You really can’t. Cuz you know where radscum came from?
Your old school feminist icons.
Dworkin, Daly, Rich, Raymond, etc
Those ladies you worship and eulogize (lol shot at Melissa McEwan, CUZ I CAN) and whine about the reputations of? The source of the ideology you are so fucking quick to step back from, hands up in the air in front of you going NOT ME NOT ME, NOT MINE NOT MINE? Yeah those the people that founded your shit. Your precursors.
And every fucking inch of your theory (that hasn’t been jacked from folks that don’t call themselves feminists and aren’t protected by your shit cuz they don’t have your privileges) came from those roots. Built on those foundations.
Sure the impact of the shit you do is smaller than a radscum. But does that really fucking matter? You still uphold the radscum forerunners like magical goddesses of uterine might come to smash the patriarchy with hammers and shit. You enable these fucks, that you are so quick to pretend don’t exist. You’re so busy covering your shit stained ass that you don’t do a damn thing to fight any of them even as they run around with your battle flags and shit. Battle flags that are theirs too, considering your founders were just as bad if not worse.
And just cuz you’re a smaller cut doesn’t mean there’s no blood flowing cuz of you.
Just cuz you’ve got less of the evil than them doesn’t mean you’re innocent.
And the more time you spend protesting innocence, denying connections, shouting THAT’S NOT MY FEMINISM, THAT’S NOT REAL FEMINISM, THAT’S NOT THE RIGHT FEMINISM instead of helping the people these piles of rancid toxic ass vomit target, attack, harm, out and endanger and fighting these soulless husks who are seeking the outright eradication of trans women (and really trans people in general but they especially want us gone)?
The more like them you are.
For every Bug Brennan with her cognitive dissonance and fucked up transmisogynist exterminationist bullcrap there’s 15 Laci Greens who think their minor fuckups are nothing and spend their days covering their asses instead of helping anyone elses’.
Imagine if these useless fuckers did something real about cissexism for once.
firstly, a reminder of what teh eff i’m talking about.
what follows are just what i PERSONALLY consider to be the highlights of this “discussion” on the future of feminist activism.2:14Sarah Arnold:Ha, indeed. To pivot a little bit, a few of the commenters mentioned or alluded to the recent Anne-Marie Slaughter piece in the Atlantic and discussions of women in the workplace. Where would you like to see those conversations going? Also, what kind of organizing do you see happening and what kind of organizing would you like to see happening regarding women and the balance between our professional and personal lives?Anna Holmes:I like to say that I feel lucky that I wasn’t a teen when Facebook - or really, the internet - was around, but I imagine that for all the downsides to new technology, the upside is that young women like Julia are able to seek out, find, and get support from like-minded people, particularly their peers.Jessica Valenti:It seems to me that conversations about work/life balance and the needs to parents probably shouldn’t focus on just the elite. I understand what Slaughter is doing - and I think talking about what powerful women do is important, for sure. But the major things that would help all parents are more basic than flex schedules.Aimee Thorne-Thomsen:Where do I start? The piece itself doesn’t lend anything new to the conversation between work-life balance, except that it re-starts it for people who haven’t had it before. That said, I think a lot of people struggle with a professional-personal life balance, thinking that there is a “perfect” balance to reach.Jessica Valenti:Like, I find it so interesting that the internet blows up over this cover of a white baby in a briefcase, but there’s very little movement on something as essential as mandated paid parental leave.Anna Holmes:I would like discussions of women in the workplace - particularly working mothers - to stop focusing so much on the one percent. Is AMS a member of the one percent? I don’t know what her annual income is, but what I do know is that she spoke from a perch and of an experience that doesn’t seem to resonate or reflect the experiences of most American women in its particulars.Aimee Thorne-Thomsen:I also think that one of the places we need to have these conversation is within feminist organizations and feminist-aligned organizations. Those organizations don’t promote a good work-life balance, often times, even though they are purportedly working on these issues.Anna Holmes:I’d also like to see more discussion of how *men* fit into these conversations.Jessica Valenti:YES Aimee! I was actually doing some sleuthing to see what the leave policies were for feminist orgs…Jessica Valenti: Men aren’t real parents, didn’t you know? *sigh*
fascinating. and great question Valenti, why *is* something as essential as mandated paid paternal leave not advocated for? especially since you’ve done so much organizing with groups working to do so and have made it a centerpoint in your own feminist activism…………..wait.
