Actually it’s literally objectively false that men do experience misogynistic sexism, on account of how the “gyn” bit means women, and men are men. Men don’t experience misogynistic sexism even if they are wearing dresses and crippling shoes.
It doesn’t happen, because he isn’t one. He doesn’t get “sexually assaulted for being a woman,” because he isn’t a woman. Of course he can “identify out of it,” because he’s not in it to begin with.
There’s something very very sick about this envy of and theft of misogyny and violence.
No. Misogynistic sexism and sexual violence don’t happen to trans women, because they are not women. Hostility and violence directed at trans women is not directed at them because they’re women, for the simple and clear reason that they’re not women.
It’s all radical feminists’ fault that trans women can’t experience diseases of the uterus!
Comments
16 responses to “He guesses you lie about it for validation”
And then there’s the fact … oh, wait, OBJECTIVE FACT… that a trans-identifying male is more likely to be the perpetrator of sexual violence than the victim of it.
This Jules Buet person seems like a troll to me, but …
And if there wasn’t so much societal push back by TERFs to allow uterus transplants on trans women
Yeah, I’m not so sure that medical science’s inability to implant a uterus into an adult male and have it be accepted and function has a whole lot to do with feminists of any kind.
Just like the current impossibility of me getting a couple of extra legs fitted on so that I could run faster than anyone else isn’t the fault of all those quadrupedal-exclusionary radical sports associations.
I mean … where in a male body would this implanted uterus go? Without the other parts of the female reproductive system, what would this implanted uterus actually do? How would a baby get in there? How would said baby, if it could somehow get in there and develop normally, get out?
There must be a term for attacking someone who appears to be a member of a hated group. Like when Hindus or Sikhs are attacked in the US because the attackers think they’re Muslims. (It’s likely that such attackers can’t be bothered with the distinctions between Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus, but I digress.) Perhaps mistaken identity will suffice. In any event, these victims are attacked on the basis of what they appear to be, not what they are. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to say that Hindus are sometimes the victims of anti-Muslim violence, despite not being Muslims. Ditto men-who-emulate-women and misogynist violence.
The tweet about uterus transplants: oh, dear. I hope that nobody expends resources on trying to do such things. Uterus transplants should go to those who normally have uteruses: women. (I’m not sure how I feel about going even that far; maybe people should become more accepting of biological limitations and not go to extreme lengths to produce genetically related children.) But it’s clear that this Jules/Juliette person acknowledges that there are biological differences between men and women and is lashing out when those differences are highlighted; or at least when the distinctive characteristics for women are not available to men on request.
On the topic of men and sexism, I think it’s possible for men to get a taste of what sexism is like if they are, for some reason, mistaken for women.
I’ll just share my experience here. Back when I was in my first year of college, the internet was barely a thing. There was e-mail, usenet, and there was a rather primitive instant message system built into the school’s mainframe. Employees could pick their own user IDs (and would sometimes use first names or other words as their ID), while lowly students like me would get a username made up from part of first name joined to part of last name. Due to a quirk in how the system assigned names and what my real name actually is, my user id ended up being a common female first name.
You probably know exactly where this is going … I could hardly use the mainframe without being propositioned and otherwise harassed. All I’ve gotta say on some of the stuff I got sent was … thankfully there was no way to send actual pictures over that messaging system. I eventually had to get messaging turned off completely on my account – which thankfully could be done.
Of course that was just a taste of the sexism that women experience all the time. And I could opt out of it. Certainly made clueless 17-year-old me a lot more understanding of what women had to go through, though.
If a boy or man is attacked for being effeminate — a “pansy” — is that misogyny? Is it a manifestation of hatred of women, hatred of femininity, or just hatred of someone who doesn’t conform to the way they “ought” to behave according to their sex? If a woman taunts the man, is that something else, or not?
I suspect a lot of the people who think TIMs experience misogyny would argue that men bullied for being effeminate are also victims of misogyny.
Pretty sure this isn’t the first time someone here has quoted Life of Brian, but:
If women questioning your ideology or misgendering you is “literal violence,” it’s an easy step to believe that all those evil, TERFy thoughts out there are harshing your Lovely Woman Feels, and setting back the progress of uterus-implantation medical science by decades out of shear spite.
Sastra #5
I suspect a lot of the people who think TIMs experience misogyny would argue that men bullied for being effeminate are also victims of misogyny.
I think it depends on whether you classify hatred for traits or behaviors that are associated with femininity as a part of misogyny. It’s probably similar to the bullies at least. Never met a male bully of that type that wasn’t also a raving misogynist.
Prefigured by the Beatles in “Get Back?”
Sweet Loretta Martin thought she was a woman
But she was another man…
Enjoy the walking with that broken pelvis you’d need to accommodate that… I’m not even sure of the status of those few dick transplants they’ve done…
*dons evil scientist hat*
Yes it would be theoretically possible, with the right regimen of immunosuppressants and hormones, to have a foetus gestate in a uterus implanted in a man. Even for them to give birth, if their pelvis was first… let’s say “restructured”. If they’d be happy with a C-section things become less complicated.
Also totally possible, again with the “right” tissues implanted and hormone regimen, to give a man fibroids. Hell, with the right transplant and hormones you could give a woman a swollen prostate gland, too. What fun!
*doffs evil scientist hat*
Just to be clear: This sort of thing is a terrible idea for all sorts of reasons… a good number of people/patients would be permanently damaged or killed as a result of the attempt. But sure, within the realm of possibility.
Also: sure, men who present themselves as women will experience expressions of misogyny. That’s going to be primarily a result of presenting as a woman or displaying feminine traits, though, not a result of them being “trans”.
If I were to start using a wheelchair to get everywhere I’d experience plenty of obstacles in my neighbourhood that people who actually need to use wheelchairs have been complaining about for ages… me opting into restricting my mobility to using a wheelchair certainly doesn’t make me more (or even “as”, if I can opt back out) oppressed than them.
Why? You identified into it…
It’s not a fact of life that you are subject to violence because you are a woman unless you actually are a woman.
Mild disagreement: some unknown fraction of trans women do actually pass as women seamlessly, and another unknown fraction of trans women can pass some of the time. In those cases, if violence is directed at them on the belief that they are female, then I would consider that an instance of misogynistic violence. Those that don’t pass can’t possibly be the target of violence where the motive is that they are mistaken for a woman.
A sticking point is that trans women, as has been noted many times over, don’t pass for women as often as they think*; another is that when they pass, we don’t notice that they are not a woman unless they mention it. This means there is an unknown element as to how much violence faced by trans women could possibly be misogynistic in motivation.
Katy has neglected other, much more likely sources of violence. What about all the obviously male trans women? It is very possible that they are targeted for violence by people that regard trans women as freakish deviants, but then, that is not misogyny at all. And what of the obviously male and easily angered trans women? The ones that fly into a rage whenever someone refuses to agree that they are a woman? Those guys probably get into fights a lot too, and I bet Katy is sweeping that into the misogyny column too.
*Katy demonstrates this typical cluelessness at the top of his feed:
https://twitter.com/KatyMontgomerie/status/1360994826074865675
#5 Sastra
I would not consider that an example of misogyny. The man is not being bullied for being female, he is being bullied for non-conformity to the strictures of being a Real Man. Those same traits would be welcomed in an actual woman.
Screechy Monkey,
You left out the end of the scene:
Pretty much sums up the state of the debate today.
I’d argue that violence deriving from misogyny is misogynistic violence. Thus, a boy or man who experiences violence for failing to measure up to or for transgressing misogynistic norms is, in fact, experiencing misogynistic violence.