Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Some clarity in how the trans movement became so embedded, so preeminent

374 replies

MarcTheGenderSkeptic · 22/09/2026 13:17

Despite being called a conspiracist here by a TRA, actually I work very hard to continually interrogate my thought processes, and not fall into easy generalisations etc.
So, I was reading Róisín Michaux and her fascinating conversation with someone high up in HIV funding, and the push in the last 20 years is to get everyone in the tent on retrovirals, meaning reaching out to not just gays and addicts, but sex workers (incl trans) and critically, the "third genders" who have migrated to the West in large numbers to end up as sex workers. And the decision was made to go for maximum anti stigmatization, which means zero messaging on personal behaviour, and critically deciding to accept these men as women. Don't blame them, get more onside.
Guess who has to move aside, and accept the messaging on health grounds that biological men can be women? Made even worse by the increase in HIV in European women who are the partners of men who use the services of these "third genders".
Then yesterday I read the amazing post from Hellofabore about how for 30 years plus, the sports authorities including IOC and FIFA decided to make total inclusion the policy, phasing out gender testing, primarily to allow the male DSDs from Africa mainly to be included, as they were IDd as female at birth, and the cruelty to deny they're still female is wrong.
Again, the overwhelming need is to not stigmatize these individuals. Of course a huge group (we know who) are stigmatized for objecting to losing sports opportunities.
And then back to Róisín Michaux again, her illuminating the revolution in psychiatric medicine, where men back in the day were diagnosed with transvestic disorder, a pure paraphylia, again to stop judging and be more inclusive, underwent massive de-stigmatisation and de-pathologisation, from paraphylia, to dysphoria, now to common all garden "sexual health category".
Three enormous areas where the drive to include men, to destigmatise their plight, to bring them in from the cold, couldn't happen in a vacuum. Society organised along sex-based lines couldn't be simply recategorised, no, a large population group (51% XX) was expected to move over, make their definition porous, extend the collective hand of kindness and inclusion, to this hardcore of men who were deemed most at risk, and needing most help.
At the same time, this blurring of definitions and imposed inclusivity spread from sport and medicine to law and education, the most motivated men worked hard to get the Gender Recognition Act on the statute book, and via Stonewall culture, "social training" and the "trans child" escalated as concepts and then real world consequences as noone in polite society other than a very brave few said anything.
So now we have developing nations male DSDs and "third genders", socially incorporated transvestites/transsexuals, and queer culture first world transgenders in the mix, a political culture in the West frozen into aquiescence and policy drift, and the only light of realism and sanity, an army of women fighting back, with amazing results re SC ruling, banishing self ID into the long grass, and medical and sports bodies tacking back to sanity.
But reading the almost scary analogousness of how health brought in trans and third genders at the expense of women, sport brought in male DSDs at the expense of women, psychiatry brought in transvestites from the cold at the expense of women, you can then see how the most motivated men got the Gender Recognition Act on the statute book to turbo charge the social trans/trans child revolution.
For me, I can now see the past as it travels into the future.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
7
Northernlightsss · 25/09/2026 23:07

MarcTheGenderSkeptic · 25/09/2026 23:02

No, you cannot impose a false identity on society.
You sound more illiberal with every post.

'How dare you impose your personal sexual orientation/religious/political beliefs upon society!!!'

Do you even comprehend how ridiculous you sound?

JanesLittleGirl · 25/09/2026 23:16

Northernlightsss · 25/09/2026 23:04

I think you'll find that's what the arc of history will bend to, not illiberal fads.

The human spirit seeks authenticity however much fascistic impulses attempt to repress it won't change that.

Re astro turfed right wing funded campaigns, sure, FW Scotland and the Darlington nurses, Sex Matters and the owners of Mumsnet are rolling in cash, all of us here have been primed to direct bigotry to bolster the impending fascism ailing the UK.

The context was mass media campaigns & how they influence public opinion.

Edited

Please tell me more about these mass media campaigns ? I'd hate to think that I have been gulled into thinking that sex is biological and gender is a social construct that acts to the disadvantage of both sexes but particularly to the disadvantage of women.

