It’s not you as an individual that threatens the political struggles of homosexual people, it’s the ideology that claims to be for you (and transgender people in general) which seeks to remove the ‘sex’ part of homosexuality and instead recasts homosexuality as ‘same gender attraction’.
As any good second-waver will tell you, the personal is the political.
The use of the word 'ideology' is ideological in itself. There wasn't any 'gender ideology' involved in my conscious realisation at seven and my development at the age of 9-12 because I wasn't on YouTube being 'indoctrinated' from 1969-1978, nor was I under any form of treatment. Please don't throw highly-disputable and glib pre-packaged statements around, nor do you speak for any gay men and women I know.
We don't even know what consciousness or a gestalt identity actually is. And I haven't read anything on any side that would qualify as a theory, but I'm seeing a lot of highly-contested frameworks and hypotheses, so when discouraged, I'm left wondering whether the underlying driving 'theories' in this larger ongoing struggle are actually the Horseshoe Theory and the Overton Window.
My preferred approach here, specifically in this space and overall broader discussion, is to read a few key threads, also get a sense check of the vibe, tone and energies, do some self-directed reading elsewhere and let things roll over for a while before I even consider posting. Recognising besieged and maximally staked-out positions and feelings on all sides, I'm not here to change anyone's mind or trade hit-and-run barbs or quips.
Putting the proposed legislative and policy discussion to one side for a moment, many of the gender critical arguments I've seen so far have a far longer history than the last 10-15 years, so I find it personally helpful to revisit and get a grounding in some of the foundational precepts as expressed at the time, and how they've evolved. Sometimes, the original is better than the sequel.
Thanks for provided video clips, though. Video is great for certain types of content, but I prefer to digest longer-form pieces where arguments are clearly laid out. As well as relating personal experiences and reading those of others, I'm more interested in deeper dives into medical, legal, political and academic perspectives. What a public figure – celeb, columnist, author or script-writer – might express is always a far more subjective, editorially-minded view.
So instead, yesterday afternoon, I read an interview with the LGB Alliance founders on Quillette, which at least, was relatively unfiltered. Some of their points, in my opinion, were partially persuasive, but in places didn't correspond to mine or other's experience. In the long run, analysis and examination of policy is critical to all sides. But that's fine, no-one has a monopoly on the truth.
I then sunk into a couple of pieces on this broader topic featuring second wave figures incl. Mary Daly and Andrea Dworkin (no iron-clad consensus there), as well as evolving strands in the third wave. Quickly picked up that Reddit closed their gender critical forum, but also had time to dip into two other relevant pieces, one from Marcus Evans at Tavistock describing his resignation, and another legal piece from gender critical perspective in policy in Canada to tighten up on loopholes, which was the clearest sign of achieving a small degree of and moving things forward.
My experience of GID services has been primarily at Charing Cross where some elements of the process raised an eyebrow, which I'm happy to expand on at some later point, if it's interesting or helpful for anyone. All I'll add is that my long-standing approach to not engage with the broader trans 'community' and carve out my own path, adhering to accepted best practice, has worked well for me. Incidentally, I've removed my name from the national cervical screening programme, which wasn't as straightforward as anticipated, but given my age, still need to attend breast screening. JoBloggs7765974 on Twitter might imagine they need a pap smear, but they're a deluded nuisance, to put it charitably.
Although I'm not convinced about self-id and clearly see flaws, quite frankly, at the outer edges of gender critical positions, some of these views represent a considerable threat to those of us where key ID documentation (e.g. passports) is vital to travel, live and work. Indulging in online performative cruelty – shoehorning loosely-considered implications into a theoretical feminist framework – and thereby bolstering in-group credentials, isn't remotely persuasive if you'd like your views to gain wider traction.
I'm going to move onto other commitments for a while. My MacBook Pro has just decided to pop its battery, damaging the case and needs to go in for a repair on Tues, so I'm going to be offline, finishing projects and backing stuff up. Thanks again to those who wrote some quality posts in this thread –its food for thought. But for all of us, no matter what's in your knickers or between your legs, it's been a challenging time since March. I've had three friends of friends die since then.
On a closing note, the random and amateurish armchair psychological diagnoses and assessments about individuals on YouTube – while undoubtedly cathartic to express – are an embarrassment and an affront to any notion of what genuine social activism is.
Have a good weekend everyone. Stay cool, stay safe.