British Cycling being embarassing, obsequious idiots ...

you're a very smart woman @brokenbetty , we've spoken before and one of those reasons we did speak is because you clearly are quite switched on when it comes to feminist theory, the 70-90's of british feminism is a fascinating place which has shaped the lives of women and LGBT people for this country since and you know this as well as i, more even, you were there. but what i think you do struggle with, much as i thought at the time and still now, is that you forget you're a middle class white woman.

when we talk about intersectionality, in bell hooks original intention, the core principle of such is not that these labels are interchangable and applyable like pin badges, but that the intersections you have are fixed, not from birth, but we aquire them through life. this helps to explain how a intelligent black women will find it much harder in the world, as a woman, as professional, as a person, than a middling white woman from a old money family. rehashed by, i'm sure you know, peggy mcintosh when discussing how privilige was an explicit tool to convey the impact of whitness and how it is pervaisive even amongst "the good ones" (funny how this has been forgotten and the intention of privledge discourse is heirachical masturbation, maybe something for people in this thread to remember). with this in mind it's very interesting reading your thoughts on intersectionality, and how you dont think it has helped women all that much. i think this goes some way to articulate why you have so much difficulty relating to trans women.

i actually reject that trans and blackness are synonymous models of marginalised experience, they're not, they're parralell but a white trans woman like myself, and a black trans woman have a multitidue of different experiences and risk factors in society at large, that are different in consequence even when considering the patriachy we both face. but we're both women even though our experiences and fears come from different avenues. much in the same way that when a trans woman stands side by side with a cis woman, we're both women.

trans women are women, they have been treated like a woman their whole life, it's why our experiences and understanding of male patriarchy are connected. one does not decide to take HRT, get shunned by friends and family, face unemployment, homelessness, and LGBT violence for an internal feeling or to win some sporting events. much like a lesbian does not choose to be gay, or a hetrosexual woman who deplores the patriarchal impact and control men have over her life chooses to end up married to a man who you have to coach into cleaning up after themselves.

the idea that trans woman somehow is embodying or weaponising patriarchy, or in competition with a woman is a misunderstanding of how patriarchy is formed. it's not an individual agency, the patriarchy isn't something one embodies, it's a structures used to describe how societry constructs to advantage white men. ofc trans women can be participatory in this, so can cis women, they do all the time, for they are both white women. which is why writers like bell hooks wrote about intersectionality, how could we critique whiteness, and the participation of white women in the patriarchy, how could we critique feminism for its erasure of black and brown bodies, how could we critique feminism of its erasure of queer experiences. i also believe hooks went on to define that trans women also are a valid critique of feminism (https://www.instagram.com/tv/CXhZ6fWAoc4/?hl=en)

i don't expect to change your mind betty, i've failed at that before, you're an autonomous person with your own experience.

but i think you might get banned if you keep calling trans women male and i don't want that, i like having strong opinionated women around in this see of fence sitting men, so i'm trying again to say, let's stop that