Laverne Cox (USA)

Laverne Cox has stated that calling a trans woman a man “is an act of violence.” In so stating, Cox has thus justified assault by transwomen against women who know, in fact, that transwomen are men. Because such assaults are now “self-defense” in response to “violence.” We have seen this “argument” used repeatedly to condone acts of violence and harassment towards women, including in the case of Jewelyes Gutierrez.

Calling transwomen men is not an act of violence; it’s an act of self-defense. It’s an act that allows Women to establish our boundaries. It’s an act that allows us to meet with other Women. Insisting that we cannot do that – that we cannot name reality – is abusive.

We like Laverne Cox, but Laverne Cox is actually a man. And saying that has nothing to do with violence.

VIDEO_ Laverne Cox Speaks On The Revolutionary Act Of Loving Trans Women At Creating Change 2014 _ Autostraddle


3 thoughts on “Laverne Cox (USA)

  1. Lavern Cox is a male, and always will be a male. It doesn’t matter what he wears, or how many plastic surgeries he gets.

    Why are women the only historically oppressed and marginalized class of persons that aren’t granted the right to define themselves? This certainly wouldn’t be tolerated from any ethnic or racial group. Blacks are allowed to define themselves, Asians are allowed to define themselves, and Native Americans get to decide who is and isn’t native.

    If surgically created “women” are possible, why not surgically created black people, or Native Americans? If people can surgically modify a white person so that he or she appears black, and through this modification, we have to start referring to this former Caucasian person as “black”, what would this do to black identity. If anyone can identify as black, Asian, or Native American, then these identities are essentially thrown out the window. Humans born male say they are “women”, and I say that they are not. Why are they right and I’m wrong? Males get to define basically everything in the world, and now they get to define who is and isn’t a woman.

    Females exist in and of themselves. They are not cosmetic creations that are designed to meet certain standards of culturally dictated “femininity”.


  2. “Laverne Cox has stated that calling a trans woman a man “is an act of violence.”

    Males are not female, and Cox was born male. He is still male. The shameless appropriation of the word “woman” is an act of violence. For thousands of years, males have taken what they wanted and colonized the entire globe for its resources. Calling a human born male a woman is a form of rape in that the male is taking something that does not belong to him. It’s not his identity to take. He will never be able to truly experience how women feel, nor will he ever be able to experience discrimination in the same manner that women do. He will never give birth to a child, and nurse the baby with mother’s milk. He has no female reproductive system, he doesn’t menstruate, and he certainly doesn’t have to worry about unwanted pregnancies because he will never be pregnant.

    I’m struggling to understand why the female sex is the only systematically oppressed group of persons who aren’t allowed to define themselves. Why doesn’t base cultural appropriation apply to females?

    Extend the logic that states that males who “feel like women inside” are women, and see how it all sounds with other marginalized populations.

    For the sake of argument, let’s say that white people wanted to redefine who is and isn’t black or Native American. Henceforth, whites are now black if they say they are, and the same goes for white people who say they are Native American despite having no drop of native blood. How would we determine who is and isn’t black? Since anyone could be black, “self-identification” would have to be based on appearance, clothes, foods people eat etc. For example, white people who identity as black could say they like basketball, fried chicken, Nike shoes, etc. Black is based on what is on the outside, forget genes and ancestry. White people could “identify as black by putting on stereotypical clothes, etc.

    I firmly believe that culturally oppressed groups have a right of self determination, and they have a right to define who is and isn’t part of their particular group. This should apply to racial and ethnic minorities, and it should also apply to females.


  3. When technology gets to the point to where humans can be reproduced without sexual reproduction, will females even be necessary? The “female” of the future could very well be a complete chemical and surgical creation that meets culturally dictated views of “femininity”, especially the type of mannerisms and dress that is most stimulating to males. Think Stepford Wives on steroids.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s