Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Is this an about-face from The Guardian?

263 replies

NopeNi · 17/10/2018 19:07

Well fuck me I wouldn't have expected to read this in the Guardian.

I mean, don't get me wrong, it still focuses on rights for transwomen and calls both sides of the debate "toxic" (of course) but it also says:

..."But misogyny too must be challenged. Gender identity does not cancel out sex. Women’s oppression by men has a physical basis, and to deny the relevance of biology when considering sexual inequality is a mistake. The struggle for women’s empowerment is ongoing. Reproductive freedoms are under threat and the #MeToo campaign faces a backlash. Women’s concerns about sharing dormitories or changing rooms with “male-bodied” people must be taken seriously. These are not just questions of safety but of dignity and fairness."

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/17/the-guardian-view-on-the-gender-recognition-act-where-rights-collide

OP posts:
RosaNullaSpina · 18/10/2018 15:42

FlowersAndHerts, no, not many activists now. But the going into schools thing is gaining traction - get them while they’re young! That could be massive.

FlowersAndHerts · 18/10/2018 15:49

But the going into schools thing is gaining traction - get them while they’re young! That could be massive.
I've not thought this out at all, but I feel the schools thing is a by-product. Pharma has plenty of legitimate targets to make money, and doesn't need to create illness. And if the trend is to de-medicalise gender dysphoria, there'll be no public money for treatment anyway. The activists are looking to legitimise their fetishes, not to create a medical condition.

RosaNullaSpina · 18/10/2018 15:52

You could be right, FlowersAndHerts. I admit I am getting a bit paranoid with all this! I really hope you are right.

Blistory · 18/10/2018 15:57

I believe targeting children wasn't about achieving social contagion - that was an unexpected bonus. It was about tugging at heart strings and deflecting away from the whole "expanding the bandwidth" type of transwomen with beards.

False suicide statistics were always going to be proven as crap but they don't care - it's not about the suicides, it's about making us all scared to open our mouths. It's another deflection and when they're called out on it, TRAs don't explain, they simply ignore.

I don't think it's big Pharma either - I'm seriously struggling to believe it's anything other than men wanting the world to be their playground again.

RedToothBrush · 18/10/2018 15:59

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b096sjk2/billion-dollar-deals-and-how-they-changed-your-world-series-1-1-health

Billion dollar deals and how they changed your world.

If you've not watched episode 1, please do so. It's not about trans issues.

It will shock you.

kesstrel · 18/10/2018 16:00

Prawn is right about the huge decline in resources for investigative journalism - or indeed ANY type of journalism. Quality newspapers just cannot afford the staff to do anywhere near what should be done. That's why lots of stories are now taken straight from the wire services, or (worse still) from press releases from PR firms, with no time for fact checking.

Nick Davies wrote a really good book about this called Flat Earth News that goes into detail about this. Newspaper print sales have dropped very sharply, and they get less advertising revenue as well, all because of the Internet. And yes, it is having serious consequences for democracy.

OvaHere · 18/10/2018 16:04

I used to be a bit sceptical about paywalls and their usefulness but I've come around to the idea that if you don't buy hard copy anymore it's actually important to choose a publication you like and support it financially. I think if people don't we can't hope to have decent journalism in the future.

SonicVersusGynaephobia · 18/10/2018 16:08

I think it's more men's sexual rights liberalism, than the Pharma angle. As others say, the population isn't big enough, especially with the push for de-medicalising it.

kesstrel · 18/10/2018 16:11

Blistory

I'm seriously struggling to believe it's anything other than men wanting the world to be their playground again.

It's definitely, in part, a men's sexual rights movement.

But I also think there are a lot of people out there who have been duped by the way TRAs have linked it to the gay rights struggle, and who just believe whatever Stonewall say must be right because they're the good guys.

With luck, there will be a slow rowing back from that among everyone but the most woke, as long as open discussion carries on. But that might not happen if the media just drops the whole issue again if the government backs away from amending the GRA after all.

OvaHere · 18/10/2018 16:11

I don't think it's just one thing. It's a perfect storm situation because it can service a variety of agendas, hence why it's gained traction so rapidly.

LangCleg · 18/10/2018 16:16

I don't think it's just one thing. It's a perfect storm situation because it can service a variety of agendas, hence why it's gained traction so rapidly.

Me too.

FlowersAndHerts · 18/10/2018 16:22

I think it's more men's sexual rights liberalism, than the Pharma angle.
I agree with that. Pharma has always taken advantage of existing conditions, and medicalised them, as described in the interesting bbc programme that RedToothBrush links to. But it has no need to invest in something that will medicalise such a small number of people.

Yes, agree to have gained so much traction, it must be a perfect storm, a bit like Trump.

SPOFS · 18/10/2018 16:24

My theory is that the Tories have de-medicalized the trans process so that the NHS doesn't have to fund them anymore.

Or...

The tories will blame the collapse of he NhS on the left wing for pushing the self-I'd things through. Imagine how many lawsuits the NHS will have in 20 years when the children being experimented on realize what was done to them... it will kill the nhs, and the lefty will be to blame...

