notes
This commit is contained in:
parent
3e64d66f3e
commit
6e0ef971b4
3 changed files with 111 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -7,3 +7,7 @@ they think a trans person feels or ought to feel / behave, in which case that
|
|||
intent is quite warranted. Other times it's a means of expressing exhaustion at
|
||||
folks who simply don't "get it", and don't particularly need to. That is to say,
|
||||
cisgenderedness is a form of [[file:20200809222134-privilege.org][Privilege]].
|
||||
|
||||
Gender-criticals or TERFs tend to avoid the adjective "cis", preferring to other
|
||||
transgender men and women as "transmen" and "transwomen", separate from the
|
||||
(assumed cis) categories "men" and "women" ([[file:RuthPearceSonjaErikainen1978.org::*Terminology][Terf wars: an introduction]]).
|
||||
|
|
5
20200810123502-post_truth_era.org
Normal file
5
20200810123502-post_truth_era.org
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
|
|||
#+title: Post-truth era
|
||||
|
||||
Fake news, alternative facts, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
- [[file:RuthPearceSonjaErikainen1978.org::*‘Gender critical’ feminism in the post-truth era][Terf wars: an introduction]]
|
102
RuthPearceSonjaErikainen1978.org
Normal file
102
RuthPearceSonjaErikainen1978.org
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
|
|||
#+TITLE: Terf wars: an introduction
|
||||
#+ROAM_KEY: cite:RuthPearceSonjaErikainen1978
|
||||
|
||||
* Race and Gender
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
These discourses have racist undertones, as the implicit whiteness of the women
|
||||
who are the subject of protection means that racialised and especially Black
|
||||
women and nonbinary people are more likely to be considered dangerously
|
||||
masculine (Patel, 2017). This is due to the enduring colonial legacies that have
|
||||
long defined racialised women as the unfeminine or ‘masculine’ contrast to white
|
||||
women’s presumed ‘natural’ femininity (see e.g. McClintock, 2013). Racialised
|
||||
women (cis and trans alike), non-binary and intersex people are especially
|
||||
likely to be rendered ‘gender suspect’ due to discourses that position bodies of
|
||||
colour as gender deviant in relation to white body norms (Gill-Peterson,2018;
|
||||
Snorton, 2017).
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
It is disproportionately cis people (both women and men) who are dangerous to,
|
||||
and perpetrators of violence against, trans women, not the other way around
|
||||
(Bachman & Gooch, 2018; Hasenbush et al., 2019). In this way, trans-exclusionary
|
||||
feminist politics can work to erase forms of gendered and racialised violence.
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
|
||||
* TERF / Gender-Critical
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
Notably, while many (but not all) trans people and allies describe
|
||||
trans-exclusionary feminist campaigners as ‘TERFs’, the campaigners themselves
|
||||
generally object to this acronym. In recent years, many have preferred to call
|
||||
themselves ‘gender critical’ – a term that denotes, less a critical approach to
|
||||
gender, and more an emphasis on claiming ‘biologically defined’ notions of
|
||||
femaleness and womanhood over gender identity and social concepts of gender. In
|
||||
addition to attacking trans people’s right to access public toilets in line with
|
||||
their sex/gender presentation, ‘gender critical’ feminists have criticised
|
||||
social developments such as LGBTIQ-inclusive school education and positive media
|
||||
representations of trans people. Increasingly, they argue that such developments
|
||||
result from what they call ‘gender ideology’ (see e.g. 4thWaveNow, 2019).
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
|
||||
* Terminology
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
In understanding the current landscape of trans-exclusionary feminist politics,
|
||||
the terminology used by different parties in the debates is central, and
|
||||
constitutes a challenge for analysing trans-exclusionary discourses. This is
|
||||
because language is being deliberately used to include, exclude, and/or denote
|
||||
power relations: for example, trans-inclusive feminist writers tend to prefer
|
||||
the term ‘trans women’, because this implies that a trans woman is a kind of
|
||||
woman (like ‘gay woman’). ‘Gender critical’ writers, however, generally use
|
||||
‘transwomen’ and avoid using ‘cis’, which can (implicitly or explicitly) exclude
|
||||
trans women from the general category ‘women’, by conflating ‘women’ with ‘cis
|
||||
women’.
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
Cisgender (or cis) is a descriptive term indicating people who are not trans
|
||||
and/or whose experience of gender corresponds with their assignment at birth. In
|
||||
use since as early as 1992, the term has come to replace terms such as
|
||||
‘not-trans’, ‘born-women/men’, ‘biological women/men’ or ‘natural women/men’,
|
||||
ultimately serving a neutralising function. In resistance to this, many ‘gender
|
||||
critical’ activists claim that cis (like TERF) is a slur. Recognition of the
|
||||
limitations of a trans/cis binary have been academically articulated (e.g. Enke,
|
||||
2013).
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
Certainly, TERF (like ‘cis’) is often used in angry commentaries online by both
|
||||
cis and trans feminists, either as an accusation (e.g. ‘you’re a TERF’) or an
|
||||
insult (e.g. ‘fuck off TERF’). Yet, it is important to understand and account
|
||||
for the power dynamic at play here. In examples such as those above, members of
|
||||
a marginalised group and their allies seek to identify, and express anger or
|
||||
frustration at, a harmful ideology that is promoted primarily by and in the
|
||||
interests of those who are systemically privileged as cis (men as well as
|
||||
women.)
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
* ‘Gender critical’ feminism in the post-truth era
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
It is increasingly argued that we are living in a ‘post-truth’ era, where
|
||||
conventional notions of expertise and the epistemic status of facts are
|
||||
fragmenting, exemplified by the proliferation of so-called fake news especially
|
||||
in digital spaces (Marres, 2018). As an unprecedented number of people have
|
||||
access to the internet and social media where they can read and circulate
|
||||
information of all kinds, numerous differently positioned knowledge claims now
|
||||
coexist digitally. Indeed, it has been argued that many people are abandoning
|
||||
conventional criteria of evidence in favour of alternative knowledges and
|
||||
beliefs (Lewandowsky et al., 2017).
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
* Appeals to science
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
By appealing to ‘biology’, authorities lay claim to the ‘neutrality’ and
|
||||
‘objectivity’ of science – a claim that has public appeal even if it has been
|
||||
contested in social scientific and humanities scholarship for decades (e.g.
|
||||
Haraway, 1988; Spanier, 1995). Yet, the authority of ‘science’ allows
|
||||
‘biological truths’ about sex difference to be presented as incontestable
|
||||
realities trumping (merely ‘social’) gender.
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
||||
|
||||
#+begin_quote
|
||||
‘Gender critical’ feminists are constructing and mobilising very particular,
|
||||
contested versions of biological ‘facts’ that are also lending support to the
|
||||
politics of anti-feminist organisations.
|
||||
#+end_quote
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue