“Female genital mutilation” is cissexist

I really don’t know how to begin this post. I don’t know how to introduce it or create some eloquent lead in. All I can say is:

Fuck.

Fuck no.

Fuck you.

Fuck everything.

cissexismbullshit

Exhibit A: Trans efforts to completely erase femalehood from existence. A determined means of preventing any sort of meaningful analysis of the oppression and abuse of women from taking place.

Trans activists are now stating that calling female genital mutilation, an act of violence against females, is cissexist. In reference to female children having their clitorises removed and their vaginas sewn shut, twanzactivists scream “WHAT ABOUT MEEEEEE?”

To all you twanz men out there (no, you will never, ever, ever, ever be women, ladies, girls, or whatever other terms you want to appropriate from females, AKA, human beings (no really, we’re actually fucking human beings) with real, actual nature-made and male-controlled vaginas):

Fuck you, monsters.

Also, if you are reading this, press ctrl+shift+W for free lipstick and bubblegum.

To all you trans/patriarchy obedient funfems:

Open your goddamn eyes and look at what you’re saying.

To trans women (that is, females, AKA, human beings (no really)): My heart breaks for you.

To my feminist sisters:

Get a load of this shit.

What is FEMALE genital mutilation?

FEMALE genital mutilation refers to procedures involving mutilation of external FEMALE genitals, namely the clitoris and labia. It is most often practiced on young FEMALE children, from infancy up to about age 15. The most common procedures are a partial or (usually) a complete removal of the clitoris, often with excision of the labia minora. Another form of FEMALE genital mutilation is infibulation, where the vaginal opening is sewn or cauterized shut. See the WHO factsheet for more information.

Why is FEMALE genital mutilation done?

Trans theorists cannot tell you that. In erasing the femaleness of female genital mutilation, they erase WHY females have their genitals destroyed.

This is just one of the many ways in which trans activists harm women. They reduce the oppression of women down to bullet points of independent, compartmentalized problems that are solved one by one, checking off each box as we go. Feminism becomes simplified down to the same level of mindlessness pervasive in MRAs who complain about how all the workplace deaths are misandry while ignoring the whole bit about women’s exclusion (by men) from those jobs.

By reducing “female genital mutilation” to “vulva mutilation,” they ignore WHY the practice continues. Mutilation of women’s’ genitals becomes just another check box, another item to cross off the list. No analysis is possible of how it originated, why it occurs, or how it is caused by, causes, and is related to other dynamics of women’s oppression.

FEMALE genital mutilation occurs because of the rules and roles society has set up for people born female. No, not people born ~iDeNtiFyInG~ as females, but infants born with vaginas. You see, infants are not born in a socially-free vacuum. They are born into societies. Those infants born with vaginas (referred to by societies as females, girls, and sometimes women when they are respected enough) are expected to act and be certain ways. Depending on the society, they must be quiet, polite, deferring, friendly, nurturing, dainty, vain, innocent. One of the demands for females in society is to be virgins, sexually innocent, and chaste. Women’s sexuality is regulated in a number of ways, and one of the most forceful comes in the form of genital mutilation to remove their sexual pleasure or prevent males from sexual access to their bodies.

Female genital mutilation would not take place if society didn’t put females into socially consequential categories based on sex, and the female sex-based category was not beaten upon constantly and forced into submission to the “male” category. But societies DO categorize on the basis of sex, and these categories ARE socially consequential in nature, and the female category IS oppressed by the male category and by society on a broader level.

Females do not have their genitals mutilated because they have vulvas.

Females do not have their genitals mutilated because they ~iDeNtIfY~ as females.

Females have their genitals mutilated because the societies have decided that people born with vaginas are just human enough to be fucked by and impregnated by men, but not human enough to have sexual autonomy.

This entry was posted in Anti-feminism, Transphobia and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

38 Responses to “Female genital mutilation” is cissexist

  1. Julia says:

    As an active redditor (username: GhostOfImNotATroll) I will say that reddit is a toiletbowl for rational discussion.

  2. For all their calling people out on checking their privileges, these folks are extremely bad at realizing that it is the epitome of privilege to call biological sex a non-issue–or one of choice! This whole thing reminds me of what I recently read about calling women ‘menstruators’ because everything else is cissexist (I don’t think it used that word, though. But there was the phrase ‘men who menstruate’ and I’m pretty sure they weren’t being sarcastic).

    http://msmagazine.com/blog/2013/02/11/of-menstruators-and-manhole-covers/

    • it’s astounding to watch as more and more language is taken away from women.

      “Tall” refers to people who are lengthier than most when measured from the top of their head to the soles of their feet.

      “Blonde” refers to people whose hair is of a particular pigmentation.

      “Right-handed” refers to people whose right hand has dominant dexterity.

      “Female” refers to people with vaginas, uteri, and ovaries. When a child is born, this categorization is made. Medical technology has made this categorization before birth.

      While lots of categories aren’t important, the sex category is, because the category a person is assigned to has a huge impact in how they are going to be treated and seen in society.

      Sex is central to understanding women’s oppression, because it is what their oppression is based on.

      But the term “woman” no longer belongs to the people assigned to that category and oppressed based on that category. No, men want in on it.

      Then we had left the term “female” to highlight the sex-based nature of our oppression, but no, that no longer belongs to us either, because “female penises.”

      Now we’re down to “menstruators,” These labels distance women further and further from the root of SEXism.

  3. Reblogged this on Pass the Flaming Sword and commented:
    “it’s astounding to watch as more and more language is taken away from women.

    “Tall” refers to people who are lengthier than most when measured from the top of their head to the soles of their feet.

    “Blonde” refers to people whose hair is of a particular pigmentation.

    “Right-handed” refers to people whose right hand has dominant dexterity.

    “Female” refers to people with vaginas, uteri, and ovaries. When a child is born, this categorization is made. Medical technology has made this categorization before birth.

    While lots of categories aren’t important, the sex category is, because the category a person is assigned to has a huge impact in how they are going to be treated and seen in society.

    Sex is central to understanding women’s oppression, because it is what their oppression is based on.

    But the term “woman” no longer belongs to the people assigned to that category and oppressed based on that category. No, men want in on it.

    Then we had left the term “female” to highlight the sex-based nature of our oppression, but no, that no longer belongs to us either, because “female penises.”

    Now we’re down to “menstruators,” These labels distance women further and further from the root of SEXism.” – By Women of the Patriarchy

  4. Bev Jo says:

    Thank you for this post. It is so important to have places to direct women who are sympathetic to these female-hating men who want to skin us and take our identities, culture, movement, etc. as women. Women feel sorry for such privileged, arrogant men, and then turn on other women, and in this case, girls, without realizing the extent of how they are harming themselves and all women.

    But one look at this, should bring the sympathy back to where it belongs….

  5. Nicky says:

    Reblogged this on Kallmann's syndrome life and commented:
    If these Gender queer theorist are now calling Female Genital mutilation cissexist. I wonder what they will say when it’s done to Biological born Intersex people as well. It’s clear that the gender queer theorist are getting weirder by day.

  6. jpa says:

    Wow, there is a lot of hate speech in this. I mean a lot.
    Aside from that, I’m a bit lost on how replacing “FGM” with “Vulva Mutilation ” results in “completely erase femalehood from existence”. Last time I checked , only the female of the species had a vulva. It would seem that both the acronym and the alternate term both point to the female, and make no effort to make anything disappear.
    Oh there I go , with that wacky logic again. Just say ” You don’t get it ” and move on. I’ll be quiet.

    • girlsoftheinternet says:

      “Last time I checked , only the female of the species had a vulva.”

      OMG, cissexism!

    • Nicky says:

      The only hate speech is your Man speak. It’s clear that your using Male logic here.

    • You appear to have failed at reading anything other than the title of the post, I guess. The very last lines of the post answer your question:

      Females do not have their genitals mutilated because they have vulvas.

      Females do not have their genitals mutilated because they ~iDeNtIfY~ as females.

      Females have their genitals mutilated because the societies have decided that people born with vaginas are just human enough to be fucked by and impregnated by men, but not human enough to have sexual autonomy.

  7. cis_straight_white_male_owning_privelege says:

    As a cis-straight-white-male-femenist I try to do my very best to own my privilege, which in most cases looks like me keeping my mouth shut when it comes to women’s issues and just listening and taking it in. But since this is the internet, a place of seemingly infinite space, I’ll take up some and add my two cents:

    Firstly, I think the poster’s main point is valid

    However with regards to the comment
    “To trans women (that is, females, AKA, human beings (no really)): My heart breaks for you”

    To my knowlege the term “trans women” actually refers to people born in male bodies complete with balls and cocks and now identify as women. “Trans men” who the poster seems to be directing the fuck you’s toward are, to my knowledge, people born in female bodies complete with vulvae and clitorises. So I wonder if the poster’s reaction to this statement would be different if they knew that the person who originally called FGM “cissexist” was in fact a trans man that was born with a vagina. I could imagine that someone who has a vagina, but does not identify as being “female” may choose to not label their vagina with the descriptor “female”. Perhaps there is such a thing as a “male vulva.”

    I understand that people born with penises, regardless of their gender identity do not know what it is like to be a person born with female genitalia and have the experience of being hated, disepowered,feared,belittled, and otherwise oppressed because of it. I also understand that Transfobia is real, and alive and in the process of stating their totally valid position on the issue, I think that their argument was necessarily sprinkled with transfobic comments.

    But thats is ALMOST besides the point the term “cissexist” refers to something that priveleges cis-women or otherwise gives them preferencial treatment and excludes trans women. Like say, excluding trans women from a Women’s only space. What I really can’t understand at all is how the practice of Female Genital Mutilation in Africa privileges anyone other than cis-men in those societies. And I know, I know, its about the LANGUAGE here. But really, would the world really be a better place for trans women if the headlines read “Vulva Mutilation in Africa on the Rise in 2013.” This whole discussion makes me wonder what the women who are subject to this practice call it in their language or what the literal translation is.

    • A man comes into a blog that has as its singular topic transgenderism. When seeing that the terms “trans woman” and “trans man” are used in a way that he is not familiar with, his assumption is that the author must be uninformed, and will change her mind once he explains it to her. Never does the thought enter his mind that she knows exactly what she is talking about, and is making a point of not deferring to trans politics.

      Please don’t continue posting here. Your opinions are far less insightful than you think they are.

    • miss pixie says:

      FGM is not a problem of ‘Africa’. In the UK, 8000 girls per annum are at risk of having FGM done to them. FGM is practiced around the world, and not just by African diaspora. Brazil, the Indian continent. It is not a religious practice (although religion has been used to justify it), it is a cultural and patriarchal practice. It is frequently performed as it is believed it is in the best interest of the girl child.

      Take a look at USA, UK history. It was performed up the mid-1950s on white women to cure them of masturbation or ‘moral insanity’. And we should take a good long look in the mirror at practices such as vaginal and anal bleaching, vaginoplasty, husband stitches, designer-vaginas… just because it’s ‘cool’ and ‘choosey-choice’ to opt for vaginal tightening, does not mean it’s not FGM. This is driven by patriarchy and capitalism making money from making women insecure.

      When I was working in a female clinic, we were trained to ask, ‘are you open or closed’ or ‘are you cut’. Those are the acceptable terms. But this is a deeply private practice, and it is not anyone’s business to randomly ask this.

      But make no mistakes, this is done to Females as a CLASS/CASTE. This is a social structure which targets those defined as female and girl children by wider society.

    • miss pixie says:

      ps… as a man, why are you here?

      If you don’t understand gender is a hierarchical class system (not an indentity, not something owned, not a binary system, not different brain sex, and not choosey choice), then removing the word ‘female’ is meaningless to you.

      If you conceive of gender as being a social structure forged by civilised patriarchy, analysed as a class/caste system of material conditions. You arrive at there being two classes turned out: one group of people are trained into weaponisation, domination and entitlement. The other group are hazed/groomed into subordination, caretaking and sexual/reproductive availability, with a target painted on them as fair-game: violence targetted to those on the shitty end of the gender-structure.

      You think we shouldn’t have female only spaces? Wow, thank you for your privileged, hetero, male opinion on spaces that are none of your damned business. You’re placing your fingers into a very old firey argument (to get an idea see the rapetastic cotton ceiling: http://gendertrender.wordpress.com/tag/cotton-ceiling/ ). It is up to women how we determine our spaces, not you.

  8. cis_straight_white_male_owning_privelege says:

    I never assumed that you were not intentional using the terms “trans man” and “trans woman” to further your own political agenda which is one that is not “unfamiliar” to me. Nor am I under the illusion that I have a chance in hell at “changing your mind” when I out myself as a cis-straight-white-male. I know my opinions are not insightful, thats why I don’t share them out loud. I do however like to contribute to a discussion, as I believe a diversity of perspectives makes for richer dialogue. Rich dialogue is dependent on a consensus of very basic terminology. Chose to respond to your post not to inform YOU of anything, but to clarify for the rest the folks that read your blog that the way you are using the terms “trans man” and “trans woman” are opposite to the way that the trans community at large uses them.

  9. loveangellove says:

    Reblogged this on loveangellove and commented:
    So good. So important.

  10. Even the “cis” prefix is sexist.

  11. Pingback: “Female genital mutilation” is cissexist | winterdominatrix

  12. red says:

    Say after me: “sexual fetish”, “autogynephilia” and “heterosexual male”.

  13. Bev Jo says:

    “Sexual fetish, “autogynephilia,” “heterosexual male.” Fucking female-hating entitled arrogant heterosexual male.

