BBC Bitsize - Pronouns

expecting girls to pretend boys and men are not boys and men is a safeguarding issue

worth repeating, and repeating

Absolutely - up there with Woman = Adult Human Female

Crazy I don't have preferred pronouns because I've just been landed with she/her pronouns by virtue of being born female. Some days being female is great, but there have been many days when I've resented my biological sex, resented the way people speak down to me or look at my tits when I talk, and there have been days when I've known the reason I was targeted was because I of my sex, those days have been painful. Some days, many in fact, I choose not to acknowledge the gendered expectations of my sex and go about my business without my hair and make up done, some days I dress up, some days I hate my big boobs because they make me feel weak and people stare at them (see above), other days they make me feel powerful because they fed my children. On no days do I identify as 'cis' because I do not identify into the gendered expectations of my birth sex. She/her are my pronouns because they reflect my birth sex and using pronouns that reflect birth sex helps other people to navigate the world, by responding to what they see with their own eyes. It means they don't have to feel confused or wrong or constantly need to self flagellate until they get it 'right'. I don't care what the people with he/him pronouns and she/her pronouns look like or wear as long as I know where I stand and who I'm sharing single sex spaces with. Pronouns are compelled speech - the purpose of which is to divide us into good and bad people (why not just hand out badges so you know who the bigots are?) and they enable pronoun champions to shut people down and stop them talking over the most minor transgressions. They also encourage young people to categorise themselves when youth should be about defying categories. Hey kids, why not 'expand the bandwidth' of male and female? I expect you'll need to spend a whole lot less time telling other people off.

expecting girls to pretend boys and men are not boys and men is a safeguarding issue

worth repeating, and repeating

Pronouns are what enable men to take the place of women on public boards in Scotland. If I call a man ‘she’ then he can push out women’s representation and, take a place that has been set aside for those who had to struggle against sexism and maternity career costs to get to that level. If I call several men ‘she’ then there may be no women represented on that public board at all and yet it will be claimed it is ‘equality’. No one to ensure the women’s voice is heard, no one who has experienced being at the receiving end of this misogynistic culture, no one who knows what it is to be a woman, what are the barriers women face. That doesn’t just harm the women who got pushed out of their places. It harms all women as the services those organisations manage (including health provision) will no longer be listening to women at their strategic level. All because you want me to ‘be kind’ and use the wrong pronoun.

And this is just about pronouns, it's not about transitioning or GRC. Why so offended?

Yeah Crazy, it's just pronouns. Why are you so offended?

I would be completely supportive in talking to a person who has such a degree of emotional distress that they struggle to accept their sexed body.

However, I will not be told to ignore the evidence of my eyes or teach my daughters to ignore the evidence of their eyes.

We navigate the world according to what and who we see. I am responsible for my (and my daughters’) personal safety and I will not be discouraged from trusting my eyes or my instincts by anyone.

I don’t believe that it helps anyone for me to collude in and reinforce their own personal crisis.

I will offer everyone kindness and respect but in the same way that assisting an anorexic to avoid food would not be a kindness, I don’t believe that submitting to an ever growing list of rules of how I can refer to someone not in their presence is any kindness that I can offer in all conscience.

Why so offended? Feels like you'd just prefer us to shut up and never talk about our issues EVER.

Isn't that exactly what GC women are trying to say too?

Apparently teaching people about pronouns and how to be supportive is bad because... Some people are bad I guess.

And this is just about pronouns, it's not about transitioning or GRC. Why so offended? Feels like you'd just prefer us to shut up and never talk about our issues EVER.

How has the article been updated? Is it just the removal of the image and the addition of another LGBT charity?

Because I could have lived with the image. I would have preferred to have seen removed the suggestion that if one doesn't fit in comfortably to 'male' or 'female' categories then one is non-binary. And the recommendation that we should be 'accepting people for who they are and being inclusive of everyone, regardless of their gender identity.'

I've got a feeling we have to exhaust the procedure within the BBC (possibly mentioned on another thread recently) before escalating to Ofcom but I'll have a look.

It is a very strange article - reminiscent of the writing style I have seen on other ideology promoting sites. The 'facts' they present seem to be shoehorned in, in a way that says 'look I have a fact that backs my point!!' but actually it doesn't really or is not a fact at all.

