Trans-inclusive feminism, intersectional feminism, queer feminism, third-wave or fourth-wave feminism... there are so many different labels which we see nowadays among feminists who affirm and advocate for trans rights. Different labels or even vastly different opinions are nothing new in general – for example, there are many vocal and influential people who say they are feminists but do not support trans inclusion, some who claim to support trans inclusion but still give in to transphobic tropes, a large population who are opposed to both feminism and trans rights, many who still consider feminism a 'bad word', some who call themselves 'equal rights activists' instead, and so on. Despite all this, there is a growing number of people who see common ground between feminism and the trans rights movement and identify with or advocate for both.
However, even among trans-inclusive feminists, it is common to see feminism and the trans rights movement as two separate but complementary struggles. Instead, I believe that they are so integral to each other that one cannot exist without the other. This is not a new idea, as the history of transfeminism shows. And... if we truly believe that trans women are women, then our struggles are common too, and not something which needs to be acknowledged and 'included' as an afterthought.
So... what would happen if we did not see these movements as integral to each other? What happens if we see them not only as two separate struggles, but even competing with and contradicting each other? What does one without the other look like?
Before we try to answer these questions, I want to make clear what I mean by both feminism and transfeminism. Feminism to me is about dismantling patriarchy and removing the systemic barriers to justice for everyone irrespective of gender. Transfeminism is about everyone's right to define their own identities, express themselves how they want, and possess complete autonomy and agency over their lives and bodies, without fear of discrimination and violence. We can immediately see that these principles are not only complementary but are essentially the same core principles expressed in different words.
I do not use the word 'equality' in either of these definitions because of the following difference between equality, equity and justice.
Image source
What does feminism without trans rights look like?
This one is relatively simpler. After all, it is what feminism looked like for a long time. Even though trans people and their allies have existed in feminist and activist spaces for many decades, it was much easier to find transphobic views rather than trans-affirming ones even up to a decade ago.
Without seeing trans rights as integral to feminism, and trans people and their identities and experiences as inherently valid, it was (and in many cases still is) common to paint trans people as either predators and invaders, or as 'gender traitors' or see them as confused or misled, depending on their assigned gender.
If as feminists we truly believe that our biology or a category assigned to us at birth should not determine the course of our lives, then how is it justifiable to invalidate trans identities which are based on that exact principle? Such contradictions were and are alienating not just to trans women, but also trans men, non-binary people, and trans allies.
If as feminists we believe that 'none of us are free until all of us are free', then it also follows that if some of us can be thrown under the bus, then it can happen to anyone. If trans rights and our realities can be ignored and invalidated, then it can happen to others too based on their sexual orientation, gender, race, religion, class, caste, language, or any other aspect of their identity. And it does happen, as the criticisms against white feminism and savarna feminism remind us.
In places where trans rights are non-existent or an afterthought, feminist policies are also either non-existent or limited in their impact. We may look at progress in different parts of the world and believe that feminism is making an impact, but systemic barriers still persist. And patriarchal power structures remain intact, and in charge of making tokenistic concessions which give us the illusion of progress.
Here's an example
Consider the reality of parental leave policies around the world. As this article shows very well, a wide disparity exists not only between the duration of maternity leave and paternity leave allowed in most places, but also attitudes towards those who take it. Moreover, in many cases, the same (or a lesser but still significant) duration of maternity leave is allowed even in cases of adoption, but paternity leave is still limited to a few days, if it exists at all in the first place.
So if the difference in duration of leave is not determined by who gives birth, then why does it exist? To reinforce existing social norms that childcare is the mother's responsibility? What about fathers who want to be more involved with childcare? What about same-sex parents? Are two gay men who become parents going to be treated differently from a lesbian couple? What about parents who are trans? Will a trans man see his rights to parental leave suddenly reduced, and will a trans woman see her rights to parental leave suddenly increased? Or will all queer and trans cases be ignored as is often the case? An organization which is very generous in such policies for cisgender heterosexual women, but ignores all these other realities, may claim that they are supporting and even celebrating the contributions of women, but will only end up reinforcing existing norms. And an organization which claims to be open and accepting of everyone's rights but does not want to actually remove systemic barriers, will probably keep coming up with one patchwork solution after another, only to entangle themselves in a web of contradictions.
