Trans sibling in law

She's still a biological woman. She's just calling herself a man.
I'd indulge her but don't get too involved... She might change her mind again down the line.

‘The GC community even excludes other women’

The only women whom we exclude from our feminism are fake women, i.e. men. Disagreeing with someone doesn’t denote exclusion, but that is the whole problem with this regressive ideology, it demands 💯 affirmation or you’re the devil. Look at what’s happened to Legaltweetz, they are trying to destroy her because she has dared to deviate from the sacred oath, they’re trying to destroy a bunny sanctuary because of who follows them on SM, these are not isolated incidents, it’s the norm with this ideology.

The OP asked about advice how she should react and people answered. What is so surprising about that?

Exactly that. I find it bizarre that so many posters on this branch take this so personally, and feel that they should insert themselves into that person's decision and 'put them right'.

What is the 'GC community' supposed to be?

GC is a default position, in that it's based on long standing norms / well established scientific principles. Being 'GC' will naturally apply to people from a wide range of viewpoints. There is no 'club'.

@SleeplessInWherever This is what I meant, FWIW. The GC community even excludes other women, who actually agree with them on some points, because they differ on one thing - you must be rude to them.

It’s a shame that there’s a wrong kind of feminism, to you.

You are commiting the same insane fallacy that we see from TRAs all the time - you aren't being "excluded" or not counted within our feminism if we disagree with you. Even if someone is rude to you they aren't having any of your rights impinged upon. Disagreement and robust assertion of the reasons for that disagreement is not an attack on you.

It's weird to assume that there's a single set of beliefs within "the GC ommunity" (Whatever that is. There's not any kind of organisation or rules). Being critical of this concept - that there exists an intangible/spiritual "essence" of womanhood the absence of which can make a female person "not a woman" and the presence (impossible to prove or define so individual assertion from the subjective beliefs of the individual being the only way to identify such a "presence") of which can make a male person "actually a woman" - is not a thing that belongs particularly to right wing or left wing politics and there are all sorts of different and robust disagreements between women who hold GC views. We don't accuse people of "excluding us from their feminism" if they disagree with us. The people who are excluded from feminism (in the sense of their rights and fredoms not being centred) are male people, although even male people can still be feminists if they are in agreement that the rights of women and girls are just as important as the rights of male people, that positive action to counteract disadvantages to women and girls is appropriate, and that when the desires and wishes of male people would disadvantage women and girls, those males don't get to do that (imcluding that male people can't opt in to opportunities/facilities that have been established specifically to counteract an advantage that males have over females).

Women who want to centre the desires and wishes of men over the safety and wellbeing of women and girls will obviously encounter robust disagreement from feminists but that doesn't mean that their rights and freedoms aren't still included within the work of feminism. Or are you saying that we ought to redefine "feminism" so that wanting to prioritise male people over female people can be an accepted and equally valid viewpoint for a feminist to hold?

@SleeplessInWherever

"The way you have been affected by the societal construct of gender, is your gender identity."

That sounds like the exact opposite of how we trans people define gender identity.

There’s only one wrong kind of feminism to me, the one that doesn’t centre the needs and experiences of women and girls, female people. It’s fake feminism.

I’ve never thought that you haven’t read any books @SleeplessInWherever- what’s your point, exactly? Your blind spot on this issue is clear.

Wasn’t asking them to be. I just think the assumption that people who don’t agree with you haven’t read the occasional book, is fairly presumptuous.

A view that differs from yours isn’t necessarily less informed, and I think it’s a shame that people assume it is.

This is what I meant, FWIW. The GC community even excludes other women, who actually agree with them on some points, because they differ on one thing - you must be rude to them.

It’s a shame that there’s a wrong kind of feminism, to you.

Come off it. It's not OP's business or job to try to change her partner's sibling's stance.
All that will happen is that relationships will be damaged.

OP this is an adult and they are free to act as they choose. You don't have to believe it or agree with it, any more than if they had converted to Buddhism. But there is nothing to be gained from "taking a stand" here, and much to be lost.

Trust me, no one here is going to be astounded or particularly impressed that you have a gender studies degree @SleeplessInWherever

Quite possibly, but it’s complicated.

I actually have a degree in Gender Studies, which those who constantly reply with comments about intelligence or confusion might find hard to believe. I recognise that quite often that’s the stock response here to “you’re saying a thing I disagree with.”