HamiltonCork · 18/10/2018 16:25

I think it's a combination of a male sex rights movement (let's face it, thanks to the internet a heck of a lot of men have porn addled brains) and a middle class rights movement. Notice how it seems to be taxi drivers, bouncers and receptionists who are getting sacked for using the wrong pronouns.

LorettasBox · 18/10/2018 16:27

In all honesty, humans are really rubbish at maintaining the discipline needed for a large scale conspiracy of the scale we're fearing.

What seems to me much more likely is a combination of laziness and incompetence on a very large scale that has been taken full advantage of by very selfish people.

LangCleg · 18/10/2018 16:29

I think it's a combination of a male sex rights movement (let's face it, thanks to the internet a heck of a lot of men have porn addled brains) and a middle class rights movement.

I think it's that and that capitalism is quite happy to go along with it because it simultaneously opens up loads of new market segments (including, but not limited to, pharma). The more we commercialise ourselves, the more capitalism likes it.

How anyone can see this as a progressive movement - even the human rights activity in the area is a right wing, libertarian, individual rights approach - is beyond me.

Fallingirl · 18/10/2018 16:29

I don't think it's just one thing. It's a perfect storm situation because it can service a variety of agendas, hence why it's gained traction so rapidly.

I think one of the wide appeals of this whole issue, is that it allows all men to be openly misogynist. To call women bigots if and when we talk about female oppression.

That appeals to a frightening proportion of men, and has allowed e.g the Labour left and Momentum to silence ‘uppity’ women.

RedToothBrush · 18/10/2018 16:33

people from less privileged backgrounds can no longer get to do things they would once have had the chance to do.

I'm from the North. But relatively privileged. I went to a very good comp. Twenty years ago the door was largely closed even to people like me, because of the concentration of the news media in the SE and nepotism and the prevalence of internships.

This isn't new.

I'd say its improved in someways geographically, but the number of jobs in news media has also shrunk.

I'd say at least half the people on my university course had a close friend or relative in the business. Nearly all were from the South East with better off parents than mine, who could afford to do unpaid work. A substantial number were privately educated. I did feel like my face didn't fit. I wasn't 'sloany' enough. I wasn't prepared to show my cleavage enough. It was totally alien and super privileged even to me.

So i can't imagine what it would have been like to have been from a background that was genuinely less privileged.

A friend of mine who works at a large media company in a senior production role said the other week she doesn't think class exists in the UK anymore. She's ten years older, and this was based on her experience of coming from a working class background. She's leftier than left.

Jaws dropped and our circle of friends did rinse her for the comment. I didn't have to say anything personally thankfully, everyone else had it in hand. She is lovely but totally oblivious to reality and how privileged she is, even in our circle. She's wildly out of touch with reality.

I'm in no way surprised at Lisa Muggeridge' s reflections or her experience as a result. It mirrors perfectly my lived experience. Not only is Lisa working class, Lisa is an outsider even within that. I think it's true of all outsiders.

Outsiders are regarded as loose cannons and problematic. They don't say the right things. They challenge their superiors. They are as 'nice' and they don't just tow the line like good little girls and boys.

They are either utterly brilliant or a complete and utter liability.

And therein has ended their career progression in a politically correct world. The unwittingly institutionalised authoritarianism and self selection process has been damaging. Why take a risk on a person when recruiting when there is a glut of applicants? And even once you are in the job, it's easy to get your cards marked unless you tick the right boxes of behaviour.

Positive discrimination can actually be an issue within that too - its a tool in which compliance is measured by the institution. It doesn't necessarily solve the problem because it's often about this thing of being compliant which is valued higher than being critical within the culture.

I think positive discrimination has merit, but I also think it has had the effect of killing our understanding of the value of critical comment. On an institutional level this is a very bad thing.

Anyway. I'm rambling again so time to shut up.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 18/10/2018 16:33

'I think one of the wide appeals of this whole issue, is that it allows all men to be openly misogynist. To call women bigots if and when we talk about female oppression. '

This. Anyone who saw Ben Cohen on the Politics Show this morning would be left in no doubt of how much he despises women. It is perfectly clear why Pink News has taken the pro trans line it has.

heresyandwitchcraft · 18/10/2018 16:49

The bit that's missing however, in my view, is why the simple premise that women and girls are going to be harmed is not having much of an impact. Have we been duped about how serious people are about treating women equally ? What message have transactivists been able to get across or what soft spot in the liberal belly have they gone after that we've missed ?

Misogyny, sexism, the in-group versus the out-group, and the need for community. Those ancient forces that can never be truly erased.

I think we all delude ourselves into thinking that irrationality, tyranny, and deep-seated hatreds are a thing of past generations. That we would never go along with spying on our neighbours for wrong-think if we lived in Ingsoc in 1984. We all think we're Winston, but many of us would probably be O'Brien.

This, I think, is the real danger of "leftism" or "progressivism," because by identifying as the moral superior, they have uncoupled themselves from the reality of the human psyche and facts on the ground. I honestly think every single person has an ideology. We all need a way to structure the world, we need some narratives to make sense of it, and therefore we all are biased with certain prejudices. Everyone also desperately wants to fit in. Instinctive patterns of behaviour do not just go away because you put a little rose emoji next to your Twitter handle and join Momentum. All "identifying as the good person" does is make you even more blind to things like misogyny and antisemitism in yourself.

So I think "identity politics" in claiming it is feminist, anti-racist, and anti-phobic is actually making a fertile ground for people to ignore the need to critically examine their own troublesome behaviours, because they can stick to certain "speech codes" and "intersectional thinking."

I believe trans activists demonstrate this effect in a microcosm - I don't think it's an accident that so many of the activists are trans women who display hostility to women. These individuals actually deny they were ever part of the oppressing class (their identity as men may be something they are ashamed of, and I think many "feminist men" wish to move away from ever being associated with "toxic masculinity"). They erase the past, and reject the reality of their male bodies and socialization. Then some trans women, by identifying as a woman, do the neat trick of putting themselves as the more "oppressed" person in the hierarchy. This gives them the license to abuse women in a way they never would if this conversation was about anything other than "trans rights" or they were still identifying as men. Some trans activists also put themselves in a situation where they are actually incredibly reliant on external validation of this declared identity, and the very existence of females will remind them that they can never be biological women. This creates a need to vehemently protect the gender identity - it is vulnerable. You also have to explain where it comes from, but now trans activism cannot even define terms in the sense of gender dysphoria or acknowledge biological sex - hence upholding the "I am what I say I am because I say so" mantra becomes paramount.

I also think this also explains why so many "woke bros" join in with hating on women, attacking "wrong thinking witches" is almost the only socially accepted abuse of women available on the left.

The other issue that's been raised is how the online world and social media seems to be driving the performative/labelling aspect of all of this, as well as potential social contagion when it comes to thinking you might be trans. You feel the need to be seen a certain way, and can now attain social plaudits measured in "likes" from the comfort of your own screen. I also think you can basically "shop around" with how you present yourself online in a completely new way, and decide your individual identity is going to be as __. You're not constrained by any physical reality, or the fact that other people can actually see you. In terms of TRAs, this would tie in with the notion that everyone has this innate gender identity which is personal to them. It's almost like an extreme individualism, which still relies on some form of outside approval. Making an avatar for yourself so that you can best play this game on social media. Because of the potential of being abused, you don't want to be too vulnerable or open with your thoughts, but you also don't want to be left out.

The problem I think we are seeing with women standing up to trans rights activism is that other people and physical reality can offer a different perspective than an individual person's conception of themselves. And in our society, we posit that every person's view is equally valid, including those who reject the notion of gender identity and go just by sex.

I think many commercial companies can see the potential for profit in all of this. As we have seen elsewhere with astroturfing, there likely are vested interests from TRAs, too. Lots of people can make money off of problematizing gender and sex - just look at the fact we have private medical practices, money thrown at LGBTQ+ organizations who now pretty much only focus on trans issues, scientific research funding into trans children and the rise of these "experts" who don't really seem to have qualifications.

Also, the underlying narcissism of some trans activists alongside their seeming need for total compliance cannot be underestimated. I think we are seeing the effect of highly-motivated autogynephilic males attempting to reach their goals of having everyone agree with them. It really could almost be seen as on par with establishing a new global company, like Apple, or something. There's a product (gender ideology) that is being sold to an international market. They need marketing, salespeople, and a steady stream of new products to keep people interested.

Once you start seeing modern transactivism with their doctrine of gender identity almost as a religious notion being proselytized by a handful of prophets, it's far easier to conceptualize. I don't doubt for a second that the people who hold trans ideology dear should be allowed to believe what they want to, and live freely. I just don't want to be legally forced to agree with all aspects of their dogma.

I think my main issue is that we are very vulnerable to these ideas being presented as facts, rather than faith-based principles, because we haven't been holding fast to basic liberal values or allowed people to properly scrutinize these claims. The culture of "leftism" has not helped.

And it's a global shift. Freedom of speech is being systematically eroded worldwide
Yes. It's frightening.

FlowersAndHerts · 18/10/2018 17:00

heresyandwitchcraft Your post is really interesting, with plenty of food for thought.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 18/10/2018 17:02

That was a fascinating essay Heresy!

Ereshkigal · 18/10/2018 17:05

I'm not the biggest fan of Chomsky but manufacturing consent via faux progressive establishment liberalism is blindingly obvious when it comes to transactivism.

The Guardian and the BBC are more to blame, not less.

YY.

rightreckoner · 18/10/2018 17:06

Going into schools was about finding human shields for this BS. It’s easy to see through Jacinta Brooks but a sad teenage girl who is in distress about her body? Much harder to say no to.

heresyandwitchcraft · 18/10/2018 17:07

RedToothBrush
Your post is so interesting.
The element of class in this, I think, is so important.
Sometimes I do wonder if the "hierarchy of intersectionality," as I interpret it now, has meant that those from more privileged backgrounds find a way to make themselves part of a marginalized group by engaging in trans ideology and declaring themselves to be non-binary.
I also think you may to need to have a certain amount of privilege to even get involved in this alternative gender business to begin with.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread