zlacker

[return to "Leap: An Online Community for Women"]
1. konoga+YA[view] [source] 2018-01-16 20:26:05
>>stable+(OP)
I expect this to be a controversial comment. I might just be overreacting.

  If you identify as a woman and are interested in joining Leap, 
  please sign up for our beta here.
I'm a trans woman who works in tech. I think it's dangerous to open a community for women to people who "identify as women". For one thing, there are plenty of women who do not "identify as women". For instance, older women may not really know what "identifying" is all about and just think "well, I'm a woman, what's to identify with?". There are also younger women who reject the idea that gender is an identity that you can choose at will.

Obviously the invitation is meant to show that trans women are welcome. That's... moving, but I think it will only cause trouble. First you create a place especially for women, which is needed because like the announcement says, many women don't feel welcome, comfortable or even safe in online discussions that tend to escalate to shouting matches, typically among men (since it's the women leaving). Then you invite in to the community people who have been socialised as men, have grown up as men, have spent most of their professional lives as men and who have often contributed to exactly the kind of working environment that makes womens' lives difficult as tech workers. That's defeating the whole point of a "community where the core culture [will be] set by women".

I'm not trying to say that trans women are not women (I mean, duh; I'm one. Of both). But it should be kept in mind that most of us carry a great deal of baggage from the time we lived as men. Baggage that's very hard to get rid of and that many of us are not even aware of. In light of this, I think this big-hearted invitation to everyone who identifies as a woman, should be revised to something more cautious. I'd think, if someone "identifies as a woman" and works in technology, they'd respond to an invitation to just "women" anyway.

To be perfectly clear, I'm totally not joining and I invite any other trans women who read this to think very carefully before doing so. Just think of all the times you had a civilised and polite debate with other trans women about trans stuff, or about anything.

◧◩
2. annabe+941[view] [source] 2018-01-16 23:29:41
>>konoga+YA
>have spent most of their professional lives as men and who have often contributed to exactly the kind of working environment that makes womens' lives difficult as tech workers

This is certainly not the case for all trans women. You may not feel like you need to join a community like this, but I don't think it's fair to then speak for/to the trans community saying that none of us should.

I've heard things similar to what you're saying in the past, but I don't think it holds water. Trans women typically aren't welcome in male-only spaces, because we aren't. Often we aren't welcome in women-only spaces because of opinions like these. Usually there aren't trans-only spaces. It ends up with us being excluded _everywhere_ because of some dubious concept of "socialisation", as if every trans woman has the same experiences such that you can discriminate based on it.

>Just think of all the times you had a civilised and polite debate with other trans women about trans stuff, or about anything.

Often! I've also had civilised and polite debates with men, and been shouted down by cis women. People are people, not just their gender, and while there are trends that's all they are.

◧◩◪
3. konoga+t72[view] [source] 2018-01-17 14:09:56
>>annabe+941
>> This is certainly not the case for all trans women. You may not feel like you need to join a community like this, but I don't think it's fair to then speak for/to the trans community saying that none of us should.

I accept that there are differences between trans women, but I believe my description covers a strong majority. I don't speak "for" anyone, of course.

>> It ends up with us being excluded _everywhere_ because of some dubious concept of "socialisation", as if every trans woman has the same experiences such that you can discriminate based on it.

I agree that the concept of "socialisation" is vague and hard to define. The problem is that there are differences in the way men and women behave in a social context and because these differences end up harming women (usually) they need to be addressed. It's easy to see that boys and girls are brought up differently (different toys, different advise, being told off for different things etc) so that's a likely explanation. The alternative is usually a biological explanation about male and female brains generating male and female behaviours. We don't really understand how brains generate any behaviours so I find the biological explanation to be very suspicious. The "socialisation" explanation sounds a lot more straightforward.

Of course there are differences between trans women, in behaviour as well as upbringing. There are differences between men, and between women. Yet, here we are with a tech indudstry that is, in aggregate, unfair or hostile to women, but not to men. You can't predict the behaviour of individuals, but you can make fairly accurate predictions for the kind of behaviours that arise in groups. That's why a community like Leap is needed in the first place.

My concern is that in the case of women-only spaces where trans women are welcome, many trans women will join, responding to their need to belong, which you express and which I feel myself. And that given enough trans women joining, a few of them will eventually display those behavioural traits you can expect from people who grew up like men and that are the traits the community seems to want to keep out.

I agree that feeling excluded from everywhere is harsh and feels extremely unfair. But we can't fix unfair by making more unfair. We can't make the world fair for ourselves by making it more unfair for others. At the end of the day, the way forward is true equality. If trans women are accepted as women, and women are accepted as equal to men (in technology, or anywhere), trans women will not need to feel excluded from anywhere.

But this is not yet the case and I really think that trans women need to give some space to cis women until it is and in order to help make it so.

>> Often!

And thanks for letting me have one, too. My experience is that it happens, but rarely.

◧◩◪◨
4. metaph+KW2[view] [source] 2018-01-17 19:49:34
>>konoga+t72
>> I accept that there are differences between trans women, but I believe my description covers a strong majority. I don't speak "for" anyone, of course.

In my experience as a trans woman in tech and very involved in the MN transgender community for many years, is that your perspective is definitely not shared by the majority. I know my argument is just as anecdotal as yours, but I only can recall a couple trans women out of the hundreds I have met through community work that would agree with you. Most of the women I work with absolutely want to join women's spaces and would be interested in Leap or similar industry groups for women. But again, this is anecdotal. Please don't speak for the "majority" of us without backing it up with polling data at minimum.

>> My concern is that in the case of women-only spaces where trans women are welcome, many trans women will join, responding to their need to belong, which you express and which I feel myself. And that given enough trans women joining, a few of them will eventually display those behavioural traits you can expect from people who grew up like men and that are the traits the community seems to want to keep out.

All groups have to manage certain individuals.

In your opinion, how much gendered socialization is enough for a trans woman to be acceptable to be able to join female spaces? ie. At what maximum age do you think they needed to start transition to access women's spaces? If not at all, then how does your socialization argument hold up against those that transition at a very young age? At what point is a woman "fully" socialized in their gendered role and ready to join women's spaces?

Additionally, how should facilitators of said spaces check to make sure the cis women joining had enough gendered socialization to join? Should they accept tomboys? Butch women? Lesbians?

What about trans men who were socialized as a women before transition? Or inter-sexed folk that identify as women?

Should there be any consideration that many trans women end up picking up (effectually) on many of the socializations women receive while growing up?

Socialization has its own issues with essentialism, and often feels stuck in the second-wave feminism of the 70s. No two women share the same experiences. Gendered socialization differs dramatically across intersectional lines and when referenced in such ways often assumes and superimposes affluent, Christian, and white experiences as the majority and proper socialization. Socialization arguments often remind of the No True Scotsman fallacy. Modern intersectional feminism embraces the intersectional identities of women, trans and cis alike (among many other informing aspects).

>> But this is not yet the case and I really think that trans women need to give some space to cis women until it is and in order to help make it so.

Often I find these lines of thought to be thinly veiled attempts at othering trans folk, erasing their identity, and forcing them out of gender spaces entirely. If transgender women are to stay out of women's spaces while not being accepted in men's spaces, where do they belong?

When it comes to gendered groups and spaces, I would maintain that identity should be the deciding factor.

[go to top]