womyn-born womyn

[spacefem]

August means that it's time for another Michigan Womyn's Music Festival (http://www.michfest.com/festival/index.htm) the largest of its kind. I've never been but it seems like the sort of thing I'd enjoy, I've wanted to go.

But reading up on the event, it seems there's controversy about who's allowed to attend. The womyn's festival aims to create "a space to mix and mingle with thousands of womyn in a village inspired by feminist values and built through a unique collective ingenuity."

Though they're not up front about it at their website, the consensus online seems to be they have a policy of excluding anyone but those who are born, lived their whole lives, and identify as a woman. The trans community & its allies are, understandably, not happy with the idea. What's a "woman"? Do you really have to be born with the right anatomy to be one? What's gender?

I learned about it from this post:
http://transhumanoid.wordpress.com/2011 ... -wbw-only/

And there's more about the controversy here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_W ... c_Festival

And here are conversations, apparently from festival organizers, from 2006:
http://eminism.org/michigan/20060822-mwmf.txt

What do you think? Is this a festival to skip, based on some underlying transphobic roots? Should a "women only space" exclude trans women? Is there value in a women's only space at all?

[HelixLuco]

Distinguishing between trans women and women who were born anatomically female seems odd to me, since in every case I've heard of trans women have identified themselves as female since early childhood. I suppose the fact that they may not have been perceived that way by their peers or subject to misogyny until later in their lives, when they were able to assert their femininity, might be grounds for the distinction, but i wouldn't think it would be a big enough deal to warrant their exclusion unless the event is principally for the public licking of old childhood wounds.

[Aum]

I would take it to the next level. How about honouring the feminine, which we all have in us, regardless of our physical sex?

The festival is not living up to its own virtues. What a shame.

[God is an Englishman]

August means that it's time for another Michigan Womyn's Music Festival (http://www.michfest.com/festival/index.htm) the largest of its kind. I've never been but it seems like the sort of thing I'd enjoy, I've wanted to go.

But reading up on the event, it seems there's controversy about who's allowed to attend. The womyn's festival aims to create "a space to mix and mingle with thousands of womyn in a village inspired by feminist values and built through a unique collective ingenuity."

Though they're not up front about it at their website, the consensus online seems to be they have a policy of excluding anyone but those who are born, lived their whole lives, and identify as a woman. The trans community & its allies are, understandably, not happy with the idea. What's a "woman"? Do you really have to be born with the right anatomy to be one? What's gender?

I learned about it from this post:
http://transhumanoid.wordpress.com/2011 ... -wbw-only/

And there's more about the controversy here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_W ... c_Festival

And here are conversations, apparently from festival organizers, from 2006:
http://eminism.org/michigan/20060822-mwmf.txt

What do you think? Is this a festival to skip, based on some underlying transphobic roots? Should a "women only space" exclude trans women? Is there value in a women's only space at all?

Why woman only? Would having men attend be benefitial? Seems like preaching to the converted to be honest. Some men could gain some valuable insight into feminist matters. It makes me laugh that people preach equality but when it comes down to it, they exclude people due to their sex. Seems like some people have a mass grudge against men. I ask you, if there was a "man only space" would there be mass controversy? Most likely.

Additional I thought feminist values are about equality?

"As feminists, we call upon the transwomen's community to help us
maintain womyn only space, including spaces created by and for
womyn-born womyn. As sisters in struggle, we call upon the
transwomen's community to meditate upon, recognize and respect the
differences in our shared experiences and our group identities even as
we stand shoulder to shoulder as women, and as members of the greater
queer community. We once again ask the transwomen's community to
recognize that the need for a separate womyn-born womyn space does not
stand at odds with recognizing the larger and beautiful diversity of
our shared community."

Trans-phobia right there.

If you ask me, events like this should see the axe.

[Sonic#]

What do you think? Is this a festival to skip, based on some underlying transphobic roots? Should a "women only space" exclude trans women? Is there value in a women's only space at all?

I'm not sure.

