Sex Equality vs Gender Equality

I was just reading a post on the Occupy Patriarchy website – although this post is not directly to do with that, it serves merely as an introduction to the topic of sex equality versus gender equality.

Here is a snippet from the post:

Several days ago, I got an e-mail from two longtime feminist activists who pointed out that the upcoming National General Assembly, Continental Congress 2.0 being planned for July 4th in Philadelphia had a gender problem. Despite a goal of delegate gender equity calling for there to be one woman and one man as delegates from each state, the current slate of candidates is overwhelmingly male.
[…]
We are writing to urgently call your attention to the fact that the current list of delegate candidates DOES NOT MEET the stated intention to have ONE WOMAN and ONE MAN from each Congressional District, an essential feature of the National General Assembly document, and necessary to a successful, democratic and transformative assembly. The voter registration section of the website specifically declares to voters that there will be gender balance in the election of delegates
[…]
As of May 25, the current gender balance of delegate candidates is 155 women and 495 men, a situation in which women are outnumbered over 3 to 1 and men exceed 50% of 876, the target total, both of which are unacceptable.

Here are a few serious questions, for all trans-supporting feminists –

  • How exactly do you benefit born-females if the parity targets are laid out in terms of ‘gender equality’ and not sex-equality?
  • Can you see that places allocated for born-females can easily be taken by transwomen, thereby meeting the quota, but in reality, nothing has changed for born-females?
  • In male-dominated politics and occupations, how is the cause furthered for females when representation is done by transwomen, who care little about things like women’s reproductive health matters? (In fact, they call these matters ‘transphobic’ and boring.)

Of course, I already know the answers to these questions, they are rhetorical to get some libfems thinking about the bigger picture with regards to females.

I am not criticising the OP post directly, but there really is not any clear indication that actual females are prioritised in the call for ‘gender equality’, after all, it is trans-inclusive is it not? Given general trans acceptance (and yes, they have acceptance, the UK Government alone has featured them in several pieces of legislation over the last eight years), it is common for woman/man, female/male to mean very different things, depending on the audience. Even now I have to cringe at using the term born-female to make my point clear – females, born-females, are the default females. [end personal rant]

Liberal feminism cares about equality, but these days they care far more about men/males than they do females. They ensure that ‘men have voices in feminism’ and that transwomen get prioritised over females who have put up with discrimination against them from birth because they were born female. If a person is promoting equality, worrying about males, and giving males an equal say in ‘feminism’, then that is not feminism, that is humanism. Besides which, men already have the majority say in feminism and women’s reproductive issues in the mainstream – there is no need to give them an ever greater share. Can you see how self-defeating this all is?

Feminism focuses on females, actual born females, over everyone else, to redress the discrimination done to us over our lifetimes from cradle to grave, and over many centuries of misogyny that we have suffered. Radical feminism seems to be the only feminism around that still does prioritise females over the male-born.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Sex Equality vs Gender Equality

  1. “Even now I have to cringe at using the term born-female to make my point clear – females, born-females, are the default females.”

    They wish to even take the term “born female” from us – I’ve seen many trans take the absolutely unsupportable, ridiculous position that they’ve ALWAYS been female, and were tragically given that male privilege and boys toys growing up when they DIDN’T WANT THEM, but that didn’t mean they were EVER male – in fact, that means they never even received male privilege! – and so on. But yes, we are the default females, but they’ve fixed THAT up and given us an moniker we didn’t want,”cis-women”. They’ve taken away our right to even name ourselves, just so we don’t seem like the default, normal female. Supposedly this is “fair” because it makes them feel less abnormal and special. Then they further demean us by calling us cissie (sissy), which to a man is the worst insult ever. Of course, it’s an insult usually used by men against other men because it means you’re a man acting like a woman (which is supposedly a bad thing). I sense a classic case of projection.

    And the crazy thing is, the mainstream liberals lap this up without the slightest pause! When women themselves wanted a simple one letter change to “womyn” to change the word from its problematic root meaning, we were ruthlessly, hideously mocked everywhere. HOW DARE WE CHANGE A WORD! We don’t have that right! We have no rights to change language, who do we think we ARE! But this nonsensical word change that demeans and lessens all females, why it’s accepted right away, spread everywhere, I see people scolded in liberal circles for not using it, I’ve been ruthlessly excoriated by “friends” for stating very calmly and firmly that I will NOT use it and have been given the big emotional blackmail pouty face for very firmly stating that it will NOT be used to describe me in my own house.

    Like

    • I know! The cis/sissy thing, they baldface deny it – but I have seen them use it in that way (the credibility of transactivists and their supporters at an all time low).

      That is actually the whole point of labelling us ‘cis-female’ or ‘cis-woman’, to define us as ‘just another category of female/woman’ when we are the bleedin’ default! They hardly ever use it for males btw, but every time female is mentioned, out trots the ‘cis’ rubbish. And it has not been around that long either, probably four, maybe five years? And it is already mainstream, the libfems lap it up for some reason (go to the UK F-Word for examples).

      I won’t use ‘cis-‘ either, totally banned. At the other blog, I may edit any libfem/trans comments that get through to read ‘proper default female unlike surgically enhanced imitation females’ (wordy? perhaps!) There are some days where I am just plain mean! 😉

      Like

      • “they baldface deny it”

        …really? First time I saw it it was DELIBERATELY hurled at me and all women as an insult. And it was meant exactly that way, the trans “friend” who made the entry about it made that quite clear. And when I objected, I was called a transphobe and he refused to speak to me ever again.

        Like

      • Yes they do!

        They have done so consistently over the year or two at least (shoddy memory, it could be longer) because we were specifically calling them out on the cis/sissy connection (as well as them naming us, and we were expected to take it). I will try to remember a few examples, I have the feeling there may be one or two over at GenderTrender, as I never go to trans/libfem blogs.

        Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s