Nature is an ecoterrorist!

A huge problem I have with the concept of “cisgender privilege” is that my female-bodied friends, and female-bodied people in general, are somehow assumed to have more privilege from being recognizable as feminine, instead of more targeted for victimization. Er, no. Femininity doesn’t work like that: there is no place of acceptance or safety, just different kinds of violence and objectification.

What I’ve seen is that when women achieve or fall into contemporary beauty (i.e. femininity) norms, they are not given a magic shield from gendered violence, whether sexual, emotional or physical. But they are given more attention of the kind patriarchy wants us to believe is positive—a guy not-so-covertly stalking you throughout the entire grocery store, spooking you so much that you keep your keys between your fingers and look over your shoulder walking through the parking lot; some douche who comes up and tells you that you’re pretty, with the obvious expectation that you’ll immediately swoon and accompany him to bed; getting “HAY BAYBEE” or sundry other things shouted at you from a passing man (in a car, on foot) instead of “FATASS” or “FREAK.” Stop acting like these things are not just as invalidating, minimizing, and fucking terrifying as the things women go through when they’re not feminine enough. They are.

Newsflash from Feminism 101: Women do not win. Ever.

But dividing women has one very salient advantage—it keeps them occupied arguing over who’s the prettiest, ugliest, bitchiest or most privileged, short-circuiting any destruction the silly little dears might have otherwise been able to wreak on the existing power structure.

Come on. This has been happening for centuries. Women fight over who’s more beautiful and the winner is men. Women fight over a husband and the winner is the man. One of the sad truths of women’s interactions throughout history is that women are always more likely to blame and fight each other than men. Patriarchy—all power structures—create a competition amongst the underclass to divert their attention and energies to getting small slivers of oppressor-given approval and power, because the easiest way to quell rebellion is to make sure it never begins. By making women compete, patriarchy succeeded in making men and men’s power invisible: in the din and dust of scrabbling to get whatever scrap of male approval was there, women forgot who was standing above them, laughing, and blamed the women around them for being better at the competition, or worse.

Part of the solidarity of the feminist movement was realizing that the women who won were still being forced to compete.

When I look at the belief that women—because it is always women—are privileged because they have an advantage in the competition, I see that history and that community disappeared. When I see the dismissal of this competition as important, as a fundamental shaping factor of all women’s lives—because all women have to deal with this in any civilization—what appears to me is not a fight for the rights of those maligned, but an incredible push to make people forget that the competition ever existed at all.

That’s the voice of postmodernism, individualism, transactional oppression. It’s the voice of the pornographers and the pimps, the doctors and the butchers and the rapists: women have power over the competition because they choose to compete.

This is the voice of reality: women have no choice to compete, because they are not the ones setting up the arenas. Men are, and the prize is sexual, emotional and capitalistic victimization. The only beneficiaries of the Colosseum were the spectators.

The privilege and power that transactivists seek does not lie in being able to participate in the competition, much less in winning at it. Those things reside only in not competing, and women cannot give you this—they’ve been trying for thousands of years to find a way out of the competition, themselves. You cannot give power you aren’t allowed to have in the first place, and women cannot oppress you as women, if trying to found a safe place for themselves and those like them—who were given no power and no choice—even counts as oppression. Demanding that women give you the power to be like them is only begging from an empty hand, because women have never had the power to decide what women were in the first place. And I find it unsurprising that when women finally do try to decide what women are—people designated unwilling competitors from birth in a system they cannot benefit from, because they have ovaries—the reaction is this vicious.

As women, they have no power to give you and even less to take yours from you. As women, they aren’t even allowed to decide who does not get to be around them, because that would be making boundaries, and those without power cannot have boundaries. As people born and recognized as men most of your lives, you still believe that women should not be allowed to have boundaries that are respected, defended. I know you believe this because your actions are written by patriarchy, and they are the same as any other man in the world, speaking slowly and menacingly: you have no right to keep yourself from me.

The only reason that oppressiveness is scented when a woman says, “I feel unsafe, and I don’t want you around me,” is that men have always had every right to women’s space, women’s bodies and women’s time. So when someone who was raised as a man is told no, it is perceived as a limiting of their rights, their privilege. Women are oppressing men by taking away their rights, the rights that were originally taken from women. But that is also invisible, especially to men.

