Aug
18

2013

Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist Criticism of “Gender” – Edited



An open statement from 37 radical feminists from five countries. August 12, 2013

gender

Forbidden Discourse Gender Statement PDF

Please note that the views expressed in this article were the views of:

Carol Hanisch (NY), Kathy Scarbrough (NJ), Ti-Grace Atkinson (MA), and Kathie Sarachild (NY)

Also signed by Roberta Salper (MA), Marjorie Kramer (VT), Jean Golden (MI), Marisa Figueiredo (MA), Maureen Nappi (NY), Sonia Jaffe Robbins (NY), Tobe Levin (Germany), Marge Piercy (MA), Barbara Leon (CA), Anne Forer (AZ), Anselma Dell’Olio (Italy), Carla Lesh (NY), Laura X (CA), Gabrielle Tree (Canada), Christine Delphy (France), Pam Martens (FL), Nellie Hester Bailey (NY), Colette Price (NY), Candi Churchhill (FL), Peggy Powell Dobbins (GA), Annie Tummino (NY), Margo Jefferson (NY), Jennifer Sunderland (NY), Michele Wallace (NJ), Allison Guttu (NY), Sheila Michaels (MO), Carol Giardina (NY), Nicole Hardin (FL), Merle Hoffman (NY), Linda Stein (NY), Margaret Stern (NY), Faith Ringgold (NJ), Joanne Steele (NY)

And did NOT reflect the views of anyone else unless expressly stated above. This was a guest post that was intended to initiate thought and constructive discussion and NOT to cause offence. The post has been removed. The original statement can be seen in the PDF above.



Author:

Covering international news, feminist and politic issues and everything else that catches the panda's eye.

  • Pingback: Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist Criticism of “Gender” | GenderTrender

  • MS

    As a co-organizer of the RadFem Rise Up! conference that recently took place in Toronto (where we received rape & death threats and were infiltrated in our private residence), I just wanted to say: thank you, sisters, for taking the time to write this.

    • bintalshamsa

      You’re no sister of mine. My sisters aren’t raging colonialist Eurocentric bigots like you.

      • Chris

        You’re no “sister” at all, bintalshamsa. Sisters don’t spend their time spewing hatred for women.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          unless they’re terfs

      • MS

        I didn’t call you a sister, bintalshamsa. Don’t flatter yourself.

    • Ovate

      The rape and death threats went on, You couldnt tell who were trans activists and male rights activists, all the violent testosterone fueled rage and death threats were directed at a group of women addressing sex trafficking, and their own reproductive issues.

  • Pingback: Much Like Richard Nixon Rejected the Analysis Indicating That He Was a Crook…. | ENDABlog 2.0

  • friday jones

    TERF: “You trannies are ruining feminism with your ickiness!”
    Trans person: “That’s really rude, and it’s exactly what earlier waves of feminism did to lesbians and WOC and–”
    TERF: “SHUT UP AND QUIT SILENCING WOMEN!” [TERF then uses moderator powers to delete trans person's post]

    • BekkyShambles

      I… I don’t understand how you got that from this article. :s
      Surely any group of marginalised people should be able to meet exclusively and without threats of violence?
      It doesn’t seem right to play “Oppression Olympics” and decide that anyone who is more marginalised than the group who wish to meet should automatically gain access to that meeting.

      Of course there should be spaces where anyone who identifies as a woman can enter, and spaces where only trans* women can enter, and spaces where only female-born women can enter.

      I don’t see how anyone could find that offensive, unless they feel entitled to that space – and that in and of itself would indicate the same kind of entitlement all men seem to feel in regards to women’s spaces.

      From what I understand, the main issue seems to be a disagreement over whether or not gender is legitimate – whether it is an identity, or a tool of oppression.

      Debates over this issue can take place in shared spaces but in exclusive spaces there may be an agreement that the people within that space are united in their stance on this issue. Or maybe they are unsure and wanting to learn more, either in shared or exclusive spaces.

      It seems like both groups are feeling threatened by one another, and this is one of the reasons they want to have exclusive spaces. Surely you can’t have your own safe space and then deny others the very same thing?

      • jadehawk

        “Of course there should be spaces where anyone who identifies as a woman can enter, and spaces where only trans* women can enter, and spaces where only female-born women can enter.”
        why should there be spaces where only non-trans women should be allowed? That’s like saying white-women-only spaces should be ok. they’re not ok. excluding women who are oppressed along axes of oppression on which you are privileged simply is not ever ok. they have the same right to those women’s spaces as any other woman, and comparing that to male entitlement is inversion of power gradients and pure consequently pure bull.

        “From what I understand, the main issue seems to be a disagreement over whether or not gender is legitimate”
        you don’t understand. gender roles are not the same thing as gender identity. you can complain that gender identity got mislabeled (since it’s innate) but you pretty much only have primitive feminist-theoretical mind-body dualism to blame for that.

        “Debates over this issue can take place in shared spaces but in exclusive spaces there may be an agreement that the people within that space are united in their stance on this issue.”
        and this is exactly why excluding people with less privilege is not legitimate. “consensus” by a privileged subgroup on the realities of excluded, oppressed subgroups is oppression. again, this is like saying it’s ok for a white-women-only club having a “consensus” on issues directly affecting women of color.

        “Surely you can’t have your own safe space and then deny others the very same thing?”
        Of course I can. I can deny “straight only” spaces the validity of existence, I can deny “whites only” spaces the validity of existence, and consequently I can deny the validity of existence of “non-trans only” spaces. Privilege has no right to demand the same right to safe, exclusionary spaces that oppression has a right to.

        • Elizabeth Hungerford

          Your argument depends on positioning women as a privileged group. That is breath takingly ignorant and false.

          Gender identity is not innate. There is no scientific evidence to support your claim. Proof-by-assertion isn’t sufficient in this debate.

          • jadehawk

            “Your argument depends on positioning women as a privileged group”
            nope. try again.

            “Gender identity is not innate. There is no scientific evidence to support your claim.”
            your ignorance of the science we have on brain-perception of sex is not actually an argument. it’s an outright fallacy, in fact: you not being aware of scientific evidence is not the same as there not being scientific evidence

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            Jadehawk, you clearly are unfamiliar with my website ‘sexnotgender’ and my work. I am far from ignorant. I have done extensive research on BRAIN SEX. The scientific evidence is wholly inadequate to support your claims. 2 or 3 studies on less than 20 subjects is insufficient to “prove” that an innate “gender” can be found in all humans.

            And “nope. try again.” is not a counter-argument.

          • friday jones

            Saying that gender identity isn’t innate is like saying that our height is not innate. At some point we developed into our current height, and at some point we developed into our current gender identity. Some factors contributing to our heights and our gender identities came from our genetic nature, and some from our development within our respective environments. Frankly, it doesn’t matter one iota whether or not either feature is primarily innate or developmental, because gender identity is for certain a real thing, just like height is.

            I reject your apart-height!

          • MS

            First of all, height is at least partly determined by environment (especially diet).

            Second, and more importantly, there is simply no evidence that gender is even partially innate. None. Cordelia Fine, a neuroscientist, reviewed thousands of studies, and she concluded that there is simply no evidence for brain sex: http://tinyurl.com/khkvv98 And she’s not the only one.

            Gender does exist, but it exists because of a patriarchal society that forces it onto everyone, especially onto biological females. Radical feminists want to abolish gender because we know that women and girls deserve better.

            If you want to keep on promoting “men are from mars, women are from venus” bullshit, then at least have the decency to stop calling yourself a feminist. Because you aren’t; you’re just another conservative.

          • friday jones

            I’m NOT a feminist, I’m a womanist. Feminism as a movement has failed women who are in various minorities, with its focus on white upper-middle-class academics. Even political lesbianism is an affront to actual LGBT people who know that sexual preference is not a choice.

          • kenzackal

            My sexual preference is a choice. That you want to believe it is innate invalidates me and my choice. That’s bigotry.

          • friday jones

            No, what’s bigotry is carrying water for “ex-gay” ministries, which you just did with your “I choose my sexual preference” bullcrap. An actual gay or lesbian person has no choice in the matter of which sex it is to which they are attracted. Maybe in your case you’re bi, and I’ve known women who had joyless sex with men before they came out as lesbians, but actual sexual preference is not a choice, and anyone who says otherwise is an Ex-Gay Preacher as far as I’m concerned, Reverend Ken.

          • kenzackal

            Thanks for reinforcing my comments

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            “Gender does exist, but it exists because of a patriarchal society that forces it onto everyone, especially onto biological females. Radical feminists want to abolish gender because we know that women and girls deserve better.”

            Right, I agree with you. So why do you have a problem with people who don’t live as their socially-assigned gender?

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            I love when males reject gender! I hate whenmales insist that rejection of their socially-assigned gender role is equivalent to being a woman. It is not. Not physically, not experientially. It is NOT THE SAME. That’s the problem.

            The maxim “trans women are women” means at least three things: first, it means that being raised as girl from birth is not an important or relevant aspect of being a “woman” because one can be a woman without it.

            Secondly, it means that having a female body is not an important or relevant aspect of being a “woman” because one can be a woman without it.

            And third, it means that to be a “woman” reflects an individual’s *desired relation* to the social construct “woman,” rather than a description of the physical and/or cumulative experiential realities of female-born (and certain intersex) people.

            THIS IS AN ERASURE of the ways that women are oppressed. That’s the problem.

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            Thanks for taking time to engage my question. What does an acceptable rejection of being a “man” look like? Amongst the male-assigned people I know, it is either (1) becoming a pro-feminist man but still identifying as a man, (2) becoming androgynous or genderfluid, and (3) become a transwoman. I don’t have a problem with any of these choices because I don’t believe there is one way to undo gender.

            I believe that how we are raised is important, but not the only thing that determines who we are. Gender is something we are raised with, but also something we perform. I don’t believe that human bodies are innately “male” or “female”–those are meanings we assign to them, as Anne Fausto-Sterling showed in her book Sexing the Body. Maybe this is a premise we fundamentally disagree on.

            I’ve read your third point a few times and am not sure I understand. Gender is assigned rather than chosen?

          • bintalshamsa

            Nothing about the existence of trans women is an erasure of the ways that I’m oppressed.

          • MS

            “Right, I agree with you. So why do you have a problem with people who don’t live as their socially-assigned gender?”

            I don’t have a problem with people rejecting gender roles. Gender abolition FTW.

            I have a problem with men saying that being effeminate means they’re a “woman on the inside”. That kind of pseudo-scientific stereotyping gives intellectual diarrhea a bad name.

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            But rejecting your socially-assigned gender *is* rejecting a gender role; it rejects that our bodies have to match our gender presentation. This is a good thing. Eventually, if we want to end patriarchy and abolish gender, we have to believe people can break from their socialization.

            How is it not essentializing to call all people with penises “men?”

            I’m assuming you don’t have a problem with transgender people who identify as neither male nor female?

          • artemisprime

            Height *isn’t* innate. Height is also a quantitative and developmental trait, while gender identity (according to trans brain sex bull) is binary and formed from earliest childhood, perhaps even birth, as evidenced by ‘trans’ children.

            Your point is both specious and disingenuous. Well done.

          • friday jones

            “Height *isn’t* innate.”

            That was my point, which apparently sailed right over your head. Gender identity and height have an equal lack of “innateness,” yet both are quite real to the people who have them. My gender identity is just as real, just as part of my actual landscape, as my height is. It isn’t as if we can pretend that either height or gender identity doesn’t exist, no matter how we came to have them. We have to live with what we’ve got, height-wise and gender identity-wise.

          • artemisprime

            wait, so what does “gender identity” mean to you? I mean, it’s pretty self-evident that a person’s height is more real than some culturally-determined idea of what are male and female things/interests. I see you also spectacularly failed to address the rest of my comment.

          • friday jones

            Gender, to me, appears to be a culturally-constructed set of social protocols and linguistic filters that changes people’s experience of themselves and their connection to others. Political ideology is a poor substitute for a cultural institution that has existed worldwide for as far back as our language trees go.

          • artemisprime

            Oh, so you *are* just talking about social roles and sexist expectations. You *are* in fact a misogynist. An an evo psych. misogynist to boot. Thanks for making that clear.

          • friday jones

            You are a sloppy thinker who is arguing way out of your depth obviously. In what way does “culturally-constructed” and “cultural institution” translate into “evo psych” in your poorly-educated brain? Dang you are dumb!

          • bintalshamsa

            Whenever a person wants to rely on self-evident claims, it’s clear they don’t have any facts to back up their assertion.

          • bintalshamsa

            Gender isn’t binary, except in your white world.

          • nevercisgendered

            but it the transsexual who jumps into the binary by electing to have genitals mutilated and altered to appear in the opposite sex…opposite is a binary.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            actually for statistical purposes any group of around 15-17 people is valid

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            Elizabeth Veldon, that sample size may be valid for statistical purposes, but the CONCLUSIONS that are drawn about “gender” from minor differences in apparent brain function are utterly absurd. There is an entire peer-reviewed paper about it here: http://www.gwern.net/docs/2013-button.pdf

            “First, low power, by definition, means that the chance of discovering effects that are genuinely true is low. That is, low-powered studies produce more false negatives than high-powered studies. When studies in a given field are designed with a power of 20%, it means that if there are 100 genuine non-null effects to be discovered in that field, these studies are expected to discover only 20 of them.

            Second, the lower the power of a study, the lower the probability that an observed effect that passes the required threshold of claiming its discovery (that is, reaching nominal statistical significance, such as p < 0.05) actually reflects a true effect1,12. This probability is called the PPV of a claimed discovery."

            I have never, EVER argued that transwomen should kill themselves. You are dishonest, uninformed, and engaging in defamation. CEASE and DESIST.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            ‘it’s statistically valid but i’m going to say it’s not’ well sorry, you conceded that the studies are valid statistically therefore they are valid.

            as to the other claim: you reposted a piece which did say that trans*women’s suicides where a form of violence and control against radical feminists, i can even look it out for you if you don’t remember.

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            Statistically valid and resulting in *valid conclusions* are totally different. Your conclusions about gender aren’t supported by scientific evidence; it’s massive speculation and conjecture. END OF.

            Ah, now I remember. You made up a bunch of crap about an article, claiming it asserted things that it did NOT. I replied to you on tumblr here [[http://sexnotgender.tumblr.com/post/46425722367/so-this-is-feminism-to-laugh-at-the-suffering-of]], but you continue clinging to your own bizarre misinterpretation that anyone with basic reading comprehension skills can determine as you arguing in bad faith. Stop doing that. It isn’t helping your side.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            you’re the one digging a hole: statistically valid data is only valid if you say it is

            wonderful!

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            shall i quote the article in question? the one i made up lies about?

            ‘Threats of suicide and self-harm: Radical feminists are constantly told that we are killing trans people, although there is absolutely no record of an actual murder taking place in which a radical feminist killed a trans person. We are accused of causing violence against trans people, of causing trans people to hurt themselves, and being responsible for their suicides. This reminds me of when my ex, a narcissistic sociopath, faked his own suicide when I finally got away from him and didn’t go back. He got his own mother to call me and accuse me of killing her son. I found out later that he had never been in a coma, but had somehow convinced her that she needed to say that to make me talk to him—which I didn’t. He was abusive and I knew this was a trap. Another ex, also abusive, once punched through a glass door that I locked when fearing his attack and when he came in the house, he showed me his bloody hand and said, “Look what you made me do.” This is psychological manipulation. I do not ever want anyone to be so tormented that they take their own life, but it is abusive and coercive to attempt to make a person agree with you or else threaten suicide or blame them for the suicide of others.’

            that’s a terf article for you, blaming victims for their own death

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            sorry, you reblogged it after i critisised it and agreed with it’s ideas. link: http://elizabethveldon.tumblr.com/post/46422982427/so-this-is-feminism-to-laugh-at-the-suffering-of

          • artemisprime

            This is laughably false for structural imaging studies, particularly exploratory ones, which made many thousands of comparisons. Add to that the common technique of using the same comparison groups to
            1. identify differences between male and female brains and
            2. Seeing where transgender brains fall in relation to the two sexes

            and you get a experimental design which is rigged (i.e. statistically guaranteed) to show what is reported in these studies: that the transgender brain falls between the male and the female brain on whatever area was chosen from the exploratory analysis. This is not, incidentally, the result that would give one confidence that there was a true positive. To do that you would want to see that the transgender brain resembled the brains of their identified sex.

          • jadehawk

            i find it cute how you had to pull a bait-and-switch to refute me because you can’t refute me with the terms under discussion as I have presented them.

          • friday jones

            E.H.: “Your argument depends on positioning women as a privileged group. That is breath takingly ignorant and false.”

            Cis women are privileged over trans women, just as white trans women are privileged over trans WOC. When comparing groups along categorical lines often one category is privileged over another. Surely you recognize the term and concept of Intersectionality? That there are many intersecting axes of categorical privileges in human society? Men are privileged over women, but white men are privileged over men of color. And yes, cis women are definitely privileged over otherwise-similar trans women.

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            friday jones, CIS refers to gender. Women are not privileged on the basis of gender. The use of “cis privilege” against women denies that women are oppressed on the basis of gender. That is demonstrably false– see all sex-based inequality in the world. Women do not have *gendered* power over transwomen. That simply makes no sense. Unless maybe you believe in reverse-sexism? And reverse-racism? Lol. Come on. Women cannot be both privileged and oppressed by the gender at the same time.

            As I have written before, it’s really quite simple:
            “Women’s gender conformity does not protect us from oppression on the basis of gender. “Cisgendered” women are still routinely targeted for sexist treatment, harassment, and discrimination. The concept of “cisgender privilege” falsely posits men and women as social equals in regard to gendered oppression. It is an inaccurate explanation of how gender norms operate as a sex-based social hierarchy that devalues women. Talking about “cisgender privilege” simply does not make sense in the context of women’s relationship to gender and oppression.”

            Cis further fails to account for people who have hostile or complicated relationships to gender like myself. You do not have the right to name my experiences for me.

          • friday jones

            I didn’t say women were “privileged on the basis of gender,” I said that cis women, that is women who are not trans, are privileged over trans women. Only a deliberately-oversimplified assessment would describe that privileging as resulting from gender, when that particular privileging results from societal heteronormative pressure, a la kyriarchy.

            Our kyriarchical society privileges straight men and women over gay men and lesbians, and privileges cis men and women over trans men and women. I’m certain that you’re smart enough to know the difference between that heteronormative pressure and the entire social construct of gender.

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            How, exactly, are females socialized as girls privileged over transwomen (otherwise known as born-with-penis and male socialized people who believe they are women)?

            What “categorical” line are you using here to claim that women-as-a-class have structural power over transwomen-as-a-class? Women lack structural power on the basis of our sex OR gender. So what “privilege” are you referring to? And don’t give me anecdotal evidence, you are debating politics: only class-based power analysis is relevant.

            Also, how does your frame account for people like Tomee Sojourner and other gender-non-conforming females who are not-trans?? Is she cis-privileged? If not, why not? If so, how? http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/anthony-morgan/tomee-sojourner_b_3714466.html

          • friday jones

            Just off the top of my head, federal legal protection via the EEOC under the heading of “sex discrimination.” For a trans person, no matter which sex you were assigned at birth, and no matter which sex you transtitioned into, you can be fired or evicted or kicked out of a restaurant or hotel because of being trans in at least 34 States in the USA alone, whereas a cis woman has protections based on sex discrimination case law at the federal level with regards to housing, employment, and public accommodations. That’s just the first thing to come to mind, mind you, not a comprehensive list of the privileges cis women have over trans people in general.

            How is it that you don’t know this fundamental fact? I suspect a form of bogus ingenuousness that indicates that you do not discuss this topic at least in good faith, and are being deceptive and intellectually dishonest.

          • kenzackal

            Can you be fired or evicted or kicked out of a restaurant or hotel because of being male in ANY state? How you look, what you wear, the manner in which you behave are all your choices. No one is discriminating against a man.

          • friday jones

            So all I have to do is detransition and I won’t face gender presentation discrimination? That’s odd, because I experienced such BEFORE I transitioned too. People discriminate against “queer-looking” men all the time.

            So I guess to be a proper man who isn’t discriminated against, I’d not only have to detranstition, I’d also have to “butch up” quite a bit. So, to clarify, you’re not only an Ex-Gay Minister, Reverend Ken, but you’re also an Ex-Trans Minister? You can make me all “normal” and stuff, if I sacrifice everything about my identity and sexuality to your god of normalcy? Sorry, my calendar says I’m busy that day.

          • kenzackal

            I’m not asking you to sacrifice anything. Im saying your chose your life. I’m saying you are not discriminated against on the basis of your sex. Furthermore, your attempts to comply with the gender stereotypes of my sex, reinforce those stereotypes which do create tremendous discrimination against me, personally, and my sex class, female. So, you oppress me. You, specifically, with your chosen actions, in addition to you, as a member of the male class.

          • friday jones

            My choice was to live, or to suffer such crushing depression that I could not hope to live for much longer. When the choice is between life and total despair, it’s not really much of a choice. Also, who the hell says that I am a stereotypically-presenting woman? I went through the Harry Benjamin Standards of Care, so for that first two years I was forced into a much more stereotypically feminine mode of dress than I am comfortable with, but my typical mode is jeans, a printed t-shirt, and sneakers. I’m more of a Bohemian musician type than a diva type.

            Your prejudice, it’s showing.

          • friday jones

            That’s exactly equivalent to saying that we shouldn’t have legal protections in public accommodations for gay and lesbian people because they can just “act straight” when they go out. I can’t leave my breasts at home, they are quite attached to my chest. And I TRIED “acting straight” for the first 22 years of my life, it didn’t work for me, people saw the queerness in me just as much before I transitioned as they did after I transitioned. But at least now I am ME, and not some two-dimensional character written for me by straight society.

          • nevercisgendered

            no, women are women. transwomen are men who transition to a surgically and hormonally altered physical body. you can not logically start from a position of saying women who are not trans are women. circular. trans are not women, she may walk and talk like a woman, but she is not a woman.

          • friday jones

            Now why in the world would I listen to you or take you seriously as a human being when you use such Essentialist rhetoric (you sound exactly like a right-winger with that crap) and you have taken a posting handle that is obviously something someone bigoted against trans people would say? Why would I take yet another sockpuppet name from the same handful of online haters seriously? The entire raison d’etre for this posting account of yours is to attack trans people online. You are maybe one evolutionary step above a Westboro Baptist Church member.

          • friday jones

            “You do not have the right to name my experiences for me.”

            Textbook hypocrisy.

          • bintalshamsa

            Yep. They have no problem naming the experiences of women of color and women with disabilities. However, if someone does it to them, suddenly the squealing and white tears break forth.

          • BlackNyx

            White women like yourself Elizabeth have more privilege than a black man or black woman in this country.

            Your argument is breathtakingly ignorant and false.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            where did i argue otherwise?

        • MS

          “why should there be spaces where only non-trans women should be allowed? That’s like saying white-women-only spaces should be ok. they’re not ok. excluding women who are oppressed along axes of oppression on which you are privileged simply is not ever ok.”

          1. Being born with a vagina in a patriarchy isn’t a privilege. Feminism 101.

          2. “Femininity” isn’t a privilege, either. It’s a hallmark of women’s oppression. Appropriating it based on psuedo-science and subjective feelings is deeply offensive to the 3.5 billion females on this planet who suffer enormously because of it.

          • bintalshamsa

            Yep. You are completely ignorant about intersectionality. Thanks for proving that.

          • jadehawk

            “Being born with a vagina in a patriarchy isn’t a privilege. Feminism 101.”

            as already noted, irrelevant and doesn’t contradict anything I said.

            “”Femininity” isn’t a privilege, either”
            Also irrelevant and doesn’t contradict anything I said.

          • jadehawk

            and I do like how you just go and label neuroscience as pseudoscience just because it disagrees with your shallow and outdated understanding of the matrix of oppression

      • friday jones

        I know you’re trying to say what you feel without giving insult, and I appreciate that, but when I see the actual informational content in your post it reminds me of the way Betty Friedan called lesbians “the Lavender Menace” and disrespected the Daughters of Bilitis. To paraphrase Sojourner Truth, “Ain’t I a woman?” Also, I’ve never known a trans support group to deny entry to a woman just because she was assigned female at birth; on the contrary, ALL women have been welcome at any of the trans-sponsored or trans-focused events I’ve attended. To us, FAAB women are not “the Other,” the way that you seem to believe that we are.

        • chouettechouette

          Really? I have seen and heard of plenty of groups that exclude ‘cis’ women. And I’ve seen plenty of people say this is okay. Which I think it is. But the same is true for cis women.
          I guess transwomen have subjects that only concern themselves, and therefore they need their own space, whilst the same could not possibly be true of cis women. How inconsistent.

          By the way, is anyone even capable of talking about trans* issues on their own merits without comparing themselves to every other oppression under the sun, as if they are all the same? The trans* movement really loves riding on the coattails of everybody else. geez.

          • bintalshamsa

            Oh look! It’s yet another TERF who doesn’t understand intersectionality. Wow! What a surprise!

          • artemisprime

            Oh wow, you are adding so much to the discussion with your blind repetition of the word ‘intersectionality’.

          • bintalshamsa

            Did you think that I was here to teach you something? I’m just here to watch you folks drown in your white privilege and ableism.

          • friday jones

            “I have seen and heard of plenty of groups that exclude ‘cis’ women.”

            Name me several. That sounds like the sort of convenient vagueness that follows a “many believe” in a sentence.

          • Ovate

            Cotton ceiling is closed, to everyone but M to T that want to break in to lesbian’s underware.

          • bintalshamsa

            Are you really trying to claim that those who you’ve label “M to T” are trying to rape lesbians?

          • friday jones

            Thing you’re talking about doesn’t exist, it’s just another bit of TERF propaganda based on some trans fool’s blog post a couple years ago. It’s now become the TERF’s online version of the bombing of the USS Maine. Whatever riles up the base, I guess, but that particular bit of raw meat is tiny and all dried out with age.

          • Ovate

            http://pleasureandpossibilities.com/programming/workshop-descriptions/

            dont hold your breath, it is real. WBW were banned from this learning how to make lesbians straight and penis -able for porn makers and pimps and dudes in dresses that want to get laid. Sorry , but that just is not very gay..

          • friday jones

            Ugh, it’s from a series of “sex-positive” workshops in Toronto. Well consider me hornswoggled, I reckon you found the one rather icky exception that proves Rule #34. Gross, huh? I mean, it’s a repellent name for a workshop and an incredibly insensitive approach to a very sensitive topic. And it’s the very first trans event I’ve ever seen that didn’t welcome cis attendees, usually they’re inclusive because a lot of us are in relationships with cis men and women and breaking up couples is not a good start to an event.

          • Ovate

            exactly, and although there are women and lesbians that are subject to sex-harrassment, corrective rape, and some are stone lesbians- sexually abused to the point they are ill and shell-shocked, even thinking about sex with another human, and these M to T are slashing their tires at Mitchfest, threatening them and plastering the grounds with penis photos? You think that may alarm them a little?

            When they say no, it means, really, no. Dont ask, at all.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            not that again!

            you’re obsessed with queers having sex. i think it’s damn unhealthy of you

    • artemisprime
      • friday jones

        I’m not sure what’s sadder: That you ran a Google image search to see if you could find a picture of me, or that you don’t realize that there are six billion people on Earth and Friday Jones is the author of “Days of Bondage,” and the name of a Robert Heinlein character, and the nom de plume of one of the (male) founders of the Cult of the Subgenius, or that you just linked to Gendertrender, which is a radfem hate site designed to doxx and attack trans women. All of that makes you a sad bucket of fail.

        • artemisprime

          If that isn’t you then there must be two lesbo-phobic misogynists posting under that name everywhere anyway criticizes trans bullshit. Please see my statement above on that matter. And feel free to quote me far and wide. I think it neatly sums up the reasonable response to this pile of rubbish.

          • friday jones

            Isn’t it the pot calling the kettle black for someone who uses Gendertrender as a source to accuse someone else of being a misogynist? Seeing as it’s a hate site dedicated to hate, and all?

            I did some Googling, and this is the original source of the screenshot you posted:

            http://endablog.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/yet-another-reason-for-a-constitutional-amendment-banning-the-neo-serfdom-concept-of-employment-at-will/

            Looks like it’s in response to three radfems posing as “Vic” who had already said the following:

            “my question about whether you have a johnson”

            “I doubt you even hold down a job let alone run a business. Unless there is a market for porn with mannish, non-passing trannies, I can’t see what your employment prospects are.”

            ” I’d clarify, but you have yet to tell me about the status of your johnson.”

            “Hey shims!”

            “Thankfully, there are still opportunities for you in niche porn (fugly tranny scat genre).”

            “Imagine that, actually getting off of your hormone-warped asses to do your own work.”

            “I am guessing this tranny-only law goes down faster and deeper than a shemale hooker.”

            Strange how scree captures of THAT material didn’t make it onto your precious Gendertrender site. Oh yeah, I guess they didn’t want to show off their trolling, just any angry responses they got.

  • http://www.tumblr.com/blog/spitefuel Spitefuel

    Discriminating against someone on the grounds that they are born different from you.

    Dictating that someone has no right to change their identity after they are born.

    Hmm…

    Well done. You’ve turned Feminism into Fascism.

    • MS

      Nobody is saying that MTFs don’t have a right to change their identity or live how they like.

      What we’re saying is that freedom of assembly and freedom of speech still apply to females, even when those females call themselves radical feminists.

      If you can’t appreciate that, and you think that nobody should be able to criticize or disagree with queer theory, ever, then YOU’RE the real fascist. Way to vomit projection all over people you disagree with.

      • bintalshamsa

        This argument is no different from those made by the other groups of white people who demanded that freedom of assembly and freedom of speech gave them the right to discriminate against marginalized folks. You folks never change.

        • MS

          Disagreement with queer theory is not bigotry by default.

          And when radfems get together, very little of our time is spent talking about trans stuff. We actually have enough of our own issues to discuss and organize around.

          The assumption that we get together specifically to talk about trans stuff is the most narcissistic bullshit I’ve ever heard. You people really think that the entire universe resolves around you, don’t you?

          • bintalshamsa

            Disagreement with Civil Rights isn’t bigotry by default. Nevertheless, the folks who disagree with them are all bigots. Isn’t that a curious thing?

            It doesn’t matter whether you spend very little time on your bigotry. When the KKK gets together, they actually have lots of their own issues to discuss, but if they spend only a minute or two on why people of color don’t deserve to exist, they’re still raging bigots.

            By the way, it’s rather cute for you to assume that the world revolves around you white women. It doesn’t, you know. It’s also amusing to watch white women resort to “you people” screeches.

          • Chris

            It’s rather cute to assume the world revolves around you, bintalshamsa. And we have only your INCESSANT CLAIM that you speak for WOC. But you could just be another 12 year old white dude harassing women. Because that’s what happens on the internet. Bigot.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            can you provide proof of this or can i safely call you a cheap lier?

  • rochefoucauld

    Foul, confused nonsense. Why has this been posted here without any kind of warning for transphobia? Why is any attention being paid to this at all?

  • Ve

    So basically 37 terfs want to take a great big dump in all the other feminists & women’s shoes, on the same day they appropriate a hashtag to raise awareness of racism in feminism, in a bizarre move of barely concealing their racism.
    I’m just glad there are only 37 of them. That means we can ignore them and get on with smashing the patriarchy.

    • MS

      Radfems are a small, irrelevant fringe that can safely be ignored… except when trans “activists” spend a huge amount of their time and energy harassing, stalking, threatening, and silencing us. Guess we’re not that irrelevant after all.

      At the RadFem Rise Up! conference in Toronto, trans activists had 2 blogs that they set up specifically speaking out against us. On one of the blogs, they admitted that they had literally spent WEEKS figuring out how to infiltrate us and try to shut our conference down. And this was a conference where no one was speaking/presenting about trans stuff. (A fine way to spend several weeks. I’m sure that the poor, hyper-marginalized trans people that trans activists claim to care so much about gained a lot from a group of 30 women being harassed, threatened and infiltrated.)

      There are 2 possibilities here:

      1) Radical feminists are in fact growing and making a comeback, and trans activists sense this, or

      2) Certain trans activists (especially the loudest and most aggressive ones) are literally paranoid, and need psychiatric help (not for GID or gender dysphoria, which isn’t an illness, but for paranoia specifically).

      My sense is that both of these things are true.

      • rochefoucauld

        “Certain trans activists (especially the loudest and most aggressive ones) are literally paranoid, and need psychiatric help” – this is really horrible disablism and you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          i take it people with mental health issues are not welcome in their feminism?

          forgive me if i don’t take part in that

          • red

            Yes, radical feminist women with disabilities are part of the radical feminist movement. Men with disabilities, or without, are not welcome. It should be simple for an honest person to understand. One who isn’t operating out of malice and manipulation.

            Men are not welcome.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            how welcome are they when you use abilist language?

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            Ignoring serious mental health issues is not politically progressive, and calling attention to paranoia and aggression is not ableist.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            ‘YOUR MENTAL!’ but i’m not being abilist.

            got you lot really are bloody sick

          • bintalshamsa

            Actually, it is ableist. Please learn the meaning of words before you use them. You never know when someone may be around who knows more than you. In your case, that is probably a quite common occurrence.

          • MS

            Pointing out mental illness (when it obviously manifests itself in certain people) isn’t ableist or denigrating by default. Some people are mentally ill, and ignoring it won’t make it go away.

            Reality exists.

      • Elizabeth Veldon

        perhaps gender variant people campaign against you because it is you who bully, harass, threaten and dox us

        • MS

          “perhaps gender variant people campaign against you because it is you who bully, harass, threaten and dox us”

          Any proof/evidence that we threaten you?

          I think that both sides can and should be handling this disagreement a lot better than they (we) are. But the violence and threats have only come from one side, and it ain’t ours.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            anyone who wishes to look into this will find the threats of violence, threats to financially ruin people by legal action and doxing that is second nature to terfs

          • MS

            I’ve been following this radfem vs trans circus for a long time, buddy. I’ve seen mean comments from radfems and doxing from one particular woman, but no threats. And no physical violence.

            Stop lying.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            one? one doxing? i’ve saw several and for violent threats? my favorate was the terf who threatend to smash an activist’s face in with a brick, another threatend to kill a friend of mine a few weeks back, you post stuff saying you want us all dead, that there should be no protection for gender varient peole…yea lets talk about how voilent and threatening terfs are

          • MS

            Evidence (screenshots/names/etc) or it didn’t happen.

            You’ve lied so many times in this thread already (and on other pages where you’ve commented about trans vs radfem) that I find it borderline impossible to believe anything you say.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            odd, i feel the same about you

      • bintalshamsa

        You bigots really disgust me. It’s no surprise that TERF groups tend to be as lily white and non-disabled as your average teabagger convention. SMH

        • Chris

          bintalshamsa, you’re very uninformed about the group of people you’re fighting against and apparently, the group you’re fighting for. You know NOTHING about the women you are calling names. And you seem to be confused about the people you believe are on the right side of this fight. Here is a short list of the trans* activists you are fighting for:
          Natalie Reed
          Gemma Seymour
          Dana Taylor
          Dana Beyer
          Julia Serano
          Shannon Minter
          Roz Kaveney
          Colleen Francis
          Joelle Ruby Ryan
          Tobi Hill Meyer
          Chaz Bono
          Stephen Beatty

          You know what they all have in common? Every single one of them is “lily white.” Yes, bintalshamsa, you are fighting mightily on behalf of white people while claiming to know that you are addressing white people who aren’t doing intersectionality correctly.

          SMH

          • GemmaSeymour

            I always find it amusing when people presume to describe me as white.

            I mean, FFS, it says it right there on my website, doesn’t it? (Checking…)
            Yep. “Woman of Color”. Plain as day.

            You couldn’t even get that right. Also, I know for a fact that at least one other person on that list is a woman of color.

          • bintalshamsa

            Well, we know TERFs can’t be arsed to actually care about WOC. They crap all over our identities all of the time. Again, this is why the vast majority of them are lily white and non-disabled. If you put them in the middle of a teabagger convention, you wouldn’t even know there was more than one group present.

          • bintalshamsa

            Yep. You really are ignorant. You see, the majority of the people I’m fighting for are women of color. Naming a few white people doesn’t mean they represent the majority of folks who I fight for. Unlike you, the movements that I participate in don’t center the experiences of white non-disabled folks. Nice try though, bigot.

          • Chris

            No women of color are being harmed by this letter. Women of color signed on to this letter. Your ignorance of the people you have knee jerk hate for is self evident. The majority of trans* people are white. It’s a white phenomena in the U.S. and Europe. Go to places that aren’t predominantly white and the rating of transitioning drops like a stone. But you would know that if 1) you actually were the activist you claim to be and 2) if you weren’t just anxious to shit on women. Apparently your favorite pastime. Not bothering to actually know who and what you’re addressing is bigotry. Nice try though.

          • bintalshamsa

            Wrong! You don’t get to decide what harms us. As a matter of fact, it DOES harm women of color. It harms ME and I’m a women of color. The majority of trans folks aren’t white. You’re silly and uneducated if the only trans folks you know are white. Trans folks have existed throughout time and throughout the world long before you white folks started trying to take over. Just off the top of my head, I can list several cultures where the existence of trans folks can be shown to have pre-dated any contact with you white folks. Feel free to educate yourself about the world outside of your blindingly white bubble.

          • Chris

            The majority of trans people ARE WHITE. That makes it very clear, bintalshamsa, that you are not who you say you are and that you are not fighting for WOC. Because if you were, you would know that simple little fact. You would be concerned with something far more important in the world than whether a bunch of white transwomen were getting what they want. You would be concerned about things that related to women, like rape, child marriage, femicide, and many other things that don’t benefit people who want to shit on women. Yet here you are, while girls and women are suffering, beating up on the women who posted something you don’t like. Your politics and priorities are very plain to see.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            there you go again – race does not form a system of oppression for woc – you are a racist

    • NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA

      There are far more of us than you can even fathom.

      • bintalshamsa

        Nope. Not really.

        • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

          Agreed. I’d actually thought radical feminism was extinct. In all my women’s studies classes, we laughed at what feminists used to believe. Then I found transphobic rants by radical feminist teenagers on Tumblr.

          • HRyan

            Wow. Where did you take women’s studies classes – Liberty University?

          • bintalshamsa

            Where did you take your feminism 101 classes – KKK college?

          • anonne

            i’m so sorry you had to read bullshit terribly constructed strawman arguments from secondary sources, by people who defensively care more about their academic posts than they do the liberation of women.

  • jadehawk

    so basically what we have here is a bunch of TERFs complaining that feminist theory has been able to move on from the primitive and exclusionary understandings of the complex interplays between various aspects of gender and various aspects of sex that dominated in the 60′s and 70′; and complaining that women their primitive theory doesn’t recognize as women insist that they have the same right to women’s spaces as all other women.

    yawn.

    • HRyan

      If you hate us so much, why do you want to be in our spaces?

      • bintalshamsa

        They aren’t your spaces. That’s the point.

        • Chris

          They ARE our spaces. And women are claiming them. Who are YOU to say differently, you obnoxious bigot.

      • jadehawk

        I don’t want into “your” spaces, AKA trans-excluding spaces, any more
        than I want into spaces that exclude women of color or lesbian women. Meaning, I’m “eligible” but I find them all equally toxic and deny that they have any positive reason for existing.
        Excluding
        people with more privilege is valid; excluding people with less is not.
        You might not like intersectionality, since it’s Feminist Theory by
        women who aren’t white cis and from the 70′s, but that dislike doesn’t
        change the fact that women who are white, straight, cis, middle class,
        ablebodied, etc. have privilege along those axes relative to other
        women, and therefore excluding them is oppression.

  • Gods & Monsters

    I am appalled that you published this transphobic rubbish without comment or warning, Pandagon. For shame.

    • bintalshamsa

      It’s been revealed that this isn’t actually Pandagon. This is actually a TERF site that bought the domain that Marcotte carelessly forgot to renew.

      • Chris

        It’s been revealed that bintalshamsa is not who she claims to be. She is actually a paid troll with nothing better to do than shit on women.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          proof?

  • Averythyme

    It takes courage to stand up for women in the climate of hatred exemplified here and elsewhere. I am a liberal feminist, but I agree that gender hurts women, and I appreciate thoughtful, gender-critical analysis. Unfortunately it has become impossible to discuss because of the bullying of certain activists (there is diversity among trans identified people on this topic, although they too are silenced on this topic). Thank you sisters for standing strong and supporting women, and free thought/discourse on feminist issues.

    • bintalshamsa

      You don’t get to decide what hurts all women. Gender doesn’t hurt me. Gender adds meaning to my life just as my skin color and hair type adds meaning to it. These TERFs aren’t “standing strong and supporting women”. They are standing strong and supporting Eurocentrism and colonialism. This is why so many women of color refuse to identify as feminists at all. Why in heaven’s name would we want to have anything to do with y’all? Ugh!

      • Elizabeth Veldon

        as a feminist i apologise for the failure of feminism to address the needs of woc and can only promise that your issues will always be a part of my feminism.

        • red

          We are women of colour, disabled women, women with children, dykes, octogenarians and women living in poverty. We are highly educated (formally or informally). We are triple employed or not at all, we pick bottles, clothing and food out of dumpsters, we volunteer our time, we care for each other and our parents.

          We have escaped male batterers, been prostituted and enslaved in pornography ( which is filmed prostitution ). We have disabled children, have no money for chemo and drug treatments for MS and other similar diseases, have lost every female organ in a woman’s body to cancer — full mastectomies, and none of that, in service to a sexual fetish.

          We are muti-ethnic, multi-lingual, over 55,000 strong online, representing virtually every continent and most countries on those continents.

          I have no more time for you. I’m a woman, there are things to do.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            ‘i’m a woman’ you’re also a biggot.

            are you a woc or are you just stealing their voice?

          • bintalshamsa

            You’re a woman of color? LOL Yeah, right! See, this is why WOC don’t want anything to do with y’all. You bigots disgust me. You can keep your lily-white movement all to yourself. You’re the reason why Western feminists have accomplished so little. You have absolutely no clue what it’s like to be a person with disabilities. That’s clear from the language that you use.

            Stop pretending to be one of us. It’s not even believable and your white antics aren’t even amusing any more.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            ah but they said ‘we are’ not ‘i am’ therefore she is not – a white woman stealing black voices

          • bintalshamsa

            If she isn’t a WOC, then she couldn’t be included as a WOC. It’s like if you said, “We are apples”. If you’re not one, then you’re still lying. Please learn to logic.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            i suspect she ment ‘we’ as in radical feminists

      • MS

        “You don’t get to decide what hurts all women.”

        But people who were born and socialized as males do?

        • bintalshamsa

          Intersectionality Pro Tip: No one gets to decide what hurts all women. Seriously, it is so hilarious how butthurt white women like you get when someone tells them that they can’t do something to WOC.

          • Chris

            It’s so hilarious when a supposed activist for WOC uses a term like “butt hurt” — a reference to rape that is usually only used by men about other men. Because they know exactly what it means to be “butt hurt” — your use of that term wouldn’t be giving something away, would it, bintalshamsa?

          • MS

            I didn’t claim to speak for WOC.

            I asked you why people who are born and socialized male get to (re-)define “womanhood” for everyone else – a point that you conveniently evaded.

          • Just Thinking

            How do you know she is white?

  • http://www.gravatar.com/bonzeblayk/ Bonze Anne Rose Blayk

    Parenthetically… I looked over some of the material, including a bunch of YouTube videos, churned out by “Deep Green Resistance”, and they seem to more like “Deep Pockets PseudoEcoRevolutionaries”… and a proto-Fascist “movement” intended to wrest people’s investments of time, energy, and money away from grassroots and truly radical environmentalist organizations such as Earth First!, in order to glorify the leadership of DGR?

    … just sayin’. Their “security” videos were, shall we say, amateurish “at best”? It seemed like a bunch of collegiate types playing at REVOLUTION!, and wanting to make sure it didn’t get out of hand… by keeping strict control of the boundaries of discourse, and appropriate behavior, and all the Miss Manners type of organizational trivia that is required to make THE REVOLUTION! happen?

    … like suppressing the anarchists.

    Now, what where we talking about? Oh yeah: a tiny minority of feminists dubbing themselves “RadFems” who want to dictate to everyone else what’s what, and characterize all critical analyses of their propaganda as “silencing”, and take on the crucial role in our future genderless society as the Bathroom Police?

    Cf. http://www.webcitation.org/680QQQuZA

    Great. “Call me when it’s over, OK?”

    Sincerely,
    - bonzie anne

    • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

      Most of the primitivists I have known have been cismen in college with mediocre analyses of gender. This was a few years ago; I haven’t seen any green-and-black flags in my city’s marches since before Occupy. But when the DGR debacle started, I was kind of surprised to see the radical feminists choosing these primitivists as their natural allies over transwomen.

    • Rani Bakr

      The primitivist critique of trans identities is way more laughable than the average TERF argument. I’d be the first to agree that when we’re all living in Mad Max times like in their absurd fantasies, I’d no longer have a trans identity. Natch. I’d be something else, neither male nor female. A sterile neuter. I can live with that. Why would anyone continue to maintain the European colonialist notions of essentializing the gender binary if they weren’t essentially patriarchal by nature?

      Tribal nations all over the world acknowledged more than two genders all through history.

      Thing is tho, if we do wind up in Mad Max times, I got first dibs on Wez. Mrowl. Mohawks are fucking hawt.

  • Elizabeth Hungerford

    Thank you for publishing this letter!! It takes a lot of intellectual fortitude to be willing to host such an acrimonious debate about the mechanics of women’s oppression in this frighteningly neoliberal climate. Gender is toxic to women; it doesn’t matter what pseudo-neutralizing term you tack onto the end of it: identity, expression, or performance.

    I applaud all of the women who courageously signed this letter with their real names. Thank you for speaking out. Thank you very much.

    • friday jones

      What’s the preferred alternative to Neoliberalism? Neoconservatism? Paleoliberalism? Your rhetoric has elements of Cultural Marxism and even a dash of old-fashioned Nihilism, not exactly human-friendly philosophies. Sure, we eliminate a cultural artifact, namely Gender, then what? Culture is a collection of strategies for reducing uncertainty in a society, so before we follow your iconoclastic direction to abolish one of the pillars of human culture in every society in the world throughout history, what replacement strategies do you recommend?

      When you strip away the cultural artifact of gender, what you have left are two physically-different sexes, one of which has a clear physical edge over the other. That seems like a huge step backwards rather than any sort of improvement. The social construction of gender constrains the two major sexes of society in ways that mitigate the primal differences between the human sexes. For example, humans have an extremely unusual amount of male involvement in the nurturing of our young for a primate species, essentially because of the societal construct of gender and the roles that produces.

      • artemisprime

        > What’s the preferred alternative to Neoliberalism?

        Radical feminism? That should be pretty obvious, no?

        • friday jones

          Radical feminism is in no way an acceptable alternative to neoliberalism, I’ve not heard the neoliberal equivalent to the exterminationist rhetoric that comes from radical feminism. Neoliberalism is inclusive, it doesn’t toy around with ideas like Eugenics and sex-selective abortion as “solutions.”

          • artemisprime

            > exterminationist rhetoric

            LOLWOT!

          • friday jones

            Oh, you never heard of the Agent Orange files? Screencaps of exterminationist and eugenics rhetoric being discussed in a positive light over at the old radfem hub:

            agentorangefiles.com/

          • artemisprime

            Hey, thanks for outing yourself as an MRA, makes it much easier for me *not to give a crap about anything you say*.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            female rage at men is a response to our toxic society and i will not criticise it

          • friday jones

            Oh, so you never heard of the Agent Orange files regarding exterminationist and eugenic rhetoric being discussed in a positive light over at the old radfem hub? You can look that up using your favorite search engine.

          • artemisprime

            Hey, thanks for outing yourself as an MRA, makes it much easier for me *not to give a crap about anything you say*

          • friday jones

            OMFG, because I googled “Agent Orange Papers” in order to show you the EXTERMINATIONIST and EUGENICS rhetoric at Radfemhub, that makes me an MRA? What does that make you, an apologist for eugenics and extermination? Why yes, under your loose accusatory standards, you ARE an apologist for eugenics and extermination.

          • MS

            Trans and MRA thinking/tactics go hand in hand. Both claim that women are privileged for being women, and both support the use of harassment, threats, stalking, and physical violence to intimidate “uppity” women into silence.

          • artemisprime
          • friday jones

            Such a clumsy attempt at internet doxxing. Surely you know that Friday Jones is both the author of “Days of Bondage” and the name of a Heinlein character, as well as a popular internet handle?

          • artemisprime

            So that isn’t you? I’m gonna go ahead and make the following statement on that:

            “ahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha riiiiiiiiiight”

          • ursprung

            Uh this is not what doxxing is. Frankly, after so many women have been threatened by trans persons for writing thoughtful and non-violent comments, I support screen shots to protest such violence. It is the only way to show that this kind of harassment is real and to expose its thuggery. I have experienced it, all the women I know who have written anything critical of gender have experienced it. So don’t try to blame the victim here, Friday. Not cool.

          • friday jones

            Uh that is not what violence is. Frankly after so many trans women have been harassed by radfems for writing thoughtful and non-violent comments, I support the insulting but nonviolent language used in that post you screenshotted for your anti-trans hate group site, Gendertrender. Radfem TERFs really are nasty awful terrible people who are uglier than sin way down deep in their stunted bigoted souls.

            The very fact that you call such insulting language “violence” tells me that you have never ever once experienced the real thing yourself. You know what’s violent? The way my co-worker once tried to tip a fire safe over onto my feet and crush them because he didn’t like the fact that we’d been assigned to work together, because I was “so queer.” THAT’S violent, not being called names such as “ugly and smelly.” You fool.

          • ursprung

            Such silly hyperbole. I see a lot of violent and aggressive comments here and elsewhere towards women by trans women. Even that you call people TERFs is offensive. I don’t see anyone here calling you a ‘tranny’, yet you resort to ad hominem on feminists. “Stunted bigoted souls”? Again you make my point.

            I didn’t screen shot anything and you clearly resort to fiction since you have nothing of substance to add here. Gendertrender is a website, but hardly a ‘hate group site’. You are incapable of accepting critique of gender without lashing out at people. This is really unacceptable on any level. It is sad that many trans take to such attacks as if women (or men for that matter) don’t know what violence is. Please stop the pedantic lecturing. We know what violence is and that you experience it is just as unfortunate as when others experience it for completely different reasons. Trans persons do not have a monopoly on suffering and your bigotry towards non-trans people demonstrated here is quite appalling.

          • friday jones

            Gendertrender’s not a hate site? Cisgender people here haven’t been patently offensive in their “critique[s] of gender?” You have very loose and shitty standards. Many of the cisgender people posting here are using the same arguments and tactics that bigoted straight people used against lesbians and gay men in the Eighties, such as the tone arguments, the appeals to normality/Nature, the accusations of perversion and dark ulterior motives, calling our righteously-expressed anger at our oppression “violent” and “offensive,” calling our very self-definition “offensive.”

            The anti-trans people here are acting in retrograde to the direction of personal civil rights for human minorities. You ignore the actual mainstream research and science on the topic, and many of you point your web links to anti-trans fringe research (the terrible trio, Bailey/Blanchard/Lawrence) and anti-trans writings by two or three upper-middle-class white political lesbians in Academia, as if all that nonsense wasn’t something that those authors pulled from their own lily-white asses in ignorance of millions of actual data points by actual researchers and clinicians that says the exact opposite.

            Not all Sneetches have stars on their bellies, get over it already.

          • ursprung

            You can’t just label a site that has a theoretical take on gender that is different from yours as a ‘hate site’. I would say that it is you who has ‘shitty standards’ then. Discursive difference is not hate. Sorry to disappoint. Nobody has appealed to normality and nature and your fictionalization of this makes what you write here easily dismissible. You can identify as anything you want, others can take issue with that identification. This is simply a truism. You cannot control how others see, feel and think. You have every right to feel your gender. Others have every right to question the erasure of sex and girlhood.

            This is a discussion, not a battle and the more aggression you lend here only slights your arguments. Pulling out racist rants here is not acceptable and I do not dialogue with racists. ‘Lilly white’ or whatever other epithets you wish to cite. None of what you write here is humane, kind or in the spirit of dialogue.

          • friday jones

            Nice tone argument, jerk. And yeah, you’re a ‘splaining jerk, with your demands that I discuss the stuff of my very identity without rancor as if you have the right to be calmly and patiently educated in trans101 in a framework you find comfortable while you make incredibly bigoted statements. And yeah Gendertrender is a hate site, because they use hate language and they doxx trans people and they bar trans women from posting there even though the site is entirely dedicated to denigrating trans people. And this isn’t a discussion, it’s me telling you #fuckcispeople.

        • bintalshamsa

          I can see why white women would prefer it. I can even see why non-disabled women might think it’s preferable. However, it sure isn’t what I’d prefer and I can understand why lots of other women surely don’t want to see it.

      • Rani Bakr

        If there’s a difference, besides being pro-choice (which I wholeheartedly endorse), between most models of this form of “Radical” Feminism and Neo-Conservatism/Religious Fundamentalism, I have yet to see it. It’s just as fundamentally homophobic, racist, classist, ableist, promotes the same European Colonialist viewpoints and their proponents endorse the same exact erasive and gaslighting tactics. Westboro Baptist Fundamentalism.

        They talk about gender as a “social construct” full stop without taking a moment to ponder what that even means. I mean, where’s the same vehement critique of, say, money as a “social construct” from this group that is overwhelmingly rich and white? Wait, I think I just answered my own question.

        They mock “self-identity” in terms of orientation but what is their beloved and enshrined “political lesbianism” if not a sexual orientation based entirely in “self-identity”?

        Their “trans-critical”/”gender critical” rhetoric is strangely silent at best and supportive at worst of the patriarchal policement and disenfranchisement of the social expression of gender non-conforming non-trans males. Funny thing, that.

        Maybe I’m just stupid, but I don’t understand how attempting to dictate other peoples orientations, policing their consensual relationships, and removing their agency and body autonomy isn’t considered extraordinarily anti-feminist.

        I’ve been openly bisexual since I was 17, once I transitioned I found myself… still bisexual. Please explain to me like I’m five years old (coincidentally, the age I first began to experience gender dysphoria) how what I’ve done is some sort of “anti-gay reparative therapy”.

        I mean, by their logic that bisexual=really straight/trans=really really straight, as a bisexual trans woman I must be the most uber heterosexual dude ever. I’ll ponder that next time I find myself being heterosexually fucked in the ass lol.

        Haters Gonna Hate. *mic drop*

        P.S. “Sorry about your dick” is this decades “God hates fags”. Pass it on. ;)

        • artemisprime

          May I suggest you make a little effort to familiarize yourself with what it means to be radical feminist? Like read some literature or engage with a radical feminist that doesn’t involve wordily dismissing them out of hand or asking leading questions. If you can un-ironically say ll the things you say about about RF, it’s pretty clear that you know f-all and don’t really want to understand.

          Oh, and sorry about your dick.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            what a worthy and adult responce.

          • artemisprime

            Well, it was definitely what the original comment was worthy of.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            i love the way you dropped in ‘god hates fags’ oh sorry i mean ‘sorry about your dick’ (same thing really.)

          • artemisprime

            because, why? What is the same about it? “Because I say so” isn’t really a convincing argument.

          • bintalshamsa

            Many of us have familiarized ourselves with you TERFs. The problem isn’t that folks don’t understand. We simply don’t AGREE. Your tired philosophy has nothing to offer most women, especially those who are WOC and/or those with disabilities. That’s why it has never caught on.

        • Elizabeth Hungerford

          Rani Bkr, I am not in favor of political lesbianism and I am not a TERF. Your guilt-by-association argument fails in less than 2 sentences.

          Here, read this. Socialization matters. Involuntary class-membership-assignment matters. Your privilege is showing: most of us cannot “identify” our way out of oppression. **It doens’t work like that.**

          http://liberationcollective.wordpress.com/2013/05/20/socialization-matters-why-identity-libertarianism-is-failed-politics/

          • friday jones

            No, you’re not a TERF, you just co-authored a letter to the UN with Cathy Brennan that urged that body to not consider any gender identity protection in their member-nations’ laws. Which seems like something a TERF would do. In what way AREN’T you a TERF? Maybe we need to drop the F?

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            friday jones, stop LYING. Quotations directly from the UN letter from 2011, which you obviously didn’t read:

            “Further, we do not believe that transgender women are any more likely to harm females. In fact, we recognize the legitimate needs of transgender women to operate in the world free from irrational discrimination.”

            AND

            “As stated repeatedly in this communication, we abhor irrational discrimination against transgender and transsexual people. However, we equally abhor the lack of concern for females that exists in the legislation promulgated by GLBT Activists to remedy irrational discrimination against transgender and transsexual people.”

            Here is a link to the letter so that you can read it for yourself in black & white. I welcome the TRUTH. http://sexnotgender.com/gender-identity-legislation-and-the-erosion-of-sex-based-legal-protections-for-females/

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            there’s someone lying here alright and i know who it is

          • friday jones

            “I weep for you,” the Walrus said:

            “I deeply sympathize.”

            With sobs and tears he sorted out

            Those of the largest size,

            Holding his pocket-handkerchief

            Before his streaming eyes.

            “O Oysters,” said the Carpenter,

            “You’ve had a pleasant run!

            Shall we be trotting home again?’

            But answer came there none–

            And this was scarcely odd, because

            They’d eaten every one.

        • anonne

          you’re fucking stupid. the overwhelming majority of radical feminists are anti-capitalists, if not socialists, and radical feminism if you’ve really read enough about it requires the abolition of capitalism.
          also most radical feminists are dirt poor working class women. as for being predominantly white, that’s even more horseshit, and also racist erasure

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            ‘fucking stupid’ – you’re really showing the level of discourse there.

            as to how woc react to radical feminism: i sugest you stop the racism and do some research.

          • Rani Bakr

            That’s all well and good, and I don’t disagree, but if you’ll notice from my first sentence I’m not writing off radical feminism as a whole, just this form of it. I’m perfectly aware that most radical feminists don’t fit this description, hence why I made the distinction.

            If you wanna call me fucking stupid, at least do it for something I actually said.

      • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

        “When you strip away the cultural artifact of gender, what you have left are two physically-different sexes, one of which has a clear physical edge over the other.”

        You’re right, female-assigned do have a clear physical edge over male-assigned individuals… we can have babies! But I know what you really meant: men are “stronger” than women. Actually, did you know that it is patriarchy that has drilled this into our heads and it isn’t really true?

      • HRyan

        Oh, i see, you’re a sexist conservative! That explains quite a lot.

        • friday jones

          Oh, I see, you’re a label-misapplying clown. That explains quite a lot.

  • Pingback: Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist ...

  • Red Durkin

    1. I am not a theory, I am a person. What you call criticism, I experience as marginalization, ostracization, victimization, and violence.
    2. The vast majority of women are not trans. Name one other marginalized group of women it would be okay for the majority of women to exclude from organizing.
    3. I have been personally threatened with violence, been told to “burn,” had women tell me they hope I die. I’ve also been called a rapist and misogynist by people who have never, not once even a little bit, met me. Women should not be threatening each other for any reason.
    4. I am not a theory. I know I said that first, but it bears repeating, because I. AM. NOT. A. THEORY. Your criticism within “the academy” reverberates intensely in the actual lives of real human beings. And I didn’t sign up for your class. I barely graduated high school. I have a right to my dignity, safety, and community that is greater than your right to criticize your own paper tiger IDEA of me.

    • Elizabeth Hungerford

      You are not a theory, you are a real person. You were born male, so you were socialized into the class of persons who oppress women on a scale unparalleled. Your subjective identity “as a woman” is insufficient to override both your socialization as male and the lived/experiential realities of 3.5 billion women socialized as girls.

      I have also been personally threatened with violence, sometimes for being a female and sometimes for being a female who dares to speak. I’m sorry that happened to you.

      I’m also sorry that you feel oppressed by sex-based social roles, but in fact, you were (involuntarily) classed at birth into the privileged group– NOT the oppressed one.

      Being a woman is not a feeling. It’s a lifelong process of social indoctrination.

      Let’s destroy– *not reinforce*– these sex-based social roles and identities as natural and inevitable parts of ourselves. Refusing to destroy them makes it harder for all women to break free from the shackles of gender stereotyping and negative assumptions about women’s social worth– because these things are “natural!!” Your approach moves women backwards, not forwards.

      • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

        Yes, socialization sticks with people, to an extent. But if transwomen retained their male privilege, they wouldn’t be disproportionately murdered.

        • red

          They are NOT disproportionately murdered to women. Anywhere, any colour, race, age, or ethnicity. Pick any country and check the stats. And check the numbers, not some bogus percentages given to make it sound worse than it is.

          As well as noting real numbers, not percentages, ask: what were they doing when they were murdered? Who murdered them?

          Was it radical feminists? No.

          And one is not socialized into Sex, or “assigned” one is born into a Sex: Male or Female. Intersex is a horrendously difficult birth defect which MUST be corrected then and there, or the baby will die.

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            Well, I was going to point out that no one is saying radical feminists murder transwomen, but then I read that you think intersex people die without having their genitals mutilated, so you failed to establish any credibility as a person who knows what she is talking about.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            not directly but since shelia jefries tried to have trans* indentiies and medical interventions outlawed internationaly…

          • red

            Intersex means born with “mutilated” genitals. That’s the point. They are frequently so dangerously deformed that the baby will die if urological surgeries aren’t done very soon, while the baby lives entubated waiting the days or weeks when it must be done. Any further surgeries can wait, until the child and parents decide what more might be done. Or not. It is never cosmetic. The distorted, malformed, missing or fused, outer genitals give some idea of the terrible deformities inside, all which must be corrected.

            You are dangerously wrong, stupidly so, and it is hurtful and damaging to those who indeed ARE intersex to see such misinformation, and this is completely unacceptable when the information is easily found. Just look for credible sources.

            Intersex is not trans sexual fetish.

            http://nickysworld.wordpress.com/tag/intersex/

          • red
          • Rani Bakr

            You obviously have no idea what the word “mutilated” means if you think people can be born with “mutilated” anything. -_-

            Not to mention that noone but you is claiming that intersex and trans is the same thing. I’ve known folks that were surgically “corrected” at birth and later transitioned to their identified gender, and it’s doubly tragic that the whole ordeal could have been avoided. I wouldn’t wish the social and physical ordeal of transition on anyone that didn’t need it.

            Not to mention that ambiguous genitalia is only one form of intersex condition. There’s also hormonal insensitivity, chromosomal variations, and all sorts of variations of secondary sex characteristics that can cause medical complications atypical of what could be expected from “biological” males and females. There was a 66-year old man recently in China that found out he had XX chromosomes, ovaries, and an atrophied uterus; how does he fit into gender-essentialist theory?

            But hey, continue to fixate obsessively on genitals, like you types are wont to do.

          • red

            Read more carefully: “Mutilate” was someone else’s term which I repeated to emphaize the ridiculousness of your perspective.

            You’re going to have to get back up. You’re boring me.

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            I’m with Rani Bakr. Mutilation isn’t a passive state one is born as; it is something done to a person. I’d say look the words “mutilate” and “intersex” in the dictionary, but you’ll probably retort that the dictionary is male.

            Or do some basic five minute research on Wikipedia. Anne Fausto-Sterling, who knows a bit about sex and gender, has this to say about intersexuality:

            “While male and female stand on the extreme ends of a biological continuum, there are many bodies [...] that evidently mix together anatomical components conventionally attributed to both males and females. The implications of my argument for a sexual continuum are profound. If nature really offers us more than two sexes, then it follows that our current notions of masculinity and femininity are cultural conceits.

            [...] Modern surgical techniques help maintain the two-sex system. Today children who are born “either/or-neither/both” — a fairly common phenomenon — usually disappear from view because doctors ‘correct’ them right away with surgery.”

            So, the mutilation is actually done to intersex infants; mutiliation is not the state they are born into.

            Now, nobody is saying infants should be left with dangerous medical conditions, but the Intersex Society of North America–some intersex people who dare-I-say know what is best for themselve–advocates that: “Medical procedures necessary to sustain the physical health of a child should be performed. Examples of these would be endocrinological treatment of a child with salt-wasting congenital hyperplasia, or surgery to provide a urinary drainage opening when a child is born without one.” But this isn’t the same as cosmetic surgery to make a child’s genitals conform to binary physical sex. (Source: http://www.isna.org/faq/patient-centered )

          • NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA

            Hm, dismissing facts from someone because you’ve decided they are not credible in any way from one single comment. HOW VERY MALE OF YOU.

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            Thanks for the compliment but I am not male nor have I ever been.

          • Just Thinking

            How is being called a male a compliment?

          • RadiantSophia

            That is most certainly NOT what intersex is. Many children with ambiguous genitalia are NOT “corrected” at birth, and they certainly do not die from it. Check your facts.

          • red
          • RadiantSophia

            1.) I am not sure why you are addressing me as “Daryl”. If that is some sort of innuendo that I am a transwoman, you are incorrect.

            2.) Your examples mean nothing. You need to educate yourself on the full extent of intersex. CAIS, for example, doesn’t even present as ambiguous genitalia. It can cause problems later, but it is usually unnoticed at birth.

            I suspect that you are just trolling. If that is the case, please leave so the grownups can converse.

          • pegarsus9

            It IS the percentages you need to look at Red, not the raw numbers (or the “real” numbers as you say, haha). Percentages tell you what proportion of the trans population is being murdered compared to what proportion of cis-female population, i.e. are you more likely to be murdered if your a trans or a cis-female?
            before attempting to understand this basic mathematics, i suggest some simple addition and multiplication for practice.

        • NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA

          Nope. Female infants and adult women are murdered at a VASTLY higher rate than trans women. The murders do have one thing in common in over 98 percent of cases: THEY ARE COMMITTED BY MALES. Point the blame where it belongs: AT MEN. And, don’t try to act like trans women are murdered at a higher rate than women. They aren’t. Not even close.

          • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

            What? That’s because there are more ciswomen than transwomen. Transwomen, especially transwomen of color, are more likely to be murdered than I am. Yes, the murderers will likely be men. That is why as a feminist transwomen are on my team in the fight against patriarchy. Patriarchy tells men that all our lives are worth less.

      • Andrew Grant

        “Your subjective identity “as a woman” is insufficient to override both
        your socialization as male and the lived/experiential realities of 3.5
        billion women socialized as girls.”

        How do you even assign validity to this statement? This seems like an astonishingly presumptuous narrative to ascribe to a person you have little to no knowledge of. It would be absurd for me to tell you what kind of socialization you have experienced in your life, because 1) I don’t know you, and 2) I’ve never been privy to your experiences. Why is it that you feel that you can dictate to women what their experiences have been?

        • http://notazerosumgame.blogspot.com/ MarinaS

          So wait, what are we saying here? That without delving into the intimate details of each and every human life, we can’t draw the conclusion that female and male children are socialized differently? We can’t, for example, assume that they went to different toilets at school without actually asking them? That they had different shapes of school uniform and PE kit? We have to ring their mothers and ask whether they really did or didn’t have a pink or a blue blanket when they were newborns, because without that detail we can’t actually “assign validity” to the proposition that, by and large, it’s likely that they probably had?

          So, what about the other stuff then? It’s impossible to assign validity to the studies showing that girls are called upon less in class? That the academic expectations of boys are higher, but demands are lower? It is to dictate to women what their experiences have been to quote the fact that girls are much more likely to be victims of childhood sexual assault and incest? It’s somehow not playing by the rules of logic to observe that there is persistent segregation in the areas of interest and pursuits that boys and girls are encouraged or even allowed to take part in?

          Or are you simply saying that all of this stuff – this enormous, hegemonic apparatus of childhood gender apartheid – is simply irrelevant? That innate tendencies are so powerful as to render its influence on the individual null, and it is only in self-reported subjective experience that we are to find the “true” narrative of gender?

          • Averythyme

            Female children do more chores in the home and get paid less allowance, they are sexually objectified from an early age with pink princess bullshit, and they are deprived of the physical and emotional benefits of sports and competition, and engineering toys, which are marketed to boys. And surprise … We become fixated on appearance and where dresses and spend an inordinate amount of time trying to please the male gaze. And that is what is referred to as femininity. It’s not “natural” or innate its oppression.

          • Andrew Grant

            The problem with framing ‘male socialization’ as a one-size-fits-all narrative for trans women everywhere is that life does not fit into such generalities. Elizabeth Hungerford, above, stated that an individual was ‘socialized into the class of persons who oppress women on a scale unparalleled.’ There are factors that complicate that narrative that go unaddressed and unexplored. For example, at least in my personal experience, I’ve known trans women who faced punishment, from young age, for acting outside what is expected of them. If you’re going to argue that trans children internalize the socialization pushed upon them by parents, extended family, authority figures, peers etc., then their personal experience in direct conflict with that socialization is integral to understanding how it has influenced and shaped their beliefs and values. A child ostracized by societal pressures simply does not share the same experience as others who embrace the lessons, both conscious and unconscious, fed to them by their environment. Such factors matter, and yet in the narratives that people like Elizabeth Hungerford impose upon trans women, they are either utterly irrelevant or completely dismissed. If we’re going to understand socialization and its influences in the formation of minds, then it’s important that we recognize all facets of socialization, and not impose such stock narratives on people for whom those narratives simply don’t fit.

          • ursprung

            Impose upon trans women? I hardly think a response online here is an ‘imposition’. Such hyperbole, Andrew. Of course we are all socialized differently in the minutia of parents, families and societies–that is a given. Hungerford was not referring to this. She was talking about the general socialization practices that most every boy and girl goes through regardless of family. My father was one who believed that there was no difference between boys and girls and we were raised accordingly. A lot of good that did when I went to school and was ritually excluded from sports, told that boys were better than girls at math, made to sit in the middle seat while on trips with friends as boys sit next to the window. This is society, Andrew, and your willful elision to the facts of society are as astonishing as your attempting to make a straw man argument here as to what Hungerford is saying. Trans women, well state is–boys–are punished for not acting like ‘little men’. But most people who are punished for this behavior are not later ‘trans women’–I know tons of men who likewise suffer from not acting as macho prototypes when boys. This is not a condition unique to trans people for goodness sake. And this is exactly the argument that Hungerford makes. Because these boys are expected to perform as men and given all the privilege to do so such that even denying this as many boys do does not reverse the fact that their access to education, safety and higher pay does not function in their favor regardless of their desire.

          • Andrew Grant

            If you think such a narrative is pushed only in this letter, and not by many points of view from many TERFs across the internet, well, that speaks for itself.

            So when you state outright that “Because these boys are expected to perform as men and given all the privilege to do so such”, I can’t help but note that you’re still identifying trans women as boys first, regardless of their own lived experiences. That’s the flaw in your argument, because your understanding of the matter begins, starts with the assumption that ‘trans women are boys’. You can’t possibly definitively know that for certain. It’s biological essentialism, it doesn’t gel with the experiences that trans women face as children. I don’t presume to know what every single trans person out there faced as a child, but when you read anecdote after anecdote after anecdote about people at a very young age expressing to parents, to peers etc. about being something other than what they are, at roughly the age at which the language skills needed to convey such information start to become apparent, it begs the question: What does it mean when kids start telling their parents that their body doesn’t fit them almost as soon as they can express the concept?

            It doesn’t seem to me to be a matter of ‘choosing’ to subvert societal norms, or to invade women’s spaces, or whatever. I don’t think three year olds have a grasp on the differences between male and female socialization. I am simply not prepared to categorize trans women as boys to begin with, because I presume (And I willingly admit this is only my presumption) that if a kid expresses these kinds of thoughts to their parents at the point where they are first capable of expressing such thoughts, then _maybe_ what we’re seeing as the formation of gender-variant thoughts are actually better described as first-attempts to explain integral thoughts of identity. I don’t know if that’s true across the board, I don’t know if that’s the case for all trans people, whether they’re men, women, GQ, whatever the case may be. I am just not prepared to identify any and every kid as their birth gender and then use that to form a narrative about how much of a threat/victim they are to women. I think we’re seeing the first occurrences of trans kids being allowed to begin transition pre-puberty, and all that makes me think is that there were most likely tons of trans kids out there who would have loved to have done the same, but were not allowed to do so. And I can’t then turn around and go “So clearly because external factors boxed these kids into a category that caused them to suicide at incredibly high rates, that led to rates of depression and other mental illnesses at incredibly high rates, that lots of them choose to undergo transition now when they’re capable of doing so of their own volition… clearly those people are their birth gender and are thus threats to women on the grounds of their birth gender.” That doesn’t seem plausible. I want to know what the TERF position is on kids as young as 5 or 6 transitioning, how ‘male socialization’ is a factor in trans girls who have identified as girls and lived as girls and been accepted as girls since they were capable of expressing themselves as such. I think that’s a question that needs to be addressed, and I don’t see anyone who espouses TERF statements addressing it in any manner other than dismissing it entirely.

            Also, there’s trans men out there that TERFs never seem to discuss or mention, but I do find it striking that so much TERF rhetoric is devoted to explaining how womanhood is innate while pointedly not including trans men in that analysis. I for one don’t think that trans men are innately women, but once again, I don’t presume to speak for them. I just think that the absence of discussion on trans men is very telling, but that’s another matter altogether.

          • ursprung

            Andrew, first, please stop using offensive terms to describe people. TERF is one term that I find offensive as do, as I have come to understand, many radical feminists. I am not a radical feminists and that you think that only radical feminists would agree with this letter, demonstrates how out of touch you are with those of us in academia not to mention many in society from the gay and lesbian community to even queer identified people. Queer was at one point in the 90s shorthand for those attempting break down gender identity, not to reify it and establish basic regressive truths about gender. This is the problem that many–men and women, feminists and non-feminists alike–have with the notions of gender posited by trans persons. Yes, many trans women identify their lives before transition and have no problems discussing when they were a boy. Some don’t. I reserve the right to use boyhood since these trans women were socialized as boys. That they are not ‘aware’ of it does not make the socialization any less real–in fact, it is exactly the unawareness of all our socialization which makes it all the more real. It is not like we are given directions as if a message in a Bacci chocolate and read it and then react consciously. No. Socialization does not happen like this. It is unconscious, happens in the prodding of parents, family , and society who say, “What position do you like best on the football team?” without even asking if the boy likes football, understands positions, etc. This is constant for girls as they are educated with the notion of marriage as an end goal, career as secondary, and clothing and physical grooming as paramount. So no, there is no ‘flaw’ in my argument because trans women are born as boys or they wouldn’t be trans women, they would be women. And when I read these anecdotes from trans persons, what is clear is that many (not all) are learning how to describe their experiences from other anecdotes. I find this distressing that there is now a culture of trans where there is a way to transition, where the narratives are too similar to be conceived as individual experience and when you go online to help sites for trans, they are told to say certain things to get Rx and to get approval for transition. You elide this detail in your critique which must be stated because the enormity of each trans situation resembling the previous points to a culture of transition which speaks less to a pathology of trans and more to a culture of trans.

            But if you want to speak to individual psychology of gender, sure, I can go there. I know many trans folks, I have been friends with many for years and their stories grow out of expectations early on by one or both parents to behave a certain way. While I have a few other friends who are not trans with parents who had similar gender expectations, they dealt with this pressure differently. My personal viewpoint having grown up with both cultures is that trans people are not mentally ill at all; rather that many trans people react differently to these pressures to conform to gender than say my friends who had parents which pressured their choices to be ‘manly men’ or ‘girly girls’. Some of these non-trans friends ended up running away, being sexually promiscuous at a young age, and others have psychological issues surrounding their relationship to their parents’ to include gender and/or sexuality. Many of the trans persons I know have body issues which remind me of my friends with anorexia. The symptoms are very similar in the refusal to accept the body and to nurture the body. Instead a relationship of self abuse begins and getting out of that can take years. While of course anorexia and transgender dysphoria are different in the focus of the body (for instance, sex versus body size), the ethos is still starkly similar. So when you write: ‘What does it mean when kids start telling their parents that their body doesn’t fit them almost as soon as they can express the concept?’ I can tell you that when a child tells a parent that they reject their body, be it the size of their body and so they starve themselves, be it the sex of their body so they can wear ‘girls’ clothes’, etc. It is up to the parent to help that child get help so that they can work through their body issues. You don’t have to starve yourself to be beautiful, you don’t have to take hormones to justify wearing a frock.

            ‘It doesn’t seem to me to be a matter of ‘choosing’ to subvert societal norms, or to invade women’s spaces, or whatever. I don’t think three year olds have a grasp on the differences between male and female socialization.’ Here you seem to agree with radical feminists because they certainly don’t claim that anyone chooses to subvert societal norms; nor do they see trans as subverting these norms (from what I have read of them). Indeed, I would argue that all people–men, women, gay and straight–subvert societal norms. It is that many trans claim the need to transition as a form of subversion when in fact this is a thinly veiled way of conforming to cultural stereotypes and regressive modalities of gender: matching the body to the gendered performance. I read radical feminists who are hoping that men can wear dresses, romp through fields of poppies and click their heels three times and end up in…well anywhere. Radical feminists seem to me to be arguing that trans discourse essentializes men and women to stereotypes because it relies on reductions to how men and women ‘really are’. Trans maintains the notion that there is a ‘real gender bind’–that having a certain type of body makes them ‘women’ or ‘men’. That is a linguistic construct since we know that such surgeries don’t really change the sex of the individual, nor does taking hormones. To rely on such a notion would be to reduce women to gonads and hormones. There is so much more that is part of womanhood and that does begin with girlhood. As for your implication that I use ‘boyhood’ to suggest a threat to women, uh, no, I do not. I use boyhood as a point of veracity, of truth. Not all boyhoods have to be about joining the Cub Scouts, having stacks of Hustler under the mattress, etc. This is yet another problem with narratives of gender that I find problematic from the trans (and here I will add the some feminist circles): that gender roles are not set up to destroy the other. Gender is a construction which individually can manifest in destructive behavior–we know that violence is also socialized and often times certain types of violence is more common to–but not exclusive to– certain sexes (ie. rape, emotional abuse, etc). The reasons for this, however, is sociological and not somatic. For instance there is no study which demonstrates that big, muscly men who can easily overpower women rape at a more frequent rate than weaker, slighter men.

            “External factors” didn’t box anyone into anything. Sex is a biological division which for better or worse (and there are pros and cons to this division) is how most every society function in certain–not all–moments. We are born with a sex and that is that. There is really not much you can do to actually change this but doctors have worked to give those who consider themselves trans this option to appear as a woman or a man. Many of us go along with this because we love our friends and family members. This does, of course, not implicate that we REALLY deep down think of these individuals as really a man or a woman. I am certainly not going to ask my trans women friends for a tampon when I run out–it would both be ridiculous and insulting to them. They know they do not menstruate so we can stop pretending at a certain point. These might be uncomfortable moments for you to read, but I can assure you my trans friends read my posts and know what I think and they have no problem with this.

            You write: ‘I think we’re seeing the first occurrences of trans kids being allowed to begin transition pre-puberty, and all that makes me think is that there were most likely tons of trans kids out there who would have loved to have done the same, but were not allowed to do so.’ That is one perspective. Another perspective which I am seeing in my work on this subject is that trans is the new drug: kids are shooting up with hormones today. That is the new subversive culture. Do not mistake current multiplicity with there having been a repression of this action before. Trans is a culture and is manifesting itself with kids who are even pressured to try out these hormones in the very similar way I was pressured into smoking pot as a kid. Many kids say no, not all do. The problem with narratives of trans, as I see it, is that some do not recognize that trans is a narrative, not a reality. It is not that I can claim that growing up as a girl was easier for me because I didn’t transition. Uh no. In fact, most women I know (and men as well) recount their childhoods as times when they transgressed gender norms and paid for it dearly. Did we sell out and conform? Most people don’t today. I didn’t as well. I am queer identified and do not think skirts are to girls are to Nancy Drew etc. That is puerile silliness of half a century ago. Many men and women today are as ‘trans’ as trans persons are today with one difference–they just move in between genders constantly, seamlessly, without declaring anything. Performance is at the heart of gender, not bodily permutations and I can refer you to dozens of books on this subject if you would like. Gender is behaviour not body. To reduce gender to a sexed body in need of ‘alteration’ would be like me claiming that my having my hymen reattached actually makes me a virgin. Such a surgery does exist, it can reattach my hymen but it simply does not erase my sexual history. Nor does my hanging upside down on my gym exercise bars makes me a bat or a lemur. But my friends just might be persuaded as many do with their otherkin friends, to refer to me as a lemur and use lemur pronouns should I insist.

            As for suicide, that is a serious issue and I do think than anyone threatening suicide seek counseling, of course. I cannot overstate this enough. But to insist that the response to body or sex dysphoria is to be answered with hormones and surgery would be like a psychiatrist telling me to cure my kleptomania with a Visa Gold card, or to cure my Stockholm Syndrome after years of captivity by having me marry my kidnapper. Trans ‘solutions’ by the medical profession are under scrutiny for a reason and I can assure you that the Johns Hopkins transgender clinic closed for these very ethical reasons. Just because something is ‘a hot topic’ or buzz word today, does not mean that such a paradigm is beyond critique. As for children transitioning–don’t even get me started on that topic. As you point out, rightly, young kids have no idea about social roles. So when a young kid wants to wear a dress or play with a toy fire truck, this has ZERO to do with anything beyond the fact that a kid wants to play with a toy fire truck or wear a dress. Again, gender is cultural not innate. If so, we would not see kids asking for culturally specific toys. When young boys in Philadelphia wish to wear ‘women’s clothes’ (although I am with Eddie Izzard on this one, there is no such thing as ‘women’s clothes’), they dress up usually in their mother’s or sister’s clothes, not in a sari–nor do they imagine a sari. Dressing is not about gender here–it is about a child expressing his feelings towards his mother/sister..It is also often about a boy’s lack of access to a certain freedom of dress that he sees his sisters have. Girls can and do wear everything without being told they look like ‘a boy’ in most cases (I refer to wearing jeans and trousers). Boys are immediately pigeon-holed as being ‘like a girl’ and discouraged from wearing any ‘girls’ clothes’. But there is no ‘identifying as’ a girl or a boy. You state this yourself–young kids have no idea about gender socialization. As such if they don’t know what gender is, then how can they know what gender they are. In fact, I would argue that none of us do because gender is not a feeling. It is a social construction. I cannot feel like a woman any more than I can feel like an archaeologist. This notion of feeling a gender is pure nonsense and I certainly can and will call this out for what it is. Claiming to ‘feel like a woman’ also is a thinly veiled form of sexism towards women masked as a minority position. I dislike the constant citations of harassment and suicide of trans people. I know this better than anyone given that I have many trans friends. I have also lost friends to suicide who were soldiers, HIV positive, gay and lesbian, soldiers in active duty, and the list goes on. Farmers in India kill themselves at appalling rates. These are reasons to explore the sociological reasons behind, not to offer hormones or surgery as panacea. Studies also show this does not resolve the issues affecting most transgender persons.

            I would suggest that you do some reading as to why these feminists don’t discuss trans men–in fact, I have and they state it clearly. Trans men aren’t trying to invade their spaces. I also cannot speak for these feminists but I can only say that what I observe online is an enormous amount of aggression to these feminists by trans women, not trans men. Hence I imagine this has something to do with this.

            By the way, just to correct your notion of biological essentialism which I am actually arguing against–there is nothing more biologically essential about this subject than having your body changed so that you can match it to a social title that you wish to claim. That is biological essentialism wrapped up with a ribbon on top!

          • Just Thinking

            Two favourite bits in the above article : 1. it would be like “my having my hymen reattached actually makes me a virgin”. LOL

            2. “By the way, just to correct your notion of biological essentialism which I am actually arguing against–there is nothing more biologically essential about this subject than having your body changed so that you can match it to a social title that you wish to claim. That is biological essentialism wrapped up with a ribbon on top”.

          • Just Thinking

            “What does it mean when kids start telling their parents that their body doesn’t fit them almost as soon as they can express the concept?” What does it mean when they don’t know it until they are forty something years old? Lived as men, with male privilege, for forty something years. Are we to say they are women at fifty because they had an operation?

  • Jorge

    Wow. Just wow. You say you want to analyze “gender” as a separate entity from “sex”, yet you vehemently exclude individuals who identify as the female gender; individuals that sacrifice their male privilege to be themselves, all to be welcomed by the cold shoulder from so-called “radical feminists”. Honestly, I don’t see how you find your ideals that different from the patriarchy–excluding and marginalizing individuals based on their genitals. You make me embarrassed for women and real feminists out there who are actually trying to abolish prejudice based on gender identities rather than exacerbate them by excluding individuals based on their sex.

  • chouettechouette

    Thanks for publishing this! It’s nice to see something that speaks out against the ridiculously sexist gender politics that currently run through mainstream ‘feminism’. Sad to see people in the comments spouting the same old tired party lines without any critical analysis, though. Already I see the pearl clutching and attempts at silencing over *GASP* TRANSPHOBIA!!! without even addressing anything you say.

    The idea that female humans are in any way privileged in society has got to be the most laughable thing the trans* activist movement has pulled out of their asses. You can’t even say the word ‘vagina’ without people pissing themselves about ‘transphobia’ and ‘cis privilege’. (It’s soooo privileged to be paid less than men, have an extremely high chance of being raped, and to watch your reproductive rights dwindle to nothing while libfems debate whether or not to reduce you to a ‘uterus bearer’ in order to be ‘inclusive’.)