to continue:2:24Comment From RasHow do you plan to work on more intersectionality with women of color through the digital feminism we’re discussing?Jessica Valenti:Ras, I think that those intersectional conversations and actions are already happening - the challenge seems to be getting them the same kind of support that more mainstream activism has. (Both in terms of financial support & sustainability and in terms of visibility)
It’s like they try to talk, but all that comes out is rancid mayo…
Also, I think we need a moratorium on the use of “intersectionality” by anyone who isn’t Kimberlé Crenshaw or directly quoting her. It just sounds like ppl use it as a shorthand for multiculturalism and that’s annoying. But maybe I’m reading them wrong, idk?
Oh my god. OH MY GOD. I am so entirely over this brand of feminism. And you know why? Because I *literally* cannot care about your upper-middle-class work-life balance issues. I CANNOT. Because I am too busy being precariously lower-middle-class (when I say precariously, I mean, at any moment my workplace could be shut down and we could all be thrown in jail) and not having much of a life outside of that, because I physically cannot have kids and also no one really wants to date a disabled sex worker.
I care about me and mine, and everyone who’s dealing with issues outside of ‘It’s so hard having all this money to do feminist stuff with because my only areas of expertise are my rich straight white cis early-thirties able-bodied mainstream-successful vanilla married white lady problems!’. Because I just do not have the energy to care about that bullshit. Fuckfuckfuckfuckfuck UGH. Stop giving these people money. They have enough money!
Also, since when is Anna ‘Jezebel isn’t a feminist site so I can be as racist and ableist as I want!’ Holmes a feminist?
Well, that went as I expected. Ugh. If your feminist issues are work-life balance, then you probably need to move back and let other people lead feminism, y’know?
In related news, the sky is blue, water is wet and the HRC only exists to accrue money and influence for itself.
And the moral of the story is never, ever trust white cis gays.
Seriously. White cis gays have proven time and again that they enjoy too much systemic privilege to be trusted as authentic members of any civil rights movement whatsoever. Not because they don’t face any real oppression, but because the combination of whiteness and cisness is so much privilege that they don’t actually want to eliminate social inequality — they just think they’re rightfully entitled to be on top of it.
The involvement of white cis gays in the LGBT movement has always been all about stomping on and climbing over everyone else — especially trans women of color — to claim the elite social status which they’ve been socialized to view as their entitlement.
Gentrification by any other name…
Unfucking hell. So tired of this shit.
Considering the recent issues the trans women’s community has had with FWHC, and how issues like these are not uncommon (“trans inclusion” at a women’s clinic means inclusion, and the provision of care no woman needs, for trans men, while excluding trans women), it is important to have a statement of how things should be. This is a very rough draft, and I’m sure it will see improvement and revision.
The central conflict here is that trans men require some health care that is associated (in our cisnormative society) with women. All people have a right to medical treatment, and furthermore the right to be treated in a way that is compatible with their genders. The problem arises when women’s clinics answer the call by de-gendering themselves while remaining DFAB-only, and especially when they begin offering treatments for trans men that are outside of the purview of women’s health, such as testosterone-based HRT for trans men.
This is being done to claim “trans-inclusiveness”, while actively working for the exclusion of trans women. It is an act of transmisogyny. Tangentially, it also implicitly misgenders trans men, while continuing a long trend of destroying women’s space by using “trans-inclusiveness” as a rallying cry under which men are allowed entry into spaces set-aside for non-men, turning those spaces gender-neutral (while still exclusive of trans women) and therefore useless as anti-misogynist safe spaces.
- Practices that specialize in care for specific body parts are to be open to everyone who needs that care. When this care is being provided for a body part that is traditionally gendered it is to be done in a gender-neutral way.
- Women’s clinics that provide primary care are to be open to all women, cis and trans. Those clinics that offer hormone replacement therapy for trans people are to prioritize providing HRT for trans people who need estrogen above providing testosterone.
- Health care for trans women is to be recognized as women’s health care. A clinic that provides care to women is to, if necessary to serve its patient population, provide trans women with the same level of body-specific care (above and beyond HRT) as cis women receive at the clinic.
They lie about what we want, they lie about what we are, they lie about what we do (especially when it comes to ourselves) and most of all they lie about how much they and theirs fuck up the lives of, oppress and harm us and ours.
Me not telling you I got a dick isn’t lying.
It’s protecting myself from all of you.
People who like to claim that we’re out to rape everyone when we criticize bigotry influencing sexual choices in cis people (mostly happens to trans women)
Who like to claim that we’re mutilating ourselves and lie about why we need what we need in order to deny us medical care when we’re making adjustments to our body that help us survive and thrive
Who like to lie about supporting all choices with one’s own body but try to block ours.
Who like to string bullshit up about how you support all women even tho you don’t support us (for feminism and trans women)
Who like to lie about what our sexualities are.
Who claim that we’re not the genders we know we are, for all sorts of reasons, all lies, all bullshit, when we have made it abundantly fucking clear what we are.
Who like to claim that every attempt to defend ourselves, verbal or otherwise, is more than necessary or vicious or evil or rageful or hateful or oppressing you when we’re trying to survive your people’s assault on our existence itself
Cis people lie.
Yes, they do.
I wrote them a few days ago. Here’s the response I just got.
First of all, I would like to personally thank you for your suggestions and thoughts on the Trans Health Initiative Program here at the Feminist Health Center. As an organization dedicated toserving our community, we take your questions and concerns very seriously and with much thought. As a direct result of your feedback there has been much discussion in regards to our services provided and the demographics we serve.
To clarify any misunderstood details,the Feminist Health Center is a gynecological clinic. Our mission statement, which can be found on our websiteat www.feministcenter.org, is to “to provide accessible, comprehensive gynecological healthcare to all who need it without judgment.” Thus, we operate and have the capacity to first and foremost meet the medical needs of those seeking gynecological services. Besides those focused programs, we are happy to meet any other needs to the best of our abilities.
Specifically regarding trans healthcare, we are proud to offer various gynecological services including lower exams, colposcopies, wellness lab work, and biopsies as well as testosterone hormone replacement therapy. This program dedicated to trans men was created 12 years ago with support from Lola Cola, partner of Robert Eads of the documentary film “Southern Comfort.” Regardless of gender identity and/or sexual identity, we are happy to provideHIV, STI/STD testing, counseling and referrals. The Trans Health Initiative is not a “partner” but rather an additional program of our Center. Because of our limited capacities of wide-range healthcare services as a gynecological clinic, we are not equipped to serve the specific medical needs of trans women, cisgendered males or estrogen hormone replacement therapy. Thus, our reasons for not offering hormone replacement therapy for trans women are because we are not currently able as a clinic to provide that type of care. However, we are more than happy to welcome any person of any gender identity and/ or sexual identity into our clinic and offer them the best support we can, including referrals to doctors and community organizations. In addition, we are equipped to assist with physician-ordered lab work for trans women who are on hormone replacement therapy.
FWHC is working to move beyond gender binaries and conflating “woman” to “person with a uterus.” As a result of your feedback we are re-evaluating and revising our website and other marketing materials to be more inclusive and more clear about who we are able to serve. At the same time, we have to walk a fine line between moving beyond biological essentialism and gender binaries and speaking the language of our clients. We have to “meet people where they are at” so that we can move forward together.
As a clinic and organization, we are dedicated to our community and having conversations tobroaden our commitment to inclusivity. Unfortunately, the issue of concern is not something that can be fixed overnight. We hope to continue down this “progressive road” with your support and suggestions. Roadblocksthat include funding and expanding our staff are issues that limit us in our scope of provided services. Rest assured, we take your concerns to heart and we are going to continue this conversation in the clinic and in the community. Thank you for your patience and time—-I apologize for the lengthy email but we highly value these concerns and hope to continue to foster this conversation with you in reaching our goals.
*I just want to note that the formatting of this email made it obvious that it was a cut-and-paste response.
Because no trans women need gynecological services, amirite? /sarcasm
The level of their ignorance about the medical needs of trans women is impressive and all too sadly typical of medical people. *eyeroll*
TW: Radscum arguments
I’d really like to get involved with this whole “The word vagina is not bad” shit
But cis women, you do the same, you treat my anatomy like it’s vulgar. All the time. And I know you’re not recognizing that anti-abortion isn’t anti-vagina, it’s anti-woman. And I know you don’t think of me as a woman.
I’m having trouble being open about supporting you when you don’t even reciprocate, and when you do the same things to my body that anti-abortion legislators do to yours
What actual legislation has been passed to make rules about your penises? Do you think we’d argue for, and vote for that legislation? Do we take bodily rights from you? No. Get over yourself. If you don’t care about the pro-vagina feels going around, fine. If you’re anti-vagina, or anti-choice- you’re a fucking misogynist.
The real kind, not the misandry you all label “transmisogyny.”
lolno you cissexist monster. I’d call you a fauxminist but no cos this is what feminism fucking is, a big ass cissexist, racist, classist ‘movement’ that ain’t moved since it fucking started.
You white cis women swear you are oh so fucking oppressed while stepping on everyone else and silencing their struggle. WON’T SOMEONE THINK OF MY PRECIOUS WHITE PUSSY?!?! No. Keep the white tears coming, my supply’s been running low anyway.
What actual legislation has been passed to make rules about your penises?
This is such a relevant question, smart-sauce. I can’t think of a damn one. But apparently by bringing up that fact, we’re oppressing people who don’t identify with their penis?? Cry me a fucking river.
OP said “I’m having trouble being open about supporting you when you don’t even reciprocate”… so your butthurt feelings are more important than the millions of the women who will be negatively affected by harsh abortion restrictions. Like, you’re so self involved you can’t get past your butthurt to be an ally to other women (notice i said “other” because i consider you a woman if that’s how you identify ok) ??
Side note: plz stop erasing WoC radfems ok. Like, they’ve made it clear they’re not fictional, they’re on tumblr and part of these discussions and erasing their existence to make your own opinions seem more inclusive is majorly not cool and like pretty oppressive.
You’re really fucking stupid
Cissexuals specifically prevent themselves from understanding that their gatekeeping requirements put the maintenance of stereotypes regarding transsexual women ahead of actually treating trans women like human beings, and that said requirements represent de facto legislating against our bodies. In most states we are never allowed to change our legal documentation to reflect our actual genders (which is actual, de jure legislation against our bodies) unless we have expensive surgery which most insurance companies deem “unnecessary” and “cosmetic” or demand that we “prove” medical necessity for based on not just the aforementioned stereotype-reinforcing standards of care but in most cases on outdated, more restrictive versions of those standards of care (most medical necessity clauses are based upon the HBIGDA SoC Version 5 or WPATH SoC Version 6 - the current version of the WPATH SoC is Version 7) - more de facto legislating against our bodies. Additionally, in most places, the legal rule of thumb for dealing with trans women’s bodies seems to be “your gender is considered to be whatever is the worst for you at this given moment.”
So cissexual women? Get on the fucking bus. Because the fact that you think trans women don’t know what it’s like to have our bodies restricted, controlled and legislated against just shows that you have not thought about trans women, at all.
If this wasn’t such a serious issue, and so personally important to me, I would be laughing hysterically at the ridiculous cis people who constantly feel the need to display exactly how little they know of the actual world.
