Staying on topic- threads in general

No, Chewbacca, I wasn’t expecting a response?

The transwidows are one of the reasons I cheerlead for MN and GN in the face of criticism. They gave a space to women who desperately needed a space to talk and MN defended that space with absolute ferocity.

The sheer level of knowledge, research, reference links and information available on the Feminism & Gender discussion boards on MN is incredible Galaxy, I've learnt so much on there. Despite asking GNHQ, several times, for a feminist discussion forum on here and being told, several times, that it's being discussed, we still don't have one.

I think it's an insult to real widows who will never again be able to communicate in any way with their dead husband. Any relationship break up is traumatic and hurtful, but if the other party is still living there is always some hope of a new relationship . Real widows have no hope of that. What should we call women whose husband go off with another woman and refuse to speak to them? Or even someone whose other half goes off with someone of the same sex? Lesbowidows, Gaywidows? They are not widows unhappy as they might be.

Are you conceding that language is important then? And that colonising words reduces their original meaning?

How about if I asked what the terminology took away from actual widows? Or told them that they could still choose to be known as such, but ‘transwidows’ allowed inclusivity and was harming no-one?

But it doesn't really matter what you think they should call themselves does it trisher? They are whatever they say they are. They can identify how so ever they wish can't they? If they want to identify as transwidows, lesbowidows or gaywidows, that's their prerogative isn't it? We none of us need any one else's approval now, remember?

I don't see what's wrong with 'transwidows'. There isn't always some hope if someone's still living, of a new relationship, 'where there's life is hope' isn't true for everyone.

I don't see how the term 'transwidows' is harmful to anyone. Pain is pain and suffering is suffering. Regardless of how a relationship comes to an end, whose to say one person's pain and suffering is any greater or less than anyone else's.

Is there a whiff of widowphobia in the air? ?

The husbands themselves claim that George or Alfred no longer exist.
That is surely the definition of a widow : a woman whose husband no longer exists.

I think trisher that you are underestimating the distress felt by women in that situation.

FarNorth

The husbands themselves claim that George or Alfred no longer exist.
That is surely the definition of a widow : a woman whose husband no longer exists.

I think trisher that you are underestimating the distress felt by women in that situation.

I think you are underestimating the distress felt by real widows .

Doodledog

Is there a whiff of widowphobia in the air? ?

It certainly seems so. Transwidows are widows, they've lost the husband they had, that person no longer exists. To compare them unfavourably by referring to 'real' widows is to deny their pain and need to grieve for what was, but can no longer be.
Another loss is to any children, they've lost their dad, and been presented with another woman in their lives, how confusing must that be?

I don't know what I think about "transwidows" as a term but I can see it must be incredibly painful for some..

I would still love and support a partner in that scenario, I don't know how/if my feelings would change romantically etc but I don't think I would see myself as widowed because the love wouldn't die just due to that.

I'm not sure what my husband would think about me talking about this lol

trisher

FarNorth

The husbands themselves claim that George or Alfred no longer exist.
That is surely the definition of a widow : a woman whose husband no longer exists.

I think trisher that you are underestimating the distress felt by women in that situation.

I think you are underestimating the distress felt by real widows .

I think you are dismissing the distress felt by transwidows who not only lose their husbands, but many feel their married life has been a lie, a sham. You don't get to tell them how bad their distress is. It's not Top Trumps in the grief stakes.

None of us know how we'd react or what we'd feel in that situation. It's wrong to invalidate what someone feels especially when it's done by picking them up for the word or words they use to try and make sense of what's happened to them and how they feel about it.

I think unless you have read the stories you cant understand. They talk of years of deceit, lots of complex sexual behaviour, the patterns of behaviour seem to follow a script in the way those who are having affairs often follow a script.

I can't begin to imagine what it must be like; can any of us?

The partner/husband is not dead they have changed gender. (And according to some they still remain the same sex so haven't even really changed). If they claim the person they were is dead you are still able to communicate with the person they have become. Now I know some widows have claimed to communicate with their dead husbands but most of them will never again be able to. The two situations are not even comparable. The pain may be similar but that doesn't give women the right to use the term. As I asked should women who are left for another woman be called some sort of widow?

Genuinely not enough to have a solid opinion on that term.

I am always open to the fact that people feel how they feel whether or not we agree that they should and those feelings matter

It doesn't mean that these women don't have the right to use this term either trisherand if women whose husbands have left them for someone else choose to regard themselves as "some sort of widow" why shouldn't they?

I find it incredible that someone who refuses to understand how women feel when they are told that they are no longer mothers, no longer women, can not breastfeed their babies and so on can insist that women whose husbands have stopped being the men they married may not choose a name for themselves because suddenly language matters!

It is notable that the people suffering in both scenarios are women, not transwomen, isn’t it?

trisher now you are appealing to my love of logic

Argh

Cannot balance logic and feelings

I'm finding it hilarious that, on the one a hand, we're being told that sex/gender i.d. is only a social construct and we should be able to identify any way that we feel comfortable with and without any societal judgement. But at the same time, women who's husbands/partners announce that they're now changing their gender, thus ending the original relationship platform, they have no such right to identify themselves as they wish and in a way that makes them comfortable. If they identify themselves as "transwidows" they're being judged as too much and underestimating the distress felt by real widows.

The double standards and lack of awareness would be offensive if it wasn't so funny.

I know, Chewbacca. It’s surreal.

The only consistency is the misogyny.

I'm going for funny Chewbacca it's too late to deal with offensive.