As a genderqueer, I am absolutely skeptical of the idea that such a thing as “cisgender privilege” exists. Seeing it in the light of male privilege and the reality of women’s lives, instead of abstracted to fit the needs of those who have been privileged all their lives, it is just more of the same thing from the same place.

Remember: pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Advertisements

Comments on: "Privilege isn’t Winning, it’s Not Participating" (21)

  1. I identify as genderqueer and recently had my hair cut quite short, so now I get a lot of ‘is that a boy or girl?’ type looks, which can be demeaning and demoralizing. Today a couple waiting at the busstop downright sneered at me, which, I would wager, I wouldn’t have gotten had I been presenting in a more feminine manner. Even when I’m wearing a skirt (gendered clothing, annoying!) I get the odd comment from friends I’ve shouted to in the street “I wondered why that boy was shouting at me! And why he was wearing a skirt!” HAHAHahah….no. So for me, being genderqueer and presenting as less feminine, but not necessarily more masculine, has only added to the intrusions on my privacy and policing of my gender which I previously faced when looking more like a ‘girl’ as people decide girls ought to look.
    Also! If you are a trans woman and women tell you that you’re not allowed in women only spaces they’re basically saying that you’re not a woman and that their opinion on your sex and/or gender is more valid than your own. Which is oppression.
    “As people born and recognized as men most of your lives, you still believe that women should not be allowed to have boundaries that are respected, defended. I know you believe this because your actions are written by patriarchy, and they are the same as any other man in the world, speaking slowly and menacingly: you have no right to keep yourself from me.”
    Are you saying here that trans women are still, in essence, men, here? And also generalising all trans women in that they must all have absorbed a similar amount of patriarchy in their request to be allowed in women’s spaces? To what extent must a person reject the patriarchy in order to be allowed into women’s spaces? Being that trans women are, in fact, women?
    Equally, cis privilege doesn’t only except between trans women and women but also trans men and men, men and trans women (frequently, violently), women and trans men…
    As a final point, I don’t think that trans women are demanding the power to be like women, from women, but the recognition of their status as women. And a part of that is the entry to women’s spaces.

    • Didn’t get to this before.

      Today a couple waiting at the busstop downright sneered at me, which, I would wager, I wouldn’t have gotten had I been presenting in a more feminine manner.

      Really? You must be pretty gifted looks-wise; many of my friends constantly get leers, sneers, and comments of all kinds. I can barely go a day without someone screaming “FREAK!” at me from their car window as I’m walking down the street, but the treatment they get is just insane. I also have several female-bodied friends who don’t fit the “feminine” standards at all (a few are fat; two just don’t “look” feminine no matter what they do), and they’re not trans. Gender normativity and beauty standards fit what you’re describing better.

      I’m also going to suggest an alternative interpretation to the change in behaviors you’ve gotten: it seems like “more” because the intrusions on your space when presenting as feminine are silent because they’re directed at a “girl.” I don’t know if it’s been your experience, but one of my female-bodied genderqueer friends, Dani, lived switchy and androgynous for a few years. When zie began presenting as feminine again, however, the intrusions skyrocketed—zie said it was probably because zie’d been presenting as strictly androgynous (instead of more feminine or more masculine), but people actually treated zem with more respect and invaded zeir space less often when zie was passing as androgynous. Genderfucky is a whole other subject, though.

      Also! If you are a trans woman and women tell you that you’re not allowed in women only spaces they’re basically saying that you’re not a woman and that their opinion on your sex and/or gender is more valid than your own. Which is oppression.

      If you feel like you have more of a right to entrance than other women do to feeling comfortable—which is a huge issue, since many trans women act with male privilege—then you don’t have a right to entry in that safe space because clearly you don’t care so much about the feeling of safety that the already-present members need. I say this for every kind of safe space. Your oppression does not trump others’ oppression. A white woman does not have a right to access a safe space that explicitly focuses on women of color merely because it is labeled a “women-only space.” And I guarantee you, if that white woman demands to be let in on those grounds—regardless of her behavior—that is an obvious indication that she’s going to be making that safe space less safe for everyone else.

