Norwegian researchers give an excellent rebuttal of anti-transgender TERF attacks

Here’s an English language translation of the article “Five researchers answer Tonje Gjevjon: Prejudiced incompetence regarding gender diversity”, originally published in the Blazer Fanzine.

It gives a very good summary of the major arguments against the transphobia of radical feminists and right-wing extremists.

Here’s one quote:

Gjevjon claims that “women who are born women (female) share the experience of being a woman and to be seen and treated as a woman.” Minority women have argued against this argument throughout the history of feminism. In 1851 Sojourner Truth asked  the question “Ain’t I a Woman?” in a speech that pointed out that black women’s experiences in an American society characterized by slavery were not exactly female. Truth herself pointed out that she was stronger than most men and that she had hardly ever been seen and treated as a woman.

In a recent story, lesbian feminist Monique Wittig argued that lesbians cannot be understood as women because they do not share the most common experience women have:The heterosexual relationship with men. Up till now feminists have not succeeded in finding out what the experiences “of being a woman and being seen and treated as a woman” can define the woman’s category. Women, also in Gjevjon’s understanding, seem to be too diverse for that .

More here!

What ‘Snowflakes’ Get Right About Free Speech

Ulrich Baer makes some very important points regarding free speech in the New York Times. The university protests against right wing extremists speaking on campus is not an attack on free speech. They represent a defense of free speech.

Free speech rests on respect for some common rules of engagement. When one group argues that it is in some way superior to another, the other group cannot take part in the debate on equal terms. 

If a fascist requires proof for the Holocaust, there is no point for a Holocaust surviver to provide such proof, as the fascist will dismiss all proof as lies. The fascist has already defined the survivor as a liar. The fascist is  invalidating the very life and existence of the Holocaust victim by denying the truth and value of his or her life. That is an act of violence, not an argument in a debate.

Indeed, as Jean Paul Sartre pointed out, the fascist will knowingly break the rules, because he is not searching for the truth, he is searching for power:

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play.”

The concept of free speech and an open discussion requires a minimum of trust and a common understanding of what truth entails.

Bear uses transgender people as an example:

“The rights of transgender people for legal equality and protection against discrimination are a current example in a long history of such redefinitions. It is only when trans people are recognized as fully human, rather than as men and women in disguise, as Ben Carson, the current secretary of housing and urban development claims, that their rights can be fully recognized in policy decisions.

The idea of freedom of speech does not mean a blanket permission to say anything anybody thinks. It means balancing the inherent value of a given view with the obligation to ensure that other members of a given community can participate in discourse as fully recognized members of that community. Free-speech protections — not only but especially in universities, which aim to educate students in how to belong to various communities — should not mean that someone’s humanity, or their right to participate in political speech as political agents, can be freely attacked, demeaned or questioned.”

Read the whole article here.