tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post1725846961060887691..comments2023-11-20T02:22:26.069-08:00Comments on An Open Letter by a Feminist: The Post-modernist and the Womyn-Only Space.Feminist Avatarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03364456372396228106noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-43462875814309829392023-08-22T17:15:06.787-07:002023-08-22T17:15:06.787-07:00Nice bblog postNice bblog postEmelyhttps://onourcrossroads.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-12345225018532400412008-04-30T06:23:00.000-07:002008-04-30T06:23:00.000-07:00hi there,i am a "transwoman" by most definitions.....hi there,<BR/><BR/>i am a "transwoman" by most definitions.. though to me I am just a woman.<BR/><BR/>I welcome women only space, but am scared of being outed from these safe havens due some peoples discrimination.<BR/><BR/>I really and truly appreciate this blog entry - my identity as woman is absolute and I go through the same issues as all my sisters out there. <BR/><BR/>There are times that women really need a little nook they can be safe in.. a lot of the time this is acheived by hanging out with other girls.. but if you are alone or there is some persistant guy for example.. eek! run away!<BR/><BR/>I will add, that during my transition I had some truly lovely sisters help me and support me, despite knowing I was lesbian they kept with me the whole time and to me they will always be very close sisters.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-69991551585457995892008-03-30T21:45:00.000-07:002008-03-30T21:45:00.000-07:00Polly: Yes, and Butler in Undoing Gender is quite...Polly: Yes, and Butler in Undoing Gender is quite clear on the need for trans acceptance. If you accept that gender is an in-process performance, then surely the logical conclusion is, what matters is who you are now, and how you are being read? Trans women are as much becoming women as any other woman. A passing trans woman is hardly more exempt from misogyny and violence because of her mystical "male energy." <BR/><BR/>Maybe trans women don't need (or even want) to be subversive. Maybe we just want to be accrued the same respect and safety as anyone else, and to have our voices be one of the many heard in the feminist movement.<BR/><BR/>>>>In a patriarchal society, the truth is that for many women the only safe space is one free of the male bodied. <BR/><BR/>You've just slipped from a discussion of trans women to "male bodied." Tsk. That's nonsensical when applied to any but pre or no hormonal trans women. But telling. <BR/><BR/>>>>And those assigned female at birth have a radically different life experience from those who do not.<BR/><BR/>So? What's your point? What's that got to do with safety?<BR/><BR/>Furthermore, how is women-born-women exactly an inherently safe space? My best (cis) friend works in a women's domestic violence shelter, and one of the main issues there is lesbian abusers who can come in under the women-only rule and further traumatise their partners. Women can and do have the capacity to oppress each other, in personal and institutional senses (eg het women over queer women, able-bodied women over disabled women, white women over women of colour and so one).<BR/><BR/>Given that, and if we're not believing in essences, what *is* the problem with making gender self-identified? Why is it so hard to police behaviour, rather than some rigid abstract essentialist notion of gender categories?<BR/><BR/>If a trans woman is behaving badly, kick her out. And do the same for non trans women. It's not that hard, honestly.queen emilyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06039121133703594308noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-34090926365642726422008-03-30T04:07:00.000-07:002008-03-30T04:07:00.000-07:00I absolutely agree that patriarchy and misogyny ar...I absolutely agree that patriarchy and misogyny are real. And I know that De Bouvoir is not a pomo- but I actually think that the Third Wave is a natural extension of the Second, building on its foundations, rather than being in opposition to it. And that much of what is said by the Third Wave is just a rehashing of what has been said earlier.<BR/><BR/>I also think because misogyny is real that women would should get to define their women-only spaces- but that they should be careful about how exclusionary they are because it is a dangerous line between regrouping and the exercise of privilege. <BR/><BR/>I, personally, would allow transwomen into my women-only space and, because of my colonising impulses, think that in an ideal world I would like if all women could do this- this is what I meant in my last comment. I also think that if we are working towards the removal of gender distinction that we need to get over our fear of transwomen, as it threatens our aim. And that I think that this fear is wrongly situated as transwomen do not have more power than ciswomen, which would be our usual definition for exclusion. But, as I said in my post, I do realise that this is a time of war and sometimes women need to be allowed to define their spaces to feel safe.Feminist Avatarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03364456372396228106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-91528143769609565232008-03-30T03:10:00.000-07:002008-03-30T03:10:00.000-07:00Would I define myself as post modernist in that I ...Would I define myself as post modernist in that I agree with Judith Butler's views on the performativity of gender - absolutely. But please note that Butler herself has explored since 'Gender Trouble' the theory of performativity further and explained that one does not choose one's gender and revised considerably her views on the potential of subversive repetition for deconstructing (or more accurately fragmenting) gender. <BR/><BR/>Gender is a social construct. And Simone De Beauvoir, writing in 1950was not a post modernist - rad fems got there first, sorry. But in a patriarchal society although gender is a social construct the effects of misogyny are real, just as in a racist society, race is a social construct, but the effects of racism are real. <BR/><BR/>In a patriarchal society, the truth is that for many women the only safe space is one free of the male bodied. And those assigned female at birth have a radically different life experience from those who do not. For this reason spaces for those assigned female at birth are justified - that is not transphobic, it's a simple fact. The only other criteria by which such a space could be defined would be to allow in anyone who self defines as a woman, which in practice means anyone at all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-10878798587410812662008-03-24T09:58:00.000-07:002008-03-24T09:58:00.000-07:00I was quite shocked at how anti-trans some of the ...I was quite shocked at how anti-trans some of the discussions in the rad fem carnival were. Perhaps, I spend too much time in my little circle of pomo feminists! <BR/><BR/>I personally think that ALL women-only spaces should include trans-women, because I really don't think we can start drawing lines about who is and isn't a woman. Actually, when I wrote this I was thinking about black women's orgs and their right to refuse entry to white women, which I absolutely support. So I then thought well... white women should have the same rights about how they define their woman-only spaces, but I have just realised there is a substantial difference. White women exercise privilege over black women. I think its an act of the imagination to think that trans-women have more social privilege than cis-women. Hmm I might blog this.Feminist Avatarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03364456372396228106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4452483540659721212.post-44941499048709176652008-03-24T09:05:00.000-07:002008-03-24T09:05:00.000-07:00The problem is, of course, that the discussion see...The problem is, of course, that the discussion sees "women" - as with Michelle's comments - ends up meaning, only and ever cis women. <BR/><BR/>eg <BR/>"Because it is in women-only space that a woman’s voice can be heard on her own terms. In women-only space she is free of the ‘male gaze’, free of the spectre of patriarchal judgement, that in mixed space- aka the ‘real world’- threatens to denounce, silence, talk over, appropriate, or ridicule her voice."<BR/><BR/>Given the context of the discussion re: womyn's space and the midst of Trans Wars Round 100, this is nonsensical unless you accept from the start that trans women are representative of the patriarchy. <BR/><BR/>It really is a *highly* essentialist discussion that always-already excludes trans women from the category of women, and it's frustrating trying to debate that because it comes down to an ontological question of gender for a lot of people. "Really" a man is a spectre that never disappears in these discussions, and "safe space" becomes less an in-process, negotiated contextual practice than an ontological principle to be defended to the death. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, thanks for the post, it's thoughtful and interesting.queen emilyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06039121133703594308noreply@blogger.com