[Sonsowey]

The New Yorker writes about why some feminists do not want to accept trans women as real women, and do not want them using women's restrooms or attending women-onlyevents. Radical Feminist events have even been cancelled due to protests by trans activists. One radical feminist convention wasa ctually held in secret partially due to threat received from trans people. The radical feminists even released a document stating how alarmed they were at the violent threats they received from these trans people. Quoting a feminist from the 70's:

"I will not call a male “she”; thirty-two years of suffering in this androcentric society, and of surviving, have earned me the title “woman”; one walk down the street by a male transvestite, five minutes of his being hassled (which he may enjoy), and then he dares, he dares to think he understands our pain? No, in our mothers’ names and in our own, we must not call him sister...

Trans women say that they are women because they feel female, that, as some put it, they have women’s brains in men’s bodies. Radical feminists reject the notion of a “female brain.” They believe that if women think and act differently from men it’s because society forces them to, requiring them to be sexually attractive, nurturing, and deferential. In the words of Lierre Keith, a speaker at Radfems Respond, femininity is “ritualized submission.”

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/0...n-2?src=mp

Steve Sailer gets a kick out of this, noting:

"There’s a certain historic irony and inevitability to lesbian feminists being routed by the only people claiming to be women who are even more ferociously masculine than themselves: individuals with actual Y-chromosomes."

http://www.unz.com/isteve/world-war-t-ne...dominance/

Its very complicated for all these different factionsvto get along...

[d-d-m]

The irony and hypocrisy is just too good!

[Dr. Howard]

here's hoping for social justice civil war.

[Glaucon]

(07-29-2014 02:39 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

here's hoping for social justice civil war.

Can you picture a fat feminist with a gun?

[Dr. Howard]

(07-29-2014 02:40 PM)Glaucon Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 02:39 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

here's hoping for social justice civil war.

Can you picture a fat feminist with a gun?

ha! not 'real' civil war but internet/court/protest/shaming civil war, turning their twitter handles on each other.

[Glaucon]

(07-29-2014 02:51 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 02:40 PM)Glaucon Wrote:  

(07-29-2014 02:39 PM)Dr. Howard Wrote:  

here's hoping for social justice civil war.

Can you picture a fat feminist with a gun?

ha! not 'real' civil war but internet/court/protest/shaming civil war, turning their twitter handles on each other.

Ah, that's just noise...

[Sonsowey]

From the New Yorker article:
(TERF stands for “trans-exclusionary radical feminist.” The term can be useful for making a distinction with radical feminists who do not share the same position, but those at whom it is directed consider it a slur.)

Abusive posts proliferated on Twitter and, especially, Tumblr. One read, “/kill/terfs 2K14.” Another suggested, “how about ‘slowly and horrendously murder terfs in saw-like torture machines and contraptions’ 2K14.” A young blogger holding a knife posted a selfie with the caption “Fetch me a terf.” Such threats have become so common that radical-feminist Web sites have taken to cataloguing them. “It’s aggrieved entitlement,” Lierre Keith told me. “They are so angry that we will not see them as women.”

[Ziltoid]

(07-29-2014 01:50 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

"I will not call a male “she”; thirty-two years of suffering in this androcentric society, and of surviving, have earned me the title “woman”; one walk down the street by a male transvestite, five minutes of his being hassled (which he may enjoy), and then he dares, he dares to think he understands our pain? No, in our mothers’ names and in our own, we must not call him sister...

If being a woman was actually such a horrible affair, then these deranged broads would be encouraging and applauding men for chopping their dicks off and trying to "transition".
They badly don't want to admit the reality of female privilege and how much better women have it in society.

[Foolsgo1d]

Someone on here called it a few months back. Feminists vs trans people is the next war and feminists might lose. Afterall, they don't want to be seen upsetting people now do they?

[Sonsowey]

Feminists "losing" that "battle" just means accepting trans people as legitimate women. Which seems incredibly likely. I mean, have you ever met a feminist who wasnt pro trans acceptance? It seems like these feminists rejecting trans people are a vocal academic minority.

All the feminists I know are pro everythibg that is not straight cis etc

[Wutang]

Would a woman who wanted to get surgery to become a man start getting accused of possessing "male privilege" after the procedure was complete?

If trans-gender people are a thing, then what about trans-ethnic? If some white boy in the US decided that he reeeaaly likes anime and Nintendo and that he was actually Japanese at heart, could he start calling himself Japanese or is he just "appropriating" (to use a word SJWs love) Japanese culture? If a black person wanted to be white, is he just being self-hating due to the oppressive white Christian male patriarchy or are the people hating on him just being "transethincphobic". Would he be considered to have white privilege once he decided to come out as white?

As insane as radfems are, at least they are consistent in their positions so they typically don't end up heading towards all the absurd conclusions I was using above as examples of modern feminist/SWPL batshittery. To pick something less crazy, look at the positions about female sexuality and sex work occupied by both radfem/2nd wave feminists and contrast it with positions held by the new generation Jezebel/XOjane reading feminists you see today. The former state that all porn, all matter of sex work is degrading and objectifying towards women - an extreme view but one that is consistent across the board. With the latter, they chatter on about being sex positive and the right to become porn stars or send nudes to whoever they want since "it's my body, my choice" but then when there's a backlash to their actions then they go off about "slut shamming" - what you are allowed to have your opinions but other people aren't or when they get pregnant they demand that the state take on the burden they have placed on the shoulders on society - but I thought you were a strong independent woman that doesn't need any man, with the state being the biggest man of them all? The most absurd and contradictory of their complaints is how one moment they'll be talking about how empowered they feel when they do anything sexual but when they get sexual attention then they suddenly shrivel?

Radfems start off with premises that I find idiotic but then they at least mostly logically draw the conclusions that would follow from these premises if they were true. The 3rd generation feminists on the hand just throw a bunch of randomly unconnected ideas - mostly whatever the trendy SWPL progressive cause of the month together into a huge mish-mash of intellectual mush which leads to all their maddening webs of speculation on privilege, shaming, gaslighting and other strange ideas that sometimes conflict and contradict with their foundational ideas. This new generation of feminists have little structure in their thoughts - the one constant that I can identify is that they want to do whatever they want and at the same time they still want you and everyone else to both assist in what they want to do AND they want you to pay when things go wrong.

[Wutang]

Reading parts of the New Yorker article is giving me a headache:

"Russell, a lesbian who grew up in a conservative Baptist family in Southern California, began transitioning to male as a student at Humboldt State University, and was embraced by gender-rights groups on campus. She started taking hormones and changed her name....

at one point during her transition, she hooked up with a middle-aged trans woman. Russell knew that she was supposed to think of herself as a man with a woman, but, she said, “It didn’t feel right, and I was scared.” Eventually, she proclaimed herself a woman again, and a radical feminist, though it meant being ostracized by many of her friends. She is now engaged to a woman; someone keyed the word “dyke” on her fiancée’s car."

"Raymond produced “The Transsexual Empire: The Making of the She-Male.” Raymond was a lesbian ex-nun who became a doctoral student of the radical-feminist theologian Mary Daly, at Boston College."

"The most dramatic change in the perception of transgenderism can be seen in academia. Particularly at liberal-arts colleges, students are now routinely asked which gender pronoun they would prefer to be addressed by: choices might include “ze,” “ou,” “hir,” “they,” or even “it.”

[Bacchus]

@Wutang- I can see how it could be hard to read, but those are the parts that made me laugh. However, I find the nonsense being spoken back and forth between the groups hilarious.

Quote:

There are young transgender-critical radical feminists, like Heath Atom Russell and Rachel Ivey, aged twenty-four, who was one of the organizers of Radfems Respond, but they are the first to admit that they’re a minority. “If I were to say in a typical women’s-studies class today, ‘Female people are oppressed on the basis of reproduction,’ I would get called out,” Ivey says. Other students, she adds, would ask, “What about women who are male?”

That might be an exaggeration, but only a slight one. The members of the board of the New York Abortion Access Fund, an all-volunteer group that helps to pay for abortions for those who can’t afford them, are mostly young women; Alison Turkos, the group’s co-chair, is twenty-six. In May, they voted unanimously to stop using the word “women” when talking about people who get pregnant, so as not to exclude trans men. “We recognize that people who identify as men can become pregnant and seek abortions,” the group’s new Statement of Values says.

In what universe can you call a woman male? These experiments in language make me laugh because no normal mental process could possibly connect the two. It would be like talking about round squares. And yet, these people exist in society and are constantly spreading awareness. I could see how they would be infuriating to others.

The whole thing is a contest to see who is the bigger victim- ugly women or gender freaks. This debate should not be an issue, except now that your victim status corresponds to how righteous of a person you are, so it's a. And right now, the trannies are winning. It's also producing some great copy, as seen throughout this story.

[Sonsowey]

Bacchus - the idea of a "male woman" relies on considering "male" and "female" terms for biological sex but "man" and "woman" terms for socially constructed gender. I think. Therefore you are a "male man". Though some feminists prefer the term "female bodied individual" over "female" because, of course, your body has nothing to do with your identity.

I remember dating a girl who was way into the feminist academic nonsense being discussed here.

I identified this contradiction when we were teens but she brushed it off.

She believed, or said, that gender was only a social construct. Ie. Men and womens differences are learned and not innate. Yet she supported trans friends.

If being a woman is just a social construct, how is it possible that some individual with a penis can feel like a woman inside?

"You dont have to be such an asshole" she would say

Trolololol

[Only One Man]

I can completely see why these radical feminists hate trannies so much and refuse to acknowledge them as women.

Their very existence undermines the entire feminist ideology of every difference between the sexes (other than sex organs) being a result of social construction and conditioning. If someone is born a male but for their entire life feels like they are actually female, and is willing to go to incredible lengths such as mutilating their genitalia and majorly fucking with their hormones, it seems like that person desperately just wants to feel like they're in the right body.

If someone born male feels like they are the wrong gender their entire life, even after being "socially conditioned" as a boy/man ever since they can remember, then their gender identity is not a result of conditioning.

If their gender identity is not a result of conditioning, it stands to reason that it is a result of something inborn/biological, the most logical explanation being something involving wires crossed in the brain before birth, basically making it so a female brain is in a male body.

If trannies are a result of a male brain in a female body or vice versa, that means male and female brains are not wired exactly the same, and differences in behavior, preferences, abilities, ect., between the sexes/genders are inherent, biological and evolutionary.

I feel no hatred towards trannies, just pity.

[Foolsgo1d]

(07-29-2014 06:04 PM)Sonsowey Wrote:  

Feminists "losing" that "battle" just means accepting trans people as legitimate women. Which seems incredibly likely. I mean, have you ever met a feminist who wasnt pro trans acceptance? It seems like these feminists rejecting trans people are a vocal academic minority.

All the feminists I know are pro everythibg that is not straight cis etc

Just wait till these trans women start proving difficult to control.

[The Reactionary Tree]

The feminists are just jealous that these shemales make better looking women than they do.

[Glaucon]

The cult of feminism is starting to fall apart. I am shocked!

[Parlay44]

Too funny.

[richler]

In this instance, the radical feminists are correct. There is, strictly speaking, no such thing as a transgendered person. There is no such thing as a "sex change." There is only confusion and mutilation. I have always suspected that this particular suite of behaviors will be judged unkindly by history.

[catoblepa]

the positive outcome of this whole situation is that RadFems with their puritanical ideas against pornography will be marginalized.

[Sonsowey]

(07-30-2014 07:50 AM)richler Wrote:  

the radical feminists are correct.

"Shocking news as trans rights activists have released a scathing report linking Radical Feminism to MRAs in what is considered the latest of a series of blows to radfems at the hands of trans women."

[Yatagan]

Wouldn't know which side to support due to how they're both anti-science in their own ways. On the one hand you have the trannies who rightfully think there's a biological component to sex/gender but also think their cosmetic surgery is a "sex change" and on the other you have the feminists who rightfully think the trannies are fake wannabe women but think gender is a "social construct".

[darklightdispatch]

(07-30-2014 12:57 AM)Only One Man Wrote:  

If trannies are a result of a male brain in a female body or vice versa, that means male and female brains are not wired exactly the same, and differences in behavior, preferences, abilities, ect., between the sexes/genders are inherent, biological and evolutionary.

I feel no hatred towards trannies, just pity.

Yes, I think that's pretty much it. Genuine trans-people are probably real (though rare) and should be thought of as having an unfortunate birth defect.

A lot of the individuals claiming to be trans these days, though, aren't really men born with female brains or vice versa, they're just unhappy, confused people with mental health issues and possibly hormone problems or something similar.

The trans position in this debate is ultimately more reasonable and accurate than the feminist one. The argument that gender is a social construct and not something innate is so obviously wrong and silly that virtually ANY competing paradigm is likely to be more accurate and closer to reality.

[Eirykr]