with us and keep it up!
If I were a trans woman I’d kick you in the throat for outing me as such in a broad, public venue like that. Just saying.
Excuse me?
I’m only saying that if I were transitioning, and attempting to live as a woman, I would want to be accepted as a woman. Not as a “transwoman”.
It seems like you have your heart in the right place, but I honestly don’t think that is the right way to go about something like this.
Oh, hi, instead of white-knighting for trans women and speaking for them maybe you should let trans women speak for themselves. Because cis people speaking over trans people and deciding what’s best for us is a major part of the problem as well.
But isn’t the author of this post doing that as well?
I’m telling cis people what the trans women I know have told me.
Also
>implying I’m automatically cis simply because I’m not trans.
>implying I’m whiteknighting
>implying you know what whiteknighting means
Cool assumptions bro.
implying I’m automatically cis simply because I’m not trans.
Cis means not trans. It’s a word ‘created’ by the trans community specifically to mean a person who does not fall under the umbrella term of trans.
No cis means that your mental and emotional gender match up with the sex you were born with.
It does not simply mean “not trans”.
Nobody is born with a sex, people are coercively assigned them. “Sex” isn’t a legitimate system of classifying people. “Sex” is a failed attempt to apply something metaphysical – gender (a social construct) – to something physical – bodies.
And cis/trans isn’t a strict binary because there are gender fluid people who are sometimes cis and sometimes trans, there are people with multiple genders, some of which may be cis, others of which may be trans… And there are genderqueer people who don’t identify as trans or cis.
And another thing: using the phrase “mental and emotional gender” is transphobic: All gender is “mental and emotional.” To call trans people’s genders “mental and emotional” is to imply that there is a such thing as Physical gender” which is a cissexist idea that is untrue.
But…I was getting ready to defend genderqueerness. If your had read a little further down the page you would have seen that. Also I have no idea what you’re on about. Physical sex is your genitalia. You’re getting all fucking abstract and shit now. I mean, more abstract than normal when talking about gender and all.
I may not have used the most elegant wording, but you are infering that I meant to say there was a physical gender, something that I did not say. I said “when your mental and emotional GENDER do not match up with your physical SEX”. A physical sex is a thing.
That makes no sense. It means both what you say in your first sentence and ‘not trans’ because that’s what not being trans means. Cis and trans are paired prefixes from Latin and are used that way in Latin and in, say, chemistry which uses Latin.
No. Just because you aren’t transgendered does not mean that you are cisgendered by default. Genderqueerness and fluidity are a thing, you know. Nice total erasure there. Good job.
From what I understand from the nonbinary, neutrois, genderqueer and fluid people I’ve met, those identities fall under the umbrella term of trans*.
Speaking as someone who’s near-enough a trans woman for transphobes, I have no clue what you’re on about.
Pingback: Reclaim The Night: Open To ALL Women? « Something More Than Sides
This is also an issue which we in Workers’ Liberty (www.workersliberty.org) were bothered about.
Judging by http://www.reclaimthenight.org/index.html Reclaim the Night has now changed its policy. Do you know any more?
The policy is what they have always had. They have taken a step forward in now putting it openly on their website instead of making people ask as has always previously been the case. But if you look on the downloadable leaflet, you can see that again they are not being explicit about it besides on their website.