US Government rules on Gender Identity

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby JackRiddler » Sun Oct 16, 2016 9:30 pm

.

I don't think transgender is inherently unhealthy! On the contrary, I think strict binary gender norms imposed on the sexes tend to be unhealthy, and obviously hegemonic, and do enormous damage to most people, often foreclosing on their options, their very thinking, and their well-being. In most societies, a class distinction is created based on biological sex, and gender is a tool for conditioning that class distinction in individuals, and for establishing norms by which "violators" are judged. People should be free to identify as they like, and more broadly and probably more importantly: people should be free to dress, behave, play roles and work as they can and as they like, and be as fat/thin/ugly/pretty/femme/butch as they are or as they'd like, up to the limit of not damaging the rights of others; and be free to do all that without suffering social approbation and discrimination simply because they violate someone else's idea of proper behavior for persons of a given sex, or be expected to make their bodies conform to the ordained proper shape for persons of a given sex or gender. I think I share with the radical feminists the idea that feminism (human rights) implies freedom from gender. Otherwise all I've said here is I don't think gender identification erases biological sex, and agree with Willow for example in finding that idea dangerous to the interests of biological women in particular.

.
Last edited by JackRiddler on Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby American Dream » Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:07 pm

Moving towards solidarity - Laurie Penny

Transphobic feminism makes no sense, argues Laurie Penny.

For decades, the feminist movement has been split over the status of trans people, and of trans women in particular. High-profile feminists such as Germaine Greer, Jan Raymond and Julie Bindel have spoken out against what Greer terms "people who think they are women, have women's names, and feminine clothes and lots of eyeshadow, who seem to us to be some kind of ghastly parody". Some prominent radical feminists have publicly declared that trans women are misogynist, "mutilated men"; trans people have responded to this harassment by vigorously defending themselves, demanding that anti-trans feminists are denied platforms to speak on other issues and, in some cases, by renouncing feminism altogether. The deep personal and ideological wounds suffered by women and men on both sides of the argument are reopened with vigour every time the mainstream press gives space to an anti-trans article by a cis feminist.

Many otherwise decent and sensible cis feminists have fallen prey to lazy transphobic thinking. In the vast majority of cases, cis feminist transphobia does not stem from deep, personal hatred of trans people, but from drastic, tragic misapprehension of the issues at stake. Recently, outspoken feminist Julie Bindel declared in an article for Standpoint magazine: "Recent legislation (the Gender Recognition Act, which allows people to change sex and be issued with a new birth certificate) will have a profoundly negative effect on the human rights of women and children." Her views are founded on the assumption that "transsexualism, by its nature, promotes the idea that it is 'natural' for boys to play with guns and girls to play with Barbie dolls... the idea that gender roles are biologically determined rather than socially constructed is the antithesis of feminism."

Bindel and others have, initially with the best of intentions, misunderstood not only the nature of transsexualism but also the radical possibilities for gender revolution that real, sisterly alliance between cis feminists and the trans movement could entail.

(This article focuses primarily on the experiences of trans women, as these experiences have been the main focus of controversy over the past three decades of feminist thought - the intention is not to erase the experiences of trans men and boys.)

Femininity is a social construct and Bindel is right to identify it as such. She is utterly wrong, however, to claim that transsexual men and women are any guiltier than cis men and women of re-enforcing damaging stereotypes. In fact, the misogyny and sexist stereotyping that Bindel identifies as associated with trans identities are entirely imposed on the trans community by external forces.

Sally Outen, a trans rights campaigner, explains: "It is only natural for a person who strongly wishes to be identified according to her or his felt gender to attempt to provide cues to make the process easy for those who interact with her or him. That person cannot be blamed for the stereotypical nature of the cues that society uses, or if they can be blamed, then every cisgendered person who uses such cues is equally to blame."

