Trans Inclusion in the Feminist Movement Article Review 1

Tarryn Priestly

Oct. 6^th, 2014

Prof. Currans

Blog Topic: The Feminist Movement

Article Review #1

Eli R. Green (2006) “Debating Trans Inclusion in the Feminist Movement”, Journal of Lesbian

Studies, 10:1-2, 231-248

      In Eli Green's “Debating Trans Inclusion in the Feminist Movement”, Green goes through and describes the exclusion of trans people, mainly transwomen, within the feminist movement. He describes the reasons for such exclusion, discussing the sources for it and why it's still a relevant topic today. With the reasons, he creates a rebuttal for each of them, explaining why they're incorrect in their thinking. He then offers 'a trans-positive perspective': including trans individuals in feminist spaces and dismissing the controversy of their inclusion.

      Green starts off with two quotes, both illustrating the exclusion of trans people in feminist spaces, the first from Charlotte Cronson stating 'We as feminists owe it to ourselves...to deconstruct and oppose ...transpolitics. In a feminist analysis they are, to put it simply, on the wrong side. In opposition to feminism.' (page 232). He then goes to say that such an exclusion could in fact be due to ignorance on the information of trans people/politics, or the fear that trans-inclusion could 'potentially undermine feminist theory and ideology' (232). He soon explains that this roots from the beginnings of feminism, when women wore androgynous clothes because the feminine clothes they were once seen in was now considered oppressive. With this androgynous dress code, feminine transwomen that relied on feminine dress were then seen as 'traitors' as they did not oppose of traditional femininity with the other women. This 'refusal' of transwomen to dress in an androgynous manner added to the questioning of transwomen's legitimacy in feminism, along with them being originally assigned male at birth.

      The exclusion of transwomen in feminist spaces was then intensified when Janice Raymond had published The Transsexual Empire, a book supporting trans-exclusion and providing one of many voices in feminism for years as there was no other voice to counter its ideas at that time. Green dissects the main points and ideas presented in this book, providing the counter voice that had not been strong enough thirty years ago. He tells of the faults within the book's premise, including its transphobic idea that transsexuals are merely people 'born in the wrong body' and enforcing the rigidity of gender. This is faulty due to its misunderstanding of other people who don't fit the gender binary and get medical 'treatment' for other reasons than to be the opposite sex. This also shows its lack of understanding of how difficult it is in the first place to get medical 'treatment' for trans people. Green goes on refuting Raymond's statements with the fact that Raymond cannot 'oppose the construction of trans identities, when according to her social constructionist views of gender, the identity of “woman” is created in the same way' (236). Raymond's statements of how female-bodied feminists would not identify as men because they're feminists and others, such as transmen essentially don't exist (when in reality the facts she had used were biased), give Green reason enough to use examples from Judith Butler and other activists to support trans people, but also bring back the idea that feminism is based on intellect and reason, not biology.

      Another source Green looks at is the website QuestioningTransgender.org (one I believe doesn't exist anymore), a website that openly states in their mission statement how they exclude trans people and how others should exclude trans people in feminism as well, referring to the politics of trans-inclusion as trans-politics. Green, of course, disagrees with the website's descriptions by pointing out how the website lacks any research-related or factual evidence to support their arguments. He then disagrees with the website's claim that the oppressed should change the world themselves and place none of the blame on the oppressor, when the responsibility of an issue such as oppression can't be one-sided; both parties involved must take responsibility and action. In later arguments, Green shows how feminists can acknowledge the oppression of trans people, but many being privileged, won't see that they themselves are the oppressor, as they believe that the one group, men, are the only oppressors when it comes to the issue of feminism.

      Green confirms that gender-variant people have their identities challenged and scrutinised by feminists within the movement, having their identities claimed as alien to the movement and their problems then aren't seen as that big of a deal. Green does agree that feminism could shift its ideology and theory with the inclusion of trans people, but that poses such a threat to people that they'd rather protect the feminism they know than reach out to the oppressed trans people. However, there are organisations that are heading in the right direction of trans-inclusion, such as the GenderPAC (the Gender Public Advocacy Coalition), but it's still a long way before trans people are truly included in feminism without question.

      While there may still be feminists that believe in the exclusion of transpeople, it's not a stance that is looked upon too highly nowadays. Most feminists would agree that 'Anti-inclusion feminists are creating a no-win situation by condemning transpeople for both confirming and blurring the gender binary.' (241). The reason this article relates to my blog topic of the feminist movement is because it discusses the inherent problems that the movement has faced and still faces today. Feminists in the movement claim to be all against oppression of the female sex, but turn around and oppress those that don't conform to the social norms of gender or sex, relating back to the quote in this paragraph that the feminist movement still has the problem of acting as an oppressor as well. This idea of oppression coming from the females in feminism relates back to Peggy McIntosh's article “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”. While McIntosh's article relays information mainly focused on race, it can be said for gender as well. She says that those people with white skin 'have been conditioned into oblivion about its existence' and have 'no training in seeing [themselves] as an oppressor....or as a participant in a damaged culture' (pg 83). This relates to the exclusionary female feminists in that they don't see their own privilege and don't consider themselves to act as an oppressor in almost the same way that they are oppressed. How McIntosh talks about privilege, albeit a white privilege and not a gender privilege, explains the power that comes from such privilege, saying that '[power] from unearned privilege can look like strength when it is in fact permission to escape or to dominate' (pg 86). This of course holds true to the female feminists, as they use their privilege to hold themselves above transwomen, having excluded them from the feminist movement for so many years.