Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Philosophy, in all its guises. => Topic started by: Nearly Sane on March 05, 2017, 06:34:58 PM
-
Is there a difference?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39173398
-
I'm not sure I think that boys now are raised with a sense of entitlement and I don't know if they were back in my day either; but some did think that they were entitled to take whatever they wanted from me. As a mother my main concern for my son is that he will go through life expected to 'man up' and he is far more at risk from mental health issues and violence from his peers than my girls ever will be - I think the pressures on young men are horrendous, just as they are on girls, but in a different way.
And it is this difference that is real - even things like never having to deal with heavy menstrual bleeding is a difference, just as women have never had to deal with erections and wet dreams. I don't like this stuff abut how shit it is to grow up female compared to growing up male because it isn't - maybe it's just that growing up is shit all round.
Where I do agree is this idea that often comes across in interviews with women who have transitioned or who are transitioning that being female is about wardrobe and make-up choices - Kellie Maloney has made comments about how the biggest difference in her life now is the amount she spends on clothes. It seems to be a very narrow definition of what it means to be female. Maybe it is because these people are in the public eye but I think they do trans people a disservice; my friend's daughter isn't remotely glamorous but is clearly female in her identity.
-
I do not have an answer to the question posed as I am neither a woman not a trans sexual so I do not have the necessary life experience. I would say, however, that, in a world in which everybody is treated fairly, compassionately and with respect, labels wouldn't matter.
What actually concerns me is that you apparently can't even raise the question without being demonised.
-
I do not have an answer to the question posed as I am neither a woman not a trans sexual so I do not have the necessary life experience. I would say, however, that, in a world in which everybody is treated fairly, compassionately and with respect, labels wouldn't matter.
What actually concerns me is that you apparently can't even raise the question without being demonised.
pretty much my take and hence when a woman who could be impregnated by rape tells me that someone who cannot be might be different, then is see it as as a difference. Not an a difference that makes the change impossible jyest one where the clue is obvious
-
I do not have an answer to the question posed as I am neither a woman not a trans sexual so I do not have the necessary life experience. I would say, however, that, in a world in which everybody is treated fairly, compassionately and with respect, labels wouldn't matter.
What actually concerns me is that you apparently can't even raise the question without being demonised.
you can't raise any question without being demonized
-
I do not have an answer to the question posed as I am neither a woman not a trans sexual so I do not have the necessary life experience. I would say, however, that, in a world in which everybody is treated fairly, compassionately and with respect, labels wouldn't matter.
What actually concerns me is that you apparently can't even raise the question without being demonised.
So you cannot have an opinion?
-
It's easier for us to have opinions and ask questions than it is for Jenni Murray and Germaine Greer. They will attract hate and possibly lose work because they have.
-
I'm not sure I think that boys now are raised with a sense of entitlement and I don't know if they were back in my day either; but some did think that they were entitled to take whatever they wanted from me. As a mother my main concern for my son is that he will go through life expected to 'man up' and he is far more at risk from mental health issues and violence from his peers than my girls ever will be - I think the pressures on young men are horrendous, just as they are on girls, but in a different way.
And it is this difference that is real - even things like never having to deal with heavy menstrual bleeding is a difference, just as women have never had to deal with erections and wet dreams. I don't like this stuff abut how shit it is to grow up female compared to growing up male because it isn't - maybe it's just that growing up is shit all round.
Where I do agree is this idea that often comes across in interviews with women who have transitioned or who are transitioning that being female is about wardrobe and make-up choices - Kellie Maloney has made comments about how the biggest difference in her life now is the amount she spends on clothes. It seems to be a very narrow definition of what it means to be female. Maybe it is because these people are in the public eye but I think they do trans people a disservice; my friend's daughter isn't remotely glamorous but is clearly female in her identity.
not sure any of that addresses the points that Jenni Murray makes?
-
not sure any of that addresses the points that Jenni Murray makes?
It's where my thoughts went on reading the article. Sorry if you find it irrelevant.
-
It's where my thoughts went on reading the article. Sorry if you find it irrelevant.
interesting, wholly, but finding it irrelevant to the position that Jenni Murray is talking about seems a different choice.
-
I'm assuming that people who believe men have a sense of entitlement believe that is acquired as they grow up. That implies that boys somehow have it easier. I don't believe that to be true in the slightest and I find it irritating. Similarly someone going through a mtf transition aged 30 will have spent more time living as a child then as a man.
I thought it was obvious that I agree with JM re the notion that being a woman is about frocks and the Estee Lauder counter. I don't think I've ever possessed a pair of patent heels and matching clutch.
-
I was discussing this very thing with friends on facebook over the weekend. I think it's undeniable that women and trans women do not share identical experiences, but I would quote Caitlin Moran and suggest that the compassionate thing to do is look at someone and ask 'how much more shit have they had to deal with than me?' whenever questions of oppression and prejudice come up. Anyway, its not a competition... is it? does living as a women beat living with gender dysphoria?
I think the real problem is the idea of 'laying claim to womanhood', as if there is a widely agreed definition of what that is. For instance...
when a woman who could be impregnated by rape tells me that someone who cannot be might be different, then is see it as as a difference.
sure, but we would never use such a difference to deny a woman unable to conceive her 'claim to womanhood' would we? For instance someone who is sterile due to a genetic disorder. No, whilst it may be reasonable to acknowledge the differences in experience between certain groups of women it is ultimately dangerous to try and define what 'being a woman' means.
As for the implied assertion that feminism is centred on the experiences of 'real women' I would simply point to Rhiannon's earlier post (which I wholly agree with) to see how the patriarchy exists far beyond the victimhood of women.
Feminism is a varied philosophy and does not have all the answers. I do think however that positions help by the likes of Jenni Murray and Germaine Greer on the issue of trans women is increasingly old fashioned. At best its proprietorial at worst its divisive and dangerous.
-
Many valid points, Samuel, but surely you are caricaturing the position that Jenni Murray is taking here, in that she was expressing concern that some of the trans people she had met were being more accepting of a patriarchal attitude to women and where therefore undermining that struggle?
-
Apparently, Jenni Murray didn't write the title, which has the interesting phrase 'don't call yourself a real woman', and also the idea that having lived as a male disqualifies you from being a woman. I don't really know what 'real woman' means, nor who is going to decide this.
The comments below follow well-trodden paths - there are those who recommend a biological approach, in other words, a man has a penis, and a woman has a vagina. This seems to ignore the social nature of identity - I don't inspect people's genitals, actually. In other words, 'men' and 'women' do a kind of self-presentation.
I suppose some women are angry that trans women want to be treated as women. It doesn't bother me, really, nor the idea that trans men want to live as men.
But it is all very interesting, as it raises many issues about sex/gender, and identity itself. There seems to be a kind of historical sequence, women fought for equality, gays and lesbians had to throw off centuries of prejudice, now trans people are doing the same. I wonder if there is anything more to come?
-
Hi Nearly Sane
as the recent furore over the photo shoot by Emma Watson has highlighted, feminism is about empowering choice, not denying it. Is Beyoncé a feminist icon? many think she is specifically because she uses the way she dresses and her sexuality as sources of power.
Jenni Murray's attitude fails to appreciate what it means to a trans woman to finally be free to express her true identity. Clothes and make up are a big part of that empowerment.
The debate over whether or not clothes and makeup are too attached to the patriarchy is actually a separate issue altogether and applies to many other areas of life. I don't see Jenni Murray arguing that married heterosexual women are playing into the patriarchy by entering into the incredibly loaded institution of marriage (unless se has, I haven't done the research).
-
Yes, I thought it was unfair to attack trans women for being conventional, when tons of 'real women' are conventional, i.e. shave their legs, and buy nice clothes.
There have been attacks on women like this, for example, by Dworkin, who wrote a strange book called 'Right Wing Women', lambasting women who cooperate with the patriarchy. And some even attacked women who have sex with men.
Surely, there is a bottom line where we respect other people's identity, and the ways in which they wish to present this. As the Germans say, Selbstdarstellung. Or as Judith Butler argues, sex/gender are performances. I like the variety. But I realize that sex/gender can make people very angry.
Interesting that trans men don't seem to get people as angry, well, I haven't noticed it. Who cares if someone wants to live as a man sans dick?
-
Mmm whether Jenni Murray hashas not argued for something at is seen as equivalent is a tu quoque fallacy. And let's be careful about the issue of Emma Watson choosing to do something and someone supporting a uniform.
In reply to wiiginhall, I think it's simplistic to portray this as women angry that trans woman want to be treated as women, I see none of that in Jenni Murray's comments. I think wevare currently in a situation where social change is outstripping the ability to talk about it sensibly. Hence the nonsense about Germaine Greer being no platformed.
-
Yes, I thought it was unfair to attack trans women for being conventional, when tons of 'real women' are conventional, i.e. shave their legs, and buy nice clothes.
There have been attacks on women like this, for example, by Dworkin, who wrote a strange book called 'Right Wing Women', lambasting women who cooperate with the patriarchy. And some even attacked women who have sex with men.
Surely, there is a bottom line where we respect other people's identity, and the ways in which they wish to present this. As the Germans say, Selbstdarstellung. Or as Judith Butler argues, sex/gender are performances. I like the variety. But I realize that sex/gender can make people very angry.
Interesting that trans men don't seem to get people as angry, well, I haven't noticed it. Who cares if someone wants to live as a man sans dick?
Again it reads to me that Murray's comments were about supporting an enforcement by means of a uniform of the patriarchy, not the choice itself. As to the difference between trans male/female surely the idea is that if you have lived as a man you have been inherently benefitting from conservative social attitude?
-
That's a fair point about lacking the vocabulary to talk about it. I saw a film recently about trans girls, and the little boys (as were), were just saying 'I'm a girl', not 'I want to be a girl'. At first this seemed to dumbfound their parents, but eventually they became supportive, and even found a school which was.
-
That's a fair point about lacking the vocabulary to talk about it. I saw a film recently about trans girls, and the little boys (as were), were just saying 'I'm a girl', not 'I want to be a girl'. At first this seemed to dumbfound their parents, but eventually they became supportive, and even found a school which was.
I think that's where a lot of discomfort comes from. I am happy to celebrate the variety with you, but we have a long way to go to translate binary language into anything that isn't hopelessly confused. I note that my old university has a candidate for rector that wants any movement to non binary pronouns.
-
This article has some interesting points about 'real women', and also documents examples of transphobia in feminist groups and individuals. Some trans women seem to report that maximum abuse towards them comes from feminists.
http://www.thefeministwire.com/2015/03/real-women-a-critique-of-feminist-transphobia/
-
As to the difference between trans male/female surely the idea is that if you have lived as a man you have been inherently benefitting from conservative social attitude?
True as far as it goes. But I think it emphasises the benefits of living as a man above the suffering of living with gender dysphoria. An unnecessary hierarchy that smacks of bias rooted in prejudice.
Do you think Jenni Murray is right Nearly?
p.s. No platforming is moronic, and fair cop of my tu quoque fallacy. Guilty as charged.
-
I was making a specific point about why there might be a perceived difference between trans men/women. I think acknowleging differences in experiences is not necessarily creating a hierarchy.
Do I think Jenni Murray is right? Mmm I am not entirely sure we can talk about right/wrong here. As raised earlier, i am struggling with how we talk about it, and the language seems blunt.
-
This article has some interesting points about 'real women', and also documents examples of transphobia in feminist groups and individuals. Some trans women seem to report that maximum abuse towards them comes from feminists.
http://www.thefeministwire.com/2015/03/real-women-a-critique-of-feminist-transphobia/
I can see how this happens. If you see that men are the same even if they want to be a woman, or feel they are a woman (note I don't know of anyway of expressing this which doesn't trivialise a trans persons experience), then they will always be in some sense a man - not saying that is right. Also the article itself stresses the difference in experience and that seens crucial.
-
Where I do agree is this idea that often comes across in interviews with women who have transitioned or who are transitioning that being female is about wardrobe and make-up choices - Kellie Maloney has made comments about how the biggest difference in her life now is the amount she spends on clothes. It seems to be a very narrow definition of what it means to be female. Maybe it is because these people are in the public eye but I think they do trans people a disservice; my friend's daughter isn't remotely glamorous but is clearly female in her identity.
I get the impression that Jenni Murray's argument stems from a strong reaction to one particular trans-gender priest she interviewed. If what JM reports is true, then the priest in question did seem to have a rather petty attittude to what being a priest or woman really entailed. But the petty attitudes of one individual do not constitute the basis of an argument to dismiss the problems of gender dysphoria.
-
I get the impression that Jenni Murray's argument stems from a strong reaction to one particular trans-gender priest she interviewed. If what JM reports is true, then the priest in question did seem to have a rather petty attittude to what being a priest or woman really entailed. But the petty attitudes of one individual do not constitute the basis of an argument to dismiss the problems of gender dysphoria.
I think we have to be careful here. The article covers two individuals who Murray cites, one of whom was happy to support a clothes policy of explicit sexism being enforced. Further I am not sure that her position amounts in any way to dismissing 'the problems of gender dysphoria'.
-
Wtf is a 'real woman'?
I don't even know what a 'conventional' woman is; I have a couple of piercings and I prefer biker jackets to cashmere twinsets, but I use deodorant and shave my legs (ever tried wearing tights with unshaved legs?) so where do I fall? Yet I do feel frustration at post trans women who in interviews talk about the frocks and the make-up like that is where womanhood begins and ends.
Womanhood isn't about the frocks and the slap - they are forms of self expression, just as is rejecting them. And ok so lippy is supposed to represent wet labia but I'm not altogether sure any woman find that a consideration when at the No7 counter in Boot's - pretty much anything can be fetishised.
So what is being a woman? I could characterise my experience through all the things that have happened to me, the expectations, getting boobs, groping, bleeding, not wanting to get pregnant, sex I didn't want, marriage, getting pregnant, birth, failing to breastfeed, divorce... but those aren't who I am and I refuse to either be a victim to my womanhood or feel that there is any superiority in it. These things have shaped my life, yes, but they aren't me.
I'm at home in myself as a woman and I guess that is what all of us aim for, being at home in our identity. I don't have the language to express what that means beyond that though.
-
Exactly Rhiannon. If women's experiences are so diverse then I'd argue that experience is no starting point to make a value judgement on what being a woman means.
I appreciate the frustration about the frocks a slap stuff but surely that is a (possibly) naive expression of identity by people who have had to deny that identity, often for years. In short I think we should give those people a break.
Also there are plenty of examples of feminists choosing to use those very tools to define their womanhood and gain power in them.
And Nearly, I know what you mean about the language. It is blunt.
-
There seems to be a spectrum of views about man/woman. At one end, you have the biological determinists, who argue that a man has a penis and a woman a vagina, and that's that. This is often used to attack trans people.
At the other end, there is the whole argument about social construction, which used to be said about gender but is now also said about sex. The most extreme here, I suppose, argue that 'woman' and 'man' are fictions, also the idea that gender is a masquerade.
Somewhere in the middle there is a kind of 'social self-representation' idea, that men and women present themselves in certain ways, e.g. clothes, hair, make-up, and so on.
There is also the issue of personal history, i.e. experiences that we have gone through as men and women.
As NS said a while ago, we don't have a language really to describe trans people, but we don't really have a language to describe sex/gender. It's striking that 'gender' itself is now used to describe sex identity, which maybe shows how it is all changing fast, and categories melting.
-
Exactly Rhiannon. If women's experiences are so diverse then I'd argue that experience is no starting point to make a value judgement on what being a woman means.
I appreciate the frustration about the frocks a slap stuff but surely that is a (possibly) naive expression of identity by people who have had to deny that identity, often for years. In short I think we should give those people a break.
Also there are plenty of examples of feminists choosing to use those very tools to define their womanhood and gain power in them.
And Nearly, I know what you mean about the language. It is blunt.
Again I think we need to be careful. I read Murray as saying that support for a patriarchal attitude as to how women should dress is wrong. I think she is wrong to caricaterise that as how all trans women think/act. As already pointed put by Rhiannon, it just isn't the case.
-
My feeling, rightly or wrongly, is that when trans women put the emphasis on the dresses and the make-up and the personal grooming they are putting what it is to be a woman in a box. It shrinks femaleness down to a love of frippery. I guess for them it is something that they want to celebrate, but I find it quite small and sad. And maybe when this kind of attitude is expressed it plays to the stereotype not just of femaleness but of transgender (which Murray seems to be reinforcing in her article) and I think it diminishes that too, although I've not gone through it, so maybe I don't have the right to comment on that.
-
Quite right nearly. I suppose that is what object to.
I thing you and wiggs are also right that we simply don't have the language for this. I have a vague memory of a story of a Native American tribe that treated homosexuals and people with gender dysphorea with great respect, assigning them a special role in their communities. Something along the lines of them having rare insight into the perspectives of both men and women. In our case the strict binary man/woman is problematic. Perhaps if there was a better defined and established place for trans people they wouldn't feel compelled to be trans at all. They wouldn't feel required to fit one or the other.
-
My feeling, rightly or wrongly, is that when trans women put the emphasis on the dresses and the make-up and the personal grooming they are putting what it is to be a woman in a box. It shrinks femaleness down to a love of frippery. I guess for them it is something that they want to celebrate, but I find it quite small and sad. And maybe when this kind of attitude is expressed it plays to the stereotype not just of femaleness but of transgender (which Murray seems to be reinforcing in her article) and I think it diminishes that too, although I've not gone through it, so maybe I don't have the right to comment on that.
I think that is allowed Rhiannon. All the more reason for the feminist community to welcome trans women and be willing to show them all the things about living as a woman that they missed whilst trapped in the wrong bilological construct.
-
Sorry... 'allowed' sounds horrible! I meant it to be understandable/reasonable :-[
-
I think that is allowed Rhiannon. All the more reason for the feminist community to welcome trans women and be willing to show them all the things about living as a woman that they missed whilst trapped in the wrong bilological construct.
But I don't even know what those things are, Sam.
And no, allowed is fine. :)
-
Just as aside, it's worth considering that Jenni Murray is saying these things from her position as a privileged white woman. That doesn't invalidate her argument but it is perhaps a reason for her words being given so much attention... that and her role with woman's hour 🤔
-
Just as aside, it's worth considering that Jenni Murray is saying these things from her position as a privileged white woman. That doesn't invalidate her argument but it is perhaps a reason for her words being given so much attention... that and her role with woman's hour 🤔
I think she is perceived to speak 'for women', both through her role on WH and also as a writer on women's issues - I know she's written on the menopause for example.
And as she presents WH does she therefore speak wholeheartedly for trans women? It would seem not. The BBC have apparently given her a warning.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/06/bbc-faces-calls-veteran-broadcaster-dame-jenni-murray-disciplined/
-
Just read the response by stonewall. Seems pretty fair to me
-
I agree.
If I'm talking to other women the only things I know we will kind of have in common are our experiences related to our reproductive systems -possibly including periods, disorders, conception, pregnancy, the menopause - and not all women experience those things, but remain women having female experiences.
-
The shortened version of new approaches to gender, is that it's identity not biology. And identity is partly socialized, and partly one's own inner world. (Although you can argue that that is also socialized).