#radfems please touch
i used to wish i were a man until i realized that not my body but the way i was treated because of it was to blame.
only in the system of oppression that is male supremacy does the oppressor actually invadeandcolonize the interior of the body of the oppressed. it is specifically through sexuality that the fundamental oppression, that of men over women, is maintained. penetration is an act of great symbolic significance. it is not just rape which serves this function but every act of penetration, even that which is euphemistically described as “making love”. every man knows that a fucked woman is a woman under the control of men, whose body is open to men, a woman who is tamed and broken in. for a man, it is an act of power and mastery which makes him stronger, not just over one woman but over all women.
can terfs be normal for once in their lives like it is not hard to calm down. relax. trans a gender. respect pronouns. don’t get women killed. it is very easy you can trust me on this i have been doing it for as long as i’ve been alive
Well, it was only a matter of time. On May 4th our minister of Law introduced a bill on behalf of our minister of Emancipation (the irony is painful), proposing to simply the procedure to change the gender on your birth certificate. A declaration by a licensed doctor or psychologist will no longer be required. Instead, someone will be able to file in writing to have their legal sex changed. Four to twelve weeks later they will receive confirmation.
Furthermore, the minimum age requirement of 16 years to have your gender legally changed will be dropped as well. Children younger than 16 will be able to change their gender if they get permission from a judge.
The impact of this on women’s rights, safety and well-being has not been considered. At all. The Council of State reviewed the proposed bill and only requested clarification on the justification for dropping the age requirement, and whether the weight of the decision for the individual is properly safeguarded when a professional no longer has to be involved.
Answer to 1: sometimes children under 16 are clear about their “gender” being “set”, so not being able to have their birth certificate changed yet is “difficult.
Answer to 2: this decision is up to the individual and the government should be involved as little as possible. Right of self-determination is the most important.The Council of State agreed to these “justifications” and is now fine with this bill, which will now be debated in the House of Representatives. Again: no consideration at all for the impact on women. Maybe because women have already lost their legal protection to begin with. Unlike the U.K. and the U.S., the Netherlands do not list sex as a protected characteristic. Instead they’ve used gender (geslacht), and a few years ago they changed the law to add that gender identity and gender expression fall under the protected category of gender. So excluding a man with a womanly identity, or even expression, from female-only spaces is already forbidden.
@girlsfrommars@dutchradfem Sorry about the blunt @, but since you’re one of the few Dutch radfems on here, I thought you might want to know this. The proposed bill can be found here. I fear there is very little hope stopping this. So far the Netherlands ignore the more critical stances that have risen up in the UK and Sweden. And unlike the UK, we do not have any feminist organizations that haven’t been hijacked by liberal feminism and trans activism, except for Voorzijand they are very small.
Update:because Sander Dekker, our (still under resignation, by the way) minister for Law Protection is a useless ass, this bill is still underway without any precautions taken to protect the safety and dignity of women and girls.
All concerns about the potential for abuse have been hand waved away with “We Don’t Think That Will Happen”. Despite the fact that those exact things are already happening abroad. Cases from the UK, Canada and the USA are conveniently ignored. Instead, Dekker defers to an investigation into self-ID in Argentina, Norway, Ireland and Malta, which concluded that Nothing Ever Happened. If anyone does have examples about trans abuse in those countries, I would love to hear them. I am aware of the number of female rapists in Norway increasing with 300% between 2015 and 2017, with self-ID being introduced in 2016, and of Barbie Kardashian in Ireland. Is there anything else known?
Apparently there was another vote on whether to mark this bill as “controversial” and postpone it, because the Netherlands still do not have a new government after elections early this year. But of course legalizing voyeurism and exhibitionism in women’s changing rooms and making all sex-based statistics unreliable and meaningless is still not deemed controversial, so on we go. The bill is now scheduled to be discussed in the House of Representatives on the 24th of January.
@womenfrommarsfyi.
Well, it was only a matter of time. On May 4th our minister of Law introduced a bill on behalf of our minister of Emancipation (the irony is painful), proposing to simply the procedure to change the gender on your birth certificate. A declaration by a licensed doctor or psychologist will no longer be required. Instead, someone will be able to file in writing to have their legal sex changed. Four to twelve weeks later they will receive confirmation.
Furthermore, the minimum age requirement of 16 years to have your gender legally changed will be dropped as well. Children younger than 16 will be able to change their gender if they get permission from a judge.
The impact of this on women’s rights, safety and well-being has not been considered. At all. The Council of State reviewed the proposed bill and only requested clarification on the justification for dropping the age requirement, and whether the weight of the decision for the individual is properly safeguarded when a professional no longer has to be involved.
Answer to 1: sometimes children under 16 are clear about their “gender” being “set”, so not being able to have their birth certificate changed yet is “difficult.
