Call for gender critical people in Cambridge, UK

[maniacmagpie]

DISCLAIMER: am not a mum and am relatively young. Have lurked intermittently here and in other feminism spaces, largely interacting with other young people (student age). Due to my age, my main exposure to these issues is from the point of view of someone moving in young liberal spaces, and my call is phrased accordingly, rather than among adult women who have a more tangible experience of systematic sexism in society, medicine and life. PLEASE let me know if this not the appropriate place for this request, and I will step back.

This is a message that I have started to spread: I have not generally been a social person and so am finding it relatively difficult to get started on contacting people. If I can get in contact with other people who share my concerns in person that would be great: if not, I will do what I can.

"Hello.

I am a student at Cambridge University. I have been left-leaning my whole adult life. I have been supportive of trans rights for years. I have always believed, and continue to firmly believe, that discrimination on the basis of being trans is unacceptable; trans people should have access to the care that they need, and do not deserve to be treated as lesser people on the basis of who they are.

Despite this, I have become increasingly alarmed by the discourse surrounding trans activism. For many years I crushed my own thoughts about misogyny, my doubts about my own understanding of sexism, with the thoughts that I must not ‘get’ it as a ‘cis’ female. I believed - or rather, forced myself to believe, when I couldn’t truly believe - that trans people, and specifically trans women, completely understand what it means to be the gender they identify with.

I no longer believe this. Please, before you dismiss me as a bigot, hear me out.

I no longer believe womanhood is a mystical force that can be detached at will from the reality of the female body, I do not believe that femininity is the target of misogyny, because non-conforming women suffer still from misogyny. I do not believe that even trans men are able to escape all misogyny and their own socialisation by transitioning - they are still able to be, and indeed have been, targeted by sexual violence in a way that only male-bodied people can visit on female-bodied people - reproductive violence, that can result in pregnancy, and the associated policing of bodily autonomy that comes with that. I believe that trans women are the targets of misogyny when it is assumed they are female bodied, and homophobia and fear when they are assumed to be male. I do not believe that it is reasonable, or appropriate, to demand that natal women stop talking about reproductive violence due to this misdirected misogyny. I do not believe that this statement is transphobic.

I believe that transphobia - job discrimination, verbal abuse and violence - is unacceptable. However, I strongly disagree that certain actions that are labelled as transphobic among progressives, are transphobic at all. I believe, not only that homosexual men and women have every right to reject opposite-sexed people as sexual and romantic partners, but also that the demands circulated among many progressive forums are damaging to young people’s understanding of their sexuality. Specifically, the toxic combination of female socialisation, lack of resources for isolated girls, and pornsick fetishisation of lesbianism for the consumption of men makes lesbian youth vulnerable to manipulation and gaslighting from mainstream LGBT+ groups, illustrated by the horrific discourse about the ‘cotton ceiling’. Not wanting to sleep with someone is not violence. Inclusivity is not something that is expressed through access to your body. I do not believe that in normal conversation it is at all reasonable to demand that any person, trans or otherwise, talk about their genitals - but sexual relationships are another matter. Sexual relationships should only be engaged with by two willing and enthusiastic participants. Human sexuality is, and should be, exclusive and not a target for guilt-tripping.

I believe that specific difficulties are presented to trans people that they should have the resources to deal with and spaces to talk about. However, I also believe that specific difficulties are presented to female people on the basis of their bodies - and that discussion of these issues is not transphobia. Naming reproductive violence for what it is, campaigning for better understanding of female medical issues in the face of the huge male bias of modern medicine, and recognition of the economic and social penalties endured by female people specifically on the basis of being physically female and not due to an inner identity, is not transphobia.

Gender hurts. Gender is a system designed to trap and control female people from birth through childhood, adolescence, adulthood and old age, because of their reproductive capabilities. This system did not fall from the heavens; it was created by males, to benefit males. Women have always, and continue to, suffer under this system - our economic power restricted, our lives at the mercy of men, our bodies policed, our voices ignored - because we are female, because we are chattel, because of those who believe we are lesser. Gender is the reinforcement of sex stereotypes, that women have fought against and will continue to fight against, as long as it exists.

Many males suffer under this system - gender non-conforming males are at inordinate risk of violence, generally from other males - due to stepping out of line. Boys who show emotion are punished for it. Gender hurts - gender is not a fun hat to take on and off, gender kills boys and men for behaving the wrong way, and girls and women for both resisting and capitulating. Gender is not a fun toy to play with and to swap around. Gender is a system designed to break us down.

‘Pussy grabs back’ - women cry - because the President of the United States said ‘grab them by the pussy’. Not ‘grab them by the feminine essence’ or ‘grab them by the girl brain’ or ‘grab them by the emotional intelligence’. Grab them by the pussy. Grab this creature who exists for his consumption and pleasure, by the only thing that gives them value in his eyes. Focusing on this does not make women genital obsessed. Pointing out that this is the root of our oppression is not transmisogyny. Recognising that we are treated this way because of our bodies is not a statement that it is the most important aspect of our selves, but a declaration that we are more than our bodies - and that we must be able to name the problem in order to combat the problem. Saying ‘this pussy grabs back’ is not transphobia. Recognising the extreme sexism of powerful men is not transphobia.

