Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Does anyone ever wonder how this will end?

609 replies

dyslek · 12/07/2021 21:22

I can see three scenarios.

  1. women lose and we end up living in some nightmarish high tec version of ancient Rome, where woman and children is a sub human resource to be exploited in anyway a man wants at an given moment.
  2. the mass hysteria quietly dies down and every kind of pretents this was never a thing (and in fact it was only those nasty feminists making a fuss that caused all this misunderstanding in the first place).
  3. due to the sheer insanity of gender idology, society slowly starts to listen to women and the horror of the unfairness wakes everyone up to womans humanity and gender stereotypes and finally totally abandoned and we all live happly ever after.
OP posts:
TalkingtoLangClegintheDark · 06/08/2021 20:24

I’d certainly like to think so.

“Can you believe it, they actually argued for putting rapists in women’s prisons and on women’s hospital wards, and not just that but they actually did it, what was going on with them?!”

But I’m still not sure how we can get from here to there.

Not with the degree of belief among those sections of the population who do believe.

Jaysmith71 · 06/08/2021 19:57

It will end with some pop nostalgia channel in 2050 called "Remember the 2020s?" or some such, in which young people who weren't even born when it happened mock the many absurdities of the decade:

"Misgenedering? Man, what were they on?"

TalkingtoLangClegintheDark · 06/08/2021 19:52

I’m just bringing this back because this is such a huge question and one I think about a lot.

Where will this end, really? We have been making some advances, for sure, but the “other side” are so convinced they’re right. They are digging in so hard. They still have so much support on their side in the form of institutional capture and funding, and young people are still being given an often entirely one sided picture of the whole issue.

How is this going to be resolved? When people like Owen Jones are so messianic in their fervour, when no one from “that side” is even willing to listen to any arguments, when it’s all gone so far beyond reason? Is there a way back?

And how do women like us move forward now we know the scale of the misogyny we’re dealing with? I feel such loathing and contempt for the men who’ve pushed this agenda, and the women too - so disappointed and betrayed by those I thought were on our side, as women, but who I now see as nothing less than the enemy, tbh, as in they are the enemy of the kind of world I would like to live in.

It does feel like a civil war, a war particularly between different aspects of the so called liberal left. Those who want to see themselves as progressive, on the side of social justice and equality. Both groups are laying claim to that mantle but it’s impossible for both groups to actually be the voice of progress when we are in such extreme opposition to each other.

I’m rambling, not sure what I’m trying to say - I suppose it’s partly that I do recognise that for some of the TRA/ally camp at least - maybe even most - they are genuinely motivated by the belief they’re doing the right thing, caring about a vulnerable minority, fighting for civil rights etc. And that makes it so much harder to combat them, so much harder than when it was liberals against Thatcher and Section 28, and it was nice and neat as to who was on which side.

So many people whose views would largely concur with mine on many other topics are on the opposite side to me in this arena. And while I can see that some/many of them are motivated by sincerely good intentions, however misguided and misinformed I obviously think those intentions are, it’s starkly noticeable that those on the TRA side never acknowledge the possibility of good faith on our side. Never. We are just demonised and dehumanised all the way.

Everything is so inverted with angry, misogynistic men/ male people comparing us to Nazis, saying how evil we are - while threatening us with the worse kind of violence/sexual violence. I saw one blue tick American guy (a Uni professor?) who actually wished for JKR to suffer a traumatic vaginal injury, but still managed to believe he’s on the right side of history.

Both sides believe they’re standing up for children, against child abuse. We just have completely opposing ideas about what keeping children safe means.

How the fuck does this holy mess get resolved? And even if we’ve got a chance here, how on earth does this play out in the USA/Canada, where things have gone so much further?

Sorry. No answers, just questions. I get heartened by the the steps forward, but then there’s always another new insanity that comes along and is lauded as something marvellous. We’re fucked, aren’t we? Can this really ever come to a reasonable conclusion? If we get the scenario we want, there will still be countless warriors on the TRA side very unhappy and still fighting against it; if things go more the way they want, we’re going to be the ones still angry and fighting.

I think this is going to be a very long civil war. I can’t see how it can resolve even in a few years. I fear it will be decades at least.

But god, I’d love to be wrong. (As long as the earlier resolution was in our favour of course!)

NiceGerbil · 18/07/2021 02:59

Although, when I had pnd and anxiety I was drawn to threads about a certain thing that I knew would really make me anxious and upset me.

I dunno I just feel a bit worried sometimes.

