Hate 101: The Womyn Born Womyn Movement
There is a particularly confusing and controversial form of bigotry that exists within the lesbian population that subscribes to a particularly extreme and radical form of feminist politics and views, commonly referred to as “Womyn Born Womyn,” or WBW. Womyn-born womyn policies center around the idea that women’s experiences under patriarchy are unique, learned, and transformative. These policies assume that girls are forced to behave in a submissive and subjugated position in society, while boys and transgender children grow up in an environment of privilege and power over girls.
Supporters of ‘WBW’ policies make the following claims:
-
Most transgender women do not have the experience of growing up female in a sexist society and as such have no embodied experience of the culturally prescribed position of “girl”.
-
All transgender women have received and, in some instances, benefited from male privilege, especially late transitioners.
-
All oppressed peoples should be allowed to make spaces aligned through a commonality of oppression to heal and recover without explanation and solely through the ease of lived experience.
-
Transgender women may make cisgendered women in the space feel uncomfortable, especially in the case of pre-operative transwomen.
-
Policies that do not exclude transgender women would allow men to enter the space if they simply wear stereotypical women’s clothes and claim a female gender identity.
- Many women’s only spaces provide a safe shelter for cisgendered women who have been abused or sexually assaulted. Such cisgendered women might feel threatened by the presence of transgender women.
Of course, these claims have little, if anything, to do with the realities faced by intersex, transsexual, or transgender persons. For instance:
-
Most transgender women do not have the normal experiences of growing up female due to the extreme abuse and violence at the hands of adult authority figures and peers, including immediate family members.
-
I know of not one true intersexed or transsexual woman who received in whole or part, nor benefited in any way, from male privilege. To make such an assumption is to claim that the physical, sexual, and emotional abuse intersex and transsexual children face daily is somehow appropriate and beneficial to those children.
-
Whether or not intersexed or transsexual women make cissexual women uncomfortable is due to the bigotry taught by the very patriarchal system WBW supporters claim to oppose. For those who have been oppressed by this system to then apply this oppression to others is reprehensible at best. I would argue it is the ultimate evil of hypocrisy.
-
Policies that exclude intersex and transsexual women do not, by default, automatically imply that men won’t enter women’s only spaces by virtue of simply dressing as women. In fact, I’ve seen such policies used to justify excluding intersex and transsexual individuals from events or facilities, while at the same time male drag performers were welcome with open arms, even in female restrooms.
-
I have worked with rape victims, both in volunteer counseling centers and in hospitals. I know of none who had an issue with my being other than a cisgendered woman. Quite frankly, the issue never came up. My focus was on the needs of the victim, to help her become a survivor. Somehow, discussing my personal life under such circumstances seems completely inappropriate. And, as someone who has been raped (WBW supporters don’t believe anyone but a WBW can be raped), I think I bring quite a bit to the table, and on many levels.
This particular brand of feminism, which really is anything but, also fails to take into account that, what one group can do, so can others. For instance:
-
In California, Proposition 8 became law by constitutional amendment, through a vote of the simple majority of the voting population. The amendment bans same-sex marriage and recognition of the same within the state, and effectively excludes LGBT persons from protections under the Equal Protection clause of the state constitution. WBW supports this right of the majority to oppress and deny rights to any minority, by virtue of a majority decision.
-
Many heterosexual cisgendered women are quite uncomfortable with lesbians sharing personal spaces with them, such as shower and bathroom facilities. Should lesbians now be segregated from the rest of the population, and given separate facilities, so that heterosexual women won’t feel uncomfortable?
-
According to WBW, only cisgendered women should be permitted to help a victim of domestic abuse or sexual assault. Using that logic, if there are no cisgendered females trained and equipped to deal with the criminal investigation, helath care needs, and to help the woman deal with the deep trauma caused by the rape, then she is on her own.
Despite all the reasons given by WBW advocates, these are but smoke screens to disguise a particularly hateful policy towards all women not born strictly women, which in particular targets intersexed and transsexual individuals, both children and adults. The true reason behind the WBW movement is that advocates of the policy believe:
-
Transsexuals are persons who really homosexuals seeking to conform to a patriarchal societal gender stereotype in order to continue benefiting from patriarchal privilege. This applies regardless of which gender assigned to at birth, or which gender surgically assigned to later.
-
Intersex persons are individuals who must undergo surgical gender assignment to either male or female, depending upon how they were raised. Even then, regardless of the gender surgically assigned to, intersex women are not WBW, because they benefited from patriarchal privilege.
