"Cis allies" being asked to provide "protection"

[OlennasWimple]

Can we talk about something that seems to be happening a lot at the moment: "cis allies" (note the " " ) are being asked to, in essence, prove their ally credentials but also take the risk and do the hard work apparently in order to protect transwomen (in particular) and transmen from attacks by terfs.

Just in the last week or so, there has been the video of the protestors on the stairs at the Jam Jar venue, which Bristol Sisters has claimed are "cis allies". There was a call out for "cis allies" to escort trans people home at night because they were scared that the terfs were in town and thus trans people were at risk of violent attack. The Free the She Wolf campaign explicitly asked for "cis allies" to attend the protest outside court in order to provide a human shield to protect the trans protesters who were going to be there.

And it's not just in person that "cis allies" are expected to get involved. When I posted the NUS slide presentation on "How to deal with terfs", one of the authors tweeted something along the lines of "Urgh, can a cis ally sort this out", and lo and behold a few new posters popped onto the thread to object to it, and of course MsIntern tweeted that she would get some of her MNHQ pals to take it down. (The slides also contain the suggestion that delegates "put yourself in between trans people and the TERFS")

What is going on here? How is the narrative growing that trans people are a) at significant risk of physical harm from terfs whilst also b) being significantly weaker than "cis allies" so they need their protection? Why are so many people apparently so keen to do this - to prove their woke credentials? Because they are hanging onto the coat tails of an exciting new movement and want to remain part of the gang? Why are so many of them women, when surely if you were looking for bouncers and security guards to keep you safe, you would want big burly men? (Pesky biology meaning that they are stronger than terfs)

Is this a new phenomenon? Have straight women always been asked to sacrifice themselves to the cause for no reward? Or is this just the TRA equivalent of making the sandwiches and putting away the chairs at the end of the meeting?

According to that article: 'follow-up tests had revealed something astonishing about the mother.'

Astonishing is the keyword here. Intersex is not the norm. Almost all of us have the characteristics of one biological sex, unless there's been medical intervention. That includes transgender people.

while for you it's "just a matter of debate."

No, it isn't. It's a need to protect the rights of women and girls. It's deadly serious to me and many others here, don't you worry about that.

Human biology is not a human construct. It works the same in animals. The rest is word salad and a political manipulation of language.

You can not change your biology. You remove bits and take artificial things but the underlying bits that remain stay the same. You can't exactly have a skeleton transplant.

Our social roles are a construct which has changed over time.

Consensus over science does change over time on the basis of new evidence. What is being limited is the ability to have a free conversation to reach a true consensus and there are pressures not to explore research to prove evidence to support theories for or against the prevailing political ideology. Enlightenment does not happen in authoritarian political conditions.

chthulucense

"In other words, if you want to know whether someone is male or female, it may be best just to ask."

Why don't you ask Malala Yousafzai how she knows she is a woman?
Or the girls who were raped and abused in Rotherham and Telford - how do they know they are female?
Or the Chibok girls who were kidnapped - I mean if its all so ambiguous, how did Boko Haram know who to kidnap?
Or the numerous victims of FGM all over the world - how do the people who carry out that practice know whose genitals to multilate, how do they even know what to do if you can't tell what female biology looks like? How do you think those victims know they are female? What if they had 'identified' as boys, would that have saved them?
When John Worboys raped possibly 100 women, presumably he drove lots of men around and well. How on earth did he know who to rape and who to leave alone? Do you think he asked them how they identified before raping them?

It’s also obvious that a. TRAs have no true understanding of real intersex conditions or DSDs and b. They are trying to lump any minor sex anatomy abnormality into the intersex label so they can say ‘oh but SO MANY people’.

A hypospadia is NOT an intersex condition. An enlarged clitoris is NOT an intersex condition and if teens with these conditions are being told they’re intersex then that is gravely wrong, coercive and disturbing.

The way children are preyed on by this movement is breathtaking. I cannot imagine any other ideology being able to interfere with children and teenagers’physical, mental and (eventually down the line when they’re older) sexual health without so much as a peep from wider society.

This needs to be talked about in the wider press without any of the spin being put on it by TRAs.

Confusing the ideology, politics and opinions for being more important than consensus based on evidence which is the essence of facts is why society across the world is in the mess its in.

What's the singular of folks? Am I now a folk?

Also, trans women are women. Contemporary law, medicine and biology all recognise this

No they don't. Making things up isn't reasoned debate it's just lying. I'll believe it and biology will believe it when transwomen have wombs and periods.

To imply otherwise is either incredibly ignorant or incredibly bigoted. There's really no excuse to be either.

That's your opinion. I'm not ignorant. I understand biology, which you obviously don't. Buy a book.

I don't need an excuse to not want my lesbian sisters to be told refusing sex with a transwoman and his penis is transphobia. It isn't.

I don't need an excuse to insist that safe spaces for women are kept that way and that people with penises do not belong in them.