I retain a deep sympathy for those who suffer with dysphoria and deal with it in the best way they can. My stance on trans identities is roughly that of a medicalist. I believe that trans people are fully deserving of respect, the same rights as every other person, and freedom from discrimination. I believe that what is being asked, by certain noisy factions of trans rights extremists, is not a call for respect but rather a call for excessive privileges at the expense largely of natal females, and a targeted bullying of lesbian females and homosexual males. I do not believe that it is transphobic to point this out.

I do not believe in brain sex, but even if I did I think it is irrelevant - if you carved open a woman to find a clearly, obviously male brain with MAN branded in big blue letters, she would still have suffered sexism based on her body. To those who believe this to be true, that they are ‘born in the wrong body’ and the only way to alleviate this is transition, I respect your autonomy and your right to live as you feel best, but must say this: sexism visited on a man in a woman’s body is no worse than sexism visited on a woman in a woman’s body. Sexism hurts ‘cis’ women as much as it hurts female-bodied people who identify otherwise. I do not believe this is a transphobic thing to say.

I want to raise awareness and spark discussion in Cambridge, both in and outside the University. I want to discuss these issues, in light of the gender self-ID consultation, the silencing of A Women’s Place UK, the violence perpetrated upon women who speak out, and the vitriol being circulated against gender critics. I invite natal women, natal men, trans women, trans men, straight, bisexual, gay, lesbian, questioning, otherwise - anyone who wants to discuss, debate or just acknowledge this topic - to contact me. My wish is to provide a space to debate and discuss these topics outside the false dichotomy of the ‘conservative right’ and the ‘progressive left’. I want to reach out to the women suffering from misogyny, men suffering from enforcement of toxic masculinity, and trans, lesbian and gay people who are being failed by conservative families on the right and by ‘queer identity’ theorists on the left who describe their reality as transphobic, who feel silenced and unable to speak out without being branded as either morally disgusting or as bigots.

Please spread this. PM me. I want to talk. I’m reaching out. I will use the tag ‘gender hurts uk’ (on tumblr, where my blog is 'yourledgerisdripping'), or privately message those of you who reach out to me.

Gender hurts."

[maniacmagpie]

Hi gals,

I'm away for two Saturdays (abroad). I'm torn between ruminating and recharging - I need a little time to rest my mind but also I'm not taking my eyes off the prize. The most important thing for me is to get my emotional footing back on track. It's been rough.

I had a mosey through this thread and others about the GRA reform on this forum, because it's interesting to see how much things have changed for me in a mere month - when I started I wasn't aware of the scale of the GRA consultation, how hard people were being punished for speaking out, how widespread the inability to speak out was. I thought it was just a few people like me who had painted themselves into a corner with the super-woke bubble. Most people I know wouldn't reach instinctively for the 'preferred pronoun' without hesitation, most would say that obviously no male should be in female sports no matter how they identified. I only wanted to reach out to the few who'd trapped themselves in an echo chamber as I did, to say it was ok to question - to realise that yes, there is a conflict of rights and difficulties.

I had thought it was my fault for retreating into a bubble. I had done so because everyone around me felt my obsession with feminism was to my detriment (and also just annoying) - so I stopped reading the news completely. I deliberately didn't watch sports coverage that I thought could upset me - I refused to watch the coverage of the Commonwealth Games women's heavyweights because I thought they'd cover Laurel Hubbard, I've avoided women's and non-binary groups (to be honest, have done so for years even prior to them becoming 'women's + nonbinary' because I didn't want to 'define myself by victimhood'), I stopped going on social media, I stopped talking about anything to do with feminism or trans rights.

It didn't fix me.

The years I spent pretending that being female doesn't affect the way people treat me, frankly, broke my head. The additional years I spent trying to wrap my head around 'cis' privilege and rewire my understanding of feminism stomped the pieces into fine sand. I'm an emotional wreck when it comes to this stuff. But I thought it was on me. I figured it was my fault. Nobody told me to respond so emotionally to this stuff, nobody told me to be affected. At the same time, nobody forced me to stick my head in the sand. They might have suggested it would be better for my emotional well-being, but nobody forced me to get myself stuck.

I finally unstuck myself and thought, well. That was very silly. I wonder if anyone else is in the same boat? Maybe it would be good to reach out to them. Maybe there's one or two people I can help, the way one or two people in anonymouse online forums helped me.

The last month or so - reading the consultation, reading Stonewall, seeing what's explicitly stated by our student union, the lack of news coverage, the realisation that people are losing jobs for questioning, seeing how WPUK and FPFW are spoken of as hate groups - terrified me. I'd literally say that for the first time in my life, upon reading the GRA proposed reforms document - in it's raw form, not paraphrased - my blood ran cold. I was horrified at what had been hidden from us.

That wasn't the worse bit though. The worst bit for me? Is how so few people seem to care.

Someone further up said

"I think sometimes you can afford to speak directly and frankly without cushioning the terrible blow of stating that women have rights too"

and horribly, upsettingly, I feel like I have to disagree. Very few people I've spoken to give a crap about women's rights for women's sakes. I'm used to this from the 'normal' side of talking about bog-standard misogyny. Very few people believe the way I'm treated by men, very few people believe that a man talking over me in a certain way might be because I'm a woman - they treat every little thing that happens to me as one-offs, even when I talk about how persistent it is. Moreover, people close to me get annoyed because I'm oversaturating them - in my bid to show them how persistent it is by telling them just how much it happens, they just glaze over and switch off. They just want it to go away.

