Targeted by TERFs

This morning when I tried to log into Facebook I found that I was banned from posting or liking Facebook posts for 24 hours. I am only able to like comments people make on posts.


So what did I do that warranted being put in 'Facebook Jail' for 24 hours?


Well it turns out that a certain TERF did not like what I had said in a comment I made to a thread about 6 months ago.
What was it I said? Something to the effect that the TERF in question is in my opinion unstable and dangerous. I also said something to the effect that I worry that someday I will read in the news that she has killed a trans* woman.


I stand by that. TERFs scare the hell out of me. They are so blindly focused on their rage fetish (transsexual and transgender women) that they seem willing to go to any lengths to harm us. When one of us stands up to them we get doxxed, dead-named and often cyber stalked and bullied. If these activities send a trans* woman into a suicidal spin, and the girl checks out, then those TERFs have killed a person. You do not need to be wielding a gun or a knife to murder. TERFs know that trans* women are particularly vulnerable to suicidal ideation, yet they continue to be a thorn in our collective sides.
Would I be surprised to hear a TERF had killed a trans* woman first hand via murder? Unfortunately no. They have shown they are capable of hatred of trans* women. Why should I doubt they are capable of violence against trans* women?


I will not hold my tongue when the topic turns to Radfem TERFs. They are dangerous for trans* women. They have shown repeatedly how much they hate us, so if they come up in casual conversation I will warn my trans* sisters about them every time.


Cathy Brennan, you got me put in Facebook jail for a whooping 24 hours, over a comment that was about 6 months old. You are a petty bitch.


Well I certainly will take this opportunity to tell it like it is about you one more time.

The TERF and TRANS* War Continues

Recently the war between transgender exclusionary radical feminists and transgender women has ratcheted up.

There have been doxxings and verbal violence flying around from both sides.

At heart of the battle is that TERF activists refuse to accept that TS women are indeed women and TS women asserting that they are indeed women.
Now one would think that such a disagreement would remain academic and reserved for the halls of philosophers but at the insistence of certain feminist voices {Trans* and TERF} this issue is worth going to war over.

TERF activists want spaces for women born women to remain transgender free. Now that seems a sticky subject. Ok, fine I wasn’t socialized as a female during my male days, but I sure as hell wasn’t treated like one of the boys. Sure go ahead and have your bonding experiences with other like minded women. Go to the Michigan Women’s Music Fest and your private group, get together activities. Not exactly very welcoming to all women…
But it isn’t that simple. TERF voices are calling trans* women men. That trans* women should not be allowed into any woman only space, like public restrooms and locker-rooms. They maintain that transgender females are somehow intrinsically dangerous to natal women and children. Some go as far as to say we rape women virtually; using our transformed bodies as a ticket into women’s spaces. The entire premise of their argument is very fear of rape mongering.

See now I have a problem. Trans* women are women. Period. Transgender females are much more likely to be attacked in a restroom. When we ask TERF Henie Penny’s to cite the evidence for the alleged dangers TS women pose, we are treated to a new round of circular logic and argument. No real evidence is presented.

I ask:
Would you really send me and my trans* sisters to the men’s facilities?!
Not only is it dangerous for trans* women to go to the men’s facilities, it also would be disruptive to society at large.

Let me say this loud and clear to any TERF reading this: Your ‘discomfort’ at seeing a TS woman does not trump a TS woman’s right to pee in peace. Your misplaced fears are not justification to send her into the men’s spaces. Transsexuals have the medical and psychological community’s on our side in these matters. The science is on the side of the trans* community. We are the gender we say we are.

 

Sheila Jeffreys Strikes Again: or, How a Cisgender person decided Trans* lives are her property to evaluate.

Ms. Jeffreys' a long time denouncer of trans* women has struck again with her newest book, "Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism".

