My time in America

After the work event, I explored a bit of Washington, DC and saw a bit of Northern California. A bit of the east and a bit of the west. 

In Washington, DC, I visited the Library of Congress, saw the Gutenberg Bible and the content of Abraham Lincoln’s pockets when he was shot and the exhibition about George Washington and King George III (for the 250th anniversary); went to the National Archives Museum, saw the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence; explored the National Air and Space Museum and saw many cool things including Neil Armstrong’s Apollo 11 Spacesuit and a space rock older than the Earth. Envious, aren’t you? It’s awesome—in the original sense of inspiring awe—to finally see these foundational documents after having grown up with American films and history. 

That’s not all. I also had a burger at Lucky Buns, ate Vietnamese food at Eden Centre in Virginia (quails!), went to a few supermarkets (why is everything huge in America?), looked inside a Trader Joe’s (America is a strange place), and met a Twitter friend (Susan). 

The contrast between that and my time in Northern California is fascinating, not only because of the differences between East and West Coast but also because my time in DC was (primarily) an American experience—going back to its foundation, seeing the documents that made the States the States—whereas my time in Northern California was (primarily) a Vietnamese American experience. I did see San Francisco (how could I not?)—the Golden Gate Bridge and the Bay Bridge, de Young Museum and the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art—but my visit was mostly to see my relatives—on both my mum’s side and my dad’s side—and experience Tết in San Jose. And what an experience that was. My first Tết in California. My first Tết with firecrackers. My time with Vietnamese people in California has made me realise I’m a very bad Vietnamese—I can only console myself that at least I still love mắm tôm and nước mắm, I have read Truyện Kiều and Cung oán ngâm khúc and Chinh phụ ngâm, I got an áo dài. 

And I can’t help wondering what kind of person I would have become—how different I would have been—if I had stayed in Vietnam or moved to the US instead of Europe. 

On Hannah Arendt and antisemitism

I always wanted to read Hannah Arendt’s The Origins of Totalitarianism—now seemed like the perfect time. Very interesting book, at least so far. 

I’m just going to jot down some thoughts. 

1/ “This situation was an important factor in the early rise and continuous growth of antisemitism in the nineteenth century. Which group of people would turn antisemitic in a given country at a given historical moment depended exclusively upon general circumstances which made them ready for a violent antagonism to their government. But the remarkable similarity of arguments and images which time and again were spontaneously reproduced have an intimate relationship with the truth they distort. We find the Jews always represented as an international trade organization, a world-wide family concern with identical interests everywhere, a secret force behind the throne which degrades all visible governments into mere facade, or into marionettes whose strings are manipulated from behind the scenes. Because of their close relationship to state sources of power, the Jews were invariably identified with power, and because of their aloofness from society and concentration upon the closed circle of the family, they were invariably suspected of working for the destruction of all social structures.” (P.1, ch.2)

Still true today, this is something I see on both the left and the right. 

2/ “It is an obvious, if frequently forgotten, rule that anti-Jewish feeling acquires political relevance only when it can combine with a major political issue, or when Jewish group interests come into open conflict with those of a major class in society.” (ibid.)

Over the past few years, I have seen anti-Jewish sentiments expressed among the anti-immigrant crowd, the anti-woke crowd, the “Covid is a hoax” crowd, and other groups, but the biggest political issue adopted by antisemites at the moment is the Palestinian cause. To clarify, I don’t mean that every single pro-Palestinian person hates Jews, or wants to destroy the state of Israel, but I would argue that lots of antisemites hide behind the Palestinian cause and mask their Jew hatred by replacing the word “Jews” with “Zionists” when saying something antisemitic. 

Regarding the pro-Palestinian (or more accurately, anti-Israeli) protests in the West and especially in London, I have no doubt that many people genuinely care about the Palestinians and want the suffering in Gaza to end, but it’s a fact that many others in the marches hate Jews, support Hamas, and want Israel to be destroyed “from the river to the sea”. You can’t deny it. You too have seen the signs. You too have heard the chants. You too have seen people openly supporting Hamas. 

3/ “Many of these bankers were Jews and, even more important, the general figure of the banker bore definite Jewish traits for historical reasons. Thus the leftist movement of the lower middle class and the entire propaganda against banking capital turned more or less antisemitic, a development of little importance in industrial Germany but of great significance in France and, to a lesser extent, in Austria.” (ibid.) 

Interestingly, Hannah Arendt points out that Karl Marx, himself a Jew, was anti-Jewish. 

4/ “Friedrich Engels once remarked that the protagonists of the antisemitic movement of his time were noblemen, and its chorus the howling mob of the petty bourgeoisie. This is true not only for Germany, but also for Austria's Christian Socialism and France's Anti-Dreyfusards. In all these cases, the aristocracy, in a desperate last struggle, tried to ally itself with the conservative forces of the churches—the Catholic Church in Austria and France, the Protestant Church in Germany—under the pretext of fighting liberalism with the weapons of Christianity.” (ibid.) 

As I have said earlier, there are antisemites across the political spectrum.

The thing I find fascinating is that there are elements of antisemitism in both of the two worst ideologies of the 20th century: Nazism and communism. There are also such elements in some of the worst ideologies at the moment. 

5/ “… the German Liberal Party, under the leadership of Schoenerer, was from the beginning a lower middle-class party without connections or restraints from the side of the nobility, and with a decidedly left-wing outlook.

It never achieved a real mass basis, but it was remarkably successful in the universities during the eighties where it organized the first closely knit students' organization on the basis of open antisemitism. Schoenerer's antisemitism, at first almost exclusively directed against the Rothschilds, won him the sympathies of the labor movement, which regarded him as a true radical gone astray. His main advantage was that he could base his antisemitic propaganda on demonstrable facts: as a member of the Austrian Reichsrat he had fought for nationalization of the Austrian railroads, the major part of which had been in the hands of the Rothschilds since 1836 due to a state license which expired in 1886. Schoenerer succeeded in gathering 40,000 signatures against its renewal, and in placing the Jewish question in the limelight of public interest. The close connection between the Rothschilds and the financial interests of the monarchy became very obvious when the government tried to extend the license under conditions which were patently to the disadvantage of the state as well as the public.” (ibid.) 

That reminds me, I should pick up a book about the Rothschilds and the conspiracy theory. 

6/ “It is well known that the belief in a Jewish conspiracy that was kept together by a secret society had the greatest propaganda value for antisemitic publicity, and by far outran all traditional European superstitions about ritual murder and well-poisoning.” (P.1, ch.3)

“Jews run Hollywood”, “Jews own the media”, “Jews control the world”, etc.—it is depressing to read Hannah Arendt’s book from 1951 and recognise many things discussed. Are Jews over-represented in certain fields? Yes, it’s undeniable. But if Jews were controlling the media and controlling the world, they’re doing a pretty bad job—the media, the UN, the WHO… have for a long time been strongly biased against Israel. 