This stuff is more of the same. Why would they give a crap about what we are losing when they don't care for it anyway? I've been absolutely devastated when expecting emotional support over some of these issues. People close to me, who claim to care for me, will talk about how it's more important even if it hurts a few women to support the few males it will help - for them to have a place to belong - ignoring my real anger at being told to look up to someone like Pips Bunce as a role model, or the Wachowski's being held up as proof that women can make it in Hollywood. The reality is that the sheer pain of being female - that these people knew I suffered with for years and still do - is just an irrational response, and annoying. They didn't care about it - they didn't want to hear about it any more. It's just not real compared to the possibility that a male might have his feelings hurt by closing comment of FPFW's rebirth video about how self-ID would make it easier for an abusive male to enter female sanctuaries. They cared more about how that might make transwoman feel like they're being equated with men. Even men who like to differentiate themselves from 'straight white men' and who notice the little things, the way women are put down in certain ways by subtle use of language, the little things we do to protect ourselves - will revert back to 'not all men', call me disrespectful, dismiss my plain observations of the things that have been said to me (and then claim not to have done this) and put the blame on me for responding in anger when I point this out.

That's the reason I feel unable to talk about women's rights for the sake of women as an opener most of the time. Most men - and it must be said, a large proportion of women - just don't give a shit.

We keep fighting. I know it's probably frustrating to a lot of people on this forum that I'm one of those people essentially taking a 'handmaiden' approach - including the erasure of homosexuality, not countering their emotional appeals with emotional appeals about women and girls having feelings too, talking about how the suppression of male feelings with 'boys don't cry' hurts boys and men. I do it because (a) as a matter of fact I do care and am not concern trolling - I'm not tacking it in to make it look 'woke' the way we feel that trans-ideologists are with period poverty - and (b) most gay men don't care about women, and most straight men don't care about women, and I've expended a lot of effort already trying to convince them to do so, and right now I'll do pretty much anything - including accepting the hurt to myself that comes with pretending that none of my feelings matter - if it will help people wake up and start helping to piss on this dumpster fire.

Having said that, it heartens me hugely that I have met a few (way too few) people IRL where I can freely express our fears for female rights without needing to wrap it up in prettiness and smiles. I wish I didn't have to wrap it up like that ever again. I wish no woman or girl had to. I wish it wasn't so few, and I wish I didn't have to be so stupidly massively grateful whenever it happens, especially from a male. I'm trying not to grovel when it happens - an old, and bad, habit, it's basic decency being given but it's like a drop of water in the desert. It's so much a part of what hurts us so much. Spaces to not pretend that women's feelings aren't important are part of what we are losing - the few we ever had. I barely even have that space in my own head, and I fought damn hard for even that little bubble. I hope I'm helping one or two people by kicking for a little niche where that space can be created and maintained. I agree so deeply that us needing the space should be enough - and yet it seems we continue to need to wheedle and beg for the scraps we have. I do wonder, often, if we should all just go for the massive civil disobedience route as has been suggested by a few other posters, just close ranks completely on the issue - but I think that the whole debacle has shown to me just how much females will put themselves through to appease males, and just how little our voices mean. I'm so tired of being told to 'go through the proper channels'. I'm tired of seeing not only that we're not listened to when we do, but that we're not listened to when we point out that we're not listened to.

Two Saturdays off and then I'll be back on King's Parade on Nov 10th. It's interesting that I'm starting to get people saying 'yeah I saw you before but didn't say anything'. Low-impact gentle presence is what I'm going for and what I seem to be achieving at least with a few people. It's also good that some people on 'the other side' knew of me from the CUSU LGBT+ facebook post and have the wherewithal to come see what it's really about, and so find out that I'm really not the kind of person who wants to take a pickaxe to them, even if we disagree (often strenuously).

Luck to you all in the UK post consultation, and stay strong - Magpie

[stillathing]

Thanks for your writing Magpie. Enjoy your break.

[ThePrincipal]

I wish I could share or take away at least some of your pain. You stay strong too.

[Manderleyagain]

Thanks for writing this. Have a lovely break. I'll keep an eye out for this thread again in November. Gentle presence is a good approach. I know I wouldn't have the gumption.

One thing I wondered , when people couldn't believe that anyone would say that biological difference is hate speech and you replied yes they do and they are telling it to my face, were there actual gender ideologists there counter protesting you at that very moment? How did the member of the public respond to that? This is the issue we have. Not only do people not know, once they do know it seems so unbelievable they don't actually believe it. Meanwhile policies have been changed and the law of the land might even change to reflect these points of view which most people not only disagree with but don't even believe anyone could hold.

I really support you but please make sure you are always safe. Have a great holiday.

[Manderleyagain]

"spaces to not pretend that women's feelings aren't important are part of what we are losing"

Yep.

[maniacmagpie]

Manderleyagain One thing I wondered , when people couldn't believe that anyone would say that biological difference is hate speech and you replied yes they do and they are telling it to my face, were there actual gender ideologists there counter protesting you at that very moment?

Sometimes I wish they would more often. It would make my life easier in many ways. I do however have an email sitting in my inbox that really is full bingo (sex is a colonialist construct, TERF rhetoric is 'hate-filled, discriminatory, and entirely unfounded in material reality', Janice Raymond has caused 50,000 trans deaths, comparing my disagreeing to disagreeing with 'the right of disabled people to live' etc). Half my response ended up being (paraphrasing) 'if it's obviously the way you say it is and obviously materially not the way I think it is, you should have arse-all problem convincing people that I'm totally in the wrong and I welcome it'. Frankly I'm begging - double down on it. Be plain. I'm a lost cause. I clearly don't care about the harm I'm doing, you might as well lock me up and bin the key, but at least tell the clueless onlookers why. Tell them why 'people with vaginas' is a better term than 'female'. Tell them how I'm harming trans people with my words. Please for the love of the goddess do it.

CUSU LGBT+ has been warning about 'transphobic stickers' and of course someone commented about being careful for razor blades being hidden under them. I honestly have lost track of whether I think these people really believe what they're saying or are merely saying whatever they think will scare the others (I suppose they must believe that at least some people believe it's plausible, even if they themselves do not believe it). I wish they'd make the content known when they brand things as transphobic. Tell us what it is you're watching out for. You can avoid hurting people with judicious use of trigger and content notices, right? Godsdammit, that's why I'm doing what I'm doing, that's why people resort to stickers. You can't 'block and stay safe' a TERF with a sign (well...you can try) or not see a sticker, the way you can block every woman you disagree with on twitter.

I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir yet again.

stillathing thanks for your (and everyone else's) putting up with my mad ramblings!

ThePrincipal please rest assured that my knowing that you feel that way achieves the sharing and taking away of the hurt that you wish for.

to all for putting up with me. Sometimes I do worry I'm being self-aggrandising, but I do think that sharing/discussing has helped me to formalise my approach to people covering a fuller spectrum of beliefs than I was originally prepared for. I also like to think that getting a slice of 'real life' is good when so many of our battles are currently conducted on social media (hypocrisy alert!) although that has certainly felt less true in recent months with the consultation...although people talk about unplugging, it's definitely folly to pretend that opinions online are detached from life...

Magpie

[maniacmagpie]

Do people here know of student activism along GC lines across other UK universities? It would be good to connect with them I think, in the way that I see that academics are connecting to speak out. Isolation is such a problem.

[BelfastBloke]

'Isolation is such a problem'. You asked for other GC people in Cambridge to get together to discuss these things. Are any there with you on your Saturdays? Are you usually on your own?

[Manderleyagain]

I have seen a couple of things about student activism elsewhere but I now can't find them.

One was here on this board - someone posted a screen shot from twitter and some more information, a student just arrived in the UK gave a talk,. It was more about free speech at Universities, but this issue lay behind it.

The other was an advert for a new feminist society at a university, specifically 'for females' !!!!! The first session was 'growing up a girl'. I probably saw it on a GC twitter feed, like Kathleen Stock or someone.

It would be worth contacting some of the 'out' academics to see if they know people. You won't be wasting their time. It is in their interests for GC students to get brave like you.

It might be worth creating a new thread on here asking that question. People won't necessarily read this thread.

[Manderleyagain]

Found one of them.
Raquel Rosario Sanchez gave a talk to Bristol Free Speech Society
8rosariosanchez.wordpress.com/2018/10/22/discurso-derecho-de-las-mujeres-a-la-libertad-de-expresion/

[Manderleyagain]

But she's an academic speaking to students I think.

[maniacmagpie]

Thanks for the heads up about the academic Manderleyagain.

Update: I have not been particularly chilled out these last few days because I have been fighting people de-sexing a set of toilets in college. There was a statement of support but no statement against (there were a few comments on the arguments made against, but since they were made in order to be dismissed, I don't think they were fully argued).

I sent a response, on the basis that since the proposing view had been aired and the opposing had not, both sides weren't being heard. Primarily I focused on sex protections. I didn't intend to wedge in the wider debate. It didn't seem the right place to do it.

Somebody responded speaking on the wider debate. Among other things, I was accused of intellectual dishonesty by focusing on sex. This was described as a 'sleight of hand' presumably to deny transwomen their womanhood. AWPUK was described as "mostly concerned with trying to galvanize a movement against changes to the Gender Recognition Act" which is reasonable, but the GRA was described merely as "ensuring more gender neutral toilets across the country"...which makes some interesting omissions.

I honestly didn't originally want to get into the entire debate over this in response to toilets, but did in the end respond to the points made about the GRA and womanhood. I pointed out that the GRA consultation had a lot more to say than 'more gender neutral toilets'. I pointed out that there is a conflict between sex-based rights and gender-identity based rights that should be considered and that this does not necessarily mean I wish trans people harm.

Since then I've had an admonishing email (not from the person originally arguing with me) telling me about concerns with regards to both my views and the way I had chosen to express them, including 'using the [vote] to open a wider debate'. I apologised for the manner (I think in retrospect I should have sent the rebuttal as an attachment in the manner of the supporting statement) and the frequency of the mass emails, but held fast to the fact that I (a) was not responsible for the wedging in of the wider debate, having intended originally not to escalate to that level, and (b) that there is a possibility, when you want to do 'whatever we can' to improve a certain group's lives, that you may make another group's lives harder in some way.

I don't know what I expect from this person. Maybe it will go horribly. I'm pretty sure he has probably decided I am a lost cause, but I'll keep trying. I had emailed him personally to begin with (he has a position in the student body so I appealed to him on the basis of his position) but he stopped talking to me, I wondered whether it was absent-mindedness or a rejection based possibly assuming that I'm not worth giving the time of day to. Until I know exactly why I'll try to keep my mind open on that.

I am trying to come to an understanding with these people that gets us somewhere but it's so bleeding exhausting to be assumed a bigot with unconsidered views all the time. I've talked and talked to trans people. I learned my feminism from some of them! I'm trying not to impose my assumptions on the activists arguing with me as I am sure all the ones I've met are genuinely trying to do good and see me as driven by irrational fear, but I do wish they would extend the same courtesy to me once in a while. I wish they'd see the potential for harm in their own words and actions as well as being abundantly happy to see the harm in mine.

Interestingly though the original person who responded with the accusations of intellectual dishonesty and assertions that 'trans women are women' has since also emailed me saying that he feels it is good that we are having the debate as it addresses such far-reaching issues, even though we massively disagree. Maybe we can get somewhere. I'm cautiously optimistic that some of these people at least recognise the need for a proper discussion to produce a result that is long-lasting and has been robustly considered.

I'm always offering to buy these people coffee to have a sit-down with me, so they can meet me and see that I'm probably not an axe-wielding murder-maniac. It's not going terribly well. It does reinforce my commitment to sitting about with a sign and a bright hat though. The constant no-platforming and pushing to 'use proper channels' and 'just be respectful' and policing of language and pleas for compromise that never results in actual compromise, but just capitulation, is just so...impossibly tiring to deal with.

I'll be back on King's Parade on 10th November (this Saturday).

Magpie

[Manderleyagain]

Well done for trying to make a difference.
the GRA was described merely as "ensuring more gender neutral toilets across the country"...which makes some interesting omissions.

That view is sooooo completely wrong. GRA is only about how we decide who is eligible to be considered legally a member of the opposite sex. But on a positive note, it shows that even opinionated people on the pro self id side can't have filled in the consultation otherwise they wouldn't have that misunderstanding (I hope!). They are so vocal and certain, but here we are writing to our MPs and submitting to consultations.

...has since also emailed me saying that he feels it is good that we are having the debate as it addresses such far-reaching issues, even though we massively disagree. That's positive. Hang on to that thought.

The question for whoever owns the loos (ie the college itself rather than a student body?) is what assessments have they done on how a new policy will impact on all groups of users - especially on the 9 protected characteristics which include sex. It's mad that we are in a situation where we have to start by arguing for basic principles Iike everyone's rights should be considered and that there might be a conflict of rights that have to be balanced.

TWAW is the sleight of hand - it rewrites reality so that no conflicting rights exist. To acknowledge them becomes unsayable.

You are doing a grand job. Remember it's not your job to do everything. Good luck at the weekend. Stay safe.

[maniacmagpie]

Thanks Manderleyagain. You always cheer me up :)

The question for whoever owns the loos (ie the college itself rather than a student body?) is what assessments have they done on how a new policy will impact on all groups of users

College confirmed to me that they own the loos, and are asking the college community. What happened was that the undergraduate student body voted to make the loos in their 'area' neutral, they petitioned college, the vote was then put out by the college to the rest of us. I found it alarming that there was no actual rebuttal, and so sought to address it. As I said I don't think I necessarily went about it in the best way, but ah well.

The more I think about it the angrier I am with the guy who was telling me off for expressing my views over the student body mailing list and his concern for my views, because I have been trying to get him to talk to me and he stopped responding, including not meeting me at a college function that I had arranged to find him at. The apparent unwillingness to have any sort of discussion that doesn't result in my toeing the line is driving me bananas. Every time I say 'this is my experience and my problem' the response is 'talk to us' or 'nobody's saying that' or 'you just haven't got to know us/trans people'. You're telling me who you are with your actions and opinions, not who you say you are. They give such enormous primacy to their opinions of themselves and are so hypocritical - I'm here! talking to you! you're just mad I didn't come to the conclusion you want!

By basically every metric they want to use I'm trans! I'm GNC and I scare people out of toilets! I don't 'identify' as a woman! I don't want my secondary sex characteristics! I wish all the time that I was a man! I'm trying to unlearn this and figure out what is sexism and whether any of it isn't (dysphoria or whatnot) - I won't pretend I don't still feel this way. But because I hold the wrong opinion, they won't give me the time of day. I've seen this reflected in how they treat medicalists, detransitioners, and desisters. If you think you might be trans, you're trans! until you change your mind or conclude it's not for you - you were never trans at all. Obviously.

Preaching to the choir again.

Remember it's not your job to do everything

You're right, and I don't think I'd feel it was, if people who's job it supposedly is would have a proper discussion. Everything I see is 'self-defining woman and non-binary' and the CUSU Women's line is mainstream libfem, they describe 'TERFs' as 'advocating violence against [trans women]', talk about how 'SWERFs view sex workers as ‘traitors’ to the feminist movement', and so on. I should stress that the inconsistencies on the page - several references to sex-based discrimination, just not super explicit - make me think that the 'TERF' and 'SWERF' entries are one or two people strongly pushing the modern trans narrative and other go along in confusion/trying to be helpful.

www.womens.cusu.cam.ac.uk/feminist-faq/

At 26 I look back on my formative years and early 20s and it continues to sadden me how much damage I have done to myself mentally through liberal feminism. I feel so emotionally stunted, and I never even fully lived the philosophy. I wish someone had compassionately given me some space to explore the problems with sex positivity without swinging back to conservative notions of modesty and the value of virginity, or the notion of becoming a man and noping out of all that bullshit, because it felt like those were my three choices - conservative right woman, sex positive left woman, man. There is currently zero way of criticising any of the woman options without someone stuffing it down your through that you are a bad feminist for being judgemental. That's why I feel I have to try. Having your eyes open is far from easy and comforting. I understand the allure of the idea of being 'validated'. But it's just a happy fiction and I know both that I'd never be able to convince myself and that it's not kindness to tell someone they can become happy so long as other people tell them what they want to hear.

I just want other girls to know there are options other than these. I'm not taking it all on myself, I've linked up with others who are fighting. Letting people know they're not alone like I was is worth it for me. Helping to link people up to make a stronger network is the longer term goal, and that's happening too.

[AnchorMum]

Remember that they will do everything they can to make you feel that your truths are lies and that it is you that's spouting non-sense and are the mad, bigoted one.

Honestly, you can't win by trying to be reasonable - not with this lot.

Keep seeing it for what it is, and keep holding on to your truth and sanity. You are doing an amazing job

[maniacmagpie]

I've just hit a new level of paranoia. I hadn't thought it possible.

www.hr.admin.cam.ac.uk/filesdignity_at_work_policy_16.10.17.pdf

I was browsing Cambridge's 'Dignity @ Work' policy - motivated by somebody mentioning on another thread (don't remember which) about how so much of the changes seem to be from a top-down, writing of policies about respect, approach. It struck a chord with my impression of the feelings many of my work colleagues had about admin in our department with regards to diversity training and stuff. It felt very forced from the top and not like they were having proper discussions (as a student I don't do this stuff, I just heard about it).

There's a little section about 'examples of behaviour which may amount to harassment'.

Sexism isn't there at all - but 'refusal to acknowledge a person’s gender or identity' is.

I feel like a paranoid dickhead for looking at this and wondering. To be absolutely fair, it is explicitly said that the harassment is 'not limited to' the listed examples. But the list having such explicit and detailed coverage of so many things including sexuality, race, ethnicity, religion, disability, dress and mannerisms - they list 'homophobic, transphobic, or biphobic' separately for pete's sakes - and there's zero mention of misogyny.

I want to stress I have no problem with addressing all those things individually but I do take issue with the fact that misogyny isn't mentioned at all. They cover all the protected characteristics in the Equalities Act except for sex, maternity/pregnancy, and marriage/civil partnership - I don't know what to make of this last omission - is it reading too much to say that cross-sex marriage/civil partnership usually hurts the female's prospects in work more than the male's, but that same-sex marriage/civil partnership remains covered somewhat by sexuality?

There is no acknowledgement of sexism - but they take a step above and beyond gender reassignment and go straight to identity.

I want to cry.

[Manderleyagain]

I don't think it's paranoia. I can see how not 'acknowledging gender identity' could be used as a horrible way to harass someone. Sexual harassment would be covered by the sexual misconduct bit - they are just giving it a different name. Sexism would be covered but isn't mentioned explicitly like you say. It's almost as if we live in a completely egalitarian society where sex equality is so entrenched and secure that sexism doesn't need any special mention any more. …

[AnonymousIsAWoman]

I always ignored this thread - I’m not in Cambridge, so I assumed it didn’t apply to me. But I am so glad I clicked today. Magpie your posts are a joy to read (for your eloquence and ideas, obviously, not your pain - I so hope you manage some self care when you’re not trying to undo the brainwashing). I wish I was local so I could come sit with you and buy you a bloody big drink. But since I can’t I’ll send you a virtual hug and let you know I think you are wonderful. I feel so inspired by your bravery.

[maniacmagpie]

I can see how not 'acknowledging gender identity' could be used as a horrible way to harass someone.

I do think you're right there actually. Where I disagree is

Sexism would be covered but isn't mentioned explicitly like you say.

The majority of sexism that I see isn't sexual harassment like comments on appearance, unwanted touching, sexual comments etc. but rather the belittling of women's abilities, ignoring their qualifications, etc. I've encountered a lot of men talking relentlessly about how much easier my life is whenever some event or other supporting women comes up, or on International Women's Day. I get asked on the phone if I'm the secretary, have people making snide comments if I get irritated about something or other to do with sexism in the news, and so on. Interestingly enough, I'm the one defending men and saying 'hey not cool' when they make jokes about domestic violence against men (saying this woman beats her boyfriend because he had an accident that resulted in a black eye) but will happily pull the 'men don't have any support at all' comment whenever something to do with DV shelters for women comes up...

I digress.

I think there's a BIG gap left by not talking about sexism that isn't sexual harassment. The short term contracts of early-career postdocs clashes hugely with pregnancy/maternity or the possibility of pregnancy/maternity. Men talk over me all the time, no matter how I identify. I've heard this reported in other departments as well (observed by my male friends in how male academics in their departments nitpick and criticise female colleagues or visitors compared to other males).

I've never escalated anything. It's rarely actually personally directed but rather background noise, and I think going over my colleagues heads is wrong. I argue with them face to face about our ideological disagreements on misogyny. I support many aspects of men's activism - real activism, like raising awareness of poor mental health and lack of coverage of prostate cancer compared to breast cancer. I see it as two sides of the same coin - breast cancer gets the attention because it's sexy, which is misogynist, and I see the unsexiness as the reason prostate cancer doesn't get enough attention, which harms men.

Nothing has been severe enough to make me go top-down and for what I've encountered I believe it would actually be counter-productive. I am often tired of feeling like I have to persuade males of my worth, but think that getting HR to come and shout it at them would probably make things worse (I'm not saying the mechanism should not be there for persistent harassment - just that it isn't appropriate for what I've encountered). But seeing all the things that are explicitly covered in the top-down approach and seeing the glaring omission of harassment based on being female saddens and worries me.

[maniacmagpie]

AnonymousIsAWoman thanks, that means a lot to me. Support from mumsnetters is definitely playing a part in keeping me sane.

[Weezol]

You write so well and do indeed have ovaries of steel. I'm in awe of your activism.

I'm a long way from Cambridge but I'll be with you in spirit on Saturday.

[Manderleyagain]

Yes I agree with you about sexism.
I also wanted to mention: "I've linked up with others who are fighting. Letting people know they're not alone like I was is worth it for me. Helping to link people up to make a stronger network is the longer term goal, and that's happening too." That's such good news. Any updates on this would be gratefully received, but I realise people may want to stay under the radar etc. It's good to know stuff is going on. Good luck at the weekend.

[maniacmagpie]

Manderleyagain looking back I realise it comes across as me just lecturing you about the meaning of sexism - sorry about that, I was venting on my experiences in frustration, but in retrospect that is what it looks like.

There's a radical feminist student group that's just been created; some of the students who responded to my OP were planning to engage in activism before I posted, but I was able to boost their numbers with some of the others who engaged on this thread and with people who came to talk to me IRL when I've been on the wall. They expect there to be pretty horrible backlash and are putting solid effort into planning how to welcome new members; we are prepared to be called all sorts of names and to have people come in bad faith.

I'm in contact with people who have been campaigning and leafletting for FPFW, and have added a few to their ranks - some by making contact on this thread, meeting them on the wall IRL and so being able to gauge sincerity, and others by them seeing me for the first time on the wall.


I mentioned I wound up fighting about toilets whilst on holiday. Had a nice long chat with a friend in college about that and my other adventures. She is calling the whole thing 'toilet-gate' which I find hilarious. She showed me a lovely load of facebook comments about what an awful person I am. Lots of virtue signalling, people standing up and calling me a terrible person and saying it's because they 'feel a shred of empathy [for] people having their validity questioned'.

A friend standing up for me and saying that the arguments are in good faith whether disagreeing with parts/all of what I said. Some people talking about free speech. Others saying it's all transphobic which is not protected as free speech. Misogyny the curious and frequent omission when it come to what is classified as hate speech, of course...and an equally curious lack of empathy for female concerns being chucked in the bin. Colour me surprised.

People saying things like 'using radical feminism to make every trans/non-binary person [feel unsafe]...is indeed not illegal but it doesn't make it acceptable' (emphasis mine, bracketed part assumed - it was missed out) and describing my arguments as 'pseudo-feminist arguments' is very revealing - they really do seem to feel that the only way someone might want to express these views is in order to attack trans people. They really, really think that female concerns for female issues are just fake, don't they?

I'm not hurt by the attempted character assassination (no, really I'm not) because it's (a) not true and (b) I don't need my character validated because I'm not a parking ticket. Maybe I should tell them I don't identify as a 'TERF'.

It's providing a valuable insight into the way they really don't consider that anyone except people absolutely toeing the line to be 'good' and everyone else is 'bad'. I'm convinced few of them have robust reasons for supporting the things they do. There were compelling and well thought-out arguments given for making the toilets mixed, the benefits of working towards a less sex-segregated society, and accommodation of GNC student - beyond the 'validation' argument, with which I disagree. But mostly the people expressing their disgust towards me seem just absolutely convinced of their own goodness and don't want to do the wifework of emotional labour (almost all of the people in the facebook argument were men) and I bet they don't spend anywhere near the amount of time wondering if they're wrong that I do.

My hope for toilet-gate is again that poking my head over the parapet wakes people up to what's really going on.


On to the physical encounters today. I got rained off today by about 1620 - I forgot my umbrella and ended up getting too cold even after a friend bought me a horribly pink umbrella to go with my horribly pink hat. A few solidarity nods, people doing the flyby 'I agree with you' with that look that I remain convinced means they're often coming from a point of having been exposed to this toxic shit. One woman gave me the finger. One woman spent a good amount of time telling me that I'm a terrible person and I should really take a good look at myself if I feel the need to hurt trans people this way. It struck me again, that most of the people spending large amounts of time on me in public to tell me I'm wrong have been women. The amount of female emotional labour going into this debate is just enormous. Nothing much new was said here, to be honest.

I had a long, long chat with a lady who said she has a transsexual child (FTM transman) and she talked about the hurt to both of them over the life changes they're going through. We agreed over pretty much everything, despite the fact that she said if her child were there he'd probably have a bit of a yell at me; she is just a mother who wants to protect her child, who has ideological disagreements with said child, sees the pain and difficulty it causes, and is still willing to come to me and build bridges. She, like me, sees the dynamic so often played out between transwomen and transmen as being that age-old story of males shouting down females. I think we've had a few threads talking about 'where are all the transmen in this?' and the general conclusion has been that there are a few high up doing plenty of damage (like Stephen Whittle), and also a lot who are getting lost as background noise except when necessary to prop up the arguments of transwomen (I wonder where we've seen this dynamic before?) and otherwise generally being ignored.

She like me rejected the idea that self-ID would actually help dysphoric transsexuals to a greater extent than it would harm them in the end, through erasure of the goodwill built up. We connected over the idea that I am part of the same spectrum as a transman - my desire to not be trapped by being female, having done the same soul-searching over identity as her child, the distress I feel over my body - even though I 'chose' a different path, feeling that accepting myself as 'Magpie' and nothing more is enough without pursuing medical transition. We both recognised that transmen need to be supported as females at times - even when they don't necessarily want it or to be reminded they might need it - we will fight for them anyway.

I thought that was a great conversation; she having fought in male spaces at work to be treated as an equal, knows how hard it is to find a space to be yourself as a female, and sees the same dynamic for her FTM child, even if expressed in a different way. She's walked the walk on feminism, working on charitable causes for women without choices, and still gets written off as a clueless 'cis' woman by her child (to be honest isn't this what all children ever do to their parents? I certainly didn't appreciate mine enough). The struggles and distress of her child are real and we all know that no matter what certain activists want to say about the people on this forum, we wouldn't deny that this can be true, even if we disagree about the best way to deal with it.

Reaching out to each other emotionally felt very powerful and I really appreciated the intensity of her respect and honesty of her support for me, her recognition that I was a person who although on the face of it is 'anti-trans' would fight for her son to live well, and the time she took to connect with me.

I think this is the first person (IRL - I'm aware of plenty online) with a deep personal investment in someone close who is trans, to agree with nearly everything I said and voice the same disagreements how over the activist movement treats dysphoric transsexuals. It is nice, sometimes, to not immediately be assumed to be attacking trans people for the sake of it, by someone with this investment.

I've mentioned my own personal investment many times here, which I generally don't want to use as a stick to beat people I'm arguing with (I use it to reach out when I feel it would create common ground but am reluctant to employ it as a 'gotcha') and am endlessly frustrated by people who assume I've never spared a thought because I must be 'cis'. I had a good laugh over this with a friend, because we both know that if I were to declare myself trans to my detractors (by all their standards, I think I could fairly claim to be) I would be written off as 'not valid' and identity-policed up the wazoo.

Final comment - she had a fantastic description of the CUSU LGBT+ 'TERF' warning:

‘There is a terf on kings parade’ how ridiculous, like they’re warning people about a traffic jam on the M5

;)

[IdaBWells]

Reading the CUSU information under TERF they claim “TERFs” “advocate violence” against trans people. If we are supposed to the apex of Ts getting together to discuss what we think and believe I have NEVER read a single post advocating violence against anyone let alone trans people.

This must be projection because there are endless quotes on twitter etc. encouraging violence against T*s i.e women.

I do not know of any women’s groups that march in parades with baseball bats and the only conviction I am aware of (at least in the U.K.) when transwomen and women have been in direct contact it was a 25 year old transwoman who was convicted of attacking a 60 year old woman.

How can some Cambridge students be so gullible as to believe that women’s oppression is not directly connected to our biology.

[maniacmagpie]

I have NEVER read a single post advocating violence against anyone let alone trans people.

Ah, but they don't read our posts - it would be unsafe. I mentioned upthread that one fun encounter I have had is five people following me up and down King's Parade, standing in front of me - when I asked why, they said it was because they felt my sign 'would make the students feel unsafe'. They warn each other about razor blades being under flyers (this is an actual thing I saw on the CUSU LGBT+ facebook page...). They don't need to hear us telling them we don't wish violence on them. They know we do, and anything we say is a lie.

They tell each other, over and over again, not to listen, not to talk, not to interact. They can read an entire history and know exactly what we think from single words. That's how they can write off pussy hats as 'hate speech' and the words male and female as 'terf dogwhistles'; if they already know that anyone who says certain words coming from a place of wishing harm, they don't have to do the legwork of considering what we're actually saying.

There's no acknowledgement that we could possibly have actual legit empathy for anyone, and come to a slightly (because it IS slight in the grand scheme of things, goddammit!) different conclusion.

How can some Cambridge students be so gullible as to believe that women’s oppression is not directly connected to our biology.

I think you're giving too much credit to our critical thinking skills. I mean this when I say it; and the sooner we realise that we do not know as much as we think we do, the better. We spend way too long being congratulated and praised for our 'intelligence' and frankly I think we need to hear more often that we're absolute dumbasses, that being book-clever on one tiny particular subject is not the same as being a robust critical thinker, and that we really need to stop and step back and listen to other people. Being smart in one subject is not the same as being smart in anything else.

An additional layer to this imho is that a great many people around me do not actually believe in sexism. I think this is exacerbated by the intensity of term; men do have to work hard, so when they hear about sexism they're often hearing 'you don't work hard'. This applies to other 'isms' but I don't feel so confident to comment on racism or classism (as I'm ethnic Chinese so I'm the 'good' sort of immigrant, and privately educated - aside from my gonads I'm as privileged as they come). We are young, so we have not faced the reality of workplace misogyny. There's also a streak of feeling like you don't want to play the victim so many women want to 'be more' than the sum of their bits by ignoring sexism - I think the thread on 'anti feminist superwomen' is highly pertinent to this.

I have a lot to say on 'isms' in higher education, but I'll condense it to this - when you have to work hard already it may not occur to you that someone else may work just as hard but be held back.

In the interests of fairness - my impression of the CUSU Women's FAQ page is that it's really incoherent, and the 'TERF/SWERF' and other intersectional queer theory stuff has been wedged in by one or two fanatics with everyone else going along in confusion/trying to do 'the right thing'. You can tell from most of the wording that they can bloody well tell that sexism is based on sex.