Very poor quality, and if the person who wrote the complaint response could read it back and make some sense of it, I would be surprised. They are very much mistaken if they think that the article achieves any of the aims they state.

I got the same reply to my second complaint. Come back to them again, or escalate to ofcom?

expecting girls to pretend boys and men are not boys and men is a safeguarding issue

💯

Same here. As far as I can see it is extremely questionable as to whether it complies with the current RSE standards although they claim it does and I would be interested to see what are the ‘facts’ that they refer to as I can only see one and that is questionable at best.
Can you set out ‘facts’ for an ideology - wouldn’t beliefs be more accurate?

As far as I’m concerned that article in no way fulfils their stated aim of ‘supporting a pupils understanding’ of the protected characteristics of sexual orientation or gender reassignment and I am disappointed that they saw fit to spend our money on this guff.

I got my BBC reply to my complaint - looks the same as Gardenbird's. They have not responded to my main point which was that expecting girls to pretend boys and men are not boys and men is a safeguarding issue. As far as I am concerned they haven't answered the complaint I made.

Thanks for sharing Garden. This is still gobbledegook:

These can include:
• Ne (Ne/nem/nir)
• Ve (Ve/vis/vir)
• Ze (Ze/zem/zir)
• And a set of pronouns known as ‘spivak’ (ey, em, eir).

I just can't believe this nonsense is being shared as an educational tool for kids.

BBC Bitesize Pronouns article has been updated:
www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zp6ftrd

A response to my complaint from the BBC - quotes from the email in italics, other comments my own.

they recognise that the image was 'open to misinterpretation' but was meant to depict a sports hall rather than a changing room apparently.

The article is intended to help teachers and pupils navigate one of the more complex aspects of this topic (RSE) and is factual and based on research into the subject.

there weren't many obvious facts in this - maybe the mention of the use of 'they' as a singular pronoun since 1375 counts as a fact?

The intention and substance of the article supports school age pupil's understanding of the protected characteristics of gender reassignment and sexual orientation.

there seems to be no mention of anything to do with sexual orientation in this article, and not really anything to do with gender reassignment, just talking about people who don't fit into male or female categories.

In order to avoid 'promotion of partisan views' - the BBC principle of impartiality - we worked with Stonewall (as stated) but recognise that the sole mention of Stonewall may have given the impression of a partial perspective and have therefore added to links to other organisations with expertise in this field

they have included one extra link to a charity called Just Like Us - I can't find out a huge amount about them but they are an LGBT charity that works in schools. Run by an ex Stonewall person - not sure if that is good or bad on the LGB side of things.

Unsatisfactory - could do better.

The BBC story made the DM by the way

My whole life I was a feminist before I even knew the word. I wanted to be treated as a person first. And I wasn't. I can count on the fingers of one hand the men I've known who have seen person first. And that may be an overestimate TBF.

That's it! It took a while to connect the bubbling resentment I felt with being repeatedly objectified and diminished for being female. In my mind I've always been equal, always seen other girls/women as equal and always felt a stinging sense of injustice that we are not treated as equals. What I experienced was doors opening or interest peaked because of the way I looked and then an expectation that you express gratitude and modify your behaviour to fit in with the men who’ve given you a pass. Which segues to the beauty privilege point, it may help gain entrance, but the conditions upon which you’re allowed to stick around make your position fragile and precarious. You must always look good and you must maintain those looks in the face of marching time. Don’t get saggy! You must smile to get your point across, be warm not cold, don't be a bitch, be kind, make men feel comfortable, don't overstep the mark or get angry. The ‘submissiveness’ that seems to appeal to some isn’t innate, it’s required. We’re all people, we’re all different, but for many men we really are just a set of parts.

There was a thread on here about, I forget the term. Beauty privilege or something?

For me this is a concept that bears no relation to feminism. It has been invented to divide us. Any 'privilege' or otherwise is based in how we appeal to heterosexual men and get treated as a result. It feels very divisive and grounded again in male gaze. Yes women who look different ways get differently. But none of us are treated well. And it appeals to this again male driven idea that being attractive is the be all and end all. I say no to the concept. All that happens is that women argue about who was worse off and how. No woman has an easy time in society. It's a distraction.

YY

The idea that women who are attractive somehow 'win' is such bollocks.

I also ticked the patriarchy approved looks boxes. Small build, big blue eyes, natural blonde etc.

I noticed the way I was treated from very young. The surprise that being pretty was not the main or determining thing about me. That compliments on my looks were not well received. That I was pretty much incapable of pretending that it was. The non reaction and challenging look put people off balance, from when I was young.

The idea that girls and women have the main aim of being attractive to men comes from men I think, and is reinforced across society. The more I think about it the more I think yes, that makes sense.

I also struggled with being taken seriously... Actually. No. Treated as a person.

My whole life I was a feminist before I even knew the word. I wanted to be treated as a person first. And I wasn't. I can count on the fingers of one hand the men I've known who have seen person first. And that may be an overestimate TBF.

Lots of men don't automatically see us as people at all. We are 2D stereotypes if they don't know us, objects.

I'm not gender non conforming, I look stereotypically female, I enjoy looking feminine and I've recognised that it can be useful, but it has also been a huge burden in my studies and in my job. Mainly because LOOKING stereotypically female triggers immense shock when you go off script. So, for example, I was told by a male friend at university (many moons ago) following a heated debate between myself and a group of young men I considered to be friends and intellectual equals that they had "all fancied me, up until I lost my temper" that evening. So the most important aspect of the relationship with each of those men was not - as I thought - the opportunity for exciting and rigorous debate, but that they wanted to screw me. It made me rage, as have numerous experiences ever since. "Tone down" my reactions in the workplace, smile for the creepy, but important perv who can't take his eyes off your tits, be witty and entertaining, but not too clever. Fold yourself up, bend, make yourself smaller. I'm a hell of a lot bigger nowadays and I couldn't care less because they'll ignore you once you're my age whether you're stereotypically feminine or not. Sorry I've gone off topic, probably a bit angry after a tough week, but this: the whole thing stems from men.

Yes the whole thing stems from men.

Male imposed gender roles (albeit often supported by women for reasons that are probably another thread!)

A very shallow view of women and girls based in narrow stereotypes

A good dash of misogyny

None of this is new

GNC women have always got shit from men for not toeing the line. Up to and including violence, rape and murder.

Our status as sex objects/ public property unless with our male owner starts from a really young age with street harassment and worse, way worse

And all the rest of it. Which is just so awful. And whether it's seen as trivial by society (a man wanking at you when you're 12) or serious (FGM, forced marriage) it all comes from the same place.

I have seen a few threads on here about street harassment where a mum is with a daughter. Daughter gets obscene stuff shouted at her. Mum goes up at the lights and says what the hell she's only 13. Men look horrified and are apologetic.

And that kind of encapsulates the problem. Lots of men don't automatically see us as people at all. We are 2D stereotypes if they don't know us, objects. No thought is given to how the girl/ woman being shouted at will feel, because she's not a whole person.

That's at the heart of this. Some men look at us as presented in the media and as we're seen in society and think yeah. That looks good. Go around being sexy, loads of people want to sleep with you. Prosecco and what have you all the way. I mean that sounds shit to me which I suppose makes me not a woman. But again. Men have always told us what we are, and the ones who don't conform are wrong.

So in a bizarre way it makes sense. If you are a man and you have consumed those stereotypes then what's the fuss about? I meet those things so that's what I am too...

That's what I thought must be going on, NiceGerbil. It's s perplexing point unless the person making it is applying men's behaviour patterns, which of course don't apply.

Lesbian women, along with children and teenagers, are emerging as the most vulnerable, marginalised and oppressed groups in all this, as I see it, followed by women and transmen then transwomen, if we need rankings.

I'd march and speak up - just as I did against war (Vietnam) as a student -for any or all these groups to have their human rights: protection for children; equality of opportunity, pay etc for the adult groups and free speech and freedom to dress and express ourselves as we please and live untrammelled by gendered expectations. Everything but giving up rights to single sex provision in public toilets, changing rooms, hostels, refuges, hospital wards and prisons.

The lesbians thing is old hat and I believe comes from the same place as it all- that lots of men don't see women as real whole people.

I've come across this at work. Men assuming that if a woman is attracted to women then she must follow the same behaviours, feelings, patterns around sex as men. They assume she is 'like a man'. They can't even begin to get to grips with anything outside their own personal reference points and feelings.