My first feelings on this matter are: How the hell does she feel entitled to critically analyze the politics of “transgenderism”, why does she keep railing against transsexual women, why does she feel she has any currency in the topic? {Transgenderism?!! WTF is that?}

She has forced her way into the discussion of trans* lives and bodies for a long time. Trans* women have been dealing with her telling the world we are vile for a long time. It is getting to the point with her that she is making her money on the backs of transgender lives and this is unjust. She rails against us and says vile things, then writes a book and makes money from our suffering?! NO!! If she was any sort of decent human she would donate every cent of the proceeds from that book to charity. Preferably a trans* one, but we all know that isn’t going to happen.
When she isn’t writing about “transgenderism” and instead is focusing in on real women’s/womyn’s issues she is smart and articulate. She proposes things to contemplate on that take some tough work. You will check your privilege at the door and think deep when you read her works. She is a true feminist and she is respected in many circles.
However that respect is then transferred to a topic she is not qualified to speak on and many feminists take her every word as gospel. This really harms TS women when such a prominent figure in the feminist world takes such a hard and vile stance on them. Transgender people of all stripes are a marginalized community and we really do not need prominent public figures making our lives more difficult.  

To get a little idea of the Ms. Jeffreys’ opinion on the matter let us turn to a wiki section on her views on trans* people:

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheila_Jeffreys

{Jeffreys has received attention for her views on transgenderism, transsexualism and gender reassignment. In an interview, Bindel explains that Jeffreys believes transsexual surgery "is an extension of the beauty industry offering cosmetic solutions to deeper rooted problems" and that in a society without gender this would be unnecessary.[5] Jeffreys has presented these views in various forums. In a 1997 article in the Journal of Lesbian Studies, for example, Jeffreys contended that "transsexualism should be seen as a violation of human rights." Jeffreys also argued that "the vast majority of transsexuals still subscribe to the traditional stereotype of women" and that by transitioning medically and socially, trans women are "constructing a conservative fantasy of what women should be. They are inventing an essence of womanhood which is deeply insulting and restrictive."[

Jeffreys' opinions on these topics have been challenged by transgender activists. Roz Kaveney, a trans woman and critic of Jeffreys, wrote in The Guardian that Sheila Jeffreys and radical feminists who share her views are "acting like a cult." Kaveney compared Jeffreys' desire to ban transsexual surgery to the Catholic Church's desire to ban abortion, arguing that both proposals bear negative "implications for all women." Finally, Kaveney criticized Jeffreys' and her supporters for alleged "anti-intellectualism, emphasis on innate knowledge, fetishisation of tiny ideological differences, heresy hunting, conspiracy theories, rhetorical use of images of disgust, talk of stabs in the back and romantic apocalypticism."} 

Ms. Jeffreys has stood against the entire idea that gender in some ways may be innate. She clings to this notion like a religious fanatic clings to their outdated beliefs.
We need only look to the case of David Reimer to see that there is indeed something innate to gender.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer
 Admitting that there may be something to the entire idea of gender being innate does not take away from humanity.

I think that the fear that some of the clingers on of outdated ideals is that, in admitting that there are innate gendered differences, this will in some way invalidate a century of hard work by feminists. That is not a realistic fear. The ideal that all people are entitled to equal treatment will not go away. The fact that patriarchy oppresses women will not become untrue if gender may be innate.  The need for legislation to protect women and give them a fair shake will not go away with such a truth.
All it is saying is that there is something special and unique to being male or female that we have not yet pinned down.
Ms. Jefferys’,
I know that you must know that there is something about women that men do not have. There is a special something that other women recognize in other women. When we see each other there is the knowing smile and beaming of eyes, recognition of one woman to another that says, ‘I recognize my sister’.  

There is nothing wrong with saying that the sexes are different in some ways. No difference justifies patriarchy or oppression.

Back to her book:
From the book description on Amazon
http://www.amazon.com/Gender-Hurts-Feminist-Analysis-Transgenderism/dp/0415539404
{It is only recently that transgenderism has been accepted as a disorder for which treatment is available. In the 1990s, a political movement of transgender activism coalesced to campaign for transgender rights. Considerable social, political and legal changes are occurring in response and there is increasing acceptance by governments and many other organisations and actors of the legitimacy of these rights.
This provocative and controversial book explores the consequences of these changes and offers a feminist perspective on the ideology and practice of transgenderism, which the author sees as harmful. It explores the effects of transgenderism on the lesbian and gay community, the partners of people who transgender, children who are identified as transgender and the people who transgender themselves, and argues that these are negative. In doing so the book contends that the phenomenon is based upon sex stereotyping, referred to as 'gender' – a conservative ideology that forms the foundation for women's subordination. Gender Hurts argues for the abolition of ‘gender’, which would remove the rationale for transgenderism.