In the end given the sort of things posted and not knowing anything about the poster. Then not responding to say what on earth is not the thing to do, for me.

NiceGerbil · 18/07/2021 02:55

In terms of the range of the arguments and the trampling on so many things- I can't remember now but stuff like saying same sex attraction is a recent concept invented to harm others, that the idea that on the whole male people are bigger and physically stronger than female people is a lie. Pushed by feminists and resulting in women and girls limiting themselves because they have internalised that idea.

And on and on.

With some posters in the past I have got a bit concerned and said this must be difficult, maybe you should step away for a bit.

I mean I have no desire to go into I dunno an incel forum or an anti-abortion one and do this.

I know it would be pointless and upsetting.

NiceGerbil · 18/07/2021 02:48

I think that's for me one of the more interesting threads on this.

I think it's a pbp but not sure.

I worry a bit about people like this. It can't be good psychologically surely to go into what you see as full of really horrible people and keep at it like that.

StrangeLookingParasite · 18/07/2021 01:21

Well. That was a lot of foot-stamping and screeching from a certain black and white poster. How embarrassing.

RedDogsBeg · 17/07/2021 21:43

I think CuriousPanda has left the building Grammarnut.

Grammarnut · 17/07/2021 18:20

Curious Panda you have an odd view of biology. Sex is biological, not a social construct. Men have a penis and testes, at, and before, birth. Women have a vulva with vagina and clitoris (plus internal organs for gestating a child}, and have this at, and before, birth. Some people have some bits missing or have an extra X or Y chromosome but they are still either biologically male or female, a man or a woman. Woman's biology makes her the bearer of reproduction and child nurturing activities and also impacts on her social and economic power in a capitalist society.
Gender is socially constructed. Gender norms are what suggest little girls should play with dolls and wear dresses and little boys play with cars and wear trousers (in western society - in some societies the boys were kaftans and the girls wear salwar kameze i.e. dress code is reversed}. A girl who likes playing with cars and reading science fiction is gender non-conforming, apparently, as is a boy who likes cooking and fancies that kaftan. Being gender non-conforming does not affect a person's sex. The girl with Lego is still a girl, the boy baking cup cakes is still a boy. They may grow up to be gay, but they may just as likely to grow up being a heterosexual woman who becomes an architect and a heterosexual man who becomes a chef.
Do not confuse sex with gender. Even better, stop saying the lie that sex is socially constructed. It isn't, it is a biological fact. Gender is just in your head and quite irrelevant to sex.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 17/07/2021 17:43

[quote CuriousPanda]@TalkingtoLangClegintheDark
I'm literally opposed to the notion that "women are inherently weaker, I'm opposed to the constant assertions of male physical superiority that you^ keep making.[/quote]
I'm just catching up. Very busy week.

This made me laugh.

Strength and superiority.

Let me see. 30+ years of education and then being the educator in human physiology, biomechanics and sport.

Inherent truth: men, as a class, are faster and stronger than women, as a class.

Shown many times in many sports. Even before puberty this is true.

Try using endurance as a measure, in any activity, form running to pain management. Women are measurably 'better', last longer.

But 'superior', unless you are referring to the thing that is physically situated in a position higher than another thing ( usual placement of head over feet for example), is a value judgement.

Male superiority is based in patriarchy. Humans as a society don't value the things they don't excel in. Men are less likely to value endurance as women capitalise on having been allowed parity in sport and start to extend the iron 'man' distances and beat men in real time - as in women who start the race at the same time as men will finish first.

Dora the Explorer will prove to have been a biological truism.

So please, if you want to lie and twist what has been said to make some point don't use physiology to do so. I will usually respond and laugh at you!

SpringCrocus · 17/07/2021 16:04

I agree, I didn't used to mind, I wanted to be "be kind"
Now, I tend to stick to names. I feel the word woman should be reserved for, well, someone who is one.

joolzfromyork · 17/07/2021 15:57

@SpringCrocus

I think the rules allow us to use your description. But not 100% sure!

Perhaps we should find out ... (who can we ask ... or do we just hope a mod chimes in?)

Megasausagehead · 17/07/2021 15:55

@joolzfromyork

My word ... this shit does get awkward doesn't it ?

You say 'x' and other people believe that You said 'z'

Fuck it

Back in the day (yeah I'm old) I was referred to as a
M-T-F Transsexual Woman
I've never had a problem with that ... and to be honest if anyone I ever interact with on MN thinks they might choke on the word 'Woman' in this context then by all means refer to me as a M-T-F Transsexual

I wont cry ... honest Grin

I'll call you joolz if that's cool and you can be you, just as you are.

My preciousness about the word woman is not about actually naming trans, it is purely because I have no idea what it means anymore. Nor what to expect anymore. I have no education in gender and raising 3 kids, that's pretty terrifying.

FloralBunting · 17/07/2021 15:38

joolz, fwiw, it wouldn't have bothered me once, but it does now, for all the reasons I'm sure you're familiar with. But I appreciate the fair minded response, and I think MTF transsexual or just MTF is perfectly serviceable.

The difficulty is clarity of language. Acronyms are just quicker than very complicated nuanced phrases, and the women here are often trying to explain emotionally difficult things wrt our reasons for wanting single sex provision, which means complicated and arbitrary language rules are a real barrier to useful, constructive conversation.

SpringCrocus · 17/07/2021 15:31

Thank you, @joolzfromyork Smile apparently, as you have "given permission" I think the rules allow us to use your description. But not 100% sure!

joolzfromyork · 17/07/2021 15:22

My word ... this shit does get awkward doesn't it ?

You say 'x' and other people believe that You said 'z'

Fuck it

Back in the day (yeah I'm old) I was referred to as a
M-T-F Transsexual Woman
I've never had a problem with that ... and to be honest if anyone I ever interact with on MN thinks they might choke on the word 'Woman' in this context then by all means refer to me as a M-T-F Transsexual

I wont cry ... honest Grin

SpringCrocus · 17/07/2021 14:44

Sorry, but both the acronym and the words are not allowed, if you read the "guidance" pinned to the top of this board.
Which is a shame, as it is actually a good descriptor, imo.

Megasausagehead · 17/07/2021 14:41

This reply has been deleted

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

DickKerrLadies · 17/07/2021 14:30

IIRC it was the acronym of the phrases Trans Identified Male and Trans Identified Female that were problematic, although this was in the days before 'female' started being appropriated too.

IMO, the acronyms were used in the same way they've been used in online discussion for years, as short hand - such as the MN acronyms page (does that still exist?). However, I've always wondered whether the monitors didn't believe that it was a simple acronym because they said that about t-rf and they knew that was a lie so assumed the same of us. I think they assume that we used those acronyms with the same venom and hatred that they have when they call us t-rfs.

I don't think we used those acronyms as a slur and, most importantly, I don't think we used those acronyms in real life when discussing these issues whereas I'm not sure the same can be said for t-rf. No GC feminist was going around shouting about [acronym left out to avoid deletion].

Anyway, pedantry over Grin

SpringCrocus · 17/07/2021 13:53

@dyslek, be careful as the term you used above is one of those potentially "problematic" phrases.

dyslek · 17/07/2021 13:45

Though thinking about it, it probably would not be that great for an actual transexual (I do think there is a difference between a man who suffers gender dysphoria and fully transitions and just wants to live a an ordinary life and, well, people who arnt like that).

OP posts:
dyslek · 17/07/2021 13:40

yeah, I think a lot of people would interpret Transexual woman as a woman who is transexual,ie a transman.
Its easy to forget that 90+% of the population have absolutly no idea any of this is going on.
I always liked the term Trans Identified man/ woman. I always felt if was not only very accurite but respectful too, it explained who people were in a way that was not putting any judgment on anyone.

OP posts:
IsItAKindofDream · 17/07/2021 13:35

To clarify my post above - the word “it” refers to the terms being used, not a person. I’m not referring to anyone as “it” but I realise it could look like that.

IsItAKindofDream · 17/07/2021 09:25

[quote joolzfromyork]@IsItAKindofDream

So we can stop with the misleading term “Transwoman”?

is it misleading ? how? (not picking a fight ...)

I'm not a transwoman but I am a Transsexual Woman ... so do you see this as a misleading term ?

(and to all those of whatever persuasion who have trouble with my using the 'Transsexual word ... grow the fuck up willya ... ?[/quote]
It’s misleading because some people write it as two words, which makes it seem to some people that it is a Female-to-“male” person (apologies - it’s difficult not to be clumsy with the language).

“Transsexual woman” sounds like it could be a transman.

It’s also misleading, as it makes some people think that the person has actually changed sex, which is, of course, impossible.

Skybluepinkgiraffe · 17/07/2021 09:09

Yes it's interesting @Imasoulman
On one hand we have the many, many many labels that people want to give themselves. And in the other, 'trans' has become an umbrella to cover a whole host of things.

Swipe left for the next trending thread