Towards a Radical Transfeminist Synthesis
On the interrelationship between reproductive and sexual exploitation.
"Many people misunderstand how there can be an integration between a trans and radical feminist understanding of gender within the same framework, which is caused by a severe misunderstanding about the nature of womanhood.
Womanhood is fundamentally defined by two roles that contrast each other, “First type,” and “Second type.” The “First type woman” is the lady, the woman who is ‘used’ privately and is not for public consumption. Increasingly, even she is being pornographically violated by men, yet in the modern day, she can still find refuge in the arms (and domicile) of a man. Hidden from the public and the world around her.
The Nazis had a term for their ideal role for the German woman: “Kinder, Küche, Kirche.” This phrase emblematically symbolizes the role of “first-type women.” Pregnant, in the Kitchen, and in the Church. This represents the pure subordination of the self and internality of the woman as a subject, to serve the greater interests of the men around her. She is nominally seen as “prosocial,” yet repressed, forbidden from internality outside of a communal role serving the interests of men within society. Unable to act outside of the “woman’s domain.”
The first type woman knows that if she were to become the second type woman, she would lose all pretext of being “prosocial,” subjected to the most barbaric of punishments at the hands of men. If she was raped as a second type woman, she would be seen to have deserved it. Rape against second type women is to be expected. Men believe she deserves rape because they have constructed her as a harlot, a whore, and thus she is deemed unworthy of respect.
A first type woman, however false it may be in regards to her husband, is propagandized as being pure, loving, kind. “Women are wonderful.”—when they serve their purpose, submit to a man. Her husband may brutally violate her, in which case, as she is owned by her husband, it is socially permitted. The notion that “men cannot rape their wives,”, the legality of marital rape for most of history and in regimes the world over, relies on this reasoning. A man cannot “violate” his own property.
The first-type woman fears that if she is subjected to the role of second type woman, no man will ever love her. She will die alone, in the cold; used, abused, discarded, worthless. It is painful to her to imagine. A stark contrast between her fantasies of being loved, cared for, and kept safe from the world by a man.
The fantasy, which drives her into the arms of an abuser, is directly threatened by the existence of second type women. “The second type woman,” who is to be used for sex and discarded. Compensated for her effort, yet afforded no social or legal protection for her labor. This role by design is often the refuge of underclass women.
Second-Type women are not seen as “eugenic,” and thus are deemed unworthy of a reproductive role. For these women, contraception, abortion—any means of controlling and preventing them from reproducing are employed. If a second-type woman is infertile, it is merely a convenience for her not to worry about the excesses of medical intervention.
The second type woman knows of no bounds to which it is forbidden to use her: the man can fuck her, take her, violate her body in any which way he sees fit. She can be reduced to merely a fetish object, to choke, beat, dryly and anally penetrated. However the Man sees fit that she is used by Him.
In reward, she is given a meager pittance for her sex being violated. Due to her not serving a reproductive role, any long term prospects of being with a man are verboten.
This brings us to understanding the distinction between “first,” and “second,” type women. Both are oppressed in their own ways. Both are serving roles within womanhood, and within both, their womanhood is inherently defined by their relationship to men. That is to say, they are women because their sex is exploited by men. “Man fucks woman, subject verb object.” A quote by MacKinnon (Dworkin 39) contains within it a complete definition between the relationship between men and women. Men fuck. They act upon as the subject, the woman, who is fucked. Acted upon. The specific reason they are being fucked, is because they are women, because women are fucked, men fuck.
If a woman isn’t fucked, if she refuses to be fucked, she is not a woman. She is, as Wittig put it, a dissident. An escapee. A Lesbian, (Wittig 20) to be correctively fucked. Corrective fucking means correction into womanhood. In which she is regendered into an object which is acted upon, rather than the Lesbian, the dissident from the dichotomy.
A trans woman cannot reproduce. She also is seen as having chosen to become a woman. Whereas in the modern day, the excesses of patriarchal violence is condemned because it is not a woman’s choice to become a woman. It is believed women are fucked because their essence, assigned the moment they awoken into the earth, resembles the platonic ideal of the woman.
This puts the trans woman into a vulnerable situation. She is fucked. She cannot truly become pro-social, because her being fucked does not lead to reproduction. Thus she must be a second type woman, a second type woman that mustn’t be acknowledged as such. When she is fucked, it must be for momentary validation—the man will correctly acknowledge that him fucking her makes her a woman. He will hide her from his friends and family. Feed her fantasies in exchange for using her sex. He will use her as a whore is used, knowing that she is still a second type woman.
Yet, because she cannot conceptualize being included in first type womanhood, she mistakes these artificial trappings of first type womanhood for a genuine “prosocial” first-type relationship. He takes her on a date, but will she meet his father? If he marries her, who does he tell and who does he not tell? The man who is completely open, and says “I have a transsexual woman as my wife,” and defends this statement as he would if he were married to a Christian Woman, is the bravest of all men.
If she is lucky, maybe, if she can hide it. If she can scrub her existence prior to, and as open with her transition from all public record. Constantly afraid of exposure, in hiding. Maybe, he will be open as if she were a Christian woman to those in his life. Maybe. Of course, she cannot get pregnant. She must constantly prove herself to him. Appeasing ridiculous sexual demands, to justify why an infertile woman is deserving of love.
The fetishistic behavior he has her perform becomes even more ridiculous. She is lucky if a session of dry anal, which she bleeds from, is only followed by gentle spankings.” Men like novelty” is very similar to the phrase “familiarity breeds contempt” for women, especially trans women, who have no means of attaching themselves to a man in a way which he would see as necessary.
She relies on her fantasies of love, affection, romance, which preserve her only access to womanhood from the dread and pain. He feeds the fantasies to continue using her. The reality is that she is ripe for abuse. She can be beaten, raped, emotionally and physically tortured by him. In exchange, he says she is his wife, the “first type,” woman worthy of protection. He may or may not protect her from other men. He may defend the men who will deny what she is experiencing is part of womanhood at all.
She submits to him totally for conditional acceptance. The relationship between the “first-type” trans woman, is akin to the relationship between the troll and Herr Mannelig within the Swedish folk song “Herr Mannelig,” if only Herr Mannelig were to express any mercy to her suffering. The troll offers Herr Mannelig, “twelve great steeds,” “twelve fine mills,” “fifteen gold rings,” yet Herr Mannelig rejects her, “Gifts such as these I would gladly receive. If you were a Christian woman. but I know you are the worst mountain troll.” He rejects her. She is a mountain troll, unworthy of the love he would grant to a Christian woman.
This is the life of a “first-type,” trans woman. She gives everything, but she is a trans woman, a mountain troll, not a Christian woman. He may accept what she gives, but if he does, both of them understand it is the greatest symbol of mercy he has bestowed upon her. A mercy she understands she is unworthy of, undeserving, and to be grateful for. A debt, conditional acceptance, for a lifetime of submission. A submission she must be grateful to give and acknowledge herself unworthy of anything in return.
In this context, transmisogyny enables the greatest of violations by men against women's bodies. She is a discount woman, whose sex does not matter, and yet can be exploited. She expects nothing in return, she wants him to pity her enough to offer her the smallest of consolation prizes.
A lifetime of abuse by a single man and the fantasy he will or can protect her against a hostile world that would offer her nothing outside of him. There are no rules offered by the political right to trans women, for their original sin of existance disallows them from protection within their lived role. They are in the Bloodlands of first type womanhood, where their treatment is akin to an anarchist enclave within the authoritarian farmlands of first type womanhood. No contract has been made, so nothing is off limits. The only deal made is that she will only be abused by one man. Until he gets bored of his toy, and she will be grateful for it.
Most trans women cannot, or will not take this route. They take the route of accepting second type womanhood. They will be the whores, they will be used for compensation. This usage provides them the same existence under the patriarchal framework as any other “second-type,” woman. It is a nuisance in fact, if a second type woman is fertile.
If she needs an abortion, if she needs contraception, this is an extra burden, on the sex work industry which it must then provide for her. Pornographers thus love to use trans women. She is vulnerable, she understands the deal of womanhood, but she feels excluded enough from it that she is grateful for any speck of validation. No way will advocate for her. It is forbidden politically from anyone to save or advocate for her.
Unlike other women, who are allowed to privately enjoy validation for their role, she is shamed for it. That she is vulnerable is a sin. She is pinned for what her exploiters use against her, even by those who claim to be feminists. A trans woman in Pakistan, who belongs to the “third sex” Hijra community (De Piccoli) writes “According to Shia Islamic faith, a transgender is allowed to go for gender corrective procedures and enjoy all privileges as that of a cisgender woman instead of adopting the Hijra culture like we do in Pakistan. I believe the Iranian concept of dealing with transgender issues is much better than ours.”
She wishes she could be in Iran, a society by which by all means enforces patriarchal customs against women, forcing them to wear hijab, not leave the country without their husbands permission, in some provinces, not allowing them to ride a bicycle. She is not ignorant to the obligations of the patriarchal bargain she would like to make. She will fully accept the bargain with glee, no matter how brutal, because she can learn and abide by a set of rules of “first-type,” womanhood, which grants her the meager protections afforded to all other women in Iranian society.
She points out that rape against trans women is only criminalized under Article 377 in Pakistan, Article 377 is the same statue which makes any consentual sex with her illegal. It is illegal for her to have consensual sex. If the law which makes it illegal to have consensual sex is repealed, it would be legal for her to be raped. She wants it to be legal for her to consent to sex. It is currently, only illegal to be raped, in a way that does not arrest her, because she didn’t consent and he did. This is a brutal instance of rape culture.