Answer to 2: this decision is up to the individual and the government should be involved as little as possible. Right of self-determination is the most important.The Council of State agreed to these “justifications” and is now fine with this bill, which will now be debated in the House of Representatives. Again: no consideration at all for the impact on women. Maybe because women have already lost their legal protection to begin with. Unlike the U.K. and the U.S., the Netherlands do not list sex as a protected characteristic. Instead they’ve used gender (geslacht), and a few years ago they changed the law to add that gender identity and gender expression fall under the protected category of gender. So excluding a man with a womanly identity, or even expression, from female-only spaces is already forbidden.
@girlsfrommars@dutchradfem Sorry about the blunt @, but since you’re one of the few Dutch radfems on here, I thought you might want to know this. The proposed bill can be found here. I fear there is very little hope stopping this. So far the Netherlands ignore the more critical stances that have risen up in the UK and Sweden. And unlike the UK, we do not have any feminist organizations that haven’t been hijacked by liberal feminism and trans activism, except for Voorzijand they are very small.
I had no idea this was even going on because all the political news is about Corona virus. I am lost for words honestly. I am a law student but we were always taught that ‘’geslacht’’ legally speaking referred to sex. It’s in article 1 of the Constitution. So we’re supposed to believe this refers to ‘’gender identity’’ even though other grounds of discrimination (sexual orientation, disability) are not even mentioned explicitly but are covered implicitly? I have heard of Voorzij and I am following them on Twitter but Jesus Christ I had no idea the situation was this urgent
Just like everywhere else, all this legislation is ushered through pretty quietly. Late last year they also came with a proposal to add sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression and gender characteristics (as in intersex) as protected characteristics against hate speech and group defamation, while gender/sex remains excluded. So by that logic an offensive statement about TIMs will become punishable hate speech while that same statement about women will not.
You can see here (Arikel 1, punt 2) that gender identity and expression are listed as being encompassed by the category gender. I believe they were added in 2018. By the way, hetero- and homosexual orientation have recently been added too.
Based on this, the College voor de Rechten van de Mens has already ruled twice in favor of TIMs: a women-only gym was not allowed to ban a TIM with penis from becoming a member, and a TIM at school could not be denied access to the women’s bathrooms, despite being offered a neutral single stall and female students’ complaints that they felt uncomfortable with his presence.
I know the College voor de Rechten van de Mens does not offer any binding decisions but their decisions are held in high regard by other institutions, including government institutions, so this quite worrying. A human rights court can consider the ‘’rights’’ of men but not the rights of women
I don’t even know what ‘’gender expression’’ is supposed to be mean. Firing a man because he’s feminine would already be illegal considering it counts as sexism. So you’re allowed to fire him, but only if he ‘’identifies’’ as male?
I had no idea the woke gender ideology had set foot here as well, I’d always assumed it wasn’t as bad as in Canada or something. The again, I think the government recently apologised to the transgender community because back in the day they’d require some form of surgery to be able to change your legal gender, which transgenders perceive as ‘’forced sterilisation’’ (lmao as if)
Exactly, and with the explicit inclusion of gender identity and expression as aspects of “geslacht” in the Constitution, the odds don’t seem too great of a real court ruling in women’s favor to exclude men. A woman contacted the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science about the ruling on the women’s toilets in school and asked whether female students still had a right to single-sex facilities in schools. The answer was no, because excluding “trans women” from women’s facilities is now discrimination. The representative even went so far as to say that maybe it would “take some getting used to to encountering women with “manly” characteristics” in these spaces. And dragged up claims about trans people’s increased risk of suffering violence as justification. Again: safety was not a concern for this trans student, as he was offered the use of a single stall, but that was not good enough for him. It were the female students who felt uncomfortable and unsafe, but they will just have to suck it up and get used to it.
They’re hardly defining those terms. The proposed hate speech has the same issue with the terms not being properly defined. Plus in that one they want to use “seksuele gerichtheid” as protected characteristic instead of heterosexual and homosexual orientation. They claim that that Dutch term is a more accurate translation of the more commonly used “sexual orientation” in other languages, but somehow this Dutch phrasing seems much more open to include all manners of fetishes and kinks. They’re aware of some of the danger in that, because they did add the restriction that the sexual orientation in question should not be illegal, so they don’t inadvertently end up making pedophilia and bestiality protected. But no definition beyond that, probably so they won’t exclude any of the ever-growing number of sexual orientations. I also wonder whether gender expression can be used to say that a man wearing makeup or something has a “womanly” gender expression and should have access to women’s facilities on those grounds. I surely hope that kind of reasoning is still a bridge too far.
We might not be quite up to Canada’s level yet but we’re sure following its shiny example. Plans to ban conversion therapy, under which they include therapy for trans people to help them come to terms with their biological sex, are in the works as well, so it looks like it won’t be long until we have the full set. Almost every political party supports all of this. Only the SGP takes a firm stance against it, and occasionally ChristenUnie and Forum voor Democratie raise more critical questions too. Obviously those first two parties repel non-religious/non-christian voters and the latter repels for… different reasons. :’) Everything more on the Left and everything more progressive is on board and refuses to even engage in conversation about this.
Yup, you got that right. Not only did the government apologize for this “forced sterilisation”, I believe they also suggested people who underwent these surgeries might receive financial compensation. It’s wild. Being able to legally change your gender used to be a sort of accommodation for people who underwent these surgeries. Now things have gotten switched around and changing legal gender has become a goal in itself, and the surgeries a “mandatory” barrier to that goal.
Update on the decision on June 9th: they’ve declared the issue “not controversial”, so they will go ahead and discuss the matter soon, regardless of progress (or lack thereof) in government formation.
@girlsfrommars Looks like you have till 8th of July to send input.
Well, it was only a matter of time. On May 4th our minister of Law introduced a bill on behalf of our minister of Emancipation (the irony is painful), proposing to simply the procedure to change the gender on your birth certificate. A declaration by a licensed doctor or psychologist will no longer be required. Instead, someone will be able to file in writing to have their legal sex changed. Four to twelve weeks later they will receive confirmation.
Furthermore, the minimum age requirement of 16 years to have your gender legally changed will be dropped as well. Children younger than 16 will be able to change their gender if they get permission from a judge.
The impact of this on women’s rights, safety and well-being has not been considered. At all. The Council of State reviewed the proposed bill and only requested clarification on the justification for dropping the age requirement, and whether the weight of the decision for the individual is properly safeguarded when a professional no longer has to be involved.
Answer to 1: sometimes children under 16 are clear about their “gender” being “set”, so not being able to have their birth certificate changed yet is “difficult.
Answer to 2: this decision is up to the individual and the government should be involved as little as possible. Right of self-determination is the most important.
The Council of State agreed to these “justifications” and is now fine with this bill, which will now be debated in the House of Representatives. Again: no consideration at all for the impact on women. Maybe because women have already lost their legal protection to begin with. Unlike the U.K. and the U.S., the Netherlands do not list sex as a protected characteristic. Instead they’ve used gender (geslacht), and a few years ago they changed the law to add that gender identity and gender expression fall under the protected category of gender. So excluding a man with a womanly identity, or even expression, from female-only spaces is already forbidden.
@girlsfrommars@dutchradfem Sorry about the blunt @, but since you’re one of the few Dutch radfems on here, I thought you might want to know this. The proposed bill can be found here. I fear there is very little hope stopping this. So far the Netherlands ignore the more critical stances that have risen up in the UK and Sweden. And unlike the UK, we do not have any feminist organizations that haven’t been hijacked by liberal feminism and trans activism, except for Voorzijand they are very small.
Hi all,
I’m really pleased to announce that the process of organising meetings outside of London has been successful so far. So, if you are a radical/rad-aligned/gender critical feminist, anywhere in the UK, who is interested in meeting other rad etc women (adult only) in real life, please message me.
Also, if you are based in or around London/the South East, and would be interested in meeting other rad etc women in a WOC-specific group, and/or and LGB-specific group, please get in touch too.
Getting offline, building communities, and talking to each other is the first step to change.
Looking forward to hearing from you all!
Hi all,
If you are a rad-aligned woman, interested in meeting other tumblr feminists irl, and you are based in or near any of the cities listed below, please get in touch!
OXFORD, ENGLAND
BRISTOL, ENGLAND
BIRMINGHAM, ENGLAND
MANCHESTER, ENGLAND
EDINBURGH, SCOTLAND
Gender critical discord
Hello. I am mod of a gender critical/radfem leaning discord. We are always looking for new friends to join us. If you would like to join, please DM me, and I will shoot you a link. But if not, it really would help me if you reblogged!
every time someone says “andrea dworkin was right about everything” i cringe inside. consider:
dworkin’s arguments against the reality of sex
dworkin’s homophobia (for as much as y’all talk about “woke homophobia” from TRAs, did you know dworkin shared these same beliefs?)
dworkin, pro bestiality
dworkin, pro incest
dworkin, pro pedophilia
so every time i hear “dworkin was right about everything” i know one of two things immediately. one, you haven’t actually read much dworkin. which is okay! two, you’re pro incest, bestiality, pedophilia, and homophobia. but i usually give people the benefit of the doubt and assume it’s the first.
** and a disclaimer before i get angry reblogs… where in this post have i criticized dworkin’s writing on pornography and prostitution? thank you.
