Is it Trans phobic to say only women get abortions?

[Cleopatra7]

Katha Pollo recently wrote an article claiming that it is ridiculous to say "people get abortions " rather than "women get abortions" in order to be inclusive of trans men who have the potential to get pregnant and have abortions:

http://m.thenation.com/article/201289-who-has-abortions

She acknowledges that abortion is an issue for trans men but says that saying "people have abortions" ignores the fact that abortion is framed overwhelmingly in terms of women (their roles, their bodies, their autonomy, etc) and that including trans men muddied this issue. So should we say "people have abortions" or just "women have abortions"? Thoughts?

[AmazonSugarPie]

Trans-phobic? No. Cis-normative? Yes.

[eh02]

Trans-phobic? No. Cis-normative? Yes.

Agreed. I do think it's good to try to avoid cis-normative language overall, just out of an effort to be inclusive, but you run into difficult territory when you're dealing with something that has to do with biological issues where people tend to use "woman" in terms of biological sex, or being female-bodied, or having a functional uterus and ovaries, and not necessarily regarding your identified gender.

From a medical standpoint, your gender is a lot less relevant than your biological sex, so I think that is why people do tend to just say "women who get abortions," "women who are pregnant" etc. If you're pregnant, your doctor is really only going to care if you have female sex organs, not whether you identify as a man or woman, so your biological sex is really the relevant factor there.

[OkToBeTakei]

Here's an idea. People should spend more time actively being tolerant and acting kindly and with open minds rather than listen to fuckwits who keep coming up with pretentious terms to tell us how offensive we are being by not being up to date with the ever changing politically correct terms.

Give me a fucking break.

Rant over.

[Cassielfsw]

I'm in favor of "pregnant people/people who have abortions/etc" not only because of trans inclusivity but also because it nicely underscores the notion that women are, in fact, people.

[DGayle]

I don't see it as transphobic. If you are a trans man, this won't mean you suddenly have a prostate to check, or are automatically devoid of a uterus and cervix. Medicine deals with biology, not identification, and I know some people who think that your gender identify should be all that matters, but when it comes to medicine, that can kill. So I have no issue at all saying women have abortions because, biologically, it's true.

The sentiment about underscoring women are people loses something when you decide to eliminate mention of sex. en have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. People have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. Women have a 1 in 8 chance of breast cancer. People have a 1 in 8 chance of breast cancer.

Medicine doesn't exist to make use politically correct terms to people in general feel good or included. It deals in cold, hard biology to keep us alive and healthy. Our bodies don't give a damn about political correctness.

[Cassielfsw]

I don't see it as transphobic. If you are a trans man, this won't mean you suddenly have a prostate to check, or are automatically devoid of a uterus and cervix. Medicine deals with biology, not identification, and I know some people who think that your gender identify should be all that matters, but when it comes to medicine, that can kill. So I have no issue at all saying women have abortions because, biologically, it's true.

You just contradicted yourself though. Trans men are not women. Some trans men have abortions. Ergo some men have abortions. Ergo not only women have abortions.

The sentiment about underscoring women are people loses something when you decide to eliminate mention of sex. en have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. People have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. Women have a 1 in 8 chance of breast cancer. People have a 1 in 8 chance of breast cancer.

Or... people with prostates have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. If you're a trans woman who has a prostate, is a public service announcement directed at "men" going to get your attention? If you're a doctor and you neglect to consider that some women have prostates, aren't you going to miss some diagnoses? Didn't you just say that could kill?

Medicine doesn't exist to make use politically correct terms to people in general feel good or included. It deals in cold, hard biology to keep us alive and healthy. Our bodies don't give a damn about political correctness.

"Politically correct" is a red herring. This is not about trans people's feelings. "People with prostates/with breasts/who are pregnant" is more reflective of REALITY.

