Supporting men who break stereotypes.

[lurker33]

I've said this on another thread, but I'd like to explore it a bit further...

In my opinion the only thing that differentiates boys from girls are their primary and secondary sexual characteristics. Girls can do anything boys can do, and boys can do anything girls can do, barring those things that are required to procreate.

The only thing holding people back are societal expectations. We need to be challenging these, not reinforcing them with this gender identity nonsense.

A man wearing a dress and wearing makeup however should be applauded for being courageous and breaking stereotypes.

If a man dresses and acts 'like a woman' and calls himself 'a woman' then he is a parody of a woman (in the ironic sense) because the only way he can do this is to perform deeply flawed stereotypes.

Men in dresses and make up insisting on being recognised as women is therefore exactly the same as blackface and is deeply insulting to women.

Why is it ok to insult women with the lie that men are woman, but not ok to tell the truth and say men can never become women?

As a result I cannot support the GRC or self ID. These are red herrings and should be repealed and rejected.

The million dollar question: "is there going to be a flounce?"

daimbars

self ID has been proposed by trans organisations
self ID undermines the privacy, safety and dignity of women and girls for reasons that have been explained ad nauseum

some transgender campaigners are actively seeking to undermine the privacy, dignity and safety or women and girls

ReluctantCamper self ID is just a change in the administration process for getting a GRC.

It is the Equality Act that deals with sex segregation issues ie privacy, safety and dignity of women and girls. There is no threat to the Equality Act but people keep on making out there is.

I keep asking for a link as proof but nobody can share one.

Thank you Artemis7. Exactly what you said.

First time posting in feminism board and many posters know far more than I do. But I have been thinking and reading for a while now so here goes.

I think that Artemis had it spot on when they said that a person could not appropriate a different race because it is based on racist stereotypes. Why is changing one's sex or gender any different?Gender stereotypes are completely based on sexist stereotypes that I do not conform to at all. That does not make me trans. It makes me a female with a different personality to another female.

Why can't transwomen be men who are 'pushing the boundaries of manhood' rather than constantly making 'womanhood' accommodate them?

I am fully supportive of anyone living as they feel they want to (usual caveats apply) but I am a woman because of the biological physiology of my body, not because I feel womanly or feminine.

Don't know if that makes sense, other posters are far more articulate than I have been!

The million dollar question: "is there going to be a flounce?"

The all-the-dollars-ever-printed-in-the-history-of-the-world question: "will the flounce last less than ten minutes?"

Caaarrrl, hello!

I agree with you.

I seem to remember an article about a white American man who identifies as a female Filipino. You can Google it - it's definitely there.

I can't see how this is different from any other person deciding that they aren't actually a man, woman, black, white, whatever purely on how basis of 'I feel like...'. Really really really wanting something to be true just doesn't make it so.

Not that long ago this man would have been taken to the doctor or psychiatrist by his family. Nowadays he will set up a youtube channel, blog and have a fan club.

Hello back at you lurker !

Despite posting on mn under different user names for years, I have never ventured to post on the feminist boards until now.

I remember that guy. It was especially funny that he referred to the small vehicles used as a cross between a bus and a taxi that people hop on and off as tuk-tuks, which is not what they're called in the Philippines.

First time posting in feminism board and many posters know far more than I do. But I have been thinking and reading for a while now so here goes.

Welcome!

I suddenly announced that I identified as a black woman and started acting in a way that parodied all the racist stereotypes of black women, I would be called a racist. Why is it not the same for gender dysphoria?

Thanks Lang !

I've learnt a lot about feminism from many of you on here. Despite being middle aged, feminism hadn't really been on my radar before. I think it may the fact that I have older teenage daughters and I want a world where they can be, do, think, live and achieve whatever they want to as women.

I suddenly announced that I identified as a black woman and started acting in a way that parodied all the racist stereotypes of black women, I would be called a racist. Why is it not the same for gender dysphoria?

