[controversial] on transmisogyny and male privilege

[aaskew]

(apologies in advance because this possibly comes across as a 'what about the menz? :(' post. I've tried my best not to make it so, but this is a topic I'd like to discuss further

Comments

[dogboi]

Hi! Just looking over your tumblr post...

This might be a good example of why its important to believe women about their experiences. And accept some things might be harder for us to see as men who don't live in these very-particular-yet-influential feminist communities.

My impression from my limited exposure: It's not that your point #5 is the natural, logical conclusion of the previous 4 points. Rather feminists like Julia Serano have observed the details of the dynamics of trans men in feminist communities in places like the Bay Area and noticed a privileging of a particular kind of maleness. FWIW, the way the dynamics are described reminds me of the privileging of Feminist Guy concerns in more mainstream feminist spaces.

[aaskew]

I realise that a certain kind of maleness is privileged, but I'm not sure if it can be described as male privilege in the usual sense. This is especially so in queer/trans spaces that accept trans men but not trans women, such as WBW events and certain women's colleges, because I highly doubt those people responsible would be willing to allow cis men into their fold for the same reason they don't allow trans women. And if cis men are not privileged in such a space, then it would seem that conventional male privilege can't be responsible for whatever is going on in there, because cis men have the most male privilege.

Trans male privilege, maybe? Sort of as the other side of transmisogyny. Although yeah, I see your point about the privileging of Feminist Guy concerns in mainstream feminism, and I'm not sure if it has the same origins or exists as a separate but similar phenomenon.

[varanus]

No, what goes on there is straight-up transphobia that many trans men allow to continue because it materially benefits them in the short term. Which is disgusting. All those "WBW" discussions actually boil down to this: the anti-trans-woman contingent of the MWMF believes that the genitals your doctor (thought he/she) saw at birth trump everything else. So trans women are all actually men (no matter how passing, no matter how much surgery) and we are all women. Thus, a trans man is welcome in women's spaces where a trans woman is not. Now, folks who believe that know it's not ok to actually say that in public, so they invent convoluted excuses, like that the MWMF is actually about "surviving girlhood" (as if no trans women had a girlhood, or as if every non-trans girlhood is similar). Or, when talking about women's colleges, they keep bellyaching about the needs of individual trans men instead of prioritizing the needs of women, trans and cis. And some trans men go along with that shit because it's scary to leave behind your community

[aaskew]

"Transmisogyny is a problem that really does solely belong to trans women."

Yeah, not disputing that.

The thing is that most of the people accusing WBW spaces of enforcing male privilege are trans women, especially of late. There's been a lot of that going on around Tumblr recently. On one of those posts I said that I didn't think male privilege was what was going on there, and a trans woman told me to fuck off. Her post I responded to: "the trans movement is very sexist. sexism is the privileging of men over non-men."

So I'm a bit lost as to what's happening, or if there's just a lot of miscommunication going on.

[gymx]

The thing is that most of the people accusing WBW spaces of enforcing male privilege are trans women,

While varanus' point about the essentialism of radfems is spot on, you're thinking too hard about this particular thing. "WBW" spaces are allowing men and excluding women. On an ideological level, yes, radfems think trans men are women. On a societal level, they're favoring men at the expense of women. Forget about the trans prefix; that's regular old, garden variety sexism.

[aaskew]

As a side query regarding women's colleges: while I understand that trans men should not intrude on women's spaces, is there much of a choice, given that they wouldn't exactly be allowed into men's colleges? There are definitely lots of co-ed alternatives out there, but would it be fair to restrict trans people to just co-ed colleges while the same restriction does not apply to cis people?

I went to a whole string of all-girls' schools, because the top high schools (which I qualified for) in my country are all single sex, and I would have definitely not been allowed into a boys' school. (If I had been out then, which I wasn't.) The alternative would have been joining a less-prestigious co-ed school, but it wouldn't seem fair to have had to compromise the quality of my education in a way a cis person would not need to.

[varanus]

Well, my view on this isn't very popular, but here it is

[aaskew]

I agree that a trans man who is post-transition or in the midst of transition - especially medical transition, not so sure about just social - shouldn't be allowed to enter a women's college, and might have a better chance at getting into a men's one

[varanus]

See, the thing is, "I'm male but I just feel safer among women in women's space" is as bullshit an excuse as any other dumb line for men intruding on space reserved for women. There are a lot of non-trans men (think effeminate gay boys) who often get harassed and bullied by other men who would love to be in an all-girls space where they didn't have to deal with fucked-up masculinity. But they can't, because that space is for women. I feel for them, but they have to find their own way, and eventually they do. So do pre-everything trans men who wish to present as male. Either you live as a woman, or you don't enter women's space. The end.

From my experience, straight men are attracted to women, where "woman" is a total package of body parts and presentation. Some straight men do indeed see butch or gender-variant female-bodied people as sexual objects; from my experience those men are often worried about what it means for their own sexuality. Understand, too, that pre-T I had a military haircut and wore steel-toed boots; I basically

[aaskew]

Thanks. That last paragraph helped a lot.

"Some straight men do indeed see butch or gender-variant female-bodied people as sexual objects; from my experience those men are often worried about what it means for their own sexuality."

What about if their motive for attack is not sex but a desire to put the person in question "back in their place" and reinforce what they consider their 'rightful' power over them? I've mostly seen this sentiment online (and one second-hand case IRL), but it does seem to exist, where straight men see butch lesbians and trans men as threatening their own masculine identity, hence things like "corrective rape".

[varanus]

In that paragraph you quoted, I was speaking of actual sexual attraction, not sexual attack. Those are two very different things

yup, male privilege in the usual sense :-/

[dogboi]

As they say, "The devil is in the details." In this case, the details are revealed by trans women actually living in these communities and who get to see
the particulars of how these "women and trans[-masculine]" spaces go down. A perspective you or i don't really have.

For example, since you mentioned Serano, i skimmed over chapter 12 of "Whipping Girl". It's not just "oh, there are more trans men than women so OMG sexism!" like your tumblr post indicates. She carefully breaks down a number of common conversations into their classically sexist components.

Just a few things that just popped out while skimming over it...

• phallocentricism. The idea that somehow this power emanates from the possession (or prior po
  ssession) of a penis is pretty sexist!
• biological determinism. The idea that males and females are innately different and certain a
  bilities exist souly in one group or the other is fairly sexist!
• male as the norm. As she explore the attempts to paint trans women as men, Serano notes how

Re: yup, male privilege in the usual sense :-/

[dogboi]

sorry about the formatting. LJ HTML is kicking my butt!!!

[aaskew]

I've read and enjoyed Whipping Girl, but didn't think of seeing it that way. So that was helpful, thanks!

Have any radfems responded to that form of criticism, though? I'd think most of them might be pretty mad at the idea that they're reinforcing the patriarchy.

[dogboi]

I'm not aware of any formal response -- like a book or well-circulated essay or blog. But i've gotten glimpses of responses. My impression is they aren't so much mad as they just think we're childish in taking certain feminist ideas too literally or carrying to such extremes they become absurd