And even if one believes that cisgender and heterosexual fathers are not going to make good use of their paternity leave and be actually involved in childcare, then isn't it also true that by continuing these disparities in policies, we are reinforcing these biases and systemic barriers?
This same line of thought can be extended to any other issue which affects people differently by gender. If a policy or law is not dismantling structural barriers but only providing one patchwork solution after another, then asking enough questions will lead it into a web of contradictions. And until this reality exists, no meaningful feminist victory can be achieved.
What do trans rights without feminism look like?
Now let us look at the other side of the same question. In many countries including India, there has been some progress in recent years towards trans rights, and indeed some progress in women's rights too, but systemic barriers and bigotry and biases have remained the same or even gotten worse.
If trans visibility in India is going to be about finding mythological explanations for the existence of trans lives, celebrating some trans people who play by those rules and otherwise have majoritarian political beliefs, then we will continue to be swayed by these 'icons' whether they are trans women or cis women or any other gender, without making any actual progress. We will continue to have cases where a rape survivor who happens to be trans is told that there's no law to help her get justice, or we will have unjust laws after all. We will continue to have cases where a rape survivor gets arrested for being disruptive. And the existing power structures will remain, and will even shower themselves with accolades for being progressive.
If trans visibility in the US is going to be about celebrating 'icons' like Caitlyn Jenner who continue to spout transphobic and sexist nonsense, while trans people keep getting killed just for being themselves, it will not make any dent in structures which harm both cis women and trans women. In the UK, it will mean that the fears of cis women and trans women will be pitted against each other in a replay of a familiar 'divide and rule' policy. Meanwhile, people in all these places and many others will continue to struggle against sexual violence, against discrimination, for basic rights, like their right to exist and be acknowledged as who they are and have control over their own lives.
Patriarchy hurts everyone...
...and yes, that includes men too. And that is something which I hear feminists say more often and apply in practice than anyone else including 'men's rights activists'.
As I said in the beginning, feminism to me is about dismantling patriarchy and removing the systemic barriers to justice for everyone irrespective of gender. Transfeminism is about everyone's right to define their own identities, express themselves how they want, and possess complete autonomy and agency over their lives and bodies, without fear of discrimination and violence.
As long as we continue to see feminism and trans rights, and indeed other movements against unjust power structures, as competing with or contradicting each other, or at best trying to be 'inclusive' of each other as an afterthought, we will continue to be swayed by illusions of progress. Our movements will continue to be restricted to our narrow interests, seen as 'special interests' by those outside it, and will continue to depend on the social capital of a few rather than building solidarity at a large scale. We will continue to be happy with token gestures and patchwork policies, while the realities of most lives will remain unchanged, and systemic biases will remain unchallenged.
To be clear, none of this means that everyone's struggles are exactly the same. Not just various aspects of our identities but a lot of environmental factors shape our individual stories and struggles. They need not be exactly the same for us to be able to listen to and learn from each other, engage with and hold space for each other, and to build solidarity despite our differences.
To end on an optimistic note...
It is only by seeing all our struggles as a unified common struggle, and by reminding ourselves that 'none of us are free until all are free', that we can truly create a just society. And if I sounded mostly pessimistic and over-critical so far, I want to remind myself and everyone reading this, that we do have a growing number of people who see all these issues as part of a unified struggle. We will get there, hopefully in our lifetime.
If you liked what you read, please consider supporting our work by clicking ‘Membership’ or ‘Support’ on:
You can also follow us on Instagram or Twitter, and subscribe to our newsletter so that you don’t miss any future editions. A new edition will be published every Saturday.
If you would like to contact us, you can message us on Instagram or Twitter or by replying to any edition of this newsletter, and we will get in touch with you.