-
All cisgendered males, intersexed persons, and transsexuals are likely potential sexual predators seeking by any means to invade the space of women to sexually exploit and abuse them.
No, I’m not kidding. Advocates of WBW policies really do believe this, and have told me so. That this particular view, along with the other more public views, dovetails nicely with religious extremist groups opposed to any rights for any LGBT, especially those not strictly cisgendered and heterosexual, seems to be lost in this rather unusual partnership of beliefs. Neither acknowledges the coincidence of so man similar beliefs, despite claiming to be extremely different groups.
But they are in agreement on one thing. If they cannot force intersexed, transsexual, and transgender individuals to live according to stereotypical gender expectations of a patriarchal system, they will isolate them and oppress them until they conform. While I understand the need for women to have their own space free from the prurient and predatory interests of men, I cannot approve of advocacy or policies that turn the oppressed into oppressors themselves.
We’re simply better than that.
19 Responses »
Trackbacks
- Feminists For Choice » Monday Click List
- Hate 101: The Womyn Born Womyn Movement « Women Born Transsexual
Leave a Response
Entries(RSS)
How could anyone take those people seriously? They can't even spell the word "woman!" *g*
(I know they're spelling it wrong on purpose.)
When it comes to groups that oppress others, I do not particularly care what they call themselves, or how they spell it (intentionally or otherwise). I take the threat they represent to others quite seriously, especially when their reasoning is hypocritical at best.
As to the first one "Most transgender women do not have the experience of growing up female in a sexist society and as such have no embodied experience of the culturally prescribed position of “girl”." I think it is fair to say that we as a society oppress people raised as girls in a unique way, but we also oppress girls raised as boys in a unique way. The experience of a hetero-cis black male being oppressed in our society is different from the oppression of a queer child, but that does not make one experience of oppression somehow less valid. Trans woman and cis woman experiences may be different, but they don't need to be the same to be equally valid and valuable. But, that aside, I get what you're saying with the point, it's the notion "You can't be a 'real' woman because you weren't raised female".
I was linked here by one of the WBW sites I've been blogging about, AROOO, and I was shocked by the vehemence of their hatred. This site referred to MTF trans people as "delusional" and "castrati" and basically did everything they could to deny the reality of transpeople's feelings.
What really puts the icing on the cake is that one of the authors of that site is a black woman who constantly says that "privileged people don't have the right to tell the non-privileged what their reality is." I guess that only works for blacks and women, not trans people.
I've been writing about that site mostly because of their sexist views, but I was stunned enough to mention their feelings about transpeople in passing. I'm glad to see there's finally a blog article out there exposing so called "liberal feminists" transphobia.
The sad part is, I understand the legitimate concerns of most women, feminist or not. I just got done reading an article someone sent me of a case in Britain where a male prisoner who is serving life for raping or attempting to rape a woman (the news reports are vague on that point) immediately after having been released from prison for manslaughter (he had murdered his male lover).
While serving his life sentence, he somehow managed to have his birth certificate changed to say he was born female, and began the initial stage of gender reassignment, mainly hormone therapy and electrolysis. Now, as an alleged pre-operative transsexual, he (I cannot bring myself in this case to refer to this individual as a woman) has been transfered to a women's prison. This individual never once exhibited any signs of any gender issues until after having been sentenced to life. Now, a dangerous and violent sexual predator has access to hundreds of potential victims.
The problem is that a tiny minority of extremists have so severely co-opted legiimate concerns to promote an agenda of hatred and intolerance that those legitimate concerns are now being ignored, while the needs of those who victimize women get preferential treatment.
I do not ultimately know whatthe universal solution is to meet these concerns. What I do know is promotng hatred and intolerance is defeating trying to meet those concerns, and pushing away the very people who could help come up with real solutions.
I tried to post a reply to Nicky's false claims about the nature of this site several hours ago, but it was "moderated," read censored, and is not being posted. I guess that is further proof of the hypocrisy and hatred on that site you spoke of, where they are willing to post his rantings and lies but ignore any rebuttal from women to those lies. I guess whatever supports their agenda is good enough, regardless of the source or the validity of it.
Such is the nature of the blogosphere, I guess. I imagine if they actually read the article, they probably would have a far more constructive critique to offer. Given what this particular article is about (hate, not gender politics), it would likely spark a more enlightening and eduational debate than Nicky's "see the world as I do or else" statements and attacks.