This book will be of interest to scholars and students of political science, feminism and feminist theory and gender studies.}

Ms. Jeffreys seeks to some way abolish gender and “transgenderism” which she calls a human rights violation.
Well that is very presumptuous of her. I am a transgender person and my human rights were not violated. I put the hormones in my body, not someone else. I begged the doctors to help me with my medical needs.
They agreed because they KNOW that transsexuals who do not transition kill themselves in high numbers. It has been reported that upwards of 41% of transgender people have attempted suicide. That is just the percentage of us who are still alive to report. The suicide rates of trans* people is sky high. No amount of criticism of policy will change the fact that trans* people who do not get treatment have a high mortality rate.
It has been shown that transition is the only cure for gender dysphoria. Until Ms. Jeffreys finds a cure for ‘transgender ideation’ that equals or exceeds the survival/success rate of current best practices, she should not be calling for the abolition of the treatment. If we did things her way then trans* people would never have the option to transition and we would wallow in misery.

Also, transgender people who live true to self report overwhelmingly that they are more content with life post transition. They go from depressed and unable to be productive in society, to productive members of society. That alone should be reason enough to just let us live in peace without feminist leaders labeling us as a sickness symptom of society.

So I have yet to read this book and the price tag associated with it is a little steep for my pocketbook. I will eventually get my hands on a second hand copy. I suspect that there will be nothing of new substance offered from her previous writings.

Have a great day,

Cynthia Lee

Is TERF a slur?

If you are not familiar with the term TERF, it stands for Trans* Exclusionary Rad Fem. If you are not familiar with the term Rad Fem, then you need to do some catching up and you should likely spend some time with a search engine of your choice. Go ahead, I'll be here when you get back.

Caught up now? Spiffy.

So there are members of the Rad Fems who are not very friendly to trans* women and some of them are not too easy on trans* men either. As a result of this treatment, a number of trans* folks have taken some exception to the way we are spoken of by these folks. As a way to make it easy to distinguish between the Rad Fems who accept trans* women in their midst and those who do not, the term TERF was coined. It is simply an anagram for trans* exclusionary Rad Fem. So it is a spot on designator. Now that the term TERF has made it into the vernacular of the queer populace, some of those who would be obvious candidates to be referred to as TERF have taken the public stance that it is a slur and not polite.

Well with my current stance on the RuPaul verses Carmen fiasco and general stance on slurs for trans* women perhaps I should stop using TERF. If I want currency in this conversation I must walk the talk eh? Well as these thoughts crossed my mind I was also almost listening to the TV that was droning on in the back ground on a news channel. I don’t know what story came up as I was deep in my thoughts but the word “terrorist” came through floating on the air at just the right moment. I do not think many terrorists would like being called that term, but it is what it is. Sometimes a term is spot on and ugly. Like TERF.

OMG!!! Did you just conflate TERF with terrorist? Probably a little. There are people in our society that hold ugly beliefs and cause hatred to increase and thus the chance at increased violence. >Racist, Bigot, Misogynist, Terrorist, Murder, Thief all these words are designator words that are useful in our vocabulary to denote an evil person in simple to use language we all understand.

It is my position that TERF is in this pile of words that we use to designate an evil person who holds dangerous, outdated and vicious views that stigmatize and threaten others.  Add this to the fact that it was coined as an anagram to designate Trans* Exclusionary Rad Fems it does not come to the level of slur. Now maybe if TERFs start being killed and beaten with TERF chanted at them as it is happening we can call it a slur. 

As it stands attempts to get this spot on word designated a slur is just an attempt to take currency in the conversation away from TS women. Which is just pathetic.