Thank you for, yet another, illuminating piece, Julia!

I, too, have felt apprehensive about simply labeling feminists like Adichie and McGowan as TERFs as a blanket term for all feminists who express trans-problematic ideas. I tend to think of them as “ciscentric feminists” (though this label may be too “academic”). Nevertheless, their feminism is centered on their experiences as cis women and speaks primarily to the concerns of cis women.

Using your terminology coupled with my own, I would argue that whereas Adichie is a trans-suspicious ciscentric feminist, McGowan is a trans-unaware ciscentric feminist. I am basing these designations solely on their public statements.

Adichie, by her own admission, is not trans-antagonistic but believes that cis and trans women have fundamentally different experiences, thus positioning trans women as “other” within womanhood as a broad category of personhood. She, in comparison to McGowan, appears to have given more thought to these issues. Therefore, she is suspicious of trans women’s inclusion in feminist projects, but is not wholly exclusionary.

McGowan, in her confrontation with Andi Dier, kept repeating that she and Dier “were the same” in terms of their experiences of gender-based oppression. Because McGowan’s present activism is heavily rooted in personal trauma, I think she simply hasn’t given thought to how misogyny and transphobia intersect (perhaps someone needs to slip her the “Trans-Misogyny Primer”…).

I think we must also question when unawareness and suspicion cross the line and become antagonism. At present, both Adichie and McGowan have rejected the possibility of engaging in a more sustained dialogue with transgender women (Raquel Willis, for example, tweeted that she would be happy to talk with Adichie). When a suspicious or unaware feminist refuses to be self-critical regarding their thoughts on trans issues, do such refusals then cross the line into antagonism? I would also be interested to hear what you think about mainstream feminists — or feminists in general — who reject cis terminology when their trans-problematic opinions are called out, as both Adichie and McGowan did. Are such rejections merely a refusal to acknowledge privilege, or are other issues at play?

Your terminology is particularly helpful to someone like me who teaches Adichie’s work — I think it is a great way to introduce students to the basics of feminism in introductory courses — and wants trans and gender nonconforming students to feel fully included in the classroom community. The “TUMF” acronym and related terminology will certainly be helpful in unpacking her work and public statements.