So I linked my regular blog readers earlier this week to the latest edition of the Radical Feminist Carnival . And it was a really good haul. For the most part. The exception was that mAndrea managed to get another of her transphobic posts into a feminist carnival. Even more distressing to me was that she did so unacknowledged in this case. When her first post came out in the Carnival of Feminists , there was a significant response and uproar. Resulting in a long discussion and many people letting Natalie know that transphobia is not an acceptable part of their feminism or any equality rights movement.
Yet in this new Radical Feminist edition, not a peep. And I don't know if that is because it went unnoticed, or because any commenters pointing it out did not have their comments approved. I do know that I left a comment, complimenting allecto on the impressive amount of work she had done, but voicing my disappointment at the inclusion of mAndrea's work. My comment was not approved.
So here is my voice. There were many great posts in that Carnival, but mAndrea's was not one of them and I want to be perfectly clear that I in no way support her views. And I'm appalled that the host allecto would call it "a fun...topic". It's also interesting to note, that basically her entire premise (quoted for the Carnival post) is based on a faulty understanding of feminist gender theory, and was just today debunked by Feminism 101 .
mAndrea:
This individual claims to be a different gender then hiz birth body indicates. Well we have a problem with that word gender. Because feminists keep saying that there is no gender. So if transgenderism is a valid medical condition, and transfolk really do need to change body parts, then the reason they need to change those body parts is because gender is real. Which automatically makes the favorite feminist theory invalid — yanno, the one where they screech that gender is a social construct. Yanno, the one theory which has formed the foundation for all other subsequent feminist theory for the last three centuries. Yanno, the one theory which if rendered invalid automatically reboots every other feminist theory in existence.
Feminism 101:
FAQ: if “gender is a social construct”, aren’t feminists saying that gender doesn’t really exist at all?
Posted on July 21, 2008 by tigtog
A: NO. Social constructs are human conceptions, invented but not therefore imaginary (unless one thinks that social consequences are imaginary).
[...]Social constructs exist because people are acculturated to a shared tradition/belief/convention that such constructs are meaningful systems. It is the multiple intersections of social constructs that institutionalise people’s perceived social roles. The nature of social constructs that is most important for feminism (and other progressive ‘isms) is that social constructs are malleable rather than inherently fixed, and by deconstruction and persuasion these constructs can be modified (although there may be a great deal of social inertia to overcome along the way).
Transpeople do not throw all of feminism's theories out the window. Transpeople do force cispeople to do something they may not have ever done before, which is question their own gender identity and what it means to them to be the gender/sex that they are. But I have found that train of thought, while challenging, to be incredibly rewarding to explore. We cannot simply stick our heads in the sand and pretend that a topic such as gender is not going to be as complex as people are. Finding our own boxes for people whilst simultaneously decrying the boxes put on us by is hypocritical, to say the least.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: "Deconstructing Transgenderism" psssst your cis-privilege is showing.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/8105
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
Transpeople do force cispeople to do something they may not have ever done before, which is question their own gender identity and what it means to them to be the gender/sex that they are. But I have found that train of thought, while challenging, to be incredibly rewarding to explore.
Exactly. My paper on intersexed individuals my freshman year of college is ultimately what introduced me to the idea that our constructs of gender and sex are shown to be rather arbitrary when you look at the exceptions.
I just finished reading Whipping Girl: A Transexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Feminity.
It was really a great book. It opened my eyes to cissexual privilege and debunked a lot of ridiculous myths. I swear gender classes should be mandatory education at some point.
The inability of many people to even for a second question their own privileged existence consistently disgusts me. I think Transgender issues absolutely need to be addressed more prominently in the feminist movement, and the best way to begin doing that is by showing strong opposition to people who are obviously being given a podium from which to preach their ignorance about Trans issues.
oi, the comments section is even worse. hooray for the brave transwoman who waded into the fray to challenge mAndrea.
really. hating women isn't feminist. how is this so hard to understand?
I'm sorry, but what are "cispeople"? Google is no help, and I Haven't yet had my coffe
I read in Whipping Girl, and correct me everyone if i am wrong or not exactly right, that those whose subconscious sex and physical assigned sex correlate are cissexual persons. The book also discusses cissexism, an example of which is when someone does not grant transexual persons the privileges of there identified sex that cissexual persons are granted. How did I do?
Well done biancamarissa. In simpler terms, cisperson means the opposite of trans person. Not trans? Then cis.
Thanks for your lovely thoughts, whatsername. Prior to coming out as trans, I might have made rude and ignorant comments against trans people myself. So while it is painful to read, I understand the limited viewpoint of someone like mAndrea. Cis-privilege, really any privilege, can be hard to see when you have never lost privilege. While it's certainly easier to be trans now than in the past, society's reactions to me are starkly different since starting transition. It's an eye opener. The support and thoughtfulness of people like those above means the world. Thank you beautiful cis-es! Peace to all.
Yes, you made an accurate description of the 'cis' prefix. I guess we make up new words for concepts, which is why the comment about gender courses makes plenty of sense!
Whipping Girl is a must read.
Well, to be fair "we" (as in gender-theorists, feminists, queer activists, etc.) didn't make it up, we just stole the term from chemists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis-trans_isomerism
As far as where *they* got it from, who knows...
...Oh, and another thumbs-up for Whipping Girl.
The socially constructed bit of gender is how people behave in a particular society given that they know they are men or women. However, if it's all socially constructed, there wouldn't be any trans people. Trans people know despite all the attempts of their parents and society to tell them what sex they are, that they are in fact the other one. I believe there is a function in the brain, call it brain sex, which tells you what sex you are. You don't have to look at your genitalia. Just like gay people know they like same sex people. Gay behaviour might be socially constructed, but the desire is built in.
Wow, Andrea really, REALLY likes to hear herself talk. I could only make it half way through that garbage before I started scrolling to see if it ever ended. It seems as if she has yet to discover the magic of editing.
No doubt she is horrible, but I have a hard time taking blustering, long winded buffoons like her seriously. If you can't make your point in a concise manner, you don't have a point to make at all.
rootneg2 commented at July 23, 2008 11:15 AM: "Well, to be fair 'we' (as in gender-theorists, feminists, queer activists, etc.) didn't make it up, we just stole the term from chemists.
" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cis-trans_isomerism
"As far as where *they* got it from, who knows..."
Latin?
J7Sue, I can't make sense of your comment.
The socially constructed bit of gender is how people behave in a particular society given that they know they are men or women. However, if it's all socially constructed, there wouldn't be any trans people.
I don't see how these two correlate at all.
J7Sue - i think you're getting "sex" and "gender" mixed up (Andrea does a fair bit of that, too, as a side-helping to all that trans-hatred she's got going on.)
Sex is the biological/brain/body based stuff, Gender is the socially constructed stuff.
cedar/whatsername "J7Sue - i think you're getting "sex" and "gender" mixed up "
Thanks for the guidance. Clearly you're not understanding what I mean.
Brain sex - what sex you know you are in your head - tells you which socially constructed behavioural messages to pick up . So female brain sex people get to like pink, for example. In a different society, it might be a different colour.
For trans people, physical body sex and brain sex doesn't match, so they are repeatedly told they are their body sex, and have to try to manifest the correct socially constructed gender behaviours for that. And that's unpleasant, because we know we are not the gender we pretend to be, even though our bodies would make other people think we are.
What gets me is the lack of evidence for what's being said. And the demonisation of any contradiction. It reeks of fanatic post-modernism, the kind where all dialectic is a power-struggle. The philosophy where being honestly mistaken is impossible, any opposition must be due to evil motives.
All I can argue with in return is actual evidence, objective data measured by fallible people.
See
http://aebrain.blogspot.com/2008/06/bigender-and-brain.html
Feminist transphobia--that is to say, transphobia rationalized using feminism or feminist theory--makes me retch. It's just trying to make biogtry okay by applying theory otherwise used progressively. And that is pretty darn low, as it sells out many of (what I think of as) feminism's core values for the purposes of exclusion and derision.
J7Sue and what does that have anything to do with the social construction of gender eliminating transgenderism?
Well said, whatsername. It frustrates me that mAndrea draws so much (apparently approving) attention in the feminist blogosphere, but the silver lining comes in discussions like these (must add Whipping Girl to my reading list!).