    And no, they are not “transwomen” or “transfolk” or any kind of women. Trans is a myth and a con and a cult. But these men could do very little to further harm girls and women if women did not support them. It is primarily women who obey them and betray us, policing our every word, forbidding us to say no. Just stop it and look at what you are doing.

    I read this week that the murder rate among M2T is very high. I keep saying, they are the most male of men….

  14. L says:

    Some of the things I’ve just read on this blog are some of the most vile things ever. This blog is perhaps the most vile thing ever. I suggest that the author goes and reads a book to gain a deeper understanding of transgender people.

    Transwomen don’t undergo painful gender reassignment surgery and radically change their lifestyle because they want to get in on what women are doing or because they get a kick out of it. They go through it because they were born into the wrong body at birth. This exists you know. And saying “You will never be a woman” is probably the most offensive thing I’ve ever read.

    How can you sit here and call yourself a feminist when you deny the basic premise of equality that our movement was founded upon to some of the most marginalised women in society?

    And yes, if you define yourself as a woman. You are a woman.

    • kesher says:

      Most MTFs never get sex reassignment surgery.

      And yes, if you define yourself as a woman. You are a woman.

      If a transgender person wants to believe that, that’s their choice. It’s not incumbent on the rest of us to play along. For the record, I’ve historically been pro-trans, at least to the point of being sympathetic to people wanting to live their lives on their own terms, assuming they’re not harming anyone else and assuming they’re largely staying out of my way. Where I part ways on transrights is the insistence that a transperson is exactly, totally the same as a cisperson of that gender. That is culturally, factually, biologically incorrect. Almost everyone, even people who are sympathetic to transpeople, makes a distinction.

      Take a theoretical example of an adult non-op (like I said, the majority of transwomen are non-op) transwoman having a sexual relationship with a minor girl. What do you think the public’s perception of that relationship would be? I can guarantee that even people who are otherwise sympathetic to transwomen would see the transwoman in this scenario as a sexual predator. Now take an example of an adult transman having a sexual relationship with a minor girl. Do you think the public would see the transman as a predator? Did they/do they see Brandon Teena as a sexual predator? No, they don’t, because, at some level, they see straight transmen as lesbians and lesbian transwomen as straight men. If that attitude changes in my lifetime, I will be shocked.

  15. thevenusenvy says:

    I wonder what a trans man who has suffered FGM in childhood would think of this post.

  16. thevenusenvy says:

    Reblogged this on THE VENUS ENVY and commented:
    I’m wondering what a trans man who has suffered FGM in childhood would think of this vile post. TW for extreme transphobia, shoddy feminism and discussion of genital mutilation.

  17. Pingback: The Emperor’s New Penis | CounterPunch | Women of the Patriarchy

  18. You’ve hit the nail n the head – and I have been saying this for years (in offline conversation) that it is about the oppression of women & their sexual pleasure… because what happens if a women experiences sexual pleasure? UMMM…. she might be dissatisfied with her partner & go looking elsewhere!! Well, men can’t have that can they?? Of course oppression happens via most/all religion – texts written by men for men- (all religion is about the oppression of women) it is just that religions that practice this ritual are at the most extreme.

    And as an aside to some of the comments here.. trans people may CHOOSE to have sexual reassignment or identify their sexuality, etc – but female children born with vaginas into these cultures do not have this choice

  19. Gaius Baltar says:

    All true, but there’s still a reason the movement against circumcision is run by feminists (and many FGC survivors consider all genital cutting to be mutilation).

    Making an ethical distinction between any form of genital cutting (male, female, intersex) and another is still dangerous regardless of how mild a version you’re talking about. These practices have a closely intertwined history both culturally and racially, and the American view of male circumcision is rose-tinted by racism against other cultures. Of course what they’re doing is wrong, but we take that and use it to promote our own superstitions as being ‘more civilized.’

    A convenient slideshow of this practice’s fraudulent and racist history in the US:

    http://www.icgi.org/medicalization/

    And I like my feminists radical:

    http://barreloforanges.com/2013/03/06/circumcision-is-a-feminist-cause/

  20. Gaius Baltar says:

    Oh, and though I’m feminist let me be the first to accuse these transwomen of misandry. Genital mutilation doesn’t have to be against females or be more severe than another version in order to be unethical, which is what this transwoman is implying.

    But seriously, all of these practices are about reducing human sexuality to 1s and 0s. Positive and negative. Girls aren’t supposed to have anything that sticks out, and boys aren’t supposed to have anything tender or moist or internal. It’s all about reproduction over pleasure, and fixating everyone on intercourse. That’s the sort of thinking that happens when a self-replicating machine gains the ability to alter its replication system.

  21. floacist says:

    Reblogged this on THE FLOACIST.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

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