If you're GC, what should trans people actually do?

Under the current version of gender ideology, female bodied people having different social and financial challenges than people with male bodies is not a real thing.

Third spaces accept that the female sex exists and that some needs and experiences are rooted in that sex. Trans Activism (as it is currently constructed) rejects that. They think it's an illusion, a false need created by transpobia, sexism and lack of vision.

So it's not enough to ensure trans people are safe and supported, their (TRAs not necessarily actual trans people) beliefs and values also require that female only spaces, that the whole concept of female being more significant than, oh let's say gluten intolerant, no longer exist, not just for them.but for anyone. They see accepting any segregation by sex as equivalent to segregation by race...as something immoral, unjust and used to keep marginalised people disempowered.

That's the motivation of the ideological allies anyway. The motivation of at least some individual male people to be in with female at all times is probably less ideological and more selfish. But for the movement as a whole, I think it's driven by naivety and arrogance rather than outright malice or dishonesty.

When I mean no symmetry, I mean this is part of it

https://twitter.com/says_computer/status/1690803016687894530?s=46&t=HTxp6zC_d4GZ2FFv4a-YeQ

I would like someone to post the equivalent of the other ‘side’. I don’t like speaking about sides in general. But needed for this exercise.

Even hard line women’s rights campaigners are not preventing trans people from speaking or from expressing their view.

Indeed, women WANT them to speak. Actually expressing their views can be very revealing, which is why Stonewall said "no debate".

Third and/or additional gender neutral facilities and categories have always been the solution. The problem with that is that total appropriation and colonisation is the actual goal, nothing to do with privacy, safety, dignity or fairness.

As I was recently told by a gay man on another forum I post on - " Women are not real" and I am just a hateful bigot for suggesting they are.

To dissolve the boundaries between male and female; adult and child, and between public and private.

This is so true. I have asked at least three male posters on this board why they have not been campaigning for their own spaces. And asked numerous posters more why Stonewall and those before Stonewall didn’t campaign for third spaces. You never get an answer.

I remember being told that it was too hard a couple of times and I offered to help. Crickets. Tumbleweed.

Yet, those male posters doubled down that they had never, never been identified as being male in the toilets / received negative reaction while there. They have claimed they were ‘invited’. One assured us they were told they were being stupid by their female friends if they expressed doubt at first. That their female mates were fully supportive. And then one after another they tell us that they understand some women are distressed, but they are never going to stop.

Those posters show with every post that they are male. And that some have been emboldened by women who either are very privileged in never having needed a female toilet for anything other than to ‘pee’ or are simply lacking in empathy for other women and girls.

But yes. They are not campaigning for third spaces those posters and they have no answer as to why lobby groups have never campaigned for them. And they don’t seem to ever acknowledge the male transitioners who have continued to use the male toilets and spaces. And who have done the work to ‘expand the bandwidth’, of their own sex as gender nonconforming males not expand the female sex category to forceably include them.

Transgresing boundaries is definitely the point. That is the whole point of Queer Theory. To queer everything.

Perhaps violating women’s boundaries and scolding women who try to defend themselves, is really the point.

I think invading women's spaces is at least part of the point. It has been suggested on here for years that men who identify as 'transwomen' could campaign for their own spaces so that women don't lose theirs. Women have even offered to help them to do this. They don't want that. They want our spaces with all the unconsenting women and girls in there.

Indeed. It makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

Perhaps violating women’s boundaries and scolding women who try to defend themselves, is really the point.

Here's what transwomen/ trans identified men can do:
Stay out of women's spaces and sports - including spaces for lesbians. Lobby for your own if you are afraid of other men

Here's what transmen/ trans identified women can do:
Stop demanding that we neutralise language about women to make you feel better. And stay out of gay men's spaces. You are welcome in women's spaces because you are women. You are welcome in women's sport as long as you aren't doping. Also: leave tomboys alone.

I don't understand why all the energy of the trans community has been spent on screaming at (mostly) women who want to retain their single sex rights, why it hasn't instead been spent on campaigning for the things trans people say they need. All these things are supplementary to the sex based provision already in place. In addition to. Not instead of.

Imagine what could have been achieved if they'd done that instead of snatching our resources from us.

The middle ground is what gender critical women want. As stated by many people - live your life without expecting others to "affirm" you. You only need that because you know you can not change sex and you are not what you would like to be. The extreme would be wanting to force gender norms on you, inflicting violence if you disagree, trying to get you sacked if you disagree, tell you how you had to dress, what you call yourself, that you werent doing your sex properly. There is only one extreme here - and it isnt us.

@Helleofabore

Thank you. You have expressed very eloquently what I was trying to say!

