Guest post: Simulations of an idea of femininity
Originally a comment by Mike Haubrich on Feminism is for everyone except women.
I fully understand why many feminists say that men can’t be feminists, and I understand why they are suspicious of men who claim to be. It’s because we have a tendency to take over when we get involved, and when it comes to transactivists, they are living up to those expectations. What I don’t understand is how people can make declarations such as “MY feminism will be intersectional” as if people could buy a feminism and paint it any color that works best for them.
I think that moving Women’s studies over to Gender Studies has had an obvious and negative effect on people’s understanding of feminism, more of that “forced teaming” thing that has done so much damage to LGB activism. People really don’t know what feminism is anymore, and that is more detrimental than all of Rush Limbaugh’s years of making fun of feminazis. Many people don’t know the difference between female and femininity, thinking that femininity is what defines girls and women and that the actual body of a female human being is immaterial. And of course, this not a goal of feminism (in my understanding,) which is to break down the limitations of gender. Saying that a man who is feminine, or desires the feminine role, is actually a woman affirms that femininity is the defining property of a woman.
Never mind that men who desire this only act out simulations of their idea of femininity, and can have no idea what it actually is to be a woman.
Thanks for correcting my spelling, Ophelia. :)
Typos scream and run away when I approach.
Genderists depend heavily on the Gender Nonconforming Gender Nonconformist — the transwoman who’s either hyper-masculine or has the usual varied lot of interests and the transman who’s either consciously feminine or has the usual varied lot of interests. It’s how they avoid the rather obvious conclusion that transgender status consists of people simulating their personal ideas of masculinity or femininity. “Why, nothing could be further from the truth!”
This, I think, is part of the reason they keep insisting GC “go talk to real transpeople.” They think our finding a TW who loves NASCAR or a TM who wears dresses and makeup will confound our expectations and rock our world.
But they haven’t avoided stereotypes. They’re simply simulating their personal idea of a masculine woman or a feminine man, making them GNC squared.
When I’m having a conversation where I feel the need to be precise, I usually opt for the wording, “I try to ally with feminists.” (Ditto with anti-racism, since I’m a North Sea mutt.) The phrasing serves two purposes: first, it makes it clear to my audience that feminism, whatever salutary effects it might have for men (and yeah, there are many), is not and must not be about the needs of men; second, it reminds ME that my allyship is something that I, personally, cannot actually declare. It’s the folks I’m trying to ally with that get to decide if, at any given moment, I’m being successful at it. (My other go-to phrase is that “ally” is a verb, not a noun, in these contexts, because it’s something you do–and when you stop doing, whether it’s because you slip up or just because you’re too exhausted to carry on the struggle that day, then you stop being.)