Margaret Jamison andd Kitty Glendower are not real names.
They are Jenique Meekinsfrom NC and Kathleen Wilson-Goode from California, a couple of phonies who are both married and supported bymen.
While that may be true, there are quite a few intersex cases out there of transpeople that are required to go through the transsexual route to be happy with themselves because of improper doctor actions at birth. I personally know of a few, and they live not only with the facts that they were improperly surgically altered at birth, but also with the fact that they need to now transition to be whole.
As such, it does tend to apply to this movement at least from one side of the fence. If a surgically altered intersex person with a female mindset who was brought up in a male social role tried to enter a "womyn-born-womyn" space, they would be rejected just as much as any transwoman that attempted to enter. Even after they were forced to transition to a more female social role, they would be subject to such a "ruling" by the Patriarchal Feminists (I really like that btw).
It seems to me that these Patriarchal Feminists are using a double standard here as well. Not only do they say that you have to be born and raised as a girl, but they also reference genetalia as a means to express their bigotry. In the case of Lu's Pharmacy, a representative hinted at the fact that female-to-male transsexuals would be allowed to get their meds because Lu's serves any "woman-born-woman," thereby labeling transmen as women even if they sound, look, and act like men on the outside. Essentially, the Patriarchal Feminists want to create certain stipulations for being "real" women. But what would happen if say a post-op transman had bottom surgery, proclaimed it, and wanted to get his meds? They probably would either have to deny him (and contradict themselves further) or admit that genetalia is not the definition of what makes a man or a woman. Such is their intentional bigotry.
I love it when someone gets it.
My probelem with this article is that statements are made without referencing when and where WBW have made made statements that prove the statements of this piece.
For example:
All cisgendered males, intersexed persons, and transsexuals are likely potential sexual predators seeking by any means to invade the space of women to sexually exploit and abuse them.
One needs a reference or three to show that's what WBW, as a group, actually believe. This statement, without verifiable reference(s), functions as an opinion statement.
As I learned in the military: Document document document.
Articles I research and write on my own tend to not have identified sources. This will always be the case with this series of discussions, out of a need to protect those sources from potentially violent retalliation.
Interestingly enough, however, the section you quoted above is actually told to me almost weekly. I cleaned up the actual language used, since the actual language used is grossly inappropriate for this particular site (I cannot block minors from accessing it, nor do I care to keep them from at least reading the articles and subsequent discussions related to this series).
Something I learned doing intelligence in the military is the importance of protecting the identity of sources. Revealing sources is a geat way to end up without any information, not to mention get them killed.
I do encourage people, however, to research for themselves whatever I post here, especially as it pertains to this series. I don't want people to simply take my word for anything. I'm human, which means I come with my own set of biases and flaws, and make mistakes just like anyone else.
I did stumble across an, um, interesting if not vitriolic discussion between WBW extremists and those who are questioning the movement and its policies in the forms over at the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival web site. I'm sure other readers can provide you with more examples as well. While disturbing in its hatred, it does provide some interesting examples of just how extreme the movement has become.
What WBW's will not admit is they believe biology = destiny. They welcome transmen (or at least pre-T transmen) with open arms. So they don't even believe in a womyn born womyn policy; they believe in just a born womyn policy.
Actually, had they at least accepted transmen or intersex men, I woudn't have had such a big issue with this particular extremist movement. But, as I've been told a few times in the last couple of years, transmen are rejected because they "are conforming to patriarchal stereotypes and betraying their womenhood." Intersex men are rejected for being men to begin with.
"Most transgender women do not have the normal experiences of growing up female due to the extreme abuse and violence at the hands of adult authority figures and peers, including immediate family members."
I think you might have meant male?
Actually, one could pick any gender, and it would apply. I picked the one in particular used in arguments by the WBW movement, though either can easily apply.
The problem with the argument is it negates the often extreme violence faced by those who's gender identity, anatomy, or expression are not the norm.
I am a transsexual woman who was born as girl with penis and gonads - I am a Womyn Born Womyn, too. Women who deny transsexual women the right to live as accepted member of their birth sex (that is female) will get a new name from me: Patriarchal Feminists - cause they believe in a phallo-centric definition of sex instead of accepting the biological varaince of human sex (that is much more complex as to believe in the absence or presence of a penis). Neither I am socialised "male" (what stereotypes do they think of?) nor I had been experiences as "man" cause I never had been one. Sorry for my bad english.
Interesting tite, Patriarchal Feminists. I'll have to remember that one.