Think I am beginning to get it...

[SlowlyWaking]

And largely due to reading here and the gender critical boards over on Reddit so thank you.

Just had a few things click into place for me and wanted to share and learn more.

Sex is biological and cannot be changed.

Gender is a spectrum constructed by society as feminine roles and identities all the way along to masculine ones. When somebody identifies as non-binary/gender neutral/pangender/genderqueer they are essentially saying 'I move along this spectrum day by day, moment by moment, Im neither always overtly masculine or feminine.' (Personally, I think I, and a lot of people do that, but I'm still a woman.)

Women are currently more fluid and flexible in sitting anywhere on this spectrum because of the earlier waves of feminism. Women are more comfortable with (and often embrace) the masculine elements of their identity whereas men are still stuck in what it means to be a man and wont be so open to their femine elements.

This has led to a rise in toxic masculinity/manosphere/ anti feminist culture because they are afraid to lose the privilege that has oppressed women for so long. This fear of 'losing' something stops men from feeling like they can move fluidly along the gender spectrum. It has led to feminine males transitioning to female because it makes the things they want to do/be more societally acceptable by presenting as a woman. Conversely, females transitioning to male are hoping to win some of the power - many have been victims of abuse at the hands of men and seek to protect themselves from the system by becoming part of it. As they are generally no threat to men or the male privilege, ftm trans people largely go unnoticed.

Feminism is the advocacy for women's rights based on equality of the sexes, so feminism is about protecting biological females. Whether or not they are masculine or feminine or anywhere on that spectrum doesnt matter but biological females face oppression in ways that are exclusive to being born female like FGM and rape. Therefore, transwomen are not female.

That doesnt deny that feminine males also face discrimination but it does deny that their struggle is based on their sex. Feminine males have their own struggles because they dont fit the box of what an 'ideal' masculine male is - a box that was constructed by the patriarchy (alongside one that says what an 'ideal' feminine female is) in the first place to keep women oppressed.

Self ID is a problem in that it removes the protection of biological females, thats why feminists are so against it. It cannot be allowed to happen. Females must be allowed to only compete aginst females, females must be allowed to change separately from males. Gender has no place in those arenas.

TRAs are often at odds with feminists because they dont understand that their fight should be about deconstructing gender roles which would benefit everybody. Transgender people should be feminist allies. MRAs who spout sarcastic statistics about their privilege dont seem to realise it is the patriarchy that is responsible for putting them on the front line, for putting them into hazardous employment, for making women the primary caregiver in the majority of cases and, predominantly, men that are raping other men. Men should be feminist allies. Even women need to wake up and realise this. The patriarchy has worked hard to desecrate the word feminism to the point where women won't even identify as feminists - thats crazy to me, women wont admit that they support the fight for, and desire, equal rights for women.

I'm still wading through what I think about post-op trans people in terms of their access to safe spaces and opportunities to compete in sport/hold job roles specifically relating to womens' rights. Im still unsure about pronouns. But its coming together in my head. Little by little.

I know I've missed a whole heap of apostrophes but meh. Lazy.

I find it fundamentally baffling that people believe that they ‘have been born into the wrong body’.
By whom? And how? Are they talking about souls? Is it a metaphysical thing?
WE ARE OUR BODIES. The rest is just
-stuff and things
-societal expectations linked to gender stereotypes
So surely if we stop gendering stuff and things AND dismantle the hierarchical value system that is gender then that’d be a good start.

But there do also seem to be differing behaviour patterns in the animal kingdom regarding mating for example. I do often wonder if some of this is more innate than we realise.

I know that male circumcision isn't as nasty as FGM but I don't see any reason to separate male and female genital mutilation. Both abhorrent albeit in slight different ways. Sorry, just had to point that out. Carry on.

Moody
I’m sure there is innate biological stuff hence the need for competing with the same sex only in sports for example.
Human biology is amazing and nuanced and complex and there is a clear difference between the sexes.

I just know I manage to navigate the world with ambition drive and an attraction to women without fighting anyone I come across or raping/ assaulting people. I won’t lie in my younger days one or two women said I came across as creepy until they got to know me so I took it on the chin and resolved to be better. I seem to be in the clear on that front since my teens. Basically the take home is men can improve!

I agree. However, I think some men may be at higher risk of developing aberrant personalities/behaviour. Just like how some breeds of dog seem to have more potential for violence if badly socialised, but nearly all will be ok when well adjusted.

It’s just occurred to me that women perform femininity, which probably sounds obvious to everyone else. I guess what I’m trying to get at is that there is NOTHING instrinsically female about femininity. When I get up in the morning I decide how much I am going to dial it up or down, eg if I am going to be in an important client-facing meeting, where being the public face of my company means conforming to more rigorous expectations/dress code, or working from home in my joggers & hoody. It’s all BS.

Let women and men present themselves however they, personally, wish to do so. Be it Tea-dresses, or formal trousers suit, or kilts, or jeans and a jumper or T-shirt. No problem.

But single sex spaces for women and girls must remain, because men in general cause a great deal more violence in society than women. E.g, 98% of sexual criminals are men.

Blimey moodydench that is a very depressing thought/world view.

I also don't agree that the animal kingdom is separate to ours really. We attribute all facets of animals to basically nature, but surely the fact that dogs can be socialised to be friendly and safe, proves that nurture and socialisation plays a large role in the animal kingdom too .

I find it fundamentally baffling that people believe that they ‘have been born into the wrong body’.
By whom? And how? Are they talking about souls? Is it a metaphysical thing?
WE ARE OUR BODIES.

I spent quite some time after a near death experience and months in the hospital in a strange state of what I think might have been a dissociative disorder. I felt like a changeling and kept looking in my eyes in the mirror without seeing that sparkle of humanity we see in almost every persons eyes. I recovered mentally as well as physically eventually.
I suspect that may be what dysphoria is like.

Have any dogs, or even cats, written books on philosophy? No? Then we'll park that one as a fantasy job, then.

Women are women. Men are men. Because of different biology.

We live in a patriarchy. I do not want men = in women's shortlists, women's changing rooms, women's toilets, or women's healthcare or women's social care positions - masquerading as women. Women must continue to have the right to say NO to men.

Archy and Mahitabel?

Damn, I forgot to say men in Women's sport, in my previous post. Men who fail to make the grade as men are then allowed to redefine themselves as women, and thus beat women in sport because of their physiology?! Pathetic!

If we think back throughout history has there ever been a time when men as a class did not cheat women as a class. I do not think so.

Even now only 0.5% of drivers are female and I can tell you from my years of experience that most women don't seem interested in this job - same with warehousing, construction, etc, and many of the other jobs I've gained good knowledge of through delivering to worksites.

I think women would be more interested if warehousing and constructon were less male dominated. On a societal level women get the impression that these sort of jobs are not for them... and I think they also have a reputation as not being partcularly female friendly. Fairly or unfairly the stereotype of a hyper masculine work culture which dismisses or even demeans women persists in some lines of work and construction is one of these imo.

Perhaps as a society we perhaps need to be encouraging more girls to consider these jobs... like STEM careers are being encouraged for girls in schools.

It is not right imo to simply state that females don't want to do 'dangerous' jobs and will leave this up to the much braver menfolk [incidentally, just how dangerous is HGV driving anyway?].

Ive just been thinking about skeletons, as in how archaeologists are able to identify the sex of a skeleton based on biological markers of sex like the shape of the pelvis, the femur, teeth and skull and numerous other signs.

Surely this is undeniable evidence to trans people that sex is biological and females remain females and males remain males once all else is stripped away? Even those pesky chromosomes and reproductive systems.

I know that is a very reductive argument, literally the bare bones (sorry) but is it a legitimate one? My skeletal knowledge is limited so unsure what the margin for error is on those kind of characteristics. Inspired by Munroe's facial surgery - Im thinking that even after all of that, archaeologists would still identify the skeleton as male no matter the gender identity presented during life.

Just more thoughts from a busy brain.

I solved this very same problem for archaeologists a while ago - engraved metal discs to be buried with persons stating preferred gender.

That still wouldnt stop archaeologists from identifying the skeleton as male or female.

They might say, we know that this male identified as a woman from the age of 30 until death and had surgery to achieve a more feminine aesthetic. But the concrete evidence is that the skeleton is male.

I can plant a rose that blossoms white and paint it red and put a little plaque there that says 'Red Rose' but that doesnt make it so. That doesnt make it wrong to paint the rose red or to enjoy the aesthetic of the red painted rose, but it doesnt stop it from being a white rose.

This might have little to no value to anything but just a train of thought im currently exploring.

There will be a threat added ‘and if you misgender my bones you will be hearing from my lawyers great great great great grandchildren’.

SlowlyWaking - the dominant background ideology within transactivism is postmodernism/social constructionism, so this line of thinking is irrelevant. If you see human society as fully socially constructed, material reality is not a concern. I dislike this ideology because it disregards existing structural power relations in favour of hyper-individualism.

I mean to say irrelevant to transactivists.

Working in a male dominated industry, i can say that moving to a career with even fewer women would not appeal, not because of the job but because of the isolation that you feel when unable to are excluded from the male groups.

Based on my experiences over many a year, Team of 10 with 1 woman is an isolating experiance. Team of 10 with 2 women changes the whole dynamics. The banter drops. Topics of conversation broaden. respect grows.

Langcleg

I see, so although it might reaffirm my knowledge of what sex and gender are as definitive separate things, TRAs would dismiss it because to them the two are entwined/one and the same and therefore a biological marker of what makes a woman has no more value than a socially/individually constructed one?

As in, 'Yes MB may have a skeleton with a narrow pelvis and square jaw but its a female narrow pelvis and square jaw. Munroe feels like a woman and has a feminine aesthetic so is one.'

Much along the same lines as the female penis idea.

It always comes back to the same thing doesnt it? Males trying to define what it is to be a woman without having lived the experience of being one.

therefore a biological marker of what makes a woman has no more value than a socially/individually constructed one

Precisely this. And you can see, I imagine, that there are implications beyond trans? If inner identity is the sole arbiter, then the possessors of inner identities who already have social power due to structural inequalities - male people, upper/middle class people, etc - will be the most important and influential inner identities. (Hello Shon, hello Laurie.)