The irony of this poster calling other people ignorant!

Too bloody right red.

The rise of fake news and a climate where everyone’s opinion is seen as equally informed is dangerous.
No platforming stops kids being able to engage with and challenge dangerous ideologies.
Fake news created an atmosphere of paranoia
24 hour news creates a pressure to put anything out and stops careful analysis and fact checking.

The difference in analytical ability and critical thinking I’m seeing in younger people is really noticeable. They’re vulnerable to shit logic, and believe what they’re told, because they’ve never been exposed to twenty unpleasant arguments at uni/school and been given the tools to analyse what’s more likely to be true

The difference in analytical ability and critical thinking I’m seeing in younger people is really noticeable. They’re vulnerable to shit logic, and believe what they’re told, because they’ve never been exposed to twenty unpleasant arguments at uni/school and been given the tools to analyse what’s more likely to be true

Yes this is so true. I actually bet I could argue their own position better than most of them could, because I know where the weak spots are in my own arguments.

Also, trans women are women. Contemporary law, medicine and biology all recognise this...To imply otherwise is either incredibly ignorant or incredibly bigoted. There's really no excuse to be either.

The law is a verbal fudge. Medicine and biology (which I know a fair amount about, and it’s pretty clear you don’t) do not believe this. Biology doesn’t have opinions. It just IS. Biology says humans are sexually dimorphic and that you can’t change sex.
To say otherwise, if I’m going to paraphrase you, implies an odd mix of gullibility, misunderstanding and vulnerability to propaganda.

Do you actually believe humans can change sex? I keep asking people this and no one is willing to say yes. Because if you believe that then your critical thinking capacity is dangerously low and I have a bridge you may be interested in

angry

You Cant have a single folk

Does contemporary medicine still suggest screening trans women for prostate cancer, but not for uterine or ovarian cancer? If so it's acknowledging that they're not actually women.

Why can't you have a single folk? That's not very inclusive!

I dunno ereshkigal dictionary said

Ask the most recent poster whose name escapes me

I will put money on them not believing any dictionary definitions...ever

chthulucense

Thats the name

There is a propaganda technique which relies in over intellectualising a subject.

Use a bunch of words that are not in common usage to add to the effect. What it does is give the person doing it look like they have authority and superior knowledge. It has the effect of appearance: 'Oh they sound clever so much know what they are talking about'. Its a way of establishing superiority whilst spouting absolute nonsense.

It is hard for a large proportion of society to challenge and to debunk as bollocks because they can not access the language nor have the necessary background knowledge. This means they lack the ability to be able to sound like they command the same level of intellectual authority.

It closes down debate by restricting who can participate.

Good communication skills however are based on being able to translate complex ideas into a universal and easily understood language to make an idea accessable to all.

Failure to do this, can make the use of this particular propaganda technique backfire because it is fundamentally elitist. It is arguably most effective in circles where value is placed on sounding clever and informed.

It lacks power where the dynamic is of people who do have educational knowledge, ability and experience and can see straight through what someone is doing.

I see you.

If a person is attempting to portray themselves as a source of greater than average knowledge then understanding what an op-ed piece is and how it differs from a piece summarizing peer-reviewed research might help.

Confusing the ideology, politics and opinions for being more important than consensus based on evidence which is the essence of facts is why society across the world is in the mess its in.

Yes! And not helped by the collapse of print newspaper circulation, which has led to comment replacing journalism. Far too much power put in the hands of opinion formers instead of information imparters. Would Lil Owen Jones be capable of producing a piece of data-driven reporting? I think not.

It's also interesting that transactivists and their allies rarely link the peer reviewed studies themselves, but rely on other people's usually quite shallow interpretations of them. Which means one of two things - they underestimate the intelligence, experience and knowledge that gender critical posters have. Or they themselves don't really understand it enough.

Cross posted with Lang and Angry saying much the same thing!

Precisely.

The attack on feminists is part of the authoritarian take over dynamic: eliminate those who can challenge your language and your intellectual appearance first. It usually starts with demonisation then criminalisation.

See Throughout History.

Which means one of two things - they underestimate the intelligence, experience and knowledge that gender critical posters have. Or they themselves don't really understand it enough.

Or they know the primary literature doesn’t support their view ...

Or all three.

Spouting this stuff at working class communities in the north isn't going to sit well for Labour. The culture is to call a spade a spade and there isn't the same respect for intellectual bollocks in such circles, in part because its deliberately exclusionary. To say they are stupid is fundamentally wrong though. Nor will saying they are bigoted going to go down well.

We've been here before. Recently.

Clearly lots of people who should have, have not learned from this.

The problem is that there isn't really any primary literature that supports claims regarding gender identity.

(Of course there bloody isn't because genderists have gone out of their way to redefine gender / womanhood / etc as solely subjective, i.e. unobservable. You can't do science on phenomena that are unobservable. Science relies on replicable observations. We are in religion territory here)