    I always wonder what in the world they mean by ‘gender identity’. What does it mean? It apparently has nothing to do with biological sex and nothing to do with gender roles. All I ever see is the useless ‘it’s someone’s innate sense of gender!’ Ok, what’s gender? ‘Someone’s gender identity.’ What a bunch of circular horseshit. Any attempted explanations I’ve seen just end up being awfully sexist or meaningless. In the end I’m pretty convinced it’s about gender roles.

    P.S Trans* activists? Stop ganking terms from intersex people. FAAB and MAAB are terms to describe have their genitals surgically altered when born in order to make them appear male or female. It does not describe merely being born male or female. Because I’m not sure you know this, but you’re born either male or female (with a low low chance of being intersex). You’re not born a genital-less ken doll, and the mean ol’ cissexist doctors don’t plunk a vagina or penis onto you at a whim just to make you cry.
    And stop tokenizing intersex people in your arguments. They are not a gotcha you can use against people who talk about biological sex (Which is a real thing. Again, not sure you know this). They have nothing to do with the trans* movement.

    I’m not even a radfem, but I really don’t care if anyone wants to call me a TERF <3

    • MS

      I was recently talking to an FTM, and I asked (politely) what he meant when he said that he was a woman.

      His response: IT MEANS I’M A WOMAN. ZOMG YOU’RE A BIGOT WHO HAS TO BE TAKEN DOWN!!!!!!11!

      These people don’t have logic or real arguments. That’s why they have to resort to physical violence and intimidation – they know that they would NEVER be able to win the debate on arguments alone.

      • RadiantSophia

        This makes absolutely no sense.

        • MS

          I made a mistake; I meant a MTF (a trans”woman”). I’ve edited the comment, but thanks for the heads up about my typo.

      • NI MEN HAO-DY TRAMPOLINA

        Yep. I will never forget having a trans woman scream in my face that “trans women ARE WOMEN!!”, call me a fish, and threaten to beat the shit out of me in a parking lot. Nothing male about that, nope.

        • Andrew Grant

          I didn’t know calling people fish was a predominantly male characteristic, but there you go.

          Is threatening to beat the shit out of someone a male characteristic if a woman says it?

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            i’ve had threats from both men and women, seems aggression is shared by both.

        • bintalshamsa

          Well, that kind of reminds me of being called a “n*gg*r” who deserves to die just two days ago by a radical feminist who disapproved of my friends use of the term “queer”. Nope. Nothing white privileged about that, nope.

          • red

            Liar.

          • bintalshamsa

            Prove it.

          • Chris

            You’re a liar, bintalshamsa. A bald-faced liar. No radical feminist ever called you that or said anything like that. You weren’t getting any traction with your constant claims of “racism” so you had to start making things up? Keep it up. You misogyny is plain for everyone to see. Your lies, too.

    • MS

      P.S. the “women are privileged for being women” bullshit that the trans crowd promotes is eerily similar to what MRA’s promote. I guess that’s why trans “activists” and MRA’s were so easily able to find common ground in shutting down RadFem 2013 in London.

      • Elizabeth Veldon

        didn’t one of the leaders of your movement offer to write for a mra blog but was told to go away (because they’re scared of women)?

        • MS

          “didn’t one of the leaders of your movement offer to write for a mra blog…”

          Evidence?

          And don’t waste my time telling me to look it up. You make a claim; you provide the evidence.

          If you can’t, then STFU and stop lying.

          • Rani Bakr

            Cathy Brennan offered to write for the MRA site avoiceformen. A two second Google search can find receipts for that. Not linking because both Cathy Brennan and the “men’s rights movement” make me violently ill to contemplate. Just, ew.

          • MS

            “Cathy Brennan offered to write for the MRA site avoiceformen.”

            I just googled this, and it seems to be true.

            The woman is even more vile than I thought (and I never thought highly of her to begin with). Unbelievable.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            best tell the radfemm2012, 13 and radfemmrizeup because they all had her as speakers and indeed a poster here penned a litter to the un along with her

          • bintalshamsa

            You’re attempt to silence a woman shows exactly why your claims to have our best interests in mind is a load of bull crap.

          • MS

            Asking somebody to back up their claims with evidence is “silencing” them?

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            so i didn’t even have to answer you, oter people did it for me

      • bintalshamsa

        The Eurocentric bs that TERFs promote is eerily similar to what white supremacists promote. I guess that’s why TERF are virtually identical to the bigots you can find at the average teabagger, EDL meeting.

        • Chris

          The only Eurocentric person here is you, bintalshamsa. Your obsession with whiteness is alarming. It has filled this thread. It’s eerily similar to the things that men’s rights activists try to get away with when they’re working to change the subject from men’s oppression of women. The average bigot is usually a misogynist. Is that what you’re trying to distract us from, bintalshamsa?

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            you see chris, but then you don’t do you, that that which directly oppresses people tends to form the core of their activism.

            by refusing to accept this is race with woc you are showing yourself to be a racist.

  • red

    “We saw the results as demonstrating that just as these men enjoyed
    cross-dressing as women before the operation so they enjoyed
    cross-living after it. But they were no better in their psychological
    integration or any easier to live with. With these facts in hand I
    concluded that Hopkins was fundamentally cooperating with a mental
    illness. We psychiatrists, I thought, would do better to concentrate on
    trying to fix their minds and not their genitalia.

    Thanks to this
    research, Dr. Meyer was able to make some sense of the mental disorders
    that were driving this request for unusual and radical treatment. Most
    of the cases fell into one of two quite different groups. One group
    consisted of conflicted and guilt-ridden homosexual men who saw a
    sex-change as a way to resolve their conflicts over homosexuality by
    allowing them to behave sexually as females with men. The other group,
    mostly older men, consisted of heterosexual (and some bisexual) males
    who found intense sexual arousal in cross-dressing as females. As they
    had grown older, they had become eager to add more verisimilitude to
    their costumes and either sought or had suggested to them a surgical
    transformation that would include breast implants, penile amputation,
    and pelvic reconstruction to resemble a woman.

    Further study of
    similar subjects in the psychiatric services of the Clark Institute in
    Toronto identified these men by the auto-arousal they experienced in
    imitating sexually seductive females. Many of them imagined that their
    displays might be sexually arousing to onlookers, especially to females.

    This idea, a form of “sex in the head” (D. H. Lawrence), was what
    provoked their first adventure in dressing up in women’s undergarments
    and had eventually led them toward the surgical option. Because most of
    them found women to be the objects of their interest they identified
    themselves to the psychiatrists as lesbians. The name eventually coined
    in Toronto to describe this form of sexual misdirection was
    “autogynephilia.” Once again I concluded that to provide a surgical
    alteration to the body of these unfortunate people was to collaborate
    with a mental disorder rather than to treat it.”

    (…)

    I have witnessed a great deal of damage from sex-reassignment. The
    children transformed from their male constitution into female roles
    suffered prolonged distress and misery as they sensed their natural
    attitudes. Their parents usually lived with guilt over their
    decisions—second-guessing themselves and somewhat ashamed of the
    fabrication, both surgical and social, they had imposed on their sons.
    As for the adults who came to us claiming to have discovered their
    “true” sexual identity and to have heard about sex-change operations, we
    psychiatrists have been distracted from studying the causes and natures
    of their mental misdirections by preparing them for surgery and for a
    life in the other sex. We have wasted scientific and technical resources
    and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness
    rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it.

    Paul McHugh is University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University.

    http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/02/surgical-sex–35

    • Elizabeth Veldon

      is that the same dr who faced a malpractice suit for sexually inappropriate behaviour with patients? the one who’s research is laughed at by everyone in the field?

      • Elizabeth Hungerford

        McHugh is an expert whether you like his politics/personal behavior or not.

        • red

          That’s wrong anyway, wrong on two counts. And, what’s the legal word when you slander someone? Oh. Slander.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            i love the way poor, under represented, privilege lacking terfs always threaten legal action.

        • GemmaSeymour

          Paul McHugh, an expert? That’s kind of like saying Bess Hungerford is an expert on law. Yes, the both of you may have professional credentials in your field, but when you continually come to conclusions that are not only just not corroborated by evidence or by other researchers, but actually soundly refuted, well, nobody at all defines you as an expert.

          Oh yes, and did I forget to mention that Paul McHugh is closely associated with the Roman Catholic Church, having authored papers as an advisor to the Vatican that attempt to subvert public opinion against trans people? Silly me.

  • Chris

    In the current climate of hatred toward radical women, this took courage to write and intellectual honesty to publish. Thank you all for making it happen. 


    For people who have no background in this subject, the comments to the article are the perfect illustration of the mindless hate thrown at radical women and the consistent attempts to make such women shut up. Women writing under their real names stating a case for their political views should be able to discuss those views without fear of violent threats and censorship.

    The women who wrote this said it best: “our movement has a history of airing serious differences in speeches and distributed position papers, not in physical attacks, threats of bodily harm and censorship of such analyses.” If you’re doing the latter, the chances are very good that you don’t have a real argument, you know that, you’re afraid to think for yourself, and you would much rather take the easy path of attacking women. Anonymously, of course.

    • http://www.gravatar.com/bonzeblayk/ Bonze Anne Rose Blayk

      “Our movement has a history of airing serious differences in speeches and distributed position papers, not in physical attacks, threats of bodily harm and censorship of such analyses.”

      Sure … your “Radfems” perform the crypto-essentialist “analyses”, then let the Christianist/Nazi thugs do the dirty work.

      thank you for nothing – bonze blayk

      PS: I am not “changing my gender”; I am asserting it… and I am 100% OUT:

      https://twitter.com/HonestAbeLinkin

  • artemisprime

    Thank you to all the signatories for making this brave stand.

    • bintalshamsa

      White privilege isn’t brave. Whiteness isn’t brave. This letter is whiteness in action.

      • Chris

        Misogyny isn’t brave. Your comments are misogyny in action, bintalshamsa.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          can you show her hatred of women?

          thing is that unlike terfs she probably won’t threaten you with legal action for insulting her.

      • MS

        Nothing in this letter denigrates WOC.

  • HazelStone

    Thank you!

  • http://ubuntulinuxtipstricks.blogspot.com maco

    So, you’re bigoted jerkfaces when it comes to transpeople, and you’re mad that we figured it out. Boo fucking hoo.

  • Sarah M

    37 people I never need to organise with.

    • red

      Yay.

      • bintalshamsa

        Yeah, I’m glad you have something to be happy about now. You folks have been mighty grumpy ever since you found out you’d have to share those lunch counters.

        • Chris

          “Lunch counters” — as if you actually care about anything like that. What you care about is shitting on women, bintalshamsa. There’s no mention of race in this letter. You’ve been working very hard to try to change the subject from gender to race. I wonder why that is. Maybe because you don’t have a real argument. You just really, really hate women. And that means that you’re probably not who you say you are.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            woc split off with radical feminism because it refused to accept that they where discriminated upon because of race – learn your own history will ya?

  • jocelyn

    I have not seen any other mainstream feminist sites dare to bring up the topic of how feminists are threatened by trans activists for criticizing gender. Women shouldn’t be silenced this way.

    Thank you.

    • jocelyn

      To those who downvoted my comment – do you disagree when I say that no mainstream feminist site has brought this up before? Or, do you disagree when I say that feminist analysis shouldn’t be silenced with threats?

      • GemmaSeymour

        No, we disagree that it constitutes anything that could possibly be legitimately referred to with the terms “feminist” or “analysis”, much less actual criticism, that it was silenced or that any attempt to silence it has been made, and that any threats were involved.

        • red

          Hey Gemma, what’s the knob in your neck?

          • GemmaSeymour

            Oh, that? That’s the bolt I had installed by Dr. Frankenstein, so that he could connect the leads from the lightning rod.

          • bintalshamsa

            Hey Red, what’s that burning cross in your hand?

          • pegarsus9

            what is the name of the deformity or ‘mutilation’ in your brain red?

      • pegarsus9

        also disagree that it’s a type of analysis, it’s just discriminatory, poorly justified drivel

  • Elizabeth Veldon

    37 he? wow, that’s quite a movement

    • Chris

      So they’re completely pointless and too small in number, they’re so far, far beneath you, yet you’ve spent how much time refuting what they say, just on this thread alone?

      • bintalshamsa

        I enjoy pointing out Eurocentric white privileged bullshit. I’m sure I’m not the only one. Keep up the good work, you might even get up to 40 whole signatories by the end of the night. LOL

        • Chris

          Gosh, bintalshamsa, you still haven’t done any research about these women you hate so much. And you’re still here commenting about these terribly insignificant women. LOL.

          • bintalshamsa

            Why would I hate them? Y’all amuse me! That’s why I’m here and I’m sure getting my money’s worth. LOL

          • Chris

            bintalshamsa, you plainly don’t do anything of use. Real activists do real activism. You’re not doing anything here. But good job. Gold star for your hatred of women. Very impressive.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          they do seem to have a problem with you bintalshamsa.

          for me and a number of the people i know in the gender variant community we do not see acceptance within a Eurocentric, snow white feminist movement as a victory.

          if there is not freedom and equality for all marginalised and excluded groups of women then feminism continues to fail and many of us will continue to press for change

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          sorry, that post was rather out of nowhere but i’ve enjoyed your posts and i felt like it’s something i had to say.

          feminism without woc is just privilege extended.

      • Elizabeth Veldon

        because you have doxed my friends, put them on sites meant to document rapists in the community, you fight to have my very existence made illegal, you brag that you got medical interventions many gender variant people need removed from medical insurance in the usa.

        i fight you because you are my enemy, you want me dead. you want to claim i’m lieing? http://elizabethveldon.tumblr.com/post/58533743053/with-thanks-to-miss-marci-hawkins-find-her-on#disqus_thread

        • Chris

          You have a deep, deep sickness to be at war with people you don’t even know while lazily grouping them all together. You’re eating poison hoping someone else will die. That never turns out well.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            i am not the one saying they wish a whole community dead, unlike the terfs

          • bintalshamsa

            Oh look! It’s ANOTHER TERF ableist. There’s enough of y’all here that, at this rate, you might be able to start a movement in about a hundred years.

          • Chris

            Oh look! It’s bintalshamsa again. ANOTHER time. What is her problem? Does she not have a real life working her incredibly important activism? Or maybe this is really all she does. Trolling silly little internet posts, looking for women to shit on. Well done,
            bintalshamsa, well done.

  • sapphocles

    Heartfelt thanks to all the brave women who were willing to step up and make this important statement. Your clear yet compassionate words about the emperor’s latest outfit offer much-needed support to those who have been marginalized as a lunatic fringe of “TERFs” and radfem dinosaurs. May your thoughtful analysis provide the gravitas that finally turns this dismal tide.

  • GemmaSeymour

    It never ceases to amuse me that transmisiast false feminists persist in claiming the moral high ground of intellectual discourse while refusing utterly to engage the rest of society on a basis of equality and respect for the requirement of collaborating on mutually acceptable terms of discourse.

    There is no debate to be had here, no argument made which does not assume the validity of its own premise without the corroboration of sound reasoning. I have often read thaT the modern definition of the word, “asshole”, is a person who demands that all social interaction take place on their terms, rather than terms which are negotiated between all interested parties. While it is an amusing definition, what is far closer to the truth is that such people are more properly described by the term “sociopathic”, for which we now clinically use the diagnosis, “Antisocial Personality Disorder”.

    Such people exhibit a complete inability to empathise with others, a lack of remorse over the consequences of their actions, a consistent objectification of other people, a constant willingness to attempt to manipulate the emotions of others for their own personal benefit. and a pathological attachment to propagating falsehood, among other traits generally recognised as incompatible with the sort of compassionate compromise which is the hallmark of responsible, reasonable, enlightened, educated, wise, and civically-minded people in every culture.

    They persist in their zealotry, largely because their entire identities are formed by and bound up with a paranoid victimisation complex that is often self-generated, although it should be admitted that many of these women have suffered greatly at the hands of others.

    They would deserve our pity, if it was not that they have turned to using the tools of kyriarchy to violent and lethal effect to assuage their frustration upon those who are even more marginalised than themselves, and it would be ironic if it were not for that those who are the targets of their rage are other women, some who they refuse to recognise as women, and others who they wrongly believe have been deluded by those they desire to place and imprison in a dehumanised, criminalised underclass, but who refuse to be cowed by their violence. They justify this behaviour by assuming for themselves identities which are, in their own estimation, categorically incapable of the impulse to dominate, oppression, and violence.

    Sadly, while in general society, these women are largely ineffectual, the fact remains that they are usually highly privileged in class, credentials, and race, and embedded in women-centric academe and economy. They are usually strategically and tactically highly circumspect about revealing their loathing and hatred for other women and the ways in which they enforce their groundless belief system on the lives of other women. Within their limited spheres, they wield great power over the options and worldview available to many women. The damage they have inflicted upon society and the lives of women all over the world, particularly since the mid-1970′s, has taken decades to undo, but we are finally beginning to see that the tide has turned in favour of compassion, tolerance, and true understanding.

    The moments when they reveal their hatred are rarer than we might wish, so take this opportunity to mark these names, and pass them along to your sisters. They are poisonous, vicious little scorpions in the grass, and the nature of a scorpion never changes. On the other hand, scorpions are quite fragile creatures, and easily crushed by the weight of logic and reason.

    • jocelyn

      So to summarize, you call women and feminists who find the idea of gender and gender roles harmful to women “little scorpions” and sociopathic. You also seem to think if someone criticize gender they must be white, rich or otherwise privileged, and somehow hate other women.

      It also seems your famous for creating and taking a weapon to your protest of a female-only festival: http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/gemma-seymour/

      • GemmaSeymour

        Ah. If the best you can do to rebutt me is to repeat uncorroborated falsehoods about me in a pathetic attempt to assassinate my character, which I feel I must reiterate is exactly one of the symptoms I described above, then no one is really required to engage your fallacious points as if there were any merit to them.

        However, thank you for demonstrating the proof of my thesis so effectively. With enemies like you, who needs friends?

        • red

          I think Gemma just jizzed in his dress.

          • bintalshamsa

            Red, do you often find yourself fantasizing about the ejaculation of trans women? I think we’re starting to get to the bottom of why you’re so obsessed.

          • Rani Bakr

            People like red fantasize more about trans women’s genitals than trans women do.

            Kinda like how homophobes are consumed by obsessive thoughts about gay sex. Actually, way more than kinda.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            i don’t want to read your sexual fantasies red, thanks

    • Chris

      Oops, you’re misogyny is showing. Your perfect resemblance to men’s rights activists shines brightly: “entire identities are formed by and bound up with a paranoid victimisation complex.” Yes, that’s exactly what men who hate women say. For people like you, Gemma, women don’t actually suffer horrible bigotry, hatred, discrimination, abuse, oppression, harassment, and worse. It’s all in their minds.

      Congrats, Gemma, you’ve come through with flying colors, showing just exactly what you’re side of the argument is actually all about.

      • GemmaSeymour

        Once again, an amateurish attempt to discredit my points by claiming that they resemble the points of some other hated group, without actually rebutting the point that was made.

        In other words, while I do not concede this point, since I have no interest in acquainting myself with the vagaries of “men’s rights activists” at the moment, the possibility that such creatures might raise similar points about the type of nonsense this article represents has no bearing on whether or not the argument is valid.

        Allow me to introduce you to the fallacy known as the “association fallacy”, also known as “guilt by association”.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy

        Also see:

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

        …since furthermore, you misrepresented what I actually stated.

        and

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

        • Chris

          Keep talking, Gemma. You have no idea how obnoxious you are, but other people can see it. You’re a bigot. It comes through loud and clear. And you’re an arrogant bigot imagining that you are educating people. (“Class dismissed”? Oh, honey, you are a sad, sad person.) You are the poster child for everything that is wrong with your side of the argument. Please do keep showing the world. Every time you comment, another woman is converted to the gender-critical feminist political view. Keep recruiting, Gemma!

          • GemmaSeymour

            Nope, you still haven’t actually rebutted any of my points.

            I don’t imagine I’m educating you. You’ve pretty much already effectively communicated that education isn’t something in which you have a stake, so educating you is clearly an impossibility.

            What I’m doing is demonstrating conclusively the vapidity of your whining. This isn’t bigotry, it’s complete and utter disdain and contempt for your inability to compete in the intellectual sphere by adhering to the accepted standards of argumentation theory.

            For that to be classified as arrogant, you would first have to prove it to be untrue. I have no fear that that’s going to happen.

            This must be rather frustrating for you, this running around in circles chasing your tail and never catching it.

          • bintalshamsa

            Actually, every time Gemma comments, I feel a little encouraged to fight this racist, Eurocentric TERF foolishness. It’s plain to see that y’all are the bigots. That’s why your silly little cluster has always been so blindingly white. The majority of WOC want nothing to do with you. You are the poster child for everything that is wrong with whiteness. Please keep showing the world why we should continue to reject your racist ideology.

          • Chris

            If you really knew anything about this issue, bintalshamsa, you would know how lily white the transgender movement is. You would know that it’s a western, U.S., and European movement. You would also know that it’s overwhelmingly white males who transition. And you would also know that the majority are middle class and above. This trend is well-researched and documented. By trans* people themselves. But you don’t care about that. You want to continue to shit on women and this gives you the perfect opportunity. It’s obvious to everyone reading your comments that you hate women. We get it. What is also obvious to anyone who is paying attention is that you don’t have any facts, you just have hatred. And you’re drowning in it. It’s not hurting anyone else.

          • bintalshamsa

            Wrong! Actually, there’s no transgender movement. There are MANY transgender movements. White people (like you) are actually rather late to the party. People of color have recognized the existence of trans folks for thousands of years. This has been well-researched and documented by academics in many fields all across the world. But you don’t care about that.