I sit somewhere between 2nd and 3rd, I’d imagine. Views change. But I’d find it genuinely difficult to label myself as GC in the current trans debate because there are whole parts of it that I personally don’t agree with.

"I'm concerned about my vulnerable sil."

"Your concerns are transphobic. The only thing that matters is affirmation"

"I'm concerned that she's at risk due to various factors"

"Oh they don't matter. As long as you've virtue signaled your allyship, nothing else matters"

"But safeguarding"

"Safeguarding is irrelevant if someone identifies as trans because identity is everything and the only thing that matters is affirmation"

What @LadyBracknellsHandbagg said.

I think what this thread confirms is the absolute absurdity of gender ideology as a concept, because it’s all about feelings, which appear, we are led to believe, to be fluid, arbitrary, subject to change at a moment’s notice, and open to interpretation depending on the day of the week, which is all very well, but when we need to legislate for the safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls, facts need to be at the forefront.

Hi @Primsose86,

I am sorry that this thread has been Fucked Up Beyond All Recognition (FUBAR). Your original and subsequent posts showed that you have a real concern for your DH's sister and how you can best help her to travel forward. I don't have any personal advice to offer but I would suggest that your relationship is is one step removed. You might be best served by following your DH. Let what works for him work for you. His relationship with her is closer than your relationship with her and, truth be told, without your relationship with your DH, you wouldn't have any relationship with his sister.

Please don't try to overthink it?

As I said above, it’s not impossible that gender identity could be defined as you have done here; that’s a way of thinking about identity as primarily social that meshes perfectly well with both “gender critical” and second-wave feminism.

BUT (and, as I said above, it’s a big but), that’s exactly the opposite of how “identity” is understood by proponents of transgenderism. That really ISN’T how gender ideologues use it. For them, “identity”, and “gender identity”, is an inner inborn sense of essential maleness or femaleness (eg. identity in its etymological sense of “sameness to oneself”). That’s why the “born in the wrong body” trope became popular; that’s why they say gender identity is like being born gay. That’s why “trans” makes sense to them: because it’s a “mismatch” between inner “gender identity” and biological sex.

It sounds awfully like you might actually really be gender critical, @SleeplessInWherever. 😂

Haha, I thought it was me @PractisingMyTelekenipsis my reply was exactly the same!

‘The person below my previous post says they don’t have a gender identity. That is, they don’t believe in the idea of an innate, ineffable feeling of maleness or femaleness. That isn’t the same as not being affected by gender as a social construct.’

Thank you @marshmallowpuff for pointing this out, I have just corrected that presumption myself! If it’s one thing I hate it’s people putting words in my mouth.

‘The person directly below you doesn’t have a gender identity. They have been unaffected by those social expectations, or constructs, and have somehow escaped the impact of them.‘

Where did I say I have been unaffected by them, or that I have escaped the impact of them? Please don’t misquote me. Unfortunately, it suits certain sections of society to use these regressive terms and stereotypes, mostly men, because it is advantageous for them, and sadly, some women find it necessary to ingratiate themselves with those men for what they perceive to be their own advantage, but I think is often just a lack of confidence in their own abilities. Just because I don’t have a GI, doesn’t mean that I can opt out of having to deal with the consequences of the people that perpetuate these stereotypes, but I don’t have to engage with it by playing their silly games and pretending to agree with things I know to be false, such as GI.

For your information, there are some very intelligent, knowledgeable women on this board, with real life experiences that have formed their views, you’d best bring your A game if you think you can best them.

there have been a lot of people on FWR explaining how gender identity works (in their opinion)

trans people, trans allies, random people who think they are the only ones that understand nuance 😒

i think i can safely say that the explanation given by sleepless makes the least sense

So Afghanistan women identify with being denied an education?

Do you extend this to other things like class and race?

Yes but the way they identify in their own skin has got bugger all to do with the rest of us.

And therein lies the problem.

Nobody ever asked the female swimmers, for example, if they agreed that they shared a gender identity with Lia Thomas. (The only female swimmer who was actually known to have a gender identity was Iszac Henig, who identified as a trans man.)

So when you have someone saying, "I identify as a woman/man therefore I belong in women's/men's spaces" they are basically saying, "I identify as one of you and I don't give a shit whether you agree with that or not".