They are proud of their transphobia, aren't they?

can't possibly understand what it's like to grow up without it.

I have no respect at all for this position because being in a tiny minority whose brains were programmed in utero to be the opposite sex of their bodies doesn't confer privilege, at all, not even the minor privilege of growing up in the right body and having an idea of what following sex roles closely enough to blend in might be.

If those "womyn" can't recognize and respect that kind of pain and struggle, they're not any people I'd ever want to hang out with.

Which is kind of funny coming from some of the same people who insist "gender is a social construct!" Which is true, but only partly; gender roles are socially constructed, gender identity is to some significant extent innate (and probably related to things like the effects of differential levels of in utero testosterone exposure), and neither of them is necessarily related to biological sex.

which trans-women who still had male genitals wanted to use.

One of these trans-women has said she has no intention of ever transitioning. Is it fair to expect lesbians to want this person in their shower?

Funny thing: transgender people still need to shower, too. (And, fun fact about hormone replacement therapy: testosterone blockers and oestrogen make trans women actually getting erections a very infrequent if not imposible thing.) It's apparently a difficult concept for a lot of people, but sex is not gender is not sexuality.

to change "her" male body.

gives me any indication or reason to believe that that person and the trans woman referenced in the other post re communal showers are in fact one and the same. (This is an important and relevant bit of context, I'd think.)

precisely WHAT....it makes me think of OB-GYN....?

Does their discrimination about the body parts one was born with mean that trans MEN can turn up and say "What's yer beef? I was BORN a 'womyn' after all.....?"

In the 21st Century I must say I find this bigotry--and that's what it is-- a bit surprising--I thought we were over all that stuff at this point in time--at least, by "we," I mean people who at least affect a progressive demeanor. How long has it taken for trans people to pound home the message (and convince people of its validity) that the whole idea behind the gender surgery is to make the outside match the inside?

So really, when those trans women were born, they were women--only their outsides didn't match their insides.

Unless this is the Ronald Reagan branch of this particular festival, or something?

Seems pretty hateful and exclusionary to me.

still have male bodies and have no plans to ever physically transition. And they want to be everywhere the lesbian women are, including the showers.

It's not that difficult. Do they think the trans-women are going to attack them or something?

If the entrenched US Navy can handle women in submarines, surely this group can adjust.

into a place where the lesbians want privacy.

This is the opposite of the situation in the Navy, actually. In the Navy, the more "equal" or privileged gender is being required to accept the less "equal" or privileged gender into its midst.

In this situation, members of the less privileged gender have sought to make a place where they are not imposed upon by members of the privileged gender. And yet there are transwomen there who look exactly like the men that the lesbians are trying to get away from.

is someone who says "she" never intends to physically transition. At all. "She" prefers to retain her male body. I don't think she is typical of transwomen.

But you're right. I'll change the post.

If she's on hormone replacement therapy? She's already transitioned. Testosterone suppression and oestrogen affect the body in very significant ways, altering things like bone density, skin texture, fat distribution, sweating and body odour, sex drive...someone who's been on a regimen of HRT for three years has "transitioned". Vaginoplasty isn't a requirement (and isn't legally a requirement for legal gender transition including change of gender markers on legal documents in the UK and some US states).

She wants to be accepted as a woman but she wants to retain her male body, as is.

The conventional spelling of the name women reminds them of the word "mankind" and how it is supposed to include females and yet excludes them.

So they don't want to refer to themselves with a name that is rooted in the word "men."

The Anglo-Saxon gendered nouns were "wǽpman" and "wífman", both kinds of "man" (ie, "person&quot .

You know, it's like a candy bar...you break off a chunk and share...!

"Here, you guys can have this -men chunk..."

Sounds like a lotta hate going on, there. Real shame, that.

Of course, even now we still don't have an equal rights amendment, and at least one Supreme Court Justice (Scalia) has said that equal protection laws don't apply to women.

But those radical feminist lesbians shouldn't be angry, right? It's just so rude.

I still think that being exclusionary is, well, stupid and bigoted. Oh, and rude, too.

And I doubt that Justice Scalia is a (trans or otherwise) woman, either...! It's not like he's going to try to horn in on the party with his wrongheaded opinions.

Last time I checked, two wrongs just don't make a right. Lashing out at people who were "born that way" because Justice Scalia is an asshole and we don't have an ERA is well...illogical. At best. And discriminatory.

