Recently, I’ve seen discussions on social media about people referred to as TERFs. That’s “trans exclusionary radical feminists.” To my understanding, this refers to women who don’t accept trans women as ‘real’ women and therefore won’t invite trans women to events that are scheduled for women only. This is a very controversial in some circles. I’ve read various articles and posts online and discovered that this has been going on for decades.
So, what do I think?
First, we have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly in this country. If a group of people want to gather and invite certain people and exclude others, that is their right. It is also their right to speak their opinion in public if they wish. They have a right to do this, even if what they say saddens or offends others.
At the same time, I find it impossible to define what a ‘real’ woman is, or a ‘real’ man, for that matter. Where do you draw the line? Does a woman who’s had a hysterectomy (ovaries now removed) still qualify as a ‘real’ woman? What about how someone was raised? Is a child who saw themselves as female and began transitioning at age 3 (lived as a girl from then on) more of a woman than someone who transitioned at age 33 or age 63? Does having ‘bottom surgery’ (change from male to female genitals) qualify? What of the intersex person who has Complete AIS (androgen insensitivity syndrome), who has an ‘F’ on their birth certificate, was raised as a girl, now lives as a woman, but has XY chromosomes (has no menstrual cycles, and cannot have children)? Are they invited to the conference?
As I was born male and still go by male pronouns today, how can I wrap my head around this controversy among women? In order to better understand it all, I thought about how I feel when I hear the words “Be a real man!”
How would I feel if a group of men decided to hold a conference for only ‘real’ men? Let’s say they excluded me because I didn’t play football in school, have never bench pressed over 100 pounds, and often wear skirts or dresses when I go out.
Would I have feelings about this? Sure, I would. Being excluded from anything strikes an emotional chord in me, perhaps based on my history. But let’s think this through for a moment. Would I really want to attend a conference like that? No. I wouldn’t have much in common with such a group anyway. But, more importantly, I disagree with trying to define men in such narrow terms in the first place.
Would I attempt to stop that conference? No, I wouldn’t. Perhaps such men need to talk about football injuries in a safe environment, where other people just wouldn’t understand. OK. Would I disagree with their use of the term ‘real men?’ Yes I would. But not because I need them to approve of the idea that I am also a ‘real’ man. That’s because, to me, a ‘real’ anything is irrelevant.
You see, in the long run, I get to decide who I am. I am real. Really me. What kind of man am I? Well just ask me. I’ll tell you. It may take awhile for me to describe myself, because I’m complicated. I might refer to myself as ‘gender queer’ based on some aspects of my gender identity. My body is human male, for all practical purposes, ok.
What about male privilege? Sure, I ‘enjoy’ privileges in life stemming from many things, such as the fact that I’m six feet tall, pale skin, male body, thin build, raised protestant (sort of) from a middle class family, and grew up in an almost ‘all white’ town. I’m supposedly dripping with privilege!
At the same time, I was seriously underprivileged socially. I was an underweight ‘misfit’ when it came to school, gym class, swimming lessons, college, the medical system, romance, and the Army (I was drafted). I was bullied constantly while growing up. Other kids called me a queer before I had any idea what that meant. In those ways, I was in more of an ‘underclass’ or perhaps I should call it an ‘outcast’ class.
So, it’s always complicated, from my point of view.
So let’s say you consider yourself a woman, regardless of what kind of body you started out with or what body you have now. What makes you real? I say you get to decide. I happen to know that plenty of ‘real’ women think of themselves as not fully qualified because their bodies don’t look like the ones in fashion magazines. Well, to me, you are just as ‘real’ (perhaps even more ‘real’) than the pictures of the women shown on those pages.
Here’s my invitation: If some women want to have a conference and exclude you, let them. If they want to say you’re not a ‘real’ woman, you don’t have to accept that because nobody can define what’s ‘real’ for you. If you want to hold a conference and exclude them, be my guest. Or perhaps hold a conference for all women, or even all people, and invite them, if they’re willing to attend. You have the power.
So, what do I think?
First, we have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly in this country. If a group of people want to gather and invite certain people and exclude others, that is their right. It is also their right to speak their opinion in public if they wish. They have a right to do this, even if what they say saddens or offends others.
At the same time, I find it impossible to define what a ‘real’ woman is, or a ‘real’ man, for that matter. Where do you draw the line? Does a woman who’s had a hysterectomy (ovaries now removed) still qualify as a ‘real’ woman? What about how someone was raised? Is a child who saw themselves as female and began transitioning at age 3 (lived as a girl from then on) more of a woman than someone who transitioned at age 33 or age 63? Does having ‘bottom surgery’ (change from male to female genitals) qualify? What of the intersex person who has Complete AIS (androgen insensitivity syndrome), who has an ‘F’ on their birth certificate, was raised as a girl, now lives as a woman, but has XY chromosomes (has no menstrual cycles, and cannot have children)? Are they invited to the conference?
As I was born male and still go by male pronouns today, how can I wrap my head around this controversy among women? In order to better understand it all, I thought about how I feel when I hear the words “Be a real man!”
How would I feel if a group of men decided to hold a conference for only ‘real’ men? Let’s say they excluded me because I didn’t play football in school, have never bench pressed over 100 pounds, and often wear skirts or dresses when I go out.
Would I have feelings about this? Sure, I would. Being excluded from anything strikes an emotional chord in me, perhaps based on my history. But let’s think this through for a moment. Would I really want to attend a conference like that? No. I wouldn’t have much in common with such a group anyway. But, more importantly, I disagree with trying to define men in such narrow terms in the first place.
Would I attempt to stop that conference? No, I wouldn’t. Perhaps such men need to talk about football injuries in a safe environment, where other people just wouldn’t understand. OK. Would I disagree with their use of the term ‘real men?’ Yes I would. But not because I need them to approve of the idea that I am also a ‘real’ man. That’s because, to me, a ‘real’ anything is irrelevant.
You see, in the long run, I get to decide who I am. I am real. Really me. What kind of man am I? Well just ask me. I’ll tell you. It may take awhile for me to describe myself, because I’m complicated. I might refer to myself as ‘gender queer’ based on some aspects of my gender identity. My body is human male, for all practical purposes, ok.
What about male privilege? Sure, I ‘enjoy’ privileges in life stemming from many things, such as the fact that I’m six feet tall, pale skin, male body, thin build, raised protestant (sort of) from a middle class family, and grew up in an almost ‘all white’ town. I’m supposedly dripping with privilege!
At the same time, I was seriously underprivileged socially. I was an underweight ‘misfit’ when it came to school, gym class, swimming lessons, college, the medical system, romance, and the Army (I was drafted). I was bullied constantly while growing up. Other kids called me a queer before I had any idea what that meant. In those ways, I was in more of an ‘underclass’ or perhaps I should call it an ‘outcast’ class.
So, it’s always complicated, from my point of view.
So let’s say you consider yourself a woman, regardless of what kind of body you started out with or what body you have now. What makes you real? I say you get to decide. I happen to know that plenty of ‘real’ women think of themselves as not fully qualified because their bodies don’t look like the ones in fashion magazines. Well, to me, you are just as ‘real’ (perhaps even more ‘real’) than the pictures of the women shown on those pages.
Here’s my invitation: If some women want to have a conference and exclude you, let them. If they want to say you’re not a ‘real’ woman, you don’t have to accept that because nobody can define what’s ‘real’ for you. If you want to hold a conference and exclude them, be my guest. Or perhaps hold a conference for all women, or even all people, and invite them, if they’re willing to attend. You have the power.
RSS Feed