Ian McEwan on gender identity

[MoonriseKingdom]

gu.com/p/4t3f7?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Article about a recent talk by Ian McEwan. I'm not sure what prompted the topic to come up but he seems quite well informed on some of the concerns that have been discussed on here. I think his description of people seeing their identity in a consumerist way was interesting. I expect he won't be invited to speak in any university debates any time soon.

If there is a lack of online abuse aimed at men by trans activists, I'd think it is because very few men are involved in the movement and surrounding issues. You can't be a target if you aren't involved.

What did the times editorial say?

That doesn't explain why the men who are involved, and there are a surprising number of them, don't get the same levels or types of abuse.

It's the same with gamergate. Men get some shit, women get threatened, doxed and swatted.

Anyway, this is a derail, so sorry OP.

Bloody hell, "niche conflict"??

That's us told, then. Creating a fuss over nothing, eh? I think you have inadvertently nailed it, though Grimarse "very few men are involved in the movement...". Well, no, probably not, because it's not men's identity that is being redefined away from underneath them, is it? You'll forgive us if we have a different take on the topic.

I don't understand why you would come here and flaunt your lack of understanding of the problem like this, though, like it was a badge of honour? Maybe that's the male equivalent of a Victimhood Badge of Honour - the Unthinking Obliviousness Badge of Honour?

Anyhoo, back to the topic, yes it's nice that Ian McE is speaking out on this, the more the merrier, and probably no rape threats to worry about either.

If there is a lack of online abuse aimed at men by trans activists, I'd think it is because very few men are involved in the movement and surrounding issues.

Anything other than that women might be disproportionately targetted, eh?

Well, I seem to have ruffled a few feathers. I came in here not to flaunt, but as I explained earlier, because I read his article at the week-end. And then I misunderstood an earlier post, for which I apologised. And in case it wasn't clear, I apologised for the misunderstanding.

And yes, it is niche. How is that offensive? It seems like a battle of wills between feminists and trans activists. And whether you like it or not, this battle is not at the forefront of public conciousness. Outside of Fwr, and now McEwan's article, I'd say very few people would know the first thing about trans issues. Be honest. For those who have non-feminist friends, how many of them would have a clue about the issues? Fwr is the only board I have seen it discussed. It isn't a criticism, it's an observation.

It's been discussed in chat and I am sure aibu

More and more people I know are becoming more aware of the issues that are being bought about with the insistence of trans women being accepted as women and being able to use women's spaces. For many still it seems so ridiculous that it's something that won't possibly happen so not worth being concerned over or some completely support transwomens rights over women but it is something that more people are becoming aware of

I would have thought it wasn't anything to be too concerned over even a year ago

Sadly the left wing press have silenced anything that is sees as anti trans even when what is actually about is redefining what is to be a woman (by mainly males) and many women rejecting this and women fighting against that I think we ar to keep spaces just for girls and women

But we are used to being silenced we are used to male privilege and it's nothing new that our considerations are not seen as that important

What I believe to be absolutely necessary is to keep spaces for girls/women

Excuse typo

It isn't a criticism, it's an observation

Why do you imagine we are interested in your observations?

(Well because you have a willy - obviously).

It's this very issue that has brought me to feminism and if the discussions on this and other sites as well as comment pages on the guardian for example are anything to go by I'm far from the only one.

It's definitely entering the mainstream. A lot of women are coming to realise that a certain vocal minority of trans activists do not have the interests of women at heart and in fact it's quite the opposite.

I'm not actually sure that those minority trans activists have the interests of the majority of trans people at heart either.

I am not a fan of Ian McEwan because his presentation of female characters is, as scallops said, misogynistic. This makes me cautious about suddenly cheering along with him as an ally on this issue. My sense of caution also stems from two things he says in the article. Firstly, he calls the conflict "interesting" (rather implying that he would agree with the poster who finds it a "niche" issue - almost beneath him), whereas an increasing number of women I know find this issue passionately infuriating. Secondly, the irony of his referring to gender identity as something that may be chosen like a "ready-to-wear little black number"! Because if you really want to make something sound superfluous and trivial then make sure you compare it to something associated with women and their shallow obsession with appearances!!

Grimarse, the reason it appears 'niche' and not at the forefront of the public consciousness, is because it is happening under the radar. Yes, it is largely confined to lots of debate/articles/consciousness raising etc on the internet rather than a wider discussion, but that will change.

A white paper has been submitted to the Govt for consideration into law, which, if passed, will massively erase women's rights to safe spaces as they will, effectively, be opened up to everyone.

I'm not going to go into detail as it would be too derailing, (google Maria Miller and the Equality commision white paper if you want to read it) but it's the reason so many of us are extremely concerned.

Of course it's off the male radar in the main, because it simply doesn't affect them. Although if you have a wife/girlfriend/sister/mother/grandmother/aunt/neice/daughter, it will affect them so the radio silence from men is a bit disconcerting. Hence it is nice when high profile men like McEwan wade into the debate.

It seems like a battle of wills between feminists and trans activists

It's not really a battle of wills given that one group of people have decided to completely redefine a word without clarifying what they think that word means.

It's more a battle between logic and stamped feet.

Pink, I think the 'ready to wear like a little black number' is actually a good way of summing up the co-opting, at a very superficial level, of being a woman. If womanhood can be externally created, then it is nothing more than a dress to choose. I don't think McEwan is diminishing women so much as the trans* movement.

I can't comment on the misogyny in his writing, I stopped reading Atonement when I realised it centred on rape (I think) and I was not at a strong enough emotional stage. But may re-visit. Nonetheless, it kind of makes sense that a misogynist would want women to be actual real and bodily women.

It's not a battle of wills.

I am genuinely scared and worried, laws are being changed that effect me, my daughter and future generations of women, if we will still be allowed to use that title to define ourself. Trans Women will be allowed to compete with us in the Olympics, get changed next to us, tell us how to be a woman.

I'm not a feminist getting her knickers in a twist, I am very concerned about the future.

Imagine trans black people started telling black people how to be black, with the full backing of progressives. Imagine that, why is it any different?

The only difference is that we are women and we have to budge up, make room, stop fussing.

...and we have to accept that we are the oppressors of people born male, and that they should be prioritised in women's spaces from now on.

Yeah, no.

What also scares me is how it sets one generation of women against another, younger feminists swallowing the movement and falling over themselves to prove how right on they are, whether they are right or not.

Divide and conquer.

It feels like a niche issue because so far it is mainly feminists speaking out. However it is certainly not a niche issue because there are various rule changes and law changes in the pipeline that will have a wide impact on women and girls. By the time the impact of legislation filters through it will be too late.

I posted this article because I thought it was good to see a wider range of voices on the subject. I don't know enough about McEwa to comment on whether his books/ views are mysogonistic.

When you have prominent left wing female MPs looking to sign away important aspects of women's rights I think we need all the help we can get to bring attention to this.

Changing the definition of woman also changes what it means to be a man and to be gay. Women might be noticing the effects first, but it's not just a woman's issue.

It's also an issue for anyone who cares about how government policies are made. There has been little consultation and no scientific basis or clear reasoning for making the proposed changes, yet Maria Miller appears to be ploughing on regardless.

www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/06/biology-not-always-destiny-says-ian-mcewan-after-transgender-row

My comments were all zapped. That "as a biologist" bullshit comment which made Guardian Pick -surprise!- tries to make the case for ladybrain while airily dismissing concerns about shared bathrooms. I pointed out the legitimate discomfort and fear felt by women sharing their private space with biological men given the very real threat from predators and zap!

And over 1000 comments and still nobody could explain what on earth 'as a biologist' meant when claiming that gender was a brain thing.

I'm a biologist too. I did biology o-level.

I know, it's bonkers. Just the confirmation bias of the brainwashed.. oh this random person on the internet who says they're a biologist...yeah science!