      Part of male privilege is believing that your behavior does not matter: only what you feel—your own perception of yourself—does. I vehemently disagree with that. Your behavior is virtually everything that matters. (I’ll be writing a post on this eventually.)

      Are you saying here that trans women are still, in essence, men, here? And also generalising all trans women in that they must all have absorbed a similar amount of patriarchy in their request to be allowed in women’s spaces?

      No and no.

      If you view personal identity as valid, as I do, then the first is impossible. As I said in another comment, a better suggestion is that behavior is not inherent to gender—therefore, someone can ID as and be a woman while still acting with male privilege. I’ve met some FAAB people who act with male privilege because of their upbringing, although by far the majority of people who internalize those behaviors were MAAB.

      I’m also not claiming that you have to have “absorbed patriarchy” to be a MAAB woman and want into a woman-only safe space; the male-socialized privilege comes afterwards, and is not possible to explain simply. Demanding to be let in, especially to the point of demonizing, running smear campaigns, targeting rape/death threats, and in general proving that you are extremely unsafe and should not be let into any safe space ever—all of which I’ve seen IRL or heard about second-hand happening to FAAB women at the hands of MTFs—and the entitlement to inclusion at the expense of others’ comfort and sense of (or real) safety, etc., etc., are all part of male-socialized behavior, and they are harmful. In other words: you can feel entitled, as a woman, to a woman-only space; what marks you as privileged is your feeling of entitlement to that space at the expense of others.

      Also, patriarchy isn’t something you can not absorb—all humans do it, at least in this society and others like it, and it’s largely a matter of social/media involvement that determines the extent (so if you want to escape internalizing patriarchy, do yourself a favor and be raised by wolves?). So for me to assert that “trans women have absorbed patriarchy!” would be laughably meaningless. I thought that was a pretty Oppression 101 kind of thing, though, like with the racism-in-the-air metaphor.

      To what extent must a person reject the patriarchy in order to be allowed into women’s spaces?

      As I have a number of thoughts on this subject, I haven’t even begun to unravel this one for myself. I have three things down already:

      1. Don’t be an aggressive and entitled jerk. (There are a couple lists out there walking men—as a social and behavioral reality—through how to respect women as people.)
      2. Listen to other women. Pay attention to signs that you may be making them uncomfortable.
      3. If the members of the safe space are okay with you being there, then you have a de facto right to be there.

      Those are not meant to go in any particular order, and they are mere snippets of thoughts. The first two are pointers on how to actually be someone who will uphold a safe space. The third is just an observation—that many MAAB women do already have the right to be in some women-only spaces, because those communities already decided. I know of two of them in Denver (or knew, it’s been a few years).

      Equally, cis privilege doesn’t only except between trans women and women but also trans men and men, men and trans women (frequently, violently), women and trans men…

      … If transfolk have cis privilege over non-transfolk, that means that the “cis” in “cis privilege” is not so much. They have a gender normativity advantage. A non-white (say, a Black) person can use the tropes and standards of racism against Chican@s (or other Black people), but that doesn’t mean they benefit from that racism—they still suffer from racism. You can employ the tropes of oppression against someone and make them suffer for it, but that does not mean you benefit yourself from the same oppression. That’s, well, what the entire point of this post was.

      As a final point, I don’t think that trans women are demanding the power to be like women, from women, but the recognition of their status as women. And a part of that is the entry to women’s spaces.

      I wasn’t assuming it was the power to be like women. On a class front, if you can transition, you already have that power via class privilege for gender coaches, the mandatory therapy, and surgery costs. I will repeatedly point out that in my experience, “tranny pros” don’t ever actually manage to transition fully—they usually end up dead, sometimes from pimps, sometimes from drugs, more often from johns.

      I’m actually going to talk about how the recognition of MAAB women as women is not actually enough in an upcoming post.

  2. Why did you delete my comment? I’m trying to show you the real concerns of trans women here, and you’re completely ignoring them.
    That’s called erasing. You’re participating in oppression, right now.
    If you can’t handle it, don’t make posts like this.

  3. I’m also posting my original comment, which you so nicely decided to delete – great trans erasure RIGHT THERE.

    Thanks, Savage Rabbit, for telling me I’m not a real woman.
    No really, I get that enough from men, but from a feminist? I expected better.

    But no, it’s supposedly selfish of me to want a safe space where I don’t feel like I’m going to get attacked, raped, and brutalized and possibly murdered for simply existing, you’ve got to go out of your way to attack me too.
    So it looks like there’s nowhere safe for me – not even feminists, the ones who are supposed to be fighting for the rights of all marginalized groups.
    Thanks. You’ve done great justice here today. By showing me that there’s really no place for me, you’ve let me know that I really just shouldn’t exist. I’ll take you up on that advice now.

  4. Anon, chill. I’ve been gone for several days. WordPress has a schedule-post feature. I didn’t delete your comments (well, I’ve deleted several of the trollier ones), so you might need to find something else to do for a while while the internet slowly trundles on.

    You absolutely deserve a safe space where you will not get brutalized, raped, and attacked. However, there are some caveats:

    1. So do FAAB women.
    2. If you are making someone else uncomfortable in their space, YOU get to leave.
    3. Are FAAB women the ones physically brutalizing, raping, and attacking you? Physically. Not emotionally. Not a whole lot of people escape emotional abuse, but some abusers have more power behind it.

    If FAAB women are brutalizing, raping, and attacking you, how is ANY space with FAAB women “safe”? You should be demanding spaces without FAAB women, because they’re. not. safe. Which is what I’m saying, over and over and over again: you have the right to a safe space, as do all women, regardless of color, age, socioeconomic range, etc. If FAAB women are threatening you, then you have the right to a space without them, because only that will be safe. And since FAAB women are extremely violent towards you, then trying to get into their spaces is horribly counterproductive. You need your own space. You deserve a safe space. If you feel FAAB women are a threat? Then they don’t get to be in your space. And vice versa.

    Oh, and “cissexist pig?” I’m genderqueer, which you might want to read up on, because that’s real fuckin’ transphobic right there. Furthermore, any more bigoted speciesist remarks from you will get screened.

  5. Speciesist? In your bio, you say you’re reclaiming the word “savage” from the way it’s used against animals, but you’ve completely forgotten that you’re appropriating its use against Native/3rd world peoples.

    And if your idea of more exclusivity, division, and segregation is a better idea for ‘safe spaces’, you are well mistaken. Segregating our Safe Spaces isn’t going to make anybody more knowledgeable, tolerant, or less likely to harass. It’s going to allow negative attitudes to fester without being challenged.

    And if you still really think that MAAB women somehow have male privilege, there’s just no words to describe how wrong you are.

    • @Anon

      Speciesist? In your bio, you say you’re reclaiming the word “savage” from the way it’s used against animals, but you’ve completely forgotten that you’re appropriating its use against Native/3rd world peoples.

      I pointed it out specifically because it was used against animals first—applied to those people only as an excuse to oppress them as being enough like animals to escape consideration.

      And if your idea of more exclusivity, division, and segregation is a better idea for ‘safe spaces’, you are well mistaken. Segregating our Safe Spaces isn’t going to make anybody more knowledgeable, tolerant, or less likely to harass. It’s going to allow negative attitudes to fester without being challenged.

      I don’t have much faith in the idea that challenging people’s misconceptions and bigotry has any kind of effect, actually. Certainly it never has for anyone I’ve ever met. Change is something that happens inwardly, particularly for something as fickle as bigotry; you can’t “persuade” anyone who isn’t already being actively persuaded.

      I’m a pessimist at heart.

      But even more, that’s not what safe spaces are about. They’re not there to foster conflict even if the end-goal is tolerance; they’re intended to make you (general) feel safe. As in, not threatened or at risk of harassment. Making “safe spaces” a place for conflict, even educational conflict, defeats the point. You know that one of the functions of a “safe space” is a place where you don’t have to explain or defend yourself or try to persuade others, right?

      And if you still really think that MAAB women somehow have male privilege, there’s just no words to describe how wrong you are.

      If you can only conceptualize male privilege as something that people identifying as male have, and as something that is neither internalized nor unconscious, then you are a) extremely essentialist and man-hating, and b) falling prey to a reductionistic myth.

      So, in other words, no. I’m not. I even explained how you were wrong, even.

      (MAAB women is a good phrase, by the way. I’ll have to work that into my vocabulary.)

      • At the safe space where I attend, you are banned if you violate safe space.
        By violating safe space, you give up your ‘right’ to a safe space of your own. The purpose of a “Safe Space” is not to house oppressors.

        This means that the head of command must be knowledgeable about all forms of oppression and offensive language, and must be willing and able to recognize when someone is being attacked or slurs are dropped, etc.

        And hey, maybe getting banned from a place is a great way to get someone to rethink dangerous language.

        • If you violate safe space first by making others feel unsafe, then it doesn’t matter how much you feel like they’re oppressing you to kick you out. If you’re entering a community without caring about the comfort and safety of the members already within it and demanding they accept you, then you’re not trying to make a safe space. You’re trying to make a you space.

          And hey, maybe getting banned from a place is a great way to get someone to rethink dangerous language.

          Alright, as you wish. I was finally starting to have a productive conversation, too. But since you don’t feel the same, you get your wish—you’re banned.

  6. This is not a competition, it’s a hierarchy. A hierarchy that you are enforcing by suggesting that cis women are somehow incapable of being privileged because they are not the top of this fucked up cultural food chain we’re living in.
    Other than that, I can only repeat what people are telling you. This is erasing. Insisting that the definition of “woman” for the purposes of safe space is biological is erasing. Your body is not your self, we threw out that pamphlet years ago.
    Look, as a FAAB queer woman, I “pass” in the wider world. I don’t get gaybashed because people don’t think I’m gay. However, I also get erased in the queer community. My sexual orientation is questioned and I am often treated with hostility, because of the fact that I pass. That doesn’t mean that being able to pass isn’t a privilege. I would never dream of denying the fact that being FAAB is a privileged position in comparison to the position of trans* persons, that would be stupid. The whole premise that your biology is the basis for safe space denies cis privilege and damages equality.
    Yes, women are marginalized. But FAAB women have more privilege in their perfectly manicured pinky fingers than any single trans* person will ever have, and by denying that you are doing so much harm. You are enforcing the hierarchy and that’s just not acceptable.

    • This is not a competition, it’s a hierarchy.

      Explain to me how hierarchy automatically excludes competition. Now. Fucking assertions won’t get you anywhere here; you need to describe how your point functions or go back to fucking Oppression 101.

      How does competition among the oppressed not exist? So, at some indefinable point in your life, you’re handed some kind of rank badge that can never change? So all women are sorted in a vertical ranking system that can never change, no matter how their looks and presentation changes, no matter how they act, and how much they support or buy into systems of oppression? So there’s no such thing as being able to sell out other people because your own ranking will never change? So men as a social reality have no impact on women’s ranking within a hierarchy, because it is fixed? So women are not encouraged to fucking fight each other tooth and nail in order to get male approval?

      That’s fucking ridiculous. Get over yourself. My patience is officially nil for this kind of I-say-so-so-it-is-true crap. Oh, and… yeah. That’s exactly what you said, because that is straight-up the only interpretation of your words that is not wildly generous.

      A hierarchy that you are enforcing by suggesting that cis women are somehow incapable of being privileged because they are not the top of this fucked up cultural food chain we’re living in.

      Oh, hey. I never fucking claimed that. Ever.

      I have claimed, however, that women do not have any power to oppress women as women; they borrow men’s power to reinforce oppression against other women. “The Sword of Power” is illusory; you can theoretically gain power by selling out other women and gaining men’s approval, but it is not your power. It’s granted to you at the discretion of those who actually benefit from the oppression you’re supporting.

      A white woman can oppress a woman of color via white privilege, but she cannot oppress that woman of color with “power” from being a woman. Because there is no power in being a woman. She can “gain” temporary and fickle power from men by siding with them against her—by encouraging favoritism and getting “honorary dick points”—but that white woman, as a woman, has no ability to oppress other women. She can only use oppression that others benefit from—and she may believe in that oppression herself—but she will never be able to hold “female privilege.”

      All social dynamics are complex. If you refuse to understand and accept complexity, then you shouldn’t be here.

      This is erasing. Insisting that the definition of “woman” for the purposes of safe space is biological is erasing.

      I’m not. I have never claimed that “women-only” spaces should apply only to FAAB women. Quite the opposite, in fact. I merely have more nuance in my beliefs than you believe is convenient.

      Your body is not your self, we threw out that pamphlet years ago.

      Denying that “woman” is a social reality is erasure.

      That doesn’t mean that being able to pass isn’t a privilege.

      Um, I disagree. Sorry for offending you with my disagreement; I’ll try harder to be just like you in the future, I promise.

      There’s a difference between merely not being attacked as often and actually benefiting from something.

      Furthermore, my lesbian friends want to tell you that you’re fucking wrong. “Privilege” is having your identity accepted, point-blank, because you say so, and being able to gain power from that. It’s not any kind of “privilege” to have everyone assume you’re something you’re not—weren’t you just complaining about erasure? If my lesbian friends need to make the choice between personal safety and being true to themselves every time some fuckwit-with-a-dick assumes they’re straight, THAT IS NOT PRIVILEGE. Because, ultimately, that would mean that MAAB women are “privileged” if they pass either as male or as female. And honestly, I’m not willing to say that they can pass if they’re willing to basically sell out their identity and personal integrity, so therefore they’re privileged. That shit is whack, yo.

      I would never dream of denying the fact that being FAAB is a privileged position in comparison to the position of trans* persons, that would be stupid.

      You need to actually describe how this is true, or you have no point to be considered; you’re just making an argument ad lapidum.

      The whole premise that your biology is the basis for safe space denies cis privilege and damages equality.

      Well, good thing I don’t support that! Which you might have noticed, if you weren’t so busy making bad faith arguments against people who appear to disagree with you.

      But FAAB women have more privilege in their perfectly manicured pinky fingers

      Woah. Okay. You lose. You have lost this argument. Whatever point you might have had is null and void. You have gone from “I am a transactivist” to “I am using transactivism to hide my seething misogyny” in less than a complete sentence.

      (I know exactly one FAAB person who regularly gets manicures, and she’s got a lot more against her than simply getting her nails done. By contrast, I know more men for whom this statement is true.)

      Your IP is officially banned. Get out of my space and do not come back.

      Perfectly manicured pinky fingers… seriously. You might as well have been making some derisive comment about nappy hair. Holy shit get over yourself.

  7. Hm, there’s a lot I object to in this post, but my biggest concern is that you, an admitted genderqueer individual, somehow feel that you still have access to women’s spaces? And indeed, the place to define who is and is not a woman, or threat to women? It sounds like you’re just as guilty as the men you define of trying to force competition: trans women vs cis. And since you’re conveniently only a woman when you want to access women’s spaces, from the safety of your oh-so-smug gender variance, you sit back and watch. Oh hell yes “cisgender privilege” exists, and you are basking in it, thumbing your nose at the women lacking it. Why else do you get access to women’s spaces while trans women have to fight and be misgendered and be hurt to access the same safe space? A space which, considering people like you inhabit it, might not even be that safe? (But don’t take this as an argument to keep trans women out, because they need this space, as much as or more than you do.)

    Trans women are women. End of story. They’re just as legit as any cis women, and since you ID as genderqueer, they’re more woman than you.

    “As a genderqueer, I am absolutely skeptical of the idea that such a thing as “cisgender privilege” exists. Seeing it in the light of male privilege and the reality of women’s lives, instead of abstracted to fit the needs of those who have been privileged all their lives, it is just more of the same thing from the same place.”

    Nice try, but cisgender privilege isn’t male privilege. They can overlap, but cis privilege is about living up to society’s expectation that when the doctor picked you up at your birth and said, “It’s a girl!” (or “It’s a boy!”) that doctor was right. That the gender marker on your ID fits your self-identification. That your body (specifically your genitalia and hormones) matches the norms of your gender. That people won’t misgender you, or it will be clear that they are in error if they do. That you have access to the spaces your gender resides in because when people look at you, they see a woman (or a man). Being genderqueer doesn’t mean you avoid this, because genderqueer =/= trans. (The two can and often do overlap, but they are NOT THE SAME THING.) Being genderqueer and making it clear this is the case, sticking up for your own gender and refusing to be accepted as male or female, not using a bathroom you’re comfortable in unless it’s gender neutral — this would be living genderqueer without cis privilege. Keeping your identity for yourself and living day to day as a binary gender, at least where other people are concerned — it’s a legitimate way to live, but it also means you’re participating in cis privilege. Denying it makes you just as complicit in oppression as those men you hate so much.

    And I’ve now just been relegated to the spamlist because I claim you hate men. Now I should go read The Spearhead with all of the rest of my MRA buddies.

    • Hm, there’s a lot I object to in this post, but my biggest concern is that you, an admitted genderqueer individual, somehow feel that you still have access to women’s spaces?

      No. I don’t feel I have access. I don’t go into them. I don’t expect to be welcome in them. I can’t understand how you got this idea from my actual words. Mind, I’ve also never encouraged competition between FAAB and trans women (actually, quite the opposite), but you’re thinking that, too.

      Well, enough of that; I won’t bother humoring your strawman.

      They’re just as legit as any cis women, and since you ID as genderqueer, they’re more woman than you.

      Yes.

      I’m not claiming they’re not women; I’m claiming that, having not been socialized from birth as women—as a distinct and real experience, the denial of which is far more “cissexism” than y’all are accusing me of—they have different experiences, ones which do not actually appraise them of the lived experience of women as a social reality. And I am also claiming that male privilege is not something encased in the perception others have of you.

      I’m not speaking about “women as biological,” because I don’t believe that at all. I’m speaking about “women as a social reality,” as an encouraged and enforced pattern of behaviors, many of which vary from culture to culture, some of which do not for most.

      This is an enormous problem I have with the trans community in general: what I’ve seen is an immense hostility to anything but gender essentialism.

      You can be a woman and still act with male privilege because of your upbringing. Hell, I know FAAB women who do this. What your sex/gender identity is has very little real impact on your actual behavior. So you might actually take that as this: no matter how male-privileged MTFs act, they are still women, because their privileged behavior does not determine their identity, and vice versa.

      They can overlap, but cis privilege is about living up to society’s expectation that when the doctor picked you up at your birth and said, “It’s a girl!” (or “It’s a boy!”) that doctor was right. That the gender marker on your ID fits your self-identification.

      But I rarely ever see anyone who actually fits that description. You may be attributing more self-satisfaction to most people than they actually attain. Furthermore, I don’t particularly believe it’s privilege to merely not suffer—the idea of any kind of basline existence (as not hating or agonizingly desiring to change some part of your body) is really just warped. Because privilege is an unearned advantage, but merely not experiencing dysphoria is not particularly any kind of real social advantage.

      If there’s anything like “cissexed privilege,” it’s got to be along the line of pull-yourself-up-from-your-bootstraps ableism or classism—someone who thinks living with the social disadvantages you do is “easy,” because they’ve never had to live through it themselves. And I’ve never claimed being transsexual is easy.

      Genderqueer is definitely trans. You get tired of other people defining you out of existence? Don’t do it to me. Hypocrite.

  8. Interesting, other comments that have been made refuse to show up.

    • Again, I deleted quite a few of your trollier comments (as I said before). Kindly remember that I only publish your comments if they make me think; you’re not exactly entitled to be heard here, so you should have no illusions about that.

      • Interesting – so posts that directly call on your oppression may just be entirely deleted, which means you have 0 accountability.
        Interesting how you have control over what the ‘truth’ is here, at your blog.

        • Yep. Because it’s my blog. Too bad for you. You can get your own blog, if you want, and then you’ll have access to your own version of truth on the internet as well.

          You may need to find a good therapist to talk to about your need to make everyone submit to your idea of the truth, particularly in the way that you’re so intolerant of disagreement. That’s a very male-socialized mindset to have.

        • Now I’m going to try out actually being that Internet Tyrant you so wish to believe I am. Delete, delete! Bwahahaha! Feel the burn of censorship on a single blog on the internet! Now your ideas will never be accepted! I AM THE OVERBLOG. ALL MUST LISTEN TO ME.

          It’s really funny that you act like not having your comments published, no matter how small and irrelevant or ridiculously inflammatory, is some kind of human rights violation. Which is hella entitlement; I don’t even expect that. Because, 1) about 80% of all blogs I’ve ever visited—most of them not feminist—have as part of their comment policy “comments are posted at the mod’s (/s’) discretion.” I’ve so far tolerated your crap, even though you clearly have more interested in being accepted as right than actually being right, so that makes me about 70% less stringent on comment moderation than, say, the now-defunct Shapely Prose.

          And 2) this is my blog. On your blog, if I acted the way you have been—spamming my comments queue, insulting me, trying to play “gotcha” games, and yanking out bad faith arguments in droves—you’d be absolutely justified in spamlisting my comments, too.

          Your assertion that I believe I have a “a universal hold on truth” is a beautiful example of one of those bad faith arguments because, hey, guess what? I’m still learning. The beliefs held within are subject to change without warning. You don’t like what I say here? Give it a week.

          One of the reasons I’ve been deliberately not talking about how your comments have clarified some things for me and made me change my beliefs on others is that you come across as an arrogant, entitled, privileged fuckneck, and I don’t believe it would serve any purpose other than to inflate your already overblown ego. I changed my beliefs because, even with overly simplistic and hostile people like you, I still believe in change. Above all else, I can’t believe at any point that my worldview is completely, 100% right and accurate, because I come from an extremely limited and isolated place—inside my own head—and because before I gleefully realized just how vast and awesome the world actually is, I acted just like you, and I don’t want to be you again.

          By the way, in regards to a comment you posted before: stupidity is not something descriptive of anything innate in anyone. It is an act of malice—to deliberately forsake the birthrights of every creature: observation, curiosity, enthusiasm and honesty. I can say that I am actively trying to employ these things in my everyday life, but from what I’ve seen, you’re likely just going to bring out another bad faith or “gotcha” argument again. The only reason I allowed any of your comments to pass through is that I wasn’t assuming bad faith of you, even though your behavior shows it’s not so much of an assumption to do so anymore.

          Furthermore, “stupidity” as a word has been in common usage for so long that its original use is basically as buried as “sinister”—sure, everyone knows that left-handers have historically been fucked over and oppressed, but these words don’t have an oppressive impact because they are so often used colloquially. The information of what they used to refer to is passed around like some mildly interesting party favor—as with “bleeding like a stuck pig,” it’s not really meaningful anymore in an oppressing-group-A way.

          Besides, I don’t feel entitled to make up new words 24/7 for which other words already exist, like “gender normativity.”

  9. Cantankerous said:

    You really must think quite highly of yourself, don’t you? You have derailed time and time again

    [snip]

    • I’m not “derailing.” It is my blog. Ergo, I cannot possibly be derailing. Because it is my blog, and I am talking about what I want to. On my blog. Because it is mine. Not yours. Mine. Because you are not the administrator. Are you tracking this yet?

      Yep, I sure think highly of myself, me and my iron-fisted control of my blog. I mean, that’s so outrageous. If I really wanted to be humble, I’d go onto other people’s blogs and fail at shaming them for talking on their blog about what they want to talk about! Outrageous!

  10. For the record, if you want to do any of these things:

    – Complain about how I run my blog,
    – Complain about what I talk about on my blog,
    – Complain about the temerity I have to disagree with you and still not consider myself a bigot (OMFG, you don’t believe capitalism is necessary? I know X poor person and they think capitalism is necessary! YOU’RE CLASSIST),
    – Make bad faith arguments (you kick puppies because you do not 100% agree with me!),
    – Make irrelevant comments,

    … Welcome to the banned list! Admittedly, it’s not very prestigious, since you have to be a total fucking tool to get on there. I have repeatedly made thought-out responses to you covering misinterpretations of my words and all I’ve gotten in return is frigging whining. And honestly, given the quality of the comments in the first place, that’s more than any of you deserved.

    This is not a safe space. I don’t care how entitled you feel to this space. You can get your own blog, and I won’t come argue with you, so you can have your bandwidth kingdom completely free of dissenters, as you like it.

    At least, I hope that if anyone showed up acting like you have, you’d ban them.

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

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: