Judith Butler says that J.K.Rowling and the transphobic TERFs do not speak for feminism at large.
If you haven’t heard about Judith Butler before, here is a short summary: She is one of the most important gender theorists in modern times.
When right wing extremists despair about postmodern gender theory, she is probably one of the thinkers they are referring to (not that they have ever read her).
She has shown how social structures, language, the stories we tell and the roles we play strengthens the oppression and marginalization of women. In other words: For her gender is definitely a cultural and social phenomenon, and because of that she is on a collision course with the so-called “gender critical feminists” (TERFs) who want to reduce gender to biological sex.
I strongly recommend that you read the recent New Statement interview with Butler, where she addresses the thinking and the tactics of TERFs in very clear terms. The interview is behind a paywall, but you should be able to access a couple of articles for free.
Still – in case you are locked out – here are some important excerpts.
She refuses to think of transphobic TERFs as mainstream feminists.
I want to first question whether trans-exclusionary feminists are really the same as mainstream feminists. If you are right to identify the one with the other, then a feminist position opposing transphobia is a marginal position. I think this may be wrong. My wager is that most feminists support trans rights and oppose all forms of transphobia.
So I find it worrisome that suddenly the trans-exclusionary radical feminist position is understood as commonly accepted or even mainstream.
I think it is actually a fringe movement that is seeking to speak in the name of the mainstream, and that our responsibility is to refuse to let that happen.
She dismisses J.K. Rowling’s idea that allowing people to identify as they want will be a threat to women in women’s bathrooms.
The feminist who holds such a view presumes that the penis does define the person, and that anyone with a penis would identify as a woman for the purposes of entering such changing rooms and posing a threat to the women inside. It assumes that the penis is the threat, or that any person who has a penis who identifies as a woman is engaging in a base, deceitful, and harmful form of disguise.
This is a rich fantasy, and one that comes from powerful fears, but it does not describe a social reality. Trans women are often discriminated against in men’s bathrooms, and their modes of self-identification are ways of describing a lived reality, one that cannot be captured or regulated by the fantasies brought to bear upon them.
She dismisses the idea that the term “trans-exclusionary radical feminist” (TERF) is a slur.
I wonder what name self-declared feminists who wish to exclude trans women from women’s spaces would be called? If they do favour exclusion, why not call them exclusionary? If they understand themselves as belonging to that strain of radical feminism that opposes gender reassignment, why not call them radical feminists?
My only regret is that there was a movement of radical sexual freedom that once travelled under the name of radical feminism, but it has sadly morphed into a campaign to pathologise trans and gender non-conforming peoples.
My sense is that we have to renew the feminist commitment to gender equality and gender freedom in order to affirm the complexity of gendered lives as they are currently being lived.
She does not accept the idea that the term gender can be defined once and for all, for example in reference to biology.
We depend on gender as a historical category, and that means we do not yet know all the ways it may come to signify, and we are open to new understandings of its social meanings.
It would be a disaster for feminism to return either to a strictly biological understanding of gender or to reduce social conduct to a body part or to impose fearful fantasies, their own anxieties, on trans women… Their abiding and very real sense of gender ought to be recognised socially and publicly as a relatively simple matter of according another human dignity.
She also says:
It is painful to see that Trump’s position that gender should be defined by biological sex, and that the evangelical and right-wing Catholic effort to purge “gender” from education and public policy accords with the trans-exclusionary radical feminists’ return to biological essentialism.
It is a sad day when some feminists promote the anti-gender ideology position of the most reactionary forces in our society.
So there you have it: One of our leading feminist philosophers are comparing TERFs to the transphobic extremists of the right. And she is right to do so.
It is important to stress this: TERFs are not representative of feminism. They represent a toxic fringe movement that at this point in time does more to help right wing misogynists than women.
By the way, if you’ve ever jumped into debating with radfems or other exclusionists, this is a must-read.
Look at how Butler is dissecting the TERF position. She isn’t arguing on their terms - half the goal of exclusionists is to draw you into an argument over their false premise, in order to get you to legitimize their position. No, Butler is doing exactly the right thing, and pointing out their whole foundation is flawed. Her deconstruction of TERF ideology is most cutting because it’s effectively, concisely, and clearly explaining that the premise of their beliefs is wrong at every level - that what they propose is not for debate because it is fundamentally false.
Anyway, I’m just absolute in adoration over how she talks about these topics. She’s not just tearing down TERF rhetoric, she’s dismantling it with the precision of a master.
IF same-sex attraction is real (which it is), AND there are women who are exclusively or predominantly attracted to women (which is a fact), AND we find same-sex attraction in all ages and all cultures (which is also a fact), AND we acknowledge that the homophobia and transphobia found in our societies are so strong that no one will chose to present as gay, lesbian or transgender (unless they truly are gay, lesbian or trans), AND this orientation is stable (which it is in the case for most lesbian identifying women) – THEN it makes no sense to believe that lesbian women will change their identity simply because some trans people tell them to (which, by the way, trans people do not).
BECAUSE if that was the case, lesbians identities would be nothing but mirages (which they are not).
THIS tells us that those few who stop thinking of themselves as lesbian and start calling themselves trans instead (or queer, bi or pansexual) do so because of a process of self discovery which leads to the acknowledgement of their real identity, AND to invalidate that sense of self is similar to the act of invalidating the identity of lesbian women.
Don’t do that.
Photo of two Minoan double-axes (labrys), a symbol that is also used to refer to lesbians. The double axe was a symbol associated with Minoan priestesses and their mother goddess. Some argue that it is a reference to the cycle of the moon, which is associated with women, others that it is a simplified butterfly, a symbol of rebirth. The labrys has also been associated with the amazons, the female warriors of Antiquity.
Anonymous asked
from what i understand LGB is just about sexual attraction and trans people can still be gay so it still includes them?
crossdreamers answered
TERFs are trying to rip the LGBT+ movement apart. Don’t let them!
These days the abbreviation LGB is mostly used by transphobic TERFs (trans-exclusionary radical feminists). It is an old tactic: Defeat your opponent by sowing discord and conflict.
The long term goal of the right wing extremists is to marginalize all queer people, reestablish the strict gender binary and promote traditional gender roles. Strange bedfellows for “feminists”, you might say, but that is what irrational prejudices can do to some people.
The good news is that no well established LGBTQAI organization has fallen for this trick, which is why the transphobes have had to make their own anti-trans organizations, like the LGB Alliance in Britain.
As for LGB including lesbian (L), gay (G) and bisexual (B) trans people:
Yes, gay, lesbian and bi trans people are included in the L and the G and the B as far as the leading rainbow organizations go. But they are not included in the LGB of the transphobic fringe.
The anti-trans activists claim that trans women who are attracted to women are perverted straight men and that gay trans men are deluded lesbian women. The arrogance of these people is mind-boggling. They show no respect for the life experience of queer people who do not live up to their own narrow and old fashioned standards.
They are, like their right wing allies, aggressively invalidating the gender identities of trans people, causing a lot of suffering in the process. They are now actively supporting policies that are aimed at harassing transgender kids, forcing them to use the wrong bathrooms, banning them from taking part in sports as themselves, causing these children the kind of trauma gay and lesbian kids have experienced through the ages.
This is a true tragedy: Lesbian TERFs, who themselves have been bullied for their sexual orientation, are now using the exact same tactics to harm trans kids. That is the worst kind of betrayal, and it says a lot about what kind of people we are facing here.
Sexual orientation is not the same as gender identity
Note also that transgender identities cannot be reduced to sexual orientation. A lot of trans people are neither lesbian, gay or bisexual. They are straight. But they are still part of the queer rainbow community, as they face the same kind of invalidation and marginalization as other queer people. This is why the T belongs in the LGBT+. Indeed, trans people have always played an important role in the LGBT+ community.
Here’s a photo of leading British TERF Posie Parker together with a Norwegian Nazi leader. Did she know he was a Nazi? I don’t know, but they did take part in the same conference, an event promoting anti-trans propaganda, and that tells you a lot about what kind of thinking “gender critical feminism” represents.
“Gender critical.” If a self-described feminist says they’re gender critical, they’re anti-trans. It’s an argument that gender identity is made up, but “biological sex” is material and real. Anti-trans groups argue that even the idea of a gender identity is a threat to women and their rights. Obviously this is not true. Anti-trans folks who think “TERF” is a slur (they’re out there) use this phrase to describe themselves to avoid explicitly identifying as trans-exclusionary, even though they are.
“Sex-based rights.” Anti-trans activists will often use this phrase to suggest that trans people pose a threat to these rights and are therefore anti-feminist. This is a way of separating the rights that cis women have from those of trans women, without straight-up saying they’re transphobic.
“Male-bodied.” This is an incredibly transphobic and inaccurate way that anti-trans activists will describe trans women.
“LGB.” This one is pretty self-explanatory: if a group is really, really insisting on not including a specific letter of the acronym (like the U.K.’s LGB Alliance), there’s a big ol’ transphobic reason for that. And, sure enough, the aforementioned group’s topline includes references to the phrases above, along with a follow from the world’s most famous transphobe, J.K. Rowling.
Woods also points out that some TERFs have adopted purple, green and white colors. This flag is very similar to the genderqueer flag, so be careful when you see it.
A necessary reminder: Most feminists are not TERFs. They understand that trans women are women and that reducing gender to biological sex is a trick developed by the existing system to oppress gender diversity and uphold traditional gender roles.
“How do you insist that gender is solely tied to chromosomal sex when the lived experiences of thousands of trans people clearly demonstrate otherwise?”
I don’t see how your worldview squares with reality. You claim that I am allowed to change my body as I choose and wear anything I want, but that I’m not allowed to claim to be a woman.
You say that society operates on gender being solely based on chromosomal sex. Okay. Let’s take that idea and put it into practice in my everyday life. I walk into a restaurant and go sit at the bar. I’m wearing women’s shorts and a t-shirt. My legs are shaved, I have long hair, and just a little makeup on.
Medically speaking, I’ve had my facial hair lasered off, my body no longer produces testosterone, and I’ve been on estrogen for about 5 years. I’ve trained my voice so I speak with a higher pitch.
All of those things combine to create the aesthetic of me that I’m showing the world.So far, I’m existing 100% within the acceptable parameters of your worldview. I’ve told no one that I’m a woman, I’ve used no restroom, whatever.
Okay, I sit at the bar. The bartender comes over and asks, “what would you like, ma'am?”. They have taken in all the visuals and audible signifiers I listed and, based solely on them, determined that I am female. My chromosomal makeup has played no part in their assumption.
Now, what, in the Gender Critical acceptable world, am I expected to do next? Am I obligated to “correct” the bartender?Does your dogma dictate that my freedom of speech must be violated so that I’m forced to tell the bartender that they got it “wrong”?
This is how every interaction I have with a stranger goes every day of my life. Am I under an obligation to say “I’m actually a man,” to everyone I meet who calls me ma'am? Despite my chromosomal makeup, I am seen as and treated as a woman everywhere I go.
And before you say, “they can tell but they don’t want to say so”, let me assure you that my interpretation as female goes far beyond miss and ma'am.
As someone who has lived as both a man and a woman, I know how different people treat you in subtle ways depending on which one you are perceived to be. These people (rightfully) believe me to be a woman; no question.
Now, because I am perceived as female, would it not be more socially disruptive for me to use the men’s room than the women’s?
Let’s go back to the bar. If I stand up and head to the bathroom, me going into the men’s room is obviously going to viewed as unacceptable, whereas using the women’s will be the same mundane trip to the facilities I’ve had every day for the last 5 or 6 years.
What chromosomes I have and what’s between my legs have zero bearing on how I’m expected to interact with society. How do you justify a worldview where I’m both allowed the freedom to dress or change my body as I wish but also forced to go against how people naturally react to me as a result of those changes?
