(no subject)

[lupagreenwolf]

I have been adding ETAs to my main Livejournal post about this since it's been getting the most attention, but I wanted to highlight the latest one as I am on a laptop instead of my phone for once:

So--I feel a bit like my point has been missed on some parts, so I wanted to clarify. I have absolutely no problem with cis-women-only rituals. What I have a problem with is when a ritual that is purported to be for "all women" or, in the case of Z's ritual, "the beauty and grace of the feminine form in all of her infinite variety", is limited to cis women only. This exclusion of trans women from rituals stated to be for ALL women invalidates trans women's identities AS WOMEN. It is NOT enough that trans people have their own trans-centric rituals and spaces, though these have great value to many trans people. "Transgender" is not a third sex separate from "men" and "women". A transgender woman is a woman, and if your ritual is specifically stated to be for ALL women, then you need to include ALL women, cis and trans.

That's what I'm trying to convey. I could also go on about how I feel so many cis women are ignoring the fact that trans women's issues ARE women's issues. I could add in how transphobic it is for cis women who have been raped, abused, or assaulted by men (and I include myself in that demographic as a sexual assault and abusive relationship survivor) use our trauma as a weapon against trans women simply because they were born into male bodies. I could emphasize that cisgender women do have privileges that trans women do not, simply for being cis--no one doubts that we cis women are women because we were born with vulvas, but trans women have their identities as women questioned all the time, within and outside of paganism. But I feel that these issues have been more than adequately covered in the many comments and discussions as a response to this post, for which I am very grateful.

So I am just going to leave this as my main point: have cis-women-only rituals if you want. Or cis-men-only. Or trans-women, or trans-men, or genderqueer, etc. There is space for sharing unique experiences. However, don't call your cis-women-only ritual one that is for ALL WOMEN. That is where I get angry, and why I was protesting this weekend.

Comments

[sapphire_rose]

It truly surprises me, if it was based on The Body Sacred, that it was limited to only cis-women. That's sad, because the message of love and acceptance of all women is so strong within that writing!

[brock_tn]

The problem here is that Z is evidently completely unable to accept the idea that trans-women are women. In 2011 she made it unequivocally clear that she perceives trans-women as men who have disguised themselves as women for the purpose of invading and destroying the sacred space of "real" women. Except that Z used far more inflammatory and insulting language in her public statements than I did in my paraphrase, and she has never disavowed those stanements nor apologized for them.

It's pretty clear that Z simply does not get this particular issue.

Which is terribly sad. Because people who stop being able to learn have started to die on the inside.

I will try to feel pity for Z. But it's difficult to do that when one is so angry with her.

[sapphire_rose]

Her soul has a lot of growing to do. :-(

It's rather sad that the Girl Scouts have more right with this issue than she does.

[spider_fox]

I personally rather that Girl Scouts gets the idea right rather than Z, if we had to choose between the two. Girl Scouts is a much more public and widespread institution, and therefore can be beneficial to more people.

But yea, I do agree that it's pretty sad.

[scatteredshells]

I have issues with cis-women only rituals because... WHY the necessity of only cis women? Is it a bleeding monthly/ability to get pregnant thing? Is that some mystery of womanhood that can only be in the ritual/experienced/under? Like, really? Are they asking for proof of fertility and moonblood at the door? Are barren women exempt? Post-menopausal? Women with PCOS issues who may have high enough testosterone levels from their condition to start growing facial hair?

And underneath all of those requirements I would technically be allowed, except I would never got because I AM NOT A WOMAN. I was coercively assigned female at birth and ever after, coercively because it always went contrary to what I felt, people keep reinforcing it, no you can't wear that, no you can't have that toy it's a boy's toy and you are a girl, you are a girl because you were born with a certain genital configuration and we know far, far better than you.... all of it, coercive. I am not female, a girl, or a woman.

Trans women have been participating in feminism, and front-line, since white western feminism started. They have been pushed out at every opportunity (do some research on Olivia Stone records, for one example out of many,) these 'genetic women only' rituals only perpetuate an ongoing history of transphobia, cissexism, biological essentialism, and transmisogyny that have existed within western feminism movements since their inception. It is disgusting, especially when as you said they advertise the ritual for all women and then exclude some women based on things like medical history, perceived ability to conceive, and more.

[scatteredshells]

Also: this fear of trans women and their junk, like, reducing trans women only to their presumed genital configuration, or presumed past genital configuration. Right down to non-consensually calling trans women's genitals 'penises,' assumptions on how those are used, and more. Also, very classic transphobia and cissexism, also very disgusting, IMHO. Trans women are women. If you're after some sort of ritual that is for monthly-bleeding self-identified women who are actually able to conceive in the year that the ritual is being held, then pre-screen ritual attendees for that.

[elf]

I can imagine plenty of reasons for rituals limited to specific groups of cis-women... women who have given birth, or who breastfeed, or who bleed/have bled every month, or who are fertile right now, and so on. (Nevermind checking for accuracy; I'm willing to posit basic honesty for the most part.)

I'm having more trouble coming up with reasons for all-cis-women rituals, but I'm willing to posit such rituals could exist without promoting transphobia. But there's a big difference between "this ritual is for us, to build energies based on our shared our experiences" (whatever those might be) and "this ritual is for WOMEN which means NO ICKY MANPARTS in your pants or in your physical history!!!"

[thejeopardymaze]

I can imagine rituals made specifically for say, pregnant women for health and protection (despite the rhetoric about natural birth and parenting, pregnancy always carried risks of danger, and not just for humans, I have a horrifying story about a mare who wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for veterinarians if you're interested), but it's the overall attitude that pisses me off.

[elf]

Yep. No problem with "this ritual is to celebrate bodily fertility and strengthen the bodies of women carrying a child." Or, "this ritual is to welcome our new teenage sister to womanhood, so it's for menstruating women only." Or "this is for mother-child energies." Or whatever.

But, "this is to celebrate the diverse beauty of the female form" doesn't have any reason to limit attendance to cis women, and the way this one was done was an insult and an attack.

[brock_tn]

By Ghod, I think you've hit on it: it's not body morphology that's the issue, its *!*!*GUY COOTIES*!*!*.

[elf]

Z's rants make it very clear that she thinks a penis or a Y chromosome comes with some inborn anti-woman traits, and that anyone who's ever had either is devoid of spiritual value.

When pressed, she'll admit that men have men's mysteries, and that there are trans mysteries, but the confusion and condescension when she talks about them makes it clear that it's like parents talking about four-year-olds declaring themselves married... obviously, they can tell it's important to the adults, and it's very cute that want to participate, but nobody thinks it's *real.*

(Am speaking from inference. Have no direct quotes to offer right now; if anyone has examples of Z actually *honoring* the existence of men's mysteries or trans mysteries, rather than "I guess they can do something religious too," I'd be happy to hear it.)

[scatteredshells]

Still have issues with this concept of cis women only rituals.

There are trans men and non-binary people who conceive, stay pregnant, give birth, even feed their children with lactation secretions. There are cis men, trans women, and non-binary people who do have the equipment for lactation and some of those people do go so far as to nurse their children/aid their partners/etc. I bring this up to illustrate the inherant biological essentialism, rigid gender roles, and binarism I personally encounter in the vast majority of modern western paganism & related spiritualities.

The biggest issue with trying to limit these groups based on such criteria is how many incorrect, insensitive, ignorant, and offensive assumptions are made about others, their bodies, and their relationship with their gender and their bodies.

Having a cis-woman-only space is a privileged equivalent of men-only, straight-only, white-only, etc. While I appreciate and acknowlege that there can be and are spiritual reasons to gather/participate/etc. along some particular lines, even men-only rituals, the fact remains that our western society still privileges (trans or cis) mens voices over (trans or cis) womens voices, erases non binary genders entirely, privileges white voices over POC voices, hetero over queer, etc. To the point that every pagan womans event IS for not merely cis woman but a rather rigid definition at that.

The reply to my comment below yours illustrates how such rigid definitions can alienate other cis women who are gender-non-conforming in various ways.

Finally, though I admit lack of personal experience, I have generally encountered cis women who are infertile or who do not want children, who do identify with the creator and nurturer archetypes, to find other ways of identifying other than through birthing/raising children, ie: nurturing personalities, pets, creating art, etc. Even encouraged to do so by others within the community.

[scatteredshells]

Again, I can definitely see the need, value, and validity of rituals or gatherings/etc. based on those who are pregnant, or trying to conceive, etc. The list goes on. The automatic assumption that everyone who is or has been pregnant (or who badly, badly wishes they could be) is or must be a cis woman is what I am taking issue with here, that is cissexism. Trans men and non-binary people who are pregnant, have been pregnant, or who want to be pregnant one day are constantly degendered, and assumed to be women/female from all angles because in society 'uterus' = woman = female = pregnancy = feminine, etc.

[elf]

I, personally, see no need for cis-women-only rituals. I can posit that some cis women might need such a ritual, and that, hypothetically, it could be possible to have a reason for it that wasn't based on transphobia. I have doubts about this, because I've yet to see any description for "women-only-and-we-mean-no-trans-women" rituals that weren't steeped in either transphobia, or what they really meant was "this ritual is for women directly participating in aspects of physical fertility."

Sometimes there's transphobia and other alienations built into those; sometimes, they really are just focused on certain aspects of fertility and haven't figured out how to phrase things politely. (When six women have been circling together for a couple of years, and offer to host a ritual in a semi-public venue, they may not realize how their self-descriptions come across to people who have different experiences of womanhood.)

Racking my brain for "what I have in common with other cis women, that I don't have in common with trans or genderqueer women"... I'm not coming up with much to build a ritual on. I can imagine plenty in common with other people who've given birth and breastfed, or with other people who menstruate, or with those women who work in the corporate world. None of those are cis-women-only things. But people are diverse and constantly surprise me; I can imagine the *idea* of "cis women's mysteries" if not the content of those mysteries.

Maybe we could have a workshop for "cis women lecture other cis women on how transphobia and gender absolutism are bad for all women," with all the hurtful statements that would bring up confined to an audience who's not the direct targets of the bigotry.

[elialshadowpine]

On the matter of there being very rigid definitions of cis womanhood by these groups:

I tend to agree, and the focus on the uterus/period/pregnancy/childbirth/breastfeeding is part of what's put me off from a lot of feminist-minded pagan groups. I'm a cis woman who has PCOS and PMDD; when I was a teenager, I basically didn't bleed. As an adult, I bled constantly. Because of the PMDD (or my bipolar disorder, or some combination of the two), I have constant bipolar cycles when my hormones are fluctuating like that. My period has to be controlled by hormonal birth control. I have my withdrawal bleed twice a year.

I also have never wanted children. I don't hate them, per se, but I like my life as it is, and my cats are my children. I see baby pictures and have no idea why people think that's cute; I see kitten pictures and immediately want dozens. My maternal instinct is species-misplaced.

I was introduced to the idea of Dianic Wicca and other feminist pagan groups when I was a teenager, and I feel no more kinship now than I did then. Honestly, I felt put off and unwanted. Their idea of what constitutes womanhood is very stuck in traditional gender roles of women being mother, nurturer, caretaker, whereas I have never really been any of those things. Some of the writings I have read made me feel like I would be considered less of a woman by them, because I don't identify with these things.

At the same time, I consider myself very feminine, because that is who I am (and my memories of Not Here -- well, let's just say womanhood was not treated so strictly... here, I receive regular comments that I am one of the most masculine women people have met). And yet, I do not identify with any of the things that they put forth as being necessary and even fundamental of womanhood.

So, I don't understand why cis women rituals are necessary. I can sorta vaguely understand why other cis women might want them if I look at it sideways, but for me, these things that are so important to these rituals are things that are either unimportant to me or I view with distaste and disgust because they are annoyances to my body or things that I simply do not ever want. It is limiting, and the idea that my womanhood should be boiled down to my reproductive organs and genitalia is downright abhorrent to me.

[scatteredshells]

Thank you very much for sharing, I am always greatful to learn from the experiences of others.

[charcoalfeathers]

Thank you.

He says it so succinctly. I may open up a whole 'nother ball of wax with this analogy, but it helps illustrate to people why "cis-women only" rituals are so absurd.

I'm going to weigh in on the Dianic "genetic women only" hubbub.

Z Budapest is not an "Elder." She's just old. She is the Rick Santorum of Paganism.

Maybe she's the David Duke of Paganism. I mean, doesn't the KKK have a RIGHT to exclude blacks? There are lots of places black people can go. Why do they have to come and crash the poor Klan rallies?

Tell me there's a difference between misandry and misogyny. Tell me there's a difference between excluding trans people from excluding black people.

I'm surprised at the number of Pagans who just now realize how toxic this woman is, how vicious her message is. She's always been like this. Hate is the only thing she ever brought to the table.

[autumnalmonk]

THIS! Thank you for sharing this and the link.

+1

[thejeopardymaze]

Personally I'm very disappointed that PantheaCon still supports this crap.

Re: +1

[elialshadowpine]

Indeed. I had hoped they would have taken a more firm stance after last year's events. I don't really have the money for a non-local con, but I'd heard a lot of great things about Pantheacon, and had at one point hoped to get out that way... seriously rethinking that now.

"Unity in Diversity"

[thejeopardymaze]

Unless you're a member of the wrong group.

I can't afford to go to these things anyway, and I hate dealing with airports and plane ride, so I'd be lying if I said I was boycotting. Still, it would be nice to see others decline next year, despite some of the great things I've seen available the past few years.

[dharma_slut]

This exclusion of trans women from rituals stated to be for ALL women invalidates trans women's identities AS WOMEN



it's incredible, but you can repeat and repeat and repeat that inthis conversation, and people will simply bleat once more; "Why can't ciswomen have their own rituals?

[autumnalmonk]

While trans issues are not something I am generally active in, this is one that I have a definite opinion on and for exactly the reason you have highlighted. To say you are celebrating all the "infinite variety" of a thing and then to specifically and intentionally exclude something inherently insults and invalidates the excluded.