Another quick thought from re-reading her essay.
“The service sector of the wives/mommas/assistants/girls is almost exclusively a woman-only sector; its boundaries not only enclose women but to a very great extent keep men out. Some men sometimes encounter this barrier and experience it as a restriction on their movements, their activities, their control or their choices of “lifestyle.” ”
One of the claims around trans “rights” is the notion that men who claim to be “women” are actually wanting to break down barriers (what Frye is talking about as “boundaries”, ie the way women are contained and restrained as a class for the benefit of men as a class).
But this is not what is going on in with the trans/queer thing either in theory or practice. Men claiming to be women are not breaking down barriers around the constraints put on women, nor breaking the demand for the service they, as men, require from women. They are simply reiterating that (despite their other claims that women do not exist unless men conjure them into being, and that anyone can be a women) actual women exist to serve them. The only barriers or boundaries they want to break are any that women have set up against being available as 24/7 servants.
Our “NO” is to be broken, our means to name the oppressor is to be broken, our right to organise for liberation is to be broken. Our personal bodily boundaries are up for grabs, but not the cage we as women are told to stay in. It is a movement for men to abuse women, to rework the barriers to suit them. Not to free us in any way at all.