How do you insist that gender is solely tied to chromosomal sex when the lived experiences of thousands of trans people clearly demonstrate otherwise?
Harassing transgender kids, stopping trans women from going to the bathroom and calling vulnerable trans women of color sexual perverts doesn’t make you look good, does it? So what can you do about that?
Catherine Butler has published a brilliant tongue in cheek answer to a socialist who finds “trans people a bit yucky” over at Medium.
Inspired by her article I have put up some pointers to “gender critical” TERFs, LGB Alliance supporters and other transphobes who think of themselves as liberal and progressive.
This is how you, as a “radical” anti-trans activist, may be able to sleep at night.
1. Stop talking about trans people and start talking about “trans rights activists” and “trans ideology.” Better yet, call being trans “a cult” to make sure no one listens to their arguments, because – believe me – you don’t want people to do that.
2. Do not talk about your most important allies… You know: Conservative media and Tucker Carlson, Trumpist Republicans in states like Texas and Alabama, Hungarian and Polish fascists, British sexist reactionaries, Marjorie Taylor Greene and other racist Karens, misogynistic religious fanatics and so on and so forth. They make people see that you are not as radical and compassionate as you think you are.
3. Use the “free speech” argument as often as you can, unless trans people disagree with you, at which point you should complain about harassment and slander.
4. Indeed, talk about “cancel culture” a lot, even if you think of yourself as a “woke” person. I mean, you love watching kittens on YouTube, don’t you? So how dare they call you insensitive to other peoples’ suffering?!!!
5. Talk about details and extremely rare incidents. If someone, in a debate, insists that we need to see the whole picture, talk about “autogynephilia”. Sure, that theory has been debunked, but a lot of people do not know that.
6. Since trans women are harmless, you have to create an imaginary, but credible, threat. The homophobes of the past used the false “gay men and lesbian women are sexual predators threatening women and kids” narrative with great success. Do the same, even if you are gay yourself.
7. Do not read up on biology, gender theory, intersectionality, and studies of cultural polarization. The less you know about reality, the better.
8. If anyone compares your tactics to the tactics of white supremacists, create a diversion by calling your accuser racist.
9. If you used to be harassed as an outsider as a kid, suppress all the feelings those bullies awoke in you. You are one of them now. Deal with it!
10. Talk about trans men as little as possible. You think they are women, right? And you think of yourself as a feminist? So it does not sound good when you call people you think are women naive, emotional, and easily mislead.
11. Avoid young people. They seem to think that solidarity, tolerance, compassion and inclusion are things that you do, and not something you just talk about. Where did they get that idea?
12. Torturing transgender kids sounds a bit… eh…you know… inconsiderate, to say the least. But you have to double down on this one. You cannot make an omelette without destroying the lives of children. Everyone knows that.
13. Yeah, I know, your identity cannot really be reduced to what you have between your legs. That would be weird, wouldn’t it? But keep in mind that as far as trans women go, this is the truth and nothing but the truth… or at least truthish enough for Fox News.
14. Do not meet trans people. At the moment you see that they are human, you have lost.
Please Please Please Please sign this. It’s a petition against 2 transphobic teachers in my school district. We need your help. Reblog if you sign
Transphobic teachers in Oregon want to change restroom signs to “anatomically male” and “anatomically female”
The two educators at North Middle School in Oregon, Assistant Principal Rachel Damiano and Teacher Katie Medart, have published a video where they argue for changing restroom signs to “anatomically male” and “anatomically female”.
This is obviously just another attempt at excluding transgender people from society. It is part of a larger strategy of policing trans people out of existence.
The reason right wing extremists and trans-exclusionary “radical feminists” focus on the bathrooms is that they have a strong symbolic and cultural value. Banning trans people access to the right restrooms gives a signal to the world that trans people are not welcome in society.
These teachers have also petitioned that transgender students should be required to meet with their teachers and parents or guardians to discuss whether their pronouns and name are valid enough to be used in a teaching environment.
This is another transphobic tactic aimed at presenting transgender people as misguided or confused. If these teachers had any real idea about what it means to be trans, they would not have made these suggestions in the first place. And if they have no real knowledge about what it means to be trans, why should they be included in a debate about correct pronouns?
