Chimamanda And Trans Women

[Hawken]

Yesterday I think, Chimamanda said "When people talk about, ‘are trans women women’ my feeling is that trans women are trans women,” she stated. “If you’ve lived in the world as a man with the privileges that the world accords to men, and then sort of changed, switched gender, it’s difficult for me to accept that then we can equate your experience with the experience of a woman who has lived from the beginning in the world as a woman, and who has not been accorded those privileges that men are" and some people took it personal.

I don't understand, aren't trans women trans women? I failed to see a response from the series of replies she got, that properly explained what the uproar was about. Personally, it read like they were upset at being referred to as trans women as opposed to just women. And that's absurd considering how transitioning from one gender to another is in integral part of their narrative, their life story. Why would they seek to drop it? Sweep it under the carpet?

Is it a term they do not want to be associated with? I'm honestly baffled.

[Calllaris]

Socialization is an integral part of gender, not just genitalia.

 

Transgender women argue that prior to their transitioning they were assigned the nature of women even before they took to its gender physiology. Claims this original nature from birth, juxtapose their birth - male physiology is conflict / complex enough. Given, but different.

 

In that interview, Adichie dwelt upon the different societal experiences and exposures, Cis women vs Trans.

[scarlet]

Does Chimamanda have a point. Yes. Did she articulate it well. No.

 

And that is the reason for all the brouhaha. For every transgender female who was better at masking her feminity as a male, there is a transgender female who didn't have that ability (aka the guys we like to call sissies). It's not like an option, gender identity is fluid.

 

And I can understand that someone like Caitlyn Jenner definitely did not have the same experiences as Sahhara (in the article). Caitly won an Olympic gold medal as a male and became the top dog of the Kardashian clan and even had daughters before succumbing to her trans nature. She was able to keep the facade for that long.

 

But why should Caitlyn Jenner be the ideal transgender and not someone like Sahhara?

 

Because feminists can be disingenuous I think.

 

There is a tribe in Cambodia, the Kreung, where girls who cross puberty are given huts called love huts where they are free to have sex with whomever they choose (Google Cambodia love huts). Unintended pregnancies are taken care of by the girl, her family, and whoever marries her eventually. There is no such thing as "slut," "olosho," or "whore." Divorce is non-existent. Girls have the right to choose whoever they want without discrimination.

 

There is a also tribe in China, the Mosuo, that is often dubbed, Women are taught to be independent of men from day 1. They can function without men. Women lead their respective families, and women marry men not vice versa. Men leave their families to live with the women who marry them. Both genders have their roles in the society and there is virtually no discrimination.

 

Amongst the Sahrawi people in North Africa, divorced women who remarry have more grandiose parties than newly wed virgins. In fact, divorces are celebrated. Zero divorce stigma.

 

Now let's ask ourselves this, why should the oppressed women in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East be used to signify the ideal woman and not the Mosuo women? I'm pretty sure if Adichie was asked, she'll say the Mosuo and Kreung women are not women because they didn't have the experiences of women (aka herself).

 

What nonsense? From a supposed scholar?

 

The Mosuo women are women. The Trans women are also women. Don't get me wrong but this "division" does not help anyone. It's just favoring elitism, that all animals are equal but some are more equal than others which is so against everything that fundamental human rights stands for.

 

Gender discrimination affects more women in sub-Saharan Africa and Middle East, it doesn't mean women in other parts of the world shouldn't be accorded same rights or have less of a story to tell. Does Adichie even have a strong discriminatory experience when compared to women in some sub-Saharan African communities who genital mutilated at birth and forced to scavenge for food and water for miles while their men lazy about? Who and what gives her the right to say her story or experience is of more value than that of another person who identifies as a female?

 

It's like saying Caucasian racism against Asians is not racism because it isn't as bad as Caucasian racism against Africans. All is RACISM. Some more severe than others. What purpose does that achieve rather than make some people feel like elitists. More important than others.

 

It's shameful, when people fighting bigotry exhibit bigotry.

 

TRANS WOMAN ARE WOMAN irrespective. So like the subs, such as Butch trans women may have it bad, while effeminate trans women may have it much worse, most times worse than even cisgendered women. It doesn't make one sub-category of women more deserving of rights or the female gender identity than another sub-category. Or that the experiences of one sub-category is more important than the experiences of another sub-category.sigh

 

If cisgendered women want to feel great about themselves, they shouldn't use transgendered women as their footstool. Is just so wrong!