7/ “Not the Dreyfus case with its trials but the Dreyfus Affair in its entirety offers a foregleam of the twentieth century. As Bernanos pointed out in 1931 "The Dreyfus affair already belongs to that tragic era which certainly was not ended by the last war. The affair reveals the same inhuman character, preserving amid the welter of unbridled passions and the flames of hate an inconceivably cold and callous heart." Certainly it was not in France that the true sequel to the affair was to be found, but the reason why France fell an easy prey to Nazi aggression is not far to seek.” (P.1, ch.4) 

Is this the case? I have no idea. But the chapter about the Dreyfus affair is interesting.

Emile Zola was indeed a true intellectual, who stood up for the truth and for justice, putting himself at risk. In contrast, many members of the intelligentsia now pretend to stand up for justice and to side with the oppressed, but they sympathise with terrorists, condone atrocities, and unthinkingly repeat slogans and received opinions.

But then that’s nothing new, I guess. It’s only a few months ago when I read Wonder Confronts Certainty, in which Gary Saul Morson wrote about the educated class’s bloodlust and love of violence, and their embracing of revolution for the sake of revolution. 

8/ “It was against the rich and the clergy, not for the republic, not for justice and freedom that the workers finally took to the streets.” (ibid.) 

That’s a good observation, speaking as someone from a communist country. 

9/ “While the mob actually stormed Jewish shops and assailed Jews in the streets, the language of high society made real, passionate violence look like harmless child's play.” (ibid.) 

And that is happening again now. On the streets of London and other Western cities, there have been people chanting genocidal phrases and calling for jihad and calling for intifada; in the West, there have been intimidations of and attacks on Jews, or Jewish businesses; but some people still pretend or perhaps convince themselves that antisemitism is overblown, that there’s no cause for concern, that the chants are all harmless.

I can’t help fearing that we’re reliving the 20th century. 

10/ “The case of the unfortunate Captain Dreyfus had shown the world that in every Jewish nobleman and multimillionaire there still remained something of the old-time pariah, who has no country, for whom human rights do not exist, and whom society would gladly exclude from its privileges. No one, however, found it more difficult to grasp this fact than the emancipated Jews themselves.” (ibid.) 

The shocking responses to the October 7 massacre, which I never would have expected—remember that the first protests were immediately after the massacre and before Israel’s retaliation—truly opened my eyes. 

Vintage Didion: Didion on politics and the press

I’m currently reading The Year of Magical Thinking, after finishing Vintage Didion. You perhaps have now noticed that I’m on a Joan Didion marathon. 

Taking a break from social media means having more time for reading (which does make me ask myself, why the hell did I spend time arguing with morons on fb or going through stupid tweets instead of reading good books and enjoying the company of intelligent, interesting people?). I’m enjoying Joan Didion’s company. 

Vintage Didion includes 3 essays from After Henry, 3 chapters from Miami, an excerpt from Salvador, an essay from Political Fictions, and a separate essay called “Fixed Opinions, or the Hinge of History”. They’re all good but I especially like the one from After Henry about Central Park Five, “Clinton Agonistes” from Political Fictions, and “Fixed Opinions, or the Hinge of History”. 

What I find interesting in these essays is that Joan Didion, through her eyes as an essayist, journalist, and novelist, examines the narratives created by politicians and by the press. In the essay about Central Park Five for instance, which according to wikipedia was the first mainstream media to suggest that they were wrongfully convicted, she examines the 2 contrasting narratives by mainstream news on one side, and by black-owned newspapers and black activists on the other; she also writes about the kind of story that gets attention and becomes big, the kind of news that gets ignored, the kind of language used by journalists and by politicians, and so on. In the essay about Bill Clinton, she contrasts the year 1998 with 1992, and writes about how the press (or rather, a handful of prominent journalists) shapes the news and promotes a scandal. In the last one, she writes about the mood in America after 9/11 and the language, the narrative in the news. 

I don’t fully know Didion’s political views, but she is perceptive and sceptical and critical, and she writes well about the way the press frames a story or an event. I should get hold of Political Fictions. Reading Didion’s essays, I can’t help wondering what she thinks about what’s happening today, though many of her observations all the way from the 60s are still true today, and in many cases, worse now.   

For example, in “On Morality” (Slouching Towards Bethlehem), she writes about the disturbing frequency with which the word “morality” appears everywhere, and she ends it with:  

“It is all right only so long as we recognize that the end may or may not be expedient, may or may not be a good idea, but in any case has nothing to do with ‘morality’. Because when we start deceiving ourselves into thinking not that we want something or need something, not that it is a pragmatic necessity for us to have it, but that it is a moral imperative that we have it, then is when we join the fashionable madmen, and then is when the thin whine of hysteria is heard in the land, and then is when we are in bad trouble. And I suspect we are already there.” 

This is from 1965—it is still true, and it is worse. People still assign moral burdens to everything, and also talk about being on the right or wrong side of history. People still act moral and “inflict their conscience” on others, and also talk about compassion and kindness and tolerance—the kind of kindness and tolerance that involves silencing and de-platforming anyone that they see as intolerant and bigoted.  

In “The Women’s Movement” (The White Album), she voices her criticism of the feminist movement in the 70s and mocks the feminists for portraying women as mere victims. 

“That many women are victims of condescension and exploitation and sex-role stereotyping was scarcely news, but neither was it news that other women are not: nobody forces women to buy the package.

[…] Just as one had gotten the unintended but inescapable suggestion, when told about the ‘terror and revulsion’ experienced by women in the vicinity of construction sites, of creatures too ‘tender’ for the abrasiveness of daily life, too fragile for the streets, so now one was getting, in the later literature of the movement, the impression of women too ‘sensitive’ for the difficulties of adult life, women unequipped for reality and grasping at the moment as a rationale for denying that reality.” 

The essay was controversial apparently but she wasn’t wrong, and what she wrote still applies now—it’s not that there’s no discrimination against women, but many feminists concentrate their energy on non-issues (such as manspreading for example) instead of real problems, and it doesn’t help anyone to see women always as victims and men always as (potential) perpetrators or abusers. In the #MeToo movement, I can think of a few cases that are a bad date or a regretful relationship that get equated with sexual assault, as though women had no agency. Again, I’m not saying that there is no misogyny, no discrimination against women (there is), and Didion clearly knows it too, but it doesn’t help to infantilise women. 

The thing is that she also mocks the creation of Women as a class, but the essay is from 1972—I wonder what she thinks about the current attacks on biological sex and the concept of womanhood. 

Reading Didion’s essays, I can just replace names in my head and her observations about certain groups of people like politicians, journalists, activists, etc. apply well for today’s equivalents. Depressingly so. Like (some) activists or political leaders not caring whether something happened because it had happened many times to others, for example. Or the press picking a story over others and framing it in a certain way. 

Interestingly, in the essay about Clinton, Didion notes: 

“The Lewinsky story had in fact first broken not in the traditional media but on the Internet […], posting on the Drudge Report.” 

She quotes James O’Shea of the Chicago Tribune: 

“The days when you can decide not to print a story because it’s not well enough sourced are long gone.” 

That was 1998. Think about now. 

The pity is that she writes about Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush (and I think she has written about Barack Obama) but not Donald Trump. I’d like to know what she thinks about Trump, and the current political trends.

Cuộc tranh luận về trans và vấn đề mâu thuẫn giá trị

Lời tựa: Gần đây tôi có viết 2 bài cho báo Trẻ về vấn đề trans nhưng không được đăng, có lẽ không phù hợp với báo Trẻ. Đây là một vấn đề tương đối mới, có lẽ người Việt không quan tâm nhiều, đặc biệt người lớn tuổi. Tuy nhiên đây là một trong những vấn đề gây tranh cãi nhiều nhất ở các nước dân chủ phương Tây hiện nay, và có thể ảnh hưởng trực tiếp đến quyền lợi của người Việt ở các nước này, dù quan tâm hay không, và các gia đình có thể có mâu thuẫn do khác biệt thế hệ.

Vì thế tôi đưa lên blog 2 bài đã viết về chủ đề này.

Vấn đề trans và mâu thuẫn giá trị

Trong bài viết trước về Reddit, tôi đã viết sơ về cuộc tranh luận về người transgender, thường gọi tắt là trans (người chuyển giới đã qua hay chưa qua phẫu thuật). Đây là một trong những vấn đề phức tạp và gây tranh cãi nhất hiện nay ở các nước phương Tây.

Trước tiên, một trong các điểm quan trọng của gender ideology (ý thức hệ giới tính), giống (sex) và giới tính (gender) là hai khái niệm tách biệt—sex là sinh học, là male hay female, còn gender là xã hội, là man hay woman hay non-binary (phi nhị phân, tức là không phải nam không phải nữ, không theo nhị phân giới tính).

Thế những ý chính của cuộc tranh luận về trans là gì?

Self-ID

Trước đây khái niệm trans mang nghĩa transsexual, và chủ yếu dùng cho người đã qua phẫu thuật chuyển giới. Sau này khái niệm trans mở rộng, trở thành transgender, và bao gồm tất cả những người cảm thấy giới tính (gender) không khớp với giống (sex) của mình sinh ra, dù chưa dùng hormone và chưa qua phẫu thuật, và cũng bao gồm những người không có ý định phẫu thuật.

Đi xa hơn, phong trào trans muốn có luật công nhận self-ID, tức mỗi người có quyền tự xác định (identify) giới tính và phải được luật pháp công nhận, và người khác không có quyền gọi giới tính sai (misgender) người khác.

Riêng ở Anh, luật pháp không công nhận self-ID, và vừa qua BBC đưa tin vài thay đổi về Gender Recognition Act (Đạo luật công nhận giới tính), sẽ bỏ ý định dưới thời thủ tướng Theresa May cho phép người dân đổi giới tính trên giấy khai sinh dù không có chẩn đoán y tế, và cũng sẽ có những biện pháp bảo vệ không gian an toàn cho phụ nữ¹.

Không gian của phụ nữ (women’s spaces)

Mọi quốc gia trên thế giới đều có sex segregation vì lý do an toàn và riêng tư—tách biệt không gian dựa theo giống/ giới tính, chẳng hạn như nhà vệ sinh công cộng, phòng thay đồ/ thử đồ, nhà tù, shelter (nơi nương thân cho nạn nhân bạo hành gia đình hoặc bạo lực tình dục), v.v…

Một mặt, các nhà hoạt động cho quyền lợi trans (trans rights activists, thường gọi tắt là TRA) nói rằng, không cho trans women vào không gian của phụ nữ là phân biệt đối xử với người chuyển giới và không công nhận trans women cũng là women.

Mặt khác, có nên chấp nhận trans women trong không gian của phụ nữ không, đặc biệt những nơi như shelter hoặc nhà tù?

Một mặt, trans women có quyền được tôn trọng, chỉ muốn mình được công nhận cũng là phụ nữ, và không nên bị phân biệt đối xử, nhưng còn vấn đề an toàn với phụ nữ, đặc biệt phụ nữ bị chấn thương tâm lý, và trong tình trạng dễ bị tổn thương? Hoặc chấp nhận trans women là một chuyện, chẳng hạn như Sheffield Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre², nhưng có nên chấp nhận bất kỳ ai xác định mình là nữ, theo self-ID không? Làm thế nào để tránh những kẻ nguy hiểm, muốn lợi dụng chính sách self-ID để tấn công phụ nữ?

Trang web nữ quyền Feminist Current đưa tin, ở Anh luật pháp hoàn toàn không công nhận self-ID, nhưng khắp nước Anh vẫn có nhiều nơi áp dụng chính sách self-ID³.

Riêng ở Anh, một trong những trường hợp gây chú ý là Karen White, một trans woman trong nhà tù nữ và tấn công tình dục vài phụ nữ ngay trong tù⁴.

Thể thao cho phụ nữ

Một chủ đề gây tranh cãi nhiều là trans women tham gia thể thao của phụ nữ. Chẳng hạn, BBC hay Wall Street Journal đưa ra tranh luận và lập luận của cả hai phía⁵.

Một mặt, nếu không cho trans women cùng thi đấu thể thao với phụ nữ, đó là phân biệt đối xử, không công nhận trans women là women. Và nếu không cho, trans women phải làm gì? Không được tham gia thể thao? Chỉ tham gia thể thao với người chuyển giới, vốn là thiểu số trên thế giới? Hay tham gia thể thao với nam giới? Nhưng còn tác động của hormone lên cơ thể?

Nhưng ngược lại, có công bằng với phụ nữ không nếu cùng thi đấu với trans women, đặc biệt trong những môn cần sức mạnh? Những người phản đối nói, dù ai đó đã qua phẫu thuật nhưng đã qua dậy thì không thể thay đổi thực tế là cơ thể có khung xương lớn hơn, mật độ xương (bone density) và khối lượng cơ bắp (muscle mass) cao hơn, và mạnh hơn cơ thể nữ giới. Mâu thuẫn ở đây là giữa quyền lợi người chuyển giới và sự công bằng với nữ giới.

Trẻ em

Quan trọng hơn là phải làm gì với trẻ em: bao nhiêu tuổi thì nên biết về vấn đề giới tính và chuyển giới? Bao nhiêu tuổi thì được quyết định chuyển giới? Cha mẹ cần làm gì khi con mình tự nhận là trans?

Những người ủng hộ phong trào trans nói, trans cũng như đồng tính—cha mẹ cần chấp nhận và ủng hộ con cái, đổi từ ngữ xưng hô, chấp nhận tên mới, cho con cái ăn mặc theo giới tính mới… Các tổ chức ủng hộ trans như Mermaids và Pink News thường nhắc tới tỷ lệ tự sát trong cộng đồng trans để cho thấy người trans không nên bị xa lánh hay từ bỏ⁶, mà cần sự hỗ trợ từ gia đình.

Những người phản đối cho rằng, ủng hộ trans và ủng hộ đồng tính là hai vấn đề khác nhau dù cùng là LGBT—đồng tính không ảnh hưởng trực tiếp đến cơ thể, nhưng chuyển giới sẽ dẫn tới những quyết định không thể rút lại như phẫu thuật, dùng hormone hoặc puberty blocker (thuốc chặn dậy thì). Người ủng hộ nói, trẻ vị thành niên không qua phẫu thuật, có thể chặn dậy thì để có vài năm suy nghĩ, và với những đứa trẻ bị rối loạn định dạng giới (gender dysphoria), nhìn cơ thể dậy thì và phát triển theo giới tính mình không muốn có thể gây trầm cảm và dẫn tới tự sát. Phe phản đối lại nói, không ai biết hiệu ứng lâu dài, puberty blocker có thể ảnh hưởng phát triển trí não.

Gần đây một phụ nữ tên Keira Bell tuyên bố kiện NHS (National Health Service—dịch vụ y tế quốc gia của Anh) vì lẽ ra phải được bảo là suy nghĩ thêm để quyết định. Keira Bell lúc nhỏ xác định mình là nam, và sau khoảng 3 lần gặp ở Tavistock Centre ở London, được nhận puberty blocker khi 15 tuổi. 8 năm sau, và sau khi qua phẫu thuật, Keira Bell nhận ra đây là quyết định sai lầm và trở thành detrans (chuyển giới ngược lại)⁷.

Đây chỉ là một trong nhiều trường hợp người detrans lên tiếng kể câu chuyện của mình, sau khi nhà văn J. K. Rowling nói về vấn đề trans và đẩy nó lên thành một cuộc tranh luận toàn quốc (thậm chí quốc tế).

Nhà báo Abigail Shrier ra một cuốn sách gọi là Irreversible Damage: The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters và cũng xuất hiện trên chương trình của Joe Rogan⁸, nói về tỷ lệ tăng đột ngột cao của trẻ vị thành niên nữ xác định mình là trans. Đó là do xã hội chấp nhận trans hơn, hay là ảnh hưởng và áp lực trang lứa (peer pressure)? Bao nhiêu trong số đó thật sự muốn trở thành nam, và bao nhiêu chỉ lầm tưởng vì là tomboy, lesbian, hoặc trầm cảm do vấn đề tâm lý khác?  

Nói tóm lại, vấn đề trans ở các nước phương Tây một lần nữa lại là mâu thuẫn giá trị—một mặt là quyền lợi của người chuyển giới, đặc biệt trans women, và một mặt là quyền trẻ em và phụ nữ. Đâu là cân bằng? Làm thế nào để không ai bị phân biệt đối xử, nhưng mọi người đều được bảo vệ an toàn?

¹: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53101071

²: https://twitter.com/srasac/status/1282663698935549952

³: https://www.feministcurrent.com/2019/12/10/reforms-to-the-gender-recognition-act-have-been-postponed-but-self-id-is-being-rolled-out-across-the-uk-nonetheless/

⁴: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/11/transgender-prisoner-who-sexually-assaulted-inmates-jailed-for-life

⁵: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/46453958

https://www.wsj.com/articles/should-trans-women-compete-in-women-s-sports-11573602744

⁶: https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2019/09/10/world-suicide-prevention-day-mermaids-trans-kids-gender-recognition-act/

⁷: https://news.sky.com/story/i-should-have-been-told-to-wait-woman-treated-with-hormone-blockers-to-reassign-gender-as-a-teenager-takes-nhs-to-court-12031191

⁸: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MYb0rBDYvs

__________________________________________

Trans và nữ quyền

Trong hai bài trước, tôi đã viết về Reddit và trans, trans và mâu thuẫn giá trị. Tại sao đây là vấn đề đáng chú ý? Vì đây là vấn đề phức tạp, có xung đột quyền lợi giữa nhiều nhóm khác nhau, và trong vài khía cạnh, một số chính sách bảo vệ trans (transgender, người chuyển giới đã qua hay chưa qua phẫu thuật) ảnh hưởng đến quyền lợi của trẻ em và phụ nữ.

Tại sao nhiều nhà hoạt động nữ quyền (feminists) cảm thấy phong trào trans, theo nghĩa nào đó, là một cuộc tấn công lên quyền lợi phụ nữ?

Không gian của phái nữ

Như đã viết trong bài trước, có rất nhiều tranh cãi về chuyện có nên chấp nhận trans women vào khu vực của riêng phụ nữ không, như nhà vệ sinh công cộng, phòng thay đồ, nhà tù, shelter (nơi nương thân cho nạn nhân bạo hành gia đình hoặc bạo lực tình dục), v.v…

Cách đây không lâu, Sheffield Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre ở Anh gây chỉ trích trên Twitter khi quảng cáo tìm nhân viên là bất kỳ ai xác định mình là phụ nữ, sau đó phải rút xuống. Tuy nhiên, trung tâm này vẫn nhận nạn nhân tấn công tình dục là trans women¹.

Ở Canada, Vancouver Rape Relief and Women’s Shelter, shelter lâu đời nhất ở Vancouver cho nạn nhân bị cưỡng hiếp, trong năm 2019 bị vandalise với các dòng chữ “TERFS go home you are not welcome” and “Kill TERFs”² (TERF là trans-exclusionary radical feminist, thời kỳ đầu là từ trung lập, sau này trở thành từ xúc phạm) do chỉ nhận phụ nữ, không nhận phụ nữ chuyển giới. Năm 2020, Vancouver Rape Relief and Women’s Shelter bị cắt kinh phí³. 

Sex và gender, và vấn đề sức khỏe

Một trong những ý chính của gender ideology (ý thức hệ giới tính) là, giống (sex: male/ female) là sinh học, còn giới tính (gender: man/ woman) là xã hội, và hai khái niệm là tách biệt.

Tuy nhiên, trong vài năm gần đây các nhà hoạt động quyền lợi trans (trans rights activists—TRA) đi theo hướng khác, bảo biological sex không có thật, hoặc bảo sex không chỉ tách ra làm hai thành male và female mà là một spectrum, trong đó intersex (người liên giới tính) ở đâu đó ở giữa⁴.

Pink News, một trong những trang web lớn nhất cho cộng đồng trans, nói câu “only females get cervical cancer” (chỉ có nữ giới mới bị ung thư cổ tử cung) là “disgustingly transphobic lie” (một câu nói dối phân biệt người chuyển giới đáng tởm). Tuy nhiên, Pink News chưa bao giờ tấn công tổ chức Prostate Cancer UK vì gọi ung thư tuyến tiền liệt là bệnh của đàn ông và dùng hashtag #MenWeAreWithYou.

Như đã viết trong bài về Reddit, các subreddits về vấn đề sức khỏe phụ nữ đều bị tấn công, rút xuống, hoặc đưa cho TRA quản lý và bị kiểm soát ngôn ngữ, như r/PCOS cho người bị polycystic ovary syndrome (buồng trứng đa nang), r/endo cho người bị endometriosis (lạc nội mạc tử cung), hoặc r/pregnancy cho phụ nữ mang thai. Trong khi đó những subreddits như r/ErectileDysfunction, r/circumcision, r/Phimosis, r/ProstateCancer, r/TesticularCancer… có thể nói đó là vấn đề sức khỏe của đàn ông mà không bị TRA tấn công—không bị gọi là transphobic.