[nelliebelle1197]

No, the reality is that women's issues are always minimized and abortion is primarily a women's issue. The fact that abortion is even an issue is rooted in patriarchical constructs and the need for men to control. The article points out that the relative few men who get breast cancer don't take away from the fact that breast cancer is primarily a women's issue. Domestic violence is the same way- it is framed in the context of women, not the men who are abused by women or other men because women are the primary victims.

It is ignorance of reality and the state of women in culture to try to neutralize the issues that are primarily women's issues. The 'people' language is the red herring. It is patriarchical and anti-woman because it is yet again an attempt to remove women from the issues that impact us most.

[RachelB]

Or... people with prostates have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. If you're a trans woman who has a prostate, is a public service announcement directed at "men" going to get your attention? If you're a doctor and you neglect to consider that some women have prostates, aren't you going to miss some diagnoses? Didn't you just say that could kill?

This is basically my reason for preferring the "anyone with ovaries" framing, where access to abortion is concerned-- anyone who once had them but has had them removed (i.e., some number of cis women) isn't going to need abortion services. Anyone who does have them might.

From everything I have heard, dealing with acute body dysphoria is miserable. I don't want someone who's already having a rough time because of a pregnancy they don't want to go through that, on top of everything else, just to receive necessary medical care. It is a pretty shitty bargain to have to choose between seeking timely health care and avoiding known triggers for self-harm.

[Antimony]

No, the reality is that women's issues are always minimized and abortion is primarily a women's issue. The fact that abortion is even an issue is rooted in patriarchical constructs and the need for men to control. The article points out that the relative few men who get breast cancer don't take away from the fact that breast cancer is primarily a women's issue. Domestic violence is the same way- it is framed in the context of women, not the men who are abused by women or other men because women are the primary victims.

It is ignorance of reality and the state of women in culture to try to neutralize the issues that are primarily women's issues. The 'people' language is the red herring. It is patriarchical and anti-woman because it is yet again an attempt to remove women from the issues that impact us most.

It's patriarchical? No. I seriously doubt it.

Anti-woman? Nope.

The thing is, this kind of "people with ovaries" and "people who are pregnant" language is not championed by patriarchs or really, most heteronormative people. It, as far as I can tell, having been rooted in it, is a direct result of discussion in the intersection of feminist and queer circles (if you ignore TERFs, who I do not consider to be feminists, because if your feminism has to exclude a type of woman, well, that's messed up.)

Inclusive language helps people find help and that is important. We all know that most people who are getting abortions. But when you're trying to provide services and information to a large group of people, inclusive language doesn't negate that. I also don't see how using inclusive language negates the issue -- it at least suggests that we are having a discussion on how we best distribute information.

This is basically my reason for preferring the "anyone with ovaries" framing, where access to abortion is concerned-- anyone who once had them but has had them removed (i.e., some number of cis women) isn't going to need abortion services. Anyone who does have them might.

From everything I have heard, dealing with acute body dysphoria is miserable. I don't want someone who's already having a rough time because of a pregnancy they don't want to go through that, on top of everything else, just to receive necessary medical care. It is a pretty shitty bargain to have to choose between seeking timely health care and avoiding known triggers for self-harm.

THIS I really agree with. Many, many of my friends are trans (I actually didn't have any cishet friends until college. High school was a queer time to me.) They aren't trying to distract me from my needs a cis-woman but they are both a) supporting my needs and b) protecting, and advocating for their own community.

I do not think that using "women" as the primary language is an outright act of transphobia but it IS an act of cisnormativity and cishetnormativity contributes to the depressing stats regarding trans people too.

[nelliebelle1197]

It absolutely is patriarchical and anti-women. It is oppressive and denying women agency and control over their basic biology. Women are not allowed to claim issues for women because a very few vocal activists don't like it? Sorry, but that is oppressive. And considering the few people leading the charge are/are identifying as men, then hell yeah it is patriarchical.

Biological women who are/have transitioned to men are, in fact, men, men telling women what they can think, feel and what words they are allowed to use. That is patriarchy. The irony is beautiful and sad.

I truly believe that someday, researchers will find that transgender has a biological root - fetuses are undifferentiated in the first few weeks and I have no doubt that the complexity of fetal evolution often leads to people having different insides than outsides. But transmen cannot take women's issues away from them because they are MEN. It is very simple. If you are identifying as a man, part of the oppressive, patriarchical majority, then you have no business telling me as a woman how to label my issues. Women have to give up too much and it is absurd we are not even allow to claim our own unique political issues because someone's feelings might get hurt. 21 million women have abortions each year and 50,000 die from unsafe abortions. In the US, safe and legal abortion is disappearing. This is a women's issue; that is inescapable and demeaning to women to neuter the issue like this.

[DGayle]

You just contradicted yourself though. Trans men are not women. Some trans men have abortions. Ergo some men have abortions. Ergo not only women have abortions.

Or... people with prostates have a 1 in 8 chance of prostate cancer. If you're a trans woman who has a prostate, is a public service announcement directed at "men" going to get your attention? If you're a doctor and you neglect to consider that some women have prostates, aren't you going to miss some diagnoses? Didn't you just say that could kill?

"Politically correct" is a red herring. This is not about trans people's feelings. "People with prostates/with breasts/who are pregnant" is more reflective of REALITY.

A trans man is a person born into the biological body of a woman who gender-identifies as a man. There's nothing contradictory in saying that being a trans man doesn't mean you have a prostate or are suddenly without a uterus. Biologically, a trans man is still a woman. As I said, and you need to get through your head, medicine doesn't care about gender identity or politically correct terms and phrases. Medicine deals with the biological BODY, and gender identity doesn't change the biological body.

Frankly, this is very fucking stupid: "If you're a doctor and you neglect to consider that some women have prostates, aren't you going to miss some diagnoses? "

You're basically saying doctors should assume women have prostates since some people who gender-identify might have them. Do you really think doctors should start ordering prostate checks for women, to be on your idea of the safe side, and for good measure, start talking to men about their yearly paps since most trans men haven't had bottom surgery?

[DGayle]

What the fuck is this world coming to when saying "woman" can now be considered transphobic, cisnormative, and cisheteronormative? What the fuck is this world coming to when a biological woman gender-identifying as a woman is a bad thing that should be shamed because we are all just people? How is taking away the right of a cisgendered woman to identify as a woman any different than telling a trans woman that she's doing it wrong? I'm getting sick and tired of people saying that it's oppressive, bigoted, or phobic, to identify as a gender that some people might feel is oppressive to some people. Guess what. It's oppressive to ME to say that "woman" is wrong and I should identify as just plain "people." But that probably doesn't matter since I am in the majority. If you want to support equality, then you need to support the right for cisgendered people to identify as a gender instead of wiping it out and just calling it "people." If a trans woman is all right identifying as a woman, but I'm not, then that's hypocritical and it is oppressive.

And again, medicine isn't about political correctness. Medicine is biological fact, not gender identity, and it's stupid and can be dangerous to assume everyone is the same because some people who identify as women have prostates, and some people who identify as men have uteruses. Like it or not, gender identity has NOTHING to do with biological make-up, and advocating ignoring this is literally advocating dangerous medicine for the sake of politically correct terms and removing "women" from the picture and just calling us "people."

[Ofglen]

Trans person here rolling my eyes so far back into my head i can see my brain

Cis people talking about how trans men are *actually* "biologically" women and trans women are *actually* "biologically" men like tell us how you really feel

I do not know where to begin with this explanation. So instead, I'm going to go complain to to other trans people about the cis people on the internet that refuse to gender us correctly and love to pretend that you care about our medical care.

Before I do that, read this, and stop coming up with all these excuses to misgender us. Either own your transphobia or get the fuck over it.

"If cisgender people REALLY thought “biological sex†was important and weren’t just using it to police trans people who complain about health forms, they would

ask why there’s no intersex option on health forms

ask why there isn’t a different column where you denote if you’re trans and whether you plan on getting surgery (you know, since that affects your HEALTH)

use their cis privilege to point out the flaws in running health on a male/female system

stop saying “biological sex†while ignoring the existence of intersex people, as well as people with hormonal imbalances that put them at risk for disorders that typically don’t apply to their “biological sexâ€

basically it’s really obvious that cis people only say “they NEED to ask male or female on health forms its for your HEALTH†to get trans people to shut up, because cis people are scared of change"- list courtesy of tomibunny.tumblr

Stop pretending you're misgendering us "for our health".

And yes, it is transphobic to say only women get abortions. Not only women get abortions. You can acknowledge that access to abortions is incredibly affected by misogyny without making blanket statements about the genders of people getting them. It is also cisnormative. Cisnormativity is a type of transphobia, not a different thing. :x

[OkToBeTakei]

Cisgender.

Now I read that this ridiculous term hopefully won't make it into everyday terminology as it was not intended to. Unfortunately it is.

Labels .... How I hate them. How I hate more the people who insist on making the labels the issue rather than the actual issues.

They waste time and energy arguing. Pretentious arseholes.

I would not presume to act so condescendingly toward an individual who has probably struggled a long time with their identity to assume they don't know if they have a prostate or not.

[IronicallyMaeve]

I don't think it's inaccurate to say abortion is a women's health issue. The vast majority of people getting abortions are women. However, to say that ONLY women get abortions is inaccurate.

@Oflgen makes a good point about medical records. It's easy for me to just check the "female" box. What about a transman who still has a cervix? If his healthcare provider doesn't know he has transitioned, then it's unlikely he will get a pap smear. And a woman with a prostate may not get screened for prostate cancer.

Gender identity is still a new thing for most people. I have trans* friends. I'm gay. I get it. But most people aren't involved in the queer community. Even for me, it's a struggle to watch my language sometimes, especially when talking about sex. I'm getting better, though! As a whole, I think people are more aware and more accepting.

[lauraloralara]

Trans person here rolling my eyes so far back into my head i can see my brain

Cis people talking about how trans men are *actually* "biologically" women and trans women are *actually* "biologically" men like tell us how you really feel

I do not know where to begin with this explanation. So instead, I'm going to go complain to to other trans people about the cis people on the internet that refuse to gender us correctly and love to pretend that you care about our medical care.

Before I do that, read this, and stop coming up with all these excuses to misgender us. Either own your transphobia or get the fuck over it.

"If cisgender people REALLY thought “biological sex†was important and weren’t just using it to police trans people who complain about health forms, they would

ask why there’s no intersex option on health forms

ask why there isn’t a different column where you denote if you’re trans and whether you plan on getting surgery (you know, since that affects your HEALTH)

use their cis privilege to point out the flaws in running health on a male/female system

stop saying “biological sex†while ignoring the existence of intersex people, as well as people with hormonal imbalances that put them at risk for disorders that typically don’t apply to their “biological sexâ€

basically it’s really obvious that cis people only say “they NEED to ask male or female on health forms its for your HEALTH†to get trans people to shut up, because cis people are scared of change"- list courtesy of tomibunny.tumblr

Stop pretending you're misgendering us "for our health".

And yes, it is transphobic to say only women get abortions. Not only women get abortions. You can acknowledge that access to abortions is incredibly affected by misogyny without making blanket statements about the genders of people getting them. It is also cisnormative. Cisnormativity is a type of transphobia, not a different thing. :x

Trans men *are* biologically female, and trans women *are* biologically male. If that weren't true, where would the "trans" label even come from? Human beings are sexually dimorphic, except in cases where intersex conditions occur, as you noted. It's bullshit to pretend like biological sex is a fairy tale or is somehow irrelevant to health, especially given the serious lack of comprehensive sex ed that goes on in the US. If a patient knows about their personal hormonal variations or if they know they are intersex, then they would likely put that information in the section of the medical form that says "other conditions not listed" or some variation of that.

Also, many people don't appreciate the term "cisgender."

[Terrie]

There is so much irony in complaining about the term cisgender while insisting that people must accept the label of "biologically male/female."

[nelliebelle1197]

Trans person here rolling my eyes so far back into my head i can see my brain

Cis people talking about how trans men are *actually* "biologically" women and trans women are *actually* "biologically" men like tell us how you really feel

I do not know where to begin with this explanation. So instead, I'm going to go complain to to other trans people about the cis people on the internet that refuse to gender us correctly and love to pretend that you care about our medical care.

Before I do that, read this, and stop coming up with all these excuses to misgender us. Either own your transphobia or get the fuck over it.

"If cisgender people REALLY thought “biological sex†was important and weren’t just using it to police trans people who complain about health forms, they would

ask why there’s no intersex option on health forms

ask why there isn’t a different column where you denote if you’re trans and whether you plan on getting surgery (you know, since that affects your HEALTH)

use their cis privilege to point out the flaws in running health on a male/female system

stop saying “biological sex†while ignoring the existence of intersex people, as well as people with hormonal imbalances that put them at risk for disorders that typically don’t apply to their “biological sexâ€

basically it’s really obvious that cis people only say “they NEED to ask male or female on health forms its for your HEALTH†to get trans people to shut up, because cis people are scared of change"- list courtesy of tomibunny.tumblr

Stop pretending you're misgendering us "for our health".

And yes, it is transphobic to say only women get abortions. Not only women get abortions. You can acknowledge that access to abortions is incredibly affected by misogyny without making blanket statements about the genders of people getting them. It is also cisnormative. Cisnormativity is a type of transphobia, not a different thing. :x

I don't know where you are in your journey, but is your ultimate goal to 100% identify as a man? I have a dear friend who gave up a very lucrative career and generations of social status to become what she knows she is- a woman. She has no desire to remember her male exterior. She 100% woman as far as she and anyone who knows her is concerned. She has a right to own women's issues whether or not she can produce children because she is a woman.

If you identify as a man, then you need to accept what men have done to women and how important women's issues are. Men have created an oppressive society for women, and women have the right to identify their issues and claim them, just as much as YOU do. You can't have it both ways. It is completely hypocritical to tell women that YOU have the right to neuter our issues because of certain traits in your biology but then jump on women who do not want you co-opting what is clearly a women's issue because you don't want to be defined by biology. Women are defined by biology constantly; laws are being made to control women's biology. It is such male privilege to think you have a right not to be defined by your biology. I don't have that right as a woman - in fact, it worse for women because it does no matter whether we have a prostate or not. We cannot escape our exteriors.

This is actually starting to make me angry. Sticking "-phobia" on something doesn't mean it is true. It is deeply offensive to me that a very few people think they have the right to redefine women's issues and struggles. I will NOT have a man tell me what to think, feel and accuse me of phobia. And that is exactly what these activists are trying to do. I even saw something on transmen objecting to women-only abuse survivors groups. That is ridiculous - I would not want someone identifying as male in a safe space like that.

This is just another patriarchical watering down of feminism. You see it all over the place, with young women not even identifying as feminists and not understanding the unique problems women face as different.

[nataraja]

Interestingly the word woman originated from womb-man = man with a womb.

The whole discussion is really complicated but I wonder what is the trans-person's definition of the words "woman" and "man"?

Is it terminated by a person's gender or biological sex?

How can the female gender and male gender be defined anyway?

Some feminists say that all gender is constructed, that it doesn't really exist and that women and men in reality only differentiated bodywise. But if this were true then why are there so many people that claim they feel like a woman even though they have a male body? Who is the woman in the man's body? How can she be described?

I think there is some confusion going on within the big field of gender and queer studies.

[Rachel333]

I don't think it's inaccurate to say abortion is a women's health issue. The vast majority of people getting abortions are women. However, to say that ONLY women get abortions is inaccurate.

Exactly this. I disagree with those who say you shouldn't use the word "women" because it is mostly women getting abortions, and it is definitely a women's health issue (even though it's not something that applies to even all cis women), but it is also just inaccurate to say that only women get abortions.

I don't see anything wrong with using "cisgender." It's a useful term in certain contexts and makes conversations about trans issues easier.

Interestingly the word woman originated from womb-man = man with a womb.

My understanding is that it's from "wife man," and "wif" just meant "woman" in Old English, so it's kind of like saying "woman man."

[OkToBeTakei]

Trans person here rolling my eyes so far back into my head i can see my brain

Cis people talking about how trans men are *actually* "biologically" women and trans women are *actually* "biologically" men like tell us how you really feel

I do not know where to begin with this explanation. So instead, I'm going to go complain to to other trans people about the cis people on the internet that refuse to gender us correctly and love to pretend that you care about our medical care.

Before I do that, read this, and stop coming up with all these excuses to misgender us. Either own your transphobia or get the fuck over it.

"If cisgender people REALLY thought “biological sex†was important and weren’t just using it to police trans people who complain about health forms, they would

ask why there’s no intersex option on health forms

ask why there isn’t a different column where you denote if you’re trans and whether you plan on getting surgery (you know, since that affects your HEALTH)

use their cis privilege to point out the flaws in running health on a male/female system

stop saying “biological sex†while ignoring the existence of intersex people, as well as people with hormonal imbalances that put them at risk for disorders that typically don’t apply to their “biological sexâ€

basically it’s really obvious that cis people only say “they NEED to ask male or female on health forms its for your HEALTH†to get trans people to shut up, because cis people are scared of change"- list courtesy of tomibunny.tumblr

Stop pretending you're misgendering us "for our health".

And yes, it is transphobic to say only women get abortions. Not only women get abortions. You can acknowledge that access to abortions is incredibly affected by misogyny without making blanket statements about the genders of people getting them. It is also cisnormative. Cisnormativity is a type of transphobia, not a different thing. :x

:shock: :roll:

Person here rolling this person's eyes so far back I can see my arsehole.

Nobody has ignored the existance of 'intersex' people as 'intersex people were not being discussed. Nor were people with hormone imbalances. In the lovely manner of your post I will respond in like, don't fucking call me transphobic and don't quote tumblr to ........it's daft.

This article was written for the angry such as thee.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/914 ... privilege/

Suzanne’s crime, it transpired, was to be ‘cis-gendered’ as opposed to transgendered (that is, she was born female) and not to have ‘checked her privilege’ — what passes for a battle cry in certain ever-decreasing circles these dog days. It’s hardly ‘No pasarán!’ — rather, it declares an intention that it is better to be nagged to death on one’s knees rather than stand by one’s principles on one’s feet. Consider how lucky you are, born women, before you raise your voice above that of a trans-sister! — that veritable cornucopian horn of plenty which we lucky breed fortunate enough to be born to a sensory smorgasbord of periods, PMT, the menopause, HRT and being bothered ceaselessly for sex by random male strangers since puberty take such flagrant delight in revelling in, shameless hussies that we are. Add to this that Suzanne was, like myself, born into the English working class, and therefore marginally less likely to have beaten the odds than a dancing dog or busker’s cat to have become a public figure, and I was buggered (not being homophobic, there) if I was going to put up with a bunch of middle-class seat-sniffers, educated beyond all instinct and honesty, laying into my girl.

The idea that a person can chose their gender — in a world where millions of people, especially ‘cis-gendered’ women, are not free to choose who they marry, what they eat or whether or not their genitals are cut off and sewn up with barbed wire when they are still babies — and have their major beautification operations paid for by the National Health Service seems the ultimate privilege, so don’t tell me to check mine. Here’s hoping that the in-fighting in-crowd of intersectionality disappear up their own intersection really soon, so the rest of us can resume creating a tolerant and united socialism.

Amen to the bolded.

[Firiel]

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/914 ... privilege/

Amen to the bolded.