 

Its just like pulling the threads on lesbians and gays saying they are more deserving of pity and rights than bisexuals and asexuals.( that would make no sense too)

 

Feminists can take their high-handed exclusivist pompous selves to the stratosphere that their over-inflated egos is taking them. Don't dare step on transgendered women.

 

The LGBTQ+ community is too busy to pander to the egos of ANYONE, no matter how learned. We really can't have a face-off between the feminist and LGBTQ+ communities. It'd be messy and take valuable time away from the core of what our movements are all about: eliminating unfair discrimination.

[disney]

Grey I. Actually feel like kissing you all over for this .

Thanks for taking ur tym to write and analyse this issue :)

[dreamgal]

Does Chimamanda have a point. Yes. Did she articulate it well. No.

 

And that is the reason for all the brouhaha. For every transgender female who was better at masking her feminity as a male, there is a transgender female who didn't have that ability (aka the guys we like to call sissies). It's not like an option, gender identity is fluid.

 

And I can understand that someone like Caitlyn Jenner definitely did not have the same experiences as Sahhara (in the article). Caitly won an Olympic gold medal as a male and became the top dog of the Kardashian clan and even had daughters before succumbing to her trans nature. She was able to keep the facade for that long.

 

But why should Caitlyn Jenner be the ideal transgender and not someone like Sahhara?

 

Because feminists can be disingenuous I think.

 

There is a tribe in Cambodia, the Kreung, where girls who cross puberty are given huts called love huts where they are free to have sex with whomever they choose (Google Cambodia love huts). Unintended pregnancies are taken care of by the girl, her family, and whoever marries her eventually. There is no such thing as "slut," "olosho," or "whore." Divorce is non-existent. Girls have the right to choose whoever they want without discrimination.

 

There is a also tribe in China, the Mosuo, that is often dubbed, Women are taught to be independent of men from day 1. They can function without men. Women lead their respective families, and women marry men not vice versa. Men leave their families to live with the women who marry them. Both genders have their roles in the society and there is virtually no discrimination.

 

Amongst the Sahrawi people in North Africa, divorced women who remarry have more grandiose parties than newly wed virgins. In fact, divorces are celebrated. Zero divorce stigma.

 

Now let's ask ourselves this, why should the oppressed women in sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East be used to signify the ideal woman and not the Mosuo women? I'm pretty sure if Adichie was asked, she'll say the Mosuo and Kreung women are not women because they didn't have the experiences of women (aka herself).

 

What nonsense? From a supposed scholar?

 

The Mosuo women are women. The Trans women are also women. Don't get me wrong but this "division" does not help anyone. It's just favoring elitism, that all animals are equal but some are more equal than others which is so against everything that fundamental human rights stands for.

 

Gender discrimination affects more women in sub-Saharan Africa and Middle East, it doesn't mean women in other parts of the world shouldn't be accorded same rights or have less of a story to tell. Does Adichie even have a strong discriminatory experience when compared to women in some sub-Saharan African communities who genital mutilated at birth and forced to scavenge for food and water for miles while their men lazy about? Who and what gives her the right to say her story or experience is of more value than that of another person who identifies as a female?

 

It's like saying Caucasian racism against Asians is not racism because it isn't as bad as Caucasian racism against Africans. All is RACISM. Some more severe than others. What purpose does that achieve rather than make some people feel like elitists. More important than others.

 

It's shameful, when people fighting bigotry exhibit bigotry.

 

TRANS WOMAN ARE WOMAN irrespective. So like the subs, such as Butch trans women may have it bad, while effeminate trans women may have it much worse, most times worse than even cisgendered women. It doesn't make one sub-category of women more deserving of rights or the female gender identity than another sub-category. Or that the experiences of one sub-category is more important than the experiences of another sub-category.

 

If cisgendered women want to feel great about themselves, they shouldn't use transgendered women as their footstool. Is just so wrong!

 

Its just like pulling the threads on lesbians and gays saying they are more deserving of pity and rights than bisexuals and asexuals.( they would make no sense)

 

Feminists can take their high-handed exclusivist pompous selves to the stratosphere that their over-inflated egos is taking them. Don't dare step on transgendered women.

 

The LGBTQ+ community is too busy to pander to the egos of ANYONE, no matter how learned. We really can't have a face-off between the feminist and LGBTQ+ communities. It'd be messy and take valuable time away from the core of what our movements are all about: eliminating unfair discrimination.

A thousand likes

[Calllaris]

Did we actually understand the crux of Adichie's discuss?