Even a casual assessment of the situation indicates that the problem lies not with transsexual people, but with our entire precarious construction of what is 'male' and what 'female', 'masculine' and 'feminine'. Bindel's description of trans women in "fuck-me-boots and birds-nest hair" are no different from today's bewildered 12-, 13- and 14-year-old cissexual girls struggling to make the transition from deeply felt, little-understood womanhood to socially dictated, artificial 'femininity'. Like teenage girls stuffing their bras with loo-roll and smearing on garish lipstick, the trans women for whom Bindel, Greer and their ilk reserve special disdain are simply craving what all growing girls crave: social acceptance.

Amy, a 41-year-old trans woman, says: "Transition in later life is a really weird experience, in that you're suddenly and unexpectedly plunged into being teenage, plus you have teenage levels of female hormones coursing through your veins. You haven't grown up through the sidling-toward-teenagerhood that girls get, the socialisation and the immersion in society's expectations and realities. Trans women get to learn those, just a quarter of a century late, in my case. The results tend to be a bit wild." Or, as one cis friend of mine put it: "If I'd had the income that some trans people do when I was a teenager, I'd have owned a cupboard full of fuck-me-boots."

Indeed, the fact that socially accepted female identity is something that must be purchased is something that trans women understand better than anyone else. For socialist feminists like myself, who locate patriarchal oppression within the mechanisms of global capitalism, the experience of trans women, who can find themselves pressured to spend large amounts of money in order to 'pass' as female, is a more urgent and distressing version of the experience of cis women under patriarchal capitalism. In our society here in the UK, where shopping for clothes and makeup is a key coming-of-age ritual for cis women, all people wishing to express a female identity must grapple with the brutal dictats of the beauty, diet, advertising and fashion industries in order to 'pass' as female.

Not a single person on this planet is born a woman. Becoming a woman, for those who willingly or unwillingly undertake the process, is torturous, magical, bewildering - and intensely political. In the essay 'Mama Cash: Buying and Selling Genders', trans author Charlie Anders explains: "Transgender people... understand more than anyone the high cost of gender, having adopted identities as adult neophytes. People often work harder than they think to maintain the boy/girl behaviours expected of them. You may have learned through painful trial-and-error not to use certain phrases, or to walk a certain way. After a while, learned gender behaviour becomes almost second nature, like trying to compensate for a weak eye. Again, transgender people are just experiencing what everyone goes through."

The concept and practice of sex reassignment surgery is the territory over which radical feminists and trans activists traditionally clash most painfully. Bindel, along with others, believes that the fact that SRS is carried out at all means "we've given up on the distress felt by people who identify as gender dysphoric, and turned to surgery instead of trying to find ways to make people feel good in the bodies they have."

Bindel makes the case that the SRS 'industry' is part of a social discourse in which homosexual and gender-non-conforming men and women are brought back into line by "nutty bloody psychiatrists who think that carving people's bodies up can somehow make them 'normal'". Were SRS an accepted way of policing the boundaries of gender non-conformity here, Bindel's equation of the surgery with 'mutilation' would be more than valid - it would be urgent. However, SRS is nothing of the sort.

In face, SRS is carried out only very rarely, and only on a small proportion of trans people, for whom the surgery is not a strategy for bringing their body in line with their gender performativity but a way of healing a distressing physical dissonance that Outen vividly describes as "a feeling like I was being raped by my own unwanted anatomy".

Surgery is normally a late stage of the transitioning process and falls within a spectrum of lifestyle choices - for those who opt for it at all. Trans activist Christine Burns points out: "Julie Bindel is quite right that we ought to be able to build a society where people can express the nuances of their gender far more freely, without feeling any compulsion to have to change their bodies more than they really want to.

"However, that is precisely what many trans people really do. Only one in five of the people who go to gender clinics have reassignment surgery - the other four in five find accommodations with what they've got. Bindel's thinking cannot admit that, far from emphasising the binary, 80% of trans people are doing far more to disrupt gender stereotypes than she imagines. With or without surgery, trans people are living examples of the fact that gender is variable and fluid."

