Bilerico wrestles with question: Is Violence against Lesbians an appropriate action ?

August 5, 2011

 

An unprecendented blogpost today from an alleged LGBT website. Bil Browning’s Bilerico raises a discussion of whether Threats and Violence Should Be Used against Lesbians by Transgender so-called allies! The question of whether threats and violence should be used against Lesbians was raised by a male transgender Mercedes Allen who is sponsored by the Bilerico website. He posted that he personally was against violence against Lesbians by Transgenders: “ And I want to be clear that I am not advocating threats (or worse, violence) to try to silence the authors — on the contrary, I’m perfectly happy to hold Brennan and Hungerford’s views up for all to see, and let the public be the judge.”

What On Earth??? Who on Earth in the LGBT umbrella IS ADVOCATING for violence against Lesbians? Transgender males, according to Mercedes Allen. Apparently transgender folks are upset that two Lesbian women wrote a letter to the UN in support of sex-based protections for women. Why are Transgenders so upset with Lesbians who support protections for women? So upset that the question of violence against them is on the table? Apparently such protections for females impose on the rights of males to use funds allotted for female sports programs under title IX. And male “rights” to use female-only gyms, female college dorms, female support groups, domestic violence programs for women, women’s prisons, etc.

Bilerico, an LGBT website actually raises the issue of whether or not threats and violence should be an appropriate response to women who support such female rights. I can’t imagine a purported LGBT website discussing whether or not violence against gays or transgenders is appropriate or not. Or whether Lesbians should be attacked or not. Or whether females should have sports programs or not.

 

 But there it is. Front Page on Bilerico.

Mercedes’ piece titled “Less than Women, Less than Human” claims that Lesbians acknowledging that male-bodied people are (gasp!) male-bodied is the same as “calling them less than human”. And that threats and violence against Lesbians that acknowledge male-bodied people as male-bodied is an option worthy of debate. Well guess what guys, just because some women are Lesbian, and have a sexual orientation to the same-sex,  doesn’t translate into Lesbians “thinking males are less than human”. Lesbians don’t think males are subhuman. Really guys, it’s not all about you. Are we really having a conversation on an LGBT website in the year 2011 about whether women should have their own sports programs and whether Lesbians hate men, and whether THREATS AND VIOLENCE ARE AN APPROPRIATE ACTION for transgender males to take against Lesbians who acknowledge their male physical sex??? Mercedes says yes.

Read it and weep.

68 Responses to “Bilerico wrestles with question: Is Violence against Lesbians an appropriate action ?”

  1. Sargasso Sea Says:

    Good gawd, the comments.

    “I never get these “women-born women only” exclusionary types. But then again, if human history has taught us anything, it’s that oppression and marginalization is an exercise that every minority group is just itching to try out for themselves; they’re just waiting for their chance, dammit!”

    The powers of projection are awe inspiring! And besides that wbw are NOT a minority, Peabrain, you just treat us that way.

  2. dentedbluemercedes Says:

    I took a position opposing threats because the original essay that my article responded to made a claim that Brennan receives threats from trans people because of her position on trans human rights.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Wish you had mentioned in your piece any reference to the threats of violence Brennan and other Lesbians who advocate for women’s rights receive from Transgenders and that your comments were in reference to that history. As it reads it appears you are contemplating the appropriateness of such violence on your own, with no knowledge of the incredible duress Lesbians who advocate for specific rights for female-bodied people receive from male-bodied transgender persons. Your post shows a willful misreading of the issues outlined by the women who wrote the letter to the UN. It’s too bad your post wasn’t clear on the history of threats against Lesbians by male Transgenders and that your comments were, as you claim, a response to that. I do appreciate that you personally do not advocate threats and violence against Lesbians and other females who write letters in support of sex-based protections for females. Even though you disagree with such rights for females.


    • Anyone that uses the phrase “panty check” is a sensationalist moron.

      Conveniently, Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford waited until the deadline for submissions before making this public, so that transsexuals are not given an opportunity to respond, and once again have no voice at all in the question.

      Well Edsel, there was nothing stopping you putting in your own submission, independent of anyone else’s, declaring how, roughly 70-80% of twanzwomen are still packing penis, and how that is not a problem for biological females.

      But you, and your dress-up cronies didn’t bother. Too busy performing faux-womanliness I bet. That is why radfems don’t do the feminity thing, so that we have time to do other more important things. Nice adam’s apple btw.

    • Sargasso Sea Says:

      Yes of course you were referring to the “claim” of threats toward Brennan and how you don’t condone such behaviour, but you couldn’t say that clearly in your piece because your commenters wouldn’t have liked it now would they?

      They might think you’d gone *soft* on them. :P

  3. Cathy Brennan Says:

    Mercedes – I have received threats for years because of my concern with the overbroad definition of “gender identity” pushed by GLBT activists. Please do not misstate this to state I have gotten threats because of my position on “trans human rights,” as if I advocate that people of trans experience are not human or are “subhuman.” That is patently false.

    • dentedbluemercedes Says:

      Because of your position in general. I do not claim that you personally consider trans people subhuman — only that that is what one feels when faced with an argument against your inclusion in human rights policy.

      And I’ll point out that your essay isn’t about the definition, but whether gender identity and trans people should be included at all.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Then you should make posts about your feelings, not make wild accusations and veiled threats because your feelings tell you that being male makes you subhuman. Feeling subhuman when someone acknowledges your sex is perhaps more appropriate for a personal blog – or a therapeutic environment- than a legal critique.

      • bugbrennan Says:

        I suggest you re-read. It is about how gender identity – broadly worded – has trumped the exception to anti-discrimination protections based on sex in sex-segregated facilities.

        Do you think this is a good result for females? I would argue that this is an egregious breach of female civil rights. And indeed, I did, as requested.

        This, ultimately, boils down to priorities. You are either for women and women’s safety, or you are for “something else.” You can get to where you want to be by supporting a narrow definition of gender identity. It amazes me that this is a difficult concept. Why is it ok to burden all women with this overbroad bullshit? Do you actually think those definitions are meaningful?


    • Some mansplaining there Julian? And you link to a piece about lesbians that just has to mention transwomen.

      The attack on the five lesbians comes less than two weeks after a D.C. transgender woman was shot to death in Northeast D.C. and one day after a second transgender woman was targeted by a suspect who fired a gun at her but missed hitting her just one block from where the first victim was killed.

      Most lesbians are fully aware and have had some form of street violence or harrassment against them.

      You and Browning can take your faux concern for real females and shove it. We are wise to you.

  4. LeighAnne Says:

    Okay. Radical Lesbian Seperatists on one side and Radical Transgender Seperatists on the other. Shoot it out already.

    One note: I know a lot of transsexuals who joined the Marines trying to “shake off” their sexual identity, and “man up.” Nothing like being a butch lesbian, not even close.

  5. myrtle Says:

    You know what? When you’ve got a substantiated point to make, you can make it whenever, you don’t need to play manipulative games. They released when they were done with it. If there’s anything there you can disagree with by documentation, do so. Asshole.

  6. myrtle Says:

    Speaking of assholes, how many of you “women” (snort) have prostates?

  7. Bil Browning Says:

    I should have realized as soon as I saw that you couldn’t even spell the name of the blog correctly once (and it’s only 8 letters!), that you’d be unable to grok the point of the post. You managed to turn one sentence (from a 2600 word article) that admonishes people to stay civil into some sort of threat while still managing to be as offensive as you could possibly be.

    This is the kinda crap that spews from religious right nut jobs and it’s on an “alleged” feminist website. Huh. Go figure.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Oops I misspelled the name of your crappy blog- hahaha. Your nasty comment does nothing to inspire me to correct it. No wonder Lesbians avoid your hateful site.

    • bugbrennan Says:

      Bil – How many lesbian bloggers are on your website? And how many gay male? And how many trans? “Gender identity” as a concept has disproportionately impacted lesbians – you, as a gay male, probably don’t realize that. You could do with some more balanced coverage if you want to be a GLBT community blog.


    • Yeah, well I mentioned above, that Weiss linked to of Browning’s mansplainy faux concern for lesbians – but could not do so without the mention of transwomen.

      We can see through you Browning.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Good thing Bil Browning showed up to ‘splain Feminism to the Lesbians!

      • Bil Browning Says:

        Are you smart enough to know what a block quote it? I didn’t write that. The newspaper did. I quoted the article. *rolls eyes*


      • As you SELECTIVELY quoted a section of the report, you could easily have omitted it, if not for pushing your tranz agenda that is. That was my point.

        You cannot write (or indeed quote from other sources) about real women without mentioning bloody transwomen. That is why your mansplainy faux concern shows up for what it is.

        But then again, as most transwomen are still packing penis, I can see why you have such an affinity with them.


      • Obviously I had to explain all that for the thickos with penises.
        *rolls eyes*

      • GallusMag Says:

        Hey Bil you made a spelling mistake there, Buddy. Guess that means you’re incapable of groking the complexity of this issue.
        *snicker

  8. yttik Says:

    You have every right to be concerned about that sentence, GallusMag and the way it was presented. There was no attempt made to condemn the violence and threats already made against Brennan and to state that such threats have no place in this debate. What there was instead was a passive/aggressive phrasing, intentional or not, that left the reader believing such behavior is your choice, one you are free to make after you read the report. As it said, “you be the judge.”

    Mercedes goes on to list several atrocities happening to trans around the world and practically implies that rad fems are to blame. As is written, “But Cathy Brennan, Elizabeth Hungerford and the good people at Radfem Hub can sit back and smile….” Yes, we are not only perpetuating global violence against trans, we’re smiling and cackling about it. Clearly we are the enemy, clearly we are responsible for all the violence against trans, indeed we plan to annihilate them all, so you be the judge of whether or not violence is warranted.

  9. bugbrennan Says:

    Can I also say, the constant reference to me as “Brennan” I take as a homophobic, gay bashing slur.

    It’s Ms. Brennan, or Cathy if you are my friend.

    Thanks you!

  10. GallusMag Says:

    From the Google cache of a now scrubbed post from Pam’s House Blend titled “Cathy Brennan Promoting Elimination of Human Rights for Transsexual Women. Not exaggeration.”

    “…this is quite simply a prelude to horror.

    It is apparently not enough to deprive trans women of a place in women’s communities – so-called “radical,” so-called “feminists” mean to deprive trans women of life, and have gone to the United Nations, no less, to accomplish this monstrous feat.”

    [Emboldening Mine- GM]

    • bugbrennan Says:

      The entitlement is palpable.

      Is it any wonder the L in the GLBT has not wanted to publicly have this conversation?

    • GallusMag Says:

      Correction: The above referenced post still stands. It was the front page post by Laurel Ramseyer titled “”Cathy Brennan & Elizabeth Hungerford take their anti-trans hysteria to the UN” that was scrubbed.

      Ahhh, the old “hysteria” invective…

  11. KatieS Says:

    I cannot think of a better demonstration of why women don’t want males of any sort in our private spaces.

    Males, as a class, are violent toward women. This class includes any person who was born a male.

  12. yttik Says:

    This is redundant for those who are familiar with this debate, but I can never figure out why transactivists seem to believe human rights are a one way street. There is no give and take on their part. I mean, this report clearly states, “… we recognize the legitimate needs of transgender and transsexual women to operate in the world free from irrational discrimination.” So where’s the trans version, “we recognize the legitimate needs of women…..??” Oh yeah, it doesn’t exist.

    I’m a woman, I recognize women live in a constant state of danger/fear. If a woman is uncomfortable with me being in the bathroom, I’ll find a different bathroom or wait until she leaves. If I’m following a woman down the street and she’s uncomfortable, I’ll cross the road and fall back. I’m certainly not a threat to any woman, but accommodating womens reality is simply basic human courtesy. If, instead of empathizing, I demanded that my human rights entitle me to completely disregard a womans right to feel safe, well, then I’d simply be… an asshole.

    • dentedbluemercedes Says:

      You wrote:
      “So where’s the trans version, “we recognize the legitimate needs of women…..??” Oh yeah, it doesn’t exist.”

      Seriously? Some of us are actively involved in womens’ rights and womens’ health issues in our communities.

      And I’ll grant you the point about courtesy. But we are talking about law and policy, which get into absolutes. Courtesy isn’t really in the equation if a law or policy mandates you can’t use a womens’ restroom.

      • GallusMag Says:

        Mercedes does not believe females have the right to any female spaces, female funding, or female legal protections based on sex. Am I right Mercedes?

      • bugbrennan Says:

        Mercedes – and, similarly, why is it, in your absolute view, ok to subject women to nontrans male-bodied people in sex-segregated facilities? When you allow people to self-identify, you allow precisely that. Are women’s concerns about this invalid? Do you want to continue to silence us by calling us bigots and accusing us of crimes against humanity?

        Fix the definition. If you think I am your problem, you are dead wrong.

      • Sargasso Sea Says:

        Some of us are actively involved in womens’ rights and womens’ health issues in our communities.

        And which “womens'” health issues would you be speaking of Mercedes? My wild guess is that it is not those that have anything to do with pregnancy or cervical/uterine/ovarian cancer.

        Certainly I need not go into the complex nature of breast feeding naturally.


      • …to subject women to nontrans male-bodied people in sex-segregated facilities? When you allow people to self-identify, you allow precisely that.

        Exactly Cathy. The thing of it is, because we are female (and feminists) we are a wake-up to when our rights are compromised, because it has happened for so long, so often.

        And no, the Mary-come-lately brand of feminism doesn’t cut it with me either, because it is primarily twanzwomen’s rights, and fuck-you-FABs.

        Edsel, in the UK trans legislation was swept in with barely a whimper or discussion. There were no massive street demonstrations to get trans rights. Unlike the decades and decades that women had to do just to get the vote. Big difference. Because trans rights are really transwomen rights – again, for the male born.


      • And a post script.

        All we ever hear from are transwomen*. That again, because they are male-born, and so bloody full of male entitlement it isn’t funny.

        *and Chaz Bono. Big deal.

      • yttik Says:

        “Courtesy isn’t really in the equation if a law or policy mandates you can’t use a womens’ restroom.”

        As a woman born woman, there is no law or policy that makes it safe for me to use a public restroom, ever. Women face violation in restrooms every single day, including having cameras installed without their knowledge all the way to sexual assault. All those things that make transwomen want to seek refuge in the women’s room rather than the men’s, those are the reasons women fight so hard to try and keep their own spaces private. Rather than acknowledge the reality of women’s lives, transactivists act as if the greatest human rights violation ever, is to have someone tell them they aren’t entitled to use a certain public restroom. That humiliation is somehow so much more important, so much more heinous, than the very real horrors that women experience at the hands of men every single day.

        This letter written to the UN states quite clearly some of the consequences women will experience if gender identity legislation is allowed to erode the legal protections for females and you don’t care. You don’t care! You don’t pause for one moment to read the very real dangers being explained, about what can and does happen to women when male perpetrators learn to use your legislation as an excuse, indeed, as a red carpet to farther violate women.


      • Awim to that yttik, awim.

        *applause*

  13. myrtle Says:

    I think you’re far too generous Yttik. I think we are talking to men who want to further violate and harm women. Those men who would physically harm us are these men, not some other group. They’re dangerously mentally ill. What’s next in the women’s washroom, strangling some women because she wouldn’t tinkle so he could get his rocks off? Because there is a sick fetishistic reason they want to be there.

  14. Bev Jo Says:

    When female restrooms are open to men claiming to be women, the assault rate on girls and women will increase dramatically. The incredible arrogance and sense of entitlement of men appropriating our identity shows exactly how male they are. No amount of death threats or bullying will change what and who they are, but it does reveal them more to the women conned by them.

  15. Chonky Says:

    Bile rico = rich bile (sounds like a nice f2t name)

    When dudes are yapping about ANYTHING, it always always boils down to resolving disagreements or perceived threats with potential, or actual violence.

    Psssst trannies, when I win the lottery, I’ll buy you your own planet.

  16. myrtle Says:

    Here:
    August 6, 2011 at 5:46 am

    I was replying to here:
    August 6, 2011 at 1:13 am

    “Rich Bile” Thanks Chonky! Copious unadulterated malevolence.


  17. When I first saw the write-up by Cathy and Elizabeth, I was impressed with how sensitive it was towards transwomen. I don’t think this is because I hate trans-women, but rather, I *have* seen hate against transfolks, and this is NOT the form it takes. So, I am baffled by the uproar over all of this.

    The authors bring up legitimate concerns which I have not seen anyone at Bilerico respond to except to say that females need to “get over” our transphobia. Guess what? Most women ARE accommodating, and even if they feel uncomfortable in the restroom, aren’t going to call security or question the other person. This is the kind of people we are via upbringing female.

    Has it ever occurred to you folks at Bilerico that some of us actually HAVE been harmed by transwomen, and thus are speaking from personal experience? It’s not something easy to speak about, for a number of reasons, including the usual self-blame, which is why you don’t hear too much about it.

  18. KatieS Says:

    “When dudes are yapping about ANYTHING, it always always boils down to resolving disagreements or perceived threats with potential, or actual violence. ”

    Yup. They make the case against themselves. This opens the door to male perverts of all kinds, pedophiles, etc. But the defenders of this position are strangely silent on all of those issues. Strangely silent. They care not about children, either. They just threaten violence.

    Violence against women and children by M2Ts. Not a novel approach. A male approach.

  19. amazondream Says:

    Threats and violence against lesbians by mtf (predominantly) and ftm transfolk happen all the frigging time. Just witness the violence, intimidation and vandalism committed against the womyn fo the Michigan Womyn’s Music Festival last year. Recently Maria of Out!Wear was inundated with over 1000 emails that contained threats to her safety, her home and her business solely because she exercised her right to print shirts for womyn exercising their rights to name themselves. Maria was even posted on ‘Blast’ and attacked there. All this with the implicit approval and support of PFLAG.


  20. Just excellent Gallus.

    When are trans women going to admit that men are the enemy, not women? THat it is *men* who kill trans women, not radical feminists?

    When are they going to start educating *men* not to beat up and kill women and other men/trans women?

    When are they going to start a campaign to teach *men* that men who dress feminine should be allowed to use the men’s bathroom without getting beaten up?

    All women have ever wanted is to be left alone by men. But they won’t leave us alone. ANd now they’re piling THEIR problems onto our front doorstep.

    As if we haven’T got enough already.

    For future reference Mercedes et al, you make yourself look like laughing stocks when you compare violence against trans women with violence against women. The reason for this is, there is such a DEARTH of violence against trans women in the grand schemen of things compared to the perpetual slaughter of women that goes on every single day.
    Two women A WEEK are murdered by their spouse in the U.K alone. Can you imagine?! Two women a week!!!!

    The fact that trans women such as Mercedes don’t recognize that violence against women is much more prevalent than violence against trans women tells us that they don’t believe women are quite as human as them.

  21. bugbrennan Says:

    From Laurel Ramseyer’s Facebook Page:

    Laurel Ramseyer
    I demand solid reasoning from anyone who would seek to deprive a fellow human being of basic civil and human rights. I don’t find that in Brennan & Hungerford’s letter.

    Pam’s House Blend:: Cathy Brennan & Elizabeth Hungerford take their anti-trans hysteria to the UN
    pamshouseblend.com..

    Yesterday at 5:47pm · Like · · Share

    Adam Kuglin You know… I’m really sick of men being the excuse for this sort of ridiculous nonsense, too. The way these two hacks write, it’s like all men are rapists.\
    Yesterday at 5:52pm · Like · 1 person.

    Charles Butler Amen, Laurel.
    Yesterday at 5:59pm · Like.

    AND WHAT THE LETTER ACTUALLYS SAYS

    We do not single out individual males as predatory, nor do we think any particular male is more likely to harm females. Further, we do not believe that transgender or transsexual women are any more likely to harm females.[xxii] In fact, we recognize the legitimate needs of transgender and transsexual women to operate in the world free from irrational discrimination.We do not single out individual males as predatory, nor do we think any particular male is more likely to harm females. Further, we do not believe that transgender or transsexual women are any more likely to harm females.[xxii] In fact, we recognize the legitimate needs of transgender and transsexual women to operate in the world free from irrational discrimination.

  22. KatieS Says:

    Either they don’t know how to read, or they are too lazy to do so.

    Or, they are lying.

  23. myrtle Says:

    That’s it Katie!!!

    They are functionally illiterate, and the most stunning display of it I’ve ever seen. Consistently incapable of understanding words and language.

  24. Bev Jo Says:

    I too have seen men claiming to be Lesbians grope Lesbians they don’t even know in public.

    It is so important to not be conned or mindfucked in any way by these men — which means to not give them a bit of what they are demanding. THESE MEN ARE NOT WOMEN. They cannot become women, any more than they can change species. So please, do not support them by calling them “transwomen.” I won’t even call them “transsexuals” or “transgender” because that still implies there is some reality to saying they are not simply men. Male doctors, synthetic hormones, and castration does not make women. We are more than the absence of foul male parts. And certainly the majority of these men who are not castrated are not women.

    Do Lesbians bemoan how oppressed transvestites and drag queens are? They are caricaturing female oppression. So why be concerned about this other version who caricature us? If Lesbians want to help men, there are many men who are far more oppressed in the world than these.

    But I suggest we do what Lesbians rarely will do — support other Lesbians. And for women to put females first for a change, since no one else does.

    I have a friend who is afraid to not honor these female impersonators with our pronouns or to call them “women.” Please, let’s support each other to say “no” to every lie, every con, and every intimidation.

  25. kurukurushoujo Says:

    I don’t think that they’re illiterate, lazy or lying. They are just delusional. They see that Cathy and Elizabeth have written a paper in which they make a difference between FAAB and MtT. That means murder, mayhem, genocide and rape. Their delusions make them illiterate and lazy so that they can feel right.The stuff by Pam’s House Blend is especially ridiculous.

    Everyone can see that gender identity laws overriding sex discrimination laws can be dangerous. If the latter should be replaced by the former aborting female foeti and killing female children because of their sex ceases to be a hate crime. This was what horrified me about the stuff Undercover Punk posted some time ago about a paper which argued that sex differentiation is caused by cultural norms alone. Of couse, trans people have to argue this and don’t give a fuck about the international implications. Otherwise, they may have to face up to the reality of unchangeable genetic biology.

  26. bugbrennan Says:

    Thank you for the support here, and thank you to trans allies who are able to have civil discussions about difficult topics.


  27. So I guess the question is this: how can trans women function in a binary-defined world so that both that radical feminists would be happy and the safety of trans women be respected? That was my primary issue with the paper Brennan et. al. composed, and said as much in Bilerico’s comments section. There is discussion that trans women should have their rights respected, but simultaneously calls for the expulsion of trans women from sex-segregated spaces. I can understand the need for WBW spaces – I’m more than happy to show my displeasure with these spaces by withholding money from orgs that aren’t trans-inclusive – but I think we need to come to some sort of working, practical compromise that both respects the rights of WBW while simultaneously allowing trans women to function in a world that oftentimes doesn’t acknowledge the difference between the two.

    Look, I’m not in a place where I need to convince anybody of anything. I experience this world in a female gender, and whether or not that is acceptable to everyone is a question for philosophers. What I do need, however, is the ability to function within a society that places strict organizational boundaries between genders without putting myself in a position of potential harm. I may not have started this way but society presently interacts with me as a female – to the outside observer there is no difference between me and the woman next to me.

    Perhaps the best question to ask is this: at what point should a trans woman be able to use sex-segregated spaces such as restrooms, changing facilities, or women’s resources? I assure you that if I were to attempt to access male resources with my present body I’d be met with consternation, scorn, and anger. Additionally, what mechanisms would you propose to enforce these distinctions, given that many younger trans women have enough passing privilege to not be seen as transgender at all?

    I’m not trying to be contrary or accusatory here. I’m just honestly trying to wrap my mind around a mindset that, to my perception, seems diametrically opposed to my capacity to be perceived as the gender I present every day.

    Austen

    • GallusMag Says:

      You understand the need for WBW spaces, yet they cause you “displeasure”? Why should your displeasure override the needs of WBW?

      Do you have any links to police reports where men were attacked in men’s restrooms for “looking too female”?

  28. KatieS Says:

    Austen, what is your position on the risks to women born women of allowing all males legal access to women’s facilities, such as restrooms? Surely you must have thought about the safety issue for this much larger group, since all, or nearly all, members of this group have had to deal with threats to our safety since early childhood. We are an at-risk group and this puts us more at risk. I don’t think that issue can be overlooked in this discussion, since it is the reason so many women are alarmed.

    • GallusMag Says:

      Austen sees the need for women’s sports teams and women’s health services, but they are a source of his displeasure and he withholds his support of such.

  29. GallusMag Says:

    Austen do you think incarcerated females should be housed separately from the male prison population?


  30. Excellent points, all, and I’d like to take them one at a time.

    I don’t support WBW spaces – this is different than discounting the need for them. In a similar way I don’t support Catholic institutions but can simultaneously see the need for their existence. It’s just the market at work; WBW may have spaces to themselves, and while I acknowledge the need for them I don’t have to give them my dollars when I could, say, spend them with a trans-inclusive organization.

    I can’t provide links for “too feminine boys being beaten in men’s rooms,” but I think that sends us down a rabbit hole instad of working toward a consensus position. I don’t want to compare oppression beyond saying that we all experience it in different ways. If it’s okay with everyone here I’d prefer steering the conversation in a different direction.

    KatieS, I never said I was for all males entering women’s facilities, and addiitonally, Gallus, I never said I didn’t see the need for women’s sports teams. I agree with both your points. I see a real need for segregation within spaces on a count of male violence and sexual aggression, and while I’m not sure if my personal experience is admissible within the eyes of the crowd here I’ve experienced flavors of this aggression within my own experience.

    What I am really searching for is a discussion on a workable definition of what is permissible and not permissible in sex-segregated spaces. Is there any way we could agree on, say, a certain minimum standard of what constitutes “female gendered” for sake of public accomodations? I think Brennan et al. have put forth a workable definition in their document from which we may be able to build consensus and get along.

    (On a side note, I’d like to mention that I really appreciate the discussion. It’s always good to hear another side of the story. I’ll try to be respectful in my dialogue here but I’m honestly not too versed on this strain of feminism and may flub at times. I ask for apologies in advance.)

    • GallusMag Says:

      Instead of demanding attention and offering “apologies in advance” for not bothering to familiarize yourself with the issues you claim to want to discuss, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the issues at hand prior to attempting to engage in that discussion. Looking into the difference between sex and gender, and the difference between female and “feminine”, and female and “female gendered” would be a good place to start.
      Best of luck with your studies and feel free to come back when you have a working understanding of the issues at hand and can converse on the topic without apology. Take care.


    • *may* flub

      rotflmao
      It’s at times like these I really need TenaLady.

      You will know what I mean when you hit menopause Austen. Oh no, wait… you won’t, will you?

  31. GallusMag Says:

    “Female Gendered” is the most offensive, women-hating, sexist turn of phrase imaginable. There’s a hint for you. Asshole.

  32. Sig Says:

    Why on earth is it up to women (aka “FAAB” aka “WBW”) to educate anyone, particularly, say, a “WBM” about this issue? That’s a cop out. Go read up on Feminism – beyond the fun feminism blogs – and then come back. If you have to ask, you *don’t* experience the world as a woman grown from a girl experiences it every day of her life.


  33. Austen,
    The notion that there should be a working definition of “the female gender” that would include your good (male) self is nothing but old fashioned sexism and misogyny.

    all you have is your imaginings of what it *might* *be* *like* to live as a woman, based on some gender stereotypes you’ve picked up somewhere.

    This is quite different to *being* a woman, actually *being* a member of the female sex.

    It’s one of those times where you have to tell someone, the more they open their mouths, the more they scupper their own arguments. This applies to Austen’s posts.


  34. And I really want to cuss at someone who compares women-only spaces to that paedophile rink known as the Catholic church.

    A) Catholic priests duping mothers into handing over their children for sexual abuse for generations, then covering up the evil to protect their name

    b) Women demanding sex-segregated spaces to protect themselves from males?

    Same difference, innit.

    In the eyes of a trans woman.


  35. [...] and inaccurate post titled “Less Than Woman, Less Than Human“, which actually raised the topic of violent retaliation against Brennan and Hungerford. The Bilerico post falsely claimed that the [...]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 597 other followers

%d bloggers like this: