i was concerned you would not check back.

and thank you for giving us this information.

NOW

quit getting us in trouble. participate and enjoy. we dont know a whole lot in terms of definition and we are getting accusations made about us when we are looking around in confusion.

welcome back

good to see you.

Thank you!

And yes, it's about women and girls... all women and girls. Even those not FAAB.

That's what happened, they told me I was a girl at birth. They were proven correct when I started my period and other female bodied stuf.f

I've never heard this phrase or seen this acronym before. Can you help me understand why it is important to you to identify this way? I'm trying to understand.

I see what you're getting at. It is important to me to identify this way because other people have identified FOR me. It is important to identify myself. Thanks for your question.

I'm trying not to jump to conclusions, but this is looking a bit like you are saying that your femaleness is better than the femaleness of people who identify as female but were not assigned female at birth, in other words, male to female transgender people.

I don't want to jump to conclusions, which is why I'm asking for clarity.

The context: Your partner was banned from this site for making a statement that sounded very transphobic. You were banned and then reinstated. Your statement that you are proudly Female Assigned At Birth raises questions, especially since you aren't using the term in its usual sense.

edited for clarity - the term FAAB has a very specific meaning, it turns out. You aren't using it in that way, which is one reason why we are asking for more information.

"edited for clarity - the term FAAB has a very specific meaning, it turns out. You aren't using it in that way,"

what is the specific meaning?

I got confused and mixed Sera up with someone else (another DUer who was banned who Skinner said had also posted as a man before).

Is that why you're identifying as FAAB? Because I (or someone else) got you (or Feldspar) confused with some other person who was banned?


OK on edit no, you spelled it out in the OP... the doubts about you being a male troll. So yeah, I get the FAAB stuff now. Nevermind.

does that make you better/more special/more female/more deserving of the label and the protection of feminists, than those who were born male but have transitioned?

This is a very interesting site, I learned alot here: The Intersex Road Show

This introductory article is a good start: Intersex 101

I do not identify as a male. I am female through and through.

I ask before I shoot. Um... I meant that to be funny... I think I missed the mark.

Discussing leading to understanding is a grand idea.

Yes, I thought your joke was funny.

This.

1,000,000,000,000,000,000 times this.

That confuses me... first I have to learn a new acronym, which I'm happy to do but I don't get why you're using this acronym incorrectly. I mean, if you identify as female through and through, then faab doesn't work. It makes me wonder why you chose this obscure acronym to describe yourself.

*scratches head*

I had to research FAAB.

So why does your OP go to great pains to say that you and Feldspar are FAAB?

would you think I think that? People identify in many ways do they not?

boasting about being born female. it makes me think that both of you are trans-phobic and should not be allowed on du.


congratulations on being cisgender. its nothing special. 99% of people are.

This.

I gotta say, I don't see the point of identifying as FAAB unless it's somehow counterintuitive (genderqueer / identifies as male).

You have expressed your opinions loud and clear and entitled to them fully.

is akin to when whites claim to have white pride and see nothing wrong with it.

there is nothing wrong with being proud of being a woman, there is something wrong when you have to qualify that by saying you are proud to be someone who was born a woman (as opposed to those who transitioned)

Please do not place words in my mouth. TY

if you could clearly explain WHY you had to tell us that you were born a woman as oppose to transitioned into a woman, i would probably not have to question your intent

I am entitled to identify any which way I please....right?

again. "I am a someone who has white-pride" would not be allowed on du simply because its a way to identify.

no intention of breaking any rules. Identifying as a born woman is now analogous with white power?

Anybody who identifies as a woman is a "born woman." Transgender males to females were women at birth, but identified incorrectly by others as males.

There are many identities that are not welcome on DU. Being a Republican is one. Being a white supremacist would be another, for example.

You're entitled to identify any way you please in the real world, but on this particular message board there are rules.

1. Lioness' white pride analogy is a good one -- it is divisive, and

2. It really isn't cricket to misuse ID terms, now is it? And, you misused FAAB.

Both of these are very interesting to me.

How do you feel about trans people? Do you condone your partners remarks that were hidden because they were transphobic?

I will never speak for my partner. If allowed, she could come back and speak for herself.

I am pro-woman, not anti anything.

If they i/dentify as a woman, who am I to stop them?

My interpretation of what she said may not agree with yours.

Take it up with admin. and bring her back. If a few of you collaborate, it can be done. Thank you.

And how you feel about Feldspar's opinion.

Why are you sidestepping? mad asked you a legit question.

i am so done with this shit.

what do you mean by that?

i was hoping you WERE actually done.

weeks ago

I saw the math (2+2+2=6), but I have no idea what it's referring to.

People coming into the Feminists forum for no reason but to attack.

I see one disruptor; she may have more sock puppets than she can fit in one drawer, but she's still in the group. I also see that she will continue to try and pit us against each other as long as she is able. Do you not see that?

I don't have a fucking clue who you are, but if you have something to say to or about me, say it, and say it to my face.

I have another account at DU. When I first joined, I used a name I had used on other discussion boards: bushwah. It is an expression of disgust and disbelief. When I started reading the boards, and we're talking 2001, I found lots of people with names that included "Bush" one way or another. In that sense, mine was inadvertently clever, and I was surprised no one else had chosen it.

However, I didn't want to have a name that identified me with that specific an era/focus, particularly since I am not even a USAmerican. There was no option for changing a username at the time; a name-change option was allowed a while later that was useful precisely for people with name like ihatebush.

Here's the profile for that username:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=100096

as Evolve_Already. See sub-thread starting at #123. She was also TakesAVillage_People, though that wasn't banned. And her partner was TAPat (not banned), and Feldspar (banned). This doesn't have to be about you; it's about the thread starter.

that iverglas has a sock pocket. so i think we can understand her confusion that this time, the comment was not about her.

except for not having the courage to name me.

so i added the imply

However, the fact that people might think that you would break the rules by having a sock puppet doesn't surprise me. After all, you've been caught red-handed breaking the rules in order to continue posting in a thread in which you had been blocked from posting.

No, I was talking about the OP. It might be fine and dandy with you that someone is coming in here to start shit between two groups that have more in common than some seem to want to admit. However, some of us can actually identify with both of these groups and would like to see them work together.

So, I'm just going to lay everything out on the table. I'll start from the middle, rather than the beginning, because I don't have the time or the energy to go back that far (besides, that part is all right here in this thread). Sera Bellum came in here a few weeks ago and started a huge row by saying something homophobic and getting herself PPR'd. Then, at the request of some here, the admins gave her the benefit of the doubt and reinstated her. Suddenly, just as the dust was beginning to settle, here comes Felspar. Now, she gets herself tossed for a trans-phobic remark and the dust up starts all over again. While this whole scene is playing out, there is no sign of Sera Bellum. But, as soon as things start to settle down again - "Hello My Sisters"! And, we're off again...

I can guarantee that when the dust starts to settle again, she'll be back. In the meantime, thanks for giving me permission to participate in your forum.

so you come into the feminist forum to call a member out?

accusing her of sockpuppet in another forum.

that isnt against du rules? that is not aganist the SOP in this forum?

She edited posts in a thread that she was kicked out of. That is circumventing the software and breaking TOS.

then threw out accusations

Would you care to address what my post was really about?

There is proof that she went back into a thread and edited her old responses in order to stay in a thread that she was kicked out of. You were a part of that conversation and are quite aware of it. I don't give a shit if she has a sock puppet or not.

skinner will decide if she broke the rule as you guys continue to trash her all over.

why dont you leave it to skinner to clarify if she broke the rule

hey

you didnt address my point that if she thought you were talking about her having sockpuppets, it might have to do with a thread in lbgt

My post was not about iverglas. It was about Sera Bellum. Would you care to address the subject of my post?

I'm just a curious soul.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=about&forum=1139

that you will not address the situation. I don't have a beef with you, iverglas.

