“Given the constant genital policing, you can’t expect trans folks to feel included by an event title focused on a policed, binary genital,” tweeted @DrJaneChi, an abortion and transgender health provider. (She mentioned “internal genitals” as an alternative.)
I'm a little confused by this. If the trans folk she's supporting (and I think it's terrific that she's supporting them, I really do) can be forced to bear the child of a rapist, how is it hurting them to point out that people who are born with vaginas need reproductive freedom?
It's not a question of 'people who are born with vaginas having reproductive freedom'. It's about NOT making a marginalized group even more marginalized by using language which (intentionally??) excludes them.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel such an event/movement could be phrased? I know some guys who mention of/reminder that they have a uterus can be triggering (which is what I can only assume the writer of that tweet means about internal genitals--uteri aren't genitals, but organs, of course, but I'm not sure internal genitals are physically a thing. I could just be misinterpreting her, though, and internal genitals is simply a term I'm not familiar with). So A Night of a Thousand Uteri could be potentially triggering, as well. How could one address the topic of female-bodied/female assigned at birth folk needing reproductive freedom and protection that doesn't exclude or trigger/upset anyone?
You know what, I don't have the perfect answer to that.
The important point though, I think, is to *listen*.
A whole lot of people DON'T LISTEN, you know? They just *roll their eyes* and think to themselves 'oh no not another one'.
I don't claim to represent all aspects of intersectionality. But I think the important point is that if someone points out that something is triggering for them then maybe we should actually listen and figure out how to do things better.
I originally read the initial article a couple of days ago, and even at the time I wanted to cover my face with my hands and beg the author to just stop talking.
Just - oh, god. Maybe if some of these people stopped bleating and tried listening, they might actually learn something.
IMO the radicalization of the online feminist/SJ presence is not something positive.Totally agree, it's a much needed discussion. We're isolating people, stifling discussion and promoting group think and mob justice, and I think it's a frightening paradigm shift. Just the facts that the comments on this already are of the snarky type where people just say "lol oh gawd" and stuff proves exactly how badly such a discussion is needed. Such responses and attitudes are just not constructive towards engaging people in real-life social justice or critical dialogue. I've been sticking with real life activism at this point because I find that speaking with other people in real life and sort of re-learning how to respectfully disagree, introspect, and look for common ground is much more productive, will more likely affect other people and change other people's minds (or have your own mind changed), and is overall more informative than just group-think bashing and group-think agreement. In short, this article is totally needed. I don't think we
( ... )
“I fear being cast suddenly as one of the ‘bad guys’ for being insufficiently radical
I just got chewed out on facebook a couple of days ago for not being angry enough about something related to queer rights. The fun part? I'm a lesbian, and the person trying to call me out was straight. So done with people trying to one up each other over how radical they are...
I get yelled at alternately for being too angry and not being angry enough. According to FB, I need to be angrier about GMOs and shut up about trans* jokes being offensive. ~Straight people~
Comments 186
I'm a little confused by this. If the trans folk she's supporting (and I think it's terrific that she's supporting them, I really do) can be forced to bear the child of a rapist, how is it hurting them to point out that people who are born with vaginas need reproductive freedom?
Reply
Just no.
It's not a question of 'people who are born with vaginas having reproductive freedom'. It's about NOT making a marginalized group even more marginalized by using language which (intentionally??) excludes them.
Reply
Reply
The important point though, I think, is to *listen*.
A whole lot of people DON'T LISTEN, you know? They just *roll their eyes* and think to themselves 'oh no not another one'.
I don't claim to represent all aspects of intersectionality. But I think the important point is that if someone points out that something is triggering for them then maybe we should actually listen and figure out how to do things better.
Reply
ETA: Oh lord, the comments in this place are going to be a damn mess.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Just - oh, god. Maybe if some of these people stopped bleating and tried listening, they might actually learn something.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
I just got chewed out on facebook a couple of days ago for not being angry enough about something related to queer rights. The fun part? I'm a lesbian, and the person trying to call me out was straight. So done with people trying to one up each other over how radical they are...
Reply
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment