[ SECRET POST #4106 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4106 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #588.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Talking about uteruses and vaginas is fine. The problem comes when you assert that those things are universally identical with being a woman. And sure, some of the discourse and criticism around that is perhaps more pointed than it needs to be, and a lot of people who are doing that stuff really aren't thinking about the issue at all one way or another.

But, like, at the end of the day, I don't think that there is a way to actually assert that all women have vaginas without being trans-exclusionary. It's a fundamental contradiction. There is a real and inescapable sense in which saying that all women have vaginas is trans-exclusionary, whether or not people intentionally mean it that way. I don't think you can really choose both sides on that one - either trans women are women, or they're not. No amount of talking around the issue is going to alter that.

And I really don't think that any part of this critique is about shaming women for their biology and I'm not sure where that idea even comes from.

[(Anonymous)]

Are you serious? You can't see the cis woman biology shaming inherent in derailing every conversation about reproductive rights or periods or breastfeeding by jumping in and claiming that calling these things women's rights issues makes you trans-exclusionary? There is a vocal segment of the trans community that likes to dismiss these issues as unimportant because they don't affect them, and unfortunately they use the same language that women hear all the time from politicians who don't think they should have to support some pregnant woman's prenatal care because after all, they can't get pregnant.

So, here's the thing -- if you only care about the parts of women's rights that affect you directly, then you don't care about women's rights. You care about your rights. That doesn't make you less of a woman, but it makes you less of a person.

[(Anonymous)]

And I really don't think that any part of this critique is about shaming women for their biology

That's exactly what it is though? They're now unable to talk about issues that intrinsically only affect those who have these biological traits without getting shouted down by the women who don't share these biological traits. It's no different than the centuries of bullshit and control cis male politicians have had over women's biology. I think it's bullshit that in women-centric circles, you can't even mention vaginas or periods or reproductive rights without getting demonized for not including women with penises.