The new Caitlyn Jenner

I know I am going to miss the editing deadline. Let me tell you a story from circa 1991.

I was on the board of CT NARAL. Interestingly, a majority of the other members were lesbians. Abortion rights were not an immediately obvious focus for a lesbian, one might have thought, and that was what the organization concentrated on. (Certainly there are reproduction-related rights issues that might more frequently engage lesbians, including sterilization, adoption, insemination, and parental rights, but abortion is probably not one of them, unless the woman were a rape victim.) At one of our annual retreats, there were some people from the DC HQ of the organization. They told us some stories about taking visiting state-level activists–often heterosexuals; ie, people like me :slight_smile: --to lesbian singles bars in DC, and how they would “sit there in their pearl necklaces and look uneasy.”

I asked them why they would expect a straight woman to be particularly comfortable in a lesbian bar, where the assumption would be that she was interested in female partners. They responded that it was just nice to be in a female space, where you wouldn’t be hassled by male attention, to which I replied, “But why do you think straight women GO to singles bars if not to meet men???”

There was a certain divide between the women on the board who were staunchly pro-choice and were heterosexuals who had actually borne children, and most of the lesbian contingent, who were young women who had not yet entered into a relationship where they might consider having kids with their partner.

Anyway, it’s complicated.

It doesn’t take away from the remarkable gains of the second wave feminists to point out that they are not perfect, never were, and are often sadly full of hatred towards trans women. I think trans women should be welcomed to womanhood, welcomed as true females who are finally being allowed to express their female selves - as all women should be able to do - and in all they myriad ways that women can be themselves.

What do they think of FTM trans people? I’m worried now.

@consolation:
Your comment about me “manplaining” is as stupid a putdown as the Rush Limbaughs of the world calling feminists “feminazis”, it assumes a lot of things about me you don’t know, and it also is a very old tactic used by those who can’t come up with an argument, to attack the other person’s character or where they are coming from.

For the record, I was not deriding all feminists and as someone who has a passion for history, I am well aware that feminism was not all of one type. The people I am talking about were those who wanted to tell others how to live, whose idea of a perfect world was one scripted to their ideas of things. I am talking about the identity politics that has turned private decisions like decisions on being a stay at home mom into somehow being someone who is a ‘traitor’ to the cause and other extreme thinking. Feminism should be played out among the broader idea of human rights, and one of the things that is supposed to be about is giving people the freedom to be themselves, to live as they choose and not have others telling them how they can live their lives, I don’t care whether it is religion, the law, or the judgements of so called leaders of the cause, when they step over that line they are wrong.

What makes identity politics suck is that instead of fighting the real battles, things like the bias women face in the world, the academic bias that is still out there, the glass ceiling that is very real in many businesses and professions, the forces of the religious right that are not just trying to control women’s sexuality, especially in issues like abortions and even in access to medical care (ie the religious reich’s campaign against planned parenthood),it turns it into a purity battle over who is good enough to call themselves a woman. It isn’t about whether a woman should dress in a certain way, or whether she chooses to have kids, or whether she works outside the home or not, it is all about being able to fully be enabled as a human being who happens to be a woman. Women have spent a good part of history being told by religion and by men what their roles are, what they can do, how they can dress, whether they can read sacred books or be priests or even go to temple or church, so how is it feminism for anyone to tell other women that whatever they do isn’t really ‘being a woman’? That is the kind of feminism I was talking about, not the ideals of feminism in its various forms (I also find the whole first wave, second wave, third wave labels to be quite honestly academic naval gazing, they are all feminism, all part of the same arc that is supposed to be about liberating women to be themselves).

This kind of identify politics existed/exists in the LGBT community, there have been all kind of battles over what it means to be a gay or lesbian, there were lesbian bars in the bad old days in NYC that not only would not let a trans person or a gay male go there, they wouldn’t let women in, gay or not, that didn’t fit their own little niche, and the LGBT 'community" has often been a fractious place, a lot of gay and lesbians looked at trans people as badly as straight people often did. A lot (though not all) of the feminists who despised trans women were of the radical lesbian fringe, but not all of them were, Donna is correct, a lot of the whatever wave feminists, in academia and otherwise, were outright hostile, rather than seeing the struggle for trans folks face and realizing it was about in some ways the same rights women had been fighting for, and choose to see it as ‘men behaving badly’ rather than someone trying to be themselves in an unfriendly world. The good part was a lot of feminists, gay and straight, got it, and there was support from those folks and over time the haters and the sneerers, other than people like Germaine Greer, have come to understand what it is all about.