The vendetta being conducted against me, other members of this group, and this group as a collective entity?

I think I've made my position on that situation quite clear.

You win. You've spent a lot of time and energy running around DU trying to make this all about you. And, guess what, it worked. Enjoy the attention. The fact that it comes at the expense of both groups makes it all the sweeter, I'm sure. Enjoy your 15 minutes (or days, for all I care). I'm done.

So does everybody else.

Hopefully you'll just finish soon.

I'm sure there's somebody interested in your revisionist history, but it ain't me.

uncomfortable.....

sera bellum is getting quite a grilling, and there is nothing in our rules that she must answer the questions especially when the intent seems to be bringing back a subject people get labeled for and there is really not an open discussion on different feminist views or opinions. no back and forth conversation.

if a poster were allowed to discuss this in an open manner without trying to label in some way to get her tos'ed, that would be one thing.

i personally have found the whole subject interesting from a feminist point of view. not agree with it necessarily (because i am totally clueless), but can see an argument that transwomen (from what i read only, not opinion) bring male privilege to the table. so though i am defending their woman, as a feminist i can see that point, too.

(brave enough to say out loud, and ready for the pointing fingers to all me a bigot)

but, we cannot talk about the subject on du, from what we have learned the last week, without fear that discussing and learning leads to problems.

the reason i bring it up here is, .... is there a possibility that a gay woman feminist might have that feminist view? and if she does have that feminist view does it mean she/we cannot discuss it on du? and if she cannot discuss it on du, what purpose to this grilling, demanding she express view?

repeating, this is me not knowing ..... shit

Listen to TriMera, because she is right. No disrespect from me, either.

I just don't know how to be any clearer without breaking the rules.

I'm confused. I thought that asking for clarity before jumping to conclusions was a good thing.

I took to mean that rather than explore why Sera might think her partner's views were not what others were saying, there were just questions of 'do you agree'... and I was suspicious of the "FAAB" with no intuitive reason to think she was anything but, but then I realized that she had been thought to be a male troll before, so that also might be a reason to hold back on the suspicion / accusations.

So although there were questions, they seemed to be the kind that were asked more in the spirit of looking for a confirmation of what the questioner expects to hear, rather than an open request for an explanation.

e.g. "Your partner said x, which I took to mean x... that was offensive to me. Can you explain why they said it or what they meant by that?"

However, I am very uncomfortable with the way that this term FAAB is being used by this poster. The recent context of the OP's posts and her partner's posts add to my discomfort. I think it is fair to ask the poster what they mean. And I must say that her answers have not been very transparent. There seems to be a lot of side-stepping going on and that is adding to my discomfort.

Note that I am careful not to say that I am offended by anything. I am saying that I am uncomfortable, and as a result of my discomfort, I am asking for clarity. The fact that that clarity is not forthcoming is adding to my discomfort, and leading me to ask follow-up questions. Those questions, too, are not being answered in a very transparent way, imo.

This is not a minor matter. This is not a matter of semantics. Real people's lives are literally at stake. Transgender people are murdered and driven to suicide every day.

and yes, I was uncomfortable with the way FAAB was used initially... but then I thought I might have discovered why... but no, that term is too loaded for that, I think.

I almost posted this this morning, but I didn't know where to put it. And I was worried about starting an argument (sigh).
http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2012/02/09/this-is-what-happened-to-cece/

I can cosign your post 100%.

including this link I found today. It's eye opening and repulsive.
http://wewillnot.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/transitioning-is-anti-woman-no-matter-which-way-youre-going/

there are feminist out there that are bigoted against the trans community.

and just being a feminist or LGB doesn't keep you carte blanche to be a bigot

I ... I'm speechless.

I mean I guess I shouldn't be surprised, they're people... with human failings... but... argh. Just argh.

I don't think it is well understood on DU how deeply hurtful - the point of being life-threatening - transphobic bigotry is to real people.

I had no idea.

I think there are many well-meaning people who are just clueless. I know because I am one.

The history of abuse directed at transgender people is incredibly heartbreaking, and their rights are not well-protected at all. DADT is repealed, but it's still illegal for transgender people to serve in the military. There are no workplace protections, nothing. As far as we have to go for "gay" rights, the country is much, much further behind with trans rights.

The history is horrific. Just plain horrific. I had no idea either until about a year ago, and I've been alive more than a half century.

I don't blame them for not "outing" themselves.

sigh.

On the one hand I'm curious about why, but on the other... I don't know if I really want to know.

for anti-trans comments. She's walked them back over the years.

God, that link is horrible. o.O

And while I disagree with the author's explanation for why it's necessary, I agree that there should be some spaces for women who were born in a female body to be around other women who are born in a female body -- and a community has the right to preserve the nature of that space.

Mainly, it's because there are some things that women who were born in a female body can only share with others who were the same -- for example, discussions/rituals about menstruation. A menstrual blood empowerment ritual is not something that our transgender friends and allies can really share. If I want to talk to someone about that very specific bodily function who understands it both from previous *and* current experience, that is something I can only discuss with a post-menarche, pre-menopausal woman who was born in a female body.

There was a kind of dust-up regarding one intentional community in my local area that is safe space for women who were born female only -- they were having discussions about whether or not they should invite transgendered persons into their space. As part of that discussion, they wanted to hear from both FTM and MTF folk, but due to current policy it was impossible for them to stay overnight on the community property during those discussions. I offered my home as a haven so no one would have to pay for hotels, etc, and had quite a few very lovely and interesting houseguests for a weekend. Wolf Creek Sanctuary had a similar meeting to discuss whether or not they would invite people who were not gay males into their space -- I'm honestly not sure how either discussion ended.

I'm very glad that places like Short Mountain Sanctuary that are inviting to all genders instead of just one or two, all sexualities instead of just one or two or three, etc. But do I think that every safe space should be just as inclusive? No. There are things that I will never fully understand about the experience of a gay man in our culture, and there may be times when they need to be around others who can understand that aspect of their experience from personal previous and current experience.

And I don't think either of the two ICs I mentioned are bigoted for being safe space for people who share that experience.

That whole "male privilege" thing. No, they don't. They are actually doubly damned by others' male privilege. Go to your library or bookstore today and get Jenny Boylan's "She's Not Here," for something that is more approachable for you to help you understand. I'm not being snarky. It's a very good book and will explain things to you, much more so than theory websites will.

MTF are not men, that is the first thing you have to understand. THEY ARE NOT MEN.

What feminist view are you talking about?????

And, lastly, everything can be discussed on DU, but there must be honesty up front when one enters into the discussion. Posters have a right to question Sera Bellum on this.

Last edited Thu Feb 9, 2012, 05:23 PM - Edit history (2)

i am on my way out the door and regardless of how i tippy toed to say what i did, .... you found a way to diss me a couple three times. dont even pretend everything is open for discussion. it just is not.

I guess I'll promise never to do that again. I took pangs to explain your misconception, and a really good resource that is interesting, and not as dry and academic as a theory website. Won't be happening again.

At this point, I believe, you are just trying to get offended by certain posters, me being one of them. I am weary with it.

And yes, everything is, if the discussion is approached with honesty and sincerity.

I'm just going to put it out there. So far, there had been none of the "fucking" this and "shit" that that is so pervasive in other threads in this forum. As a feminist I find it very disheartening to see women cursing at one another.

I mean this in a very respectful way. I'm not trying to call you out or anything. I'm just tired of seeing women curse at one another, in the Feminist forum of all places.

either... because it was mystical and gave feinist a bad name or made them look silly, something.

lets define all the things we cant say.... but ______ and _____ is a big thumbs up.

(and not you saying _______ and _______ is ok).

cant promise i will never curse in any thread. ever again, cause it isnt going to happen.

but i can respect not cursing in this thread here, for right now.