🚀 go-pugleaf

Before I actually answer what you've said, one note: Please don't
cross-post so enthusiastically. SIX newsgroups?? I'm replying from
soc.bi, and as I don't read alt.transgendered, soc.women, or
alt.feminism, I don't know what the general tenor is in those
groups and don't care to get involved in cross-posted discussions
of heavily-emotional topics such as whether or not an MTF transsexual
is "really" a woman or not.

William wrote:

> 	Especially with the title of the Womyns's Music Fest, we see
> evidence of rejection men with a dislike of the masculine.  There
> may be similar feelings at the all-woman safe-sex club.

> 	Anyway, so what we have with TS's are beings that are drawn to
> being feminine and repelled by the masculine so much (in themselves) that
> they need to switch their physical sex.  It would seem with such a
> desire to escape "the masculine", TS's should be well accepted in women
> only places.  Not only are they then women -- but they are women by *choice*,
> not by accident of birth.

That's one way of looking at it, and I won't dispute it. Another way
of looking at it, which I also will not dispute, is that these people
were raised as males and taught male ways of viewing the world and
conducting themselves, and their life experiences are thus quite
different from that of people born female. This was the explanation
I heard for the exclusion of MTF's from the Michigan Womyn's Music
Festival.

My own feeling is that there is no single right answer to the question
of whether an MTF transsexual is "really" a woman. I think there
are elements of truth in both your viewpoint and the opposing viewpoint
I described in the previous paragraph. I think I could summarize my
position by saying that an MTF "is" a woman, but somehow not quite
in the same way or to the same degree as a born woman. Maybe that's
not nice or fair, but I think it's reality.

Craig

-- 
      /----------------+-------------------------------------------------\
      | Craig Dickson  | So also the light that is absorbed. One absorbs |
      | crd@netcom.com | little, and is called white and glistening; one |
      |                | absorbs all and is called black.                |
      \----------------+-------------------------------------------------/

In article <crdCMv921.I0L@netcom.com> crd@netcom.com (Craig Dickson) writes:
>Before I actually answer what you've said, one note: Please don't
>cross-post so enthusiastically. SIX newsgroups?? I'm replying from
>soc.bi, and as I don't read alt.transgendered, soc.women, or
>alt.feminism,
---
	I xposted it from alt.transgendered.  If I hadn't xposted it to 
other news groups, you would not have responded.  I felt that the topics
would best be discussed by input from people in the news groups I posted
to.  I mean I can talk about feminist or women's issues in a vacuum, or
I can xpost the topic to groups where I might actually *get* their 
opinion.  Posting in a vacuum or talking to people who think too much
like me isn't instructive -- we just all sit around saying "yeah, that's
right, yeah."  End of discussion.  *grump*.  Not very interesting or
informative.


>That's one way of looking at it, and I won't dispute it. Another way
>of looking at it, which I also will not dispute, is that these people
>were raised as males and taught male ways of viewing the world and
>conducting themselves, and their life experiences are thus quite
>different from that of people born female. This was the explanation
>I heard for the exclusion of MTF's from the Michigan Womyn's Music
>Festival.
---
	This is a very valid attitude.  It seems very similar to whites who
want to ban blacks or asians from various activities since they were not
raised *as whites*.  It also would be similar to men's clubs who want
to exclude women because women, not having been raised as men -- just
aren't the same as men.  Etc.  There is no doubt that people with different
backgrounds will be different and have different perspectives.  A woman
raised in japan or the phillipines will have a very different attitude
and background about a woman's place in society than a woman raised
in the US.  TS's, it would seem, would also have a very different attitude
toward feminity -- loving and relishing it so much that they irrevocably
chose it over their birth sex -- in fact many feel that they are truely
not complete and whole people without aligning their body with their
spirit.  I guess I would hope for understanding of this choice/necessity
from groups that have equally been the victim of enforced societal roles
and stereotypes.  

>I think I could summarize my
>position by saying that an MTF "is" a woman, but somehow not quite
>in the same way or to the same degree as a born woman. Maybe that's
>not nice or fair, but I think it's reality.
---
	True, but women do come in all different shapes sizes and backgrounds.
There are certainly some women that are more masculine in their behavior
than many men.

william
---
    My definition of a free society is a society where it is safe
    to be unpopular.
                                    -- Adlai E. Stevenson

This strikes me as being a difficult question to deal with on a lot of
fronts, but this particular formulation is problematic

In article <2mbjbo$1jb@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> wat@athena.Eng.sun.com (William) writes:
>	What is the nature of female rejection of TS's?  Cases that I know
>of are: the woman who stabbed the 7 yearr post op TS up in the North
>Bay for not being feminine enough; The threats of violence and 
>vandalism against TS's at the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival; and
>a rule at the Ecstacy club also stating only "women-born-women".

You are assuming here that there is a single phenomenon causing these
events, and you're giving a name to that phenomenon - "female
rejection of TS's" - that strongly suggests that it is common to all
women. I think the real situation here is a lot more complex, but I'm
willing to let the simplification go by for a while

>	Especially with the title of the Womyns's Music Fest, we see
>evidence of rejection men with a dislike of the masculine.  There
>may be similar feelings at the all-woman safe-sex club.

I think that equating the spelling "womyn" with a rejection of men and
a dislike of the masculine is missing the point. The point is to
define women as something other than people-who-are-not-men. Much as
a woman can love her husband dearly, but keep her own name, women or
womyn can be quite positive towards men without wanting them to be
ever-present and defining. Making this kind of statement is apt to
make it difficult to get along with feminists, whatever your gender or
theirs. 

>	Anyway, so what we have with TS's are beings that are drawn to
>being feminine and repelled by the masculine so much (in themselves) that
>they need to switch their physical sex.  It would seem with such a
>desire to escape "the masculine", TS's should be well accepted in women
>only places.  Not only are they then women -- but they are women by *choice*,
>not by accident of birth.

Many women - particularly women who hang out in women-only places -
find the entire notion of femininity a troublesome patriarchal ideal.
They don't dislike masculinity; they dislike the entire
masculine/feminine paradigm. I don't think that TS's are beings that
are drawn to being feminine, but certainly a feminist group is not the
ideal place to be if you are drawn to being feminine, regardless of
the configuration of your chromosomes.  There is so much baggage
associated with being feminine in our culture - it has to do with
passivity, eagerness to please, helplessness - that truly deeply
wanting to be feminine, as opposed to wanting to wear outrageous
clothes or to be female or to wear makeup, is not a good sign about
one's mental health.

Furthermore, a lot of the point of woman-only space is setting up a
space free of people who have been acculturated the way men are in our
society. It's not just about reduced testosterone living, or a lack of
male genitals; it's much more complex than that. The TS that I know
best, at the time when I knew her, believed in a vision of what it
meant to be female that was not about femininity as such, but that
still struck me as dangerously oversimplified, and she believed that
she was more like a woman than like a man, while behaving like a man
in most of the ways that annoy me most. (Leaving the toilet seat up
never bothered me that much, but being unable to find anything gets to
me.)  Other people in this thread have had similar experiences, of
people who thought of themselves as women, but had "male"
characteristics that in context seemed unsettling and possibly
unpleasant. I don't think it's fair to believe that a person who grew
up as a man in our culture is ever going to behave like a person who
grew up as a woman in our culture. Whether or not that constitutes
sufficient reason to bar them from some or all woman-only space is a
very different question, and not one I care to try to answer;
politically woman-only space isn't something I have any particular
interest in.

	Elizabeth D. Zwicky
	zwicky@erg.sri.com

In article <2mlk26$19k@magic.erg.sri.com>,
Elizabeth Zwicky <zwicky@magic.erg.sri.com> wrote:
>This strikes me as being a difficult question to deal with on a lot of
>fronts, but this particular formulation is problematic
>
>In article <2mbjbo$1jb@engnews2.Eng.Sun.COM> wat@athena.Eng.sun.com (William) writes:
>>	What is the nature of female rejection of TS's?  Cases that I know
>>of are: the woman who stabbed the 7 yearr post op TS up in the North
>>Bay for not being feminine enough; The threats of violence and 
>>vandalism against TS's at the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival; and
>>a rule at the Ecstacy club also stating only "women-born-women".
>
>You are assuming here that there is a single phenomenon causing these
>events, and you're giving a name to that phenomenon - "female
>rejection of TS's" - that strongly suggests that it is common to all
>women. I think the real situation here is a lot more complex, but I'm
>willing to let the simplification go by for a while
---
	Clarification: female rejection of TS's = rejection that is done
by females -- but in no way did I mean to imply a all or even a majority.
In fact, if I had to guess, I would think TS's would be more accepted
by women than men -- but that is only a guess.


>>	Especially with the title of the Womyns's Music Fest, we see
>>evidence of rejection men with a dislike of the masculine.  There
>>may be similar feelings at the all-woman safe-sex club.
>
>I think that equating the spelling "womyn" with a rejection of men and
>a dislike of the masculine is missing the point. The point is to
>define women as something other than people-who-are-not-men. Much as
>a woman can love her husband dearly, but keep her own name, women or
>womyn can be quite positive towards men without wanting them to be
>ever-present and defining. Making this kind of statement is apt to
>make it difficult to get along with feminists, whatever your gender or
>theirs. 
---
	As was already pointed out, they chose the name myn spelling to
separate and reject the masculine.  In my own personal experience,
those who insist on the 'myn' spelling usually have strong
anti-male feelings.
>
>>	Anyway, so what we have with TS's are beings that are drawn to
>>being feminine and repelled by the masculine so much (in themselves) that
>>they need to switch their physical sex.  It would seem with such a
>>desire to escape "the masculine", TS's should be well accepted in women
>>only places.  Not only are they then women -- but they are women by *choice*,
>>not by accident of birth.
>

>Furthermore, a lot of the point of woman-only space is setting up a
>space free of people who have been acculturated the way men are in our
>society. It's not just about reduced testosterone living, or a lack of
>male genitals; it's much more complex than that. The TS that I know
>best, at the time when I knew her, believed in a vision of what it
>meant to be female that was not about femininity as such, but that
>still struck me as dangerously oversimplified, and she believed that
>she was more like a woman than like a man, while behaving like a man
>in most of the ways that annoy me most. (Leaving the toilet seat up
>never bothered me that much, but being unable to find anything gets to
>me.)
---
	I wouldn't disagree with this, however, by the being able to find
things criteria, I was the female in my last relationship.  She often
misplaced things.  This points out an important point.  What does
one use for a criteria?  It is quite conceivable in this day and age
for a girl to be raised as a tomboy and be very masculine and a boy
to be raised in a protected manner and end up being possibly meek,
shy and 'feminine' -- in the stereotypical usage of those words.  


  Other people in this thread have had similar experiences, of
>people who thought of themselves as women, but had "male"
>characteristics that in context seemed unsettling and possibly
>unpleasant.
---
	No doubt true -- I also know women who have decidedly "male"
characteristics.


> I don't think it's fair to believe that a person who grew
>up as a man in our culture is ever going to behave like a person who
>grew up as a woman in our culture.
---
	Quite true, but no two women are likly to behave the same
either.  It is likely there is going to be an overlap of behavior
between the two sexes -- it is that grey area we are examining.

william
---
    When we lose the right to be different, we lose the privilege to be
    free.
                                    -- Charles Evans Hughes

In article <2mlk26$19k@magic.erg.sri.com> zwicky@magic.erg.sri.com (Elizabeth Zwicky) writes:

>Many women - particularly women who hang out in women-only places -
>find the entire notion of femininity a troublesome patriarchal ideal.

I do, and I'm not a separatist by any means.

>They don't dislike masculinity; they dislike the entire
>masculine/feminine paradigm. I don't think that TS's are beings that
>are drawn to being feminine, but certainly a feminist group is not the
>ideal place to be if you are drawn to being feminine, regardless of
>the configuration of your chromosomes.  There is so much baggage
>associated with being feminine in our culture - it has to do with
>passivity, eagerness to please, helplessness - that truly deeply
>wanting to be feminine, as opposed to wanting to wear outrageous
>clothes or to be female or to wear makeup, is not a good sign about
>one's mental health.

I do not understand why anybody would want to be passive, waste their
life away pleasing others, and be helpless.  I've certainly done all
of that, but I don't see it as a virtue.  This kind of "femininity" 
makes me miserable.  I am much happier when I'm active, kind and
decent to others without catering to their every whim, and when I'm
competent at life tasks.  I think these are important virtues for any human 
being, male, female, or whatever.

>Furthermore, a lot of the point of woman-only space is setting up a
>space free of people who have been acculturated the way men are in our
>society. It's not just about reduced testosterone living, or a lack of
>male genitals; it's much more complex than that. The TS that I know
>best, at the time when I knew her, believed in a vision of what it
>meant to be female that was not about femininity as such, but that
>still struck me as dangerously oversimplified, and she believed that
>she was more like a woman than like a man, while behaving like a man
>in most of the ways that annoy me most. (Leaving the toilet seat up
>never bothered me that much, but being unable to find anything gets to
>me.)  

"Honeeeeeeyyyyy, where are the scissors????"   

>	Elizabeth D. Zwicky
>	zwicky@erg.sri.com

Thanks for the post.



