Janice-Raymond

anonymous asked:

Search "woman kills trans woman" and every search, EVERY GODDAMN ONE is: trans woman killed, man kills trans woman because he feared masculinity after flirting with her, trans woman murdered, MAN KILLS TRANS WOMAN. Wow. It's almost as if women aren't their problem, but who do they spend time harassing????

Ah but you see according to many genderists those men kill transwomen because they’re extremely well-versed in Germaine Greer and Janice Raymond because feminists are apparently that powerful and influential. 

You know, I’m sure there are people reading this and saying to themselves, “What do you mean, ban on funding trans healthcare? There was a ban?”

Yes, there was a ban. In 1980, based upon the information presented by one woman, Janice Raymond, author of the recently published at that time anti-trans screed, “The Transsexual Empire”, the National Center for Healthcare Technology blocked all funding for transition-related surgeries, which caused a cascading effect throughout the healthcare and health insurance industries, until no transition-related care whatsoever would be covered.

Think about that. Based on the known-biased opinion of one person, the federal government changed course, cutting off millions of trans people for accessing life-saving healthcare for the next 34 years. And you probably didn’t even know about it.

Where would the acceptance of trans women be today in 2014, if for the past 34 years, we had been able to access the the care we needed? Where would medical technology have progressed? How many trans people would not have committed suicide? We know that trans people attempt suicide at a rate over 25 times that of the general population. And those are only the ones we can count because they didn’t succeed. How many trans women would not have been murdered?

Today, we finally saw that ban rescinded by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the descendent of the NCHCT, at least in part, but it is the removal of that blanket ban which is the crack which will ultimately cause the dykes to burst under the pressure of the tide of conscience.

Today, the arc of history at long last bent toward justice for all women, not just some. Beginning today, we will speak not of justice delayed, not of justice denied, but of justice fulfilled, of justice upheld.

I can not even begin to express my thanks that Janice Raymond lived to see this day, so that one day, she will go to her grave knowing that despite her best efforts to destroy us, in the end she lost. Upon her soul lie the countless numbers of women whose lives she could have saved, but instead extinguished, in the name of feminism.

A new day has dawned in America. We have moved that much closer to the promise of freedom for all that was made to us 238 years ago, and again 149 years ago, and again 50 years ago. The tide has turned, and now we can truly say that the day will soon come when all trans women, all trans people, will receive the care they need in the moment when the need is discovered, to the best of our abilities.

—  Gemma Seymour, 31 May 2014
One thing that I have found refreshing about working in an international context is that women from other countries, particularly in the developing world, have no illusions about their so-called rights. International feminism is not terribly liberal. Surrogacy could never be defended as a woman’s right to control her own body in Bangladesh. It would be recognized immediately that surrogacy only gives women the “right” to give up control of their bodies, and promotes a traffic in women from the developing countries to the west. By focusing on a rarefied and reductionistic realm of rights, U.S. reproductive liberals are circumscribing the new reproductive technologies to the U.S. domestic arena, when the issues of the reproductive use and abuse of women are being played out on an international marketing and medical stage.
—  Janice G. Raymond, “Reproductive Technologies, Radical Feminism and Socialist Liberalism”, Reproductive and Genetic Engineering: Journal of International Feminist Analysis, Volume 2 Number 2, (1989) [PDF]
To expose the victimization of women by men is to be blamed for
creating it and for making women into passive victims. The liberals fail to recognize that women’s victimization can be acknowledged without labeling women passive. Passive and victim do not necessarily go together. It is the liberals who equate victimization with passivity. It is they who devise this equation […] It seems obvious that one can recognize women as victims of surrogacy, pornography, and prostitution without stripping them of agency and without depriving them of some ability to act under oppressive conditions.
—  Janice G. Raymond, “Sexual and Reproductive Liberalism”.
versobooks.com
Judith Butler on gender and the trans experience
"I reject totally the characterization of a transwoman [sic] as a mutilated man. First, that formulation presumes that men born into that sex assignment are not mutilated. Second, it once again sets up the feminist as the prosecutor of trans people. If there is any mutilation going on in this scene, it is being done by the feminist police force who rejects the lived embodiment of transwomen [sic]. That very accusation is a form of “mutilation” as is all transphobic discourse such as these."

Share this with every TERF you come across.

When asked what they hated most about prostitution and how they survived, the Russian/NIS women consistently described hating that they had been broken spiritually and physically by degrading sexual acts and abusive conditions. Many still carry an excruciating burden of humiliation and shame. Some tried to ply men with drugs so buyers “would forget about sex altogether.” Others used drugs and alcohol to dull and deaden their feelings. Women who reported drug use before entering prostitution also reported a history of sexual, physical and mental abuse prior to as well as within prostitution. Thus, their drug use must be seen in the context of this accretion of abuse. Respondents interviewed in the U.S. country report also stated that prostitution worsened their drug habits, ultimately trapping them further within the sex industry.
—  Janice G. Raymond et al. A Comparative Study of Women Trafficked in the Migration Process: Patterns, Profiles, and Health Consequences of Sexual Exploitation in Five Countries (Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Venezuela and the United States). (2002).
The reason that women wear trousers is mainly comfort and convenience. Trousers are practical in all types of weather and don’t make women physically vulnerable or encourage sexual harassment, as certain styles of feminine clothes do. More significantly, a woman putting on a man’s clothes is, in a sense, putting on male power status, whereas a man putting on women’s clothes is putting on parody. That drag queens and cross dressers can draw hoots and howls in audiences of mostly men says more about how women were and are perceived than it does about the supposed boundary-breaking behavior of gender-bending men who wear women’s clothes.
—  Janice G. Raymond. “The Politics of Transgenderism.” Blending Genders: Social Aspects of Cross-Dressing and Sex-Changing. Ed Richard Ekins and Dave King. Routledge, 1996. 215-223.

It is not hard to understand why transsexuals want to become lesbian-feminists. They indeed have discovered where strong female energy exists and want to capture it. It is more difficult to understand why so many feminists are so ready to accept men–in this case, castrated men–into their most intimate circles. Certainly Dionysian confusion about the erasure of all boundaries is one reason that appeals to the liberal mind and masquerades as “sympathy for all oppressed groups.” Women who believe this, however, fail to see that such liberalism is repressive, and that it can only favor and fortify the possession of women by men. These women also fail to recognize that accepting transsexuals into the feminist community is only another rather unique variation on the age-old theme of women nurturing men, providing them with a safe haven, and finally giving them our best energies.

The question arises: are women who accept transsexuals as lesbian-feminists expressing gratitude on some level to those men who are finally willing to join women and pay for their male privilege with their balls? Gratitude is a quality exhibited by all oppressed groups when they think that some in the class of oppressors have finally relinquished their benefits to join them. But, of course, it is doubtful that transsexuals actually give up their male privilege. As one woman put it: “A man who decides to call himself a woman is not giving up his privilege. He is simply using it in a more insidious way.” Furthermore, a man who decides to call himself a lesbian-feminist is getting a lot. The transsexually constructed lesbian-feminist is the man who indeed gets to be “the man” in an exclusive women’s club to which he would have otherwise no access.

—  Janice G. Raymond. The Transsexual Empire, Chapter IV: Sappho by Surgery: The Transsexually Constructed Lesbian-Feminist. Teachers College Press, 1994. 99-119.
The distinction between forced and voluntary prostitution is precisely what the sex industry is promoting because it will give the industry more security and legal stability if these distinctions can be utilized to legalize prostitution, pimping and brothels. Women who bring charges against pimps and perpetrators will bear the burden of proving that they were forced. How will marginalized women ever be able to prove coercion? If prostituted women must prove that force was used in recruitment or in their working conditions, very few women in prostitution will have legal recourse and very few offenders will be prosecuted.
—  Janice G. Raymond. “Ten Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution.” Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, 2003.
Adrienne Rich has been a very special friend and critic. She has read the manuscript through all of its stages and provided resources, creative criticism, and constant encouragement. Her work, and her recognition of my work, have meant a great deal to me in the process of this writing.
— 

Janice Raymond, The Transsexual Empire, acknowledgements.

Adrienne Rich wanted trans women denied medical care. Adrienne Rich wanted Sandy Stone removed from Olivia and driven out of the feminist movement. Adrienne Rich provided “constant encouragement” to a call for our end.

Hey, other trans women. Here’s the deal

Very few terfs are actually innocently mislead. 

This isn’t some kind of liberal you’re dealing with who is operating under denial and tries to be a decent person to some level at least.

These people are on the same level as westboro baptist churchers. They want trans women eradicated. Destroyed. Literally “morally mandated out of existence” (as Janice Raymond wrote).

They want us dead.

They can not be reasoned with. They can’t be convinced. They can’t be made to see reality. They will, even if you attempt gentle communication, work to hurt you. They will work to abuse you. They will work to do as much harm as possible in the hopes that they can either cow you to their genocidal viewpoint or harm you enough to defend yourself so they can claim you were a “violent dangerous male”.

The only purpose for communicating with a terf is to tear apart their rhetoric for others to see. Make it clear that they’re wrong to others. You’re not here to convince them. It’s not worth the cost of trauma to you. 

Seriously, it’s not worth it. Don’t expose yourself to it. If you have to engage, do it swiftly, rip their crap apart and then block and move on. They are out to hurt you. And enough of us die every day, enough of us suffer every day, for any of us to go into hell willingly. 

Please just don’t do it.

Radical feminists have never denied the agency of women under conditions of oppression. But radical feminists have located women’s agency, women’s making of choices, in resistance to those oppressive institutions, not in women’s assimilation to them. Nowhere in the more “nuanced” feminist liberal literature on choice is women’s resistance to pornography and surrogacy stressed as a sign of women’s agency. What about the agency of women who have testified about their abuse in pornography, risking exposure and ridicule, and often getting it? What about the ex-surrogates who choose to fight for themselves and their children in court, against the far greater economic, legal, and psychological advantages of the sperm donor? If we want to stress women’s agency, let’s look in the right places.
—  Janice G. Raymond. “Sexual and Reproductive Liberalism.” The Sexual Liberals and the Attack on Feminism. Ed. Dorchen Leidholdt and Janice G. Raymond. Teachers College Press, 1990. 103-111.
Friendly Reminder

One of the cornerstones of Janice Raymond’s career is a book that, among other things, insinuates repeatedly that trans women were invented by the Nazis, basing the assumption on the fact that SRS was first performed, “in Germany during the 1930’s.” Whether she knows or cares that it was done by a gay Jew in a facility the Nazis burned to the ground has never been clear.