            The idea that I hate women is just silly. I love being a woman. You’re the one who wants to do away with gender. I don’t even hate you. At best, you’re an amusing relic of what white privilege used to make possible. You’re losing your grip on the world and it drives you to anger, but you shouldn’t assume that’s what motivates the rest of us.

          • Chris

            Keep trying to change the subject, bintalshamsa, you’re as transparent as Gemma. You don’t hate women, some of your best friends are women. LOLOLOLOLOL.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            the rage of calaban

  • Pingback: Scorpions in the Grass | Gemma Seymour-Amper

  • GemmaSeymour

    Let us all not fail to recognise the fraudulent nature of the very existence of this website, which in itself demonstrates conclusively the points of diagnosis which I raised in my earlier post.

    At the following URL, you will find a statement by the original owners of the domain “pandagon.net”:

    “It’s been brought to my attention that the old URL for Pandagon, before it moved here to Raw Story, expired without my or Jesse Taylor’s knowledge, and has been purchased by a bunch of bigots who are using it as a platform to hate on transgender people.

    In case there’s any confusion—and I firmly believe that people of good faith know straightaway that Jesse and I have been targeted here and have nothing to do with this—let me state firmly, for the record: Jesse and I have nothing to do with this.

    I suspect what’s happened here is that a small group of obsessive anti-trans bigots—in order to “punish” me both for defending the rights of trans women to be called women and because I’ve pointed out before that transphobes claiming to be “radical feminists” are a marginal group of people who use social media and blogs to make themselves seem more relevant than they are—have hijacked the URL.

    That is the sort of sleazy behavior that you see with the small groups of obsessive haters that the internet is so good at cultivating, and practically an admission on the behalf of these anti-trans bigots that they have nothing better to do than harass people for disagreeing with them.”

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/19/a-short-statement-on-anti-trans-bigots-swiping-pandagon-net/

  • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

    “We defend the right of RadFem to exclude men, including M>F trans people, from their feminist meetings and to invite speakers who analyze gender from a feminist perspective.”
    “The ‘freedom for gender’ movement, whatever the intentions of its supporters, is reinforcing the culture and institutions of gender that are oppressing women. We reject the notion that this analysis is transphobic.”

    I don’t get how anyone can claim she isn’t transphobic but call transwomen “men” in the same letter. Have you signers not met any transpeople? Transwomen are women. Hatred of transwomen is misogyny. Cisgender feminists should see transwomen as part of the struggle for gender liberation because we all have a stake in ending patriarchy.

    I also don’t get how radical feminists who want to do away with gender see transpeople as an enemy. How else do we break gender-essentialism without allowing people to choose their own gender expression and identity without judging and policing other people’s gender? No feminist transpeople and their cis allies are denying that women are oppressed by cismen under patriarchy, but radical feminists are denying that trans people experience gender oppression.

    I am disappointed to see Marge Piercy as a signer. Now, I am considering no longer teaching her fiction because I don’t want to give money to someone who thinks policing gender is how we liberate people from gender.

    • Elizabeth Hungerford

      Lake, you admit that you don’t understand the critique, but you are going to stop teaching Marge Piercy’s work in retaliation for your own ignorance? That seems rather self-defeating.

      Freedom from gender-essentialism means NOT framing gender as an essential part of ourselves; it means NOT internalizing those constructs as “natural” and “inevitable” elements of our SOULS!

      “I-dentity (aka trans) politics is fundamentally LIBERTARIAN. It is ahistorical and acontextual. It essentializes sex stereotypes by renaming them consensual “gender identities.” It invisibilizes power structures that give rise to female oppression. It is anti-feminist.”

      • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

        Someone else’s inability to make a coherent argument doesn’t necessarily make me the ignorant one. I’ve been around feminism for a while, minored in women’s studies in undergrad, specialized in feminism in my PhD program, done hella offline activism, blah blah blah feminist cred. I agree with 90% of what radical feminists have to say but can never get on board with policing other’s gender.

        Who are you quoting? What is wrong with being libertarian (presuming you mean the classic definition of the term, not that “anarcho”-capitalism BS)? Are you (or the person you are quoting) saying everyone should be androgynous rather than fit within a gender binary? If not, why can ciswomen live as stereotypes as women but not transwomen?

        I genuinely ask. Personally, my desire to abolish gender leads me towards a more androgynous gender expression, but I am not going to mandate that what works for me is what everyone else has to do.

        These questions are my attempts to understand.

        Nonetheless, I am saying I am considering not teaching her work anymore. Piercy is welcome to come on these comments and convince me why I shouldn’t stop financially supporting her.

        • red

          She’s probably whooping it up somewhere, buying rounds all around. I know I’d be.

        • Elizabeth Hungerford

          I am quoting myself, frankly. Excuse me I should have removed the quotation marks from the copy/paste. In response to your other questiosn I will also repeat what I said to you below:

          I love when males reject gender! I hate when males insist that rejection of their socially-assigned gender role is equivalent to being a woman. It is not. Not physically, not experientially. It is NOT THE SAME. That’s the problem.

          The maxim “trans women are women” means at least three things: first, it means that being raised as girl from birth is not an important or relevant aspect of being a “woman” because one can be a woman without it.

          Secondly, it means that having a female body is not an important or relevant aspect of being a “woman” because one can be a woman without it.

          And third, it means that to be a “woman” reflects an individual’s *desired relation* to the social construct “woman,” rather than a description of the physical and/or cumulative experiential realities of female-born (and certain intersex) people.

          THIS IS AN ERASURE of the ways in which women are systematically oppressed are targeted. That’s the problem. Oh, and it is appropriation. Which is offensive in ALL other contexts except when applied to “woman.”

          • GemmaSeymour

            Today’s lesson in Latin: petitio principii, circulus in probando

      • GemmaSeymour

        Oh noes! Elizabeth Hungerford has raised the LIBERTARIAN bugaboo! We’re discovered! We’re done for!

        Honestly, Bess, I wonder that you ever win a case, if that’s the level of persuasive ability you exhibit. And here, I thought this was going to be a fair fight. Shall I tie a hand behind my back to make it easier for you?

  • Pingback: Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist Criticism of “Gender” | fire in my belly

  • HazelStone

    I really appreciate these authors defending women-only spaces. So many feminist events and activities are open to anyone, but we really do need those rare spaces without male privilege to clear our heads and make good strategic decisions. All oppressed groups need that to work for their own liberation.

    Also, I think that we should be free to critique trans people if/when they are doing misogynist things or perpetuating gender stereotypes without being accused of being transphobic.

    This all seems very basic to me.

    • GemmaSeymour

      This issue, however, is not that you are not free to critique trans people for doing misogynistic things of perpetuating gender stereotypes. The issue is that what is happening here is that being trans is being categorised as being *inherently* misogynistic and *inherently* perpetuating gender stereotypes. And that is quite clearly incorrect.

      All while pretending that criticising trans women *isn’t* inherently misogynistic, because the actual argument here is one which assumes its own premise, namely, that trans women are not women and/or not female (and please, spare us the “sex not gender” bit, we’ve heard that one already), a premise which quite evidently is not accepted universally.

      As I said in my first comment, this is not a debate. There is no argument to be had here until and unless trans women are treated with equal dignity and given equal input into the negotiation of mutually acceptable terms of discourse.

      • ursprung

        You completely miss the point of the letter. This letter does not ‘treat’ trans women with any less dignity. It points out certain idiosyncrasies in gender performance and slippages in meaning. And yes, trans women do have male privilege. Transitioning does not undo history, memory and learning. But establishing privilege does not in and of itself defer trans (or others’) rights to a lesser rang. It simply establishes certain truths that I think many (not all) trans attempt to gloss over.

        • GemmaSeymour

          No, I did not completely miss the point of the letter. The entire point of the letter, the entire point of the disagreement between trans people and so-called radical feminists is that this letter and those who identify with it make the entirely unprovable assertion that trans women are men, that trans women are male, while trans people make an equally unprovable assertion that trans women are women, that trans women are female.

          That’s really what this whole nonsense distills to. That you are trying to point to “idiosyncrasies of gender performance and slippages in meaning” only shows that you have no real interest in understanding the underlying argument, and are doing nothing more than parroting what you probably heard from someone who probably heard it from their teacher in a women’s studies class.

          No, transitioning does not undo history, memory, and learning, but where you err is in assuming that this point supports you. You err, because you assume that you have any real knowledge of a trans woman’s experience. You do not, just as I do not have any real knowledge of a cis woman’s experience.

          The whole point is that neither of us can prove it. It is one of the areas of knowledge that is beyond the frame of reference that would be required for any person to have definitive, objective, empirical proof.

          The point is, you cannot assign male privilege to trans women, because you have no, can have no, knowledge of the experiences of trans women. Only we can tell you about our lives.

          The letter establishes no truths whatsoever. This is metaphysics 101, the most basic level of epistemology and ontology. We might as well be arguing over whether or not God exists. It is a pointless, meaningless exercise.

          Or, it would be, if my life wasn’t at stake. And that’s what I think you don’t really get—that this is about my very existence, my agency, my ability to put a roof over my head, clothes on my back, and food in my mouth. It is about my very survival.

          You can be as callous about that as you like, but what does it gain you?

          • kenzackal

            You are right. You “do not have any real knowledge of a cis woman’s experience”. You did not share our girlhood. You do not, and have never, shared our oppression. You are not us. You are someone else.

            As an oppressed class, we have the right to name our oppressors, to meet separate from our oppressors, as we define them, and to plan an end to our oppression without external oversight.

          • GemmaSeymour

            No, I did not share *your* girlhood. I had my own girlhood. I did not share yours any more than you shared mine. The difference is, I’m not telling you you didn’t have a girlhood. I’m not telling you are not a woman. I am not telling you you are not female.

            The fact that you cannot see the difference would be remarkable, astounding even, if it were not so common. The fact is that you continue to present arguments which are trivially shown to be groundless. I don’t even have to stress myself to counter this, because you’ve already done it for me.

            The same arguments by which you claim the moral high ground are the same arguments that incriminate you. You have the right to name your oppressors, but when you name us your oppressors without any shred of evidence, then we are in conflict.

            When you claim that it is impossible for women, who are themselves an oppressed class, to themselves be an oppressor class, then you are either being willfully dishonest, or you are lacking in insight to a degree which is pitiful.

            If you have the right to name your oppressors, you cannot also deny that right to others without being hypocritical. And so, we name cis women as our oppressors. And once again, we are in conflict.

            Again, I ask, ubi nocere? Where is the harm? Where is the evidence that trans women oppress cis women? There is none, yet, the reverse is quite clearly true. The only way that you can make a valid claim in that regard is to cast trans women as “not women”, “not female”. But as you have no valid grounds for making that determination, your argument falls on its face without me even doing a thing.

            This is why radical feminism is seen as a failed ideology. It isn’t even logically self-consistent.

            The question you should be asking yourself is not whether or not trans women are different from cis women. The question you should be asking yourself is whether or not what differences we may have are sufficient to justify creating an artificial separation within the community of women, and whether or not creating that separation is wise, or whether it fulfills the goals of women’s liberation. We maintain that it does not. We get that you disagree. We’re dying because of it every single day.

            Ubi nocere?

          • Elizabeth Hungerford

            We have answered those questions. Yes, denying that women are fundamentally constituted by a *feeling* of “woman” is wise and consistent with the goals of feminism. Being a “woman” is not a human right, it is a lived reality. Respect. Is that so hard?

            Transwomen are NOT dying because of gender critical feminism. They are dying because of heteronormativity, male violence, and the cult of masculinity. Yeah, it’s a *gender* problem. The dissonance burns.

            Unless you think men are *essentially* violent? I don’t. But that is the logically unavoidable inference of insisting that there are women-are-naturally-like-this and men-are-naturally-like-that. Biological essentialism, we hate it.

          • http://www.gravatar.com/bonzeblayk/ Bonze Anne Rose Blayk

            “Unless you think men are *essentially* violent?”

            Nah. But it’s blatantly obvious that males have a greater propensity to aggression, and that this is derived in large part from male biology.

          • ursprung

            I completely understand your side of the argument and have many trans friends. Your pointing out that I have a point does not in itself render my argument without compassion. I understand that trans people have issues with their bodies and I cannot imagine how that feels. But this is not about feeling, it is about truth, it is about what is real. Likewise you cannot assume knowing what being a woman is like, nor can I. Because being a woman is not a ‘feeling’– it is a fact of being born and raised with a female body. But I do not ‘feel’ it. I do not feel like I am a plumber or a poet. You cannot feel constructions. You throw out words such as epistemology and ontology and clearly have no idea what they mean as their is no reference to either in the letter whatsoever, nor set out in your response. But if you want to argue sex as ontology, we sure can. That would make you male which is what science admits. You cannot make a ‘woman’ from a man. Sorry. Not even the Biblical story of Eve coming from Adam’s rib is plausible on any level outside of the anagogical. As for episteme, well it is the knowledge of gender which is being debated in these sort of forums. Grow thicker skin and stop insulting people here for disagreeing with your viewpoint. “Callous” is not what people are for asserting epistemological ideas such that sex is not gender, that you cannot change sex (a physical impossibility) or that by so stating that this renders us ‘callous’. LOL. Your life is not at stake. You clearly need a passport and to travel to areas of the world where hormones are not what keeps people alive, but where access to water, sewage and food is what is life defining. That you feel your life is at stake I do not doubt. But I maintain my reservations as to the reality of your ‘life and death situation’ as anything beyond purely psychological.

          • Just Thinking

            “definitive, objective, empirical proof”. Sounds like a man talking to me. That’s what gives it away. The way you talk.

          • RadiantSophia

            Thank you for dismissing every woman in scientific, tech, or mathematical fields. Your definition of “sounds like a man talking” is reenforcing patriarchal gender roles.

          • Just Thinking

            Not really. Read Harding.

      • Elizabeth Hungerford

        Gemma,
        “The issue is that what is happening here is that being trans is being categorised as being *inherently* misogynistic and *inherently* perpetuating gender stereotypes. And that is quite clearly incorrect.”

        No, it is not clearly incorrect. How do you figure? A male-socialized person with a penis cannot be or become a “woman” unless he references some aspect of the social construction of female to claim said “womanhood.” It’s a circular argument and rational people aren’t buying it.

        Which makes me lol to what you say next:

        “because the actual argument here is one which assumes its own premise, namely, that trans women are not women and/or not female (and please, spare us the “sex not gender” bit, we’ve heard that one already), a premise which quite evidently is not accepted universally.”

        You’re absolutely right: we are not accepting a proof-by-assertion logic that transwomen are women and(?)/or female just because some people *said so.* That presumes its own premise! Penises are not female. Surgically constructed vaginas are not reproductively viable. And consciously choosing to present oneself as a “woman” to the world, as you do, is not *experientially equivalent* to being socialized into the sex-class “woman” from birth. These are basic distinctions. Elementary, really. GENDER is not SEX. I never spare a reminder.

        We are merely asking for respect. Respect for women’s lives, respect for women’s lived experiences, and respect for the material realities of women’s oppression. If you are one of us, stop undermining us.

        “As I said in my first comment, this is not a debate.”

        Again, you’re right, there is no debate. Women are BORN INTO a class that is oppressed on the basis of sex and gender. Transwomen were born penises, as such, they were born into a class of people who is not oppressed on either axis. You individual desire not to belong to that class is not the same as being a member of an *oppressed* class. It’s a false equivalency.

        Btw, here you are supporting and participating in transwomen-ONLY space: https://www.facebook.com/events/203224256504089/permalink/205404456286069/

        • RadiantSophia

          “reproductively viable” is astoundingly bad criteria for womanhood. What about post-menopausal women? What about prepubescent girls? What about women who have been sterilized? What about XY CAIS intersex who were raised as women since birth?

    • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

      I have a vagina and I wear pink clothes and eyeliner. Are you going to critique me for perpetuating a gender stereotype? (ETA: I should clarify, I was born with a vagina and still have one.)

      • http://notazerosumgame.blogspot.com/ MarinaS

        Why wouldn’t I? Because it would hurt your feelings or interfere with your personal choices? I don’t personally wear makeup up or sexualised clothing; I think they are the physical manifestation of our internal oppression. As a Jewish woman, I feel the same about wearing eyeliner as I would about wearing a yellow patch – like I’m collaborating in the oppressor’s othering of my humanity.

        The difference between trans* and non-trans* women however, and the reason why I might *critique* your fashion choices but never *judge* you for making them, is that while trans* women face disproportionate and violent sanctions for taking on these characteristics of performed femininity, non-trans* women face sanctions if they don’t. Non-gender conforming women face more sexual violence, harassment and social discrimination than gender conforming ones, so if any woman chooses (or is forced to by workplace requirements / “tradition”) to protect herself by paying lip service to feminine appearance, then that’s the right thing for her to do. Safety first.

        Of course non-gender conforming men also face a huge amount of violence and push back from society; that is part of the reason trans* women are in so much danger. This should really clue us in to the fact that gender is a mandatory ideology underpinned by violence, and make us question the social and medical expectations that led us to demand that trans* people make a show of this performance before being given access to the medical interventions they are looking for. It’s not in and of itself an argument either for or against trans* liberation.

        • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

          While I wear pink and eyeliner, I also have hairy armpits, a butch haircut, and a peach-fuzz mustache. I have never experienced violence for my non-gender-conformity. I have experienced violence for being a woman, but I actually find that in my liberal city I am sexually harassed less since I adopted a more genderqueer presentation. My experience is certainly not universal, but I will never believe that I am statistically a greater target of violence than my transwomen friends who are routinely harassed and assaulted by strangers on a weekly basis.

      • Dana M. Scruggs

        Dana’s
        Petition

        “The
        Right To Work” for Transgender/Transsexual People!

        Please take the time to read this post. If it moves you, then take the time to write
        your: Governor, Senators,
        Congressmen/Congresswomen, President, Media (Local and National). I am starting a movement to help
        Transgender/Transsexual people in obtaining employment. My movement is called, “The Right to
        Work Movement”. Please help me make this happen! I only have one life . . . I have lived in
        poverty for years now, because of prejudice and bias from people who have never
        even met me. Such people make harsh opinions about minorities that they do not
        understand. Yet, no one can argue that
        all US citizens have the right to work! Please
        help!

        Dana Michelle Scruggs

        The following post is a very brief summary of what my life as a Male to Female
        (MtF) Transsexual has been like since I first came out. It focuses only on one form of
        Transgender/Transsexual Discrimination . . . Work Place Discrimination. If
        you have already shown me your support in a previous reply on this important
        topic . . . Thank You! If not, please
        take the time to read it, and leave a comment.
        If you, your spouse, family, friends, or even acquaintances want to help
        . . . then please write your Senators, Congressmen/Congresswomen, President,
        Media, etc. Transgender/Transsexual individuals are the tiniest of all
        minorities! We just want the right to work.
        Please help by supporting this cause; and by forwarding this post to
        others you think might be supportive.

        Dana’s Story

        Hi! My name is Dana Michelle Scruggs. I am a Male to Female (MtF)
        Transsexual. I have both Bachelor and
        Master’s degrees in Nutrition, and am about to complete my Master of Science
        degree in Marriage and Family Therapy (MFT).
        I have a 4.0 Grade Point Average. I have been unemployed for 49 straight months
        now, ever since I came out as a MtF Transsexual in the work place. I have been turned down for each and every
        job that I have applied for since I first came out as a
        transgender/transsexual.

        The most disparaging part of my story is that the very same thing happened when
        I applied to “Christian” Hospitals”.
        One of the most blatant incidents of discrimination against me came from
        Adventist based hospitals. The Human Rights Commission (HRC) has admonished
        such practices but the fact remains that “Christian” Hospitals hide behind
        their religiosity as a way of discriminating against transgender/transsexual
        individuals. I only asked for “The Right to Work”. I did not ask to become a member of their
        church. I just wanted to work.

        Unfortunately, transsexuals experience the worst part of LGBT discrimination in
        the work place! Why? We cannot hide or time our “coming
        out”. When I was on Hormone
        Replacement Therapy (HRT), my body began to change. The day came when I could no longer hide the
        physiological changes that my body was going through. The end result . . . the women (not the men)
        whom I worked with proceeded to make my life a living hell on earth! They ostracized me and harassed me on a daily
        basis until I could not take it anymore . . . this led me to attempt suicide. I resigned from my job just six months before
        I would have been vested in the state hospital that I was employed at. I had no choice. I have been unemployed ever since. I could not even draw unemployment because I
        resigned from my job. I spent the next
        four years applying for every job I saw in my field. I always got the job interview but never the
        job.

        I did not qualify for housing or other assistance programs because I was a
        single woman without children. Hence, I
        qualified for absolutely nothing! I used
        up all of my life savings and retirement trying to survive over the last four
        years. I have nothing left! I was evicted from my apartment (due to my
        inability to pay rent) on February 26th, 2013.
        After that, I lived in a hotel room from March 1st, 2013 until May 15th,
        2013. I had no more money and was about
        to be asked to leave the hotel, when a woman (who was staying at the same
        hotel) asked me if I would like to stay with her for a while. I am now sleeping on a cot in the hotel room
        of a stranger. I am penniless.

        Did I mention that I have a Master’s Degree (with a 4.0 GPA) and am just about
        to complete my second Master’s Degree with a perfect 4.0 Grade Point Average?

