this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2025
15 points (100.0% liked)

Communism101

1408 readers
1 users here now

This is a community for those who are new to or unfamiliar with communist, socialist or simply leftist philosophy. Ask basic questions here and learn about what we stand for!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

CW: Transphobia

I'm still learning about Marxism and its views about trans issues, so please let me know if what I'm writing is inappropriate or just wrong.

This past week, the British Supreme Court ruled that the term “woman” in the existing UK Equality Act should be interpreted as only people born biologically female, and that trans women, even those with gender recognition certificates (or GRCs), should be excluded from that definition.

To me, this seemed extremely transphobic of course and something I almost expected from UK's Supreme Court. However, some time after the ruling, the Communist Party of Britain (CPB) posted this statement where they said they welcomed the ruling, further staying that:

This materialist outcome corroborates our view that “sex” must mean biological sex for the purposes of the Act and any other interpretations would negate its single sex statutory protections.

We reject any notion that the Supreme Court ruling was influenced by, or issued as a result of, a transphobic political climate and note Lord Hodge’s remark when delivering the judgement - that it should not be seen as victory of one side over another.

All of this seemed very transphobic to me and just a bunch of bullshit if I have to be honest. Not only because it's quite obvious that the current climate in the UK is extremely transphobic, but also because the very transphobic JK Rowling herself both endorsed the CPB over their views on trans issues and gave some £70,000 to the group who made the appeal to the Supreme Court. So the CPB is just plain wrong.

However, as I said at the very beginning, I am still learning. From my understanding, gender is a social construct belonging to the concept of Superstructure and as such it can be influenced. So on one side I can understand the CPB's will to not want to mix the terms 'sex' and 'gender'.

But trans women DO exist. So why is the CPB celebrating a ruling that specifically excludes trans women and deny them the same protections reserved for those women who were AFAB? Isn't that just a denial of the material conditions that show us that trans women are real?

If the CPB is consistent with previous ML literature on this and I'm just writing nonsense, I would appreciate some suggestions on what reading I could do about this topic.

Feel free to recommend any author(s), theory or articles that touch on these issues please, as I'd love to read more about them

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] EnPeasant@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I would add the text Transgender subjugation or Transgender liberation?, from British maoist group Red Voice Media, that delves into the dialectics behind gender and sex, adding a third position to the debate (a marxist one that isn't neither postmodern like Butler or reactionary like P. Morgan).

I make their words mine when refering to British transphobia

Britain and Transphobia. (For the purposes of this essay, Britain refers to the state that currently exists and does not denote that nations which reside within this state are actually a part of one British nation.)

Britain is one of the main poles of anti-transgender ideologies and attacks across the globe, garnering itself the reputation of being an island full of transphobia. However, although this is seemingly common knowledge in some communities, little investigation is done into why this is the case and why it is so rampant.

Britain was one of the first places in the world to develop capitalism, and thus was one of the first to see the proletarianization of women. As such, and as with the destruction of the feudal patriarchal family, there was a rise in popular women’s movements who agitated and, later on, fought for the rights which the bourgeois revolution had not granted them such as the right to vote and equal rights with men – in short, bourgeois rights. These demands and protests were just at the time, as progressing past remaining feudal customs was historically progressive. However, the demands of these first liberal feminists who later went on to become the slightly more radical suffragette movement could not escape their bourgeois and petty-bourgeois views and did not recognise socialism as the only way for women’s emancipation.

In addition to this, we also have Britain’s status as one of the first imperialist powers to emerge alongside its long colonialist history with the British Empire being formed in the 16th century. Due to this, any ideology and movement back home which could be useful to justifying and continuing the plunder and looting of its colonial empire was absorbed by the bourgeoisie. Thus, alongside the patriarchal ideology and the bourgeois family, the demands and beliefs of the liberal feminist movement was consolidated and solidified in the ruling classes’ apparatus. This explains the origins and the constant support for so-called ‘sex-based rights’ groups which have existed for over a hundred years and now are being directed by the bourgeoisie against transgender people. This targeting directly reflects the attitude towards sexual minorities in the late 20th century where first they were hounded, targeted, and oppressed by the ruling classes, until it became beneficial to co-opt these movements, many of which were led by petty-bourgeois and post-modernist groups and leaders. As such, the blame partly falls down to communists not seizing upon this contradiction in order to agitate towards revolution, and the same fate will befall us if we do not learn the lessons of the past.

Thus, alongside the patriarchal ideology and the bourgeois family, the demands and beliefs of the liberal feminist movement was consolidated and solidified in the ruling classes’ apparatus. This explains the origins and the constant support for so-called ‘sex-based rights’ groups which have existed for over a hundred years and now are being directed by the bourgeoisie against transgender people.

This was very interesting! And it rang even more accurate after reading from a lot of users in here that most British communist organisations seem to fall into this category sadly.

It was basically the reply to my whole question lol so thank you