MarieDeGournay · 25/09/2026 23:27

Northernlightsss . Its purely scientifically uncontroversial that gendered behaviours are biologically influenced by hormones genes & evolutionary pressures AND shared by the sexes hence butch women & effeminate men existing.

I have no doubt that it is purely scientifically uncontroversial that adult humans sometimes do not conform to the socially constructed stereotypes around their biological sex.
Hence adult human females who are gender non-conforming, and adult human males who are gender non-conforming. Still women and men, though.

Not sure what point you think you are making.

Thelnebriati · 25/09/2026 23:38

'Princess' used as a derogatory term and 'King' used to mean 'ruling over' sums up the point pretty nicely imo.

MarcTheGenderSkeptic · Yesterday 00:11

Northernlightsss · 25/09/2026 23:04

I think you'll find that's what the arc of history will bend to, not illiberal fads.

The human spirit seeks authenticity however much fascistic impulses attempt to repress it won't change that.

Re astro turfed right wing funded campaigns, sure, FW Scotland and the Darlington nurses, Sex Matters and the owners of Mumsnet are rolling in cash, all of us here have been primed to direct bigotry to bolster the impending fascism ailing the UK.

The context was mass media campaigns & how they influence public opinion.

Edited

Ah, now we're getting to it. Gender Critical opinions, mirroring a good 70% of the population at a conservative estimate (the polls all going in the wrong direction for TRAs for several years now) are "fascist", ergo Joe/Josephine Public are 70% fascist.
Yep, that's <absolutely> gonna get people on your side.
And re the criticism that GCs arent fascist supremacist etc in and of themselves, just the mass Murdoch Dacre Fox GBNews UnHerd-Spiked-Spectator-The Critic axis that are fascist, what, they're using GC women as forward guards, you wanna check what your TRA friends are always saying to the media. That Sex Matters and LGB Alliance are American funded culture war shills, surely that's got to stretch to the citadel of anti-trans discourse as you would see it, the very forum you're on, so right wing it lets you practice as much free speech as you like.
Surely you must believe the Darlington nurses, Jo Phoenix v OU, Nurse Peggie, FW Scotland at the SC, Maya Forstater and Allison Bailey etc are all agents for the cause?
Because your buddies do, and if there's a hive mind, it certainly isn't GC.
I mean, what could have convinced Helen Joyce to have given up a lucrative gig at The Economist to go rogue fascist as GC campaigner if it wasn't filthy lucre and a seat at the NWO of a TERF bio-essentialist future.
Re that arc of history, it was never in your direction even if it looked it, what we see as the soft underbelly of a modern liberal age that struggled to deal with the hegemonic thrust of a highly motivated special interest group, as the absolute TRA static of the last 15 years is replaced by cogent argument that can't be cancelled and No Debated anymore.
It's fascinating, that when women talk calmly, clearly, passionately, minus hyperbole, that arc shown as naturally towards...SC ruling, sports organisations one by one tacking back to reality, prisons more and more off limits, and women less and less cowed to reiterate the equitable position of biology over temperament.
That's literally the arc of history on its course that was the situation up until the turn of this decade and social media based mania and cowardice in the public square gradually retreating.
All that's left is the performative highly visible virtue on steroids battle over the SC ruling. And that was lost by the TRAs the moment the verdict was released, all that remains is smoke and mirrors.

OP posts:
Rollingpinofdoom · Yesterday 00:21

Northernlightsss · 25/09/2026 22:58

All individuals have every right to self determination of their identity. What they don't have is the right to tell others who they should be.

And no, you don't speak for all women.

But aren’t men claiming to be women telling women that because woman means “anyone who wants to claim to be a woman is a woman” that the word woman is actually meaningless? I mean if you can’t define a word, how can you claim to be it?

MarcTheGenderSkeptic · Yesterday 00:29

Rollingpinofdoom · Yesterday 00:21

But aren’t men claiming to be women telling women that because woman means “anyone who wants to claim to be a woman is a woman” that the word woman is actually meaningless? I mean if you can’t define a word, how can you claim to be it?