Quyền lợi dựa theo sex (sex-based rights)

Luật pháp cho những quyền lợi dựa theo sex, nhưng tại sao các tổ chức khắp nơi lại xem gender quan trọng hơn sex?

Trong tháng 7 vừa qua, Action Aid UK, một tổ chức từ thiện cho quyền lợi từ thiện, định nghĩa woman là bất kỳ tự xác định (self-identify) là woman, và không có cái gọi là một cơ thể male hay female⁵. Tuyên bố này gây chỉ trích dữ dội trên Twitter, đặc biệt từ feminists—làm sao có thể nói không có cái gọi là female body trong khi sự đàn áp với phụ nữ trong lịch sử và khắp thế giới có liên quan trực tiếp đến các đặc điểm sinh học và sinh sản của nữ giới? Làm sao có thể nói không có cái gọi là female body trong khi công việc của Action Aid UK tập trung vào những vấn đề như kinh nguyệt, thai và phá thai, tục ép hôn, hủ tục cắt âm vật, v.v…?

Những vấn đề này là vấn đề của giống (sex) chứ không phải vấn đề giới tính (gender).

Sau phản ứng mạnh mẽ trên Twitter, Action Aid UK bảo tuyên bố đó không phải là chính sách, nhưng không nói rõ quan điểm và chính sách thật sự là gì, mà bảo phải xem xét lại các nhóm liên quan⁶.  

Trang Feminist Current có bài viết của Raquel Rosario Sánchez, một phụ nữ gốc Dominican, cho rằng gender identity ideology là một dạng feminism của người có privilege⁷, coi trọng gender identity (bản dạng giới) của dân phương Tây hơn thực tế phân biệt giới tính ở các nước nghèo, các nước đang phát triển—những nơi phụ nữ thật sự bị đàn áp vì là female, và sự đàn áp liên quan trực tiếp tới đặc điểm sinh học và sinh sản của phụ nữ⁸.

Như Sánchez nói, một nước dân chủ phương Tây có thể có bài báo của một người sinh ra là nam, nói chì kẻ mắt xác định phái nữ của mình (“How My Eyeliner Defines My Womanhood”)⁹. Nhưng ở các nước có vấn đề phân biệt giới tính trầm trọng, một bé gái không thể cứ tuyên bố mình là nam để thoát những vấn đề như bị cắt âm vật hay cưỡng hôn—khái niệm gender không thể thay đổi thực tế là phụ nữ và bé gái khắp thế giới vì phân biệt vì sex, vì cơ thể female.

Khái niệm woman

Một trong những ý quan trọng của những người phản đối gender ideology là, thế nào là woman, nếu ai cũng có thể tự xác định mình là phái nữ? Thế nào là woman, nếu trans women là women?

Trên Quillette, Helen Joyce có một bài viết phân tích, những người theo phong trào trans đều không thể định nghĩa thế nào là woman—hoặc là nói lòng vòng “phụ nữ là một người cảm thấy mình là phụ nữ”, hoặc là định nghĩa bằng stereotypes, như phụ nữ là người tuân thủ các chuẩn mực của nữ tính (femininity) như đa cảm, dễ bị tổn thương, quan tâm tới ngoại hình, v.v…¹⁰ Cái thứ nhất là ngụy biện, cái thứ hai khác nào đi ngược lại với nỗ lực của feminists hàng chục năm qua để xóa bỏ gender stereotypes?

Nếu một người sinh ra với cơ thể nam, không qua phẫu thuật cũng chẳng dùng hormone, nhưng tự nhận mình là trans woman và bảo phái nữ của mình được xác định bằng chì kẻ mắt, vậy thế nào là woman?

Khái niệm lesbian

Ngoài khái niệm woman, khái niệm lesbian (đồng tính nữ) cũng bị cướp và bóp méo. Quan điểm của TRA là “lesbians can have penises” (đồng tính nữ có thể có dương vật), và tất cả những lesbians không muốn hẹn hò hoặc có quan hệ tình dục với trans women đều bị gọi là transphobic, TERF, hoặc “vagina fetishists” (đám tôn sùng âm đạo).

Một trang web về quyền lesbian gom lại một loạt screenshots những câu TRA tấn công, chửi bới lesbians (không phải trans), thậm chí dọa cưỡng hiếp¹¹. Không phải không có lý do mà có phong trào Get the L out, ý nói tách chữ L (cho lesbian) ra khỏi LQBT+, vì cảm thấy lesbians bị lấn áp trong cộng đồng LGBT+ và mất quyền lợi.

Bản thân nhà văn J. K. Rowling, khi lên tiếng về vấn đề trans và quyền lợi phụ nữ, cũng bị nhục mạ và dọa đánh.

Bạo lực

Sự tấn công phụ nữ không chỉ dừng ở lời nói. Năm 2018, trans woman Tara Wolf hành hung một phụ nữ 60 tuổi và đập bể camera giá £120, nhưng chỉ bị phạt và trả phí tổng cộng £430¹².

Kết luận

Phong trào trans có phải là một cuộc tấn công có chủ đích lên phụ nữ không, hay đây chỉ là vấn đề mâu thuẫn giá trị? Trên thực tế, quyền lợi phụ nữ vẫn bị ảnh hưởng nhất, và Rowling đã phơi ra mặt trái của phong trào trans.

Nhờ vậy, nhiều phụ nữ, ít nhất ở Anh, đã bắt đầu lên tiếng.

¹: https://twitter.com/srasac/status/1282663698935549952

²: https://globalnews.ca/news/5824446/vancouver-rape-relief-womens-shelter-graffiti/

³: https://www.feministcurrent.com/2019/03/20/discontinuation-of-grant-to-vancouver-rape-relief-shows-trans-activism-is-an-attack-on-women/

⁴:  https://www.nature.com/news/sex-redefined-1.16943

⁵: https://twitter.com/SVPhillimore/status/1283391395303231489

⁶: https://twitter.com/BellaTricks40/status/1285979694010114048

⁷: Privilege dịch là đặc quyền, nhưng ở đây ý nói những người quen sống sướng và có nhiều quyền, ở phương Tây.  

⁸: https://www.feministcurrent.com/2017/07/26/white-feminism-thing-gender-identity-ideology-epitomizes/

⁹: https://www.bustle.com/p/how-eyeliner-defines-my-womanhood-54595?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=owned&utm_campaign=feminismbustle

¹⁰: https://quillette.com/2020/06/20/she-who-must-not-be-named/

¹¹: https://lesbian-rights-nz.org/shame-receipts/

¹²: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/transgender-activist-tara-wolf-fined-150-for-assaulting-exclusionary-radical-feminist-in-hyde-park-a3813856.html

Truyện Kiều: underneath the Confucianism

1/ In my brief blog post about Confucianism, I wrote that Truyện Kiều must be understood in light of Confucianism. Indeed, Truyện Kiều is a 19th literary work, based on a 17-century Chinese novel, which depicts a society shaped by Confucianism. 
For example, it’s because of filial piety that Kiều sells herself to save her father and brother, and because of loyalty that she asks Vân to fulfil her promise with Kim Trọng by marrying him instead; similarly, it’s because of respect for her sister that Vân agrees. From the modern perspective, these actions are difficult to understand, and one might say it’s one thing for Kiều to ask Vân and Vân to accept, but why does Kim Trọng go along with it? Readers must keep in mind that this was a different time, a different society. After all, my great grandfather never meant to marry my great grandmother—he was in love with her sister, but she passed away.  
However, it’s precisely because Truyện Kiều depicts a Confucian society, in which everyone must know their own place and perform well their own part, that it’s interesting to see a character cross boundaries and do something unconventional, or to see the hierarchy disrupted. 
Kiều, for instance, has 3 loves in her life: Kim Trọng, Thúc Sinh, Từ Hải. This is remarkable. It’s no wonder that for a while in Vietnam, many critics of Truyện Kiều called it pornographic and immoral. 
Kiều takes the initiative in her relationship with Kim Trọng. They meet at the festival and fall in love at first sight, and for 2 months, Kim Trọng is sick with infatuation but doesn’t know how to start a conversation with her even though they’re now neighbours and he’s schoolmate with her brother Vương Quan. It’s only when he finds her hairpin in a tree that he gets an excuse to start talking to her, and afterwards it’s always Kiều who comes to him—she goes to his house several times. The only time Kim Trọng comes to her is when he gets the news of a relative’s death and must go away for a while. 


2/ To save her family, Kiều sells herself to become Mã Giám Sinh’s concubine (in English: Scholar Ma). Then she follows him back to his province, and meets his main wife, Tú Bà (in English: Madame Tu). 
Imagine Kiều’s shock when Tú Bà changes their pronouns and roles, forcing her to address her as mother and Mã Giám Sinh as father. This is a society in which there is a hierarchy and each person has a clear role—Kiều and Mã Giám Sinh have had a wedding, and their wedding night, why does she now have to address him as father and his main wife as mother? As it turns out, Tú Bà runs a brothel and Mã Giám Sinh recruits prostitutes for her by pretending to look for concubines, and it is custom that the woman running a brothel to call her prostitutes her daughters. 
I had a brief look at Timothy Allen’s translation—he removes an important line, misrepresents the relationship between Mã Giám Sinh and Tú Bà (Mã Giám Sinh is not only a pimp working for her), mistranslates the kinship terms (he translates “mẹ” and “cậu” into “auntie” and “uncle”), and therefore downplays the significance of the scene, in which the roles are suddenly changed and Kiều doesn’t understand the change. It is a great deception, and the first step in Kiều’s 15 years of adversity. She sells herself only to be concubine, but ends up becoming a prostitute. 


3/ Confucianism dictates that women are inferior to men—a wife is inferior to her husband (see my blog post about Confucianism and the 3 Obediences and 4 Virtues for women). 
It is therefore interesting to look at 2 marriages in Truyện Kiều. 
In Mã Giám Sinh- Tú Bà marriage, Tú Bà is the one running the brothel. Once his job is done, he’s more or less dropped from the narrative. It is Tú Bà who hires Sở Khanh and creates a scheme to deceive Kiều, give her a painful lesson, and force her to yield. 
If we go back, it is clear that Mã Giám Sinh is quite afraid of her—at the beginning, he can’t resist sleeping with Kiều, because of her beauty, and thinks that if his wife finds out, it can’t be worse than being forced to kneel. That line clearly shows who’s dominant in the marriage. 
In the brothel, Kiều meets and falls in love with Thúc Sinh (in English: Student Thuc). He decides to buy her out of the brothel and marry her, but he already has a wife, Hoạn Thư (in English: Lady Hoan). They live together and have the happiest time of their life, but after a while, Kiều has to ask him to return home, inform his wife, and seek her approval. 
Hoạn Thư is an intelligent, artful, and cunning woman. Thúc Sinh returns home but doesn’t dare to mention his new concubine, thinking why he has to confess if she doesn’t ask. He doesn’t realise his wife is manipulative and calculating, and she plans to take a revenge on Kiều and teach him a lesson. Without spoiling the story, I will only say that so far Hoạn Thư is the most fascinating and vivid character in Truyện Kiều (followed by Tú Bà as 2nd), and in Vietnamese her name becomes a noun to refer to insanely jealous women. 
Thúc Sinh, for whatever reasons, doesn’t become a noun, but he is vividly drawn as a pathetic, feeble man, scared of his wife (“sợ vợ” is the Vietnamese term for “scared of one’s wife”). Before Hoạn Thư, he is weak and helpless, even when she humiliates Kiều in front of him. 
There can be many reasons—after all Thúc Sinh is (forever) a student, whereas Hoạn Thư comes from a rich, powerful family, and he is probably dependent on her. But I think he’s also weak by nature, and in some ways, deplorable. 

If you’re interested in other classics beyond the Western canon, especially East Asian classics, you should read Nguyễn Du’s Truyện Kiều.

Truyện Kiều: Confucianism; reading as a Vietnamese

This blog post is written for my non-Vietnamese friends who are interested in Truyện Kiều (The Tale of Kieu) and intend to read it in translation.

It is strange to read Truyện Kiều for the first time, as a Vietnamese. I am familiar with the general plot and all the main characters—there is no surprise in this regard, I also recognise many lines. The reading feels both new and familiar—I’m returning to my roots, and in some ways, it feels like home. 


Truyện Kiều is guided by 2 main philosophies: Confucianism and Buddhism. For now, let’s talk about the former. 
Confucianism is a system of thought and behaviour that originated in ancient China, formed by Confucius (known in Vietnam as Khổng Tử). “Although transformed over time, it is still the substance of learning, the source of values, and the social code of the Chinese.” (Encyclopaedia Britannica) Confucianism not only influenced but shaped Chinese and many other East Asian societies, and today China, Vietnam, and other East Asian countries such as Japan and South Korea are still Confucian at the roots.   
As Truyện Kiều is a Vietnamese literary work, published in the 19th century, and based on a 17-century Chinese novel, Jin Yun Qiao by Qingxin Cairen, it helps to have some understanding of Confucianism. 
As it is impossible to write about Confucianism in depth in a blog post (nor am I learned enough), I will only write some main points. 
Confucianism places great emphasis on social morality, social harmony, family, and hierarchy. Social harmony results from people knowing their place in the natural order and in society, and performing their part well. 
The ethical codes are defined by the 5 Constants: 
Rén (仁, benevolence, humaneness);
Yì (义; 義, righteousness or justice);
Lǐ (礼; 禮, proper rite);
Zhì (智, knowledge);
Xìn (信, integrity).
And the 4 Virtues: 
Zhōng (忠, loyalty);
Xiào (孝, filial piety);
Jié (节; 節, contingency);
Yì (义; 義, righteousness). 
(Wikipedia) 
In Vietnam, these concepts are known as: Nhân, lễ, nghĩa, trí, tín and Trung, hiếu, tiết, nghĩa.  
2 very important values in Confucianism (and Confucian societies) are loyalty and filial piety. Related to the concept of loyalty is the Mandate of Heaven (天命, thiên mệnh), which is used to justify the Emperor of China (read more on Wikipedia). 
Filial piety is a virtue of respect for one’s parents, elders, and ancestors. 
Confucianism also has the 3 Obediences and 4 Virtues, which is a set of moral principles and social code for women. From Wikipedia: 

“The three obediences for born females are to obey, give obéisances and follow the spiritual, ethical and moral wisdom of:
1. her father as a maiden daughter (Chinese: 未嫁从父; pinyin: Wèijià cóngfù)
2. her husband as a chaste wife (Chinese: 既嫁从夫; pinyin: Jìjià cóngfū)
3. her sons, and upon conflicts, in prioritized order according to the seniority of each, as a widow in perpetuity dedicated to clan and family (Chinese: 夫死从子; pinyin: Fūsǐ cóngzǐ)” 

And: 

“The Four Feminine Virtues for women are: 
1. Feminine Virtue in Ethics in matrimony (Chinese: 婦德; pinyin: Fùdé)
2. Feminine Virtue in Speech in matrimony (Chinese: 婦言; pinyin: Fùyán)
3. Feminine Virtue in Visage i.e. 'comportement' / manners / facial appearance, in matrimony (Chinese: 婦容; pinyin: Fùróng)
4. Feminine Virtue in "Kungfu" / "Works" / 'oeuvres' i.e. active and ongoing feminine participation in chaste, monogamous, matrimonially-restricted sexual intercourse as a Virgin preserved for a lifelong monogamous marriage arranged for the first and foremost interest and benefit of the Empire/State (in the case of Imperialty, extant Imperialty and/or any extant Royalty, Aristocracy), clan and family bridewealth and the name and moral fame of the patrilineal clans of birth, especially of the husband and in-laws but also of self and the mother's patrilineal clan of origin, and with Virginity preserved until spiritually presented on wedding day upon clan-officiated and family-arranged marriage; lifetime monogamous maximal reproduction especially of son heirs and chaste daughters normally about ten offsprings at least five of which are healthy sons; loyal child-birth for the only one spouse in a lifelong marriage; and enlightened, dedicated and responsible child-rearing in lifelong maternity; spiritual, religious, moral, ethical and philosophical education of children; etc. (Chinese: 婦功; pinyin: Fùgōng)” 

In Vietnam, they are known as Tam tòng tứ đức. Tam tòng: tại gia tòng phụ, xuất giá tòng phu, phu tử tòng tử. Tứ đức: công, dung, ngôn, hạnh. 
Needless to say, it is a sexist, patriarchal ideology—women are considered inferior to men. The key thing about Confucianism is hierarchy, order, and social harmony. If you watch Farewell My Concubine, for example (which I revisited recently), you can see the hierarchy very clearly in the relationships between master and pupil, husband and wife. 
Nguyễn Du’s Truyện Kiều must be understood partly in light of Confucianism. For example, it is because of loyalty and filial piety that Thúy Kiều sells herself into marriage (to be a middle-aged man’s concubine) to save her family—she has to choose between her duty to family and promise with Kim Trọng (not between family and herself). It is because of loyalty that she blames herself for breaking the promise with Kim Trọng, and asks her sister Thúy Vân to fulfil it instead by marrying him; and because of filial piety, Vân accepts it. 


People who complain about clashing with views and values in 19th century Russian or British literature should try reading 19th century Chinese or Vietnamese literature. Confucianism and other traditional values, embodied in the characters and expressed in the Chinese classical allusions, are far harder to take. 
I imagine, to a Westerner today, the mindset and values in Truyện Kiều must feel alien, even incomprehensible sometimes. It must be difficult to understand, but at the same time you have some kind of distance. As a Vietnamese who grew up in Vietnam and know Confucianism, I don’t have that distance. Truyện Kiều is a masterpiece, I’m enjoying the poetry, but struggling quite a bit with Confucianism and Buddhism in it.

On trans issues

This blog post has no disclaimer.
1/ Recently I’ve noticed that the word “transphobic” is used very regularly, almost everywhere and for almost everything, perhaps nearly to the point of losing all meaning. 
Examples of transphobia can be bullying, abusing, or mocking transgender people; using violence against transgender people; denying jobs, housing, or healthcare to transgender people; dismissing feelings of gender dysphoria, etc. 
However: 
Discussing transitioning and detransitioning is not transphobic. 
Questioning gender ideology is not transphobic. 
Having a debate about trans athletes in women’s sports, or even disapproving of trans athletes competing in women’s sports, is not transphobic. 
Talking about the differences between trans women and cis women, or between trans men and cis men, is not transphobic. 
Not dating trans people is not transphobic.  
In a free society, people have the right to question things, to have a conversation, to have a debate. The word “transphobic” is too often thrown out carelessly, to shut up others and end a conversation, like some other words such as “sexist”, “misogynistic”, “mansplaining”, “racist”...—and like them, “transphobic” starts losing its meaning and is taken less seriously. 

2/ A short while ago, a study in the Journal of Social and Personal Relationships revealed that 87.5% of participants would only date cisgender people and excluded transgender people. 
The result is to be expected. What is telling is that the author of the study, Karen L. Blair, decided to write a commentary on her blog about it, and wrote: 

“What then, does this mean for trans people’s overall well-being if the majority of people within society won’t even consider them as potential dating partners under hypothetical conditions? A lack of social support could contribute to some of the existing discrepancies in mental and physical well-being within trans communities.” 

Not dating transgender people is seen as a lack of social support.  
Did she ask the participants what their reasons were? No. Instead: 

“... the authors speculated that exclusion was likely the result of factors ranging from explicit transprejudice, such as viewing trans persons as unfit, mentally ill, or subhuman, to a lack of understanding or knowledge about what it means to be a transgender man or woman, and therefore, what it would mean to date a trans person.” 

It didn’t seem to dawn on her to consider the thought that maybe those participants were just not attracted to transgender people. 
Then in the conclusion, she wrote: 

“Ultimately, each individual has the freedom to decide whom they date or are interested in dating, and thus the article does not suggest that any single individual must include trans people within their dating pool. However, the article does suggest that examining and following the overall societal patterns of including or excluding trans people within the intimate realm of dating can be used as an indicator of overall acceptance and social inclusion of trans people. In other words, it is one thing to make space for trans people within our workplaces, schools, washrooms, and public spaces, but it is another to see them included within our families and most intimate of spaces, our romantic relationships. We won’t be able to say, as a society, that we are accepting of trans citizens until they are also included within our prospective dating pools; at the very least, on a hypothetical basis.” 

(my emphasis) 
In short, she’s suggesting that toleration doesn’t only mean respecting trans people’s human rights and treating them equally and respectfully, but toleration also includes dating and having sex with them. 
The entire blog post can be read here: http://www.cambridgeblog.org/2019/06/who-will-date-a-trans-person/ 
She’s not the only one who has such opinions. I’ve come across other articles, such as this: 
https://www.them.us/story/cis-trans-dating?fbclid=IwAR0TKBvrjhhU4mct-ICJi88Bqa6gt7EXzvCqiY2OxWWEevkkn2EZVZEyxt8# 
Or videos like this: 
https://youtu.be/2X-PgHSZh6U 
The speaker, a transgender person, argues that not dating trans people is discriminatory and hurtful. 
Someone may ask me, is it racist not to date Asian women? Well it is if it’s because you think Asians are inferior to white people or Asians are stupid/ dirty, etc., but if you’re just not attracted to Asian features, no, that’s not racist, and I don’t care. 

3/ Relating to the subject above is the concept of “cotton ceiling”, a term in the trans community which refers to the barriers trans women face when denied access to sex with lesbians. Have a look: 
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/12/22/shallow-creepy-fetishist-of-vaginae/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/07/31/people-arent-thinking-deeply-enough-about-their-sexuality-more-cotton-ceiling-from-transactivists/
https://transgenderreality.com/2015/11/20/its-a-girls-dick/ 
Google “Get the L out”, you can find lots of articles about conflicts between lesbian activists and trans activists, and the movement to get the L out of LGBT. Here is an example: 
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/feminism/2018/07/why-were-lesbians-protesting-pride-because-lgbt-coalition-leaves-women 
As I read about conflicts between the trans community and other parts of the LBGT community, I noticed an interesting pattern: trans men don’t seem to say much, whereas some trans women are very loud and have been attacking cis straight men and lesbians for not wanting to sleep with them—cis straight men are called “insecure”, “confused”, “afraid of being labelled gay”, “suffering from toxic masculinity”, whereas lesbians are derided as transphobes and “vagina fetishists”. 
This is not to say that all trans people are the same, nor that all trans activists are toxic. However, such people exist in the trans community. It is harmful and dangerous to suggest that it’s transphobic not to date trans people, or to argue that trans people are exactly the same as cis people. 

4/ A few years ago, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie sparked an outrage when she said that trans women were different from cis women. 
In fact, screaming “transphobic!” is an automatic response whenever someone says that trans women and cis women are not the same. Trans people shouldn’t be seen as less human, and I understand that it’s hurtful to say that trans women are not true women, but it is silly and delusional to suggest that there are no differences whatsoever between trans women and cis women, either in biology or in experience, especially if a trans woman transitioned after puberty.     
The argument that “trans women are real women” and “people are whatever gender they identify as” is problematic and wrong in the case of lesbians, because lesbians should not be harassed into having sex with trans women, nor abused for not doing so. 
It is a greater issue when we talk about trans athletes in women’s sports.

5/ Let’s look at the debate on trans athletes in women’s sports. 
https://www.wired.com/story/the-glorious-victories-of-trans-athletes-are-shaking-up-sports/
https://nationalfile.com/womens-sports-are-being-dominated-by-trans-athletes/?fbclid=IwAR3FGq03X4eJ6Qo2EkDr0DszbN0Evxt_EHkXZVT7-_mqwiSykKg1jlL4n2M
https://nypost.com/2019/10/13/justice-for-trans-athletes-is-unfair-to-girls-like-my-daughter/ 
If you believe that trans athletes should have the right to compete and it would be unjust otherwise, how do you make it fair when trans athletes who transitioned after puberty have an unfair physical advantage? Getting hormones might have an effect on their performance, but doesn’t change their muscle mass and bone structure.  
There are people who, in response to the debate, say that the gender binary in sports should be dispensed with, and men and women should compete together—such statements are not worth examining. 

6/ The media, when discussing trans issues, tend to talk about gender dysphoria and trans people’s suicide rates. They don’t talk about the actual process of transitioning and its effects on physical and mental health. Nor do they touch on the subject of detransitioning. 
These subjects are important, because there are things to consider if you’re thinking about transitioning. More importantly, they are part of the debate if you ask, at what age should children be allowed to transition? On the 1 hand, certain characteristics can no longer change after puberty. On the other hand, when do you actually know that a child is not happy with their gender and transitioning would be the answer? What if the problem lies elsewhere? What if the child is mistaken? What if they change their mind a few years later? 
In times of confusion, the online trans community can be dangerous, because their “diagnosis” of someone as transgender can often be based on meaningless stereotypes. 
https://transgenderreality.com/2017/09/29/non-conformity-to-gender-roles-as-red-flags/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/09/30/wearing-the-most-comfortable-sandals-ever-more-stereotypes-about-men-and-women/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/06/14/feeling-pretty-and-delicate-that-is-clearly-female-behavioral-traits-right/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/05/19/have-you-ever-identified-more-with-female-characters-than-male-ones/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/05/10/the-dangers-of-stereotypes/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/03/02/like-to-wear-comfortable-clothes-dislike-sexism-change-your-sex/ 
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/01/20/really-what-little-boy-wants-to-be-the-girl-lion/ 
https://transgenderreality.com/2015/12/11/i-wasnt-like-other-girls-i-liked-pokemon-i-liked-dragonball-z/
For the record, I’ve never liked pink, and as a kid, I had guns as well as dolls, and most of my stuff were blue. The idea that there are girl stuff and boy stuff is absolutely ridiculous, and it is a lot worse to claim that if a girl likes boy stuff, she must wish to be a boy, and vice versa. 
It is a pity that there was a time people said that men and women were the same, and girls could be whatever they wanted to be—astronauts, engineers, doctors, etc. but now liking something is seen as a boy thing or a girl thing. When, for example, a person who identifies as genderfluid, says that they sometimes feel like a guy and sometimes feel like a girl, I don’t know what they mean. What does it mean, really, to feel like a guy or a girl? If liking girl things is equal to feeling like a girl, isn’t that reinforcing gender stereotypes? 
The online trans community can sometimes cause harm in the way they give advice and persuade young people to believe they are transgender and should go for transitioning. 
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/03/15/lie-to-them-to-get-hrt-give-them-the-good-old-narrative/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/08/04/questioning-teens-and-social-contagion/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/07/30/do-you-feel-uncomfortable-with-yourself-in-some-way/
https://transgenderreality.com/2016/05/13/i-hide-my-meds-in-my-saxophone-case-self-medding-advice-to-minors/
This, again, doesn’t mean that all trans activists are the same, but these people exist in the online trans community, and this is something, I think, parents should be aware of. 

7/ In conclusion, trans issues, like everything else, are not black and white. Nuance is important. Facts are important. It is harmful to shut down a debate and dismiss everything as transphobic. 
Trans issues are not simple, and if you say that people not only can identify as whatever gender they wish but must also be recognised as that gender and have all of its rights, that can, very often, come at the expense of someone else.