And while I don’t necessarily disagree with you about Caitlyn Jenner, I quite honestly think she is a complete airhead who thrust herself out there when she obviously hadn’t figured out what or who she is, but I also find your comments to be indicative of the same kind of attitude I was talking about with the feminists who thought it was their right to define others. So women who get plastic surgery, get breast enhancement, botox, etc, are not really women? So women who want to fight aging, who don’t want to go gray, who have an idea of the way they want to look, aren’t women? So a woman who has had breast cancer and had to have a mastectomy, and has them rebuilt, is not a woman? To a transgender women, secondary sex characteristics like having breasts or being able to be free of things like a big jaw or the brow ridge is about feeling like they are themselves, much as women who have had a mastectomy may not feel whole unless they can get their breasts rebuilt (even the insurance companies and the law recognize that one, legally insurance companies have to pay for breast reconstruction after mastectomies as far as I know, it isn’t just cosmetic).

And I wish you would do some research, the reason that transgender women have things like breast augmentation, take hormones, get hair transplants, electrolysis, etc, is that they are trying to make themselves look like the woman they feel inside (yes, that is a cliche, it is a lot more complex than that)
more importantly, a lot of transgender women, assuming they were of child bearing age, would love to be able to have the ability to have kids, but the reason, as you so snarkily put it, that transgender women are getting breast implants and facial surgery and such is that is all they can do, the medicine doesn’t exist to allow them to be mothers. I am sure if that technology existed more than a few would go through that if it existed, it doesn’t. Not to mention that with Caitlyn Jenner being 65, it wouldn’t make much sense as it might not for people transitioning in later life. By the way, there are a lot of transgender women if you met them would probably be very, very close in your views of things, for all the Caitlyn Jenner hoopla, there are a lot of transgender women who aren’t over the top, designer dresses and heels, lot of jeans and sweaters and comfortable shoes, too, lot of them find Caitlyn Jenner as distasteful as you obviously do, take it from me.

@greenwitch :
Transgender males are an interesting case in point to transgender women, and also show some of the contradictions among those women who don’t like transgender women. A lot of transgender men often start out in the lesbian community, and one of the weird things is the type lesbians who want nothing to do with transgender women seem to have no problem with transgender men in their spaces and such, their view seems to be that even though the person is on testosterone, is living as a man, in all ways presents male, it is okay for them to be in that space, but a transgender woman who is living as a woman, who is presenting as a woman, is not welcome, it tells you the complexity of gender identity, and also tells you that a lot of people who should know better have very similar attitudes to the religious fundamentalists and such who say there is only male and female and everything is determined by chromosomes and so forth.

Oh, please. Sheer nonsense, like everything else Germaine Greer has ever said about trans women. Caitlyn Jenner is 65, for God’s sake. God forbid she should want to do what she thinks is necessary to be perceived as herself. . And OF COURSE younger trans women having been wishing forever that such things were possible. (I would certainly have wanted to take advantage of such a thing had it been available 30 years or even 20 years ago.) But most trans women aren’t stupid enough to waste a whole lot of time “clamoring” in public for something that’s decades away (if it ever becomes possible). And they know full well that people like Greer would ridicule them if they did, under the overriding principle that whatever trans women say is wrong. Because if a trans woman does “too much” to be feminine? She’s a ghastly parody, aping womanhood. Not enough? She’s a revolting man in a dress. The famous Catch 22 directed against trans women. And really, it’s the same fundamentally misogynistic rhetoric that’s essentially directed at all women, turned by some against trans women.

This is a sample of Greer’s deliberately vicious rhetoric from 1989. She hasn’t changed. (The article is no longer available online, unless one wants to subscribe to one of the British newspaper archives, but plenty of people – including me – copied it when it was.)

The Independent - UK News - July 22, 1989

As for Janice Raymond, I’m not sure how much of her rhetoric is based on the heterosexual sex = rape doctrine (which Andrea Dworkin never actually said, by the way); it’s based largely on a rather demented theory that trans women are agents of the patriarchy trying to colonize and infiltrate womanhood. To quote the Wikipedia article about Raymond’s book “The Transsexual Empire” (because of course we’re so powerful!):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Transsexual_Empire (citations omitted)

And yes, I do remember how feminism was ridiculed 40-50 years ago. I also remember the attempts by some feminists to forestall such ridicule by trying to throw various groups “under the bus.” Never mind trans women; do you remember the fears of “the lavender menace”?

I’m entirely capable of recognizing the achievements of second wave feminism and simultaneously recognizing its aspects that weren’t the least bit admirable.

@donnal:
“And really, it’s the same fundamentally misogynistic rhetoric that’s essentially directed at all women, turned by some against trans women.” Thank you! That pretty much sums up the attitude I think is in the kind of feminist I was talking about, where in a sense they are as misogynistic as the society (generally men) have been towards women, in that they want to define what a woman is, and if you aren’t that, then you aren’t a woman, much as society and religion that called a woman who isn’t married "not a woman’ or called a woman who worked outside the home ‘selfish’ and so forth.

