to disagree with gender ideology/pronouns

[changednameforthiss]

Genuinely don't understand why this is a controversial statement, but somehow we're so far removed from truth and reality, and saying there are no more than 2 genders is enough to get you fired from your job and cancelled forever.

I believe in man and woman as science dictates, and that's it. Why is that hateful? I am not hating PEOPLE for stating this, because I simultaneously believe in the idea that any adult should 100% have the ability and right to freely express themselves in ways that feel congruent with their inner. I also believe people can medically transition to appear as a woman/male if they deal with actual gender dysphoria i.e. genuinely loathe of the sex they were born it; and I believe people have the right to perceive themselves as a woman/man . However, that does not make you the opposite sex. This is a perception, i.e. it is subjective...

So if someone does not want to refer to someone as their preferred pronouns, it is rude at best, but it's certainly not criminal as many people try to make it now. Personally, I will call you by your preferred pronouns because I think it's just good manners, but I honestly don't think it's the truth and I don't think anyone is what their biology (thus hormones) would reject. But we are allowing this to happen and the topic of gender ideology is impacting and in some cases damaging our children who have to deal with adult topics they are wayyyyyy too young to comprehend, as well as women's safety by opening doors for biological men into women's spaces that should not be opened. This is a big problem!

Why is this so controversial? Can we not respect everyone and their right to self-expression and femininity/masculinity across sexes without changing our vocabulary to affirm people's self-perceptions as well as rejecting biology?

If you think I'm hateful, I beg of you please explain why because I'm not getting this and it's driving me insane.

Thanks for replying.

You've raised an interesting point that I'd never considered which is that gay people (well, certainly men) can actually prove they're attracted to other men, because obviously if they weren't they wouldn't have the necessary bodily response required to have sex.

In regard to women's spaces etc, I agree with the concerns but they neither prove nor contradict whether dysphoria is a mental illness or has some biological origin IMO.

I suppose the only spanner in the works is that some mentally ill people do actually believe in their delusions so demonstrating 'conviction' isn't necessarily proof that something is valid.

FTR I don't in any way consider gay people to be mentally ill or anything like that but I just can't help but draw a parallel between them having the sexual preferences typical of the opposite sex whilst trans people also identify with the opposite sex but aren't accepted as real by many.

In reality, I know that the objections are 99% based around the threat to women's rights yet I'm still interested in the root of transsexuality as it seems to be too pervasive to just be a fad/mental illness even if some kids adopt it as a misguided fad/are confused.

I don't buy the mumsnet trope that they're all perverted middle aged men with fetishes. I think there's more to it than that.

Too pervasive to be a fad? That's exactly how a fad works.

Where were all the teen girls identifying as boys ten years ago? Why is there now such an explosion? And more to the point, how come most of these girls desist after a few years (in my experience of secondary schools anyway)?

Gay people very very rarely desist from being gay.

I don't buy the mumsnet trope that they're all perverted middle aged men with fetishes. I think there's more to it than that.

I think most GC MNers agree with you that it is more nuanced than that. Perverted middle aged men with fetishes is one cohort of trans people. Gay, effeminate men is another. People with ASC is another. Young women with histories of sexual trauma is yet another. This is one of the problems that GC talk about a lot. That not all trans people have the same feelings and motivations. Not all of them even have gender dysphoria. So we’re trying to group all these people together who may have nothing in common other than declaring a trans identity.

don't buy the mumsnet trope that they're all perverted middle aged men with fetishes. I think there's more to it than that.

I should think not, as afaik that trope doesn't really exist. I think it's well understood that there are many different types of people who stonewall has foolishly gathered under the 'trans umbrella'.

I really like this post. Women have fought for so many years to get to where we are and it feels like it's crumbling away.

In regard to women's spaces etc, I agree with the concerns but they neither prove nor contradict whether dysphoria is a mental illness or has some biological origin IMO.

I don't think these things are relevant to each other. Regardless of what trans is caused by, keeping out of women's spaces is non negotiable.

But in answer to the question, I think lots of things are being grouped under the trans 'umbrella' right now.

That includes genuine dysphoria, gender non conformity, trauma responses and yes, fetishistic men - who account for a clear proportion.

Then of course, self ID gives a free pass to men who are none of these things, but happy to take advantage of an opportunity to abuse women more easily.

Part of the problem is that all these people have been grouped under one heading. This is very advantageous for some of these groups. Can you guess which ones?

So no response to ANY of MY points?

Yeah. Thought so.

🤔

I actually think a long term study into what causes people to be/think they are trans would be fascinating. As you say, is there actually a biological cause? Is it trauma? Genetics? Same as knowing what causes any mental illness TBH.

But, regardless of what the causes of it are, people who are male (which includes transwomen) need to stay out of women's toilets, changing rooms, prison cells, sports teams etc etc.

I just can't help but draw a parallel between them having the sexual preferences typical of the opposite sex whilst trans people also identify with the opposite sex

That's not an 'also'. There is no parallel.

Gay men being attracted to men is unrelated to straight women being attracted to men. Lesbians are not attracted to women because straight men are attracted to women. They don't 'identify with' people who have the same object of sexual attraction (often quite the opposite).

Oh come now, I could find loads of examples if I wanted on here. I can't really be arsed but I will if I have to.

Unless you can provide sources I'm afraid you're just stating your opinion.

If lesbians don't identify with men and gay men don't identify with women then why are there so many effeminate gay men and butch lesbians?

Of course many aren't but you can't deny it's a thing.

I cba. 🤣 It would be like arguing with an MRA. I know your game.

Interesting.

I guess lesbian rights campaigners are MRAs too.

Yep.

Interesting take not to address concerns highlighted in the Cass Review about young same sex attracted people suddenly declaring themselves as trans...

Yep.

I cba. 🤣 It would be like arguing with an MRA. I know your game.

RedToothBrush is one of the most serious posters on this topic I can think of. This isn't a game for her, as I'd have thought was blindingly obvious.

If gender dysphoria is not a mental illness — that is to say, a condition of suffering that can be alleviated by certain accommodations — then can you explain why women should make accommodations for males claiming access to female spaces?

@Anitazmum

Even before medical options were available, there were men who dressed like women and women who dressed like men!

And they did it for no reason other than in made them happy.

That's a very naive take.

It "made them happy" to mislead others about their sex because they wanted to live in ways that were not socially acceptable for their true sex.

In that context transitioning "made them happy", but only because it resolved unhappiness created by the restrictions their cultures applied to sex.

For women in particular, access to many professions, to ownership of assets and to legal personhood itself was restricted to men. Adopting a male persona was a way to maintain financial, social and legal autonomy.

Trans gender identities are a symptom of rigid social restrictions around sex. They reappear throughout history and in multiple cultures not because they are a fundamental human characteristic but because humans frequently impose rigid social restrictions around sex.

You're right to call child abuse.

I couldn't help wondering when I first saw the pic of the transwoman breastfeeding: At what point does this sort of thing become pedophilia? Genuine question.

Spot on. 👏👏

In simple terms why is being homosexual completely beyond questioning but being trans is seen as a mental illness?

Being homosexual is a sexual preference, not a mental illness.
This is unlike, for example, body dismorphia, the root cause of eating disorders, where people believe their body is a certain way when, in reality, it is not. This is a mental illness and is treated as such.
Gender dysphoria is, in my view, in this same category: the person feels they were born in the wrong body, when the facts (biological sex) state otherwise. This, in my view, should also be treated as a mental illness. Hope that helps.

If lesbians don't identify with men and gay men don't identify with women then why are there so many effeminate gay men and butch lesbians?

All people of all orientations can be masculine or feminine.
There are masculine (you've called "butch") lesbians, there are feminine lesbians, there are middle of the road, standard appearing women who are lesbians. There are effeminate gay men, while a lot of gay men are also hyper-masculine, most are just plain old ordinary.

Gender ideology's terminology like "identifying with or as a man or a woman" really doesn't apply unless you are ideological to that extent.

Some lesbians get drawn into gender ideology and end up believing their sexual orientation is because they're really a man in the wrong body, so actually "hetero" after all. That's what I would call a conversion. Gender ideology proclaims to be against conversion therapy but ends up promoting it.

People rejecting stereotypes in their appearance, whether they are homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual, are not declaring they are something they are materially not.

If lesbians don't identify with men and gay men don't identify with women then why are there so many effeminate gay men and butch lesbians?

This* *could only be written by someone who lives in their own world where everyone follows sex based stereotypes. I know plenty of heterosexual men and women who could be described as ‘effeminate’ or ‘butch’.

Nothing to do with a ‘gender identity’ that involves trying to convince society that you really are something you are materially not. The only thing a person with a gender identity materially is, is a person with a gender identity and that should not allow them open access to single sex spaces or protections meant for the sex that person with that gender identity is not. Throwing all this whataboutery around doesn’t change that fact.

Can you please clarify what part of being sexual orientation involves wanting the world to treat you as something that you are materially not?

You posted this: ”To elaborate, there often seems to be the insinuation that trans people are in some way mentally ill - how many times have we heard the argument "well, we don't affirm the beliefs of anorexic people that think they're fat."”

”However, both gay and trans are orientations driven by feelings rather than scientific proof. It took decades before gay people were accepted and they were at times seen as indecent and sent for conversion therapy.”

But you really seem to be missing the significant difference. That people who are same sex attracted do not demand any additional accommodations be made for them. They rightfully expect to be treated equally for who they are. Nothing more and it doesn’t require anyone to believe that this group are something that they are materially not. Whether you choose to try to draw those comparisons about ‘feelings’ and whether they are provable or not. A person who is same sex attracted has an arousal response to people of the same sex as them. Not the other sex. Or else they would be bisexual.

Either way, there is something material to their body’s responses. And again, they don’t demand additional accommodations by society.

A male person who expects society to treat him as a female person is demanding additional accommodation from others. It means other people have to accommodate that person’s belief which is based purely on philosophical belief. And yes, post modernist theory that someone is what they say they are. But they are not a female person in any way. And reducing people to ‘butch lesbians’ etc is just someone labelling others who don’t conform to sex based stereotypes. It is a very weak point to bring in. A male ‘presenting’ as a female person still does not change material reality that they are male.

Not only are they still male, they are also only performing their own concept, as a male person, of what they believe a female life experience is. They can never be what they want to be, because that is the material reality of their situation. Every single interaction that person experiences, is one of a male person presenting as a female person.

The same is most certainly not true of a ‘butch lesbian’. Because they are a female person who merely presents a different version of being female while still being female. Ie. They are always a female person and they know this and don’t expect the world to treat them as ‘male’.

The additional accommodation includes laws and policies allowing those male people to be treated as a female person. One aspect of this can be explained that these male people not only have access spaces for male people, they want the extra right of access to female single sex space. What other group of people expect this additional right? Another aspect is that those male people have not experienced the negative sexist discrimination that female people have and still do experience from birth, yet also want to access opportunities set aside for those female people to overcome that negative sexist discrimination that they have experienced. I am not saying that those male people don’t experience their own unique issues, but they should not be removing opportunities set up for female people in this way. Again, another additional accommodation, and what other group is making these demands?

So, same sex attracted people live according to their material reality. It is one where there is a bodily response. No one same sex attracted is demanding someone treat them as being different from
what they materially are. Plus, if someone treated the person who was same sex attracted as them being heterosexual, it doesn’t disprove that they are same sex attracted. If it wasn’t discriminatory or abusive, would it even matter to that same sex attracted person?

On the other hand, a group of people do demand that people treat them as if they were something they materially are not. They claim their gender identity makes them something they are materially not. This would be fine if they didn’t demand others comply with this philosophical belief. But they do demand compliance.

How is being ‘trans’ an orientation exactly? That usage sounds more like forced teaming.

reducing people to ‘butch lesbians’ etc is just labelling others who don’t conform to sex based stereotypes

This, exactly. Trans ideology is sexism on steroids (literally!) Far from breaking down gendered stereotypes, it enforces them to the point where same-sex attraction is seen as an aberration. Not so long ago, people used to ask lesbian couples "Which one of you is the 'man', then?" and gay men which one was the 'woman'. Genderists take this offensive assumption all the way, insisting that the supposed aberrant has actually changed sex to fit a bonkers idea that only heterosexual sex is possible.

Exceptions are made, unsurprisingly, for heterosexual males who 'transition', becoming lesbian women according to them. That's acceptable (supposedly) because any sex taking place under those circumstances is physically heterosexual. It's a penis and a vagina, but the penis-owner has declared himself female. The aberrant female lesbian is thus converted - by sophistry rather than corrective rape, though the forced invasion of lesbian communities has distinctly rare-like overtones.

The same theories apply to heterosexual females 'transitioning' into gay men. There's a qualitative difference in that gay men are simply not tolerating these invasions. The pressure's as insistent, though, with female 'gay men' angrily instructing males to welcome their vaginas as bonus holes (eurgh) and strap-on dildoes as better than the real thing.

In the genderist world-view, the only real lesbians and gay men are those in physically heterosexual relationships, re-labelled as homosexual. Physically homosexual relationships are disgusting, antisocial, abnormal. It's old-fashioned homophobia in new wrapping paper.

You are contradicting yourself here. You say that kids end up being trans without any external input and then go on to list all the ways that external input can affect them. Your sex shouldn't dictate your social groups or your hobbies. Only regressive people who agree with stereotypes think they should. Maybe if kids were allowed to be friends with who they want and enjoy any hobby, they wouldn't feel like they were the wrong sex.