pro-uterus-agenda:
appropriately-inappropriate:
pro-uterus-agenda:
appropriately-inappropriate:
alexandrachenkova:
appropriately-inappropriate:
alexandrachenkova:
appropriately-inappropriate:
alexandrachenkova:
radbeef:
alexandrachenkova:
confirmed-terfs:
shit-genderists-say:
sapphicintherealworld:
aight i mean if terfs want a definition of women that doesnt include the word “women” in it and isnt transphobic here yall go
women (n.) a personality trait and mindset, and/or a way in which someone was raised/socialized
so whats the next argument
holy fuck
Op is 200% correct girls are sold into sexual slavery, endure genital mutilations, and are married off as children to grown men bc of their mindset
…that’s only certain cultures though
this idea of a universal womanhood BASED ON GENITALS is really fucked because it assumes a (white, western) binarist concept of gender and gender roles
little girls who are sold into sexual slavery etc. aren’t sold because they have vaginas, it’s because their physical characteristics are culturally associated with a misogynistic concept of inferiority
(i.e. the second part of OP’s definition)
gender is a social construct and has real-world implications but that doesn’t mean we didn’t make it the fuck up
If we didn’t make it the fuck up it wouldn’t vary from culture to culture
genitals have nothing to do with gender
we just think they do because of (one specific) societal tradition
also your blog is utter garbage and you are a garbage person
have a lovely day :)
Excuse me? “little girls who are sold into sexual slavery etc. aren’t sold because they have vaginas, it’s because their physical characteristics are culturally associated with a misogynistic concept of inferiority”
Are you actually fucking kidding me. What. I can’t even imagine the type of cognitive dissonance required to pretend that sexual slavery and sex trafficking have nothing to do with sexual characteristics.
It has nothing to do with sex based oppression, guys, it just so happens that straight men who consume and profit off the sex trade like the OTHER"physical characteristics that are culturally associated with…inferiority" and never EVER consider their vaginas.
So does that mean that women without those ‘physical characteristics’, ie muscly women for example, those that have ‘physical characteristics’ associated with ‘superiority’ would never be raped or sold into sexual slavery? Could all those little girls say “I reject these physical characteristics and actually I identify as a man” and the traffickers would just back off? I mean, after all, they weren’t kidnapped because they had vaginas right?
Are you even listening to yourself?
Muscly women who have vaginas can, of course, be raped or sold into sexual slavery. By “physical characteristics” I mean vaginas, as well. But it isn’t just little cis girls who are trafficked; little cis boys and men are as well, though arguably not as frequently, and little cis boys aren’t subjected to child marriage That’s because the little girls are read and present as female/inferior/vulnerable, not because they have vaginas; if that were true, no little cis boy or trans girl would ever be raped, simply because they have a penis. Identifying as male doesn’t save you from being sexually assaulted. But if you PRESENT as male, it reduces the risk, not mitigates it entirely. Little trans boys who are sexually assaulted are not gonna be at less risk if they present as female. If they present as male, that reduces the risk of their being trafficked, but if someone is specifically targeting little boys, that line of conjecture goes out the window.
My point is that somewhere along the 10,000 year history of humankind, a group of us decided that a) there are two different genders based on two different sets of genitals, and each must look a certain way and that b) it was cool to treat one of those genders like crap. AFAB people did not spring forth from the earth, ready to be villified and assaulted. We made that shit up. There are matriarchal societies where women are privileged over men, and everyone still has the requisite genitals which you describe. Trans men WHO PASS AS MEN are at less risk of sexual assault because at first glance they are assumed (correctly) to be men. Trans women who perform femininity/pass as women are at higher risk of sexual assault because they appear at first glance to be women.
“That’s because the little girls are read and present as female/inferior/vulnerable, not because they have vaginas”
So you’re saying that little girls are inferior and are treated horrifically as a result?
And that somehow, the presence of boys in trafficking negates the argument that females are disproportionately targeted?
Boys are rarely prostituted, infrequently sold into slavery (sexual or otherwise), rarely seen as “burdens to the family” (as in China and India and Pakistan and Sudan) and are hardly ever aborted for the crime of “presenting as inferior” in utero.
“My point is that somewhere along the 10,000 year history of humankind, a group of us decided that a) there are two different genders based on two different sets of genitals, and each must look a certain way and that b) it was cool to treat one of those genders like crap.”
Gee and I wonder why that could be. What does every female in the historical record have in common? What could those 10,000 year old females have all shared?
There’s this quote about controlling the means of production–in that if you control that, you control society. No surprise, then, that “somewhere along the line”, males started taking an interest in the means of (re)production. After all, if you don’t keep wifey under lock and key (often literally), how do you know the kid she’s feeding is really your own?
There’s a reason men care(d) about their brides being virginal (nobody’s been here ergo she’s mine) and about having heirs (nobody’s been here ergo it’s mine and safe to leave my $$$ to).
Cmon now.
no, I’m saying that since they present as female, they are read as inferior because of misogyny, not that they actually are inferior. same goes for trans and intersex women who don’t have vaginas per se, but still present as female/feminine and are therefore subject to misogyny.
and i’m not ignoring the fact that young girls are more often trafficked/sold than boys. i’m simply saying that these things ALSO happen to boys, the majority of whom have penises, and so to bring up sex trafficking as the most reliable indicator of “sex based” oppression is maybe not the best lynchpin of your argument.
and re: historical misogyny: NOT EVERY SOCIETY EQUATES GENITALS TO GENDER, BRO. especially non-western societies. trans women and men and what we would today call “nonbinary” people have literally ALWAYS been around all over the world, and frequently accepted as their stated gender, so to say that afab people the world over have always been subject to misogyny SOLELY BECAUSE THEY HAVE VAGINAS is a) wildly inaccurate and b) incredibly eurocentric.
“since they present as female, they are read as inferior because of misogyny, not that they actually are inferior”
And since female is an innate biological trait, it’s nothing that can be presented in to.
“ame goes for trans and intersex women who don’t have vaginas per se, but still present as female/feminine and are therefore subject to misogyny.”
The intersex community have repeatedly asked to be left out of your false analogy; their medical issue is not the same as an assumed identity.
Furthermore, you’ll notice that trans women aren’t harassed because they’re feminine females–they’re harassed for being feminine MALES.
That’s not misogyny, that’s homophobia.
Ever wonder why so many trans women have an origin story that includes a repressive or regressive environment growing up? Laverne Cox–poor, religious, Deep South, just one example amongst many.
That’s no different than any boy from a conservative community who got called faggot for wanting to join cheer instead of football. Only HE doesn’t call it a gender identity.
“’m simply saying that these things ALSO happen to boys, the majority of whom have penises, and so to bring up sex trafficking as the most reliable indicator of “sex based” oppression is maybe not the best lynchpin of your argument.”
Okay then. Let’s use some other metric. Would you prefer:
-males are not the victims of sex-selected abortions (India, Pakistan)
-males are not the victims of parental abandonment (China)
-male infants are not raped in neo-natal wards to ‘cure’ HIV (Sub-Saharan Africa)
-male children are not subject to female genital mutilation, from clitorodectomy to infibulation (Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East, Levant)
-male children are not subject to breast ironing (Equatorial Africa)
-male children are not forced into marriage before puberty (India, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Middle East, South and Central America, the whole wide world)
-male children are not denied the right to access education because they’re menstruating (Africa, Middle East, Asia) or because they’re not worth the investment (South and Central America)
And all that just before the age of sixteen.
So, do you need more examples, or are those enough?
“re: historical misogyny: NOT EVERY SOCIETY EQUATES GENITALS TO GENDER, BRO”
Really? And in caps, too! My goodness, what an extraordinary claim! Which, by definition, REQUIRES EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE TO PROVE.
Which societies are those, precisely?
“trans women and men and what we would today call “nonbinary” people have literally ALWAYS been around all over the world, and frequently accepted as their stated gender”
Incorrect.
Cultures that have a third gender tend to be among the most culturally strict in observing gender roles. Those American Indigenous tribes you like to trot out for rhetorical Diversity Points? Every single one that had a third sex, be it Two Spirit or another name, was extremely observant of Male and Female behaviours. The Lakota, to name one, had a “third gender”. They also forbid women from hunting, and men were exclusively hunters. So what do you do when a male–and it was generally a male–doesn’t fit the Hunter/Warrior social class?
You have three options:
Ignore him and let him do his thing (unacceptable, breaks the social convention)
Call him a female and let her do her thing (unacceptable, breaks the social norms)
Call him a Two-Spirit, create a social caste juuuuuust for them, and so the social order is preserved
If they were truly so open-minded as you argue, why is it that they’re all “add-on” sexes? There’s the Hijra (an “add on” gender for males who assume feminine behaviours, many of whom are homosexual). There’s the Two Spirit–same deal.
So what you’ve noticed is that trans individuals tend to increase when the social conventions are particularly strict and forcibly adhered to, and that a term for them is created in collectivist societies where exclusion isn’t an option but transgression isn’t tolerated.
What you see as ACCEPTANCE, is actually really othering.
But nice try!
a) trans women are female, full stop, and if they are harassed it is because they look visibly trans and/or because they present as women, not because they are gay. to equate transmisogyny to homophobia is erasure.
b) amab infants are not subject to those specific crimes, yes, but it’s because little afab infants are ASSIGNED the gender of female, and are therefore subject to misogyny. a newborn doesn’t even know how to move their own muscles, let alone what a gender is. notions of gender are really only solidified in a child’s mind by the age of three. ergo, gender is not immutable and only linked to sex, but is instead socially imposed. if it were not, all infants with vaginas would be subject to the crimes you describe, no young child would ever be confused about their gender or gender presentation, and again, gender would not vary from culture to culture.
c) can someone who is native american/south asian speak to the above characterization of two-spirit people/hijras?
“a) trans women are female, full stop”
How can trans women be female? If they were female, what would they need to transition to? If they’re female, what are they transitioning from?
If they’re female, why don’t we hear about trans women suffering infibulation, or breast ironing, or denial of education at menarche, or sex selective abortion, or rape as a war crime, or forced marriage to a man three or four times their age?
How can a trans woman be female when their very name for themselves used to be MaleToFemale?
Furthermore, an extraordinary claim (“trans women are female full stop”) requires extraordinary evidence.
What, exactly, makes trans women female other than their say-so?
“and if they are harassed it is because they look visibly trans and/or because they present as women, not because they are gay.”
You are aware that in most places on this planet, people don’t even know what a trans woman is, right? They just penalize people they see as Twinks, or flaming gay men.
No surprise, then, that even Trans icons like Marsha Johnson and Silvia Riviera straddled that line between “trans woman” and “drag queen”–and both, immediately prior to their deaths, reiterated that they were Very Feminine Men.
Until recently, those two communities were very closely entwined. Don’t be so ignorant of your so-called community’s history, honey, it just makes you look a little dumb.
“to equate transmisogyny to homophobia is erasure.”
Not if both stem from the same perspective.
After all, what is the most common reason that males who kill trans sex workers say? “I saw he had a dick and I’m not gay”.
So, they weren’t killing them for their femininity but because of their sex and their internalized homophobia.
“b) amab infants are not subject to those specific crimes, yes, but it’s because little afab infants are ASSIGNED the gender of female, and are therefore subject to misogyny.”
So you’re saying that if a female infant–you can say female, you know, it’s not a dirty word–isn’t “assigned”, they escape it?
And pray tell, who “assigns” this? Is there a tribunal? A panel of judges? What is the adjudication criteria?
What, exactly, makes sure that ALL females, world wide, are a) “assigned female”, even in places where maternal post-natal care consists of squatting in a field and taking a Tylenol later if she’s fortunate and b) what are the traits that would lead someone to assign the sex female to this infant?
“a newborn doesn’t even know how to move their own muscles, let alone what a gender is. notions of gender are really only solidified in a child’s mind by the age of three”
Curiously, that’s also three years into a socialization that sees girls given baby dolls while boys are given Lego. That’s not a demonstration of an “innate gender identity”, it’s a manifestation of years of gender indoctrination and “boys don’t do that” and “girls can’t do this”.
Don’t believe me? Read up on all those veeeeery young kindergarten transitioners, and hear what their parents say about the “clues”.
“My daughter Jazz loooooooves pink and playing with Barbies”, says the nice suburban mother who can’t wrap her head around the idea that a colour preference and emotive play doesn’t make her son a daughter. “My son Chaz looooooooves girls and was a total tomboy”, says the wealthy mother who can’t reconcile her daughter being a lesbian and would prefer a “normal” son instead.
Funny how that pans out, hmm, especially when something like 80%+ of gender non-conforming kids go on to be lesbians or gay men.
“ergo, gender is not immutable and only linked to sex, but is instead socially imposed”
Yes, that’s what radical feminists mean when we say that gender is socially constructed. Careful, you’re starting to sound a little TERF-y.
“if it were not, all infants with vaginas would be subject to the crimes you describe”
Incorrect. Those crimes I described happen to female children based on their cultural context–not all females worldwide will experience infibulation, for example, but all people who experience infibulation worldwide are female.
See how that works? Some things are simply reliant on biology.
“no young child would ever be confused about their gender or gender presentation”
You’re joking, right? The West as we know it has become one of the most pervasively gender-segregated regions in the world, to the point where there are pink and blue Kleenex boxes, because apparently Man Snot is Ultra Heavy Duty or something.
So what happens when a female decides she likes cars, after a lifetime of being told that cars are boy things?
There’s a reason 80% of “trans” kids are just gender non-confirming lesbian and gay children, and it’s because children are currently being fed a message by liberal politics that if you like activities for “the opposite gender”, you miiiiiight be one.
Of course that leads to confusion. How could it not?
“white western binarist concept of gender” omg please make white feminists stop talking about woc forever please stop blaming little brown girls for their own oppression holy shit why have i not deleted my account yet please do some research on sexism in south asia pre colonization please don’t get all your opinions from tumblr omg
I’m sitting here dying. I mean, damn. Second hand embarrassment is just making me cringe, and I’m only mixed race.
I can’t imagine what my unmixed readers are thinking.
you stayed so calm and handled it so well though. i was literally shaking while reading this.
i don’t even know where to start with this mess. i can’t even fathom the kind of mental gymnastics it takes to believe “little girls aren’t oppressed for having vaginas. they’re oppressed for being assigned female at the birth” because, of course, doctors flip a coin when the baby is in utero to determine whether it’s male or female, it has nothing to do with its body.
i come from a place in india (punjab) where when a baby with a penis (someone please kill me for writing that) is born, there are huge celebrations. you have parties, you distribute sweets amongst all your friends and family and the entire village. when a vagina baby is born, people come to your house and cry like it’s a fucking wake.
also, white genderists love to trot out the existance of hijra in india as proof that “trans was acceptable until the whites got there!!!” failing to realise that a huge amount of hijra are actually intersex. the rest are transwomen. it doesn’t include trans men because trans men are virtually non-existant in india because females or AFAB or vagina people or whatever the fuck we have to call ourselves now don’t get the luxury of identifying out of our oppression. hmm, i wonder why that is.
telling a little brown girl, “hey that sucks your parents married you off to a man 4x your age, it wouldn’t have happened if you had been wearing a kurta pajuma instead of salwar kameez” is victim blaming bullshit. how do people not understand that?
Oh shit!
I’m sorry–I hope I wasn’t out of line with that Hijra reference, then. I’m mixed Latina, so i’m totally running off of academic information. If you have something to add, I’d be happy to add it, or edit it, or whatever.
In any case, I shake like a leaf with physical confrontations, but online discussions allow for a bit more objectivity and a LOT more distance.
But it’s fucking infuriating, I won’t lie. I come from a country where people go for sex tourism–like Rush Limbaugh, that scum of the earth. It’s reprehensible, and those girls are young. Nobody’s working in a brothel barely post-pubescent because they identify as female.
Kids aren’t denied food because they identify as female. They aren’t denied school because they identify as female.
They’re denied those resources because they ARE female.
This is the height of white privilege, to sit online and talk about How Hard They Have It, when you and I and every other beige-to-blackberry hued woman on our feeds is ready to commit justifiable homicide because we know, or have seen, what it’s like to be female in a world that sees you as a burden and not a blessing.
I fully admit I’m more fortunate than most, because my mom is white and I moved to the “First World” a while ago. But I remember seeing little girls toting their baby siblings around the barrio barefoot, while their brothers got pressed and starched school uniforms, and it infuriates me.
So apparently I was a lot less chill about it than I thought