Work hosted a lovely workshop on pronouns and trans 101. It was well attended, everyone was doing their best, the presenter was qualified, yet I couldn’t shake my internal skepticism. That I felt this way really bothered me; why couldn’t I just appreciate this?
I think my apprehension wasn’t to do with the presentation at all, but a larger question that has kept coming up as acceptance has made unprecedented inroads: are people nice now because they’re questioned the foundational beliefs that led them to mistreat others in the first place? Or have they not done this work, and this newfound kindness because they personally benefit by tapping into this trendy thing?
Because with the latter, they’re not going to stand up to adversity when there’s repercussions; which would be precisely when their support actually matters. I also don’t consider rhetoric around inclusion laudable if the speakers are going to be just as exclusive to other groups that don’t enjoy the social capital that being trans-inclusive confers in some circles. Substituting tranny jokes for mocking people based off of looks isn’t progress.
I keep seeing this shallow acceptance play out. So as I watch colleagues navigate this topic, I just can’t help but wonder how authentic of a change will be for them, especially those drawn to spotlights.
Comments
4 responses to “Is it genuine support?”
An astute observation, and an impressive display of self-awareness. Indeed, the narrative about “menstruators”, “birthing people”, “pregnant men”, and the like went away pretty quickly over the last week. When the chips are down, it’s pretty easy to distinguish virtue-signalling from sincerity. Trans rights may trump women’s rights, but apparently abortion rights are still higher on the totem pole.
Yeah, I wish that the people who got upset at inclusive terminology appearing somewhere and thought it meant trans rights were at odds with women’s rights would realize through these events that we’re all on the same side.
This violence that trans women face, the violence that cis women face, the violence that gay people face, and legislative efforts to deny bodily autonomy from abortion to puberty blockers – so much of it is at its core about control over women’s bodies. Forcing traditional gender norms on everyone is also about upholding that control; norms that gay and trans people transgress by merely existing and that cis women defy by exercising autonomy such as the right to choose.
We all want self-determination; and protecting/affirming trans rights and women’s rights and the right to choose gets us closer to that. I wish if anything that the terrible news out of the US would bring about this solidarity; but looking at Cawsbar and the like, I just see silence on the impending reversal of Roe and a continued singular focus on disparaging trans inclusion no matter how insignificant.
It’s not about “inclusive” terminology, it’s about demeaning terminology that erases women. No, people that want rapists in women’s prisons and creepy deranged men like Jessica Yaniv and Darren Agee Merager in women’s spaces aren’t on the same side as people that don’t. People that think it’s fair for a mediocre 6’1” male to lap women that have been training their whole lives for a sporting event aren’t on the same side as people that don’t think it’s fair.
Puberty blockers have nothing to do with a woman’s bodily autonomy. The issue is over whether experimental treatment that involves chemically (and eventually surgically) castrating someone too young to make decisions about any medical procedure is actually safe or worth the myriads of risks that come with it. Even the reddest state has no interest in banning plastic surgery or sex hormones for transgender adults (women, men, or anyone else that applies). Likewise limits on abortion aren’t about taking away a woman’s bodily autonomy or enforcing traditional gender norms (whatever that even means in 2022). They recognize that bodily autonomy isn’t unlimited because someone with another human being inside of her body has certain responsibilities that other people don’t (first among them, not killing that human being). But just about every country in Europe recognizes this to some extent. Their laws differ in terms of whether it extends to the whole pregnancy or just part, but allowing abortion on demand throughout all nine months puts you on a very small list of countries. Soon, US states will be able to do the same. On the other hand, decisions concerning only a woman and her body are not remotely controversial. 96% of Americans support access to contraception. Given that feminists have disagreed about abortion since the 1960s (they were broadly opposed to it before the likes of Hugh Hefner and Larry Lader marketed abortion as the epitome of women’s empowerment), that overturning Roe v. Wade will have zero effect on Canadian women (as they live in an enlightened country where anyone is entitled to a tax-funded abortion throughout all nine months and the most woke prime minister of them all plans to expand abortion and further marginalize those that conscientiously object to it – even if all they do is provide free services to pregnant women – without more than token opposition), and that Americans don’t (and shouldn’t) care what self-righteous Canadians think of them, it’s not really a surprise Canadian Women’s Sex-Based Rights (Cawsbar) wouldn’t comment on the Supreme Court of the United States and its proceedings. It’s called staying in your lane.
There’s no point in addressing your comments, as I won’t be able to convince you that the inclusion of trans people doesn’t pose an existential threat.
If we can’t agree on that basic point then continuing what is for me an emotionally draining exchange does no good.
However, I do want to keep your remarks for posterity. I support gay rights including same-sex marriage and years ago reader(s) that opposed such things let me know in the comments on this blog too. And now those comments are their own sort of historical record; reminders of the attitudes that were once prevalent.
The lines you used from “mediocre male to lap women” to “rapists in women’s prisons” to “erase women” are very specific 2019-2022 era talking points emanating from a very specific crowd that frequents Twitter. This is the fourth iteration of dog whistles I’ve witnessed in the past decade to advocate against the inclusion of trans people and no doubt there’ll be new ones in a few years, so preserving these has anthropological value to me.