Transmaxxing

The fact is that there are people who identify as a certain gender.

Thing is, ELO, you type out stuff like this, but you don't know what a "gender" is. What do you think it is?

The problem with this accommodation is that other people also exist and have needs.

So it makes some men happier to identify as women. This doesn't make them women and doesn't mean that women's need for single sex spaces ceases to exist.

The problem with this idea of everyone identifying as whatever they want is that this doesn't occur in a vacuum. Other people also exist.

To take one (extreme, but realistic) example. A rapist in prison identifies as a woman. If we take this at face value and say that he is therefore a woman and can be transferred to a women's prison, what about the women in that prison who are now put in danger from this rapist who self-identifies as a woman? Lisa Nandy thinks that the rapist's desire to be in a women's prison should override the women's need to be safe from rape in prison.

What do you think?

And please for the love of god tell me you plucked that from thin air and you aren't currently in the room next to me?

I beg to differ Sir.

Anyway will you be paying by cash or card?

As usual when faced with questions about trans rights an attempt by TRAs to derail the conversation is made, believing that this will suddenly stop all arguments.

People seem to struggle to define who is trans, and give little thought to how a lack of gatekeeping will lead to more people deciding to medically transition, only to regret the permanent changes to their body a few years later.

Gatekeeping prevents stupid people doing stupid things.

Sigh.

How do you know it's an idiot with ridiculous fake tits?

Wheres the line between normal and ridiculous?

You appear to know the answers. Share so we too can know.

I disagree. Supposing gender ideology is adopted 100% by society; gender identity relies on gender stereotypes. These change with fashion. Even the traditional 'transwoman'' stereotype is seeming old fashioned with younger men with beards saying they're women. Over time more and more people will be 'gender neutral ' in their appearance or male/female clothes will be worn by both sexes until we come full circle and realise that the only real difference between humans is the practical reality of sex and we'll have to organised things all over again to make the world safe, practical and medically appropriate for those of us who produce the sperm and those of us who produce the eggs.

Thanks for that reply.

Whether men can be women and on what exact terms snd the precise causes of transgenderism aren’t the key issues.

The fact is that there are people who identify as a certain gender. Doing so makes them happier. The groundswell of opinion (certainly among those in positions of power or likely to soon be in power - eg Labour) to to accommodate them more.

This is what is happening while you guys talk amongst yourselves on Mumsnet.

@EastLondonObserver how is gender critical thinking an ideology? Don't you acknowledge that human existence relies on two sexes to create new life?

I appreciate that you are being a bit more nuanced in your thinking and trying to consider accomodations that could make acceptance of self ID workable but I went from being twaw to thinking there must be a compromise and thought lots of situations through to their logical conclusion until I got to a point of realisation that in some situations honesty about sex matters and that doesn't mean hating trans people or dismissing the mental anguish some of them feel, but we all have to live within certain boundaries and women have the right to preserve some spaces for ourselves.

"Luckily, the western world increasingly agrees with me, whatever jargon-heavy sniping goes down here and in other snake pits of the internet"

They really don't.

And gender critical thinking is not an "ideology".

It is based in science, and science is a FACT whether some people like it or not.
Those FACTS will still be true in 1000 years time.
Men cannot be women.

And nothing you and other followers of the ideology try to justify with your mental and linguistic gymnastics will change that.

Yes some people were suspicious of homosexuality or felt a moral judgement that it was wrong. But the majority soon realised that gay people are no threat because the same rules apply to everyone; the same rules of consent, safeguarding, relationships.

The problem with the 'trans' debate is not the same. Take sport: the open and honest thing to argue would be: shall we change the rules so that men and women compete together in rugby, football, athletics? Is this the way forward? Should prisons be mixed sex? Maybe gay or disabled men would benefit from being in mixed sex prisons? Maybe this would be good for women too? Perhaps all rape support groups, all domestic violence refuges should be mixed sex? We could have an open and honest debate about this and balance out the pros and cons.

But no. Instead we have this bizarre situation where we say sport is single sex but if a man says he's a woman he can join in the women's team and everyone has to pretend not to notice he's a foot taller or is a balding 50 year old playing alongside 20 year old women. Etc etc. And women get shouted and spat at if we point out that biological sex is more important in certain areas of life than a 'gender' which you feel or choose or change.

I think more work can be done to manage and weed out outliers. You seem to assume I agree with every single piece of accommodation called for by the most ardent trans activists. I don’t.

The precise details of how every issue can be worked through isn’t my forte. But, as with the anxieties surrounding many prior social changes (some justified, some not), I see enough reason to believe they can be resolved around trans issues.

Gender-critical thinking is no less an ideology than queer theory. The most ardent supporters of both are never going to meet in the middle. In the meantime, more tolerant and practical people will develop solutions around the points of contention.

ELO has made it clear he doesn't care about women, women's privacy, dignity or safety. It's bog standard misogyny.

But, @EastLondonObserver If you allow one man to say he is a woman and therefore allow him into women's spaces you cannot discriminate against ANY man who says he is a woman. It doesn't matter why he says he is a woman, whether he believes it himself or not, whatever his personality or motivation, you cannot discriminate. You therefore have to allow all of these 'outliers' the same right as other men to say they are women unless you can decide on a cut off point or some rules. As we saw in Scotland, any suggested rules or safeguards were rejected because trans activists cannot accept anyone who says they are trans being told 'no'.

I have no problem with people being gender non conforming, in fact I celebrate it. What I have a problem with is people lying about their sex and expecting others to go along with that lie. There really is no practical reason why a man NEEDS to say he is a woman and use single sex spaces or compete in women's sport when he can maintain a 'feminine' identity and use male spaces or argue for a third space if he is not comfortable around other men.

It’s a “sacrifice” I think that can be worked through so it doesn’t become one.

You guys have already decided it can’t be.

Again, the wind isn’t blowing in your favour.

For me, this is greater accommodation of trans people in society.

Well, of course. Transmen present no threat to you whatsoever.

Women are at risk from males, but that's a sacrifice you're willing to make.

I see outliers as inevitable, and through working on better safeguards and policy any issues they present can hopefully be overcome.

You guys see them as intractable barriers that invalidate self-ID, trans people in trad women’s spaces etc.

It’s not my job to have all the answers. But it is my perigative (as it is yours) to decide which course of action I want to support. For me, this is greater accommodation of trans people in society.

Luckily, the western world increasingly agrees with me, whatever jargon-heavy sniping goes down here and in other snake pits of the internet.

The thing is, @EastLondonObserver We know the Canadian teacher is a man in comedy boobs but the Canadian authorities are taking his 'gender expression' seriously. We know Dylan Mulvaney is a man taking the piss out of women but President Biden took him seriously. We know that Karen White is an extremely dangerous sick joke but the prison authorities take his 'transwoman' identity seriously. Seeing as you can also see the joke in all this, perhaps you could be the one to point it out to the chaps in authority who haven't figured it out yet?

Nope.

Those weren't the questions.

Comprehension is not your strong point is it?

Try reading the thread again.

You have not addressed ANY of the points raised.

I'm all for using simple mainstream words to describe things.

Woman
Mother

As a couple of examples

What would non-ridiculous fake breasts on a male look like, by the way?

Where is the boundary for ridiculousness?

A cup?

We must speak more slowly and use fewer words, wims. So that the man can keep up.

What are the questions?

Something about an anti-woke Canadian idiot with comedy tits per chance?

I know you think your questions are going to reveal the fractures in my POV and cause any trans-sympathetic thoughts I have to collapse around me.

But it’s just an idiot with ridiculous fake tits.