Amongst those who call themselves feminists – people who advocate for women’s rights in order to achieve gender equality – there is a minority who deem themselves ‘gender-critical’ feminists, more commonly known as ‘TERFs’ (Trans-exclusionary Radical Feminists). The term was first used by activist Viv Smythe in a blog post in 2008, and since then has been used, particularly online, to identify hostile attitudes towards the transgender community, glossed over by wrongfully assigning the term ‘feminist’ to them. The approach of this subtype of ‘feminism’ – though I am hesitant to call it that – is fundamentally and cripplingly exclusionist, and simply not the way to achieve gender equality. Feminism is about inclusion and equality, not exclusion and marginalisation.
To fully comprehend the two intertwining areas of feminism and transphobia, it is essential to look at the past and history of both. Throughout the history of feminism, there have been various different ‘waves’, all which took place at different periods and focused on different issues facing women at the time. First wave feminism, for example, took place predominantly throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, and focused primarily on legal inequalities such as the right to vote. Second-wave feminism, however, beginning in the 1960s and lasting for around 20 years, developed hostile attitudes towards the transgender community. However, what is important to recognise is that the feminist movement, and feminism itself, has not condoned transphobia at all in the 21st century, with both the third and fourth waves of feminism being trans-inclusive – as a result, I would suggest that Trans-exclusionary Radical Feminism ought not be labelled as a subgroup of feminism, as the aims of both groups are wholly disparate: one seeks to include and empower, the other seeks to exclude and shame.
Essentially, the TERF argument is based on the assumption that ‘transgender women aren’t women’ – Trans-exclusionary Radical Feminism aims to seek equality for one group by marginalising another, therefore simultaneously missing the objective of feminism as a whole of achieving gender equality. Feminism seeks equality for all women, not just certain types of women that are chosen by a group of ‘feminists’ who feel like they need to exclude other women to promote their own good. Furthermore, since feminism is a progressive movement about gender equality for all, it seems greatly counterproductive to exclude the transgender community from this initiative, as it would appear to make more problems than it solves.
Though the media likes to make us think at America is generally at the forefront when it comes to LGBTQ+ inequality (a law prohibiting the firing of employees based on sexual orientation or gender identity was only passed on June the 15th, barely even a week ago), when it comes to transphobia the UK is arguably the epicentre of the issue. The attack on the UK transgender community has presented itself in many ways, such as convincing the public that allowing transgender women to access female safe-spaces such as bathrooms is a danger to ‘real’ women (which, as studies have shown time and time again, is false). This very week, our Prime Minister Boris Johnson has abandoned the government’s plans to allow transgender people to legally change their gender without medical diagnosis, on top of suggesting plans to ban transgender people from using single-sex spaces such as bathrooms. Such regressive steps in terms of transgender rights should not still be taking place in 2020, especially in the name of ‘feminism’. Feminism is about empowering women - all women - hence why transphobia has no place in feminism.
Though historically speaking the anti-trans era of feminism was left in the 20th century, the TERF community is very much still present in society today, spreading relentless messages of hate to a group that should not be attacked for something they have literally no control over. Mere weeks ago, author JK Rowling sparked public debate through a series of transphobic tweets (not for the first time, either), later defending herself by stating that ‘it isn’t hate to speak the truth’. Here, and in most other cases in today’s society, it is obvious that what is fuelling discrimination is ignorance. Ironically, in her response to the media backlash she admitted that the reason she feels the need to post so frequently online regarding the transgender community is due to the amount of misogyny currently in society, saying that she has never ‘seen women denigrated and dehumanised to the extent they are now’ (whilst simultaneously denigrating and dehumanising a whole group of women through her words). The issue is that, in taking a strictly biological view of what is means to ‘be a woman’, TERFs such as JK Rowling directly narrow the reach of feminism itself. Women are not defined by their bodies, and by asserting that they are, these ‘gender critical feminists’ are not promoting feminism at all - since when are women defined by having periods? Or being able to reproduce? Or by their bodies in general? I am sure that TERFs would not intentionally exclude, let alone incite direct hate against, biological females who could not get pregnant, so why can’t the same tolerance be extended to transgender women? I believe the answer is as follows: TERF ideology is not about feminism, it is about disguising hate in order to promote pre-existing prejudices towards the transgender community.
Feminism without trans people is not feminism. Equal rights for others does not mean fewer rights for you. Trans-exclusionary Radical ‘Feminists’ aren’t feminists, they’re transphobes who use selective biology to discriminate.