It basically asserts certain women aren't "real" women because of parts. The quote provided pretty much sums up the philosophy some women aren't real women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Womyn's_Music_Festival

After artists were once again requested to boycott festival in 2014, Vogel issued another statement on the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival's Facebook on May 9 to address what she called the "rampant inaccuracies in social media" regarding the festival. In it, she noted:

We have said that this space, for this week, is intended to be for womyn who were born female, raised as girls and who continue to identify as womyn. This is an intention for the spirit of our gathering, rather than the focus of the festival. It is not a policy, or a ban on anyone. We do not “restrict festival attendance to cisgendered womyn, prohibiting trans women” as was recently claimed in several Advocate articles. We do not and will not question anyone’s gender. Rather, we trust the greater queer community to respect this intention, leaving the onus on each individual to choose whether or how to respect it. Ours is a fundamental and respectful feminist statement about who this gathering is intended for, and if some cannot hear this without translating that into a “policy”, “ban” or a “prohibition”, this speaks to a deep-seated failure to think outside of structures of control that inform and guide the patriarchal world. Trans womyn and transmen have always attended this gathering. Some attend wanting to change the intention, while others feel the intention includes them. Deciding how the festival’s intention applies to each person is not what we’re about. Defining the intention of the gathering for ourselves is vital. Being born female in this culture has meaning, it is an authentic experience, one that has actual lived consequences. These experiences provide important context to the fabric of our lives, context that is chronically missing from the conversation about the very few autonomous spaces created for females. This erasure is particularly mindboggling in a week when 276 girls were kidnapped and sold into sex slavery solely because they were female. This is the world females live in.[29]

It is accusatory all the while complaining 'we won't prevent them from attending, but they know they are wrong if they do!' So they may not be "banning" any attendance, but they are still promoting the same transphobic bullshit, "some women aren't real women!" Talk about splitting hairs.

"Lisa Vogul hasn’t changed her stance saying that trans women shouldn’t come."

You are quoting a transphobic cesspool. Did these people attend? I have no idea, but what I can see is a very transphobic post making claims. If people are there to disrupt, then they should be dealt with accordingly, but to STEREOTYPE all transgender women in such a manner is BIGOTRY!

to be accepted at Womyn's fest.

One attended a workshop (that included at least one victim of sexual violence) and described how "she" masturbated with her penis and a cock ring.

Does it really seem unreasonable that the lesbians would object to that?

I already said if someone is not adhering to the program, then that is a reason to dismiss THAT person, it is NOT an EXCUSE to label ALL people like that person with the same "reason to exclude." It is nothing but BIGOTRY.

The list of "transgressions" supposedly committed (excuse the pun) is really something else, too.

It's like

#1: ~ sighting
#2: ~ sighting
#3: ~ sighting
#4: ~ sighting
#5: at solo sex workshop, presumably where people were talking about solo sex, current or former possessor of ~ also described solo sex, but described solo sex involving a ~, which while not strictly a ~ sighting, implies the description of a ~.
#6: women who do not have ~es are upset at being confused with women who do have them, when being interrogated about ~ status by others committed to preventing ~es from attending the gathering
#7: ~ sighting
#8: trans individual makes presence known via graffiti in bathroom
#9: trans individual demonstrates why trans individuals should not be welcome at event by removing bigoted t-shit from clothesline that says trans individuals are not welcome at event
#10: ~ sighting

Etc.

No, no hate on display.

Since it refers to trans women as "men". (Trans women who from their photos have very clearly transitioned.)

One does however get a pretty clear idea of where they're coming from.

It's got the same flavor as saying "If you're 'passing' as a caucasian, we won't ask you about your race...but this is a white's only club, and minorities aren't supposed to golf here!"

I am of the view that trans people ARE "born" into the gender they say they are--it's just that their business ends don't match THEIR "intentions." That's not their fault, they didn't ask to be "born that way."

I think they need empathy, not exclusion.

...kind of gives the gender-agenda away. Since the Festival has always had a spiritual component (if I understand correctly from reading the catalog long ago) I hope the organizers and participants can look deeply into their souls and find sisterhood with transgender women.

If feminism is about trying to tear down the social forces/barriers that divide and define the rules and roles of each gender, then these "womyn" seem to be going against that philosophy. They seem to be perpetuating the idea that there is and should be a social division between the sexes. They seem to be supporting a 'men vs women' type of mentality....a "separate but equal" type of thinking.

I've seen how some of them write on the internet. When they talk about transgenderism, it is very similar to the way the far-right talks about homosexuality. They see it as transexuals choosing their gender. Sort of like when the far-right thinks gays are choosing their orientation. And it has that radical/bigoted tone to the rhetoric.

when it comes to gender identity they're like right wingers. Men are men and women are women to them transgendered women are not real women. Which is ironic because feminism historically sees gender as social construct.

And the irony is that I agree with them in principle- my gender's vast majority embarrass me on most days. That said, exclusion and hate/fear make people smaller, not bigger, inside.

"My feminism will be intersectional or it will be bullshit."