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.
I'm not speaking for the majority of trans women. I'm speaking of them. So when I say that "my description covers a strong majority of trans women" I mean that the traits I list describe a majority of trans women, in my experience and in my opinion. I don't mean that the trans women I describe in this way would agree with my description of those traits, or that a majority of them would share my views.
If you ask me, because I also have a bit of background in various trans communities, I think the majority of trans women would not accept the traits I ascribe to them. I did warn that my comment would probably be controversial. In trans cirlces, it would most definitely be.
>> 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?
While there is still need for gendered spaces? We belong in our own spaces. Personally, I'd feel a lot safer and not just a lot less awkward in a space meant for trans women than in one meant for cis women, or even all women.
I don't have to speak in the hypothetical. I have actuall been in trans spaces. Once as a representative of my country at a TGEU meeting, which was how I imagine heaven to be, a couple of days where I was between the only people in the world who can really get me, other trans women and men (the few cis people were friendly enough to not spoil it although I wasn't sure why we had to have a cis facilitator, but no matter).
Another time I went to a meeting of an LGBT group at the university were I studied. This was a meeting to discuss trans matters and it was open to everyone, but it was preceded by a closed meeting, only for people who identified as trans. And that was nice also.
Finally, I've been a member of a local support group for trans people, for a couple of years, before I started working and didn't have any time to attend the meetings anymore.
All those were places were I've felt I can really belong and where I don't have to explain anything, although sometimes this had more to do with passing privilege and women with less heteronormative presentation were less welcome, I'm very sad to say.
We need more spaces like that. For trans women in tech (whose numbers are legion, btw) we need a special place just to discuss our very specific needs and experiences. A community for cis women in tech is just not going to be that, I'm afraid.
And that's besides the fact that I fear we'll just end up making things awkward for the cis women also.
Again anecdotally.
>> I mean that the traits I list describe a majority of trans women, in my experience and in my opinion.
Well, here is where the wheels fall off. Prescribing negative male traits to the majority of trans women is beyond the pale. I disagree and find the connotation offensive and transphobic.
>> While there is still need for gendered spaces? We belong in our own spaces.
Again, I disagree, for reasons: 1. Size: The trans population is small, like very small compared to almost all other groups. It would be a greater burden on society to request that all spaces now accommodate unique and private spaces for trans folk, and extrapolated, a different space for flavor of trans. 2. Exclusion and Identity Erasure: Many trans folk (myself included) identify with one of the two binary genders. It is an affront and an erasure of our identities to segregate us from general society. I for one am not looking to wear my trans scarlet letter with pride, thanks.
Now, that is not to say that trans folk should not have access to our own support networks and industry groups. But to claim that we should stay out of the majority groups because we have a different past is offensive, as is the connotation that trans women make cis women uncomfortable. As a passing trans woman, I have been asked to leave trans groups because my "privilege" makes others uncomfortable. In this case, where do I belong? Should I make new industry groups for passing trans women with mixed Irish/German/Greek heritage that enjoy swing dancing and traditional music? Should cis women segregate by ethnicity or by tomboy-ness?
Intersectionality does not imply segregation. Trans women are women, full stop, and should have access to the same groups as cis women.