My gut feeling is that a "women only space" should not exclude trans women, but I assume that a person who identifies as a woman should be considered the same gender as a cis-woman. Their experiences are not identical though. I could see arguing, for instance, that there should be a trans-woman only space. I would have nothing against it. If that's so, then why does a cis-women gathering rub me the wrong way? Maybe it's because I prefer more inclusive definitions of gender, ones based in self-identification rather than external criteria. Cis-people wouldn't identify as trans, and wouldn't seek to enter such a space under that identity. Transwomen identify as women, and seek formal recognition as such. Excluding them disregards their wishes, their identification. I consider that discourteous. But I don't have a formal reason for that, partly because it's late and I haven't eaten dinner quite yet.

I believe that there is value in single-identity gatherings. They shouldn't be the only form of gathering, but sometimes, if one places a lot of stock in an identity, it can be reassuring to stick around people that share it. I also think that it's important to hang around other groups as well, and that for many of us, we lack experiences from outside our identity group. So it may well be comfortable, entertaining, and may well provide direction and purpose in advocating for particular issues, but it has inherent limits.

[Aum]

^ I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that transwomen have always been women, it has just taken them longer to come to terms with that, and they have had to work hard to make a transition.

That's what it means to be trans. You are born a woman in a man's body. The body is incidental... the spirit if you will is female.

I think this event is too hung up on sex and isn't fully grasping what gender means. Trans women are women with a different experience, but they ARE women. The event's statement is transphobic to a tee... it is not acknowledging that transwomen are the genuine article, just as the rest of society doesn't.

I personally would not support such an event on those grounds.

[lillerina]

I am opposed to the idea of womyn-born-womyn. I think, Sonic, that it perhaps rubs you the wrong way because of privilege. Cis women have cis privilege, while trans women lack it. A space that is 'for women' is open to cis, white, heterosexual women, but trans women, women of colour or queer women may feel that their intersection of concerns is unwelcome. Frequently those who have the most privilege will drown out the voices of others, partially because oppression trains one that ones voice is unwelcome or will not be heard. This is also part of the reason that I think that safe spaces can be really useful.

Women only spaces allow women a break from dealing with male privilege, allow for discussions that will not be colonised and shouted down by men, allow for a space where the question being asked is not "What do men think? how can we help men? how can we behave in a way that is acceptable to men?" but rather "What do we think? What do we need? How can we behave in a way that nurtures us instead of supporting patriarchy?"

There are spaces where I, as a white woman, am unwelcome to comment. There are spaces where I, as a woman who is not currently dealing with disability, am unwelcome to comment. There are spaces where I, as a woman who has never experienced financial hardship, am unwelcome to comment. I don't have a problem with any of this. Oppressed minorities carve out their spaces painfully and with great difficulty. We need these spaces to get a break from kyriarchy, to recentre ourselves, to focus on what is vital and important to us rather than educating ignorant newcomers who stomp on us with their boots of privilege and then spout the same questions and make the same demands that we've been dealing with our whole lives.

You want to be an ally to our cause? Excellent, welcome. But be prepared to educate yourself, be prepared to sit down and shut up instead of shouting down the people that you're supposedly wanting to support, be prepared to have things not be all about you. One of the best ways that you can be an ally and show that you're an ally is to stop demanding access to woman only spaces. Claiming to be an ally to feminism and then demanding that we open our safe spaces to you is like saying "Well I support gay rights, but I think that we should have a straight pride parade too." You're missing the point by a mile. We have these things because we need them, we fought hard to get them and maintain them, and if you want to take them away, you're not being an ally. You're just demonstrating that you're not ready to let go of your privilege yet.

[kelsa]

I believe that there is value in single-identity gatherings. They shouldn't be the only form of gathering, but sometimes, if one places a lot of stock in an identity, it can be reassuring to stick around people that share it. I also think that it's important to hang around other groups as well, and that for many of us, we lack experiences from outside our identity group. So it may well be comfortable, entertaining, and may well provide direction and purpose in advocating for particular issues, but it has inherent limits.

