![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
skull_bearervia https://ift.tt/2tImdbh
mojrim:
skull-bearer:
mojrim:
skull-bearer:
mojrim:
soprie:
transprophetess:
everybody just latched onto “terf = enemy” and then never again put any thought into why that is, and what transmisogyny is, so they just make a big deal out of being an anti-terf instead of understanding the problem in the first place
Some stuff to know:
TERF - Trans Excluding/Erasing Radical Feminist:
Someone who believes that trans women are not women and don’t belong in women’s spaces. They believe that trans women are predatory cis men pretending to be women in order to have sex with lesbians.
SWERF - Sex Worker Excluding/Erasing Radical Feminist:
Someone who believes that sex workers (those who make money from pornography or prostitution) are not feminist / not valuable / should not be welcome in feminist / women’s spaces. They believe that women participating in pornography or prostitution are upholding patriarchy and damaging the feminist movement.
Truscum aka transmedicalists:
Someone who believes that you must experience body dysphoria in order to be trans. They also tend to be attached to the gender binary and erase or exclude anyone who does not conform to a male / female gender identity (genderfluid, non-binary, agender, bi-gender, etc)
Ace exclusionists:
Someone who believes that ace-spectrum people are not inherently LGBTQ+ and do not belong in LGBTQ+ spaces. They see ace people as secretly cis/straight invaders and leeches to LGBTQ+ programs and resources. They also tend to believe that the definition of LGBTQ+ centres around those who experience discrimination for same-sex attraction, and therefore ace folk do not belong.
Trans women are women.
Non-medical trnas people are trans.
Ace people are LGBTQIA+.
Know why we do not welcome these people.
Okay, but I’ve never talked to a radfem that hated on sex workers. They regard sex work as inherently demeaning and women who do it as victims, not enemies.
Yeah, and sex workers hate that attitude and find it backwards and demeaning, and they hate that SWERFs oppose important legislation that could help them stay safe because their precious morals forbids it.
That takes us down quite a rabbit hole, really. Radfems point to statistics which show that trafficking increases in countries that legalize prostitution, that the overwhelming majority of sex workers are exploited victims who are trapped, and that no one grows up dreaming of sex work as a career.
I don’t actually have solid position on this. My point is that (a) radfems don’t hate sex workers and (b) it’s possible to have different answers to the same question in good faith.
It would help if they, y’know, listened to sex workers who explain that legalising prostitution makes them safer. How about we make our position what the people actually affected by this are saying, instead of a bunch of people to who it is only theoretical?
It doesn’t matter how they feel about sex workers. I’m sure most people working in gay conversion therapy don’t hate gay people, they just think they they are doing is wrong. You can have the best intentions but still hurt people, and most sex workers are pretty clear SWERFs are hurting them. The SWERFs don’t care.
There’s an ideological element to this that you are ignoring: To a radfem all sex work is men using the power imbalance to exploit women for sex, making those women victims to slightly varying degrees. Given the actual history of prostitution and pronography it’s hard to argue against that position. There are exceptions, to be sure, but we cannot examine a system based on the lives and opinions of its more privileged participants.
The radfems I’ve known don’t consider this theoretical as some have come from lives of sexual exploitation and most know someone who has. Most prostitutes in the US have no idea what this argument is much less believe that radfems are hurting them, they are simply trying to avoid getting hurt or killed by either their customers or their pimps. The very tiny minority of sex workers who have a voice are generally the more privileged members who either like the work or are at least comfortable with it.
The radfem answer to this isn’t to punish the prostitute but the pimp and the john as criminal sex offenders facing serious prison time and a life on registry. The prostitutes themselves would be sheltered, offered counseling and drug rehab, and convinced to turn state’s evidence against the aforementioned pimps and johns. Thing is, they are a tiny minority of the american polity and one nobody is listening to. This both means that their program won’t be enacted and also that they are not doing any material harm to sex workers generally - they simply don’t have the power.
This kind of petty infighting on the left is always amazing to me, really. You share a common enemy that is far more powerful and far more inimical to all. In this case it’s the religious voters who view sex work as a mortal sin and want women punished for “selling their virtue.” You might notice those voters are generally mute on punishing the pimp and the john because, surprise, they are pro-patriarchal bible thumpers who see female sexuality as the root of all evil.
As I’ve said, I have no dog in this fight, but it seems you and the radfems have a great deal more in common than not and would be better off teaming up to at least decriminalize the prostitute herself if not the guys involved. You can part company after that but right now you’re expending an inordinate amount energy fighting shadows.
Okay, since you’re clearing off the fucking pier let’s break this down for everyone else in the audience.
Look at my last point. This chucklenipple’s rebuttal to my pointing out that we should listen to what sex workers say will keep them safe is ‘bhut muh… muh… MUH IDEOLOGY!’
They are actually, seriously making the point that a SWERF’s ideology is more important that a sex worker’s safety.
This is a perfect example of what the first OP was pointing out- that all of this radfem bullshit has its roots in ideological purity. It’s the elevation of radical feminist dogma to such a pedestal that any idea which may not fit 100% within its constraints is immediately dismissed or attacked.
The result of which that this very decriminalsation of sex work which you whine we should all be ‘working towards’ is exactly what radfems are so set against. They will not allow the merest inch of compromise with what they see as an innately evil system.
If you think it’s okay to maintain moral virtue at the expense of people getting hurt. You’re a SWERF, you’re a TERF, and you just got banned, boyo.
mojrim:
skull-bearer:
mojrim:
skull-bearer:
mojrim:
soprie:
transprophetess:
everybody just latched onto “terf = enemy” and then never again put any thought into why that is, and what transmisogyny is, so they just make a big deal out of being an anti-terf instead of understanding the problem in the first place
Some stuff to know:
TERF - Trans Excluding/Erasing Radical Feminist:
Someone who believes that trans women are not women and don’t belong in women’s spaces. They believe that trans women are predatory cis men pretending to be women in order to have sex with lesbians.
SWERF - Sex Worker Excluding/Erasing Radical Feminist:
Someone who believes that sex workers (those who make money from pornography or prostitution) are not feminist / not valuable / should not be welcome in feminist / women’s spaces. They believe that women participating in pornography or prostitution are upholding patriarchy and damaging the feminist movement.
Truscum aka transmedicalists:
Someone who believes that you must experience body dysphoria in order to be trans. They also tend to be attached to the gender binary and erase or exclude anyone who does not conform to a male / female gender identity (genderfluid, non-binary, agender, bi-gender, etc)
Ace exclusionists:
Someone who believes that ace-spectrum people are not inherently LGBTQ+ and do not belong in LGBTQ+ spaces. They see ace people as secretly cis/straight invaders and leeches to LGBTQ+ programs and resources. They also tend to believe that the definition of LGBTQ+ centres around those who experience discrimination for same-sex attraction, and therefore ace folk do not belong.
Trans women are women.
Non-medical trnas people are trans.
Ace people are LGBTQIA+.
Know why we do not welcome these people.
Okay, but I’ve never talked to a radfem that hated on sex workers. They regard sex work as inherently demeaning and women who do it as victims, not enemies.
Yeah, and sex workers hate that attitude and find it backwards and demeaning, and they hate that SWERFs oppose important legislation that could help them stay safe because their precious morals forbids it.
That takes us down quite a rabbit hole, really. Radfems point to statistics which show that trafficking increases in countries that legalize prostitution, that the overwhelming majority of sex workers are exploited victims who are trapped, and that no one grows up dreaming of sex work as a career.
I don’t actually have solid position on this. My point is that (a) radfems don’t hate sex workers and (b) it’s possible to have different answers to the same question in good faith.
It would help if they, y’know, listened to sex workers who explain that legalising prostitution makes them safer. How about we make our position what the people actually affected by this are saying, instead of a bunch of people to who it is only theoretical?
It doesn’t matter how they feel about sex workers. I’m sure most people working in gay conversion therapy don’t hate gay people, they just think they they are doing is wrong. You can have the best intentions but still hurt people, and most sex workers are pretty clear SWERFs are hurting them. The SWERFs don’t care.
There’s an ideological element to this that you are ignoring: To a radfem all sex work is men using the power imbalance to exploit women for sex, making those women victims to slightly varying degrees. Given the actual history of prostitution and pronography it’s hard to argue against that position. There are exceptions, to be sure, but we cannot examine a system based on the lives and opinions of its more privileged participants.
The radfems I’ve known don’t consider this theoretical as some have come from lives of sexual exploitation and most know someone who has. Most prostitutes in the US have no idea what this argument is much less believe that radfems are hurting them, they are simply trying to avoid getting hurt or killed by either their customers or their pimps. The very tiny minority of sex workers who have a voice are generally the more privileged members who either like the work or are at least comfortable with it.
The radfem answer to this isn’t to punish the prostitute but the pimp and the john as criminal sex offenders facing serious prison time and a life on registry. The prostitutes themselves would be sheltered, offered counseling and drug rehab, and convinced to turn state’s evidence against the aforementioned pimps and johns. Thing is, they are a tiny minority of the american polity and one nobody is listening to. This both means that their program won’t be enacted and also that they are not doing any material harm to sex workers generally - they simply don’t have the power.
This kind of petty infighting on the left is always amazing to me, really. You share a common enemy that is far more powerful and far more inimical to all. In this case it’s the religious voters who view sex work as a mortal sin and want women punished for “selling their virtue.” You might notice those voters are generally mute on punishing the pimp and the john because, surprise, they are pro-patriarchal bible thumpers who see female sexuality as the root of all evil.
As I’ve said, I have no dog in this fight, but it seems you and the radfems have a great deal more in common than not and would be better off teaming up to at least decriminalize the prostitute herself if not the guys involved. You can part company after that but right now you’re expending an inordinate amount energy fighting shadows.
Okay, since you’re clearing off the fucking pier let’s break this down for everyone else in the audience.
Look at my last point. This chucklenipple’s rebuttal to my pointing out that we should listen to what sex workers say will keep them safe is ‘bhut muh… muh… MUH IDEOLOGY!’
They are actually, seriously making the point that a SWERF’s ideology is more important that a sex worker’s safety.
This is a perfect example of what the first OP was pointing out- that all of this radfem bullshit has its roots in ideological purity. It’s the elevation of radical feminist dogma to such a pedestal that any idea which may not fit 100% within its constraints is immediately dismissed or attacked.
The result of which that this very decriminalsation of sex work which you whine we should all be ‘working towards’ is exactly what radfems are so set against. They will not allow the merest inch of compromise with what they see as an innately evil system.
If you think it’s okay to maintain moral virtue at the expense of people getting hurt. You’re a SWERF, you’re a TERF, and you just got banned, boyo.