Keep in mind that all serious experts in the field agree that transgender identities are real and that trans people deserve acceptance, respect and assistance.
OPB.org reports that the two educators in Grants Pass are now on leave and that “these postings were not authorized by the District and are not official statements or positions of the District.”
They may look like nice and compassionate soccer mums, but make no mistake about it: What these two are doing is causing immense harm to transgender kids. (From their video)
The Grants Pass School District 7 says that it is “committed to providing welcoming and safe learning environments for all students, including our LGBTQ students.”
Good. Let us hope that means that the district will put an end to this bigotry.
The two educators have organized their anti-trans activities under the banner of a “I Resolve Movement”, which looks very much like a front for the so-called “gender critical radical feminist” movement to me. That subculture is neither critical, radical nor feminist. They use the exact same arguments as right wing fanatics these days.
I see that their facebook-page has already been removed. Good. Now let us help the students of North Middle School end this anti-LGBTQIA activism.
2015-2016: Using $10,000 in seed money the [right wing “Christian” organization Alliance Defending Freedom] ADF stands up WoLF, a “feminist” organization whose sole activity is fighting against transgender people, to make their religious goals look secular and feminist.
2015: The [right wing extremist Family Research Council] FRC publishes it’s plan [for] trans people: no legal recognition, no legal protections, no transition related health care, and no trans people in the military. It encourages religious based conversion therapy instead.
2017: Despite running a campaign that largely avoided LGBT issues, Trump quickly appeases his base and moves to ban trans people from the military and revoke federal protections. The FRC and Ryan Anderson of Heritage are key influencers.
2018: Project Blitz, a powerful political movement to eliminate the separation of church and state, develops a playbook to pass state laws treating transness as a communicable public health hazard, to be eradicated by the government like measles.
2020: The [American Principles Project] APP, a religious right PAC, bucks the RNC and tries to make the 2020 election about trans people as a wedge, focusing on trans youth sports and medicine. Though unsuccessful at the time, they succeed post-election.
2020: A consortium of religious right organizations launch a project to attack LGBT youth and parents, with the aim of passing laws outing trans youth, plus bathroom, sports, and medical bans. They promote conversion therapy as the only option.
2021: Tucker Carlson and Fox News ramp up the anti-trans coverage to unheard of levels, (several segments a day) largely echoing the stated aims of the religious right and shaming Republicans who aren’t draconian enough.
2021: The GOP shifts focus to “wokeness” and “cancel culture” which they blame in great part on transgender people. They make it clear that trans people are one of their top issues going forward, and a intention of fear mongering with falsehoods.
2021: A record number of anti-trans bills are passing state legislatures. Most use model language provided by ADF, and target target trans youth in sports and medicine. Some bathroom bills as well. Many pass. It’s the worst ever.
March 26, 2021: Tucker Carlson, Fox’s most popular host, openly embraces white nationalism. Her also endorses the notion that if the left doesn’t surrender (presumable giving up trans people as a sacrifice), fascism is the only option left.
April 8, 2021: [British/American right wing extremist blogger] Andrew Sullivan proposes a “compromise” to the “transgender question” that includes a national bathroom ban, “separate but equal” facilities and sports, national bans on health care for trans youth, and banning any discussion of trans issues in schools.
April 8, 2021: Donald Trump wades into the fight, threatening Republican Governor Asa Hutchinson for vetoing a bill banning care for trans youth. This signal Trump has embraced the anti-trans right, and this will drag on for years.
It also signals this is likely to be a wedge issue in 2022, and in the general election in 2024, making it the first time in 20 years that LGBT issues have been centered in a presidential election, and that the GOP thinks they can win on this openly.
Brynn Tannehill is a leading trans activist and essayist, and has written for The New York Times, The Huffington Post, Bilerico, Slate, Salon, USA Today, The Advocate, LGBTQ Nation, The New Civil Rights Movement, as a blogger and featured columnist. She recently published her new book American Fascism.