I don’t think Janice Raymond bought into the sex=rape crap (though I disagree, I am pretty sure Andrea Dworkin believed that, the quote I read, supposedly from her, is that every time a woman goes to bed with a man it can be tantamount to rape, and it went on to say it is rape because in those situations the man has the overwhelming power and a woman has no choice, which if she said it is ludicrous, and she was most definitely MacKinnon’s cohort in the 1980’s attempt to destroy the constitution over the porn issue, totally blind to the danger of what she was doing). Reading that quote reminded me what the attitude was, I heard the same kind of drivel from the same group of academic mental masturbation specialists, their argument was that transgender women, seeing the gains women were making thanks to the women’s rights movement, were men trying to grab back the power and such that women had been able to obtain, basically it sees transgender women as men going through transition and such to gain power, which is so asinine it isn’t even funny, given the reality of what transition does to many who do it, in terms of loss of status and power, not gaining it.

If by “they” you mean transphobic feminists, the general view of trans men is, of course, that they’re still women. Sad, pathetic, delusional women who’ve “sold out” to the patriarchy, and mutilated themselves, in the vain hope of benefiting from male privilege.

That’s what I was afraid of.

Okay, @musicprnt, you are the expert on everything to do with the subject, and I know nothing. So there is no need to keep on battering with endless paragraphs detailing everything about women’s experience that you know everything about and ignoramuses like me know nothing about. Have it your way.

“Wear what makes you feel comfortable” can also encompass Caitlyn Jenner’s white pantsuits and kitten heels. Comfort is not confined to elastic waist jeans and crew neck sweaters and it shouldn’t be assumed that people who dress “up” either routinely or occasionally are uncomfortable and just doing it to satisfy outside expectations.

@consolation:
I never claimed to know everything about the subject, I was talking specifically about an aspect and certain people. Your basic argument was that I was a ‘typical man’ who knew nothing about feminism and so forth, and I responded by talking specifics. As far as trans folks go, I do know a lot, I won’t claim to know what Donna does, but I know enough to know that what the kind of feminists I am talking about think about transgender women and how mean and hateful and frankly, stupid it is, their theories are basically worthless drivel to cover for their hatred. I also will add that your last post is childish, it is someone who cannot discuss something, so turns it into 'why bother, you know everything", which is one of the oldest dodges in the book for someone who basically can’t stand when someone else actually knows something and doesn’t believe what they do.

No, it wasn’t. It is obvious that you know a lot about it. It is also obvious that when you detect a scintilla of disagreement you cannot restrain yourself from going on and on and on, trying to bludgeon me or anyone else who has the temerity to disagree with you to any degree at all even slightly into agreement.

You have now compared me to Rush Limbaugh and called me childish. Which is one of the oldest dodges in the book for someone who basically can’t stand when someone else actually knows something and refuses to bow down to their dissemination of “superior” knowledge. It is not that I can’t discuss it, it is that there is no discussion here. There is your way or the highway.

BTW, I do know a number of trans women, and have for almost 20 years. They have run the gamut from the “man in a dress” to a woman who dresses mostly in pants and t-shirts and is clearly feeling her way into her female self. (She recently had facial feminization surgery.)

Regarding the subject of trans women in general, I think that we are actually in almost full agreement. Regarding the follies of some feminist extremists, I think we are also largely in agreement.

@consolation:
I was not comparing you to Rush Limbaugh, I was saying that accusing me of "mansplaining’ on my comments about some feminists was the equivalent of Rush Limbaugh calling feminists “feminazis”, ie it is totally false and denigrating.

As far as my writing, it simply was writing about why I felt as I did. You accused me of dismissing ‘second wave feminism’ and such, when I was talking about the extremists and the way they want to tell others to live, whether it is telling women that choose to be SAHM as being ‘sellouts’, or telling them how they should dress, or people like Catherine Mackinnon trying to violate the first amendment, that was my point. My whole rationale is that no one has the right to decide what a ‘true woman’ is, any more than they do what a ‘true man is’ (the irony of feminism is that it highlights how rigid things are for men as well, how much there is of ‘what a man should do’ and so forth
).

The reason for my thoughts are simple, I saw what happened to women up close and personal. There was a kindergarten teacher in the school I went to in the late 60’s, she had a degree in aeronautical engineering (I believe she studied under Von Karmann), she had been a women’s air transport command pilot in WWII, but she could not get a job as an engineer because they wouldn’t hire female engineers in the post WWII world, and by the time she could have possibly gotten a job she was too far removed. Looking back I always remember her and it is why I absolutely will fight anyone telling anyone else how to lead their lives, I don’t care if they are some medieval religious bigot or someone claiming they know the one true way. I also saw it with my mom, she trained as an engineer (EE), but it was much the same thing.

I am glad that you agree about the extremists (and I wouldn’t expect someone totally agree with me about anything) and about transgender women, I don’t look for fights and I honestly was not trying to sledgehammer anyone.

It seems to me that the two of you agree on most of these issues more than you think.

Caitlyn Jenner — the reality TV star and prominent transgender activist — will publish a memoir about her highly public transformation from the Olympic track star and motivational speaker Bruce Jenner into a glamorous transgender woman, Caitlyn Marie Jenner.

Ms. Jenner will write the memoir with Buzz Bissinger, a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and author of “Friday Night Lights,” the 1990 nonfiction book about a Texas high school football team that inspired a film and television series. Grand Central Publishing is tentatively scheduled to release the Jenner book in the spring of 2017.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/20/books/caitlyn-jenner-to-publish-a-memoir-about-her-transformation.html

And I Am Cait has a second season premiering in March, for those who want to watch.

Wait: we need ovaries and uterus to get the woman card? We’re going to lose some then!

Look, the typical hallmarks (physical) of women are missing in some segment of CIS women. Whether removed, or missing at birth.

What we wear is just a personality trait. There are tomboy heterosexual women and pretty girly lesbians. So that can’t define us.

Having a baby? Even CIS women with all the necessary parts don’t always want that.

Feminism is dead in my opinion. Humanism is the new feminism. Men can mansplain all they want if it helps. And women who got there via the trans method? Just women.

Interesting that she chose Buzz Bissinger to do the book, I don’t know him per se, but given that his most famous book is about high school football in Texas and the culture around it, kind of 180 degrees from her story, guy must have impressed her. I am sure she will get criticized for writing the book, from what I hear she could get an 8 figure advance out of it, so some will argue it is just more publicity I am sure. From what I can tell, Bissinger isn’t under any kind of constraints with the book, that he has a free hand interviewing people, so hopefully it is an honest and hard hitting memoir.

Feminism is alive and well, and there will always be a need for it as long as misogyny and discrimination on the basis of sex continue to be as pervasive as they still are (on both an individual and institutional level). I won’t be ready to subsume it under “humanism” (which has a very specific meaning that doesn’t really overlap with feminism) until there are no longer substantial numbers of men who refuse to see and treat women as fully human. (In my previous life, three different men – all of them intelligent and well-educated – confided in me over the years that they did not, in fact, believe that women were “people” in anything resembling the way they thought other men were.)

I also don’t believe for one moment that trans-exclusionism is inherent in, or necessary to, feminism. If I did believe that, I wouldn’t identify as a feminist.

@donnal:
I obviously agree. In an ideal world it would be “genderism”, whose goal would be to make sure that people of any gender can achieve what they wish to and live as they wish to and be judged for who they are, but we aren’t there yet.

My problem with feminism is what happens with any movement, it changes from a target goal (which in the case of women IMO should be that any woman, who come in many shapes, forms, backgrounds, start of life, etc, has the right to live their life and achieve based on who they are and what they can bring to the table), to where self appointed leaders start doing things like defining what a woman is or isn’t (and the same crap happened in the gay community, the lesbian community, the black community ad infinitum), it becomes about theory and identity politics rather than keeping the eye on the prize, and what you end up with IME is leaders who rather than fighting for the right of someone to be themselves, turn it into ‘this is what you must be to be a woman’.

If for anything, I think the term has to be out there so that people don’t forget that the problems still exist and even if they themselves have achieved, that isn’t true for others. When I see interviews with young working women, who proclaim themselves “beyond feminism” I cringe, because I know damn well that they see their own lives and think that everything is fine, that they will be treated as well as men through their career and life, and they don’t know what is coming down the turnpike (also known as the innocence of youth lol).

Interesting with the book, getting back to the original topic, Caitlyn may be opening up another can of worms. According to what I read, Bissinger is pretty open about being a crossdresser, and Caitlyn choosing him as the author might get some noses bent out of joint in the transgender community, given the antipathy some have towards crossdressers and such.

I absolutely agree with you.

But I also understand–and in fact to SOME degree share–the irritation and disappointment of feminists who see *so * much publicity being given to a person whose definition of “being a woman” seems to be being a Barbie doll. Many women fought long and hard to move beyond that stereotype so that women could be themselves, no matter what that self was. Sure, one can argue that the Cait version of womanhood is as valid as any other, but I think you will see what I mean.