Wow. It seems someone doesn't understand how "privilege" is not something you have or don't have but rather a conglomeration of different variables, some more important than others, that as a whole affect how we interact with culture and how culture interacts with us.

I do not have male privilege. But I do have white privilege. I also have straight privilege and cis-privilege. A black person telling me to "check my privilege" if I am not considering my own white privilege is okay, EVEN IF THAT PERSON IS MALE. I could tell him to check his (male) privilege later, if applicable.

Also, I fucking hate the notion that we shouldn't advocate for rights, understanding, and acceptance here because things are better here than they are elsewhere. I mean, why are we feminists complaining about gay folks not being able to get married or about not being able to get abortions or about getting cat-called on the streets here in the West when in the Middle East, female genital mutilation is still practiced?

I say this as a cis-gendered feminist, but it seems to me like some people just hate the fact that they no longer have sole possession of the "oppressed" card.

Seriously, there's enough oppression to go around, guys!

Also, for the trans* folks who have commented here, I'm sorry your opinions and experiences AS THE NON-PRIVILEGED PARTY are being dismissed like this.

[OkToBeTakei]

Wow. It seems someone doesn't understand how "privilege" is not something you have or don't have but rather a conglomeration of different variables, some more important than others, that as a whole affect how we interact with culture and how culture interacts with us.

I do not have male privilege. But I do have white privilege. I also have straight privilege and cis-privilege. A black person telling me to "check my privilege" if I am not considering my own white privilege is okay, EVEN IF THAT PERSON IS MALE. I could tell him to check his (male) privilege later, if applicable.

Also, I fucking hate the notion that we shouldn't advocate for rights, understanding, and acceptance here because things are better here than they are elsewhere. I mean, why are we feminists complaining about gay folks not being able to get married or about not being able to get abortions or about getting cat-called on the streets here in the West when in the Middle East, female genital mutilation is still practiced?

I say this as a cis-gendered feminist, but it seems to me like some people just hate the fact that they no longer have sole possession of the "oppressed" card.

Seriously, there's enough oppression to go around, guys!

Also, for the trans* folks who have commented here, I'm sorry your opinions and experiences AS THE NON-PRIVILEGED PARTY are being dismissed like this.

You say all that as a cisgendered feminist? Soon we will all be a bunch of dehumanised labels.

The irony of the fact that you interact with fellow humans by checking your privilege in every given situation highlights exactly the problem we have with society today. You make one astute comment. There is enough oppression to go around and if you had read the full article you may have realised this nuance. The point being that we should be tolerant of one another, create an accepting society WITHOUT one party or another claiming as you put it the most oppressed card. That goes for race, sexual orientation et al.

Do NOT apologise on my behalf. YOU do not have THAT privilege.

Fucking labels.

[Firiel]

You say all that as a cisgendered feminist? Soon we will all be a bunch of dehumanised labels.

The irony of the fact that you interact with fellow humans by checking your privilege in every given situation highlights exactly the problem we have with society today. You make one astute comment. There is enough oppression to go around and if you had read the full article you may have realised this nuance. The point being that we should be tolerant of one another, create an accepting society WITHOUT one party or another claiming as you put it the most oppressed card. That goes for race, sexual orientation et al.

Do NOT apologise on my behalf. YOU do not have THAT privilege.

Fucking labels.

And there's your good point. I'm sorry for that blanket apology.

So, I'll do it again more responsibly-- to the trans* folks that have commented on this thread, I'm sorry for making the assumption that trans-phobia wasn't common in feminism and that the majority of feminists want to listen to people's experiences and understand what it's like for people of all stripes to live and interact with the world. Clearly, I was wrong.

Why do you think it's wrong for me to check my privilege when interacting with people? To me, that means when I am thinking about where I am today, I remember that I was raised in a fairly wealthy household and have not had to overcome much discrimination. It reminds me that I cannot know what it is like to live life as a black woman or feeling like I need to keep my sexuality a secret or hating each contour of my body because it represents a gender that I am not. It keeps me (ME, this is personal) from being a self-satisfied arse.