What broader issues has the trans (lack of) debate opened your eyes to?

I look at this in a slightly different way. For me, men are so used to being centred that they think every time something is dedicated to a different group, it is unfair if they do not get the same consideration.

Other examples include, for example, female only shortlists: "so men must be penalised and withdrawn from consideration?" [no, but do you really believe that men are ALWAYS the best option and that there's no unconscious bias in an election or job search? weird how 90% of the winners in these situations are men?]

For instance they shut down womens only swim/ gym sessions. They see woman have the space but they dont want it or dont like it because they by control what happens in it. They are the victim because theres no men online session.

I look at this in a slightly different way. For me, men are so used to being centred that they think every time something is dedicated to a different group, it is unfair if they do not get the same consideration. Because they don't understand that every other slot at the swimming pool is, in effect, for men. Because they are used to being able to do what they want without having to adapt. If you ask those male swimmers whether they regularly change how they swim or consider the women in the pool they will claim that they have the right to swim and that the women must get out of the way. They simply can't see it.

I've talked on MN about this before but I read something that said men don't get out of the way for women on the street. I had always thought this was silly as if anything, often men can be "chivalrous" etc. Then I was pregnant with severe SPD and physically couldn't move and I realised that yes, men might regularly hold a door open for me etc, but when walking down the street they automatically assume everyone else will get out of their way - they don't need to adjust. As a result, others (mainly women) don't walk in straight lines but are rather constantly moving and adjusting. But now I couldn't. So instead, I was being bashed around constantly.

When I told DH this, he was completely surprised and couldn't believe it. A few days later he told me that he was deeply ashamed because after we'd discussed it, he'd started paying attention and realised that HE did it. It had been, of course, completely unconscious. This is a man who gives up his seat for everyone, always lets others (not just women) through doors first etc. But he was suddenly aware that when just walking, he just went straight. It was a real light bulb moment for him.

I'm so hoping that the teens coming through will be the critical independent thinkers that will be the anti-snowflakes. On critical thinking, and diversity of opinions and debate, I asked my DD 'Do you think the point of a debate is to win, as in debating clubs or lawyers, or to unveiled the truth?'

That's why I could never understand how a lawyer could advocate for a murderer who is guilty, for example. And why I disagree that everyone's views should be included with equal weight in a discussion, because, clearly some people are not interested in truth, but they will claim they are, and will consciously claim untruths (TWAW, pedophilia as sexual orientation etc.) for their own agendas.

You do not arrive at the truthful, balanced answer, by virtue of including equal representations of different views and reconciling them. E.g. I've had HR telling me that 'Gender' as a word is more inclusive than 'sex' in the equality policy, and so it was replaced with 'Gender'. Sorry, that's not an inclusive, balanced view, that's just plain wrong. Sorry for ramble.

Some of these things I have come to suspect are about having little imagination. Which I realise sounds a little silly, but I've come to the conclusion that many people don't and maybe can't really imagine what it is like to be a different person, or to have different feelings, or what it might be like to live in a different place or situation.

Similarly with ideas - many people when you talk about the implications of a change in law, or just a change in what people believe, cannot extrapolate to imagine the kinds of effects this might have in 10 years or a generation, or how it might impact other sorts of beliefs.

That's not my experience of KS3 & 4 right now, I have to say. There is a lot of respect for LGBT expression, but when it comes to the classroom there is an emphasis on critical thinking.

I find there is a lot of talk about critical thinking, but very little understanding of what that actually means. I sense is that this is because for many teachers they see it as being challenging to the dominant narrative. So if they see the dominant narrative of western history as being somehow colonialist, for example, critical thinking would be narrative challenging that. What doesn't much happen is trying to step behind even that and realise that the anti-colonialist perspective is also in some ways a dominant narrative. Or the identity politics narrative.
At a basic level all education begins with Know Thyself - who you are and where your own way of thinking comes from. And if you don't know it you can't look at your own perspective with either the respect or the skepticism it deserves. Many school programs now are so thin on content, particularly historical content, that students are left in a position where the current state of thinking is all there is for them. They have very little sense that there are whole other ways of thinking with a different, but coherent, internal logic. Any diversions from what they have been taught about what is good and right tend to be dismissed as prejudice or racism.

