Debunking some myths

[pallas81]

I know I will be crucified for this but I aim to reach out to those who consider themselves open minded on the issue of reform to the Gender Recognition Act.
There is a great deal of talk about the dangers of male predators in female only spaces. It needs to be pointed out that this has nothing to do with the 2004 Gender Recognition Act or its possible reform. As the law currently stands, transgender women are perfectly entitled to use female toilets, changing rooms and facilities such as shelters and rape crisis centres. A Gender Recognition Certificate is NOT required. In fact, in law, it is illegal to demand such a certificate.
Transgender people are protected under the 2010 Equality Act. For those who are vehemently opposed to trans people having certain rights, you should be campaigning against the Equality Act instead of occupying yourselves with self identification.
However, I should point out that in the countries that have already adopted self identification as law there is no evidence that male predators have used it to prey on vulnerable women.
I'm afraid that much of the anger around this issue looks like paranoid fantasy when one knows the facts. Despite the best efforts of squalid sites like Transcrime, the rates of criminal behaviour among self-identified trans people is much much lower than the societal average and there is ZERO respectable evidence that self identified transgender females represent any threat to non-transgender females of any age.
If you wish to comment, please try to be courteous. Thank you.

@Bibijayne this is the thing - we've been debating this for months or even years now, and we're yet to find one single example of a trans activist who will give reasoned arguments.

This brings us to the conclusion that there are no reasoned arguments.
Are we wrong about that? If so, please tell us why?

You still haven't said what you think your evidence proves, nor have you given us anything that refutes any of our claims.

And you're back on personal attacks. "people baying for blood because someone dare question their world view"

We're not baying for blood, honestly. We're asking you, repeatedly, to offer some proof of your beliefs so that we may understand them.

We - and others reading - have no idea why you believe transwomen are women, other than 'because you do'. I really would like to understand the thought process - can you offer any compelling evidence? If not for us, then for the many lurkers who are not "baying for blood"

@AssassinatedBeauty True. And I have tried to address a number of those points before and some more below.

@Teacuphiccup no, they say you change gender :) which is different to sex (a few posters have been keen to conflate the two concepts to fit a specific narrative). At which point I, and many other people see no reason why someone cannot use the gender terms associated with their new gender. It alleviates a great pain from one person, without in any way shape or form diminishing my identity.

To a few different posters:

As I've said before, I prefer unisex and gender neutral spaces to spaces segregated based on sex or gender. So am at odds with many of the posters asking specific points around that.

I'm also a cis-gendered woman, so I'm not in a position to answer specific points regarding definitions and the spectrum of trans-peoples identities. I can only comment on reports and studies I have read and experiences told to me by trans-people I have met.

I do think feminism has a place for women of all backgrounds and experiences. My experiences as a white, middle class cis-woman are likely to be very different to other women's. To deny one group a voice because their experiences are different is unhelpful.

To deny one group a voice because their experiences are different is unhelpful.

We're not denying transwomen a voice. We're saying we don't think they're women.

You say "they say you change gender which is different to sex". So, to be clear, are you saying you think transwomen change their gender but not their sex?

This matters, it's fundamental.

Can I ask why you want to get rid of all sex segregated spaces, @Bibijayne? What is the benefit to women and girls of doing that?

I'm also a cis-gendered woman, so I'm not in a position to answer specific points regarding definitions and the spectrum of trans-peoples identities.

You have asked whether we'd accept fully passing transwomen in our spaces, though, and I shared the Stonewall definition to make the point that things have gone far beyond that.

Essentially, what we're being asked to do now is accept any biological male who decides to enter a toilet or a communal changing room, regardless of appearance or motivations, because challenging them is transphobic.

Woman is not an identity, trans is. Stating your trans is the the identity, which is cool, identify as trans, goth, emo, whatevs, kudos.

you're

Infantilising language 'bless' and gendered language 'Flouce' pretty much indicate that no, you do not want reasoned debate. Which makes it a totally pointless exercise.

I used flounce. I did not use bless.

You’re still doing the thing where you sulk and say debating is pointless. It’s not pointless it’s just that you don’t have a leg to stand on logically. So the only recourse you have is name calling and accusations of hatred and bigotry. That isn’t debate. Debate is arguing your side.

I do want debate. I am debating, or attempting to engage you in that. My stance, my arguments are the following and I can and will back any specific point up with a reasoned argument.

Transwomen remain Male
Sex segregated spaces are important for safety privacy and dignity of women and girls (and also important for privacy and dignity of men.)
Humans cannot change sex
Sex is an immutable biological fact
Gender is largely a social construct - the set of expectations a society has of each member of that sex (and frankly the sooner we smash or expand those gender stereotypes the better.)
Self ID is dangerous because it will endanger women and girls
Self ID is dangerous because it will dilute safeguarding practice for all children, regardless of sex or gender identity.
Most children who identify as trans desist this affirmative treatment is morally and ethically wrong.

Those are the basics. So please, let’s debate. You tell me why you disagree with the points above. Without resorting to calling anyone a bigot, or or saying it’s pointless.

I can expand on any of those points. Pick one or two - tell me why I’m wrong and let’s argue (in a nice polite way.)

You aren’t cis gendered by the way. There’s no such thing. Cis is a term used correctly when talking about isomers in stereochemistry or when talking about the proximity of a control element of a specific gene. It’s grossly offensive to use it to describe a woman.

Can I ask why you want to get rid of all sex segregated spaces, @Bibijayne? What is the benefit to women and girls of doing that?

Yes exactly. Why exactly do people think that women should want sex segregated spaces eradicated? How does it make things better?

Bibi

I don’t think anyone is conflating sex with gender, in fact I think everyone is very aware of the difference.

You say that someone being known as their new gender and not their biological sex doesn’t affect women well I’m sorry but I’m going to have to disagree with you there and this is reason why.

Gender is not innate, by its very nature as a social construct it changes over time and what society you’re in. Gender is the tool the patriarchy uses in order to keep people in their sexed roles, as a radical feminist I reject gender, I have a personality, a sex and then some gender crap I’ve picked up from my conditioning.
The trans ideology reinforces the unproven claim that gender is innate, this is bad for women (and men actually) as it strengthens the prison of gender. Instead of having people who all just do whatever they like regardless of sex, trans ideology has the category man and woman and your behaviours and feelings decide which box you fit into, and if you fit into neither your non binary.
This strengthens the boxes for everyone else.

I reject gender but I’m not non binary as I am of the sex class female and as a result have experienced opression because of that, I have suffered in my career because of the assumption that at some point I’ll gestate a baby. This is sex based opression, not gender based. That won’t happen to a trans woman and I reserve the right to name it.

I 100% support trans people to call themselves what they like, dress how they like, present themselves how they like, but I would also like to be able to keep the category woman sex based not gender based. I’m not a woman because I have long hair or like to hang out with other girls or prefer netball to football, I’m a woman because I belong to the sex category female and am an adult.

Trans ideology gives individuals the freedom to choose with gender box to be in, whilst reinforcing the boxes for everyone else.
Radical feminism smashes all the boxes and allows people to just be who the fuck they want to be.

Radical feminism has been trying to dismantle gender since the year dot.

We’re not going to told we have to have certain behaviours and feelings to be a woman by misogynists, and we’re not going to be told that if someone has certain behaviours and feelings then they must be women by misogynists claiming to be woke either.

I’ve got a question for you bibi

Why do you think women who have dedicated their entire lives to women’s rights, gay rights, equality and dismantling gender have suddenly decided to become, in your words ‘bigots’?

Does it not strike you as odd that a group of women who have never shown any signs of bigotry before have suddenly gone for this issue?

Why do you think that may be?

I agree with teacup.

Gender stereotyping is narrowing and solidifying. Just appearances for example ...When I were a lass you could happily ‘be a girl’ with a shaved head, a pixie cut, a tea dress and biker boots, a suit, long hair, short hair and any or no makeup. Now I look around at teenage girls and the vast majority look the same. Long swishy straight hair. A particular makeup look. Very similar clothes.
Boys in my day (late 80s/90s) were wearing dresses - look at kurt consumer for example. Frock, eyeliner, definitely a bloke. There was no ‘fit this box or you’re not a boy.’ You could be a boy and be gay. You could be a girl and wear what you wanted and not be ‘girly.’ The culture of sexuality as you entered puberty was far less toxic than it is just now. I’m not sure how old you are but it was SO different to today.

So these narrow gender stereotypes are a bit crap really. They force young women particularly into a very sexualised stereotype too early. I can totally see why 70% of presentations at gender clinics are girls - it must be absolutely hideous to hit puberty in this climate, especially if you’re already non neurotypical or have any existing issues. These kids are mainly not suffering from gender dysphoria - they’re saying ‘stop the world I want to get off’ and I have massive sympathy with that because it’s an embodiment of how gender expectations oppress us all.

So feminists have always failed against gender. We’ve always been for women and men wearing and acting outside those narrow boxes. More men taking maternity leave would benefit us all. More women deciding yes they can be engineers benefits us all. Smashing those boxes benefits everyone. Except maybe the porn industry but frankly they can eff off.

So as teacup says - we’ve been fighting for our rights, for men to be released from these boxes too. For gay rights. For marriage equality. We are in general a pretty accommodating and reasonable set of women.

And now we are saying that self ID in particular is a danger to women, and to children of both sexes. Have we suddenly decided to be bigoted gits or perhaps have we seen whatcthe consequences of self ID would be?

Do YOU understand what the consequences would be? For single sex spaces? For the ability of women from faith communities to participate in public life? And particularly how it will affect could safeguarding? Because it will dilute current practices to the point they’re useless. And that’s a big worry.

Kurt consumer..? Cobain! Clearly my autocorrect is millenial... 🤦🏻‍♀️

So these narrow gender stereotypes are a bit crap really.

Yes. The idea that female & male can be signified by people's taste in clothes or makeup is regressive & sexist. Take a certain celebrity's statement that their girly side makes them like high heels & nail varnish, or the idea that someone is female when they wear a dress or male when they wear a suit. That's a strong reinforcement of gender stereotypes that do nobody any favours.

Feminists would much rather see a world where anyone can wear / look / act how they want but everyone knows that doesn't change their sex.

It was reported (may actually have happened) that two women went into a "men only" swimming session. The supposed purpose was to claim that people would be able to go into single sex sessions if it was easier to get a Gender Recognition Certificate. The implication of course is that they showed their GRCs first ...

No, it was to show that someone who looks exactly like the sex they are, but claims to be the opposite sex without showing any proof at all, will be admitted to a "single-sex" environment.

And to show that this is already happening, without waiting for any self-id legislation.

How happy is everyone with that situation?

That's exactly it, Bowlofbabelfish.

The supposed purpose was to claim that people would be able to go into single sex sessions if it was easier to get a Gender Recognition Certificate.

No, the Man Friday campaign aims to highlight the absurdity of self ID and to make organisations who have changed their policies already as if it was in law have a think about the implications.

It also inconveniences men. It doesn’t harm them - the lady in question is always extremely polite, but it inconveniences them. Why is that important? Well firstly because no bugger is listening to us women ... but It’s important because men don’t want to give up their single sex spaces either but at the moment none of this TRA stuff is affecting or impacting them. And so they have no idea or they don’t care to speak out.

If men are inconvenienced- what then? god forbid if the masons had to admit women! Or if the gentlemen’s clubs where the power plays are carried out had to admit women - then men might just realise that this is problematic. And stand with us to maintain the single sex exemptions to the equality act. Those are the bits under threat from self ID, the bits we are all worried about. 

So ManFriday has raised the profile of this issue in a non aggressive way. No one has been shouted at, hurt, or had abuse like TERF shouted at them. It’s a very civilised protest method and I support it wholeheartedly.

When I were a lass you could happily ‘be a girl’ with a pixie cut, a tea dress and biker boots - have you met DD?? Definitely would have been more suited to our era than her own.

Bibi we know you are busy and all, and don't want to enter a long debate(!) but can you answer this with a simple yes or no:
Can humans change sex?

have you met DD?? Definitely would have been more suited to our era than her own.

I miss my super short pixie cut. Ah for the bone structure (and sylphlike figure) of youth... I bet dd looks great 👍

She does! I look at her sometimes and blink, wondering where my stocky frizzy little 12-year-old went.

I do mistake my teenage son and daughter for each other rather a lot when wearing the wrong specs though. Definitely turning into my grandmother.

(Not that DS tends to wear tea dresses, but he has a swirly coat that he's very fond of, and as I say, wrong specs...)

@bibijayne
yoohoooooo, where are you...?

Got a Scooby Doo earworm now.... !!!!!

Posters keep saying that radfems are conflating gender and sex

Just about every thread now

When no one is actually doing that

Weird