Of course, like any other surgery, SRS has its risks and a minority of patients will regret the procedure. But for most of the trans people who decide to pursue SRS, the operation allows for potentially live-saving progression beyond the debilitating effects of gender dysphoria. Moreover, many post-operative trans people have found that the operation actually lessens their overall distress around binary gender identity. Amy explains: "'Being female is an important part of my identity, but it's not an all-consuming part any more. Until I transitioned and completed surgery, it was much more so. I woke up from surgery, and the burning dissonance, the feeling of everything being wrong, wasn't there any more. These days, I realise that I don't actually have that strong a sense of gender any more. Isn't that strange, given all I went through to get here?''

The radical gender fluidity within the trans movement is exactly what Bindel, when I spoke to her in the process of writing this article, emphasised above everything else: "Normality is horrific. Normality is what I, as a political activist, am trying to turn around. Gender bending, people living outside their prescribed gender roles, is fantastic - and I should know. I've never felt like a woman, or like a man for that matter - I don't know what that's supposed to mean. I live outside of my prescribed gender roles, I'm not skinny and presentable, I don't wear makeup, I'm bolshie, I don't behave like a 'real woman', and like anyone who lives outside their prescribed gender roles, I get stick for it."

What Bindel has failed to grasp is a truth that could re-unite the feminist movement - that trans people too, far from "seeking to become stereotypical", are often eager to live outside their prescribed gender roles and frustrated by the conformity that a misogynist society demands from those who wish to 'pass'. Marja Erwin told me that "gender identity and gender roles are not the same. I am trans, and I am not the hyperfeminine stereotype. I am a tweener dyke and more butch than femme. I know other trans womyn who are solidly butch, and others who are totally femme, and, of course, the equivalents among straight and bi womyn."

Much of the stereotyping imposed upon trans women is enforced by sexist medical establishments - a phenomenon which radical feminists and trans activists are unanimous in decrying. Bindel, like many trans feminists, objects to the fact that psychiatrists are "allowed to define the issue of gender deviance", giving medical professionals social and ideological influence beyond their professional remit. Clinics in the UK require trans people to fulfil a rigid set of box-ticking gender-performance criteria before they will offer treatment and SRS demands this conformity with special rigour. To receive SRS, trans women patients will normally be expected to have 'lived as a woman' for two years or more - but individual psychiatrists and doctors will get to decide what 'living as a woman' entails. A UK psychiatrist is known to have refused treatment because a trans woman patient turned up to an appointment wearing trousers, whilst Kasper, a trans man who was treated in Norway, was pressured to stop dating men by surgery gatekeepers.

"I had to answer a lot of invasive questions about my sexuality and my sex life, and one of the doctors I had to see lectured me about how transitioning physically might make me stop being attracted to boys," he says.

All this is a far cry from some feminists' fear that surgery is prescribed to 'transform' cissexual gay men and lesbians into transsexual heterosexuals.

The demand that trans people conform to gender stereotypes in order to be considered 'healthy' or 'a good treatment prospect' is something that cis women also experience in their dealings with the psychiatric profession. It is standard practice for women in some inpatient treatment facilities to be pressured to wear makeup and dresses as a sign of 'psychological improvement'. The institutional misogyny of the global psychiatric establishment is something that radical feminists and trans activists can usefully oppose together.

Feminists - even prominent ones with big platforms to shout from - do not get to be the gatekeepers of what is and is not female, what is and is not feminine, any more than patriarchal apologists do. Intrinsic to feminism is the notion that such gatekeeping is sexist, recalcitrant and damaging. If feminists like Greer, Bindel and Jan Raymond truly believe that having a vagina, breasts, curves, a uterus, being fertile or sporting several billion XX chromosomes is what makes a person a woman, it clearly sucks to be one of the significant proportion of women have none of these things.

There are cis women all over the world who lack breasts after mastectomy or a quirk of biology; women who are born without vaginas, or who are victims of FGM; women who are androgynously skinny, naturally or because of illness; women who are infertile or post-menopausal; or, significantly, the 0.2% of women who are intersex. Is the female identity of these cis women under question too? If it is, feminism has a long way to go.

Greer and her followers seem singularly uninterested in the science behind their binary thinking, which establishes that prescribed gender roles still fall largely into the binary categories of 'man' and 'woman', but human bodies do no such thing. The spectrum of human physicality belies gender essentialism - as must feminism, if it is ever to be the revolutionary movement our culture so desperately needs.

Trans activism is not merely a valid part of the feminist movement: it is a vital one. The notion that one's biological sex does not have to dictate anything about one's behaviour, appearance or the eventual layout of one's genitals and secondary sex organs, now that we live in a glittering future where such things are possible, is the radical heart of feminist thought. It is essential for cis as well as trans feminists to oppose transphobia and transmisogyny.

Conversely, at the very heart of sexist thought is the assumption that the bodies we are born with ought to dictate our character, our behaviour, our appearance, our choices, the nature of our relationships and the work of our lives. Feminism puts forward the still-radical notion that this is not the case. Feminism holds that gender identity, rather than being written in our genes, is an emotional, personal and sexual state of being that can be expressed in myriad different ways that encompass and extend beyond the binary categories of 'man' and 'woman'. Feminism holds that prescribed gender roles are a tyranny that no-one - whether trans, cis, male, female or intersex - should be forced to conform to in order to prove their identity, their validity or their human worth.

Feminism calls for gender revolution, and gender revolution needs the trans movement. We must put aside the hurts of the past and look towards a future of radical solidarity between all those who are troubled by gender in the modern world. Whatever our differences, until contemporary feminism fully and finally accepts trans people as ideological allies, it will never achieve what Germaine Greer, Julie Bindel, Christine Burns, Sally Outen and every feminist who has ever longed for a better world are all working towards: an end to the damaging and demeaning tyranny of gender stereotypes. Whatever our differences, only with trans people on side can feminism hope to work towards the type of equality our radical foremothers dared to dream of.


Taken from http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/200 ... eminists_s. This piece was completed in 2009 on the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women.It is offered in recognition of the ideological and (sometimes) physical violence that has been done to trans people by cis feminists, in the hope that all feminists can one day stand together to resist violence against women, and in memory of the hundreds of trans women who have been murdered at the hands of misogynists over the past decade, in particular the latest UK victims, Andrea Waddell and Destiny Lauren.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby American Dream » Tue Oct 18, 2016 10:21 am

Excerpt from:

Trans Politics and Anti-Capitalism: An Interview with Dan Irving

Gary Kinsman

http://uppingtheanti.org/journal/articl ... capitalism


How is the oppression of trans people connected to and shaped by capitalist social relations? How do class divisions play themselves out amongst trans people?

The experience of sex/gender variance is mediated by one’s class location. Trans people come from all classes – including the professional middle class, the working class, the working poor, and criminalized labour. One of the ways that class divisions get played out is through the issues that get addressed. Often, it has been the issues that affect middle class, white, and heterosexual trans professionals that get politicized.

The politics of passing are laden with class divisions. Those who can afford immensely expensive medical procedures and non-medical means of gender modification – clothing, binders, cosmetics – are more likely to be read as either men or women if that is their goal. The economic privileges that are likely to accompany professional class locations are linked directly to accessibility and safety. It’s much easier for a trans person who passes as either a man or a woman to move through public spaces free of harassment and violence. It’s also easier for them to access essential services. Nevertheless, the risk of being “discovered” as sex and/or gender- variant continues to cut across class divisions.

When understood through one’s relationship to production, class location itself is also mediated by sex/gender identity. Trans people, especially those who are unintelligible as either “men” or “women,” have immense difficulty obtaining and maintaining employment. Transgressing the hegemonic sex/gender binary can have a devastating impact on trans people, especially when considered in light of other relations of dominance mediating their identity. While we usually hear of “successful” trans people who – in spite of their transition – were able to maintain their jobs as professionals, many trans people work precarious jobs in the service industry, in high tech industries where they are not visible to corporate clients, or in criminalized sectors of the economy like the sex and drug trades.

