Okay, flipping the TERF argument around.. even supposing that

>>8255748
TERFs are radical feminists. They do all sorts of politics stuff related to women, and they don't want trans women to be included in their feminism.

>>8255752
Well, taking the hardcore essentialist view, transfolks aren't really fully either sex. Many issues that affect cis women also affect trans women because of the cultural construct that is gender. Why not work together when that happens?

>>8255748
>That's extreme self-determination. Not accepting them as their "new" sex is intellectually coherent* but getting mad at them for practicing autonomy over their own bodies is not.
The point is that they only need to because they can't be socially accepted in their presentation and behavior in their natal sex.

>No one looks at an XY woman's karyotype before letting her into a space. Cultural gendered spaces are - surprise - about culturally constructed gender rather than biology.
Because an XY woman was female socialized whatever her karyotype. The same can't be said for transes which is why they aren't included.

>>8255761
>The point is that they only need to because they can't be socially accepted in their presentation and behavior in their natal sex.
I think that accounts for why some - but not all - people transition. I also think that some people just want to have bodies (and/or, to the small extent that minds differ, minds) more like those of the other sex, and that this is fine. I don't think those folks would disappear in a post-gender world.

>Because an XY woman was female socialized whatever her karyotype. The same can't be said for transes which is why they aren't included.
I think this argument is reasonable to an extent, but I have some issues with it. What it means to be socialized as a woman or as a man differs between cultures. You probably wouldn't reject a woman who grew up in an isolated post-gender feminist commune, right? You could flip the argument and say that the problem is the existence of male socialization rather than the lack of female socialization. Okay. To a certain degree someone who was socialized in one way while growing up can never entirely shake that off, but socialization is also a continual process. After one transitions, particularly if they transition convincingly, they are not treated like men and are put under much of the same cultural pressures as women. They're often "culturally" women in the respect to the culture they find themselves in. Furthermore by the very act of transitioning they show commitment to trying to shake off their male socialization. This is not an ironclad argument for inclusion, but I think exclusion is not the inevitable conclusion here. I'm obviously extremely biased but I'd err on the side of inclusion.

>>8255788
Very good points, madam.

>>8255788
retard parent of agp

>>8255788
>I think that accounts for why some - but not all - people transition.
Others are fetishists.

>You probably wouldn't reject a woman who grew up in an isolated post-gender feminist commune, right?
A woman from a feminist commune is obviously going to be female socialized.

>socialization is also a continual process. After one transitions, particularly if they transition convincingly, they are not treated like men and are put under much of the same cultural pressures as women.
Choosing to be subject to some limited female socialization isn't the same as being raised under it and knowing your biology will always single you out differently (needing different healthcare, abortion access, being socially set back by your upbringing).

>They're often "culturally" women in the respect to the culture they find themselves in.
Dependent on passing.

>Furthermore by the very act of transitioning they show commitment to trying to shake off their male socialization.
Being a woman is something you are not an identity to be committed to like a club.

>>8255847
>Others are fetishists.
Why do you think this is so? Why can't someone just want a different sort of body?

>A woman from a feminist commune is obviously going to be female socialized.
Why would a feminist commune perpetuate gender?

>Choosing to be subject to some limited female socialization isn't the same as being raised under it and knowing your biology will always single you out differently (needing different healthcare, abortion access, being socially set back by your upbringing).
Sure, it's different. It's also very different to male socialization. This is not exactly relevant to, say, a music festival though?

As an aside, trans folks do need different healthcare and are certainly set back by their upbringing.

>Dependent on passing.
Right, though less so in more accepting areas.

>Being a woman is something you are not an identity to be committed to like a club.
This is not about being biologically being a woman though, or socialization wouldn't be a factor.

>>8255869
>This is not exactly relevant to, say, a music festival though?
A music festival to speak to cis women about their lived experiences as cis women? Pretty relevant.

>>8255889
See, as I've said in my original post, segregating by sex makes sense in contexts where sex is central. Women's festivals don't really do that much of the time, focusing on gender.

>>8255897
Because experiences of pregnancy, menstruation, girlhood and sex politics such as abortion access are totally gender and not sex...

>>8255903
You're right, all of these experiences are more closely related to sex than gender. Most of these events focus on gender-related stuff more than they focus on these things.

>>8255913
You're welcome to run an event without a focus on sex where people are welcome regardless of sex. Plenty exist already where everyone is welcome, even in feminist-run events.

>>8255915
Right, but there are events that are aimed at women, focus on gender over sex yet still turn away trans folks. I think that's a problem.

