Anonymous asked: The theory of "cis privilege" cannot withstand a simple test for logical consistency. Women are targeted regardless of their mode of presentation, be it masculine or feminine. Whether they conform or not, they'll get shit for being AFAB. Men are only targeted when they are gender-nonconforming. They are safe as long as their presentation is masculine. This is not a difficult concept.
They can’t even explain how female genital mutilation, female infanticide, sex-selective abortions based on male preference, child brides, acid attacks over dowries, misogynistic/sex-based discrimination, domestic abuse, human/sex-trafficking, “corrective rapes” of lesbians and girls being denied an education based on their sex, all fall under “cis privilege” and the “perks” of being female in a heteropatriarchal world.
This is total fucking transphobic bullshit. Fuck you. It is not a hard concept to wrap your head around: you may be privileged in some ways and oppressed in others. It is absolutely a privilege to have your gender match your sex, to not feel body dysphoria, to not have to deal with the work and expense of hormone therapy/ surgery or the huge level of transphobic violence etc. Saying that they can “choose” to conform and thus be safe in male CISGENDER PRIVILEGE is just as much bullshit as saying women should to the best of their capabilities pretend to be men so that they will have MALE PRIVILEGE. People should be able to express who they are without the threat of violence. When this expression does not meet you with violence, when your expression is accepted and normalized, that is PRIVILEGE.
You want to talk about logic? You know nothing about fucking intersectionality. You can be oppressed by your class and privileged by your gender, sexual orientation etc. etc. You know nothing.
This is not feminism. Claiming that if you’re a “woman” you have to be a certain way, conflating sex and gender, is not feminism.
Do you remember what feminism is based in? That gender is socially constructed? That the oppressive nature of “woman” is socially constructed? So how come when transwomen ask for feminism to integrate them into their struggles it’s is so fucking revolutionary? Transwomen face BOTH misogyny and transphobia as their genders. While it is true they may have some sex privilege, propagating the idea that it’s a “choice” for them to be who they are whereas for cis-women it’s biologically determined is the epitome of anti-feminist.
Cisprivilege is never having to worry that people will attack you for daring to perform a gender on your body that does not match their naturalized ideals. Cisprivilege is being able to be who you are without people asking you “why you have to be that way”. Cisprivilege is not being misgendered, demeaned, dehumanized, or called an “it” because you cannot fit the normalized gender-sex binary.
Not to mention, something I’m just realizing, you are aware transmen exist? And trans people who do not even fit the binary? You’re arguing that cisprivilege doesn’t exist based on one group of people-transwomen. Just… fucking logic, man.
It completely disgusts me that such transphobia is accepted within the feminist movement. And I find it very revealing that so manypeople who are “anti-gender” are not agender in their own lives and have no issue with people when gender is in line with its accepted sex, but when an oppressed minority group wants to express their genders the same way cis-people do, suddenly it’s unacceptable “bc like de sexz is supposed to match ze genderz and wtf are intersez people? no i only know binary logic.”
" It is absolutely a privilege to have your gender match your sex, to not feel body dysphoria, to not have to deal with the work and expense of hormone therapy/ surgery or the huge level of transphobic violence etc"
A person can not have privilege for being female, ever. Under patriarchy, males as a class oppress females as a class. Women who identify as women do not hold institutional power or actively oppress males who identify as women. The modern trans movement says you don’t have to suffer from dysphoria to be considered trans, and anyone who considers themselves a trans woman should have access to female areas.
"Cisprivilege is never having to worry that people will attack you for daring to perform a gender on your body that does not match their naturalized ideals. Cisprivilege is being able to be who you are without people asking you “why you have to be that way”. Cisprivilege is not being misgendered, demeaned, dehumanized, or called an “it” because you cannot fit the normalized gender-sex binary."
Have you never met a butch lesbian? Do they have cis privilege? A gender non-conforming homosexual male who identifies as a man? Do they have cis privilege? Also, I don’t think you understand how privilege or institutional power works.
"Not to mention, something I’m just realizing, you are aware transmen exist? And trans people who do not even fit the binary? You’re arguing that cisprivilege doesn’t exist based on one group of people-transwomen. Just… fucking logic, man."
? Trans men exist, and are still oppressed by males under patriarchy, our male-dominated society. Cis privilege does not exist. Male privilege does.
"And I find it very revealing that so manypeople who are “anti-gender” are not agender in their own lives and have no issue with people when gender is in line with its accepted sex, but when an oppressed minority group wants to express their genders the same way cis-people do, suddenly it’s unacceptable"
Being gender nonconforming is great, but it can be dangerous, that’s why radical feminists don’t shame women who do conform but ask them to critically examine their behavior. One can not identify out of the gender hierarchy, so the term agender is meaningless. A male who identifies as agender still benefits from male privilege, and male domination, the consequences of gender. Gender is not fun or something you express, it’s a hierarchy that places males in a higher position in society than females. It’s the socialization we receive based on our sex, grooming females to be submissive and males to be aggressive and dominant.
Radical feminists do not have a problem with people not conforming to gender roles, we have a problem with males demanding access to female areas like bathrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, victim shelters, etc. We have a problem with males shaming and silencing women who do not agree with them. We have a problem with males “identifying” with sexist stereotypes of what females are supposed to be, according to men. Feminism is a female liberation movement, gender non-conforming males will benefit, but have no place in determining the agenda and should not be prioritized over females.
They’re SO into their bullshit they actually think women have privilege for being women. Pathetic.
[T]he rationale behind forcing women to accept intact males in their bathrooms and changing rooms, etc., is that these “gender nonconforming” males will be attacked by other males if they use the bathrooms specified for males.
In the instance of school children, what this means is that rather than teaching boys that gender nonconformity is ok and that abusive, bullying type behavior from other boys is wrong, school administrators tacitly consent to this type of behavior by sending the non-conformers off to the (presumably) less violent realm of the girls.
Altogether, such policies reinforce and promote the belief that it is only “natural” that “boys will be boys”- violent, abusive, intolerant- and that girls, because of their “nature”- submissive, empathetic, pacifistic-will be welcoming and tolerant. Further, it is a declaration, via policy, that non-compliance to the artifice of gender stereotypes somehow transforms one into a different sex. In sum, they are policies that preserve and engender the behaviors which they are meant to eliminate.— Rede Roberts (via hereticswords)
Most girls are relentlessly told that we will be treated how we demand to be treated. If we want respect, we must respect ourselves.
This does three things. Firstly, it gets men off the hook for being held accountable for how they treat women. And secondly, it makes women feel that the mistreatment and sometimes outright violence they face due to their gender is primarily their fault. And thirdly, it positions women to be unable to speak out against sexism because we are made to believe any sexism we experience would not have happened if we had done something differently.
I cannot demand a man to respect me. No more than I can demand that anybody do anything. I can ask men to be nice to me. But chances are if I even have to ask he does not care to be nice. I can express displeasure when I’m not being respected. But that doesn’t solve the issue that I was disrespected in the first place.
I can choose to not deal with a man once he proves to be disrespectful and/or sexist. But even that does not solve the initial problem of the fact that I had to experience being disrespected in the first place.
As a young girl, I wish that instead of being told that I needed to demand respect from men that I had been told that when I am not respected by men that it’s his fault and not mine. But that would require that we quit having numerous arbitrary standards for what it means to be a “respectable” woman. It would mean that I am not judged as deserving violence based on how I speak, what I wear, what I do, and who I am.— excerpt from “FYI, I Cannot “Demand” Respect From Men so Stop Telling Me That!" @ One Black Girl. Many Words. (via daniellemertina)
🙌🙌🙌🙌 this. In it’s entirety.(via theherproject)
Alan Davies completely and utterly demolishing gender roles (via vanillanice)