How did we get here?

A few resources:

Useful history thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3463920-Lets-go-back-to-2007

Dr Em's wonderful series of articles focusing on the early 1970s in the US:

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/just-be-nice-feminism-part-i/

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-ii-beth-elliot-1972/

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-iii-west-coast-lesbian-conference-1973/

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-iv-the-gutter-dykes-1973/

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-v-beth-elliotts-response/

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-vi-pride-parade-1972/

https://uncommongroundmedia.com/what-was-happening-before-just-be-nice-feminism-part-vii-pride-parade-1973/

Sheila Jeffreys Unpacking Queer Politics (free download):
https://radfem.org/unpacking-queer-politics/

Stephen Nolan podcast on Stonewall:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/brand/p09yjmph

The book, Terf Island by Fiona McAnena, has accounts of recent UK history and The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht by Susan Dalgetty and Lucy Hunter Blackburn focuses on Scotland which has really been the frontline for a number of years.

Also if you have the stomach, Trans Britain, edited by Christine Burns contains accounts by the TRA themselves on how they did it.

Purely anecdotal but I used to do quite a lot of freelance work at the EHRC in the mid-2000s. Although I’d describe myself as a second wave feminist and had read The Whole Woman by Germaine Greer, which IIRC planted the seed of mistrust, I basically thought transwomen were seeking something that would enable them to live their lives in peace etc. I was only present for one or two GRA related meetings but remember how ‘professional’, well organised, forceful and determined the transwomen (no transmen!) who attended were. Way more forceful than most of the disabled people and disability organisations I primarily worked for at the time. I think, looking back, there was cognitive dissonance because they absolutely didn’t behave like women. And used the Ladies.

So I think there was a chasm between general, vague public perception of timid, probably gay, socially bottom-of-the-pile transsexuals who needed our kindness and the reality of actually quite powerful, well-connected men laser-focused on getting exactly what they wanted.

You misunderstand what sex is and how biologists understand it.

Yes, I said 'sex' was bi/multimodal & that it was a scientific consensus amongst biologists. Are you seriously suggesting that ‘sex’ doesn't comprise of multiple traits, with variable distributions? That individuals don't possess different combinations of chromosome type, gamete size, hormone level, morphology, and social roles?

What's the relevance of the "equation" here?

Yes, I said 'sex' was bi/multimodal & that it was a scientific consensus amongst biologists. Are you seriously suggesting that ‘sex’ doesn't comprise of multiple traits, with variable distributions? That individuals don't possess different combinations of chromosome type, gamete size, hormone level, morphology, and social roles?

What's the relevance of the "equation" here?

UMMMM, you implied it was an issue when society at large doesn't seem to care:

"How is that definitive list of male and female behaviours that allows accurate categorisation of humans coming along? The list of behaviours that never change from birth to death so that categorisation for access to single sex provisions can be done?"

You were the one that told us that sex was bimodal.

I asked you at the time for the equations for the bimodal model and what the labels for each axis was.

Or is this another thing you forgot you said? I did recommend that you kept a diary of what you had said and posted on MN to help you. Because you seem to forget between posts.

“Um, doesn't seem to be an electoral issue any where except for one particular jurisdiction where a manufactured moral panic ensued”

Umm, what elections are you talking about and ummm, why are those elections relevant to the categorisation of sex class of humans?

Purely anecdotal but I used to do quite a lot of freelance work at the EHRC in the mid-2000s. Although I’d describe myself as a second wave feminist and had read The Whole Woman by Germaine Greer, which IIRC planted the seed of mistrust, I basically thought transwomen were seeking something that would enable them to live their lives in peace etc. I was only present for one or two GRA related meetings but remember how ‘professional’, well organised, forceful and determined the transwomen (no transmen!) who attended were. Way more forceful than most of the disabled people and disability organisations I primarily worked for at the time. I think, looking back, there was cognitive dissonance because they absolutely didn’t behave like women. And used the Ladies.

So I think there was a chasm between general, vague public perception of timid, probably gay, socially bottom-of-the-pile transsexuals who needed our kindness and the reality of actually quite powerful, well-connected men laser-focused on getting exactly what they wanted.

Purely anecdotal but I used to do quite a lot of freelance work at the EHRC in the mid-2000s. Although I’d describe myself as a second wave feminist and had read The Whole Woman by Germaine Greer, which IIRC planted the seed of mistrust, I basically thought transwomen were seeking something that would enable them to live their lives in peace etc. I was only present for one or two GRA related meetings but remember how ‘professional’, well organised, forceful and determined the transwomen (no transmen!) who attended were. Way more forceful than most of the disabled people and disability organisations I primarily worked for at the time. I think, looking back, there was cognitive dissonance because they absolutely didn’t behave like women. And used the Ladies.

So I think there was a chasm between general, vague public perception of timid, probably gay, socially bottom-of-the-pile transsexuals who needed our kindness and the reality of actually quite powerful, well-connected men laser-focused on getting exactly what they wanted.

"How is that definitive list of male and female behaviours that allows accurate categorisation of humans coming along? The list of behaviours that never change from birth to death so that categorisation for access to single sex provisions can be done?"

Um, doesn't seem to be an electoral issue any where except for one particular jurisdiction where a manufactured moral panic ensued….

"And can we please please please have the BIMODAL SEX model you talked about? With the axes marked clearly."

What on earth are you ranting about?

"How is that definitive list of male and female behaviours that allows accurate categorisation of humans coming along? The list of behaviours that never change from birth to death so that categorisation for access to single sex provisions can be done?"

Um, doesn't seem to be an electoral issue any where except for one particular jurisdiction where a manufactured moral panic ensued….

"And can we please please please have the BIMODAL SEX model you talked about? With the axes marked clearly."

What on earth are you ranting about?

What are you ranting about now. Of course biology is real. There’s a whole science plus sub categories. It was just the garbled nature of your post is very confusing. Have another coffee and try again.

Whaaat? Biology isn't 'real' when inconvenient?….😫

chat gpt is going downhill fast. The words are even more jumbled than ever. Have you tried a different one? It may help. Your post sounds garbeled. Did you put it through Google translate as well?

How did we get here? IE the point where females & males freely express their shared personality traits?

Biological evolution.

Whilst males & females have distinctive biological functions that result in on average distinctive behaviours, behaviours also overlap because as it turns out adaptability is necessary for survival. IE different environmental pressures call for different approaches that our shared capabilities can adapt to.

Cue feminism. Given certain environmental pressures were 'relieved' meant people were more at liberty to express whatever their individual organic personal inclinations were that didn't always align with previous social expectations of gendered roles because of shared personality traits.

All this is to say that the idea that gender expression is purely a learned phenomena is false. Rather its a an organic phenomena to express masculinity or femininity.

'But that doesn't mean you can change biological sex' people say. True, but given society has associated typical behaviours to specific sexes its accurate to say on the level of societal categorisations, behaviour is a sex distinction.

Gender critical feminists whilst correct to be concerned by how patriarchal expectations continue to pressure behaviour, don't account for how the overwhelming majority of that behaviour is a free choice powered by natural inclinations that was millions of years in the making which is now reflected in societal acceptance.

“given society has associated typical behaviours to specific sexes its accurate to say on the level of societal categorisations, behaviour is a sex distinction.”

How is that definitive list of male and female behaviours that allows accurate categorisation of humans coming along? The list of behaviours that never change from birth to death so that categorisation for access to single sex provisions can be done?

And can we please please please have the BIMODAL SEX model you talked about? With the axes marked clearly.

How did we get here? IE the point where females & males freely express their shared personality traits?

Biological evolution.

Whilst males & females have distinctive biological functions that result in on average distinctive behaviours, behaviours also overlap because as it turns out adaptability is necessary for survival. IE different environmental pressures call for different approaches that our shared capabilities can adapt to.

Cue feminism. Given certain environmental pressures were 'relieved' meant people were more at liberty to express whatever their individual organic personal inclinations were that didn't always align with previous social expectations of gendered roles because of shared personality traits.

All this is to say that the idea that gender expression is purely a learned phenomena is false. Rather its a an organic phenomena to express masculinity or femininity.

'But that doesn't mean you can change biological sex' people say. True, but given society has associated typical behaviours to specific sexes its accurate to say on the level of societal categorisations, behaviour is a sex distinction.

Gender critical feminists whilst correct to be concerned by how patriarchal expectations continue to pressure behaviour, don't account for how the overwhelming majority of that behaviour is a free choice powered by natural inclinations that was millions of years in the making which is now reflected in societal acceptance.

I like to hope with the Supreme Court ruling and public opinion changing rapidly we are finally moving into a new period where women’s rights and concerns matter, and biology prevails. But I don’t really understand how we got here to begin with and I really hope some knowledgeable posters can provide some background on this.

I am mid-to-late 30s. Femboi-emo kids were cute when I was a teen. I had a very huge crush on Brian Molko. Most of my male friends (and my now husband) wore eyeliner. Nobody in my year came out as gay whilst at school as the taboo still existed, but interestingly 3 girls in my mixed sex class of 30 came out as lesbians away from school (yes, they are all actual women - not men).

My exposure whilst a teenage to transsexuals was Hayley Cropper, the sympathetic and kind transwoman-played by an actual woman in Coronation Street; and Nadia, the winner of season 5 big brother, who I had forgotten all about in all honesty and was only reminded about due to current BB. It’s now occurred to me that the gender recognition act passed in the same year Nadia won BB.

At that time trans was unusual - I remember cross dressing being a thing and named, as we know, as transvestism. And I also remember, back then, so many of the historic and well documented serial killers had proclivities in cross dressing, which seems to now be downplayed.

So what happened between then and now? Why did very, very few men manage to influence the change in the Equality Act? Where did this sharp increase of trans people suddenly come from (we know it can’t be the GRA because most didn’t apply for it)?

And I think more importantly - why did both governments and media suddenly become so afraid to call a man a man? And worse, seek to punish a woman who dares to call a man a man. The GRA is one thing, but so many of the men who have been actively labelled as women by both politicians and journalists don’t hold a GRA. Where is the political and journalistic integrity they are supposed to uphold?

What happened? Not so much the boom in trans people but why they became a law of their own?

I wonder though whether it was sports that provided the evidence about fhe retenfion of power in male bodies. That power differentiation proof was not ‘unknown’ but we had do go to the effort of proving it.

that then worked with other aspects which was based on moral ground which some people deny or twist to suit themselves.

I said that biological sex is more than just genitals. You have to consider the way hormones affect behaviour

What behaviour do I exhibit as a woman because of my hormones?

Notably, the idea that there was no serious difference between men and women, apart from genital configuration, was wholly accepted. Physical, mental, emotional, whatever.

All of these idea, when they become part of the background assumptions people hold, and when they aren't ever interrogated, imo tend to leave people with a sense that sex, as in biological sex, has no real significance. So all that is left of it is the social performance.

These two statements seem to contradict each other and I don't see how they can be used to promote transgenderism.

The first one says there's no difference between the sexes except for genitals, the second that the genitals (and other biological differences) have no significance, and only the nonphysical differences are important. What are these nonphysical differences when the first statement says that they don't exist?

The first statement can hardly be used to promote the idea of being "born in the wrong body" or a man having a ladybrain, if the only difference between men and women is their genitals and their brains and emotions are the same. So a person with a penis transitions to a person with a vagina for what reason exactly? A different sexual experience?

The second one says that the biological body doesn't matter, so you can be a person who acts/dresses etc in a certain way regardless of what sort of genitals you have. So what would be the point of transition?