>>8255915
>>8255924
Let me elaborate.
There was a women in tech conference a while ago. Most of the talks were about things like various forms of workplace discrimination and how to deal with them. Biological sex played a role in some of them (e.g. companies being reluctant to hire women they thought were likely to become pregnant soon) but not in others (e.g. male colleagues consistently underestimating their female colleagues in peer reviews, preventing them from being promoted). The conference included transwomen and I think that's a good thing. If a conference or a space is focused on one of the strongly sexual subjects you spoke of earlier separation makes sense. In cases like this one separation would be harmful.

>>8255963
Except transgendered women underestimate cis women the same way other men do and unlike women they have the backgrounds and experiences of male privilege that don't need the support when it comes to promotion that women do.

The conference shouldn't have included trans women.

>>8255748
Because transitioning mtf undermines the whole idea of male privilege when they see how good women have it. Not too difficult to see why there is resistance.

>>8255982
>Except transgendered women underestimate cis women the same way other men do
I don't think that's true. Women, trans or not, are generally more helpful to their peers.

>and unlike women they have the backgrounds and experiences of male privilege that don't need the support when it comes to promotion that women do.
That's untrue. If anything the conference has shown that they face most of the same problems as cis women when it comes to working in tech.

The conference would've been poorer without them.

>>8255991
Show me the evidence trans people suffer the same lack of privilege women do?

>>8256050
I can't think of anything I can cite right now. Just a lot of people sharing their personal experiences and remarking on the similarities. I don't think it's a super controversial claim that people who appear like women, even if some of them don't pass completely, are discriminated against in much the same way.

>>8256050
>lack of privilege women do
>lack of privilege
>women

>>8256064
>I can't think of anything I can cite right now.
Maybe ponder why that is before assuming you people share the same experiences as women.

>>8256070
Should we disbelieve the cis women who told us as much? Did they lie to us about their own experiences being practically the same when it came to many workplace situations?

>>8256079
Cis women don't know trans women's experiences and might be deluded into thinking they are the same.

>>8256124
People can communicate with one another, in great detail, as they did here.
This argument can be easily turned around too, claiming that you can't tell that the experiences differ because you're not both a cis and a trans woman.

>>8256129
The proof is your inability to think of a single example of how trans people suffer the lack of privilege of real women.

>>8256134
A single example? I provided one in the initial post.
>>8255963
>e.g. male colleagues consistently underestimating their female colleagues in peer reviews, preventing them from being promoted

I wrote that I can't cite any evidence i.e. research.

>>8256142
Right, you can give made up examples with no evidence. Doesn't count.

>>8256173
Doesn't count for what? If you think I'm lying to you then so be it. I'm relaying what I know is true, from the testimonies of a lot of people.

>>8256186
I don't think you're intentionally lying. I think you're subconsciously cherrypicking and listening to voices that reinforce your biases.

>>8256189
I've heard such things from too many people on too many occasions to think that's the case, but if I can't convince you of that, okay.

>>8255748
>Okay, flipping the TERF argument around..
>even supposing that pre-transition trans people are just their birth sex, why SHOULDN'T they transition?

Myth: Radical feminists are all, always, against transitioning.

Truth: Radical feminists' opinions on this range from "physical transition should never be necessary given proper mental health care" to "adult people can do absolutely everything they want with their body, it just doesn't change their sex, neither (truly) biologically nor politically."

Truth: Additionally, SOME radical feminists criticize SOME expressions of transgenderism on the basis that it's "womanface": a male parody of stereotypical womanhood/femininity, and therefore offensive.

>We don't restrict people from making unhealthy life choices that make them happy so long as they are not harmful to others.
Parents rightfully restrict their children from such things, however.

Also, your health insurance doesn't pay for your expenses in getting into an extreme sport. Should it pay for transition? A radical feminist's opinion would likely range from "never" to "when a politically unbiased medical professional deems it necessary."

>Living with untreated dysphoria is generally more unhealthy than transitioning
Not my topic of expertise but, what long-term scientific studies exist about the outcomes of transition? I imagine it's hard to control for the effect of social discrimination though...

>E probably makes you live longer anyhow
Source?

>>It reinforces gender roles
I'm not sure if a radical feminist has ever raised this claim against medical transitioning. Generally it's meant in the context of "social transition" where the person takes on a stereotypically feminine appearance.

>>8255748
well its unhealthy, and people cant make decisions on their own, so PATERNALISM IS A STRONG BACKBONE OF FEMINISM

Side-note: I said "radical feminists" but all women who criticize trans ideology on any grounds are slurred "TERF" so sometimes I can't even be sure myself which women I interact with on this topic actually are radical feminists. Anyhow...

>>8255748
>Gender abolitionists should be fucking cheering on people who want to modify their sexual characteristics to be like those of the other sex.
This is a misunderstanding of the gender abolitionist view. The view says there is no connection between anatomy and personality. All anatomies can have all personalities. To modify your anatomy has nothing to do with opposing gender. Opposing gender is done through speaking out against gendered stereotypes and being your authentic self regardless of how people think you ought to be in connection with your anatomy.

>No one looks at an XY woman's karyotype before letting her into a space.
She was born with a vulva and is therefore socially and politically a woman.

>Cultural gendered spaces are - surprise - about culturally constructed gender rather than biology.
They are actually about allowing female people to exist in the public sphere. Before gendered bathrooms and other facilities were mandated, all such facilities in which one does private things were male spaces per default, and as such women could not exist in the public sphere very well.

>It makes sense to exclude non-biologically male/female people from male/female spaces if those spaces are somehow focused on sex rather than gender e.g. a meeting focused on sharing one's experience of growing up as their birth sex.
Exactly. However, holding this position actually makes you "TERF".

>Lets move to a unisex individual stall-based architecture already jesus fucking christ
That's a good idea in general, though a whole walled off female-only room sometimes serves as a "safe heaven" for women in various situations. Such spaces already tend to exist, so taking them away from women would be nonsensical.

>>8255748
>Not accepting them as their "new" sex is intellectually coherent*
>*Thinking of them as their old sex post-HRT isn't, though. Hormones are not just cosmetic. They reshape the brain. Even under the most stringent, essentialist scientific view transfolks are hybrids.
The political sex classes of female/male are dependent on assignment at birth and consequent socialization into membership of that class. A person who lived as male for the first 20 years of their life cannot claim to fully lose their male privilege. It would make most sense politically to consider them a special subclass of the male class, analogous to e.g. gay males.

>>8256654
>This is a misunderstanding of the gender abolitionist view. The view says there is no connection between anatomy and personality. All anatomies can have all personalities. To modify your anatomy has nothing to do with opposing gender. Opposing gender is done through speaking out against gendered stereotypes and being your authentic self regardless of how people think you ought to be in connection with your anatomy.
What if I want to modify my body as part of expressing my authentic self?

>>8256765
If you're modifying your body you're not being authentic kinda by definition.

>>8256773
I don't think I agree with that. If I'm not athletic but I want to be muscular is working out not authentic? If I don't like one of my personality traits and work to change it am I being inauthentic? Are tattoos not authentic?

If I did any of these things due to external pressure, because I just wanted to fit in or gain some advantage, then sure. If I want them for their own sake, though, I think pursuing them IS being true to myself.

>>8255752
It's not about leaving out, it's actively working against trans people, to remove rights, and to make society hate trans people

>>8255761
>The point is that they only need to because they can't be socially accepted in their presentation and behavior in their natal sex.
But then women don't need to be able to have a job, or really have any rights... Because they're socially accepted to not to.

>>8256790
Muscle growth is natural in healthy physically active people. If you obsess over bodybuilder-style gigantic muscles though, that'd be problematic.

I do think tattoos and piercings are inauthentic. I never understood them.

But there's a question of degree here as well. A tatoo or piercing are trivial compared to HRT. And HRT isn't as far gone as SRS.

If it really has no serious health risks, I could understand someone taking some E for the fun of it. But if they can't feel "like themselves" without it, I don't buy this being natural; it's more likely to be a result of cultural brainwashing into thinking certain body types being contradictory with certain personalities / identities.

>If I did any of these things due to external pressure, because I just wanted to fit in or gain some advantage, then sure.
Deeper than evident external pressure, there is also the issue of subliminal brainwashing beginning from birth. Our minds are absolutely flooded with gender stereotypes by people around us (how they present themselves, how they treat us, etc.), through the media we consume (books, movies, video games, etc.) and more.

There's also the question of whether it's even possible to truly liberate oneself from all the mentioned brainwashing, or whether it even makes sense to attempt this when the rest of society still operates within the resulting mindset...

>>8256876
I think a problem is that non-trans people simply do not understand what trans people are going through. I've never come across one who does. Ever. Even people who are sympathetic and supportive don't truly understand what we're experiencing. Less sympathetic people tend to want to minimize and trivialize what we're dealing with. The lack of understanding is a serious barrier, and I wish non-trans people would be more willing to accept what we say about ourselves at face value.