'Biological essentialism'?

I've distanced myself from them, I just cannot be arsed to engage with them any more. I know this is wrong, and I should carry on, and I really do admire those of you that are still shouting into the void of stupidity.

This is very much my approach, just from a different angle. The only word I would substitute is stupidity for belief.
Believing in gender identity is as illogical to me as believing in god. And I'm not going to waste my energy arguing about who's right or wrong when it comes to "facts". My interest is in highlighting and fighting against the harms that result from the belief being enforced as a truth. I feel the same about religion when it impacts others too, but thankfully there are established ways of dealing with radicalism for religion (and most people recognise what radicalism looks like in that context).

OP well done for carrying on the good fight, and holding up the gender critical team. I really do admire you for having the energy.

I tried this with people who have swallowed the TWAW hook line and sinker. I'm pretty good at arguing, but I realised that its like a cult and there is no reasoning with them. They will argue black is white and it won't matter what you say. They will even deny your own lived experience as a woman. They don't care about facts, women's safety, homophobia or child safeguarding. The holy grail of trans rights trumps everyone and everything else.

I've distanced myself from them, I just cannot be arsed to engage with them any more. I know this is wrong, and I should carry on, and I really do admire those of you that are still shouting into the void of stupidity.

Personally think the issue, when it comes down to it, for many of those who deride 'biological essentialism' is that they seek to eliminate, deny or suppress anything which is 'essentially' female - and that comes down to pregnancy, childbirth and childcare. In denying female biology and all that stems from it - they see liberation. They even want to deny that males are stronger, faster and more muscular ( generally), hence the reason we have sexed categories in sport.

See the glee with which Miriam Cates losing her seat has brought for some. That she is a Christian who values the traditional family and the role of mothers and motherhood is a reminder of all that they are seeking to escape. Women's essential biological reality is viewed with disdain and denial, as a source only of suffering and oppression.

This is one of the results of 'equality' feminism in which women seek to assimilate into the male mainstream.

To my understanding bio-essentialists belive that sex and gender are tied together. Sex = gender.

It sounds like he believes that if you have a certain gender it, in effect, makes you that sex - which makes him the bio-essentialist and is just as much nonsense as looking at it from the direction of 'if you are a certain sex you must adhere to the gender norms of that sex'.

Good on you for speaking up I know how difficult it is.

Hear, hear. I was so scared when I first started IRL conversations.

IME it's also a very liberating threshold to have crossed, as it gets a tiny bit easier each time.

I managed to have an unexpected conversation the other day with a neighbour after a small indication that there was an "in". I tested the water with the subject of women's sports and we took it from there.

I'm also selective. I don't tell trans(-identified) people that I know IRL that I don't believe in gender identity. I just choose not to use any pronouns when referencing them. I'm not going to change their belief and they aren't going to influence me to believe in it, so I'm not going to invite conflict for the sake of it. However, I have been able to openly share my concern about the conflation of gender identity and autism without getting my head bitten off! The discussions I've had with them have been really helpful to gain an understanding from their perspective. Admittedly I've had to bite my tongue on a few occasions but there are many occasions in life where this is a sensible choice to make. I fully expect to say the "wrong" thing to the wrong person at some point but that's a risk I've accepted. I just mitigate it the best I can. It's not going to stop me from raising awareness of the harms associated with gender identity belief.

He can't think of a good argument for it so he's resorted to name calling to shut you down. Arsehole.

Agree with this.

It's not about trans people for me it's about biological men and I won't say Transwomen. Instead I say biological men however they present or identify. Also, inform him that biological men already have access to healthcare specific to their bodies and biology.

Good on you for speaking up I know how difficult it is.

Agreed.

It's the grown-up version of Rachel Rooney's book, "My Body is Me!".

It's the simplicity and irrefutability of this logic that causes so much anger as a response from genderists. Rather than accept that they hold a belief (that is predictated on those cultural roles and stereotypes) they shut down the conversation with insults.

Make up is expensive but it's a choice!

Ask him to explain what he means.

Is it wrong to provide gyne care to females ? Abortion rights? Cervical smears? Trans men are females.

Does he want trans men to automatically go to male prisons?

All sport should be mixed sex?

He's using a trope that is a straw man. He's misrepresenting your arguments.

Your point is that females are biologically different and as such need some specific things ensconced in law linked to this. How they feel in terms of personality, dress, career etc is a free choice.

His arguments harm trans men.

None of that matters because they don’t see women as people, not people like them.

My view (and I'm speaking as a non-expert because I have realised that I don't actually have a deep interest in feminist theory.... sorry, everyone 😬) is that most men don't really give it much thought. Women's boundaries are irrelevant. I used to think they were irrelevant too when it comes to understanding gender identity stuff (because equality was "sorted", so "what does it matter?" etc), so I'm not too cross when I come across it from (some) men. I've said on previous threads that it took me months to understand why JKR was talking about the erasure of the word "woman", despite me being incredibly concerned (and already learning lots) about autistic children who were identifying out of their own sex. I only bothered taking the time to understand about it because I slowly realised that it was all inter-connected and because I had a motive to improve my understanding (supporting my daughter). People's own motivation to understand gender identity belief makes a huge difference in the journey that they go on and how they interpret what they hear. I can't remember who said it above (sorry!) but I agree that it's telling that he even knows the term "bioesssentialism": he's obviously been influenced by some gender identity theory from somewhere that takes an affirmation approach.

If I wanted to engage more in the conversation with him, I'd either focus on impact (and agree to set aside difference in beliefs, as per my previous comment) or I'd ask him about whether he would be interested in dating a woman with a penis. I fully agree with PPs above who say that making it about sexual attraction is the only thing that will resonate with some men. Obviously NAMALT.

Obviously if your own motivation is from a feminist theory position, OP, my belief suggestion isn't going to be much use to you, as it circumvents all of that. But to echo above comments, it doesn't sound like he'd be interested in a feminist theory approach and you'd be wasting your time.

“We can't escape our bodies, but they shouldn't limit us either. Society should be aware of these differences and cater for them rather than reinforcing them with gender stereotypes and trying to deny these differences exist.“

That’s the nub of it, I think.

I'd also like them to explain why they think we need a word for "most female people, including all female people who do not have a gender identity and all female people who believe that they have a gender identity which is female, but excluding female people who believe that they have a gender identity which is something other than female, plus male people who believe that they have a gender identity which is female", but that we don't need a word for "female people".

I can think of tons of situations in which we need to collectively refer to the latter group, and literally zero situations in which we need to refer to the former group.

The only possible use I can think of for a word for the former group is to create an artificial category consisting of nearly all women plus this small, self identifying group of men.

Coming back to the "because it's what they want" point again.

The category only exists because they say it does and they want it to.

🤦🏽‍♀️ just the level of delusion.

That’s a very good analogy! And I think your two questions get to the heart of the matter.

I mean, you'd think this would be a "gotcha" argument. But I once had this conversation with a bearded woke bro in a heterosexual relationship with a woman, who said that he would have sex with a trans woman, and when I suggested that would make him bi, he flatly denied it. Even to the point where, when I asked him, "So if you were being anally penetrated by a trans woman with a penis, what kind of sex would that be?" he said, "Heterosexual sex, because trans women are women."

I think in some cases there might be some internalised homophobia at the heart of it all.

Precisely! If they want to redefine the word female to include males, then they need to explain what word they would use to describe the type of human that, if their body has developed according to plan, is capable of giving birth to young humans.

Yup depressing isn’t it, I don’t really like the argument but it is literally the only one that gets an “oooooohhhh” moment. They don’t care how many trans people in prisons are sex offenders or all the examples of women being put at risk, having their boundaries violated or being excluded from their own stuff. None of that matters because they don’t see women as people, not people like them.

Comes back to sexual attraction doesn't it?

If he wouldn’t sleep with a transwoman with a penis (assuming hetro) then he is a biological essentialist too. If he can decide when a transwoman is actually a man why can’t women do the same. It’s the only argument some men seem capable of understanding.

It’s really a basic argument but if he wouldn’t shag one he doesn’t really think they are women either, in which case why on earth should women pretend to think they are women? Ah yes because it doesn’t affect him does it. Costs him fuck all to “be kind”.

Honestly I'd just try and point out that he's neither a trans woman, nor a woman

And should keep his big male mouth shut about issues that don't involve him! Honestly, I'm so sick and tired of men mansplaining womanhood.

I have to say I think mens lack of awareness of how the world is designed for default human being male and a blindness to the biological realities of women is a real issue. How many have incorrect ideas about periods or don't understand that women's don't pee out of their vagina for example? The menopause is some alien concept to them.

To many men sex is merely about sexual availablity and attraction. Precisely because they don't give thought to differences in physical size and strength and the mechanics of biology. Because these things don't affect them and their only interest in and understanding of women is about their own sexuality.

See it through this lens and it's starts to make a lot more sense.

In which case it's helpful to take @BonfireLady's approach.

A trans woman is a male person who believes (a) that they have a gender identity and (b) that their gender identity is female.

I am a female person who believes (a) that I am a woman because of my biological sex and (b) that I don't have a gender identity.

What do we have in common besides being human?

We do not share the same biological sex or the same identity.

What is the logic for us using the same toilets and changing rooms, being accommodated in the same prisons or rape crisis groups, or competing in the same sporting categories?

Is there any reason for this which is not, simply, "because it's what trans women want"?

If the only reason is "because it's what trans women want", why is what trans women want considered important and what women want considered unimportant?

If trans women's needs are considered important and women's needs are considered unimportant, this would suggest that trans women are in fact men, and all of this looks like traditional misogyny with a new name and pronouns, rather than a progressive new equal rights movement.

All the pregnant trans women surrogates in Ukraine who couldn't get their babies to their new owners? I mean, there must have been at least none of them!

Biological essentialism is the idea that women are only about reproducing and rearing children. Being Gender Critical isn't like that.

Gender Critical is a rejection of gender stereotypes which originated from biological essentialism. Trans ideology fixes these ideas but then says you can change your sex to fit into the ideal of gender stereotypes and biological essentialism.

Being Gender Critical is a rejection of gender stereotypes and biological essentialism whilst also recognising that biology is real. It's a recognition that society has developed around the idea that default human is male therefore everything is designed for males or by males without much thought as to how females are slightly different.

This is covered well in two books - The Design of Everyday Things and Invisible Women. It's from the design of phones being for an average default human - male. So they fit male hands. But don't always fit female hands for example. It's about how healthcare has developed on testing on males and how male bodies respond. We are becoming increasingly aware that female bodies respond differently - particularly due to hormones.

We can't escape our bodies, but they shouldn't limit us either. Society should be aware of these differences and cater for them rather than reinforcing them with gender stereotypes and trying to deny these differences exist.

Your friend is an idiot who refuses to see the every problems women face.

He doesn't want to see them because if he did, he might have to feel compelled to do something about them. But they aren't his problems so way should he bother. It's easier to tell women what they should be thinking and doing rather than listen to their experiences. He's only listening to males because he only values the experiences of males and doesn't see issues with the way the world is designed.

He has blinkers on.