Every single state in the United States has specific laws and regulations that deal with the ability of trans people to access identification documents that reflect our identities. Since you are so pathetically ignorant of the implications of this, you might want to investigate the fact that the United Nations has recognised by international treaty that all human beings are entitled to such documentation. Only one state in the Union allows trans people to modify their identity documents without the requirements of surgery, California, and this only happened within the past year. So, when you say that the world and society of which you are a part does not legislate against, or even concerning, our bodies, you should know that you are 100% incorrect, and you sound like an idiot for so vehemently insisting that trans people are not oppressed.
This, of course, merely scratches the surface of the extent to which cissexual/cisgender people insist on controlling our bodies. You think you’re so fucking progressive, because you think you’re a feminist, but all you really are is a selfish, self-centered, ignorant fool.
Side note: There is no such fucking thing as a radical feminist person of color, and I laugh at all you people who call yourselves “radical feminists” just because you think that means you’re “like, really, really, feminist”. Cluebat: “Radical Feminism” means something very specific in philosophical terms, and radical feminism is specifically and explicitly RACIST. It is nothing more than patriarchy dressed up in a skirt.
“Do you think we’d argue for, and vote for that legislation? Do we take bodily rights from you?”
The history of feminism is rife with explicit examples of cis feminists advocating for the elimination of trans women, specifically. The fact that you are apparently unaware of this is a further demonstration of your ignorance. You need to go back to school, little girl.
So if Radfems are trying to deny that butch lesbians have cis privilege on the grounds that “society assigns privilege” … I would just like to know what fucking privilege society gave to trans* women.
Seriously, though, the way society treats trans* women speaks of NO privilege when it comes to that gender stuff. Surprise.
So fuck you, radfems, and all of your bullshit, too.
……coming from trans people of varying genders, based NOT on gender, but on ASAB.
Look, if you feel the need to boost the numbers of your argument by erroneously grouping non-binary people of the same ASAB in with their fellow binary trans folks… then your argument SUCKS to begin with.
I don’t CARE who’s doing it. I don’t care if you are binary or not. I don’t care what your ASAB is. I’m not targeting any particular group of genders, one ASAB or the other, or even a specific political group. This is a blanket statement, regarding all people who feel the need to include all non-binary AMAB trans* folks in with trans women and all AFAB non-binary trans* folks in with trans men.
This is just another ‘girls vs. boys’ fight, and I’m over it.
Keep yer binarist, bio essentialist bullshit away from me and my non-binary siblings. Our oppression —- believe it or not —- is DIFFERENT! than that of binary people. Yes, even non-binary people who frequently get read as cis-something-or-other. Yes, even non-binary people who primarily function as binary-presenting trans people. Our situation is different in that we are NOT men or women. That means that literally every gendered assumption most people make about us is WRONG, whether it follows ASAB lines or not. Passing as the opposite binary gender is NOT always our end-goal, and for some of us is actually equally as painful as being read as our ASAB.
And I really shouldn’t have to say this —- truly, I should not have to —- YOU CAN’T KNOW 100% FOR SURE WHAT SOMEONE’S ASAB IS JUST BY LOOKING AT THEM.
So please. If you are going to refer to people in groups of ASAB —- it had better have something to do with reproductive capability or immutable (and possibly time-specific) physiological differences and not anything to do with gender or internal sex ID.
^^^ All of that.
I will also understand if you’re talking about the way, say, CAMAB people experience transmisogyny but if you’re not talking how screwed up society is with its cissexism or the stuff mentioned above? I’m not going to be happy at you, even if you are otherwise a very nice, well-intentioned cis/trans* person.
Uploading a pic of a trans* guy and saying “omg look at this guy. you totes can’t tell he’s trans. stop associating him with those nasty mtfs with the fake boobs and no hrt! it’s mean! think of the trans guys with passing privilege!” is both a glorification of cis-centrism and outright transmisogyny, you cissies. Go choke on a dick, damn.
When they go on and on about how I’m a woman because I have a uterus but a trans woman isn’t because she doesn’t, they’re saying loud and clear ‘all that matters about being a woman is your sex organs and your ability to be pregnant’. I just don’t get why you want to define womanhood that way. I really don’t.
TW: Transmisogyny of trans women as rapists
So do you understand why trans women are reluctant to allow cis women in spaces like washrooms and changerooms because 25% of sexual predators of children and teens are (cis) women? Because I certainly do. I mean, damn, that’s a lot of cis women, a lot more than trans women. So, yeah, I can understand why trans women are so reluctant and campaign to stop cis women from using women’s washrooms and changerooms because of the actions of a few. Oh, wait, that doesn’t happen. Because trans women aren’t trained in cismisogyny like cis women are trained in transmisogyny. Which is to say, just because cis women may be reluctant might be a good time for them to reflect on why one trans woman makes them judge all trans women or even “late-transitioning” or “less-passing” ones. Confront that bigotry. Like you didn’t.
Ah, well, obviously that’s pretty out of line. I’ve not been a part of the discussion, however, so I can’t really comment about that. (The joys of vacation, I guess! Everything interesting happens when you’re away.)
However, I personally have seen (and will be more than happy to provide posts if you like) support going on for Witherspoon. That’s something that I find… well, a little abhorrent. While Witherspoon’s actions aren’t enough to tar and feather all trans* women, the support that I’ve seen on sites like Jezebel and here on tumblr do tarnish the trans* community—especially when you have big name bloggers using their clout to advocate for them.
(Again, you can call me a bitch or whatever, but trans* or not, I do not feel comfortable with a convicted sex offender in my bathroom. Male, female, martian… regardless.)
That having been said, I can see how people would feel uncomfortable with the precedent this sets. I mean, yes, trans* women should have every right to pee in peace, but I also have to respect that cis women, seeing a case like this (and the subsequent support for Witherspoon), may be…. reluctant to allow late-transitioning or “less-passing” trans* women in spaces like washrooms and changerooms.
I guess my position falls somewhere between yours and roseverbenas. Everyone’s got to pee—-but at the same time, there is something to be said for the Schroedinger’s ___________ mentality. In the case of trans* women, even long-time estrogen users have more upper body strength than a cis woman, so…. I think that’s a concern to be considered.
Really? Trans women have more upper body strength than cis women even with long-term oestrogen use? Citation please? Because sports organisations that were concerned about this (women’s golf, women’s tennis) didn’t come to that conclusion.
Don’t you know that 81% of statistics are made up?
But as it happens, I am well-aware of women as rapists. I grew up in the Karla Homolka era, so I’m well aware of the depravity women are capable of. I’m also a rape victim, and my rapist was a woman, so while I appreciate your passive-aggressive attempt to ‘educate me’, this isn’t a matter on which I need much of it.
Getting to a few more statistics:
The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (1999) estimated that 91% of U.S. rape victims are female and 9% are male, with 99% of the offenders being male
Source: UCSC Rape Prevention Education
So, there’s a bit of a contradiction of statistics there. However, regardless of the statistics, the evidence is clear. Men are overwhelmingly more likely to be rapists, and stranger rape, while less common than aquaintance rape, is never the less still a very real threat.
In addition, if we start getting into rates of ‘corrective’ rape, such as is used against the LGBT community, the rate shoots up to almost 100% male. Trans* women have long been aware of this trend; from what I’ve read, the majority of rapes of trans* women are committed by men.
With that sort of atmosphere, everyone’s a little bit tense.
Consequently, areas of vulnerability that can be policed are policed with more rigorousness, resulting in situations like this one.
Which is to say, just because cis women may be reluctant might be a good time for them to reflect on why one trans woman makes them judge all trans women
Have you ever heard of the concept of Schroedinger’s Rapist? Assume anything ‘out of the norm’ is potentially harmful in an attempt at self-preservation? If cis women are trained, as you allege, in transmisogyny, it’s quite likely a manifestation of this doctrine.