Seriously? I interact with straight males every day, Sonic. My daily experience is a gay woman living in a straight, patriarchal world. When I finally get a chance to be in a space with other gay women, my concern is not "oh noes, I might not have gotten my dose of straight maleness today!" it is "finally my identity and way of living is not constantly being questioned or othered."

YOU may lack experience from outside of your identity group as a white heterosexual male, but until you learn to stop speaking for minority experience, or ignoring minority experiences like you just so nicely did in your little paragraph up there, you won't gain experiences, because why share my experience with someone who is too busy deciding I lack just that?

[Sonic#]

^ I wasn't trying to set up a competition for experiences, nor was I trying to argue against single-identity spaces. I was pointing out that there are many forms of minority identity experience, so that minority groups have things that they could learn from other minority groups, especially when one group holds more privilege than another, but even in cases where experiences can roughly parallel one another. (Privileged groups have the most to learn.) I didn't say that meaning to imply that everyone should get their dose of straight man, since everyone gets too much of the dominant culture already; you have been the alterity under that identity group all your life, seeing and lacking its privileges.

Perhaps I was in error when I thought that single-identity groups gathering together too often risked ignorance of other perspectives and issues. That was my knee-jerk reaction, assuming that single-identity groups could be overdone without thinking further about it. I apologize for saying that without thought.

I know that I'm the most privileged in this discussion, and that I have the most to learn - I initially didn't comment on this thread because I felt that I was the least qualified to object or assent. But I did comment (stating first that I wasn't sure), because I realized I had things to learn and no one else was teaching. I spoke from what I've heard and read. I won't apologize for talking about minority experiences, because that's how I learn. I will only apologize for doing so incorrectly, or doing so in a capacity that implies that I know more than I do. And I apologize for the lack of shaming that allows me to be confidently wrong while others are encouraged into silence when they may be right. This isn't about me.

[God is an Englishman]

YOU may lack experience from outside of your identity group as a white heterosexual male,

My daily experience is a gay woman living in a straight, patriarchal world

Seems like a contradiction to me. You have at someone for having little experience, then universally accuse the world of being a patriarchy no matter what institution or wherever you go. Have you lived in the UK, Australia, France, Germany? If you answer no to a single one of these countries, how can you comment without experience as you yourself have pointed out. Have you experienced those societies and governments? It's illogical to universally apply situations in the USA or wherever you herald from to the rest of the world.

Women only spaces allow women a break from dealing with male privilege

Brilliant so can I have my male only pub nights back? It was banned because it was male only. The point being here is, you can't complain about something being taken from you, and take from others. What should be happening here, is a social gathering for all, to unite everyone to move into a brighter and more equal future.

How can we behave in a way that nurtures us instead of supporting patriarchy?

Why can't people just start thinking:

"How can we change the world so males and females live in harmony and acknowledge there is masculinity and femininity in both? How can we bring the two sexes together to create an equal and understanding world?

to focus on what is vital and important to us rather than educating ignorant newcomers who stomp on us with their boots of privilege and then spout the same questions and make the same demands that we've been dealing with our whole lives.

You want to change the world? Then get used to repeating yourself. By casting out these "ignorant newcomers" you only harm yourself and the goals you set out to achieve. You should always encourage people to more understanding of the situation. Separating yourself, and striking them down creates a conflict, and hostility, and a step in the negative direction.

You want to be an ally to our cause? Excellent, welcome. But be prepared to educate yourself, be prepared to sit down and shut up instead of shouting down the people that you're supposedly wanting to support, be prepared to have things not be all about you

Isn't you dictating what goes and what does not "all about you"?

Also, you previously said:

How can we behave in a way that nurtures us

Sounds a little like you have not considered others, ergo all about you.

You're just demonstrating that you're not ready to let go of your privilege yet.

I'd hardly call my life up until this date "privileged". You should get to know me before making a claim like that.

Kyriarchy

I know many men, who have been oppressed, and never got any privilege out of the situation. Take the ones who lose custody immediately in the Australian courts, and then see their child for about 4 hours a fortnight. My friend Matthew didn't get to see his kids for 3 months. Another mate Steve saw his little girl yesterday for the first time in a year. Good men, who lose out, so let me ask you, they're definitely oppressed, so what privilege did they obtain?

[spacefem]

This all sorta makes me think about Society of Women Engineers (SWE)... I'm an active member, and I get asked from time to time why there's not a Society of Men Engineers. My quick response: "Because that's just engineering, it's already a society of men, dude. go sit down!"

SWE allows men to join... mostly that's a good thing. But I was talking once to a college girl who complained that the men in her section are sometimes more than a little entitled about it, like they really want to be honored for being an ally for women's issues, expect to be complimented, fanned with palm leaves and fed grapes at SWE meetings. This isn't totally the norm, most guys in SWE are there to learn and support, but I've noticed it from time to time.

Which is why I think women-only spaces are important. Can we change the world with just women? No, of course not, we need everyone. But on occasion we need to filter out the noise and make sure we're on the same page.

If someone's questioning the need for a women's space, I worry the next step is to question the need for a women's movemement of any kind. We'll get into that "can't we all just work for general world improvement?" kinda question and you all know how I feel about those. The answer is yeah sure, have no focus, GOOD LUCK. You don't get anywhere if you never point your lens at any one thing.

[lillerina]

What is male privilege?
Do women have female privilege?
But patriarchy injures men too.

God is an Englishman, please check out the links above.

Nobody is saying that social justice should take place solely in women-only spaces. I am just saying that they are valuable in addition to more open spaces. Actually, no, I'm saying that for some of us, they are vital in addition to more open spaces. It sounds like you are not convinced of the necessity for feminism in the first place. If this is the case, I doubt that anyone will be able to convince you of the need for woman-only spaces. In addition, spaces that insist on the participants having a certain amount of knowledge are harder to derail with questions like this. Also, there's a whole bunch of 'should' going on in that post, and I don't recall anyone asking how non-feminists thought we should run our movement.

[monk]

Wow, I was totally staying out of this thread due to my thinking I would be the most priviledged poster. and for the record I am all for occasional closed group meetings be they all women all men all whatever, mostly because some of the more painful issues don't get brought up unless you're really comfortable with those you're surrounded with. The AA(alchololics anonymous) meetings hold to this standard, anyone is welcome to attend but they really frown on people speaking if they're addicted to something besides alcohol. because if you're an outsider, you just don't get it.

Seems like a contradiction to me. You have at someone for having little experience, then universally accuse the world of being a patriarchy no matter what institution or wherever you go. Have you lived in the UK, Australia, France, Germany? If you answer no to a single one of these countries, how can you comment without experience as you yourself have pointed out. Have you experienced those societies and governments? It's illogical to universally apply situations in the USA or wherever you herald from to the rest of the world.

We have multiple members on this forum from every country you mentioned except France, the people you are posting with in this thread are from two. Now France might be a mighty bastion of equality, but if it was we might have heard about it, you think?

Brilliant so can I have my male only pub nights back?

You find it hard to find a pub with just men in it? I would say you're lucky but I'm sure if a pub declared one day a week for all women,nobody would mind another for all men.

It was banned because it was male only.

was a womans night being offered too?

The point being here is, you can't complain about something being taken from you, and take from others. What should be happening here, is a social gathering for all, to unite everyone to move into a brighter and more equal future.

that's what this forum is for.

Why can't people just start thinking:

"How can we change the world so males and females live in harmony and acknowledge there is masculinity and femininity in both? How can we bring the two sexes together to create an equal and understanding world?

We are thinking, and to answer the question it's discussions like this and meetings like the OP talked about that help us progress in the direction we're very slowly heading.

You want to change the world? Then get used to repeating yourself. By casting out these "ignorant newcomers" you only harm yourself and the goals you set out to achieve. You should always encourage people to more understanding of the situation. Separating yourself, and striking them down creates a conflict, and hostility, and a step in the negative direction.

There's a time and place for certain things to take place, wouldn't you agree that it's smart to take a moment to formulate a strategy for a battle before just jumping in and starting the fight? Don't you think it's a good idea to take a moment and maybe come up with some strategies to defuse the most common objections to your goals before confronting those who hold those objections?, or do you think our best ideas all come "on the fly"? Perhaps taking a moment (or a weekend or two) to discuss how to deal with misogynistic assholes is better accomplished without having misogynistic asshole be able to attend? What do you think? Now I'm not saying all men are misogynistic assholes, but I think you would agree that 99% of the misogynistic assholes have one thing in common, a penis. So if you ban the penis you will likely ban the assholes too and if you're on good terms with anyone attending this event I'm sure they will more than happy to fill you in on what you may have missed.

I'd hardly call my life up until this date "privileged". You should get to know me before making a claim like that.

It's all about levels, the fact that your are a free person able to post on this board says you have a certain amount of privilege.

I know many men, who have been oppressed, and never got any privilege out of the situation. Take the ones who lose custody immediately in the Australian courts, and then see their child for about 4 hours a fortnight. My friend Matthew didn't get to see his kids for 3 months. Another mate Steve saw his little girl yesterday for the first time in a year. Good men, who lose out, so let me ask you, they're definitely oppressed, so what privilege did they obtain?

For every story of an oppressed man, I will find you five of men who have not only left their kids & their mothers behind emotionally but financially as well. As for Steve and Matthew, I don't know of any men who truly wanted to be in their kids lives who were prevented from doing so. So I would have some serious questions about their conduct that would prompt the court to deny regular visitation. The only time the courts here prevent parental visitation is if the man has been convicted of domestic violence or it has been proved to the courts that there is an apparent risk to having him be with the children due to chronic drug use and even then if the man pleads with the court he can usually get supervised visitation at least monthly.

yeah, I should probably just keep my mouth shut.

[Rainbow Dolphins]

The fact that men are also oppressed in our society for being men does not change or lessen the fact that women are oppressed in our society for being women. I mean, you can argue up and down about how men's sexual harrassment isn't taken seriously and how men almost never get custody of their children and etc etc, and while those are perfectly valid issues it just doesn't have any relevance to women's issues. Women's issues are still there. We can work on both simutaneously. Honestly, I think the whole point of women-only spaces is exactly so that people don't come up and say shit like you just said, Englishman; your post implies that you want to just forget about women's issues and focus on discrimination against men instead. Can you imagine how offensive that would be if someone came up and made those arguments in the middle of a meeting with the aim of working against discrimination against women? If there are no men present this becomes a lot less likely.

That said, I don't think women-only spaces are necessarily a good thing. I feel like anytime we focus on the difference between genders we are getting further away from equality. I think it is important to have spaces and groups of people dedicated to women's rights, but I think that focusing on our differences within those groups is a little counter-productive. I can definitely understand the arguments for them in this thread, though. I think because I have never personally experienced a major event of gender-based discrimination I might not feel the need for them as much as other women who have. So I guess what I'm saying is I wouldn't argue against women-only spaces but I would not personally attend or go out of my way to support them, either. (And especially not this one, as it clearly discriminates against transgendered women... and their statement implying that all cisgendered women are somehow a part of the queer community seems pretty offensive.)

[rowan]

their statement implying that all cisgendered women are somehow a part of the queer community

....
what?
I consider myself an ally (and I hope my friends do as well) but I know I do not have the experience of being queer.

I find it extremely wrong that they would band trans women from participating.

yeah, I should probably just keep my mouth shut.

No, thank you. We appreciate our allies too, even if we disagree sometimes.

[God is an Englishman]

God is an Englishman, please check out the links above.

For the sake of not trailing to far off the point, how about I PM you and we go over it?

It sounds like you are not convinced of the necessity for feminism in the first place

Because I challenge some of the ideas? I'm in it for a discussion, and to be honest, I support equal rights of both male and female, you've never seen the other work I've done, nor met me so I find that a poor assumption.

I doubt that anyone will be able to convince you of the need for woman-only spaces

I'm about to shock you soon then. Again don't assume so quickly.

SWE allows men to join... mostly that's a good thing. But I was talking once to a college girl who complained that the men in her section are sometimes more than a little entitled about it, like they really want to be honored for being an ally for women's issues, expect to be complimented, fanned with palm leaves and fed grapes at SWE meetings. This isn't totally the norm, most guys in SWE are there to learn and support, but I've noticed it from time to time.

And I'm going to admit I was like that in the beginning. I'm less like that now, but I see your point, and I guess that's a valid reason to have female only spaces.

Which is why I think women-only spaces are important. Can we change the world with just women? No, of course not, we need everyone. But on occasion we need to filter out the noise and make sure we're on the same page.

Ok see that seems a fair remark to me, and think about it I agree, sometimes it's nice just to be around your own "kind". I guess because you're all on the same page, you can enjoy the event without the possibility of conflict. Makes more sense now and I value your input and time to discuss that with me.

If someone's questioning the need for a women's space, I worry the next step is to question the need for a women's movemement of any kind.

Ok I can take that on the chin. I agree with your focus statement also, more is achieved by focusing on one value, good point.

The AA(alchololics anonymous) meetings hold to this standard, anyone is welcome to attend but they really frown on people speaking if they're addicted to something besides alcohol. because if you're an outsider, you just don't get it.

Thus the chances of conflict or confusion are higher yes I see now. So basically what you are saying is, outsiders with little knowledge to the issues that females face will come in and act oblivious to the fact that these issues occur. Got it, makes perfect sense to me.

We have multiple members on this forum from every country you mentioned except France, the people you are posting with in this thread are from two. Now France might be a mighty bastion of equality, but if it was we might have heard about it, you think?

My point was that someone had mentioned experience and went on to say a universal fact that applied to every nation as if they have lived in every nation. I've not lived in the US, so I can't comment, I can only comment on my experiences in the UK and Australia, so I never apply something universally, that was my point. However it sounds like the USA faces many issues for females, and from what people tell me, more so than here.

was a womans night being offered too?

Tuesday nights at the Bricklayers, so yes.

We are thinking, and to answer the question it's discussions like this and meetings like the OP talked about that help us progress in the direction we're very slowly heading.

I agree, discussions like this are generally very useful to get information.

There's a time and place for certain things to take place, wouldn't you agree that it's smart to take a moment to formulate a strategy for a battle before just jumping in and starting the fight? Don't you think it's a good idea to take a moment and maybe come up with some strategies to defuse the most common objections to your goals before confronting those who hold those objections?, or do you think our best ideas all come "on the fly"? Perhaps taking a moment (or a weekend or two) to discuss how to deal with misogynistic assholes is better accomplished without having misogynistic asshole be able to attend? What do you think? Now I'm not saying all men are misogynistic assholes, but I think you would agree that 99% of the misogynistic assholes have one thing in common, a penis. So if you ban the penis you will likely ban the assholes too and if you're on good terms with anyone attending this event I'm sure they will more than happy to fill you in on what you may have missed.

Monk you're very intelligent, I like talking with you. Indeed that seems more fair and reasonable to me. I cannot deny the fact that the overwhelming majority of female haters would be men. What you are saying is it's a safe guard from those haters getting in. Pose this though, if the person was a male, but trusted and an active member of female rights groups, would he be an exception? Or is that getting too tricky?

So I would have some serious questions about their conduct that would prompt the court to deny regular visitation.

Ask away, I'll answer your questions, I was at the court.

yeah, I should probably just keep my mouth shut.

No by all means thankyou for your input, it is valuable to my learning so I appreciate it.

The fact that men are also oppressed in our society for being men does not change or lessen the fact that women are oppressed in our society for being women. I mean, you can argue up and down about how men's sexual harrassment isn't taken seriously and how men almost never get custody of their children and etc etc, and while those are perfectly valid issues it just doesn't have any relevance to women's issues. Women's issues are still there.

