General Trans thread part 2

[ChiefClerkDrumknott]

Following on from this one General Trans thread
Because I'm not Elsa and can't let it go

Even a quick read of this thread suggest there is a lot of anger. ..
Some examples...

You don't need examples. I told you that we are angry

This "debate" between radical feminism and the trans community is being seen by mainstream as a particularly nasty fight with some issues, risks and fears (on both sides) being deliberately exaggerated.

And who do you think started the fight? I think you'll find some rad fem fears stem from being threatened with death and rape when they bring up objections to some of these 'issues' you glibly dismiss. Do you not think that's an understandable reaction? By the way, have you popped over to Twitter or Tumblr yet to plead with 'TERF' killers to be less aggressive?

As mentioned earlier, I may be completely wrong. Perhaps the best solution is to get even angrier, even more offensive and aggressive...

You know what, as I said we are angry and we are 'aggressive', if you term defending women's rights vocally and loudly and consistently aggressive

Our way of thinking is widespread, but routinely silenced sixpence.

Because once people realise what's going on, they quickly lose support for the trans rights movement. So we're shouted down with name calling and threats. Made to think we're a lone bigot or part of an extremist minority.

Search on Facebook, if you're on there, for "radfem collective" or "discussing gender identity and gender critical"

I think it's incredibly telling that our arguments are never engaged with. You're really down the rabbit hole when the leader of the WEP won't even answer the simple question, "what is a woman?"

I'd love to know just how widespread it is. I want figures but I doubt they exist.

Do we need to use some of the same tactics? Start using the term misogyny every single time someone claims there's no such thing as female biology? Start shouting misogyny loudly from every roof top every where?

Thanks for the facebook recommendations. I was meaning to ask about that as I'd seen reference to facebook pages.

I think if we did a survey, we'd get pretty good results!

Q1 What is a woman?
a) adult human female
b) anyone who says they are

Q2 Should sport, toilets, changing rooms be segregated by ...
a) biology
b) feelings
c) clothing choices/hair cuts

Sixpence I will dm you about fb.

I appreciate that there are radfem groups where these issues are discussed, but most people who don't believe in genderism (for want of a better term) are not radical feminists.

Many would say they are gender critical feminists. Rad fem has tremendous guidance to give though. And is usually a safer forum to discuss these issues.

When questioned to transactivists acknoweldge biological sex exists for animals? Do they understand that you can tell a male panda from a female panda without knowing anything about how the panda feels?

singingsixpence nobody cares about misogyny though.
Not so long ago women couldnt even vote.
Still, women (even in the uk) are objectified and discriminated against.
Yet "transphobia" (even the identification of biological dofference) is like apartheid.
The difference will come if women start actually using violence (you know, like men do) but that isn't going to happen of course.

I don't think nobody cares about misogyny if there is demonstrable harm to women. Surely something can be done :(

I don't think nobody cares about misogyny if there is demonstrable harm to women

When questioned to transactivists acknoweldge biological sex exists for animals? Do they understand that you can tell a male panda from a female panda without knowing anything about how the panda feels?

I think if you ask them, they either claim that you are transphobic for asking, distract from the question, or claim that animals are totes different.

Or say that the panda who gives birth might be a male panda. Despite giving birth.
Probably there are as many answers as there are transgenderists.

This entire thought construct is really all built of cardboard ... no worse, as a cardboard house still has basic physics to support it.

Trees have sexes, too - do transwacktivists claim that the Gingko tree used as ornamental plants in Europe are not, in fact, all male, because some could have genderfeelz about being female?

It is all so absurd.

I don't think nobody cares about misogyny if there is demonstrable harm to women. Surely something can be done

Sure, we can do something. Feminist activism. After all, we did get the vote. Though only after a war had killed most men and women were needed to work in factories, if I recall correctly.

But I do think that the only people who care about women ... are women. And not all women, but just a subset of women. Sadly, those women who have it rather comfy, won't ally with other women.

I feel scared to get involved even though I want to. There's a petition I came across - LGB drop the T. I wanted to sign it but was too scared to. Although not being LGB or T maybe I shouldn't have a say in these things any way.

On here the discussion seems to win converts but is that true elsewhere?

Yes, for me anyway. I will only engage in conversation in real life (nothing documented). My friends and acquaintances are always surprised at my view on this and often want to know why I have reached the conclusions I have.

Even when I have not won the war I have won battles. I have never come out of a conversation regarding this without changing peoples minds on at least part of it. Most people haven't even considered it (much like I hadn't) once they get thinking the flaws are obvious.

You're probably right vestal about there being as many answers as transgenderists.

That is heartening that you win people roung "MyCrispBag*. I am concerned though that the people who speak out in the media aren't having the same effect. When Kirsty Wark interviewed Germaine Greer, Greer didn't get any killer points across, it seemed that Wark just saw her as outdated.

Talking to people who don't know much about the issue is most successful - ordinary people who didn't know about the whole extent of this nonsense are often shocked when you tell them about the nonsensical new laws, etc.

Those who are already caught up in transgenderism are more invested in it - admitting that you used to believe complete nonsense/ that what you used to believe is utter nonsense takes some strength of character.

Thought I'd add this to the thread, I don't usually post here but follow the debate and posts

gendertrender.wordpress.com/2016/05/30/georgia-aclu-director-resigns-over-the-organizations-failure-to-balance-transgender-rights-with-womens-rights/

For those asking about animals

Hermione

sixpence when we think about our conceptual definitions of male and female, though, those definitions contain both biological and cultural facets. So when talking about human gender, thinking about animal genders isn't relevant since we think about animal "genders" in purely reproductive terms whereas human genders are inextricably tied up with the cultural perceptions and prescriptions that surround "man" and "woman"

Hermione, livestock farming would cause him unbearable cognitive dissonance ... seeing as cows are almost all artificially inseminated nowadays, so he'd have to handle that himself instead of just keeping a herd of cattle and wait for calves to be born ... I wager his brain might explode if he tries to reconcile that with his denial of male and female as based on biology.

So when talking about human gender, thinking about animal genders isn't relevant since we think about animal "genders" in purely reproductive terms whereas human genders are inextricably tied up with the cultural perceptions and prescriptions that surround "man" and "woman"

I think about human sex also only in reproductive terms. And of course, about harmful male human behaviour - same as a farmer might think about the problems an aggressive bull causes.
I find one can see much more clearly if one removes social gender constructs from the whole thing.

Of course, people don't take kindly to being told they are just another animal species. That's why Darwin was, and still is, hated by many.

I have often observed that genderists are very much like religious fanatics. So it would make sense for them to reject the notion that humans belong within the animal realm, and consider themselves something wholly different from plants, fungi and animals alike.

vestal I don't think that humans are somehow divinely separate from other parts of nature. i'm a vegan and I see animals as being our ethical equals. I also recognise, though, that animals don't conceptualize their primary sex characteristics into genders. That's why I don't see the exploitation of female-designated animals as a feminist issue, but an animal rights issue.

However you personally define gender, it's undeniable that conceptualizing it through language brings it into a social rather than the purely natural sphere. When we use words like 'male' and 'female' to refer to people by their primary sex characteristics we lend that categorisation importance, social weight, and meaning. These words can't be divided from their historical usage or simplified to such easy definitions.

You see, I see things from the other end of the telescope. When we ignore biology, we ignore (or even deliberately obscure) the material conditions against which the oppression of women takes place.