Sex segregation is the opposite of Jim Crow
When it comes to racial justice issues, I will not pretend I am perfect on the subject. Some of you won't like me saying this because you'll think I'm deluded or that I'm also accusing you (if you're also white), but as a white person of a certain age I was raised to see the world with a certain kind of bias, and unfortunately that bias means I don't always see racial injustice for what it is. I'm working on this and am quite open to learning, but I'm never going to see absolutely eye-to-eye with all black people because, like us, they're individuals with a diverse range of beliefs and opinions.
Be that as it may. I am seeing a disturbing amount of racism in the gender identity movement.
It takes many different forms. Most often I see genderdorks on Twitter (or did, when I was more active there) proclaiming that "trans women" are women in the same way black women are women. Let's just unpack that for a second. I spent Barack Obama's two terms in the White House watching idiots on the internet pass around the conspiracy theory that his First Lady is actually a man. I can state with absolute confidence that that is not true. It's veering too far off the topic to explain why. Point is, this mentality is nothing new. White people have been questioning black women's femaleness for a long, long time. So in that context, white men in lipstick claiming they are just like black women rings especially offensive. It's just another way to call black women men: if A equals B, then B equals A. It's fucked the fuck up.
(If you are a pro-gender-identity black woman looking askance at the previous paragraph: I am going to come off as whitesplaining, but you need to take a serious fucking look at your own politics. You missed something there.)
Another one I see from time to time is genderdorks claiming that sex segregation in privacy facilities (public restrooms, locker rooms, etc.) is just like the USA's Jim Crow era with its whites-only restrooms.
Holy fucking god.
I am not fucking kidding.
It only takes a couple head-wobbles to understand what's wrong with this argument:
--
Racial segregation was about enforcing supposed white "superiority" over black people.
Sex segregation is about enforcing safe spaces for female people away from male people's sexual bullying.
-
Racial segregation was enacted by white people, the dominant racial class.
Sex segregation was demanded by female people, the oppressed sex class.
-
Racial segregation was met with approval by most white people, the dominant racial class, though some white people tried to abolish it.
Sex segregation when first enacted was opposed by most male people, the dominant sex class, though some male people nowadays are striving to protect it.
-
White people largely observed racial segregation and often relished not having to spend time in black spaces.
When we overturned Jim Crow laws, most white people still stayed out of those black spaces which were still legal (historically black colleges, etc.).
A disturbing number of male people want to invade female spaces, get aroused by invading female spaces, and create porn based on invading female spaces. Now they are passing laws to force female people to accept invasion of our spaces by male people.
-
When white people discussed integrating black and white public spaces, they spoke in terms of admitting black people, the oppressed racial class, into spaces for white people, the dominant racial class. Black people were still to be seen as black people and white people seen as white people. (See also: the Rachel Dolezal controversy.)
When blue-haired morons discuss integrating male and female single-sex spaces, they mainly speak in terms of admitting men, the dominant sex class, into spaces for women, the oppressed sex class. Men are to be seen as women and women seen as men. (See also: Dylan fucking Mulvaney. There's some controversy around him, but it isn't considered mainstream and he can still legally call himself a woman. Or a "girl," as he puts it. [Retch])
---
These comparisons are to do with racial and sex segregation in the United States. If you aren't from the United States, obviously your nation's history will have gone differently. I don't need this explained to me, because I'm not talking about you. Thanks.
(Sorry for the snark. I have PTSD from multiple decades spent fending off accusations of this, that, and the other nonsense from people who refuse to read for comprehension.)
Anyway. Ironically, the one thing Jim Crow and sex segregation have in common is both led to the existence of inferior facilities for the oppressed class in question. Black people got underfunded and decaying public schools, women get long lines for the toilets and more filth to wade through and perverts constantly invading the space. I don't think segregation must automatically lead to the oppressed having inferior facilities. This is just how it turns out when society makes no real effort to bring political imbalances into balance. "Oh, women have their own public restrooms now, isn't that nice?" No, Phyllis. We're not done. Keep going.
---
Someone may come along, read this, and question my analysis because didn't the American feminist movement put a hell of a lot of energy into sex-integrating a whole lot of places and things? The vote? Universities? The military? The Augusta National Golf Club?
Certainly it did. But did you ever notice something interesting about all those institutions? They were not named Men's Whatever. It was UNDERSTOOD that only men were welcome, yes, but it was never about The Men's Vote and Dude University and Guy Soldiers and Manly Golf. How many organizations do you know of that have "men" or "male" somewhere in the name? Have feminist groups ever tried to convince those organizations to admit women? I don't seem to recall any situation like that, strangely enough. Except the situation with the Boy Scouts but for the record, I thought putting girls in the Boy Scouts was a dumb idea. Girls need a better Girl Scouts (also, one that does not admit boys!), not to join an organization that isn't even named for them.
Also, none of these institutions have anything to do with sex. (Not even the Boy Scouts, though boys having single-sex spaces to Do Stuff Together is good for them now and again.) You do not operate a voting machine with your penis. You do not study for exams with your nads. "This is my weapon, this is my gun. This is for fighting, this is for fun." NO human being's dick is long enough to serve double duty as a nine-iron. Even John Holmes couldn't claim that one.
And there's plenty of man stuff that women don't want any part of. You don't see women, not even the blue-haired idjits, agitating to have a "right" to an annual prostate exam. No women screaming about man caves and how come they don't include women. ("She shed" sounds stupid, for what it's worth.) The few women wanting to be called "dad" are mostly being laughed down. Often by other women.
Women aren't stupid. We know the difference between sex discrimination and legitimate sex segregation.
Why don't you?