While conducting interviews for my doctoral dissertation, one trans activist brought to my attention the lack of attention given to trans people in the “pink collar” job sectors. Work in the service industry – low-paying, part-time, non-unionized and contract jobs – is overshadowed by the media representations of the extremes of the employment spectrum. Here, the focus alternates between the professionals who are celebrated for overcoming “obstacles” – trans is read as personal adversity – and the sex workers who are degraded and disciplined through sensationalism in both mainstream and left-wing commentary. This lacuna inspires my current research. By attending to trans people as workers, I’m exploring how trans subjectivities are produced and incorporated into capitalist productive relations.

Given the shortcomings that have sometimes marked Marxist attempts to deal with gender, how can Marxism be made useful to an analysis of trans oppression?

Since it allows us to critically evaluate social relations of power operating in cohesion with the capitalist mode of production, historical materialism can enrich trans theory immensely. It is within this framework that we can make sense of the constant changes to sex/gender categories as they are organized through the logic of capitalist accumulation. As a social relation based on exploitative and alienating labour relations, how does capital inform the ways in which trans sex/gender become embodied? How do other relations of domination work to ensure that the subjectivities and lives of trans people do not escape exploitative class relations? Explorations of the connections between capitalist relations of production and consumption and the construction of heteronormativity add breath and depth to “trans studies.” Marxists engaged in critical political economy can help us to think through the ways that trans identities and experiences connect with social relations of power.

Marxist analysis can also help us to evaluate the work of movements seeking the emancipation of oppressed groups and to develop revolutionary strategies that can pose direct challenges to both state and capital. This is important because the subjugation of sex and gender-variant individuals is systemic and is linked to processes of capital accumulation. Marxist analysis can help to foster solidarity between class struggles and anti-colonial struggles, between the struggle for Aboriginal self-determination and efforts toward gender self-determination.

However, given the track record of Marxism – not only in relation to gender, but also in relation to anti-racism and critical approaches to sexualities – some caveats must be provided. Marxist analysis is most useful when it defines “the working class” broadly and challenges the symbolic ideal of the straight male factory worker. That ideal is not representative of the working class in Canada. As feminist anti-racist Marxist scholars like Himani Bannerji have pointed out, the Canadian labour market has always been comprised of non-white migrant and immigrant labourers. We know that gender and sexuality play decisive roles in determining one’s position within the legal, paid labour force. Those who are not recognized as normatively gendered or heterosexual have often been relegated to the bottom echelons of the labour market.

Class struggle has to be defined broadly so that it includes more than the point of economic production. How do social, cultural, political, and community spaces factor into class struggle? We need to avoid class reductionism so that other sites of power are given proper consideration. Understanding class requires that we are attentive to the ways that it continues to be influenced by other vectors of domination. Class is trans sexed/gendered.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby parel » Tue Oct 18, 2016 1:38 pm

In the indigenous world-view, the only thing that matters is only your genealogical connection to the land, the rivers and the elements. Therefore, nobody is ever left out. There are of course, protocols involved, as with everything.

A Native American Perspective on the Theory of Gender Continuum by DRK

Given the choice between discarding or honoring a person, who did not fit neatly into rigid gender compartments, many Native American groups chose to find a productive and venerated place for the berdache. A Crow traditionalist says, "We don't waste people the way white society does. Every person has their gift ( 57)."





Two Spirits, One heart, Five genders.

Men/Women/shamans/visionaries/mystics/conjurers, keepers of the tribe's oral traditions, conferrers of lucky names for children and adults (it has been said that Crazy Horse received his name from a Winkte), nurses during war expeditions, cooks, matchmakers and marriage counselors, jewelry/feather regalia makers, potters, weavers, singers/artists in addition to adopting orphaned children and tending to the elderly. Female-bodied Two Spirits were hunters, warriors, engaged in what was typically men’s work and by all accounts, were always fearless. Traditional Native Americans closely associate Two Spirited people with having a high functioning intellect (possibly from a life of self-questioning), keen artistic skills and an exceptional capacity for compassion. Rather than being social dead-enders as within Euro-American culture today, they were allowed to fully participate within traditional tribal social structures. Two Spirit people, specifically male-bodied (biologically male, gender female) could go to war and have access to male activities such as the sweat lodge. However, they also took on female roles such as cooking, cleaning and other domestic responsibilities. Female bodied (biologically female, gender male) Two Spirits usually only had relationships or marriages with females and among the Lakota, they would sometimes enter into a relationship with a female whose husband had died. As male-bodied Two Spirits regarded each other as “sisters,” it is speculated that it may have been seen as incestuous for Two Spirits to have a relationship with each other. Within this culture it was considered highly offensive to approach a Two Spirit for the purpose of them performing the traditional role of their biological gender.
parel
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby American Dream » Tue Oct 18, 2016 1:49 pm

I agree with the above but would point out that "berdache" is a colonial/anthropological word based on deep misunderstandings of the living culture of native peoples. As I know it, north american Two Spirit people would not use this term to describe themselves and would likely consider it offensive.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby parel » Tue Oct 18, 2016 2:34 pm

American Dream » Tue Oct 18, 2016 12:49 pm wrote:I agree with the above but would point out that "berdache" is a colonial/anthropological word based on deep misunderstandings of the living culture of native peoples. As I know it, north american Two Spirit people would not use this term to describe themselves and would likely consider it offensive.


You are right about that AD.
parel
 
Posts: 361
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2007 7:22 pm
Location: New Zealand
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 19, 2016 1:47 pm

VIDEO: An Unexpected Voice for Gender Justice at Kenyan WCF Meeting

By Political Research Associates, on October 6, 2016

Last week, about a hundred people gathered in Nairobi, Kenya, for the African Regional Conference of Families, a regional conference for the World Congress of Families (WCF). The WCF, a U.S.-based international coalition of Religious Right groups dedicated to a very limited notion of “the natural family,” uses its frequent international convenings to develop and disseminate right-wing strategy. WCF uses deceptive “pro-family” rhetoric to promote conservative ideologies, which are then codified into regressive laws and policies that criminalize LGBTQ people and abortion.

Anti-gay and anti-abortion activist Don Feder, WCF’s Coalitions Director and Coordinator of Regional Conferences, opened the gathering with a speech in which he acknowledged WCF as the official sponsor of the Nairobi conference. Aside from presenting the sexual rights movement as a new form of slavery, Feder called on participants to work together to defend the natural family, which he described as “the institution on which the fate of humanity hinges.” But he also denied climate change as a hoax of the sexual revolution—a claim Michael Hichborn of the U.S. anti-abortion Lepanto Institute made the center of his presentation. Sharon Slater of the U.S.-based Family Watch International called on participants to oppose Comprehensive Sexual Education, denouncing the use of condoms and calling for abstinence only sex ed instead.

Other speakers included Alfred Rotich, a Catholic bishop from the Kenyan Conference of Catholic Bishops, who linked abortion to “accompanying vices such as necrophilia, bestiality, pedophilia, same-sex relationships as well as calls for free sex and reproductive health services for children!” Various speakers followed Rotich’s lead in linking LGBTQ issues and calls for greater reproductive rights in Africa with foreign interests and funders.

All of this was a familiar WCF script, but this time things didn’t go as planned. Just after WCF African representative Theresa‎ Okafor repeated the Christian Right claim that trans people are mentally ill—and blamed their identity on contraceptives—Gathoni Muchomba, a renowned Kenyan radio host, took the stage. In addition to being a famous media personality, Muchomba is the director of Gamafrica, a Kenyan NGO that recently launched a new initiative dedicated to supporting children with intersex conditions and their families. Although she was not included on the original list of speakers announced a day before the conference, from the podium, Muchomba issued a surprising call for the inclusion of intersex people in the new National Family Promotion and Protection Policy that was recently proposed by Kenya’s Ministry of Labor, a co-sponsor of the WCF Nairobi meeting.

