Patriarchy has always defined adult human females as women, namely that the notional woman is that which is defined by, and for , the male .
This is gender hierarchy.
It classes one gender superior .
Nonetheless, the two were obviously different, and separate.
Male and female = man and woman.

Then along comes transgenderism*.
People who define women to be whatever a person decides this is.
That a person can self identify their gender as “woman” – not exclusively but overwhelmingly based on patriarchal tropes, and with individual tweaks, including the retention of the privilege , violence (both physical and psychological) and sexual predativeness of the gender , “man” which they profess to eschew.

As such, they render the phenotype based theory of sex = gender** , in their philosophy, obsolete.
Unlike radical feminists ,however , they do not do this in order to free females from the sex based gender hierarchy that subordinates women, but rather to enforce the patriarchal paradigm of womanhood, being a notion in a male design, and for a female to reflect as cipher , and which any male who identifies as “woman” must also reflect, whilst paradoxically retaining all previously garnered male privilege.
They know what woman “is” because they know how they -“women” – “feel like women”, based on entirely patriarchal algorithms.

Thus..being sexually abused as a child, a male child, by a male adult, doesn’t define the abuser as a peadophile but the abused as a genuine , valid “girl”.
Thus being the object of street harassment, from the “eyefuck” to unwanted catcalls, advances and physical contact does not define the person harassing as an abuser but the victim a genuine, valid, “woman”.
This is done whilst simultaneously labelling the facts of female existence , such as menstruation , childbirth and even the mentioning of vaginas, as both not exclusive to women yet also “oppressive” of those not female..and hence “cis privilege” , ergo , verboten in any discourse other than that which agrees to this.

Rather than redefining womanhood as the inclusivist fiction of their imaginations, they are simply adding another reflecting lens to the continuum that is patriarchy with the added erasure of sex based gender hierarchy.
With the erasure of what this sex based gender hierarchy has done to females.
Rendering the scientifically proven existence of the actual female , to just another “construct”, that can be “fluid” and hence render -“irrelevant” – a material fact.
With the commensurate dichotomy of denial yet- enforcement – of, patriarchy.

When this transubstantiation based erasure of physical reality and it’s concomitant gender oppression is questioned those who interrogate are quickly met with violent argument , outrage and threat. Whole groups of people are labelled bigots for simply voicing a glaring , science based, cognitive dissonance.

In short, if we , as females, cannot conform to the notional woman, this must be enforced by males adopting this notion.
Coercively if needs must.
Even if this endangers female children and pathologises homosexuality.
Even if , rapaciously, this denies a female her right to sexual preference.
And woe betide any female who eschews this new fiction, this “Schrodinger’s woman” imposed on us all.

_________________________________________________________________________

* As opposed to transsexualism , which rejects the anatomy of the sex a person is born into, and often desires surgery to alter this, transgenderism requires no such desire, and many transgendered individuals adhere to the theory that if their gender is “woman” then their penis is thus female
And transsexuals, rejecting this transubstantiation , are demonised as “truscum”. 1.

** For a more in depth explanation of Radical Feminism re gender theory please follow the link below..

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism

This is not an exhaustive reference, but stands as useful starting point in any study of Radical Feminist theory.

1…this leads me to posit that many male transgender individuals are in reality extremely fond of their genitalia and would thus prefer sex to be notional rather than factual as it neatly swerves any questioning of how actually dysphoric they are, as opposed to being classified-perhaps more accurately- as autogynephilic.
It also allows – in my belief – the heterosexual ones to continue sexually pursuing females by classifying themselves as lesbians.
Otherwise, why would they get so aggressive about actual female lesbians rejecting them and their penises?

Advertisements