You are denying my existence

I'm so glad you posted that Oaxaca link bluescreen. Thank you. I wanted to post it the other day and couldn't find it anywhere. Bookmarked.

For a lot of people their sense of self incorporates the way they believe others perceive them. They are actively trying to develop an identity but they need others to ratify it in order to do so. I suppose it is narcissism but an element of narcissism is very common ime. They are seeing themselves through the eyes of others. Transgender people have been informed that their internal sense of gender is innate and belongs to them intrinsically. That can inevitably be undermined by others not seeing them that way and admitting so much. The people being perceived are informed they have a right to their chosen identity; effectively that their chosen identity is their "self". This implies they have a right to have others perceive them as they wish to be perceived. Gender identity can exist but it cannot exist in a vacuum. It requires reinforcing. For trans people to have the right to a particularly gender identity others must be forced to actively confirm that identity and world view. It is totalitarian.

I also think her position that it is surgical mutilation is perfectly logical and consistent. But I can understand trans people - including the sane ones - seeing it as a denial of their existence. I can understand it being described as transphobia.

Of course that is not an excuse for all the shrieking and death threats and complete refusal to debate anything at all.

ChattyLion Those are good points. I haven't had the chance to discuss this properly with DS as he lives and works in another part of the country and social media didn't seem a good place to continue the conversation, especially after I'd pointed out that women round the world suffer the discrimination they do on account of their biology, not on account of how they identify. He has trans friends so any further discussion on there would have looked heartless. They all seem to have swallowed the party line about Women's Place 'promoting violence' so there is a big hill to climb there anyway.

DisturbinglyOrangeScrambledEgg That's a good point too, about the rape jokes. Sadly, women laugh at them too - I used to as a teenager before I had much clue about anything, before I went to university and discovered it wasn't all either strangers in bushes or women regretting 'bad sex'. Or rare. The horrifying truth. Honestly I don't think most men have a clue about what life is like for women. And for my DS, who does not date women, a lot of this talk is academic and theoretical, and he is very loyal to his trans friends. He just doesn't see the risk of any non-trans male taking advantage of self-ID to invade women's spaces. I'll have to remind him of the 17 Oaxaca mayoral candidates who falsely claimed to be transgender in order to avoid penalties for their party failing to observe gender parity laws.

...Let alone any risk or embarrassment from genuine transgender people in sex-segregated spaces: a separate and delicate question. When I next see him I might ask him how he'd have felt as a teenager changing in front of one of his classmates who used to be called a girl but now identified as male. If the subject comes up at all.

Erishkigal Yup. The first rule of misogyny in all its glory.

"Janice Raymond does say that she thinks there should be no sex reassignment surgery, that it should be banned. "

See here: janiceraymond.com/fictions-and-facts-about-the-transsexual-empire/

I think her position that it is surgical mutilation is perfectly logical and consistent, as is opposing surgery, for example, for various body dysmorphic disorders. In terms of medical ethics, it is controversial, and given resultant loss of function with genital surgery, not something that should be undertaken unless the improvements as regards dysphoria merit it. The medical ethics of such surgery do need to be kept in view. This is not a controversial approach unless you take the extreme trans/libertarian line that any adult can consent to whatever surgery they can persuade someone else to undertake on them (or the US one that you ought to have what you can pay for?).

Given the surgery is optional line we see now from activists, perhaps the 'denying my existence' line is becoming increasingly thin. Myself, I'd hope for evidence based medicine, and perhaps the hope that if we discover more about dysphoria, or change society, then such surgery will no longer be necessary. Which is slightly different to 'should be banned tomorrow (and not on health insurance)'.

It seems to me that too many trans women live quite isolated lives, where everyone surrounding them is forced to humour the belief that they are real women....by people questioning the validity of that claim their false world comes crashing down around them, as if they are not a real woman-what are they? (Men obviously)
They forget that no one lives in isolation....very interesting article in The Times magazine this w/e about a Dr doing facial feminisation procedures on trans women-the comments very revealing-top post-reality check, if you have a penis between yr legs yr not a woman, however yr face looks. Of course some people took offence at this but it is the truth. Live & let live but don’t force others to lie.

Why would anybody work to eradicate something which they denied the existence of?

Quite.

I mean, what the fuck do they think we are all fighting against?

I'm sick of the narcissism. Truly sick of it.

Janice Raymond does say that she thinks there should be no sex reassignment surgery, that it should be banned. Some GC people agree with this, some do not. It seems to me reasonable for trans people to see this particular view as a threat to their existence.

I think people who hold this view don't see themselves as transphobic because they feel no ill will to trans people as people. They just think they shouldn't have surgery. But this is rather like Christians who insist they don't hate gay people, just their 'sin'.

It's a good derailment technique. Everyone stops to say, 'Of course we know you exist, don't be silly' and then three pages later....

Why would anybody work to eradicate something which they denied the existence of?

This is all “throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks” - oppression, extermination, denial of existence, literal violence, literally Hitler..... it all just means “give me what I want or you are BAD”

But that's men laughing at rape jokes, who then go on to do the raping - ie. the gang of blokes joking at the pub tacitly encourage the one in their number to then go and do it.

Exactly. Women are being blamed for something they have no influence over.

A bit like how laughing at rape jokes contributes to rape culture.

But that's men laughing at rape jokes, who then go on to do the raping - ie. the gang of blokes joking at the pub tacitly encourage the one in their number to then go and do it.

Women aren't the ones abusing and murdering, and feminists aren't part of the social group of men who do go and abuse and murder, asserting our boundaries is so far removed from the people who are being encouraged as to be virtually entirely disconnected.

If that was the problem, then the TRAs would be going after the men talking about this stuff, rather than the women.

It testifies to the strong religious nature of trans ideology. Two politicians disagreeing, two scientists, two philosophers, two historians etc. You don't get this hypberbolic ''you disagree with my views so you're denying my existence''. But it's very similar to the way some religious people respond to things like evolution.

There are some very conservative Christians who would say that if evolution is true than god couldn't possibly exist, their entire belief system is false and they've essentially been wasting their time. So you get this strong visceral push back against science. It's not an academic debate to them, it's much more than that, it's about their entire world view and reason for existence.

The eradication bit possibly goes back to Janice Raymond (her top point of being willfully misunderstood/misquoted:
janiceraymond.com/fictions-and-facts-about-the-transsexual-empire/
But her webpage makes clear these claims and blames go back quite a way.

But my DS, who is very woke, tells me that by insisting that people can't biologically change sex and that bepenised people should be excluded from intimate female-only spaces, I am providing oxygen to other people who really do hate trans people and will harm them. A bit like how laughing at rape jokes contributes to rape culture.

Bluescreen i’m sure you’ve said all this.. But being ‘woke’ means you would recognise differences and vulnerability and critique the social structures that enforce power hierarchies.

So he could consider whether by him NOT pointing out facts, or ignoring lies, just so that he can kindly protect TRA people’s solipsism... (note: TRAs would not give a shit about ‘calling out’ HIS feelings if he dared to disagree with them) .. by not opposing this stuff he knows to be false, he is propping up;

-GNC kids being ‘affirmed’ into permanent surgical mutilation, unnecessary drugs, and probable infertility at an age when they are too young to understand what that means.

-He’s making feminists like you more vulnerable to harassment and attack by not standing with you.

-He’s denying your voice and experience as a woman, and that of thousands of other women who would agree with you, which is not OK.

-Not to mention the facts of what happens when self ID is brought in which impacts all women but particularly younger more vulnerable women with less resources to mitigate those impacts.. and children.

Similarly, some people believe they are women trapped in male bodies. I don't believe this, I'm sure there is a more likely explanation than the existence of a female soul or essence. I'm not denying these people exist, or denying their feelings. I simply don't agree with their explanation for these feelings.

This. I do actually have some sympathy for people who believe things which are outside the limits of scientific knowledge. I do. It's fine for personal beliefs. It's when you start trying to impose your personal worldview, however rational to you, however much evidence you think you have in your personal life, onto others who do not believe, share your worldview or have a compelling reason to accept your second hand anecdotes, that there is a problem.

This has always seemed like the silliest accusation ever to me. How would it be possible to have an argument with someone who didn't exist? If we're arguing then clearly I'm aware that you exist, since I'm a bit old for imaginary friends.

When my son would put his hands over his eyes and announce we couldn't see him, we'd all play along - because he was 2, and 2 year olds are self-centred and don't understand that other people really exist outside of them (it's hard to put, but you know what I mean)

These people are adults though, and should have learned by now that everyone else is also a fully rounded being with their own thoughts, feelings and beliefs, and no amount of putting hands over eyes will make other people think they are invisible.

Some people believe they remember past lives. I don't believe this at all, I'm sure there is a more likely explanation than reincarnation. I'm not denying these people exist, or denying that they have these memories. I'm simply disagreeing with the explanation they give for these memories.

Similarly, some people believe they are women trapped in male bodies. I don't believe this, I'm sure there is a more likely explanation than the existence of a female soul or essence. I'm not denying these people exist, or denying their feelings. I simply don't agree with their explanation for these feelings.

If you don't view someone in exactly the way they want you to view them, then you think they don't exist.

Poe's law.

Easy for him to say as a member of the sex whose spaces are still being treated with respect.
Quite. An awful lot of men, even those who don't identify as women,
are instructing us on how to do feminsim

Easy for him to say as a member of the sex whose spaces are still being treated with respect.

I certainly don't deny the existence of trans people or wish them any harm. I doubt that anyone on these boards does. I certainly don't share the ideology that there is some magical female essence that I share with Malala, Linda Bellos and Caitlyn Jenner. But my DS, who is very woke, tells me that by insisting that people can't biologically change sex and that bepenised people should be excluded from intimate female-only spaces, I am providing oxygen to other people who really do hate trans people and will harm them. A bit like how laughing at rape jokes contributes to rape culture.

Ach - I get what they mean by the phrase. It doesn't stand up to close scrutiny but I am denying that gender exists as a thing which if your whole identity is feeling a different gender it must feel like people are saying you don't 'exist' as evidence.

If you don't view someone in exactly the way they want you to view them, then you think they don't exist.

Bullshit. So, if I want people to view me as a victoria secret model and they don't.......that means I don't exist?