Muchomba is hardly a traditional LGBTQI ally: she conflates gender identity and sexual orientation; didn’t know the meaning of the LGBTQI acronym; and warned that if Kenya doesn’t address intersex and trans issues, it won’t be able to fight “lesbianism.” And yet she nonetheless used her platform at WCF to bring attention to the suffering of intersex children, and unwittingly advanced the cause of sexual minorities.

Among the people who have motivated Muchomba’s advocacy is James Karanja, an intersex man who was raised as a girl. After declaring his gender identity as an adult, Karanja was treated as an outcast, but he has persisted in fighting for legal recognition as a man so that he can pursue a college education.

During her speech, Muchomba invited Karanja to address the WCF audience directly. Karanja (who does not identify as gay or transgender), told the right-wing gathering about the shame he experienced at his all-girls school, where he woke up at 3am to shower before his classmates arose; how he was later suspended because he was attracted to other girls; and how his mother suffered a mental breakdown after he came out as a man and said he was changing his name.

“I don’t want to see another child go through what I went through,” Karanja told the crowd.


More at: http://www.politicalresearch.org/2016/1 ... f-meeting/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Project Willow » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:32 pm

User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: Obama’s HUD department rules that ‘Gender Identity’ dete

Postby Jerky » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:17 pm

Grizzly » 26 Sep 2016 20:30 wrote:
Society always seems to offer some new side route around confronting trauma.


^^^
This.


Double this.

You know, Willow, I often disagree with you about certain topics, but I have to say, every once in a while you knock it out of the park in terms of your wisdom and insight into the darker, more difficult areas of human nature.

Thanks for being you.

Jerky
User avatar
Jerky
 
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby Jerky » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:26 pm

You know, there was a lot of really dark, fundamentally anti-human BS in the first two pages of this thread (the OP being particularly so). People were promoting alienating, dystopian visions of homeless shelters filled with armed women and children trying to avoid the depredations of roving packs of subhuman sci-fi trans-fetishistic predators. A lot of reactionary pseudo-science was flung around as if it was fact, and fictitious speculations bandied about as if they were legitimate projections.

In short, it was a shit show.

But it's evolved into something quite beautiful, with some truly wonderful comments and great, educational participation.

Thanks, guys, for rising above and not falling prey.
Jerky
User avatar
Jerky
 
Posts: 2240
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Toronto, ON
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:43 pm

Judith Butler addresses TERFs and the work of Sheila Jeffreys and Janice Raymond


Cristan Williams: You spoke about the surgical intervention many trans people undergo as a “very brave transformation.” Can you talk about that?

Judith Butler: It is always brave to insist on undergoing transformations that feel necessary and right even when there are so many obstructions to doing so, including people and institutions who seek to pathologize or criminalize such important acts of self-definition. I know that for some feels less brave than necessary, but we all have to defend those necessities that allow us to live and breathe in the way that feels right to us. Surgical intervention can be precisely what a trans person needs – it is also not always what a trans person needs. Either way, one should be free to determine the course of one’s gendered life.

CW: I think it’s safe to say that many gender theorists are controversial in one way or another. Some have lumped your work together with the work of gender theorists such as Sheila Jeffreys, who wrote:

[Transsexual surgery] could be likened to political psychiatry in the Soviet Union. I suggest that transsexualism should best be seen in this light, as directly political, medical abuse of human rights. The mutilation of healthy bodies and the subjection of such bodies to dangerous and life-threatening continuing treatment violates such people’s rights to live with dignity in the body into which they were born, what Janice Raymond refers to as their “native” bodies. It represents an attack on the body to rectify a political condition, “gender” dissatisfaction in a male supremacist society based upon a false and politically constructed notion of gender difference… Recent literature on transsexualism in the lesbian community draws connections with the practices of sadomasochism.

Can you talk about the ways in which your views might differ?

JB: I have never agreed with Sheila Jeffreys or Janice Raymond, and for many years have been on quite the contrasting side of feminist debates. She appoints herself to the position of judge, and she offers a kind of feminist policing of trans lives and trans choices. I oppose this kind of prescriptivism, which seems me to aspire to a kind of feminist tyranny.

