Is anyone else finding being gender critical has affected their mental health?

Sorry, @NegevNights my intention wasn't to highlight your deletion. There's been biscuit emojis deleted before now so I don't necessarily read much into deletions.

Actually @ImaniMumsnet if you're going to delete one of my posts on this thread, please will you delete the lot? I feel exposed now. Thanks.

Given there seems to be very few deletions on this thread, it can be presumed by the interjection by MNHQ that the entire thread is being reported. It seems to be a running theme at the moment.

I've had to take periodic breaks from here and elsewhere recently due to the increasingly virulent rhetoric from those who frame women's rights as 'anti trans'

On the other hand, in real life, increasing amounts of people are becoming vocal about what's going on. I had a conversation last week with someone I assumed would be very TWAW but as the conversation continued, it became very obvious that she was both very gender critical and very well informed. The increasingly desperate foot stamping online is in direct opposition to what is happening irl.

To be fair, the majority of posts have been of a thoughtful and sensitive nature with women sharing experiences with other women. There've only been a few snarky unpleasant comments and they're quite predictable.

I'm afraid it's in short supply atm.

I don't openly talk about my GC views because I don't want to be cast out of society but it definitely affects my mental health. My own experiences with men and hatred for women makes me think extremely negative thoughts and hearing about all the support for men posing as women while spewing vitriol towards actual women is terrifying. Women will never be respected, whether supportive of the trans movement or not. Any support I see for us is simply performative and does not translate to reality.

Just to echo what pp have said and the original thread subject, 3 close friends withdrew their friendship because I refused to say that a man who says he's not a man is no longer a man.

That is not what this thread is about. OP is talking about ordinary, respectful conversations face to face with close family, friends and colleagues.

Yes there is a lot of abuse hurled on twitter. From all aspects. Lots of name calling, lots of accusations and lots of demands. It's not helpful to use that as a reason for not listening to what women are actually saying about their rights.

The concerns that women have are starting to be tested in courts now and they are being validated. The people who are listening to respectful debate understand women's concerns.

They are starting to make legal precedent. For example, the gender critical belief that sex is immutable and sex matters and is WORIADS and a protected belief.

I was just responding to your comment that no-one becomes estranged just for stating that there are two sexes and humans can't change sex. That statement was incorrect, as I took the time to point out.

Absolutely this ^

@Hagosaurus I would so love to meet someone who did believe in GI and was prepared to discuss it - unfortunately so far, it’s either been abuse or a tacit agreement to not talk about it for fear of upsetting them. As far as I can see, GC is the only position which makes any sense. I would generally want to test my position with robust debate, but sadly, that’s not an option here

So what you’re essentially after is called the “principle of charity”- where you ascribe to your opponent the most convincing and coherent account of their argument you can. Then you need to see if your understanding of being GC can answer the best possible case of gender identity theory.

To do this you need to understand not just gender identity theory but identity theory in general and to see where it’s come from and how it works. This comes out of an idea called “subjectivity”- I.e.: reality as it is, in itself, is inaccessible. All we can really know is our own experience of reality.

if this is the case, and reality as it appears is all we can access but not reality as it is in itself (phenomenal reality as opposed to noumenal reality) then we are left with some issues about how we can know reality. This is the foundation of subjectivity, and it’s origins and history are both fascinating and LONG (stretching back to the pre-socratics).

If subjectivity is to be believed, then the leaps become more obvious: what is my being a man or woman? I can give an account of my own experience, but am unable to give an account of anyone else.

even worse- the language that I use to think and give my account is tainted by other people- there are those “cultural elites” who control language and thought in society, and thus to a large degree control narrative by controlling language. This is called post-structuralism.

Therefore, whatever you call man or woman, may, or may not have anything to do with what being a man or woman really is, because ultimately your experience is closed to anyone who is not you, and therefore the idea that you can define “man-ness” and “woman-ness” comes down to the great catastrophe that you just can’t know.

therefore your assertion of a scientific definition of man and woman as the two dimorphic parts of the species “homosapiens” is just you falling prey to those who wish to control you with their own language and ideas, and have failed to permit you to express your own subjective reality. And further your attempt to control the meaning of “man” and “woman” is just you oppressing me with your cultural position of power (living in a heteronormative society and culture, using heteronormative language).

That is, in my experience, the most convincing trans identity argument I can construct. I disagree with it, but if you wanted an argument to get on with it’s the best I have seen.

It is very important that people don't try to make the language that we need to report and call out abuse into forbidden language. For obvious reasons.

THIS and you have to ask yourself what sort of person wants to make it impossible for women to talk about abuse of children?

But we are losing friends and family because of this ideology and it's the whole point of the thread . It's reality for me. some of the everyday normal logical thinking people I know are buying into this shit and others are pretending to agree to it just so they don't get pulled up on it at work or lose their jobs ! .

I'd advise people to keep off twitter. I do look in, but never get involved myself. It really is bad for mental health in so many ways. Those people in the public eye who do have an account have to be very disciplined in their use of it., or esle it can destroy them.

You are again deliberately using dehumanising language.

Do you remember the effect that using that language has had on your ability to dismiss violence against women that you disagree with?

Yet, you continue.

Just as you continue to dismiss violent acts against women you disagree with.

Also 'groomer' is not a necessarily a slur, anymore than 'paedophile. It's a descriptive term for a person who is grooming people. It can of course be used falsely, but fo suggest that one can't use the term when it's being accurately applied is dangerously undermining. We need to be able to name safeguarding issues when we see them. If someone is grooming then they are a groomer.

It is very important that people don't try to make the language that we need to report and call out abuse into forbidden language. For obvious reasons.

No..... the majority of the population don't believe that people can change sex. They believe it for quite a number of different reasons.

"It seems to be used to refer to anyone who isn't a gender critical, i.e. most of the population."

It is remarkable that you would word your statement to be read as if 'most of the population' believed that people believed that humans could change sex. It is clearly false.

However, here is that constant dishonesty that you do. You have again used 'gender critical' without the 'feminist'. Would the majority of the population have beliefs that could be categorised as 'gender critical feminist'? No, of course not. Many are not feminist in the first place. And even some feminists don't use that label for themselves.

Do the majority of the population believe in the same broad premise that people cannot change sex? Yes. They believe that.

Whether or not you were deliberately deceptive, your statement is absolutely false.

Reddit is much better they don't tolerate hateful slurs, threats or false accusations.

Reddit doesn't allow any criticism of gender identity ideology whatsoever. It is a profoundly misogynist place. The gender critical subreddit was shut down and women have been banned for saying men cannot be lesbians.

Regards friends and social groups. I think many people simply adopt those who are immedaitely around them as friends without much in the way of vetting or 'inspeection'. And lots of peolle seem to feel the need for lots of friends, or else they worry it means that they are not likeable or 'popular' or something like that.

In order to be able to maintain such superficial friendships peoplealter their behaviour or hide important aspects of themselves, or even simply go along with activities, pursuits or even mind sets that don't really work for them.

It can be liberating to 'lose' those that don't really resonate with you; and every now and then people do go out of your life quite naturally. Friends which are consciously chosen are more important than ahuge circle of acquaintances.

Judging by the way people have reported friends dumping them because of their views towards gender ideology, suggests these people were never really true friends, anyway.

Few and faithful is far better.

You've been asked.many times before not yo use dehumanising language like 'gender criticals'.

@YellowBrickWall I'm so sorry for what you're going through with your son. It must be incredibly difficult

"Wouldn't it be more helpful to call stuff out where you see it "

Twitter is difficult, it's became a very hostile and toxic community and reporting people who use hateful slurs such as "groomer/pervert etc" seems to be a waste of time now. Engaging with gender criticals on there doesn't seem worth it.

Reddit is much better they don't tolerate hateful slurs, threats or false accusations.

Still not buying 'cis' and never will.

what short hand term do you think would be better for gender ideologues and activists then?

"TRA is an obviously handy abbreviation for Trans Activist."

It seems to be used to refer to anyone who isn't a gender critical, i.e. most of the population.

Cis and cisgender are valid English words with cis going back to Ancient Rome, TRA is just an acronym made-up by gender criticals.