Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Could you please help me form a coherent response

34 replies

EinsteinsArousedSausagesHCB · 09/08/2020 22:55

Hello all,

I have a tendency to waffle so apologies in advance for the length.

I have lurked on the FWR boards for quite a while now. I mainly lurk as many of you are so very coherent and much more well informed than me. Therefore although I enjoy reading and learning from you all, I often have nothing substantial to add.

But I have learnt a lot of valuable things from you all. As such, today on another forum, I took the plunge and told all and sundry that I was gender critical and that I found the term 'cis' to be offensive. This was part of a larger discussion, I didn't just blurt it out willy nilly.

A TW then responded with a large and somewhat contradictory post. Surprisingly however, they ended with saying that they agreed with my points.

Probably naively on my part, I thanked them and told them that although I agreed with much of their post, I disagreed with some. But that it felt refreshing to have a coherent discussion on the topic without any preconceptions.

Typically the tone then turned, demanding to know what exactly I disagreed with as it's important that they are able to educate themselves but they of course will disregard anything hate filled. They sounded a little erratic at this point.

Now I know how I want to respond. Which is calmly and with actual proven facts. But I am unsure of the actual data. I know that I have read much of it countless times here, but for the life of me, I cannot remember which threads nor can I find exactly what I am looking for when using the search function.

So if I list some of the points that they made which I know are incorrect (and if I include a run down of what I know in brackets), I was hoping that perhaps some of you would be willing to provide me with a little more substance?

Paraphrasing;

  1. Cis is not an offensive term it's just a descriptor. Also they have no idea where it originated but it is definitely not offensive. (Cis suggests that I am a subset of woman. I am not. I am a woman because my biology dictates so. My biological sex needs no label.)

  2. TM have it easier than TW including an example of male privilege where the TM is promoted at work after transition whereas the TW is now overlooked. (I believe that this is incorrect as the TM is still at a biological disadvantage. Also the TM may have been offered the position on merit. However if it is as they say, the TM has had the social disadvantage of being a woman before transitioning. Whereas the TW would have had the advantage of male privilege up to transition.)

  3. The old chestnut that TW are the most vulnerable of society, only to be trumped by the black TW who is the epitome of the most vulnerable in society. (I know that this is incorrect yet spouted a lot. I saw a wonderful post on here a couple of months back which wonderfully refuted this with facts and figures but I cannot find it!)

There is more, but I think just responding to these 3 points is enough. And for those of you still with me... Gin

OP posts:
CharlieParley · 10/08/2020 01:39

're point 2: there is a study I'm aware of that showed indeed that amongst the cohort they collected data on, males who identified as trans experienced a career disruption, typically while transitioning. After that their career slowly rrcovered. And females who identified as trans experienced a career advance post transition. This was expressed as a percentage decrease or increase in their earnings.

However, the study only involved post-op transsexuals (of either sex) who legally changed sex. In one country. If I recall correctly, it did not differentiate between sectors and it did not directly compare the pre-transition earnings of males to the pre-transition earnings of females but, it did, most importantly, include a graph that post transition they essentially ended up in the same space. That's because transition seemed to eliminate the very well known workplace inequality between the sexes.

There are a number of reasons for this, like for instance that testosterone is a hell of a drug and the females in question typically pass as male, thus benefiting from the privilege that continues to accrue to males in our workplaces. Unfortunately the same is not true for males (or actually it is true, but testosterone in their case however, especially a testosterone fuelled puberty, often prevents an equally successful passing as female for post-op males).

So for a very small number of females who identify as trans, male privilege may indeed accrue to them post-op (but usually only if their sex is not known), while males who identify as trans are penalised for not conforming to society's preconceptions about male stereotypes and thus lose some but not all of their male privilege.

But that same male privilege typically helped these males progress faster than their female counterparts before they embarked on their transition, so any comparisons not taking this into account are disingenuous.

That study was done quite a while ago btw and it is highly likely this or something like it is what informed your discussion partner's point 2.

However, given that fewer than 5 percent of the trans community transition all the way to surgery, these findings are largely irrelevant to today's debate which is mostly concerned with people who identify as trans and who demand acceptance as the other sex without medically transitioning. And obvious females do not benefit from male privilege.

JellySlice · 10/08/2020 01:00

Don't knock yourself down - if my search skills were, as you put it, up to parr, I would have linked it for you! Grin

EinsteinsArousedSausagesHCB · 10/08/2020 00:52

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Quotes deleted post

TehBewilderness · 10/08/2020 00:25

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Timefortea4 · 09/08/2020 23:50

Cis! Sorry auto correct

Timefortea4 · 09/08/2020 23:50

I'm interested in further info on the cos point. I have seen it recently appearing in work policies and I wonder about the best way to challenge it.

JellySlice · 09/08/2020 23:44

There was a brilliant thread last year about the futility of engaging with narcissists. Because we GC women are willing to engage with TRAs we answer point by point, but simply get dragged unwillingly and unwittingly into stoking, and this validating, the narcissists rage.

Not sure what to suggest, though.

Original poster
EinsteinsArousedSausagesHCB · 09/08/2020 23:44

Don't get fooled into trying to refute every single point thats made. You will end up spending a lot of time and effort on something that is not going to change the other persons mind.

Thank you, I know that you are correct. And that is why I initially gave a short acknowledgement of their point. In hindsight I probably should have thought it through more, withholding that I disagreed with some.

It's just difficult not to respond after the suggestions that any disagreement is likely coming from a hate filled place. I wonder if my silence and lack of response would then confirm that view for any readers who are on the fence.

But yes, I know that I am unlikely to change their viewpoint.

OP posts:
Thelnebriati · 09/08/2020 23:26

Don't get fooled into trying to refute every single point thats made. You will end up spending a lot of time and effort on something that is not going to change the other persons mind. They have Google,they could find the facts for themselves if they wanted to.

Risk assessments and safeguarding model absolute risk, not relative risk; which is why women only spaces are for women, not for ''the most vulnerable.''