I understand that. And I agree, I was trying to point that out in my post. I understand the need for female rights groups and more now the need for female only events.

Englishman; your post implies that you want to just forget about women's issues and focus on discrimination against men instead.

No it does not, that's how you've interpreted it. You've not met me, nor know who I am, so how can you say that. I was just labeling some of the issues men face, I could apply the same situation to others here also. I could kick and scream about people ignoring male rights, but I have not, I'm just putting it out there that it occurs to both sexes. Like I've said before, I try and tackle gender issues altogether, a possible fault of mine.

I think it is important to have spaces and groups of people dedicated to women's rights, but I think that focusing on our differences within those groups is a little counter-productive. I can definitely understand the arguments for them in this thread, though. I think because I have never personally experienced a major event of gender-based discrimination I might not feel the need for them as much as other women who have. So I guess what I'm saying is I wouldn't argue against women-only spaces but I would not personally attend or go out of my way to support them, either. (And especially not this one, as it clearly discriminates against transgendered women... and their statement implying that all cisgendered women are somehow a part of the queer community seems pretty offensive.)

Yes I am beginning to see the need for them also after a few people responding to my post.

I'm not someone who is stuck to his ideas, if a good response appears, I am willing to change my mindset, however I speak my mind.

I find it extremely wrong that they would band trans women from participating.

I also, however do they possibly see the person a threat because of their male past?

[Aum]

I just see it as an efficiency thing. I think most feminists are okay with educating people who don't know much, or even getting into heated arguments with men who seem to want to backlash. If that sort of thing is removed from the picture, a lot more can get done and there can be much higher level communication happening.

It's sort of like when you put only scientists together who know the same field, and keep away lay people. They don't have to spend time explaining base concepts before getting onto the core of the discussion. They just talk their lingo with one another.

If they are excluding trans people then maybe it's on the basis that trans women are sort of a hybrid of the two. They are women, but they are new to being women and its relationship to feminism. I don't think they are explicitly saying that they believe trans women aren't real women, are they?

I'm just theorizing though.

[God is an Englishman]

I just see it as an efficiency thing. I think most feminists are okay with educating people who don't know much, or even getting into heated arguments with men who seem to want to backlash. If that sort of thing is removed from the picture, a lot more can get done and there can be much higher level communication happening.

It's sort of like when you put only scientists together who know the same field, and keep away lay people. They don't have to spend time explaining base concepts before getting onto the core of the discussion. They just talk their lingo with one another.

Yes another well made point, your analogy with the scientists is a good one. I agree, that's fair enough.

If they are excluding trans people then maybe it's on the basis that trans women are sort of a hybrid of the two. They are women, but they are new to being women and its relationship to feminism. I don't think they are explicitly saying that they believe trans women aren't real women, are they?

I'd say their actions, being they will not allow them in for not being female, is implying that they do not believe they are female.

[Rainbow Dolphins]

I kind of feel like any transgendered person is going to understand about gender discrimination just as well as any woman, because they have looked at their own gender so closely and have undoubtably been subject to gender-based discrimination, or at the very least subject to living in a society that does not accept them. So I don't think there's any risk of them being unsympathetic to feminism's goals. And, really, anyone who has lived as a woman has the same chance as being subject to discrimination based on their being a woman, regardless if they have lived that way from birth or not. That's like saying a gay person isn't allowed in the GBLT club just because they didn't come out 'til college.

[letyourlifesing]

I've been avoiding this thread cause it seems like people's posts are getting picked apart and debated line by line. I'm often ok with this but sometimes I find it difficult when a topic has personal resonance.

Michigan Womyn's Festival is transphobic, massively so. MWF's policy is based on biological determinism, not a small amount of privilege, and a rather unhealthy obsession with genitalia.

MWF require people to have been A) born, B) raised and C) identify as a woman.

