HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Men's Group (Group) » "Men get treated lik...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 06:02 PM

 

"Men get treated like s***"

'Men get treated like s***,' he says. 'I mean, I know women get treated like s*** all the time. But like, when you’re a man, people just bump into you all over the place. You have to hold doors, but nobody says thank you. And you don’t get compliments, ever.'


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2222075/Not-lesbians-heterosexual-Semi-straight-couple-learning-adjust-new-type-relationship-sex-change.html


The quote is from a female to male transsexual.

And yes, I know it's from the daily fail. And they probably only included it because they could use the words transexual and lesbians in the same sentence and it's essentially a tabloid.

But I for one would be interested in hearing more about such experiences. Either male to female or female to male gender changes. It would give a unique perspective on the issue of how we treat men and women. Especially since most of us really can't realistically spend any amount of time living as a member of the opposite sex.

I suspect their unique perspective on gender issues explains why transsexuals are not generally welcome in radfem circles. Which is unfortunate.

16 replies, 1983 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 16 replies Author Time Post
Reply "Men get treated like s***" (Original post)
4th law of robotics Oct 2012 OP
Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #1
Major Nikon Oct 2012 #2
Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #3
Major Nikon Oct 2012 #4
lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #11
idtev Oct 2012 #5
HappyMe Oct 2012 #6
Upton Oct 2012 #7
Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #8
HappyMe Oct 2012 #9
lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #10
Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #14
lumberjack_jeff Oct 2012 #16
rDigital Oct 2012 #12
Warren DeMontague Oct 2012 #13
4th law of robotics Oct 2012 #15

Response to 4th law of robotics (Original post)

Wed Oct 24, 2012, 09:46 PM

1. I remember reading an article from a FTM Transsexual in the SF Weekly years ago, where he started

testosterone, and was like "Shit! All of a sudden, I wanted to have sex with every woman I saw! Here, I had always thought the 'male sex drive' was cultural patriachal BS, evo-psych nonsense, and now I was going nuts every time I saw a miniskirt!"



I think there are several reasons for the bigotry against transpeople, in radfem circles. One is the bizarre conspiracy theory about men getting sex changes to "infiltrate" places like the MWMF. Other reasons, too. Will elaborate later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #1)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 12:44 AM

2. I think it's amusing, although unfortunate, as to why many (if not most) radfems are transphobic

I actually read a radfem blog that alluded to several warped reasons why they hate born male transgendered people. One of the things she said was that crushing the "patriarchy" will actually solve the problem of transgenderism because no woman will ever want to nurture a male baby again (which will be unnecessary anyway since technology allows for gender specific reproduction) and no women will want to become men anymore since there is no power to be gained by doing so. In other words, "I'm already working to fix your problem, so just STFU."

This goes a long way towards revealing the level of hate associated with some (if not most) radfems. This is the same author that was defended on HoF and believes misandry doesn't exist. Go figure.

http://factcheckme.wordpress.com/2012/07/08/on-gay-transmen/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #2)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 02:28 AM

3. Also as I understand it, they are deeply invested in the idea of gender being not just

an artificial construct-- but one (and this is key) deliberately created with the express purpose of oppressing the 51% of the population that mistakenly believe they are 'female'.

So for a transperson of either gender to want to become the other gender, or to identify with the other gender- in the case of FTM they are emulating and attempting to become the oppressor, and in the case of MTF they are trying to embody an artificial construct which is oppressive and which the embodiment of constitutes continued oppression for others.

As for the rant you linked: Jesus, that person is a piece of work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #3)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 03:12 AM

4. If she were the only one it might be one thing

But the sad part is her brand of hateful rhetoric is just not that uncommon. It's easy to point fingers at truly hateful people like Jeffreys and Dworkin, and some feminists will say it's unfair to paint them with that brush. Then they will link to people like Twisty who repost the S.C.U.M. manifesto. At some point you realize how many well published radfems fully invested in the concept of the phallus as the root of all evil on the planet and you start to question the reasonableness, if not the sanity, of the movement. But of course mentioning that means you are an apologist for teh patriarchy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #2)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 12:48 PM

11. Wow. That is some seriously amazing shit.

and thats how i think – and what i love – about radical feminism. (and “misandry” is a euphemism for feminism, nothing more).


Nutshell there. Man hate = feminism. Don't believe me? Take it up with the radfem spokesperson.

http://factcheckme.wordpress.com/about/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #1)


Response to idtev (Reply #5)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 07:47 AM

6. Okey dokey.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to idtev (Reply #5)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 10:04 AM

7. See ya...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to idtev (Reply #5)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 11:32 AM

8. So... what's my "real agenda"? Please, do tell.

Maybe you can answer that when you proxy in ("had to! been banned so many times!") under your next identity.


http://radicalresolution.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #8)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 11:56 AM

9. Ssshh! They are

keeping an eye on DU!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #8)

Thu Oct 25, 2012, 12:39 PM

10. It's funny how she landed here on her second post.

Obvious sock is obvious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #10)

Fri Oct 26, 2012, 01:47 AM

14. THIS PARROT IS DEAD!



I blame Gender Essentialism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #14)

Fri Oct 26, 2012, 10:44 AM

16. Apparently just pining for the fjords. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Original post)

Fri Oct 26, 2012, 12:36 AM

12. Wow, I can't believe this group exists.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 4th law of robotics (Original post)

Fri Oct 26, 2012, 01:31 AM

13. Not to interrupt, 4, but I think the correct spelling is "SHIT"

(Last time I checked, net nanny software was available for people who wanted a G rated intertubes experience.)

I swear, and this isn't directed at any of you guys, of course.. but if I see one more fucking asterisk I'm going to shit. A fucking brick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #13)

Fri Oct 26, 2012, 10:10 AM

15. I just copied the title of the article

 

normally I'd spell it out.

Of course given the double standards I'm sure that would be alert worthy . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread