Xuebing Du
"I'm Dorothy Gale from Kansas"
izzy's playlists!
official daine visual archive
noise dept.
Kaledo Art
tumblr dot com
art blog(derogatory)
wallacepolsom
No title available
@theartofmadeline
JVL
I'd rather be in outer space đ¸
h
No title available
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
Sweet Seals For You, Always
d e v o n
Not today Justin
Stranger Things
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from Malaysia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Saudi Arabia
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
@ask-a-radfem
no stupid questions
answering questions about radical feminism with links to videos and websites. sincere questions get sincere answers.
rules:
Asks max 100 words in length
If you start a question with "why do radfems think x", at least try and find an example of a radfem who thinks x
dont send threatening or violent anons obviously
psst... radfems that aren't terfs, what are your opinions on transtioning? HEY! over here! TERFS! how do you actually interact with intersex people? (i'm just a curious person that would like to know other people's perspectives)
Here's a person with a DSD who you'd probably call a terf, asking the same question but to a different group. As in, "hey LGBTQI groups that just added the I, how do you actually interact with intersex people?" It could be a useful perspective.
Happily living with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome
How does radical feminism explain dysphoria? I agree with the basis of 'if the only reason you think you're trans stems from being treated badly as a girl, feeling unsafe and thinking it'd be easier to be a guy' etc, that's probably not a gender thing, that's just being aware of unequality. But what about stuff like dysphoria that is separate from that? I also have never really met anyone who cited those reasons for figuring out they were trans, I feel like I only see it from rad fem blogs talking about it.
This answer is going to be a bit of a mixed bag, clip compilation of videos and reading, because your question sparked like five different responses and reactions in my head haha. (Great question anon.)
So, different types of diagnoses are different, you can have a disease (caused by a single biological thing, like cancer which is caused by uncontrolled cell growth, or AIDS which is caused by a virus) or you can have a disorder which is characterised by a list of symptoms.
Here is the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria in children :
I would have met 4-5 of those as a kid. If i had hated my sexed body, i could have qualified for a dysphoria diagnosis. So that's one criticism of the diagnostic criteria, it leaves open the possibility that quite standard gender nonconformity combined with distress over puberty is diagnosed as dysphoria. So is dysphoria completely separate from sexism or being treated worse as a girl? By the criteria themselves, not really.
Here's a video with more discussion about the criteria:
We don't know what causes dysphoria, or if it is one thing. We don't know if distressed teenager who meets these criteria is going through the same thing as a little boy being coached to understand his gender nonconformity as being in the wrong body, like the child described in this clip (the woman speaking is Johanna Olson-Kennedy, who is Medical Director of the Center for Trans Youth Health and Development at Childrenâs Hospital Los Angeles):
Feminist analysis about dysphoria is relatively new, but some women connect it to feminist discussion about anorexia, the plastic surgery industry and anti-psychiatry. You can start out with this article by Victoria Smith and the books she mentions (may be paywalled, archive link here):
Forcing people to live in a body where they do not feel at home causes intense, often unbearable suffering.
Here is an interesting video by a detrans woman about girls growing up in toxic online communities:
Also no compilation like this would be complete without mentioning the book Detransition: Beyond Before and After by Max Robinson. It may be hard to get a physical copy but there is an audiobook or ebook option too.
Why do you love upholding the patriarchy? Whataboutism isn't an actual defense.
again, you're going to have to explain what you mean. liberating women from patriarchal harm and male violence is the feminist project.
Why do you love upholding the patriarchy?
Ok i know my pinned says short messages but you're gonna have to explain your thinking here cause i got nothing.
Interview Date: [6/15/2024]
Community: [Radical Feminism/Radfem]
Could you share your journey towards identifying as a radfem? What were the key experiences or influences that led you to this ideology?
What are the core beliefs that define your understanding of radfem philosophy?
There seems to be some tension between the radfem community and the trans community. Could you explain your perspective on this?
Rules:
Be Honest
Be Non-Violent/Harassive/Mean
Be Straight-Foward
Reblog or Comment your answer.
I was a teenager and I was skeptical of surrogacy and the porn industry, after having debates about those things in class. I went to the library and started reading books about feminism, like Kajsa Ekis Ekman's Being and Being Bought, and Egalia's Daughters by Gerd Brantenberg. And I started thinking more about how women are commodified. That gave me confidence when the boys in my class argued for porn because "some women like it".
2. Some Marxist concepts like historical materialism. In the same way as Silvia Federici talks about how it's not an accident that witch-hunting was done in communities where the economy was dependent on fishing, radical feminists argue that women's biology is not accidentally related to their oppression. (And no, this isn't the same as "reducing women to their body parts".)
3. When I was just learning about feminism, I believed in gender identity on some level. I remember when I started seeing trans activism in schools, and most of it was something like "we should have a third single-occupancy changing room for P.E." I agreed with that then and I still do. At that time I was not aware that trans activist demands were also for things like self-identifying into prisons, sports, and the women's refuges and rape crisis centres that feminists worked to build. Then I saw Magdalen Berns' videos (particularly this one about Stonewall), and that led me to question the core concept of gender identity.
The "tension" is violent threats and hounding, ummatched by "our" side. The "tension" is people crowding outside of university buildings stopping women from getting in, it's actual physical violence to women gathering to try and discuss the harms brought to women, children and gay, lesbian and bisexual people by some of the extremes of trans ideas.
What are your thoughts on the labels lesbian versus bisexual? Like, it seems it used to be that any women interested in her own sex was labeled a lesbian. And women in the women's lib movement who we would call bisexual today called themselves lesbians. Do you think that women who only date/have sex with their own sex can call themselves lesbian, since they're "living as" lesbians? Or is that erasing the experience of real lesbians? I think it's unfair to call yourself a lesbian if you're a bisexual woman, but then there's a part of me that thinks "bisexual" makes it sound as if you're equal opportunity, men and women, when that may not be the case. Of course, this is a very minor problem, and I understand lesbians face a different experience in life than bisexual women. But as a bisexual woman, a part of me just does not like the term, because there's this implication that I'll end up with a man after experimenting with women in my youth, or something. Anyway, I'm just curious on your general thoughts on this discussion - I don't have a precise question. Thanks!
(yeah its long but i'll post a lil thing of what i'm thinking)
general thoughts: i have a similar sense as you that the boundaries of "lesbian" are important because lesbians' boundaries are important (lesbian women's ability to say no to men is the axiom of all women's boundaries).
I know a woman in real life who calls herself "lesbian with an exception" and it infuriates me (and the exception is her boyfriend, not like, a celebrity man she thinks is hot). That being said I barely care if a woman married to a woman does this, there are bigger issues. (Bi women in het longterm relationships/marriages do this a lot and I don't see a serious movement for going up to long married women and their husbands like "thou shalt label yourself as bi!")
advice part: I get that you might feel insecure or not taken seriously as a bisexual because it feels like they all just end up with men anyway, or that the bi women around you don't seem as serious about dating women. You can just do what I did when I was questioning/figuring things out and just say you're "into women" for a while: its true, it makes it clear what you're looking for when dating, and people know what it means (unlike something like "febfem", which is a cool worthwhile thing, just that explaining it to people in real life can get annoying).
Why do you terfs have to come at us some much? Weâre not doing anything immoral, we just want to be included into spaces we feel comfortable in. Literally the Supreme Court members have more if a history for raping women than trans women do. So what I have penis? It shouldnât bother you so much lol
TW: Violent imagery The last few weeks have been incredibly distressing. When Joanne[1] Rowling released her essay there was a moment of col
When trans people say âwomen can have penisesâ wouldnât they be intersex? Not women? Iâm confused
No, they mean identifying as a woman is what makes you one. So if a male person who's got a penis identifies as a woman, it's a woman's penis now. That comic with Assigned Male says this explicitly, it's 47 mins into this video:
Of course not all trans people believe this, here I'm specifically talking about those who believe the gender identity idea that there is no sex/gender distinction, and say things like"I identify as a woman so I'm female". (or even "my penis is female biology because I identify as female")
Hey Rad-Fems
I have a genuine question. Why do you care if trans-women identify as women? Like if gender isnât real, then why canât they be women? Cause Iâll let people use whatever pronouns they want for me⌠cause genders fake and who gives two shits⌠(and this could very well just be my mental illness kicking in, cause I believe Iâm above gender⌠and Iâm better than everyone else and stuff) but I know people who are trans, and Iâll respect their pronouns and stuff⌠but I just donât care? Like it takes more effort to say âno youâre a manâ than it does to just go with whatever. So why do you put in the effort?
If it is literally just privately held identity, then who gives a fuck. Knock yourself out.
(I'm the same as you about pronouns by the way. I don't own pronouns, other people perceive me however they perceive me. I definitely don't own other people's perceptions.)
The issue is claiming to be a part of the same political class, and changing laws to replace sex with gender identity and claiming that has no effect on women's rights or their political representation:
Christ, where to startâŚ.. Trans ideology is based on the idea that human sexual dimorphism is not a thing, that the classification of male a
alr fucker ill bite
im trying 2 understand the absolute fuckin brainrot that is terf ideology solely so i can explain to people who actually want to make an effort to not be bigoted not fall into your pipelines. i do this already. but i wanna be more thorough and get screenshots and examples for specific questions. ill do a lil back and forth, but you wont be convincing me that all trans women are pedos n rapists and that we need to detransition people en mass and that trans people are delusional. i have a series of questions, if you consider yourself a terf please try and actually answer them, in a way that actually explains your thought process and isnt just calling me slurs because thats most of the discourse on this site. -------
how do you mentally justify the contridiction in "male and female brains have no difference and women are just as capable as men" (true and real) and "men are fundimentally more violent/ women less violent" besides just blatently liking sexism so long as it hurts men and not women (blatently harmful and bigoted just with a #girlpower coat of paint)
if its a socialization issue, how does female seperatism nessisarily help that? shouldnt the goal then to not treat women as an other, and to not define people based on biological characteristics? while biological differences exist they dont affect your mental or phisical capabilities in anything (in regards to biological sex atleast). wouldnt it be more helpful to treat it as simply a medical thing? like a blood type or something? and treat genital preference as just the same as any other random aesthetic preference in partners like, idk, liking fat people or likeing brown hair what is it about gender based oppression that makes you think that its the men that are the problem and not the whole gender thing, because its men thinking that women are fundimentally different alien creatures because we literally define people by their genitals and constantly talk about how your genitals make you fundimentally different then the "opposite". an ACTUALLY HELPFUL soution should be talking about how like, yeah! some of us look different, but thats like? fine? we are people. who cares whats in that person pants. and if your answer is that thats unrealistic and will require hundreds of years of societal change (true) why is your approach to double down on men and women being fundimentally different and not to like? work? twards something objectively better and less discriminatory? most of what terfs are known for is bigotry and thats not some crazy coincidence, its because your sexism (though you love to label it otherwise) naturally leads to transphobia. its because the core of your ideology is bigotry. women shouldnt be discriminated against cuz you are? fucking people? with the exact same capabilities, you do not deserve more/less praise more/less accountablitity more/less agency. infact id argue that this bending over backwords to try and exclude people you deem as men is why radfems are so much more of a pushover to conservatives. your willingness to go on and on about how biological differences make you a fundimentally different person just so you can rant about how men are all ugly evil penis havers just lets you be suseptible to violent reactionary shit by conservatives. regardless of where you come from politically, this applies to BOTH of us, if you refuse to really think deeply and critically about why you hate the things you do and why you like the things you do, and instead operate on gut reactions and absorbing politics from people on tumblr SOMEONE from SOME IDEOLOGY is always trying to take advantage of that. and transphobia IS violent reactionary shit, most the time i see transphobia especially against trans women its based entirely on appearance, people jumping all over themselves to body shame her for not being enough of a woman, talking about how gross and disgusting she is for wearing a dress or for having a deeper voice. why is this body shaming ok so long as you deem someone a man? attatching morality to appearance is just a blatently bad idea and its frankly gross how little so many of you are willing to critique that.
-----
whats your explaination for the tonal dissonance between "i dont want trans people dead and im not violent" and painting trans women as "always being men with terrible intentions who cosplay as women to have an excuse to rape and assault people"
because while you may not directly say "i think all trans people should be murdered" and you do it in a roundabout way with "all trans people are rapists and all rapists should be murdered" that does still say "i think all trans people should be murdered", just with extra steps. and are you aware that this is the exact retoric used by colonizers to justify genocide and slavery? painting black people as "savages and rapists"? whats your justification for painting a large group of people as fundimentally evil and violent, and how nessasarily is it somehow different then the retoric used to oppress any other marginalized group? + if its a "but im right!" consider this is also what a rapist or an antisemite or a mysogenist would say, and why you are parroting the exact same thing. like do you genuinely actually think that having a boy brain, or more testosterone, or a penis, makes you a rapist and a pedofile? really? and again if you agree with me that its a socialization issue why! dont you! treat it that way!! if you mean one thing, SAY THAT! and FIGURE OUT WITCH ONE OF THOSE YOU BELIEVE. because you cant fuckin have it both ways! if you wanna say that we shouldnt be treating women as stupid vile little vagina having worms (real and true) then like, you cant ALSO be like oh i also think we should be treating men as stupid vile little penis having worms >:) hehe i am so progressive and counter culture ignore all the horrific damage that catagorizing people like that has had i think it will be funny when we do it with men you see.
-----
what is with this insistance that people define themselves based on whats in their pants, like if having a pussy is just having a pussy thats fuckin fine alr but if you start insisting that people make that their ENTIRE PERSONALITY and that if you have one you HAVVVEEEE to have only a specific subsection of names and you HAVEEEE to be called a woman and use she/her and shit
like girl it is just words, who gives a fuck, if a guy says hey i wanna change my name to this girl name cuz it sounds cool as fuck its like! yea! hell yeah brother! and if hes like actually i prefer more feminine words to refer to me :) its like! hell yeah sister! how does that hurt fuckin anyone. is using words so hard 4 u. and before you be like ooOOuuyhghhg IM NOT DEFINING PEOPLE BASED ON THEY ARE PUSSY how is catagorizing people based on their chromosomes / genitals / appearance (and lets be honest here. its mostly appearance but you use chromosomes and genitals so you can pretend theres some kind of science proving that youre right, there is no chromosome detector 3000 for real life) not flattening them? like genuinely how the fuck do you justify that. you have to go to a different bathroom you have to go to a different doctors office you have to go to a different sports team all because i assume that your chromosomes and your genitals make you eaither unsafe or violent or constantly in need of protection and fundimentally less capable. terfs love to constantly insist that gender is whatever and then constantly try to force people to define themselves by their biological sex? why is whats in MY pants any of your fucking buisness? unless im at a gynocology appointment you dont need to know shit. all of this girlsgirlsgirlsgirls stuff what if you dont wanna be called a fuckin girl? what if i find it weird that you profile people and assume things about them because of their body? if gender is whatever why do you HAVE to be a male or a female. why do i have to fucking put my biology out on display for people to assume things about me based on? because i KNOW you assume things based on peoples biological sex and i KNOW you think more or less of people based on their biological sex thats half the ideology! why do you think every trans women is a sexist mysogenist who woke up one day at 24 and decided she was gonna be a girllll and wear dresses so she could opress woemennn moreeeee, why do you assume all trans men were groomed and exploited and brainwashed into thinking that theyre boys because of mysogeny and not cuz sometimes? being called a dude feels good? having a dick feels good? having a flat chest feels good? using he him or whatever the fuck feels good??? rad fem shit is just, sexism repackadged, do you never see the similarities? do you never see the fine print? that the core ideology is the same? this is just mysogeny again! like women are always the victim and men are always the perpetraitor. is just women have fundimentally less agency and men more agency women do bad things because theyre dumb and men do bad things because they had a good reason to. is just women have fundimentally less agency and men more agency please explain how that ISNT just the same mysogenist veiwpoints with a hashtag girlboss coat of paint. and this isnt me projecting mysogenistic right wing ideas onto you, i wrote all this stuff while looking through "radfem101" "terf reference guide" "things TRA's need to get thru their heads" posts. theres a reason people get them confused, ive been told these exact same things time and time again by alt rights and conservatives and mysogenists. so witch are you? why do you agree on so much?
-----
how do you deal with the whole, not wanting womens genitals to be constantly policed and have that be all that defines them (true and real) and the very real fact that there is no chromosome detector 3000 and if you want to create "female only spaces" you realistically are eaither going to have to subject billions of women on a daily basis to sexual harrassment to see if they are "real women" or do it just based on appearance. witch is enevitibly going to cause a disproportionate ammount of hate and violence twards black, gnc, and intersex women for not being "women" enough. something that is already happening, because trying to give rigid requirements for what looks like a woman and what looks like a man is always going to impact these groups disproportionately, you know its gonna be based off of like a white skinny cis girl! and uh! not all women are that!
and assuming there is a chromosome dectector 3000 in the future, a) intersex people b) trans men exist, and while im sure you can argue day and night about how they arent real men and phallo dicks are just a mutilated skin tube or whatever half of what you guys talk about is how you feel unsafe being in the same bathroom as someone who "looks like a dude" and who has a penis. considering the strictness in needing 100% gender conformity in trans women im sure the exact same people wouldnt be comfortable with a trans guy eaither, if youd feel ok just so long as they had the right reading on the chromosome dectector 3000 then all this talk about trans women being violent cuz penis and body hair and testosterone is just bullshit. and sense terfs love to play hypotheticals with 100% cis dudes just telling people theyre girls so they can get through the female bathroom security (a thing that totally exists believe me guys) (and also yeah telling a police officer that youre "just a trans girl" would totally actually help you in a legal case dont google trans panic defence shhhhhh its ok its ok, statistics you dont read from "xxvaginawomxngirlfucker" arent real its ok,,) couldnt a cis dude just lieeee about being a trans man? whos saying nobody can lie about my chromosome detector 3000 score! are you gonna put a bouncer in the female bathroom security gates? and like, where do trans people even pee then. we just rename the mens bathroom to the trannies and mysogenists room? the biologically more violent room? yeah lets shove a bunch of little intersex girls into the violent mysogenists room, she had body hair and a harsher jawline and that scared me so im lumping her into the room with all the people i think are pedos and rapists, she will feel totally ok about this and this wont effect her perception of herself, this wont enforce gender roles and make women having a complex about being feminine enough worse. women can be anything! except anything i think looks like a guy. so women can be feminine and nothing else :) but women can be anything i put in this super limiting box! i genuinely cannot imagine a world where this doesnt dramatically worsten sexual phisical and emotional violence against literally everyone.
and to say again. im not looking for quirky rebloggable snapbacks to each of my points i want you 2 put an equal ammount of effort as i did scrolling terflandia and writing all this up. so dont just call me a delusional tr-nny i want you to give me like. atleast a little substance here. something to chew and bite and pick apart
ok i dont have time to answer every sentence in this long as post but i hope this bunch of material amounts to a couple of hours of research.
on being a "pushover" to conservatives: (read this and tell me these women are pushovers i dare you) : (link) Gender Critical Disputes
An introduction to the objection to the gender identity concept:
"how is categorising people by genitals/chromosomes/whatever not flattening/reducing them?" :
So, after a summer recess of trying to forget that the world is manifoldly going to hell in a handcart, this weekâs exciting âBack to Twitte
and to finish off, more short responses to various common online arguments. I'm sure this will cover quite a few of the things in your post.
So, given the state of play, I decided to archive some of my threads: Who We are and What We Believe 1 March 2020 â What We Believe 9 June 2
Why do you and many other radfems make a point to comment on content that annoys you? Like why get bent out of shape about something on the internet that has nothing to do with you and isnât harming people
because this is the place where so much of the things that harm people irl is starting out . We're not calling out sexism cause we're easily offended or humorless , we call it out because it causes harm to women.
Random internet bullshit is easily ignored- i know that when i first started learning about radical feminism thought "well some of this stuff is really just random internet bullshit and doesn't affect anyone in the real world maybe it doesn't matter that much".
But when these "internet bullshit" ideas (like saying women can't have their own services, or exclusive same sex attraction is wrong) affects law and public policy in many countries, why not call it out?
I asked a nonbinary ex-friend of mine why TRAs oppose gender abolition and essentially just make more boxes to fit in and why radfems and TRAs donât have the same goals. Cause like, they should, right? We both understand gender is oppressive and both understand that your sex doesnât define what you like and who you are.
You want to know the answer? You want to know what the response was to âisnât gender inherently oppressive? Why would you want to make more of them instead of everyone just not having a gender?â
The answer was: âbecause some people like the idea of having a gender. Besides, itâs impossible to abolish gender, so why not make more.â
OâŚ.Okay? So, TRAs want to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?
And they call themselves leftists but say âabolish gender? Too hard. Letâs continue to use an oppressive system that kills women,â yet claim to be fucking anarchists, revolutionaries, and apparently can abolish the entire police force and scream ACAB (which I agree with, fuck police brutality) yet abolishing gender is just âtoo hard.â
Womp womp. They created a fucking gender out of not having a gender (âagenderâ) and theyâre so close to getting it but so far.
Litteraly never heard anyone say anything along the lines of âwant to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?â
I always hear it as we should be improving and fixing the system now which has sexist and oppressive views on gender. Itâs not like the system likes trans people much anywho
Wow, because youâve never heard of it means it never happens? Well, Iâve never heard of a trans person committing suicide. See how your argument is flawed? Because yes, trans people do commit suicide, and yes, @nyctodromist said this to me directly (unfortunately I donât have screenshots but you can ask her about it - if you do, donât mention this blog because she emotionally abused me, I wonât go into detail but I believe we can respect my privacy as an abuse victim here, and no, just because I have beliefs you donât like doesnât mean Iâm lying because I know yâall think TERFs always lie đ), so if you want to ask them about it you can.
I donât think that youâre lying and I never said you were. I just think that type of presentation of the argument reads as a strawman.
I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?
OK and I ask here cause I couldnât ask him the comments because those were turned off
Do you think that people transition to enforce the nature gender oppression like the majority of the conversation? Do you think thatâs just a small part of it? Is that the part that you have a problem with or is there like greater parts of it?
Could it be that these two are separate topics and even if transgender people abolished gender within their community, there would still be people who perpetrate and enforce sex/gender based oppression?
Because thereâs of course people who donât even care about sex, or gender, and see them as the same thing and still act sexist to people.
And then on your last point of why donât radical feminists and TRA people agree because they both know sex doesnât define the person. In my activity in radfem spaces Iâve seen quite different takes but enough vitriol directed to trans people and âtrans identified males and femalesâ that make me think thereâs a clear enough difference between the ideals
"I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?"
Good question. Here's a great place to learn about the people who are leading the conversation, the funding and legal strategies:
A Brief History of Transgenderism: Appendix to The Political Erasure of Sex: Sex and the Census
Ah cool 2 out of the 3 sections are deadlinks. Donât know if itâs supposed to be like that.
But then it complains about ONS skipping democratic processes for changing the ways it collects data? Do yall really have to vote on a change to the way a national survey is done?
And according to ONS it stated trying to collect this data after the â2007 Equalities Review by the Cabinet Officeâ because of this review and I take this from the ONS website âa great deal of data already existed, it also noted there were significant gaps in some equality areas, including information on transgender people. An important recommendation from the EDR was that: âGovernment agencies work with non-government stakeholders to agree an approach to obtaining more quality information on transgender people, including those undergoing the process of gender reassignment.â
âWhilst we have identified a need for gender identity data, the workshop we held revealed that many of the same challenges and difficulties in collecting this information still remain. The research and testing we are carrying out will inform our position on this topic and determine whether, and how best, to meet user needs for information on gender identityâ
So government agency is figuring out the best way to do something and acknowledged they didnât do it the best way doesnât sound like female erasure. Iâm not seeing the big problem with government agency attempting to better their data collection.
And itâs also hard to take this seriously when it says that thereâs no oversight and then the human rights committee comes along and tells them theyâre doing fine. Or when one of the citations disagrees with what the intended purposes and is like pro trans people
And then itâs extra hard to take it seriously when it says that ONS never addressed these concerns and a two minute Google search leads you to them addressing the concerns. Admitting that they need a better and more robust and specific survey system than what they first used.
I linked to the appendix, not the actual report (appendix doesn't mention the ONS at all)
(as for the bit about the ONS addressing the concerns, that was because of the campaigners who wrote this report and after another campaigning group won their legal case lol. so how does that work? did they time travel?)
You linked an appendix of a website so I went to look at what more information the website gave. And then looked up that to see if it corroborates since itâs always good to have more than one source
And the review I am mentioning was something occurring from like 2005-2016 with the 2016 being the a government response was published. So yeah time travel forward from that response I was speaking of in 2016 and you arrive in 2021 with the legal case.
okay fair. the situation is nuanced. they still lost the legal case that was brought over this.
anyway I didn't link the website to have a discussion about the ONS, I linked it because the specific chapter (appendix) is about the things you were talking about (what opinions were held by the people who led the movement, as opposed to internet randoms).
Again, I am pointing out that the core tenants and values are separate from what action the individuals perform.
And Iâm pointing out that the vague central ideas and concepts of radically reformatting society to destroy the patriarchy is so absurdly vague. And what that means can vary from person to person so widely. And some people focus on microscopic issues when some of the core tenants point at wider bigger issues.
And so given a link into a subsection of a website that is entirely about the belief, and so I looked at the entire website. I saw complaints about the way women were being erased, and then I looked into what was going on during that occasion. And itâs not that women were being erased, but that statistical gathering method were changing and they changed again
Because also if someone links me an unknown source imma look at what else they host on the website. Make sure itâs not an onion knockoff or see if they have any biases. Should be standard for investigating a source
Cool, I get it.
I still think a compilation of information about what was being done by Press For Change, GIRES and others, are important to understanding the flavour of trans activism that's influencing institutions.
idk this got really big and abstract really fast, I linked to the page because I think it fleshes out the thing you were saying which was "Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation?".
To which I would say, no not really, let's look at what the people who were leading the conversation were really saying. Which isn't really "transition to uphold the oppression", moreso "deny that oppression exists in the first place, or if it does, deny that it matters in any meaningful way".
Such as the idea that â[t]here is every reason to question why âsexâ should be recorded, at all, on the birth certificate. There are strong scientific, medical and societal reasons to discontinue this requirement.â (which is in the appendix with a citation)
I asked a nonbinary ex-friend of mine why TRAs oppose gender abolition and essentially just make more boxes to fit in and why radfems and TRAs donât have the same goals. Cause like, they should, right? We both understand gender is oppressive and both understand that your sex doesnât define what you like and who you are.
You want to know the answer? You want to know what the response was to âisnât gender inherently oppressive? Why would you want to make more of them instead of everyone just not having a gender?â
The answer was: âbecause some people like the idea of having a gender. Besides, itâs impossible to abolish gender, so why not make more.â
OâŚ.Okay? So, TRAs want to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?
And they call themselves leftists but say âabolish gender? Too hard. Letâs continue to use an oppressive system that kills women,â yet claim to be fucking anarchists, revolutionaries, and apparently can abolish the entire police force and scream ACAB (which I agree with, fuck police brutality) yet abolishing gender is just âtoo hard.â
Womp womp. They created a fucking gender out of not having a gender (âagenderâ) and theyâre so close to getting it but so far.
Litteraly never heard anyone say anything along the lines of âwant to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?â
I always hear it as we should be improving and fixing the system now which has sexist and oppressive views on gender. Itâs not like the system likes trans people much anywho
Wow, because youâve never heard of it means it never happens? Well, Iâve never heard of a trans person committing suicide. See how your argument is flawed? Because yes, trans people do commit suicide, and yes, @nyctodromist said this to me directly (unfortunately I donât have screenshots but you can ask her about it - if you do, donât mention this blog because she emotionally abused me, I wonât go into detail but I believe we can respect my privacy as an abuse victim here, and no, just because I have beliefs you donât like doesnât mean Iâm lying because I know yâall think TERFs always lie đ), so if you want to ask them about it you can.
I donât think that youâre lying and I never said you were. I just think that type of presentation of the argument reads as a strawman.
I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?
OK and I ask here cause I couldnât ask him the comments because those were turned off
Do you think that people transition to enforce the nature gender oppression like the majority of the conversation? Do you think thatâs just a small part of it? Is that the part that you have a problem with or is there like greater parts of it?
Could it be that these two are separate topics and even if transgender people abolished gender within their community, there would still be people who perpetrate and enforce sex/gender based oppression?
Because thereâs of course people who donât even care about sex, or gender, and see them as the same thing and still act sexist to people.
And then on your last point of why donât radical feminists and TRA people agree because they both know sex doesnât define the person. In my activity in radfem spaces Iâve seen quite different takes but enough vitriol directed to trans people and âtrans identified males and femalesâ that make me think thereâs a clear enough difference between the ideals
"I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?"
Good question. Here's a great place to learn about the people who are leading the conversation, the funding and legal strategies:
A Brief History of Transgenderism: Appendix to The Political Erasure of Sex: Sex and the Census
Ah cool 2 out of the 3 sections are deadlinks. Donât know if itâs supposed to be like that.
But then it complains about ONS skipping democratic processes for changing the ways it collects data? Do yall really have to vote on a change to the way a national survey is done?
And according to ONS it stated trying to collect this data after the â2007 Equalities Review by the Cabinet Officeâ because of this review and I take this from the ONS website âa great deal of data already existed, it also noted there were significant gaps in some equality areas, including information on transgender people. An important recommendation from the EDR was that: âGovernment agencies work with non-government stakeholders to agree an approach to obtaining more quality information on transgender people, including those undergoing the process of gender reassignment.â
âWhilst we have identified a need for gender identity data, the workshop we held revealed that many of the same challenges and difficulties in collecting this information still remain. The research and testing we are carrying out will inform our position on this topic and determine whether, and how best, to meet user needs for information on gender identityâ
So government agency is figuring out the best way to do something and acknowledged they didnât do it the best way doesnât sound like female erasure. Iâm not seeing the big problem with government agency attempting to better their data collection.
And itâs also hard to take this seriously when it says that thereâs no oversight and then the human rights committee comes along and tells them theyâre doing fine. Or when one of the citations disagrees with what the intended purposes and is like pro trans people
And then itâs extra hard to take it seriously when it says that ONS never addressed these concerns and a two minute Google search leads you to them addressing the concerns. Admitting that they need a better and more robust and specific survey system than what they first used.
I linked to the appendix, not the actual report (appendix doesn't mention the ONS at all)
(as for the bit about the ONS addressing the concerns, that was because of the campaigners who wrote this report and after another campaigning group won their legal case lol. so how does that work? did they time travel?)
You linked an appendix of a website so I went to look at what more information the website gave. And then looked up that to see if it corroborates since itâs always good to have more than one source
And the review I am mentioning was something occurring from like 2005-2016 with the 2016 being the a government response was published. So yeah time travel forward from that response I was speaking of in 2016 and you arrive in 2021 with the legal case.
okay fair. the situation is nuanced. they still lost the legal case that was brought over this.
anyway I didn't link the website to have a discussion about the ONS, I linked it because the specific chapter (appendix) is about the things you were talking about (what opinions were held by the people who led the movement, as opposed to internet randoms).
I asked a nonbinary ex-friend of mine why TRAs oppose gender abolition and essentially just make more boxes to fit in and why radfems and TRAs donât have the same goals. Cause like, they should, right? We both understand gender is oppressive and both understand that your sex doesnât define what you like and who you are.
You want to know the answer? You want to know what the response was to âisnât gender inherently oppressive? Why would you want to make more of them instead of everyone just not having a gender?â
The answer was: âbecause some people like the idea of having a gender. Besides, itâs impossible to abolish gender, so why not make more.â
OâŚ.Okay? So, TRAs want to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?
And they call themselves leftists but say âabolish gender? Too hard. Letâs continue to use an oppressive system that kills women,â yet claim to be fucking anarchists, revolutionaries, and apparently can abolish the entire police force and scream ACAB (which I agree with, fuck police brutality) yet abolishing gender is just âtoo hard.â
Womp womp. They created a fucking gender out of not having a gender (âagenderâ) and theyâre so close to getting it but so far.
Litteraly never heard anyone say anything along the lines of âwant to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?â
I always hear it as we should be improving and fixing the system now which has sexist and oppressive views on gender. Itâs not like the system likes trans people much anywho
Wow, because youâve never heard of it means it never happens? Well, Iâve never heard of a trans person committing suicide. See how your argument is flawed? Because yes, trans people do commit suicide, and yes, @nyctodromist said this to me directly (unfortunately I donât have screenshots but you can ask her about it - if you do, donât mention this blog because she emotionally abused me, I wonât go into detail but I believe we can respect my privacy as an abuse victim here, and no, just because I have beliefs you donât like doesnât mean Iâm lying because I know yâall think TERFs always lie đ), so if you want to ask them about it you can.
I donât think that youâre lying and I never said you were. I just think that type of presentation of the argument reads as a strawman.
I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?
OK and I ask here cause I couldnât ask him the comments because those were turned off
Do you think that people transition to enforce the nature gender oppression like the majority of the conversation? Do you think thatâs just a small part of it? Is that the part that you have a problem with or is there like greater parts of it?
Could it be that these two are separate topics and even if transgender people abolished gender within their community, there would still be people who perpetrate and enforce sex/gender based oppression?
Because thereâs of course people who donât even care about sex, or gender, and see them as the same thing and still act sexist to people.
And then on your last point of why donât radical feminists and TRA people agree because they both know sex doesnât define the person. In my activity in radfem spaces Iâve seen quite different takes but enough vitriol directed to trans people and âtrans identified males and femalesâ that make me think thereâs a clear enough difference between the ideals
"I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?"
Good question. Here's a great place to learn about the people who are leading the conversation, the funding and legal strategies:
A Brief History of Transgenderism: Appendix to The Political Erasure of Sex: Sex and the Census
Ah cool 2 out of the 3 sections are deadlinks. Donât know if itâs supposed to be like that.
But then it complains about ONS skipping democratic processes for changing the ways it collects data? Do yall really have to vote on a change to the way a national survey is done?
And according to ONS it stated trying to collect this data after the â2007 Equalities Review by the Cabinet Officeâ because of this review and I take this from the ONS website âa great deal of data already existed, it also noted there were significant gaps in some equality areas, including information on transgender people. An important recommendation from the EDR was that: âGovernment agencies work with non-government stakeholders to agree an approach to obtaining more quality information on transgender people, including those undergoing the process of gender reassignment.â
âWhilst we have identified a need for gender identity data, the workshop we held revealed that many of the same challenges and difficulties in collecting this information still remain. The research and testing we are carrying out will inform our position on this topic and determine whether, and how best, to meet user needs for information on gender identityâ
So government agency is figuring out the best way to do something and acknowledged they didnât do it the best way doesnât sound like female erasure. Iâm not seeing the big problem with government agency attempting to better their data collection.
And itâs also hard to take this seriously when it says that thereâs no oversight and then the human rights committee comes along and tells them theyâre doing fine. Or when one of the citations disagrees with what the intended purposes and is like pro trans people
And then itâs extra hard to take it seriously when it says that ONS never addressed these concerns and a two minute Google search leads you to them addressing the concerns. Admitting that they need a better and more robust and specific survey system than what they first used.
I linked to the appendix, not the actual report (appendix doesn't mention the ONS at all)
(as for the bit about the ONS addressing the concerns, that was because of the campaigners who wrote this report and after another campaigning group won their legal case lol. so how does that work? did they time travel?)
I asked a nonbinary ex-friend of mine why TRAs oppose gender abolition and essentially just make more boxes to fit in and why radfems and TRAs donât have the same goals. Cause like, they should, right? We both understand gender is oppressive and both understand that your sex doesnât define what you like and who you are.
You want to know the answer? You want to know what the response was to âisnât gender inherently oppressive? Why would you want to make more of them instead of everyone just not having a gender?â
The answer was: âbecause some people like the idea of having a gender. Besides, itâs impossible to abolish gender, so why not make more.â
OâŚ.Okay? So, TRAs want to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?
And they call themselves leftists but say âabolish gender? Too hard. Letâs continue to use an oppressive system that kills women,â yet claim to be fucking anarchists, revolutionaries, and apparently can abolish the entire police force and scream ACAB (which I agree with, fuck police brutality) yet abolishing gender is just âtoo hard.â
Womp womp. They created a fucking gender out of not having a gender (âagenderâ) and theyâre so close to getting it but so far.
Litteraly never heard anyone say anything along the lines of âwant to uphold the oppressive nature of gender and gender roles becauseâŚ.they like the idea of justâŚhaving a gender?â
I always hear it as we should be improving and fixing the system now which has sexist and oppressive views on gender. Itâs not like the system likes trans people much anywho
Wow, because youâve never heard of it means it never happens? Well, Iâve never heard of a trans person committing suicide. See how your argument is flawed? Because yes, trans people do commit suicide, and yes, @nyctodromist said this to me directly (unfortunately I donât have screenshots but you can ask her about it - if you do, donât mention this blog because she emotionally abused me, I wonât go into detail but I believe we can respect my privacy as an abuse victim here, and no, just because I have beliefs you donât like doesnât mean Iâm lying because I know yâall think TERFs always lie đ), so if you want to ask them about it you can.
I donât think that youâre lying and I never said you were. I just think that type of presentation of the argument reads as a strawman.
I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?
OK and I ask here cause I couldnât ask him the comments because those were turned off
Do you think that people transition to enforce the nature gender oppression like the majority of the conversation? Do you think thatâs just a small part of it? Is that the part that you have a problem with or is there like greater parts of it?
Could it be that these two are separate topics and even if transgender people abolished gender within their community, there would still be people who perpetrate and enforce sex/gender based oppression?
Because thereâs of course people who donât even care about sex, or gender, and see them as the same thing and still act sexist to people.
And then on your last point of why donât radical feminists and TRA people agree because they both know sex doesnât define the person. In my activity in radfem spaces Iâve seen quite different takes but enough vitriol directed to trans people and âtrans identified males and femalesâ that make me think thereâs a clear enough difference between the ideals
"I havenât heard of anybody in the LGBTQ community express that opinion. Maybe there are some weird people who transition to uphold the oppression, but are they leading the conversation? Are they leading the gender movement?"
Good question. Here's a great place to learn about the people who are leading the conversation, the funding and legal strategies:
A Brief History of Transgenderism: Appendix to The Political Erasure of Sex: Sex and the Census
Okay I'm a little confused, and this is just a question, radfems say they don't believe in gender but use gendered language like "man" and "women" and I know they use it to refer to sex but at the same time it's still gendered language? It's been used as gendered language for centuries, so I'm just a bit confused.
I don't think of it as "gendered language" or even "sexed language", it's "the language we use to describe concepts that exist in the world".
Men and women exist, that's the reason. We could change the words, or come up with different ones, but people are still going to reinvent the word for the male and female of the species.
Sometimes we might use "female people" and "male people" for clarity because the word "gender" had been muddled to mean at least 4 different things.
Maybe this helps a bit (example of "female people" used for clarity about 9 mins in. But it's informative, watch the whole thing!)
Through A Scottish Prism is proud to present to you, with kind permission from www.insidefilm.org , the film that Edinburgh University could