-- 

- Heather Blair       h431@midway.uchicago.edu

In article <2mlk26$19k@magic.erg.sri.com> zwicky@magic.erg.sri.com (Elizabeth Zwicky) writes:
>
>
>Furthermore, a lot of the point of woman-only space is setting up a
>space free of people who have been acculturated the way men are in our
>society. It's not just about reduced testosterone living, or a lack of
>male genitals; it's much more complex than that. The TS that I know
>best, at the time when I knew her, believed in a vision of what it
>meant to be female that was not about femininity as such, but that
>still struck me as dangerously oversimplified, and she believed that
>she was more like a woman than like a man, while behaving like a man
>in most of the ways that annoy me most. (Leaving the toilet seat up
>never bothered me that much, but being unable to find anything gets to
>me.)  Other people in this thread have had similar experiences, of
>people who thought of themselves as women, but had "male"
>characteristics that in context seemed unsettling and possibly
>unpleasant. I don't think it's fair to believe that a person who grew
>up as a man in our culture is ever going to behave like a person who
>grew up as a woman in our culture. Whether or not that constitutes
>sufficient reason to bar them from some or all woman-only space is a
>very different question, and not one I care to try to answer;
>politically woman-only space isn't something I have any particular
>interest in.
>
>	Elizabeth D. Zwicky
>	zwicky@erg.sri.com
>

  This brings up an interesting question for me...  Should someone like
me be banned from a woman-only place?  While I have no desire what so ever
to be of the masculine sex, I'd say I display alot of characteristics 
that have been culturally declared as Male.  While I can't say I've ever
left the toilet seat up :), I haven't been able to find my keys for the 
last month or so (UGH!).  I'm strong, confident, and not at all afraid of
men nor do I dislike men.

  I'd say there are alot of TSes that come closer to your idea of 
"femininity" than I do.   So...  What about me??  

- Susan

In <1994Mar22.155302.17698@midway.uchicago.edu> h431@quads.uchicago.edu (heather e blair) writes:

>I do not understand why anybody would want to be passive, waste their
>life away pleasing others, and be helpless.  

Is this what you think transsexuality is all about?

Sigh.
-- 
-----
		r l reid	ro@panix.com

In article <2mnlvl$af0@panix2.panix.com>, r l reid <ro@panix.com> wrote:

>In <1994Mar22.155302.17698@midway.uchicago.edu> h431@quads.uchicago.edu (heather e blair) writes:
>
>>I do not understand why anybody would want to be passive, waste their
>>life away pleasing others, and be helpless.  
>
>Is this what you think transsexuality is all about?

Ro, are you just skimming, or are you deliberately deleting the
context for this one?  I can't figure out which is less likely.

  In article <2mlk26$19k@magic.erg.sri.com> zwicky@magic.erg.sri.com (Elizabeth Zwicky) writes:

  >There is so much baggage
  >associated with being feminine in our culture - it has to do with
  >passivity, eagerness to please, helplessness -

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                /  
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Buy our iguanas!
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /  

In article <2mnlvl$af0@panix2.panix.com>, ro@panix.com (r l reid) writes:
> In <1994Mar22.155302.17698@midway.uchicago.edu> h431@quads.uchicago.edu (heather e blair) writes:
> 
> >I do not understand why anybody would want to be passive, waste their
> >life away pleasing others, and be helpless.  
> 
> Is this what you think transsexuality is all about?
> 

It is what I was raised to believe traditional womanhood was about.
Why else was I told not to sweat in basketball, not to slide and
get dirty in softball, and to cook, sew, clean, and dissemble?

I learned while being prepared for this role that I was not
suited for it and that being a woman did not mean I had to
embrace this nonsense.  Still sometimes when I look uncritically
at my mother, I see a beautiful (she really is) gracious, elegant
woman who makes guests feel welcomed and smooths any social
event she attends.  It's easy to see how a TS person might want
to emulate this behavior, without looking to see the
frustrated, empty, passive-agressive person beneath the facade.

Shit, sometimes *I* still want to appear like that!  It passes.

Lisa

In article <2mnlvl$af0@panix2.panix.com>, ro@panix.com (r l reid) writes:
|> In <1994Mar22.155302.17698@midway.uchicago.edu> h431@quads.uchicago.edu (heather e blair) writes:
|> 
|> >I do not understand why anybody would want to be passive, waste their
|> >life away pleasing others, and be helpless.  
|> 
|> Is this what you think transsexuality is all about?
|> 
|> Sigh.

Really. If it ain't one stereotype, it's another. We are just people
in search of comfort.

-- 

 Olivia Danielle Palmer     "This is *not* my second childhood;                                           
 slammer@delphi.com          I am not done with the *first* one yet!"