        Yet, these “Christian” Organizations say, “We did no
        harm.” Somehow, “Christian”
        Hospitals are under the impression that they should not have to hire minorities
        (especially Transgender/Transsexuals). Certainly,
        these churches have the right to not allow me to attend their religious
        ceremonies or participate as a member of their church. Yet, how can they
        possibly believe that they have the right to keep other human beings from
        securing employment?

        Then again, the public sector is no better!
        Currently, many states do not even have laws to protect
        transgender/transsexuals in the work place!
        Businesses get around hiring transgenders/transsexuals by asking
        questions on the job application such as, “Have you ever gone by another
        name?” I was born David Michael
        Scruggs. My new name is Dana Michelle
        Scruggs. This is when my male identity
        is divulged . . . and the job interview ends.
        If I am honest at the beginning of the job interview and say, “You might
        find a name discrepancy in my work history, as I used to be called David M.
        Scruggs” . . . then the job interview abruptly ends. If I remain silent . . . the prospective
        employer will still find out that I used to live as a man when he/she checks my
        work history or conducts a background check.

        I moved to California from Tennessee approximately eight years ago, because I
        thought I would have an easier time transitioning in an “open minded” state
        like California. In addition, California
        has two state laws on the books to protect transgenders/transsexuals in the
        work place . . . AB-196 and AB-887.
        Unfortunately, these laws are seldom ever enforced, and proving sexual
        discrimination is almost impossible for a transgendered/transsexual
        individual. It seems that witnesses of
        this type of discrimination seldom ever step forward to report the
        inappropriate behavior. Perhaps our government should rethink of a way to
        actually protect Whistle Blowers in the work place.

        All I wanted was “The Right to Work”! Lately, I turn on the television each night
        to see and hear the national news. Currently,
        America looks to be preoccupied with racial tension in the country. This makes me so sad . . . because . . . out
        of all of the minorities in the USA who have the least amount of Civil Rights,
        is the transgendered/transsexual. Yet,
        who is helping us? It has been written
        that, “A society will be judged by how
        well it treats its’ weakest members.”
        Transgendered/Transsexual individuals are only asking for “The Right to Work”. We cannot even focus our time/energy on other
        Civil Liberties (such as the right to get married) because we struggle daily
        with obtaining food, shelter, and clothing.
        We are not allowed the same right that every other American already has
        . . . the right to work!

        All I can say at this time is . . . Shame on the USA!

        You can help by going to: http://www.change.org/petitions/congress-senate-president-pass-the-right-to-work-bill-for-all-transgender-transsexual-people and signing “The
        Right To Work” petition, and then . . . pass it on!

        Sincerely,

        Dana M. Scruggs

    • Elizabeth Veldon

      wo space that does not include sex workers or gender variant women

  • Pingback: Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist Criticism of “Gender”

  • willow

    tbh this idea that terfs push of a universal “female or male socialization” is pretty fucking racist and I don’t have time for it

    • bintalshamsa

      Yep. It sure is. They don’t like it when WOC point that out, though.

      • Chris

        Fighting for white transwomen while pretending this is about WOC (who you plainly don’t give a shit about). Your lies are showing, bintalshamsa. But by all means go ahead trying to keep pretending and imagining no one notices how transparent you are.

  • Mercia McMahon

    As a trans woman critical of the stance of many trans women (e.g., for creating the terms cis and TERF, for trying to close conferences) I welcome this letter and its publication here. As an academic I should point out that the problem is not Gender Studies, but insufficiently rigorous Gender Studies. Reading the arguments of many trans commenters on this article makes clear just how much this debate needs proper analysis of how terms are being used. The sort of analysis required would be likely to establish that 1. whatever legal recognition someone has a trans woman she is never going to have the same experience of life as a woman born female 2. raising exceptions does not change facts it proves the rule (especially when non-inter-sex people are citing inter sex issues) 3. true dialogue cannot occur when one side are forbidden from having their own space to consider their responses to how the dialogue has progressed thus far 4. othering whole groups with terms like cis and TERF hinders dialogue 5. equality law like all law is about balancing competing needs and not about one side getting its own way all of the time. So more Gender Studies please, not less, but better.
    Dr Mercia McMahon
    http://transscribe.wordpress.com

    • GemmaSeymour

      Oh, look, a Quisling! How quaint!

      • Rani Bakr

        Heh, I have a Doctorate in Theology too, from the Universal Life Church. Currently seeking ordainment in a non-Laveyan Satanist Church for my collection, so I can perform Satanic weddings.

        • GemmaSeymour

          Sadly, I am the only practitioner of my Path. There is no one I can turn to for validation, so there will never be any doctorate for me. I have only my intuition and my rationality to guide me. It can be exciting, but mostly, it’s just kind of lonely.

    • HRyan

      Thank you! A note of sanity!

      • bintalshamsa

        Oh look! It’s yet another ableist TERF. If I yawned and stretched my arms out in this space I could accidentally bop at least a dozen of y’all without even moving.

        • Chris

          Oh look! ANOTHER comment by bintalshamsa. Who is SOOOO bored by this discussion that this is her 100th comment. She’s going for the most comments to a thread she doesn’t care about.

  • Ovate

    TERF is marginalizing, another slur you are subjecting women to.

    Stop calling US names you make up.! It is oppression!

    How would you like it if we called you SMURFS for holding your breath everytime you didnt get your way? Women dont want to do things like that, but radfems dont want the sextrade pushed on us.

    We will not let you pimp us and tell us who we have sex with, we dont want rape culture and gender based slavery.

    The pimps and porn maker trans that stalk us for sex that lead these campaigns, need to back off. If people want to De-transition, back off and be accepting. They are not failed trans, they are people.

    This is Homophobic against gay females that do not want str8 sex, this is not transphobic for females to want to be together.

    Stop trying to cure gay females.

    How much do you know about radfem?

    FEMEN are also radical feminists that stand up for women’s rights, poor rights, speak out about religious oppression on the gay community, and GLBT rights. They are the biggest group doing activism in Russia against their Gay ban and in countries other GLBT groups wouldn’t dare go near. AND they oppose the sex trade, sex trafficking/tourism, porn making as radical feminists.

    Radical Feminism is the foundation their core values. They are standing up for YOUR rights too.

    And you want to bully women for not wanting sex with you?

    I am really happy pornmakers and pimps are not the true face of trans and it turns out there are many normal trans that see what you are doing and have spoke out.

    • GemmaSeymour

      Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist. Sorry, but I’m failing to see the slur, there.

      A radical feminist who desires to exclude trans people. That’s all it says.

      Sex trade? Curing gay females? What are you even talking about? Did you maybe mean to post this as a comment on some other article? Because your words just don’t seem to refer to anything here.

      • Ovate

        I see, what you are saying-
        well you would have to be a woman to see female oppression, but you are good at dismissing it like a real man..
        anyway,
        Sorry about your penis.

        • GemmaSeymour

          Sorry about your anencephaly.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          seriously every time i see that penis comment i think is see ‘god hates fags’ but then terfs hate queers too because they’re not doing what THEY tell them to.

        • bintalshamsa

          You really are obsessed with penises. Have you ever stopped and considered why they thrill you so much that you can’t stop talking about them?

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            my partner’s a lesbian and, sometimes, i’m one too (when i’m not exercising my right to take on whatever identity is politically expedient or simply comfortable at the time) and we never mention cocks

          • Ovate

            Lesbians dont want penises, you miss the point,

            you ignored the entire point of the post about people that do not want rape culture re-victimizing them, and you are crying ‘BUT What about MEEEE? and my lady penis?’

            No means no.

            Women understand that it is not appropriate to bully your way into a rape victims’ group to promote the sex trade and argue with them. If you insist you have the right to, then you are SMURFS.

            Hold your breath as long as you want , Smurfs.

            Radfems reserve the right to protect these women’s privacy and healing space over your perceived privilege to listen to rape stories. Men dont get raped unless you go to prison and there are no females to victimize, but the women have expressed they wont be able to come to terms if a guy is listening in.

            Their woman-only space is for humanitarian reasons.

            A M to trans did sneak into the Mitchfest and went to the rape survivor group. He was welcomed at first, but it became clear he was not there to help anyone but himself. He talked about masterbating with a cock ring, and was so domineering and pushy women were re-victimized instead of helped. He commented on rape survivors sharing their personal struggles like this was his porn entertainment and the women were being whiny..

            discussions like this from trans are not welcome to women that were sexually abused as children so much that they are living with PTSD and unable to have sex as an adult. Many of the women in the radfem group are survivors, the rest are protectors.

            http://www.thelesbianmafia.com/home/this-is-the-person-who-started-the-fuckcispeople/

            ^that is not lesbian sex^ Rape victims dont want penis stories pushed on them.

            If you are laughing that one of your people scored, then that is called rape culture.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          and i’m sorry you so completely lack an argument that you have to resort to insults

          like the above poster i do not want us to be at each other’s throats and have tried time and time again to open up a dialogue but each time it’s fallen apart because of terfs, because you will only accept me one way – silent. you will only accept gender variant people if we are not gender variant.

      • Elizabeth Veldon

        perhaps they dislike that it so perfectly describes what they are – and that the TE is even more important to them than the RF bit

    • bintalshamsa

      I’m a woman and I don’t find TERF marginalizing at all. In fact, I find it an absolutely accurate way of describing certain women. Nobody here has tried to tell you who to have sex with. I can’t imagine why ANYONE would want to have sex with you, but if you can convince someone, then I say “Go for it!”. You never know how long it will be before you find another sucker.

      If you feel enslaved by gender, then that’s YOUR problem. Some of us happily embrace gender. I LOVE my gender.

      It’s no surprise that you are pimping FEMEN. They are one of the biggest racist white-dominated movements now gaining popularity among white women. They see nothing wrong with fucking over WOC on a regular basis. They aren’t standing up for MY rights and they certainly aren’t standing up for the rights of Muslim women around the world.

      However, you’re free to keep supporting them. It doesn’t surprise me. You seem like a match made in heaven.

      • Chris

        The only people who “embace gender” — who LOVE their gender — are trans people and sad, sad liberal feminists (have you checked in with Amanda Marcotte about your bizarre fixation with gender? even she isn’t that stupid). You’re exposing yourself, bintalshamsa. You’re not some great activist. You’re a misogynist trolling this thread with your hatred and spite. We get it! You hate women! That’s called misogyny and you are eaten up with it.

  • Katherine White

    Explain your reasoning behind taking the url for “pandagon.net” for this message. I’m really interested in hearing it.

    • antipropagandamachine

      It probably has something to do with Amanda Marcotte abusing her dude-given media pedestal to censor and banish women from feminism as her way of saying it’s wrong to censor or banish any woman from feminism.

      So some feminist went and spraypainted a message from 37 women on her old, boarded up bloghouse, a message that she would have stamped into silent oblivion had those 37 elderwomen’s voices required Amanda’s approval.

      • bintalshamsa

        Thanks for explaining why TERF think it’s justifiable to lie and deceive for the sake of your cause. This is something that women need to see when examining your other claims.

        • antipropagandamachine

          I think you’re just jealous of this letter getting so much attention because the domain swap was successfully pulled off and total silence from the women you disagree with is your only (myopic) goal.

          If Amanda’s name had been included as a signatory it would be a lie, but you know how pro-porn bloggers are always saying that speech you don’t like shouldn’t be censored but met with more and more speech.

          Brand Marcotte will survive just fine and this posted letter won’t stop Playboy’s editors from fingering Amanda as their favorite feminist.

          • GemmaSeymour

            Yes, you’re right. Total silence. Because there were no other domain names that could have been legitimately acquired in order to publish this without implicating it in the willful attempt to damage the reputation of another, and pointing this out to the world constitutes silencing?

            If you want to know why radical feminism is being laughed at by the rest of feminism, you need look no further than the sort of illogic you just employed.

      • Katherine White

        So… in order to punish her for not being hateful enough. Got it. That’s what I figured too, but hey, I thought maybe there would be an explanation that suggested that you guys weren’t pieces of human garbage. Not sure what I was thinking in that regard, really.

  • MS

    I find it extremely telling that not a single trans activist / pro-trans ally has so far managed to actually address ANY of the compelling arguments made in this article. Nor has a single trans activist / pro-trans ally even pretended to regret/apologize for the violence, harassment, stalking, and infiltration that trans “activists” routinely engage in.

    All of the comments seem to be along the line of “Wahhhh, you hurt my feelz because you disagree (with my bullshit claims that even I can’t back up with logic or reason or evidence)!!!!11!” That, and ad-hominems against radical feminists.

    Well, I appreciate it when men – from all walks of life – are honest. So thank you, trans “activists”, for making it crystal clear that you can’t/won’t tolerate dissent and that you demand nothing less than complete submission from females.

    The more you reveal yourself for what you really are, the more female support you lose. Even the libfems are starting to see through your bullshit.

    • GemmaSeymour

      And why, pray tell, would anyone bother addressing your specious lies and delusions? Compelling arguments? There weren’t any *arguments*, much less *compelling* ones.

      As for the rest of your blather, reality disagrees with you. The political landscape has changed. Transmisia is on its way out. This whole article exists on a website that was fraudulently appropriated from an organization that has exposed this fact to the rest of the world.

      We are all laughing at you.

      • MS

        “There weren’t any *arguments*”

        Thanks for letting us know that you have reading comprehension issues. I’ll try to keep things simple for you:

        Let’s start with the fact that gender isn’t innate. Can you handle that?

        “As for the rest of your blather, reality disagrees with you.”

        Except when it proves us right re: gender being bullshit: tinyurl.com/kj3qrav

        No need to be bitter just because you’re wrong and don’t know WTF you’re talking about.

        • Guest

          P.S. Still no apology/remorse for trans violence against radfems, eh?

          I figured as much.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            proof? i mean not second or third hand accounts, not dodgy looking, out of context screen caps that are badly photoshoped.

            i decry all violence and have spoken out against much in trans*activism including doxing, anti-lesbian language and equating anti-male rhetoric with anti-trans* rhetoric but i have still to see a credible report of violence coming from anything other than second and third hand sources or accounts later shown to be terf sock puppets

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          abilism again!

          christ, you people are disgusting.

        • GemmaSeymour

          Cordelia Fine? Really? That’s all you got? Do you see now why I’m laughing at you?

          Probably not.

          Also, straw man. I didn’t make any arguments about gender being innate.

      • MS

        P.S. No apology/remorse for trans violence against radfems, eh?

        I figured as much.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          oops, slipped up there by copying and pasting from one of your sock accounts.

          did i tell you the one about the twitter account that served as a master account for over 20 terf sock accounts?

        • GemmaSeymour

          Violence by trans people against radfems? By all means, show us your evidence. And by that, I mean *real* evidence corroborated by multiple sources, that isn’t just hearsay from Lierre Keith.

          • Ovate

            http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/gemma-seymour/

            how about your knife on a stick? Gemma, get help! Women dont do this unless they need medication. You are a bully- that is a shame. There are Trans people that are worried about this kind of violence sending the wrong message,

            BTW, the evidence came from Trans that were worried a woman might get hurt.

  • GemmaSeymour

    But, just for shits and giggles, let’s do a little breakdown:

    “…“gender theory,” which avoids naming men and the system of male supremacy as the beneficiaries of women’s oppression.”

    This is quite evidently a false claim. Nevermind that it assigns the aversion to “gender theory”, which isn’t at all something that the trans community agrees upon to any significant extent, the assertion that trans activists avoid discussing the fact of patriarchy is completely ridiculous, and I could sit here all day making citiations from thousands of trans bloggers and reporters and news outlets that proves this, but we have bigger fish to fry.

    “threats and attacks, some of them physical, on individuals and organizations daring to challenge the currently fashionable concept of gender.”

    Another false claim, which we will demonstrate in a few moments.

    ” A U.S. environmental organization that also calls itself radical feminist is attacked for its political analysis of gender.”

    Talk about a mischaracterisation of events! Let’s just completely ignore the fact that the main author of the book, “Deep Green Resistance”, has completely disavowed any relationship with the organisation bearing that name as a result of the irrational hatred of trans people exhibited by the remaining leaders.

    “Feminist conferences in the U.K., U.S. and Canada are driven from their contracted locations for asserting the right of women to organize for their liberation separately from men, including M>F (male to female) transgendered people.”

    Utterly false. The letter obviously refers to the RadFem 2012 and RadFem 2013 conferences in the UK. The venues which were to host both of these events decided of their own accord not to allow the conferences to take place in their facilities, because both facilities have a policy of inclusion by which the RadFem conferences refused to abide. I’m not sure which conference in the US is being referred to, so I’ll have to skip that one. The Canadian event is clearly the RadFem Rise Up conference, which was banned from the art galley where it was to be held for exactly the same reason the UK conferences were denied. The galley, of its own accord, decided that their policy of inclusion was incompatible with the conference.

    After this happened, several radical feminists made specious claims that death threats and other threats were made by trans activists against the gallery and the conference to the galley management. The gallery management made a public statement that no such threats ever occurred.

    And then, there is the not-so-subtle claim that trans women are men. And now we come to the crux of the situation. This is an assertion of trans exclusionary false feminists that is by no means agreed upon by anyone but them. This doesn’t even get into the incorrect usage of the word “transgendered”, which is widely recognised as an incorrect grammatical construction.

    Lies, lies, and more lies. And we’ve only covered the first two paragraphs.

    Why on the Goddess’ Green Earth would anyone need to continue with an analysis of this pablum? The whole thing is littered with falsehoods. But, I’ll play along and just touch on a few more of the lies.

    ““gender identity” has overwhelmed—when not denying completely—the theory that biological women are oppressed and exploited as a class by men and by capitalists due to their reproductive capacity.”

    We covered this one already. Repetition didn’t make it any less false. The addition of “biological” didn’t make it any less misleading.

    “Women often can no longer organize against our oppression in women-only groups without being pilloried with charges of transphobia.”

    Are we supposed to care when transphobic people are called transphobic for being transphobic? Again, the crux of this issue is that the letter refuses to treat trans people with equal dignity and engage us in the equal negotiation of terms of discourse that are mutually acceptable. So long as terms like “women only” are used with the implication that trans women are not part of that category, there is no possibility for dialogue to occur.

    May I remind you that “dia-” means “two”, and “logue” refers to “speech”? When one side claims sole right to define the terms of discourse, when only one side is allowed to speak, there is no “dialogue”. I don’t know how many times I have to say this, but there is no other way to say it, and there is no possible way that it can be painted in any other fashion.

    “Furthermore, a strong case can be made that it undermines a solution for all, even for the transitioning person, by embracing and reinforcing the cultural, economic and political tracking of “gender” rather than challenging it.”

    Trans activists tend to disagree with this statement, which I’m sure is fairly obvious.

    “We defend the right of RadFem to exclude men, including M>F trans people, from their feminist meetings and to invite speakers who analyze gender from a feminist perspective.”

    Against with the “trans women are men”. Oy vey. Do you really think that no one understands that you refuse to recognise us as women, as female, as “born girls”?

    Almost every single point made by this letter is a point of contention between us, or is mispresented as if it is when it isn’t. Very little of it is anything which taken in its context would be agreed with mutually.

    This is not a discussion. This is not discourse. This is not dialogue. You demand respect, but offer none. We come to the table, asking to be included in discussion of our lives, of the consequences which *we* face, and you turn your backs, and when you discover that the rest of the world has turned against your point of view, you concoct outright lies about us.

    What, exactly, did you expect? Did you expect us to read this letter, and agree with it? This whole letter demonstrates so clearly that only do you not understand our position and refuse to understand our position, but than you are willing to continually engage in underhanded tactics that don’t engender trust even among a huge number of cis women.

    When did trans women deny cis women access to healthcare? Never. Yet, since 1980, trans women have died, over and over and over again, because we cannot access care based solely on the fact that a single radical feminist was given the unopposed, unrebutted opportunity to comment on the validity of our existence.

    We are not your enemies, no matter how much you seem to need and want us to be your enemies. The main body of feminism, of academe, and even of society as a whole, has begun to see this, finally.

    So, when you present letters like this to the world as if the argumentation of it is in any way sound or incontestible, or when Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford presume to address the UN on the subject of human rights, when the United Nations long before they ever thought to send their letter came to a different conclusion, what exactly do you think is going to happen?

    Since 1975, 17 states, the District of Columbia, and over 100 municipal jurisdictions around the country have passed anti-discrimination laws which protect on the basis of gender identity, etc. Hardly a week goes by that we do not hear of multiple advances for trans rights.

    And nothing bad has happened because of it. And much good has been done because of it. Everyone sees this. Everyone but you, and sadly, the patriarchal forces that seek the destruction of all women. Does it not say anything to you that your arguments are practically indistinguishable from those of patriarchal conservatives? Do you really lack any kind of introspection?

    I’m sure I don’t need to tell you that women’s rights on being assaulted all over the United States and the world right now. All women’s rights, not just *some* women’s rights. Do you honestly think I am opposed to my daughter’s freedom? My sister’s? My mother’s? My grandmother’s? My aunt’s? My nieces’? My cousins’? My own?!

    .What kind of monster do you think I am?

    But, that’s really the issue here, isn’t it, in the end? You view me as a monster, as an abomination, as a threat, as a man, as male. I can tell you I am not until I am blue in the face, but that doesn’t matter to you, and there’s no way I can prove it to you, and there’s no way you can prove it isn’t true.

    It’s just the nature of the human condition. You can’t live my life, and I can’t live yours. You can’t be inside my body, and I can’t be inside yours. All we have, the only hope we have, is trust. It’s weird. Believe me, I know it’s weird, to think that everything you thought you knew about sex and gender might not be the whole story. And it’s scary. Oh, Goddess is it scary.