A) Being born woman (or girl)
What does this mean? That your external genitalia fit within certain conventions? There are plenty of people who are assigned female at birth who don't consider themselves to be female, and vice versa. Also, without wanting to co-opt intersex people, there is a gap between conventional male and conventional female external genitalia and babies are born into that gap all the time (what often gets done to them is disgraceful and something I recommend people check out).

B) Being raised woman (or girl)
I know someone whose first words were "Mama, I'm a girl". There are countless other transwomen who have insisted from their earliest memories that they are women, many of whom have been lucky enough to have been raised accordingly. MWF dismisses their experiences.

They also totally fail to get the principle of intersectionality. Not all women's experiences are the same. In fact, I challenge you to come up with one thing that all women have in common (other than the label 'woman'). Women of different races, classes, nationalities etc etc all have massively different upbringings.

C) Identifying as woman (or girl)
Basically, if someone identifies as a woman, then they are. If they don't identify as a woman, then they're not. It is not up to anyone else to define someone's gender identity for them. Transwomen aren't women who used to be men, they're women.

Oh, and as someone else said:

It makes me angry that some cis women who claim to be pro-trans and allies to trans women attend the festival. I’m sorry, but I just don’t get it. This move seems totally hypocritical to me. It is akin to a white gentile person golfing at a country club which is known to be racist and anti-Semitic. “Well of course I don’t support that. But the courses there are SO good to play at!” It is talking out of both sides of your mouth. Yes, I get that everything is not black and white, and that there are gray areas. But this is not one of them. Discrimination is discrimination is discrimination. Either you support us trans women, and our right to female space and full access to women’s, feminist and lesbian community, or you don’t.

(see http://transmeditations.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/michigan-womyn%E2%80%99s-music-festival-it%E2%80%99s-still-a-trans-misogynistic-hate-fest/)

[Rainbow Dolphins]

^You said everything I was trying to say but could not articulate! Of course all women have different experiences. A trans woman's experience does not differ any more from the general population of women than any other particular woman's experience.

[FactFinder]

I find the idea of any "women's space," especially in the context of a supposedly egalitarian belief, to be hypocritical. This is because you are intentionally excluding a party only because of their sex while claiming to be all-inclusive. This is one of the things which drives men away from feminism.

[Mordak]

i think anyone who identifies as female, regardless of what "bits" they have should be included, and welcomed to the sisterhood / blokehood who know htat feminism is crucial to development all over the world, regardless of creed or belief.

[Butterfly North]

Essentially I believe that if you hold a women-only event and then further specify the categories a person must or must not fall into to attend, you're pretty much saying that those within the banned categories are not women. In this case, that's wrong, so the policy is wrong too.

I find the idea of any "women's space," especially in the context of a supposedly egalitarian belief, to be hypocritical. This is because you are intentionally excluding a party only because of their sex while claiming to be all-inclusive. This is one of the things which drives men away from feminism.

Maybe read the thread and associated links for rebuttals to this point of view (which has already been discussed), then come back with responses to those.

[Distress Signal]

They're also asserting that transwomen have not had it as bad as "real" born women in their lives, and that they "enjoyed" male privilege up until they got an operation or started dressing as a woman or something... I'm not trans myself, but from what I've read and seen about the lives of trans women, I think that the opposite is true (not that it matters who's had it worse). This exclusion is just another one of the many exclusions and rejections of their own identity they face all their lives, and I think experiences of being sort of "between" the genders such as being treated like a man (which they're not), violently discouraged from being "girly" or "womanly" and feeling strongly otherwise gives them even more valuable insight into the politics of gender issues and feminism. Because lets face it, when a man is vehemently scorned and ridiculed by society, even to the point of widespread hate crimes and abuse just because they want to be, look like or do categorically "girly" things is a very potent side-effect of misogyny, probably exposed full force (without the veneer of patronizing). I do really sympathize with trans women and gay men, because I feel like they get the brunt of abuse from patriarchal, sexist societies for not conforming to strict gender roles. At least the feminine identities of born women are more or less accepted.