Many times when trans women point out these double standards within criminal codes, the response is “well, all women are oppressed within those societies.” This ignores the unique oppression trans women legally face in many areas. There is a fact of the matter within many parts of the United States, and around the world, that trans women can be turned away from a rape crisis shelter, merely because she is a trans woman. Because trans women don’t deserve protection.
To say a trans woman should be safe, even if it makes a single person uncomfortable, to say a trans woman does not deserve rape, that if a man stalks, and beats her, that she should have somewhere, anywhere to be safe from him, that is utterly verboten. No one can say that, not from any political party. Her protection, if it all, must be incidental. Never explicit.
To say “trans women get raped, and should be protected from social institutions,” has very rarely if ever been a centerpiece of conversation. When it is, the backlash in the media is severe. To say trans women experience misogyny is disallowed, a horrendous social violation. No matter how brutal the misogynistic violence against her is.
Being a trans woman merely modifies the content of the “first” and “second” type womanhood roles which represent the core dichotomy women are categorized into. It is deemed “sex-based oppression”, and universally denied for what it is.
Yet. For fertile women, their role is significantly changed as well by reproductive exploitation. Misogyny is not better, or more sparing in its abuses for them because of their fertility. In 1968 Ann Hill realized she was pregnant. She was 22 years old, and abortion was illegal. Panic sets in. (Saner)
She is nauseated by the prospect. A woman who becomes pregnant has her entire life changed, no matter how it is dealt with. She is terrified of losing her future, her individuality, and painfully giving birth, leading her entire life to be reduced to the role of mother.
Irrespective of if she is alone, cannot afford the child, or has a husband—it is her responsibility, if she is raped. The burden of proof placed on women who are not taken seriously would stall the process until it is too late. She may even wish to have the child, but the child dies in her womb, threatening her life. Abortion laws are indifferent to her suffering. She would be a statistical anomaly worthy of being ignored in the greater project of reproductively and sexually exploiting women.
No abortion is seen as “justified” by the onlooker, eager to rationalize the public spectacle of a woman's body. To other women, her entitlement to controlling her own body and of not being judged is a matter of “worthiness”: has she suffered sufficiently to be worthy of controlling her own body? Can she ever suffer sufficiently to not justify more of her suffering? No. No woman can suffer enough to have autonomy. To men, her autonomy is worth less than the fetus which she carries. The potentiality of life is worth more than a woman's actual life. Even if no potential life actually exists.
It does not matter to the men who legislate on abortion that a woman may be carrying a dead fetus, a fetus who will die or one which will kill her. To allow her specifically to have an abortion may lead another woman who is carrying a “potential life” to have an abortion. Implicitly, she has to die, because if she is allowed to have an abortion, another woman carrying a different potential life may also be able to have an abortion.
Ann Hill continues. “I was worried about what would happen – was I going to bleed to death? I hadn’t given much thought to the safety of it before because I knew I was going to do it. It may have been denial on my part. But that weekend, dealing with the pain and bleeding, I worried I had been permanently mutilated or would die.” (Saner) Her fear is very real. In 1968 there were one million seven hundred twenty-one thousand four hundred thirty-six deaths resulting from maternal mortality in the United States. (U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare)
How many millions of women die each year from maternal causes? How many people care? Who will count them? This is the nature of reproductive oppression.
I want to liberate all women. I want as few women as possible to die from maternal death. I want “forced birth” to be seen as a barbaric oppression of the past. I want trans women to not be imprisoned for having consensual sex in Pakistan. I want trans women to not be hidden by men, because they are socially unacceptable.
I want to abolish the notion of sex polarity, which defines women by their sexual and reproductive role and reduces them to breeding stock, or abused prostitutes at the hands of men. The same system that denies trans women social acceptance or recognition at all is the one that reduces cis women to their gestational capacity. These goals are not mutually exclusive. These goals are in fact purely in line with each other because they share a common cause: abolishing the exploitation of women's sex as a class.
@ReadDworkin (On Twitter) is a lesbian radical transfeminist and college student majoring in information technology. She enjoys reading Andrea Dworkin and other radical feminist literature.
Works Cited:
De Piccoli, Elena. “The Hijra Culture Explained by a Pakistani Trans Woman.” Il Grande Colibrì, 15 November 2018, https://www.ilgrandecolibri.com/en/hijra-culture-pakistani-transgender/. Accessed 27 April 2024.
Dworkin, Andrea. Right-wing Women. Perigee Books, 1983.
Saner, Emine. “'I was worried I had been permanently mutilated': what abortion was like before Roe v Wade.” The Guardian, 24 June 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jun/24/abortion-before-roe-v-wade-illegal-ann-hill. Accessed 27 April 2024.
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. “VITAL STATISTICS OF THE UNITED STATE - VOLUME II-MORTALITY.” CDC, 1972, https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsus/mort68_2a.pdf. Accessed 27 April 2024.
Wittig, Monique. The Straight Mind: And Other Essays. Beacon Press, 1992.