She does
Female = natal biological
Woman = these, plus males who ID as women, to include DSD males brought up as girls.
This is brilliant, cis women can keep the female category to themselves, it's the woman category where the arc of history and fairness will lead to women in future including some females if they agree to the new category definition, but also those males who's mind's eye and social interactivity indicates they're women.
That's the deal.

OP posts:
Northernlightsss · Yesterday 07:13

MarieDeGournay · 25/09/2026 23:27

Northernlightsss . Its purely scientifically uncontroversial that gendered behaviours are biologically influenced by hormones genes & evolutionary pressures AND shared by the sexes hence butch women & effeminate men existing.

I have no doubt that it is purely scientifically uncontroversial that adult humans sometimes do not conform to the socially constructed stereotypes around their biological sex.
Hence adult human females who are gender non-conforming, and adult human males who are gender non-conforming. Still women and men, though.

Not sure what point you think you are making.

No because the 'woman' & 'man' categories are based on sociological associations (sex & gender) as opposed to male/female being based on sexual reproductive associations.

Rollingpinofdoom · Yesterday 07:17

Northernlightsss · 25/09/2026 22:07

Laws should be followed but can also be challenged particularly when they aren't specific like regarding toilet etiquette. Special exemptions require rights balancing that hasn't been tested in case law yet so we are yet to see what the law actually is.

In terms of public opinion, that's certainly not uniform globally. The UK being subjected to politically motivated astro turfed media saturation scare campaigns & moral panics by far right operatives can't be considered as a grass roots phenomena. The arc of history is long & bends towards liberty not slavery.

Did that sound better in your head? 🤣🤣🤣🤣

ArabellaScott · Yesterday 07:48

It's 2026 and people are arguing that males can become females if they feel strongly enough about 'sociological associations'.

As if one can argue oneself into a different sex. If you just get the right words in the right order, and just keep working to discredit the people who say humans are one of two immutable sexes. Get laws passed, silence dissent, seed junk science articles, create whole industries based on the assertion that 'some men are women'.

Enough plastic surgery and filters and the right camera angles and voice training and close study of the opposite sex and you might actually be able to fool everyone. Perhaps if you work hard enough, even yourself.

Its the biggest con trick ever pulled off, I think. Amazing, in some ways.

In other news, the laws of thermodynamics still seem to be working as they always have done.

iwishitwouldstartraining · Yesterday 08:06

It’s not as though women gain any social power if they are perceived as more masculine.

How many high profile butch lesbians are there in government, business and media?

It’s also striking that the discourse around trans inclusion in sport always demonstrates that everyone knows exactly who is female (expected to get on with things and compete in their sex category) and male (must be accommodated by women. No effort required from male team mates).

The only reason that somebody would be treated as the opposite sex is if they are believed to be the opposite sex, which just takes us back to the point that it is sex that matters.

iwishitwouldstartraining · Yesterday 08:11

ArabellaScott · Yesterday 07:48

It's 2026 and people are arguing that males can become females if they feel strongly enough about 'sociological associations'.

As if one can argue oneself into a different sex. If you just get the right words in the right order, and just keep working to discredit the people who say humans are one of two immutable sexes. Get laws passed, silence dissent, seed junk science articles, create whole industries based on the assertion that 'some men are women'.

Enough plastic surgery and filters and the right camera angles and voice training and close study of the opposite sex and you might actually be able to fool everyone. Perhaps if you work hard enough, even yourself.

Its the biggest con trick ever pulled off, I think. Amazing, in some ways.

In other news, the laws of thermodynamics still seem to be working as they always have done.

Enough plastic surgery and filters and the right camera angles and voice training and close study of the opposite sex and you might actually be able to fool everyone. Perhaps if you work hard enough, even yourself.

And even in a world where humans weren’t so sexually dimorphic we would still need sex based rights.

I can’t tell the difference between a male and female cat from a distance, but I know that only one type will be left with the kittens.

Shedmistress · Yesterday 08:14

Northernlightsss · Yesterday 07:13

No because the 'woman' & 'man' categories are based on sociological associations (sex & gender) as opposed to male/female being based on sexual reproductive associations.

If this was the case then why didnt men who wanted to marry men just stick a dress on and get married anyway?

Why did the law have to change to allow single sex marriages?

OldCrone · Yesterday 08:23

Northernlightsss · Yesterday 07:13

No because the 'woman' & 'man' categories are based on sociological associations (sex & gender) as opposed to male/female being based on sexual reproductive associations.

So what are the "sociological associations" that decide whether someone is a man or a woman?

We know what the "sexual reproductive associations" are which decide someone's sex. What are the equivalent "sociological associations" deciding gender?

iwishitwouldstartraining · Yesterday 08:29

OldCrone · Yesterday 08:23

So what are the "sociological associations" that decide whether someone is a man or a woman?

We know what the "sexual reproductive associations" are which decide someone's sex. What are the equivalent "sociological associations" deciding gender?

And where do non binary people fit into this framework? Is their existence acknowledged or not?

MarcTheGenderSkeptic · Yesterday 08:40

ArabellaScott · Yesterday 07:48

It's 2026 and people are arguing that males can become females if they feel strongly enough about 'sociological associations'.

As if one can argue oneself into a different sex. If you just get the right words in the right order, and just keep working to discredit the people who say humans are one of two immutable sexes. Get laws passed, silence dissent, seed junk science articles, create whole industries based on the assertion that 'some men are women'.

Enough plastic surgery and filters and the right camera angles and voice training and close study of the opposite sex and you might actually be able to fool everyone. Perhaps if you work hard enough, even yourself.

Its the biggest con trick ever pulled off, I think. Amazing, in some ways.

In other news, the laws of thermodynamics still seem to be working as they always have done.

<of course> this is how the language worked. It was <always> that "female" meant natal sex class and "woman" meant some looser social grouping.
Even if that was the case, what are the previous new entrants to the woman definition above and beyond females?
Because even at the height of racism and homophobia, black and gay females were never not women.
Who's been let into the woman class? Until <now>?

OP posts:
Helleofabore · Yesterday 09:13

There is significant dishonesty in denying when a group forces destabilisation of reference language such as ‘woman’ by making it meaningless, while then simultaneously relying on the reference term being still understood and used in its original definition to communicate the group’s identity.

When it comes to the language used to describe female people, it is misogynistic.

Helleofabore · Yesterday 09:19

The word ‘woman’ would not have been acquired for use by male people, if it always referred to both sexes.

Those who force the destabilisation of the term need the word’s established usage to remain as it was. Otherwise, it isn’t useful for them anymore.

As has been said on these threads for years now, if female people invented a new reference term that was clearly defined as being only for female people, that word would soon be acquired by male people and an attempt to destabilise it would be made.

The interest is not in the word itself, it has always been in acquiring access to the defined group it describes.

HipTightOnions · Yesterday 09:26

All individuals have every right to self-determination of their identity.

’Woman & man’ categories are based on sociological associations.

Says who?

ArabellaScott · Yesterday 09:29

Helleofabore · Yesterday 09:19

The word ‘woman’ would not have been acquired for use by male people, if it always referred to both sexes.

Those who force the destabilisation of the term need the word’s established usage to remain as it was. Otherwise, it isn’t useful for them anymore.

As has been said on these threads for years now, if female people invented a new reference term that was clearly defined as being only for female people, that word would soon be acquired by male people and an attempt to destabilise it would be made.

The interest is not in the word itself, it has always been in acquiring access to the defined group it describes.

Yes. See some 'transwomen' claiming to be 'cis women' or 'biological women'. For when 'somatically' or 'legally' female isnt affirming enough.

Northernlightsss · Yesterday 09:29

MarcTheGenderSkeptic · Yesterday 00:11

Ah, now we're getting to it. Gender Critical opinions, mirroring a good 70% of the population at a conservative estimate (the polls all going in the wrong direction for TRAs for several years now) are "fascist", ergo Joe/Josephine Public are 70% fascist.
Yep, that's <absolutely> gonna get people on your side.
And re the criticism that GCs arent fascist supremacist etc in and of themselves, just the mass Murdoch Dacre Fox GBNews UnHerd-Spiked-Spectator-The Critic axis that are fascist, what, they're using GC women as forward guards, you wanna check what your TRA friends are always saying to the media. That Sex Matters and LGB Alliance are American funded culture war shills, surely that's got to stretch to the citadel of anti-trans discourse as you would see it, the very forum you're on, so right wing it lets you practice as much free speech as you like.
Surely you must believe the Darlington nurses, Jo Phoenix v OU, Nurse Peggie, FW Scotland at the SC, Maya Forstater and Allison Bailey etc are all agents for the cause?
Because your buddies do, and if there's a hive mind, it certainly isn't GC.
I mean, what could have convinced Helen Joyce to have given up a lucrative gig at The Economist to go rogue fascist as GC campaigner if it wasn't filthy lucre and a seat at the NWO of a TERF bio-essentialist future.
Re that arc of history, it was never in your direction even if it looked it, what we see as the soft underbelly of a modern liberal age that struggled to deal with the hegemonic thrust of a highly motivated special interest group, as the absolute TRA static of the last 15 years is replaced by cogent argument that can't be cancelled and No Debated anymore.
It's fascinating, that when women talk calmly, clearly, passionately, minus hyperbole, that arc shown as naturally towards...SC ruling, sports organisations one by one tacking back to reality, prisons more and more off limits, and women less and less cowed to reiterate the equitable position of biology over temperament.
That's literally the arc of history on its course that was the situation up until the turn of this decade and social media based mania and cowardice in the public square gradually retreating.
All that's left is the performative highly visible virtue on steroids battle over the SC ruling. And that was lost by the TRAs the moment the verdict was released, all that remains is smoke and mirrors.

Edited

Ah, now we're getting to it. Gender Critical opinions, mirroring a good 70% of the population at a conservative estimate (the polls all going in the wrong direction for TRAs for several years now) are "fascist", ergo Joe/Josephine Public are 70% fascist.

Most other western & Asian countries don't ascribe to the same laws other than sports reforms as the UK nor are there any broad grass roots movements afoot in them to make the changes the UK has so its hardly a uniform global cultural consensus.

That Sex Matters and LGB Alliance are American funded culture war shills, surely that's got to stretch to the citadel of anti-trans discourse as you would see it, the very forum you're on, so right wing it lets you practice as much free speech as you like.

Did I say free speech was dead in the UK? No. My point was regarding mass media campaigns.

Surely you must believe the Darlington nurses, Jo Phoenix v OU, Nurse Peggie, FW Scotland at the SC, Maya Forstater and Allison Bailey etc are all agents for the cause?

No. I suspect they are a fringe true believers of the GC movement albeit a useful idiots for far right ascension.

Re that arc of history, it was never in your direction even if it looked it, what we see as the soft underbelly of a modern liberal age that struggled to deal with the hegemonic thrust of a highly motivated special interest group, as the absolute TRA static of the last 15 years is replaced by cogent argument that can't be cancelled and No Debated anymore.

The Interchangeability of the sexes is part of the human condition. Its what motivated feminism & trans people are simply an extension of that.

Rollingpinofdoom · Yesterday 09:31

Northernlightsss · Yesterday 09:29

Ah, now we're getting to it. Gender Critical opinions, mirroring a good 70% of the population at a conservative estimate (the polls all going in the wrong direction for TRAs for several years now) are "fascist", ergo Joe/Josephine Public are 70% fascist.

Most other western & Asian countries don't ascribe to the same laws other than sports reforms as the UK nor are there any broad grass roots movements afoot in them to make the changes the UK has so its hardly a uniform global cultural consensus.

That Sex Matters and LGB Alliance are American funded culture war shills, surely that's got to stretch to the citadel of anti-trans discourse as you would see it, the very forum you're on, so right wing it lets you practice as much free speech as you like.

Did I say free speech was dead in the UK? No. My point was regarding mass media campaigns.

Surely you must believe the Darlington nurses, Jo Phoenix v OU, Nurse Peggie, FW Scotland at the SC, Maya Forstater and Allison Bailey etc are all agents for the cause?

No. I suspect they are a fringe true believers of the GC movement albeit a useful idiots for far right ascension.

Re that arc of history, it was never in your direction even if it looked it, what we see as the soft underbelly of a modern liberal age that struggled to deal with the hegemonic thrust of a highly motivated special interest group, as the absolute TRA static of the last 15 years is replaced by cogent argument that can't be cancelled and No Debated anymore.

The Interchangeability of the sexes is part of the human condition. Its what motivated feminism & trans people are simply an extension of that.

So males demanding access to female spaces is women’s fault?? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣.

iwishitwouldstartraining · Yesterday 09:55

Northernlightsss · Yesterday 09:29

Ah, now we're getting to it. Gender Critical opinions, mirroring a good 70% of the population at a conservative estimate (the polls all going in the wrong direction for TRAs for several years now) are "fascist", ergo Joe/Josephine Public are 70% fascist.

Most other western & Asian countries don't ascribe to the same laws other than sports reforms as the UK nor are there any broad grass roots movements afoot in them to make the changes the UK has so its hardly a uniform global cultural consensus.

That Sex Matters and LGB Alliance are American funded culture war shills, surely that's got to stretch to the citadel of anti-trans discourse as you would see it, the very forum you're on, so right wing it lets you practice as much free speech as you like.

Did I say free speech was dead in the UK? No. My point was regarding mass media campaigns.

Surely you must believe the Darlington nurses, Jo Phoenix v OU, Nurse Peggie, FW Scotland at the SC, Maya Forstater and Allison Bailey etc are all agents for the cause?

No. I suspect they are a fringe true believers of the GC movement albeit a useful idiots for far right ascension.

Re that arc of history, it was never in your direction even if it looked it, what we see as the soft underbelly of a modern liberal age that struggled to deal with the hegemonic thrust of a highly motivated special interest group, as the absolute TRA static of the last 15 years is replaced by cogent argument that can't be cancelled and No Debated anymore.

The Interchangeability of the sexes is part of the human condition. Its what motivated feminism & trans people are simply an extension of that.

The Interchangeability of the sexes is part of the human condition. Its what motivated feminism & trans people are simply an extension of that

Strangely, you seem to regard women as a different species to men.

Women and men are both human and there is huge variation in humans and we all have all sorts of different personalities and characteristics. However that does not make sex interchangeable. A woman who is taller than 6’ does not have a male height and is as female as a woman of 5’4”. Similarly tbe women’s height is not ‘interchangeable’ because they are both engineers who like wind surfing.

In general sex discrimination is unlawful in the U.K. and it is only lawful in limited circumstances. Your private life is of course your own business, (the law doesn’t regulate everything) but all that is required of others is tolerance, not affirmation.

You could introduce sepatate legislation to prevent discrimination in the grounds of gender category, but it would be tricky as nobody agrees what that means.

It’s certainly true that some countries don’t legislate against sex discrimination. Perhaos they will eventually catch up with the UK.

FlirtsWithRhinos · Yesterday 10:07

Silly sausage. If men and women were actually seen as "interchangeable" there'd be no need to transition! It's because (in the Genderist mind at least) they are not that a trans person has to transition to the other gender to express some part of themself they feel is unacceptable for their actual sex.

Genderists have the world backwards.

Helleofabore · Yesterday 10:27

“The Interchangeability of the sexes is part of the human condition. Its what motivated feminism…”

This doesn’t make sense.

Female people and male people are not ‘interchangeable’ for all purposes. Feminism is not about making the sexes interchangeable. It is about making sure that female people are offered the same opportunities as male people. But it is not about considering a female person to be the same as a male person.

Female people are not interchangeable in reproduction roles either. Nor are they interchangeable for single sex purposes at all.

In what way are the sexes considered ‘interchangeable’ ?