And once again, when anywhere between 75-90% of rapists are male, and 1 in 6 women REPORT rape (and we all know that only a miniscule number of rapes are reported), these survivors are already more highly attuned to ‘abnormalities’ in the environment in an attempt to avoid history repeating itself. Which may explain the bathroom policing.
Now, is it right? No, but is it understandable from their perspective? Yes, I think it is. And in this case, where the “man in the ladies’” ended up being a convicted two-time child-rapist….. well, it seems like in this case, the woman’s conclusion may have been correct.
In regards to the upper body strength:
Estrogen has numerous effects on the human body, but it only superficially alters the bone structure and skeletal morphology. Consequently, trans* women who take estrogen still retain the advantage of height and a longer reach, which anyone with basic martial arts training can tell you present a distinct threat to a smaller, shorter opponent.
In addition, all I can find on upper body strength says that “there is a decrease”. That doesn’t mean that the strength becomes less than a natal female’s, only that it decreases with the reduction of testosterone.
The fact that trans* women excel in sports like golf (where it’s all upper body strength) should be a pretty clear indicator that the upper body strength remains at least comparable to that of a natal woman’s.
But we’re tangenting—let’s get back to the salient point here. There was a child-rapist in a hospital washroom where children are often sent unattended. Are we okay with this? Is this someone whose rights we really, really want to advocate for?
I am fighting hard against the belief that you are being disingenuous and derailing on purpose when we have been talking about a woman who raped children, so I bring up the statistics of child rape by women in general, and then you somehow claim those statistics are basically insignificant because of the rates of men raping adult women. My statistics were completely on point when the claim is that a child rapist woman means that other adult women have reason to be afraid of trans women in the toilet. I showed that trans women (and other cis women) should therefore also be concerned about all the adult women child rapists in their toilets and maybe keep them out. You, meanwhile, are apparently trying to obfuscate that point by saying “OMG, there are so many more men who are rapists!” when men being rapists of adult women has nothing to do with women being safe from child-raping women in women’s toilets. Unless you are claiming trans women = men. Which, as I see further down, you are.
Also, I wasn’t trying to educate you. I was educating the people who read my blog. I was pretty sure you already knew the statistics. Given that I also know the statistics, I could just as easily ask why you’re putting out the rape statistics of adults when we’re talking about children.
Look, I know you think you’re a reasonable person and all but when you keep appealing to the idea that it is easy to visually tell men from women when, in fact, a number of ‘men in women’s toilets’ issues are that of cis women who don’t pass as women according to at least one other woman, you’re showing some serious cissexism. Schroedinger’s rapist is something I know, but it only applies if you insist that trans women look like men. Also, the idea that women get raped in the toilets a lot is just… weird. As we both know, most rapes are by someone the victim/survivor knows. They also take place in places like the perpetrator’s or victim’s homes. Stranger rapes are rare. Rapes in the toilet are rare. That you suggest that we should put more stock in a rare event when you also say you were raped by a woman but that we should be more concerned about men is headdesk-inducing. That’s just totally irrational and is not helping actually stop rapes. It is, however, feeding quite nicely into the trope that trans women are rapists and can’t be trusted in public toilets (so we should send them to men’s toilets? What? If we’re being concerned about rapes in toilets and men rape more aren’t we therefore basically saying we don’t give a shit about the trans women that will be raped in the men’s toilets? Is that what this is about? Cis women feeling safer from rape in the toilet because trans women are being raped in the other toilet?).
Also, as far as upper body strength and trans women, you have no citation, I see. You’re using more of that cissexist ‘common sense’ bullshit that also lets us know that trans women don’t look like women. How about you retract your claim because you don’t actually have anything but speculation and ‘common sense’? And, don’t blame me for pursuing the irrelevance you brought up. Except it’s not irrelevant, is it? It’s about still portraying trans women as threatening because they’re supposedly absolutely stronger than cis women.
As for the salient point, obviously the answer is to not let this woman near children. That it has been turned into justifying cis women’s transmisogyny and booting trans women from the toilet is ridiculous and obvious bigotry. That you have attempted to justify this bigotry while claiming to not be a bigot is annoying. I’ve attempted to show how ridiculous that is in the hope that you might actually catch a clue and stop acting bigoted. I now severely doubt that is going to happen, so I’m instead writing to help others be able to identify and counter the sneaky ‘rational justifications’ of transmisogyny that bigots like you use.
I’d just like to pop in here with the fact that, according to RAINN (Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network), 73% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger, and 2/3 of rapes were perpetrated by someone known to the victim (info from here).
Appropriately-inappropriate is very much focused on the idea of “stranger danger”, which is NOT what anyone should be focused on. You are far more likely to be assaulted by someone you know and trust than by a stranger in the bathroom.
Furthermore, do we really think that trans*women undergo painful, dysphoria-inducing procedures and treatment to gain access to bathrooms in order to rape cis women? Like, really? Also, do we think that someone in a marginalized position, who is terrified of violence being perpetrated against herself, is going to be all het up on raping or hurting someone who has privilege against her, in both a highly enclosed and highly public place with a lot of foot traffic? That’s not only extremely implausible, it goes against any form of logic possible.
If someone’s going to rape you, 4 times out of 10 it will happen at your house, and 2 times out of 10 it will happen at someone else’s house (again, courtesy of RAINN). I looked through all the reporting data for anything about some huge bathroom rape epidemic, and guess what? There is none. Bathroom rapes (if they happen enough to even be recorded) are lumped in with every other location because they are rare. And there is zero data on the amount of bathroom rapes perpetrated by trans*women. Again, because they are rare.
Random trans*women in a bathroom are not who you should be worried about. Look at your friends, your acquaintances, your lovers, and be worried about them, because they are far more statistically likely to assault you than a marginalized stranger in a highly public place. Baying about trans*stranger danger and making it into some sort of trans*woman bathroom rape epidemic is not only making you look ignorant, but downright cissexist and malicious.
Reblogged for excellent analysis. Thanks for looking up the statistics and making the point better than I did.
freesamuel replied to your post: It might just be me as a trans person, but to me preferring certain genitalia is what sexual orientation is. It seems wrong to disregard that people can have different physical responses to different types of people.I think people are conflating genitals with a preference for penetration or penetrating during sex… That’s a legit preference that doesn’t HAVE to have anything to do with gender.
Don’t you know? That’s all penises and vaginas do! Penises just penetrate, and vaginas just get penetrated. When one person with a penis has sex with a person with a vagina, it’s ALWAYS PIV sex. Every time! Didn’t you know that?!
God, people are so ignorant these days! SHEESH
And let me just add! When two people with penises have sex with each other, they have a choice on who puts the penis in the other person! And when two people with vulvas have sex with each other, well…strap-ons don’t exist, and they certainly can ONLY EVER be used on people with vulvas. But only by people with vulvas.
Also, all sex has to involve all partners’ genitals. Every time.
I cannot stick my dick in a vagina or any other opening. It fires up such severe dissonance that it just instantly kills the mood for me.
So I kinda lol when people are like “I DON’T WANNA FUCK YOU CUZ YOU’RE GONNA STICK THAT THING IN ME”. Um no thanks. I don’t want that thing going anywhere. You’ll be lucky if I even let you touch it with your hands. Cuz that can go wrong too.
I smell heteronormativity and even homonormativity (though maybe not lesbonormativity) in the whole penis=penetrates, vulvas=penetrated/envelops. I will also say that the sex that I have with other trans people (and I really don’t have sex with cis people much at all any more) a lot of times involves two or more layers of fabric between my partner’s genitals and mine. Cis people apparently have no imagination when it comes to sex, even if they’re not straight. This continues to be driven home by their transphobia and cissexism.
Oh, and since I always like giving clues, cis people might want to look into the concept of frottage. Just a suggestion.