Common courtesy, a non-malicious question from a transgender person

Happy to swap pronouns in return for people with penises not using domestic violence refuges, female prisons and women's changing rooms. Also people who were born males not participating in women's sports.

I'm gender critical, but I'm not a total dick! I don't believe that TWAW, but I would treat most trans women exactly as if they were women in most situations.

I just don't believe that any old man should be allowed to declare himself "a woman" specifically for the purpose of gaining access to vulnerable women. And I'm still hugely confused how this has become a "radical" or controversial belief.

FWIW the nature of social media is polarising. Many people with moderate views are scared to say anything at all, so mostly the voices that get heard are the loudest, angriest voices, on all sides.

Doubt the op will return. Usual goady rubbish.

Nobody has the right to impose their beliefs on others, or compel the speech of others to suit themselves.

/////

👏 👏

Where are you meeting all these GC people if you rarely leave home?

Quite.

Why should you be happier if people are forced to lie about whether you are male?

I'd call you your chosen name, and use the pronouns you would like.

However, if you went up against me in a scholarship for women in I would think it was very unfair. You won't have spent your school years with stereotypes telling you that girls do biology, boys do physics. Or had periods of maternity leave that stopped you publishing.

You might say that's a specific example that doesn't apply to you — but it will apply to a somebody trans somewhere. And there are hundreds of examples that all join together.

I'm not at all worried about you personally, but I worry about not being able to acknowledge that there's a difference between you and me.

You (or the character you've invented) are supposedly 'not arguing that you've changed your genetic makeup' yet you object to being described as a man. Transwomen are male and you are a man. That isn't 'disrespectful', it's simply factual. It doesn't imply 'hatred' any more than saying a cat is a cat.

To be honest, I’ll indulge toddlers and young children in pretending they are something they aren’t- mine all went through phases of wanting to be a cat/dog/shark etc. I’m deeply suspicious of grown ups wanting to be something they aren’t and I don’t think it’s kind to go along with those fallacies, not when they are outright lies, and detrimental to the rights of women.

I’ll go along with your new name, but that’s my limit. I won’t be complicit in anything else.

Common courtesy would suggest that posters perhaps spend a little time reading the words of others, using empathy, maybe asking questions, considering the feelings of others, rather than banging in, announcing their arrival with a very long post about themselves, berating women for doing something wrong and ending with a bit of a petulant huff at women for not doing as they're told.

But that's just my female socialisation talking. It's a hard habit to shake.

Actually I would like to revise my post - given the length of your initial post and the detail you go into, I think it's likely to be the latter than the former. I think you've come here to vent.

I really take objection to this use of language -

I just want to be allowed to exist

'Exist' has an expansive, dramatic, visceral meaning. To most people, it means 'to live' as in, to physically be alive.

When people use 'existing' in this way in their language, it insinuates that the people who disagree with them on xyz somehow have a problem that they're alive.

This rhetoric is used to paint feminists as violent, as bad people. It's used to automatically claim victimhood in the conversation. It insinuates that anyone who disagrees with some aspects of trans activism somehow pose a direct physical threat to the lives (existence) of trans people and because of that it's been used remarkably well to shut women up. This is not acceptable as is emotionally manipulative.

Waiting to see if op comes back to see if it's worth a thought out reply...

It's not okay for you to be treated without respect. I will always address a person with the pronouns they feel comfortable with. Where i draw the line though, is organisations like Stonewall shoving information at people and refusing to engage in actual conversations if people do not agree with their ideas.

Its disengenious. That's the problem.

I am GC and would refer to a man wanting to be called a woman as they. That way I'm not lying which is something I struggle with, but also not deliberately calling them a man.

In short: GC does not mean anti-trans. Except in the toxic pit of Twitter etc. I don’t know a single GC person who is anti a Trans person living their life as you do.

Benign, and inconsequential to you maybe

Ah, well, that's the thing. Changing language in this way, insisting on it, is not benign and inconsequential at all.

[quote EarthSight]@RedToothBrush So far, yes, you're right, there's no engagement. This was posted today though and so we might not get that engagement until these posts have been read (and there's a lot of them so keep up with so far). This might be one of those dump posts where OP just wanted to megaphone over the room, but I'm curious to see if there will be any more posting from the OP.[/quote]
I very much doubt that even if there are posts, that it will engage.

To engage you have to address the issue of what a woman is and what a lesbian is. And more importantly, who decides that.

It clearly isn't biological women and thats where the whole thing falls down. Biological women are not permitted to define themselves or use science or reproduction to back this up. We must believe like Santa and we must not be critical because thats abusive (even when its neutral in tone and based on observational data or necessary when it comes to healthcare).

The very crux of the problem is that it is sexist from top to bottom - with the only time transmen are ever really considered is to serve the interests of males or as a great big 'gotchca' to women saying this is problematic.

Yet its not men who are being replaced with phrases like 'people with cervixes' or losing single sex toilet provision when things are made 'gender neutral' in the same way. Its not men who lose their dignity. Its not men who are prevented from social spaces because they are no longer compatible with religion in the same way. Its not men who lose out if gender is used instead of sex to measure paygaps and who gets senior roles. Its not men who lose out in sport.

Until you engage with the sexism that transgender beliefs double down on, its not engaging at all. Its gaslighting.

Hi OP.

I am GC in that I believe sex is sex and is immutable, that women are women, and transwomen are Transwomen and no less worthy of respect than anyone else.

I am respectful and relaxed about how people identify and live. I would abhor any prejudice or discrimination against anyone on grounds of the gender they inhabit or present.

My only beef is with those say I am transphobic because sport is based on physical categories snd it is simply not fair for someone who went through male puberty to compete against females. I do not think make bodied sex offenders should be in women’s prisons.

That doesn’t mean I think anything other than a tiny minority of Trans people are perverts and sex offenders. I know they are not. I have worked with many Trans people (very liberal / arty environment), and had great working relationships and a couple that became friends. One of my lesbian friends is married to a Transman.

As a feminist I have always thought it good that gender boundaries and norms were challenged. Gender divergence: great. As a woman I don’t want to have to stick to a set of gendered rules. I am female, a woman, but have never been ‘feminine’.

Anyway, good for you and your partner. I am glad you are happy.