    If we can’t talk to each other about it, if we can’t treat each other with equal dignity, equal respect, equal understanding, equal tolerance…where does that leave us? Perpetually at each other’s throats? Do you want to live that way? Because I don’t. I want to make music, I want to secure every person’s right to equal protection under the law. I want to dance, to celebrate, to wonder. I want to have a garden and a potter’s wheel, to eat a good meal, and to teach my daughter.

    Trans women aren’t going to go away. We couldn’t even if we wanted to. Trans women have been here all throughout history, and we will continue to spontaneously arise, for whatever reason. I don’t need a reason to live, and neither do you.

    So, let’s live.

  • artemisprime

    I find it incredible that TERFs are simultaneously a tiny group of insignificant women and a dangerously powerful group of propagandists that are *literally* killing trans people.

    Truly we are amazing beings. Superheroes in fact. Now, can somebody show me where we do the costume change? Telephone boxes are a little passé now, I assume.

    • bintalshamsa

      You can feel free to change underneath your white sheets. There’s usually pretty of room under there. Just let me know if you need help removing the hood. I wouldn’t want you to accidentally put your eye out on that pointy part.

      • artemisprime

        Violent douche is violent.

      • Chris

        bintalshamsa, being violent, what a surprise. You have an obsession and a sickness. Look in the mirror. Stop blaming others for your hatred.

        • Elizabeth Veldon

          abilistagain

  • AnnieOnnie

    Thank you for defending women’s-only spaces against those who want to oppress us further.

    • Elizabeth Veldon

      yes, now we know who the terfs are ;-)

      • Chris

        Elizabeth Veldon, you continue to use epithets against women and you think that anyone of quality and integrity is going to take you seriously? Your hateful rhetoric points out to others that there must be something wrong with your argument. People who have real ideas can bring those, they don’t need to continuously call people names.

        • bintalshamsa

          Fortunately, you don’t get to decide who others will take seriously. Your respectability politics are just another facet of your whiteness, but you think that women of color should take YOU seriously. Having ideas doesn’t make you intelligent when those ideas are all ridiculous. Calling someone names isn’t a bad thing when those names are accurate. So, chew on that, TERF.

          • Chris

            Fortunately, bintalshamsa, your lack of respectability is on full display. How many comments is this now? Do you get paid by the comment? No one is taking you seriously. Your prodigious trolling gives you away. Calling someone names? You’re the champ, no one’s going to beat you at that lowly activity.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            and how many comments have you made? how many names have you and your supporters called other women?

            the gains feminism has made are in reverse everywhere and you do what? spend your time fighting other women.

            if i was minded to believe in conspiracy theories i’d think the purpose of your movement was to split the feminist movement.

  • Elizabeth Veldon

    you know if the terfs where just trans*phobic they would be laughable but that they also wish to punish sex workers, ignore disability as an issue, insult women of colour and get all pissed at women wanting to wear make-up or a dress.

    • Chris

      You are a prodigious liar, I’ll give you that Elizabeth Veldon. You have the comfort of having an online group of similar liars. But you forget that it’s the internet and people who are not liars and haters can simply look for themselves. And the people who won’t look for themselves can spend their time with the likes of you and yours. Liars and haters. Must be a lovely bunch to spend time with.

      • Elizabeth Veldon

        look here and see screaming about race, abilist comments and i can find a million terf sites claiming that a male-spectrum androgyny is the only way for women to look.

        you are lieing but, unlike terfs, i don’t threaten legal action when people disagree with me

        • Chris

          You’re a sick, sick person Elizabeth Veldon. Keep talking. You’ll convince more and more people of that.

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            abelist much?

          • Elizabeth Veldon

            abilism yet again

  • Chris

    So much for having space for “discourse.” Shut down again. And look at how this discussion space let misogynists go on and on and on. Now go to the other pandagon and you’ll see even more of it, with no counter arguments. If there was a valid argument to counter this post, it wouldn’t have to be stated as “fuck you” and being shut down. What are people so afraid of? What they’re always afraid of: Women speaking for themselves, away from men (Raw Story is a owned and run by men, they let a few token women take part to buff their appearance of true “equality”).

  • TransWarriorWoman

    This “letter” is absolutely disgusting. These 37 “womyn” (sic) should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. This screed is dripping with hatred, bigotry and prejudice. As a trans community, WE get to decide what is transphobic or cissexist, not you cis bullies and bigots. You are really a joke and make such a mockery of feminism. Keep up your work and you will drive everyone out of feminism. “Radical” feminism is racist, whorephobic and cissexist. It is slap in the face to Women of Color, Sex Workers and Trans* People who have made amazing and significant contributions to feminism. Most of these 37 signatories are a bunch of washed-up old second wavers who are bitter and enraged that their “radical” legacy is looked at by today’s young women and Third Wave feminists as both tragic and pathetic. That you rely on lies, distortions and innuendoes to make your point shows what specious arguments you make. It is trans* women who are bullied, silence, harassed and abused by cis-supremacist radfems, and when we dare to valiantly fight back, your side does not like it one bit. Well get used to it sisters, because we will fight you tooth and nail every step of the way. Luckily, your “radical” feminism, i.e. fauxminism is dying out. it is going the way of the dinosaur and becoming extinct, and thank the Godess for that! Our side has taken ov er feminism and Gender Studies and we will continue to activate and teach against everything you stand for. We will continue to celebrate the courage of sex workers, the brilliance of trans* people, and the vital importance of intersectionality. We will bring in new voices to the Third Wave, make feminist porn, and laugh at the fundamentalist and highly discrimnatory approach you took to feminism. Just like the racism, classism, and ableism you radfems regularly spout off, we willc confront your cissexism and transphobia and delegitimize you and your vile ideology at every turn. Hope you are geared up for the fight of a lifetime. Unlike your over-privileged wealthy cis white women asses, as a poor trans woman with multiple disabilities, I am ready to fight and I am ready to win.

    • Elizabeth Veldon

      sorry, i downvoted your comment but i have been a part of many organisations that used varient spellngs of ‘woman’ and do ot agree that this is laugable

    • kenzackal

      Hate much?

  • Pingback: Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist ...

  • Pingback: They Do Not Dig TERF | Trans Scribe

  • Elizabeth Hungerford

    Ok, now this looks like an Onion prank. Taking down a post entitled “forbidden discourse”? Really? Really.

    • GemmaSeymour

      You mean, the original letter *wasn’t* an Onion prank? It’s so hard to tell with radical feminism. You know what they say about any sufficiently advanced parody.

      • Chris

        Lots of things go over your head, Gemma. I assume you’re used to it by now.

  • Bastet

    Cis and trans women have extremely different experiences from each other. I personally, don’t see why cis or trans woman cannot talk about their own experiences separately from one another in some spaces and together in other spaces. We are not the same, our experiences are not the same. This is obvious and I see no reason we cannot admit obvious difference without put downs one way or another. While we stick with binary sex/gender understandings we are actually limiting ourselves. There are more than two sexes. There are more than two genders. This is ok. There’s nothing to fear about this. Safe spaces for all are needed and voices for all are needed.

    • GemmaSeymour

      At no time in history have trans women worked to remove cis women’s access to the public sphere. That is what is at issue here. Radical feminists don’t just want to kick trans women out of the club, they want to kick us out of ALL clubs.

      This isn’t about anyone’s right to form intentional communities, as the radical feminists would have you believe. This is about whether or not cis women have a right to exclude trans women from the community of women.

      • Bastet

        “How many cis women have had their healthcare coverage denied by trans women?”

        Can you expand on your meaning here please? I’m unsure how cis women are denying trans women healthcare.

        All women colleges; the closest I’ve ever come to this was a women only pole gym. I know of only 1 trans woman student there. I never once saw her put down or heard her talked about. That was in Brisbane, Aus. In Sydney I did a make-up class that had a trans woman student and she had a really hard time there. Some of it was unfair and unfounded and was mostly driven by an ignorant immature 20 yr old sis woman and some of it was an attitude she brought with her if ‘one up, one down’. I was actually one of the people she put down. She cslled me anorexic in class, in ftont of others and then at lunch time in a group of people proceeded to lecture me on how men want ‘real’ women. Most of the women in that class were in their early 20′s. I was 39 at tge beginning and 40 when ot finished. I was already the ‘odd one out’ by ageism which she used to try and make her ‘odd one out’ by transism more inclusive. Honestly, I would have really appreciated not having had to have dealt with that. I don’t blame all trans for that experience. I’d like yo use it, only as an example of how cis doesn’t always get priveleged over trans. I’d also like to add, that when this trans woman was negatively spoken about behind her back for being trans, I did say that I don’t hate people for their gender identity and did not participate in it.

        • GemmaSeymour

          I will give you the most prominent example.

          In June 1980, at the direction of the National Center for Healthcare Technology, part of the Department of Health and Human Services of the federal government of the United States, which existed from 1979-1982, under the Carter and Reagan Administrations, Janice Raymond, Assistant Professor of Medical Ethics and Women’s Studies, Hampshire College/University of Massachusetts Amherst, Massachusetts, was commissioned to produce a report titled, “Technology on the Social and Ethical Aspects of Transsexual Surgery”.

          The effect of this “overview paper”, as such documents were called by NCHCT, was the removal of governmental, and eventually, private medical insurance coverage of any and all medical treatments relating to cross-sex transition, and even in many cases medical treatments which might have been efficaceous at treating other illnesses because they may have had some use in transition-related therapy.

          Raymond’s academic qualification at that time include a Ph. D. in Ethics and Society from Boston College in 1977, a Master’s degree in Religious Studies from from Andover Newton Theological School in 1971, and her Bachelor of Arts in English Literature from Salve Regina College in 1965. It should be of note to readers that Salve Regina College and Andover Newton Theological School are both religious institutions, Roman Catholic and American Baptist/United Church of Christ, respectively. Raymond was also at one time a member of the Roman Catholic non-cloistered women’s religious institute known as the Sisters of Mercy.

          Janice Raymond is, of course, more widely known for her publication of the book, The Transsexual Empire” in 1979, and is an icon of radical feminism.

          Now, I don’t know about you, but I find it curious that the person commissioned by NCHCT to produce an expert opinion on the necessity and efficacy of transition-related healthcare would come from a background of involvement with the Roman Catholic church, an organisation with a long-standing and publicly acknowledged antipathy to sexual and gender minorities, and that furthermore, this same person would not possess a single medical, let alone psychiatric, qualification that would allow that person to serve as an expert on matters of medical concern.

          You might even find as curious as I do that such a matter was allowed to be considered by only a single person, who furthermore demonstrated an antipathy toward the very existence of trans women.

          Thirty-three years later, the ban on federal funding for transition healthcare is still in effect, though some agencies have found ways of circumventing it. Insurance coverage for transition care is still rare in the private insurance industry. Because no funding is available, very few studies have been conducted. Most of what we know about the effects of medical transition care is extrapolated from studies on cis women, and the rest only the result of trial and error over the intervening years. The sum total of that knowledge is small.

          And that’s just the beginning of it.

          How many trans women died because of what Janice Raymond did? It’s a number we can only guess at. But, we know that trans people attempt suicide at a rate of about 41%, more than 25 times the 1.6% rate of the general population. And those are just the ones we *know* about because they survived long enough to tell us they were trans. How many of the dead died in silence?

    • nevercisgendered

      i am not cisgendered woman. i am a woman. i was born that way. it does not mean i have to behave in the way “women” behave. that is the construct. my body is my biology. my biology provides me with the promise of my gametes to reproduce in a specific way. it is just biology. what has happened is that i was told growing up how to behave as a woman because of my biology….but my biology does not dictate my behaviour. my procreative promise does not dictate my behaviour. i have choice in how i behave. however, to say that a woman can be created by hormones and surgery to please the notion of a small part of society does not define my reality in any way. when i was 13 my sibling transitioned. i thought about what it was to be a woman. my role model had bought his/her sex in a clinic. that was not a good role model to me….my body is female. my siblings is female only on the surface. never will be and never can be female. she is now paralysed form the hormones…did you know they cause strokes and embolisms? yup. 29 years she has been completely paralysed unable to dress a s a woman, speak as a woman or behave like a woman. many life-threatening UTI’s (40% of post transition have urinary voiding problems) later, it is a miracle she is alive at all….big mistake. don’t tell me transwomen know what it is to be female!!!

      • Bastet

        Hi. The binary of sex/gender gets challenged when we say there are more than two sexes. I personally do not believe that surgery and hormones makes a woman but I also don’t believe trans are in any way wrong for being. I see there being male, female, m-f trans, f-m trans and intersex: meaning, 5 different sexes.

        The truth is, an m-f trans cannot know what it has been like to grow up as a girl, to go through a female puberty, to have to deal with protection against pregnancy every time one wishes to physicslly express with a partner, to have to smile through incredible pain at work caused by menstrual cramping, to face (as I did) uterine tumours or (as my friends and family have), polycystic ovaries, prolapsed uterus, cervical cancer and many other dpecific female ailments. They don’t know what it is like to have doctors and surgeons talk about your internal organs only in reproductive terms and get embarassed when you want to know about treatment effects on sexual function. I agree with you. There is so much more to being female than surgery and hormones could ever get even close to mimicking.

        Having said all that, I want trans men and woman to feel accepted in society, equal in society and to have opportunities in life. Not as the same sex as me but as their own, valid, real sex.

  • Bastet

    @GemmaSeymour Hi. Im using android to reply to our convo below & couldn’t get the reply button working so am posting up here instead.

    Home for me is New Zealand (though I was in Australia for 6 years). Here, in NZ, gender reassignment surgery is fully covered by insurance. The surgery is also free, paid for by public health, with a diagnosis of Gender Identity Disorder. The person has to have been living as the gender they identify as for a minimum of 2 years and have been in councelling for 1 year to firstly make the diagnosis and secondly help with transitioning. That’s the criteria for free surgery. So, though a sis-woman was responsible for the ruling in the States I’m inclined to believe it’s more a religious mentality that brought that about. I see it similarly to the American abortion debate which we don’t have over here. Abortion is free and legal here and has been prior to me going through puberty (Im currently 40, 41 in November). When I look at that debate in the States I see it being spearheaded by a religious morality. Just like transitioning requires councelling, so too does abortion here. It also rewuires a diagnosis of emotional incapacity to carry a child to term. So, both these surgeries have criteria to meet and both require sympathetic councellors (actually pretty easy to find).

    I am sorry to hear that happened in the states. Please don’t hold all cis women as anti-reassignment surgeries. Admittedly, as a kiwi, I hold different views to Americans. We had a trans-woman in politics over a decade ago, were the first country in the world to give women the vote, have had two female prime ministers, opened civil union over a decade ago, 6th country in the world to legalize gay marriage, went pro-choice as a country around 30 years ago… So, I do know I’m coming from a position of privelege on these issues because some of these, I have never even had to fight for.

    I hope that the attitudes I see here, are more common where you are. We still have a long way to go over here. The issues are by no means sorted out but they’re budging; they’re slowly moving toward a better space.

  • Chris
    • Elizabeth Veldon

      the more you and your friends engage n name calling, doxing and racist and abilist language the more peole see the truth.

      Alleluia Alleluia

  • ursprung

    Wow. Taking this piece off really demonstrates the heart of the letter! Thanks to those trans people who make these authors’ job so darn easy.

  • Chris
  • nevercisgendered

    the other day on a message board, i had a transwoman tell me that it is not that femininity or masculinity is innate, but rather it is the process of identification with a man or a woman that is innate. she asserts that she did not identify with the males in her/his life, so she/he identified with women. first i have heard this theory. anybody else heard this one?
    it is very hard to reason with delusional logic….
    bravo for the group who signed this letter. it is time that women stood up to the translobby with intellectual rigour and strength. thanks.

  • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

    I have another question for those of you who believe only people born with vaginas can be women.

    Thanks to activism and raised-awareness about trans issues, more parents are supporting their children when they come out as transgender and allowing them to transition well before puberty, when they can take hormones to prevent the development of secondary sex characteristics like facial hair, deepening voice, breast development etc. Do you think these parents are wrong to do so? Do you think they should pigeonhole their child into being a “boy” or a “girl” to match their genitals? Are these individuals always going to be “men” or “women” based on how they were socialized for their first five or ten years?

    • Oser Chenma

      I suggest that they may be making a grave mistake, since the long-term effects of such hormones on children are not well-known, and since many of those children are just as likely, or more likely, to be homosexual or simply non-gender-conforming. Children are too young to be able to consent to this sort of “medical” treatment. I don’t think children should be pigeonholed either way. Sorry, your third question doesn’t make sense to me as the definition of “men” and “women” isn’t clear here. You do seem to be asking if socializing five-year-old children based on their biological sex is going to be likely to cause them to identify as that sex. I would suggest that may be the best we can do, since the notion of giving a five-year-old child heavy doses of sex hormones based on a trend or a possibility strikes me as medically contraindicated.

      • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

        Nobody gives hormones to young children. Why would you need to? Some doctors give teens hormone-blocking drugs to delay puberty because it is illegal to give sex reassignment surgery to someone who isn’t 18. So actually, doctors are letting TEENS have some time to decide what they want to do with their bodies come 18. Here is a Huffington Post article that mentions some of the latest debates with treatment of transgender children: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dana-beyer/gender-transition-in-children_b_3530335.html

        Hormones aside, do you think transgender kids are just confused? Do you think that children with penises should be raised as boys and children with vaginas should be raised as girls? If so, how are we supposed to abolish gender if you insist body parts must match identity?

    • Bastet

      There are 5 different sexes, not 2. There is male, female, intersex, m-f trans and f-m trans. They are all valid. They are all real. They all deserve dignity and respect. They all deserve opportunity and equality. And, very importantly, one is NOT the other. No, children should not be given dangerous hormonal treatments anymore than they should be allowed to get tattooed. They are still developing mentally, emotionally and pschologically and are not able to percieve the long term ramifications of choices. That part of the brain continues to develop up until the age of 25.

      • http://borderhouseblog.com/ Lake Desire

        Actually, hormones are becoming more common for transgender teens to give them the opportunity to delay puberty until they are old enough to decide what they want to do with their bodies. What is “that” part of the brain you speak of? Are you a doctor? Prove that all hormonal treatments are dangerous. Is it dangerous for intersex kids who were re-assigned female? Enlighten me.

        • Bastet

          A teenage brain is not just an adult brain with fewer miles on it. To begin with a crucial part of the brain — the frontal lobes — are not fully connected. It’s the part of the brain that says: ‘Is this a good idea? What is the consequence of this action?’ It’s not that they don’t have a frontal lobe. And they can use it. But they’re going to access it more slowly.That’s because the nerve cells that connect teenagers frontal lobes with the rest of their brains are sluggish. Teenagers don’t have as much of the fatty coating called myelin, or “white matter,” that adults have in this area.Think of it as insulation on an electrical wire. Nerves need myelin for nerve signals to flow freely. Spotty or thin myelin leads to inefficient communication between one part of the brain and another. Teenage brains and younger are also more ‘excitable’. They need to be because it aids learning. This also means they’re more vulnerable to addiction, drug side-effects and hormone changes (which also aid in growth and development).
          Comprehensive enough for you?

  • Ovate

    ^you know what this means- :)

  • Oser Chenma

    Pandagon has silenced this letter about the silencing of feminists, signed by 37 of the most distinguished and well-known feminists in the world, by deleting the posting and marginalizing it into a pdf so as not to “cause offence”. What sad irony! It should be reposted immediately.

  • TransWarriorWoman

    “signed by 37 of the most distinguished and well-known feminists in the world.” Is this a joke? When exactly do you mean? Over 40 years ago? These are a bunched of bourgeois, washed-up, bitter second-wavers who are, in today’s society and today’s feminism, completely and totally irrelevant. In a misguided and megalomanical attempt to male themselves seem relevant, they foment hatred, bigotry, exclusion and biological determinism. This is not feminism, it is hate-mongering. These women have nothing positive to contribute, and each one of them should be ashamed for signing a hate letter. They are on the wrong side of history, and most people realize. They are losing big time, and I and countless others will make sure they are exposed as the frauds they are and educate new people that they are hate-mongers and bigots who deserve nothing but marginalization and scorn.

  • Pingback: Kallmann's syndrome life | Forbidden Discourse: The Silencing of Feminist Criticism of “Gender” | Pandagon

  • Ve

    I have no problem with cis women having cis only spaces, the internet, feminism, and other places are not. Of course people found it offensive, the default position for most feminists is that of trans acceptance and equality. Yours, an old cis feminist trans including woman

  • Gayle

    I’m more offended that the statement is “banned.” Let women speak for themselves and disagree if you want. The silencing tactics, including name calling and threats that have emerged since this was released, prove the statement right.

  • Pingback: Inside and Outside Feminism | Trans Scribe

  • Pingback: Why Are 83.4 Percent of Fortune 500 Board Seats Held By Men? | Pandagon

  • Pingback: France moves to ban beauty contests for girls | Pandagon

  • Pingback: They Do Not Dig TERF | Mercia McMahon

  • Pingback: Inside and Outside Feminism | Mercia McMahon

  • BenField

    So let’s campaign for equality by excluding half the population,you have created a paradox which intellectually removes you from the realms of reason and justice.This is ridiculous 3rd wave feminism at its worst and you leave me feeling quite empty at the thought of the awful beige existence that will occur if you ever get your way.Gender is simply a manifestation of the natural differences between men and women,yes some of the stereotypes are off but tell me an area in life where this is not the case?
    Maybe we can all get along after you’ve had your “revenge”?

  • Green Consciousness

    YOU REMOVED THIS POST??? pathetic cowardice and sexist

    • http://www.pandagon.net pandagon

      The original PDF is still there.

%d bloggers like this: