By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Jaicee said:

Since we're hearing these criticisms of gender critical feminists, I thought it might be useful to also include a short speech by a noted gender critical feminist (a more principled and weathered one than J.K. Rowling I mean) as well so that we might actually get a perspective from a veteran of this movement on their own terms. To that end, below you will find a speech by Meghan Murphy, who owns the Feminist Current web site you may have noticed I link to sometimes. It was given at the Toronto Public Library late last year amidst large demonstrations outside, mostly by trans activists disingenuously associating her with, of all things, the Trump border wall and "fascism" and "genocide" and other assorted hysterical claims. The trans activists had called upon the library to cancel the event because of who the speaker was. (It's a movement that I think you'll find struggles to tolerate concepts like free speech, dissenting views, and dialogue.) Every ticket sold. The video includes only the speech itself (not the Q&A that followed and such), which keeps it just under half an hour. I picked this one because I've found it to be Murphy's best and most succinct talk on the subject of gender identity. Without further adieu

"According to the trans movement, we are not women, we are cis-women, which apparently means we identify as the gender assigned to us at birth. This is insulting. I am not a 'woman' because I identity with femininity." *hold for applause*

This seems to be a pretty core part of the thesis of "gender critical" feminism, and it feels to me like a huge misunderstanding of what that statement actually means. I understand the perspective of this from an "abolish gender" perspective, however, I think we come to an issue when we talk about identifying and what that means. To "identify" as a woman, is not to embrace femininity but simply to speak about how you think about and name yourself. If you see yourself as a male and you prefer male pronouns, that generally means you identify as male. It does not say anything about your relationship with masculinity.

That is because gender identity and gender expression are not interlocked. We can identify as a female while expressing as masculine, and that is entirely valid.

It seems like the "gender critical" philosophy completely misses this point and fails to see how this philosophy largely aligns with the feminist critiques of the concept of "gender". It is allowing a full, independent range of expression, no matter how you identify. It is a means of stating that your identity as a "woman" does not define who you can be.

Saying "I am not cis" because you don't align with all of the stereotypes of femininity is an embrace of this ignorance, and it seems to play into those same masculine/feminine stereotypes that you are criticizing, but this time attaching them to trans individuals. A masculine trans woman is just as valid as a feminine trans woman. It isn't how you express your gender that defines your identity. This shouldn't be a difficult concept for those familiar with feminist theory, so I don't understand the roadblocks. A lot of trans individuals express as agender.

So much of "gender critical" theory is based on not understanding trans theory and trans individuals and this video made that abundantly clear.

And so much of her video isn't devoted to "gender critical" ideas, but instead to complaining about mistreatment. Those complaints may very well be valid. I'm sure that she was treated poorly by some people and that is obviously abhorrent, but it does not speak to the strength of your philosophy to point that out. Others being rude to you and mistreating you, doesn't make you more right.

EDIT: By the way, there's more that I want to say about the feeling of safety, but I'm not sure when I am going to get around to it.

Last edited by sundin13 - on 22 June 2020