Archive for January, 2015
Thank you for this. While I do t agree with it all, you put your arguement in a respectful way (I mean not wanting to offend anyone).
Yes women and transwomen are different, we have different beginnings, histories and different issues. If you take as literal what some transwomen say about their experience, then of course you may feel upset or offended, but when we have the limited vocabulary that we currently do, how else can you describe what you’re feeling?
I am a transwoman (before someone outs me to your blog). I’m not going to introduce myself as Sarah the transwoman, anymore than I would introduce myself as Sarah the woman. When people see me, I hope they see me as a woman, and treat me as such. If they treat me otherwise, well it depends how they treat me, but if they treate badly, then I respond in an appropriate way, the same way is expect anyone to respond.
I can’t tell you that I “feel like a woman”, anymore than any woman can. I can tell you I feel better being percieved as a woman, living as a woman, and the rest that goes with it, but isn’t feminsm about being able to be who you are, without someone telling you what you can and can’t be?
First of all I want to make it clear that this is not a personal attack Caroline Criado-Perez. I just don’t agree with many aspects of her article:
‘Becoming a Woman: Trans Women and Male Violence’.
Though our views may vary, I understand that feminism encompasses differing views and strategies. I do however believe in healthy debate within feminism on subjects and a right to differ. I do understand her views were based on personal experience and respect that. However, as an influential writer, I also find they somewhat endorse an existing dangerous and damaging precedent.
As I’ve said before where ever you stand on ‘the trans issue’ within feminism, you cannot deny difference. Women and transwomen ARE different, whether in terms of socialisation, health, biology, social/political history and so on. The experience of being a woman is not something transwomen will ever know, nor vice versa. It is…
View original post 445 more words
…that thing they say is next to godliness, or to put it simply, soap and water.
New Statesman | The “return” of Page 3: the Sun revels in the chance to make women with opinions look stupid
Replies seem to have been disabled.
Sorry Kev, I missed your original post thanks to my iphone, but I kinda think you missed the point I was trying to make. How can The Sun or any newspaper calling itself that actually call itself a newspaper when it has near naked men and women posing in it? That’s not news, that’s titillation. You don’t see someone getting their kit off in between the news headlines and the weather on the BBC news channel (give SKY enough time and they will most likely). To be take seriously as a journalist, you have to first be a serious journalist.
I’ve been thinking about writing this post for the past week or so every since the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo. 3 gunmen claiming to represent 2 extremist Muslim groups, shot and killed police officers guarding the satirical magazine’s offices, and then proceeded to kill several of the staff inside (I think the figure was around 12 people killed). They said that they had avenged the prophet Muhammad, and other things that have typically been associated with Muslim extremist terrorists. What had the journalist and cartoonist of Charlie Hebdo done to warrant such violent actions from these people? They’d printed images of the Muslim prophet Mohammed and mocked the religion of Islam, the same way that they had mocked other religious figures and other religions in the past. Is that justification for brutally murdering over a dozen people? Absolutely not. Did the publishers of Charlie Hebdo have the right to print such things knowing they may cause offense, absolutely they did, did they deserve to die for possibly causing offense, of course the fuck not! Do I think they should have printed that kind of thing knowing it would cause offense and upset, no I don’t, but they still had the right to print it. Did the gunmen have the right to be offended by what Charlie Hebdo printed? Absolutely they did, and here’s a few suggestions to anyone who’s offended by similar things in similar ways. Pick up a pen and a piece of paper, you can get them from most stationary shops. Write a strongly worded letter saying how upset and offended you we’re by the article(s) and that you would like an apology and a promise that they will never do it. They’ll most likely ignore it or tell you to go fuck yourself, but you know what you can do then, write them another letter, and another letter and another, or you know what else you could do? GROW THE FUCK UP AND NOT LET THE WORDS OR DRAWINGS OF ANOTHER HUMAN BEING UPSET YOU SO MUCH, IGNORE THEM, LIKE YOU’RE PARENTS WOULD HAVE TOLD YOU TO DO WITH THE SCHOOLYARD BULLY!
You know what seems really ironic to me? Charlie Hebdo was on it’s last financial legs before all this happened, they would have probably gone out of business sometime this year, but thanks to these fucktards trying to “punish” Charlie Hebdo, they’ve given them the biggest advert they could, and the current issue is being printed in the millions, where normally it would be in the 30,000 area. That’s called shooting yourself in the foot.
I’m gonna go find a lift to fart in now.