If she makes use of social construction as a theory to support her view, she very badly misunderstands its terms. In her view, a trans person is “constructed” by a medical discourse and therefore is the victim of a social construct. But this idea of social constructs does not acknowledge that all of us, as bodies, are in the active position of figuring out how to live with and against the constructions – or norms – that help to form us. We form ourselves within the vocabularies that we did not choose, and sometimes we have to reject those vocabularies, or actively develop new ones. For instance, gender assignment is a “construction” and yet many genderqueer and trans people refuse those assignments in part or in full. That refusal opens the way for a more radical form of self-determination, one that happens in solidarity with others who are undergoing a similar struggle.

One problem with that view of social construction is that it suggests that what trans people feel about what their gender is, and should be, is itself “constructed” and, therefore, not real. And then the feminist police comes along to expose the construction and dispute a trans person’s sense of their lived reality. I oppose this use of social construction absolutely, and consider it to be a false, misleading, and oppressive use of the theory.

CW: Recently, Gloria Steinem wrote:

So now I want to be unequivocal in my words: I believe that transgender people, including those who have transitioned, are living out real, authentic lives. Those lives should be celebrated, not questioned. Their health care decisions should be theirs and theirs alone to make. And what I wrote decades ago does not reflect what we know today as we move away from only the binary boxes of “masculine” or “feminine” and begin to live along the full human continuum of identity and expression.

Would you comment on Steinem’s statement?

JB: I agree completely that nothing is more important for transgender people than to have access to excellent health care in trans-affirmative environments, to have the legal and institutional freedom to pursue their own lives as they wish, and to have their freedom and desire affirmed by the rest of the world. This will happen only when transphobia is overcome at the level of individual attitudes and prejudices and in larger institutions of education, law, health care, and kinship.

CW: What do you think people misrepresent most about your theories and why?

JB: I do not read very much of those writings, so I cannot say. I do know that some people believe that I see gender as a “choice” rather than as an essential and firmly fixed sense of self. My view is actually not that. No matter whether one feels one’s gendered and sexed reality to be firmly fixed or less so, every person should have the right to determine the legal and linguistic terms of their embodied lives. So whether one wants to be free to live out a “hard-wired” sense of sex or a more fluid sense of gender, is less important than the right to be free to live it out, without discrimination, harassment, injury, pathologization or criminalization – and with full institutional and community support. That is most important in my view.


More at: http://theterfs.com/2014/05/01/judith-b ... e-raymond/
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby MacCruiskeen » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:59 pm

Searcher08 » Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:28 pm wrote:I like lesbian Londoner Magdalen Berns and her very dry, direct takes on .

Special Snowflakeism


and Non-Binary Bullshit


and




Belatedly, thanks for those links. She's great. Very dry, very funny, and very very sharp. (She just graduated in physics, btw.)

Also very succinct. Hardly any of those videos are more than about five minutes long. She wastes nobody's time, least of all her own.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966

TESTDEMIC ➝ "CASE"DEMIC
User avatar
MacCruiskeen
 
Posts: 10558
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby guruilla » Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:31 pm

Those videos are refreshing, ta. :thumbsup

It's become impossible for me to tell who's consciously pranking from who's suffering from runaway (because diagnosed and socially supported) narcissism (if there's a difference, which I suppose there isn't).

I am wondering if Narcissism could be the most widely unrecognized condition in the West, and Neo-Liberalism its Most Fully Realized Expression?

If feels like we have been so thoroughly engineered we can't see how we've become the butt of a hideous joke about to blow up in our face, with billions of casualties.

I think I'll get my coat.
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby American Dream » Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:42 pm

American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: US Government rules on Gender Identity

Postby MacCruiskeen » Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:55 pm

^^What disingenuous and slanderous nonsense. No one here is advocating any such mistreatment of transgender people, least of all Magdalen Berns, to whom you are apparently attempting (or pretending) to reply.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933

"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966

TESTDEMIC ➝ "CASE"DEMIC
User avatar
MacCruiskeen
 
Posts: 10558
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:47 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 171 guests