Because of a law passed in 2004 called the Gender Recognition Act that legally recognises a person as their acquired gender.

LOL! No attempt to justify why this is deemed to be a different scenario on an ethical level, just "teacher says so".

But Daim, a law could be passed that made it ok for me to be recognised as a black woman, but I still physically would not be one would I? I also would not have lived my life and grown up facing the same issues and possibly discrimation as a black woman.

I agree with you OP.

Laws can be changed.

So much about the GRA needs to be looked at properly.

The definition of woman would be good for a start.

No Caaarrrl of course not. Which is why we have exceptions in the Equality Act meaning it is lawful to treat trans women differently to natal women in certain circumstances. I have attached a screen shot.

Sorry screen shot fail

The Government has stated the Equality Act is not up for review

The government's head of LGBT Equality has reinterpreted the Act already by saying the bar will set high and determined on a case by case basis, which is contrary to the spirit of the Act where for example changing rooms are concerned. In addition the protected characteristic being rolled out is gender, not sex. This is confessed by transactivist Sarah Brown to be 'quite deliberate'. Changing the words or meaning of words in the law is the same as changing the law. In addition a body charged with defending the nine protected characteristics is specifically working under the premise that biological sex is not protected.

In addition to all that subversion of the law, transactivists including Stonewall have already said they will campaign directly for an outright change in the law.

There is nothing being submitted to parliament by a transgender organisation that threatens women

Self ID has a meaningful impact on women and girls that is grave enough to constitute a threat.

I asked this on another thread and got a load of abuse

No, you were told you were wrong and being deliberately disingenuous

For a link, please refer to the proposals themselves for transgender self ID.

How would the 'natal' (dislike that unnecessary term) black women feel if I started claiming that I was just as much a black woman as them or possibly even a 'better' black woman than them? That black men who were attracted to women of the same skin colour as them were being racist by not finding me attractive and considering a relationship with me? What if there was a scholarship for black women only to increase their presence in certain academic professional fields and I applied for and won that?

This is why I m so confused. People should be able to live as they want, and I undertstand that many trans people do not behave in these ways. However, I just don't understand how any of this type of thing would be acceptable if it was race that was being discussed.

daim what about the fact that despite the exceptions in the EA, they are not being applied properly or consistently. Service providers and politicians seem confused as to their meaning and in many cases, they are ignored. The right is given to the service provider to choose to apply exemptions. It needs to be strengthened, making it mandatory not optional in some circumstances to apply the exemption. The current state of the EA 2010 is not great. This was all explained on the other thread and you said you understood it. Now you're saying the same thing you originally said.

Well said. Rachel Dolezal did take up a post meant for a person of colour.

Yes Pratchet, this is the self ID petition and the Government's response. It's pretty plain to see in black & white

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/214118

We are clear that we have no intention of amending the Equality Act 2010, the legislation that allows for single sex spaces. Any GRA reform will not change the protected characteristics in the Equality Act nor the exceptions under the Equality Act that allow provision for single and separate sex spaces.

The suggestions that transgender organisations have 'power' to change is therefore incorrect. Again, it is plain to read in black & white:

The Government does not intend to change the safeguarding processes that are currently used in refuges and healthcare services. Providers of women-only services can continue to provide services in a different way, or even not provide services to trans individuals, provided it is objectively justified on a case-by-case basis. The same can be said about toilets, changing rooms or single sex activities. Providers may exclude trans people from facilities of the sex they identify with, provided it is a proportionate means of meeting a legitimate aim.

@Caaarrrl it's pretty dodgy to go town the race route as white supremacists argued there were biological differences between white and black people which justified apartheid.

Of course there are biological differences between women and trans women which is why in some circumstances they are treated the same (eg at work they are referred to as 'she') and other circumstances they are not (eg it is legal to prevent a trans woman from applying for a job as a rape crisis counsellor).