Scan barcode
A review by quackalacka
Gender Hurts: A Feminist Analysis of the Politics of Transgenderism by Sheila Jeffreys
2.0
If you have a strong argument, you will embrace the counterpoints of your detractors, because methodically disproving them strengthens your own position. If you find yourself omitting criticisms or misrepresenting your opponent’s claims, this is a sign to you that your own position needs strengthening and does not stand up to scrutiny.
Not only does Jeffreys ignore valid counter-points and misrepresent her opponents, she also argues whatever is most convenient for her anti-trans rhetoric, even if the Argument of the Moment philosophically-contradicts an earlier belief or opinion she has stated. For example, she argues that we should attempt to abolish gender, then alternately claims that the title of “woman” is a special role in society that needs protection from the diluting forces of transgender ideology. She argues that gender-affirming surgery is akin to mutilation, but then fails to consider what that line of argument means for her position as a radical feminist in full-support of women’s bodily autonomy. It’s a “throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks” approach that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny of anyone who is even mildly educated on both sides of the subject.
I suppose the book was useful in the sense that it helped me to understand trans-exclusionary radical feminism better (hence my rating), but it also depends on the reader to agree unquestioningly with Jeffreys’s premises, such as that “transgender ideology is hurting lesbian communities by turning its members into men” or that “such a vast number of trans women are afflicted with autogynephilia that there is essentially no such thing as a trans woman”. I don’t agree with the premises the author assumes and she offers no credible evidence to support them; just cites her own earlier opinion pieces as if they constitute fact.
In short, I’m glad I read this because it strengthened my original position, as the arguments contained herein are so weak.
Not only does Jeffreys ignore valid counter-points and misrepresent her opponents, she also argues whatever is most convenient for her anti-trans rhetoric, even if the Argument of the Moment philosophically-contradicts an earlier belief or opinion she has stated. For example, she argues that we should attempt to abolish gender, then alternately claims that the title of “woman” is a special role in society that needs protection from the diluting forces of transgender ideology. She argues that gender-affirming surgery is akin to mutilation, but then fails to consider what that line of argument means for her position as a radical feminist in full-support of women’s bodily autonomy. It’s a “throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks” approach that doesn’t stand up to scrutiny of anyone who is even mildly educated on both sides of the subject.
I suppose the book was useful in the sense that it helped me to understand trans-exclusionary radical feminism better (hence my rating), but it also depends on the reader to agree unquestioningly with Jeffreys’s premises, such as that “transgender ideology is hurting lesbian communities by turning its members into men” or that “such a vast number of trans women are afflicted with autogynephilia that there is essentially no such thing as a trans woman”. I don’t agree with the premises the author assumes and she offers no credible evidence to support them; just cites her own earlier opinion pieces as if they constitute fact.
In short, I’m glad I read this because it strengthened my original position, as the arguments contained herein are so weak.