I agree that the alleged extremes on ‘both sides’, pitting feminists against trans activists. are not symmetrical. There is no comparison. Feminists don’t threaten or assault trans people. I haven’t noticed feminists protest trans events. They don’t post horrific messages about harming trans people. And feminists talk rationally about erasure due to language and laws and not ‘genocide’.

It also is not symmetrical when you discuss ‘demands’. Women ask for single sex spaces to be respected but not for trans people to be excluded, just that a third option is provided (that is not the disabled provision ). They ask that female sport is respected but not that trans people be excluded, but that compete in an open category. I know all this has been said already, but it bears repeating.

Even hard line women’s rights campaigners are not preventing trans people from speaking or from expressing their view. They also don’t want trans people excluded from public life (despite the hyperbolic accusations). They want the conflicts between the rights of the two groups acknowledged and resolved in ways that work for both. This doesn’t mean that trans people get the demanded access to female single sex provisions, but that they have solutions for their needs that protect them. This may mean that they don’t get the extreme validation they demand, but that they are safe and living their life without the authoritative element of their demands.

The two sides are not symmetrical.

How can they be when they are based in ideology and not science and evidence based?

Maybe, however, the extremes in some poster’s minds include the ultra conservative extreme which so often gets lumped in with feminists. Even then, I am not sure even those people are symmetrical with the actions and demands of the extreme trans activists. Maybe they are, I don’t know as I am not seeing that here in the UK.

‘Middle’ is nice in theory. But I don’t believe it applies here when you start to analyse it in depth. Certainly not neatly, if at all.

@CyberCritical

Yes, but "Bad actors on both sides?". I just don't recognise this really.

In theory you could argue anything. But is there any better medical evidence for performing either of these? Which one?

Wasn't the post you're referring to talking about how the press presents the 2 sides, not how the poster sees it?

"Even if you look at the Let Women Speak events, the press and personal accounts are usually very polarised, it's either a case of all TRAs were violent thugs or all GC crowd were transphobic monsters. Obviously that's not the case, basic common sense tells you that neither account is 100% accurate, there will be bad actors on both sides and a collection of more moderate people in between."

@FatAgainItsLettuceTime

But you were comparing the two "tribes" as if the "bad behaviour" of the GC women is the same as or very similar to the bad behaviour on the other side in a very "both sides have extreme people" kind of way. I'm sorry, but this is rubbish. No GC women has said that that violence represents the whole trans community BUT the fact that this issue of male violence associated with the trans cause has not been called out enough by the media/society/trans allies themselves is part of the problem, in my view. Even if not actually perpetuating the violence, many of the protesters seem to think that violence is acceptable because "trans lives are being threatened".

It honestly is very relevant, because one of the cards used against GC women is that our words are "literal violence" and we should check our speech at all times. This is why it matters and why lots of GC women are fed up with it - no one is telling these organisations to stop being violent with anywhere near the same level of volume as those who tell women to shut up and not hurt feelings

I’ve never heard a good explanation for why people with body dysmorphia who want their leg amputated because they really feel it’s not theirs are any different to people who want their breasts removed because they feel they shouldn’t have them.

In theory you could argue that there was better medical evidence for performing one of them, but that wouldn't really mean that both shouldn't be considered an unhealthy delusion.

I really hate the ‘treated like a woman’ in a work context.

Exactly. If sex matters, don't be dishonest about it. If it doesn't, then it doesn't and why are you treating men and women differently?

I really hate the ‘treated like a woman’ in a work context. What does that even mean? I spent a lots of my time at work 20 years ago (male-dominated, heavy manufacturing) explaining that nobody should be ‘treating me like a woman’ (I am one) we should all just be treating each other as competent professionals. I’m not talking about holding doors open (common courtesy to either sex), I’m talking about apologising (only to the woman) for swearing, expecting women wouldn’t go on to the production floor, a union rep saying to me “I hate women”…… I’m sure things have improved since then. Nevertheless, ’Treat me like a woman’ smacks of awful sexism to me

I’ve never heard a good explanation for why people with body dysmorphia who want their leg amputated because they really feel it’s not theirs are any different to people who want their breasts removed because they feel they shouldn’t have them.

Have you seen this article? It makes that exact comparison.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/12/a-new-way-to-be-mad/304671/

I think the people who decided that gender dysphoria shouldn't be classed as a mental health issue did sufferers a disservice

I agree and I thought we were supposed to be removing the stigma from mental illness but if you say it’s a mental illness people get really angry like you’ve insulted them or think something bad should be done to them. Whereas any decent person would feel compassion but not indulge the fantasies.

I’ve never heard a good explanation for why people with body dysmorphia who want their leg amputated because they really feel it’s not theirs are any different to people who want their breasts removed because they feel they shouldn’t have them.

*transphobia

My phone is transphobic, it won't let me put transphobia