I think it’s worse than woman = broken man. I think it’s woman is nothing at all, no thought ever until something pops up where a woman is necessary to facilitate something in the mans life. Anything that looks like treatment as a human being is merely a temporary state to gain the woman’s cooperation to get what they want.

That's the thing, he's not an idiot. He's lovely, and was always one of my closest friends, for a very long time. But he doesn't think my rights are important, I guess because he is a man.

It has absolutely crystallised to me how unimportant women's experiences are, and how men expect to be centred in everything.

Very soon, women are going to be shamed for using public loos for things like changing tampons and mooncups.

Your friend sounds like - now please don’t take this the wrong way - an idiot.

My pal was perfectly okay with the idea of a man handcuffing himself to a radiator in a unisex toilet so that other men could piss on him. When I suggested that I would not like to see that when I want the loo, he told me off for being judgemental....

I then proceeded to describe what it's like for me when I am on my period and why I get blood on my hands and need to wash them..... He made retching noises and very quickly insisted on changing the subject....

Tell his that he really ought to go on social media with his rampant transphobia and see who that goes for him. But then men seem to get off lightly.

Would he sleep with a trans man?

No, he really would not. And I know this because he has talked about his fear/ repulsion for the vagina as a part of his homosexuality before, quite openly and frankly I am not offended at all by that, but rather, that he is quite happy to openly and quite assertively support an agenda that takes away that very same right from lesbians.

But I don't think he is even aware of that huge part of the debate. And if he was he would still very patiently say that yes, that was wrong, but TWAW..... It would not occur to him that if there is such a huge push to remove sexual boundaries from lesbians (but not so much gay men), then who are the people pushing this agenda really? Are they truly transgender?

Of course, I have never been able to get this far. Because #noDebate.

Interactions not intersections sorry.

don't know how to describe the sort of behavior that's flourished due to the mainstreaming of porn in terms of people oversharing and trying to push their fetishes in entirely inappropriate contexts. Sexual incontinence? I'm not arguing for a return to never talking about sex, but surely there's a balance that can be struck between that and posting about your fetish 50 times a day on Tumblr or Twitter, with photos, and then getting into screaming arguments with anyone who's all "um, this is a book group and we were talking about Mansfield Park?" because how dare those people try to shame you (by politely requesting that you cease the kinkspamming).

This topic needs its own thread! Beautifully put. I have been thinking about this and the impact of it on women and girls. I think it is indecent exposure by digital platforms. It’s the virtual equivalent of flashing which we know now is not trivial, does escalate and the hit that the exposer receives from it requires the shock/disgust/cringe from their victim. It’s a fetish that needs unwilling participants. Expanding on that it becomes obvious that digital platforms lend themselves to a new way for exhibitionists and others to feed their fetish.

Those engaging in these behaviours online get the added thrill of being able to wrap themselves in victimhood and righteous indignation when they asked to stop. I suspect this extra hit is less available in real life. Although, thinking that through, it’s exactly the same attack response that we see when women refuse a “compliment”, rebuff physical approaches or worse.

Fundamentally it’s the same entitled expectation that women will perform the part a man has assigned to them, when women refuse - immediate recast. Women is the aggressor and the man a victim. Same thing over and over again it’s only the set/costumes/props that change.

I can only assume that these horrible intersections stem from an internal belief that women aren’t actually people in their own right because men people can say no or I disagree and this is accepted.

That people really think that women are sort of broken men.

Yes, and I would include myself in that! Not that I think women are broken but I have surprised myself in some situations when I realised I was subconsciously seeing men as the default human. I think this goes a lot deeper than we realise.

If you're talking to someone who fundamentally rejects that there is any other point of view than their own, you're on a hiding to nothing.

Granted, Singasonga, but I've long ago worked out that attempting persuasion and dialogue with people like that is a pointless waste of time (see also: trying to do this on Twitter)

Would he sleep with a trans man who had no surgery. Why not?

I think I have lost one of my best friends to this ideology. Not explicitly, but we have definitely not been close since a twitter 'debate' about two years ago. He is gay and I am sure he equates the trans struggle to homophobic oppression - when I suggested that women were at risk if men were allowed access to their safe spaces he said it was the same as saying all homosexuals were pedophiles....

I also think he sees me disagreeing with TWAW is the same as homophobia. I was best man at his wedding, for God's sake.

He doesn't know any transwomen in real life (I do, and like and respect the ones I know very much). He affirms them all the time on twitter but if I try to engage with him he shuts me down by saying that as we are never going to agree probably best not to talk about it..... It saddens me hugely that he would take on the cause of strangers on line but not listen to a WOMAN who has been very close friends for over two decades.....

Hilariously, he has a side hustle in art and draws erotic nudes - all men with penises. Where are all the men with vaginas? Well, obviously he is not interested, but he does not even understand how that would be considered transphobic because, well, he is a man.

Sounds like you're taking an approach that aligns with a thoughtful, non-accusatory examination of privilege and what it means, Floral. I agree that inviting people to view a situation from another perspective is a good start to a conversation. Or at least, better than starting off accusing people of being bigots, anyway.

You need a certain atmosphere and mutually respectful mindset for that to work, though. If you're talking to someone who fundamentally rejects that there is any other point of view than their own, you're on a hiding to nothing.

If depressing!

This is a great thread.

I've been trying to juggle around the language in my head, because I'm trying to think of a way of expressing this kind of default male mentality that props up so much of what we call misogyny, woman hatred, sexism etc.

Someone was talking a few weeks ago about not using misogyny so much, because it sounds like a technical term, and using woman-hatred instead, but the last few posts have crystallized for me why I'm not satisfied with that.

I know a number of men who are decent sorts, and willing to listen to me about feminism, but if I talk about men hating women, I get huge pushback because they don't class themselves as 'hating' women.

But I have made considerable headway with some men by talking about them as being the default - Invisible Women has been very helpful in this regard - and shifting the focus away from language which puts people immediately on the defensive.

Going in cold and talking about women-hate or even misogyny when you are trying to enlighten and be persuasive is as effective as calling someone a Nazi, tbh.

One of my favourite little phrases is 'the opposite of love is not hate, it is use', and that sums up the problem with most men I know personally. They don't have huge conscious animosity towards women, which is what they think of when you say hate, but they do view women in a very utilitarian way as a default, and the headway I've made has usually been in highlighting that 'use' aspect.

Men will bristle at being told they hate women, and they often reject it out of hand. But tell a man to think about how much he assumes women will serve him, and how little he acknowledges their existence as whole human beings, and he may well find himself challenged on a moral level that he can grab hold of.

They are the default human, the world is designed around them and they dont see it or realise how immensly privilaged they are

Even when its explained to them though their default position is always to take away never to add

They know they are privileged but they seem to want to turn themselves into the victim every time.

For instance they shut down womens only swim/ gym sessions. They see woman have the space but they dont want it or dont like it because they by control what happens in it. They are the victim because theres no men online session. They have had plenty of time to campaign for one . They could easily have their own sessions. But they dont. They instead complain and get them removed altogether.

What I've really noticed is how men are centred in EVERYTHING and the resulting privilege that comes with this. And when they aren't, many react badly and aggressively.

Deborah Frances White talked about this in an early episode of TGF. It seemed she really got it, so her going TWAW was really disappointing.

They are the default human, the world is designed around them and they dont see it or realise how immensly privilaged they are

Fish don't realise they're swimming in water ...