Peak GC Moment?

[CantUnderstandNoThing]

I've namechanged for this because I'm a bit nervous of the vitriol I have seen directed at others with a differing opinion.

I know there's been a few threads with people sharing the moments they hit "peak trans", often citing individuals (Karen, Lily etc) or moments that led them to their GC beliefs.

I've realised I've hit peak GC, or perhaps peak t--f would be more appropriate, and I was wondering if anyone else has? For me, the peaking moment was the interview with India and Posie. I felt very uncomfortable with how offensive and discriminatory Posie's argument was. And really, it just came across as hateful. I realised I didn't want to be aligned with that.

The issues of violence towards women, safe spaces and the issues in women's sport are obviously very important and absolutely need discussion but the current angle of "women don't have penises" isn't helping that at all (imo obviously).

Anyone else feel the same? Or starting to feel the same?

What was discriminatory about her argument?

I felt very uncomfortable with how offensive and discriminatory Posie's argument was

Can you highlight the offensive/discriminatory parts?

If you don’t like the “women don’t fave penises” stance, then you would have to think that they do have penises. I’m with Posie on that one.

*The issues of violence towards women, safe spaces and the issues in women's sport are obviously very important and absolutely need discussion but the current angle of "women don't have penises" isn't helping that at all (imo obviously).^

Women don’t have penises, though. There isn’t really a way around that. Transwomen might have penises, however.

Sometimes I get fed up with it all. It’s an awful debate to be having in so many ways. But I don’t think that the gender critical viewpoint is wrong.

I also felt uneasy by that interview because yes I like people to be kind to each other but I'm not sure how else anyone can argue against TWAW. You either agree with that statement or disagree, and disagreeing is often blunt and hurtful.

Something I am more concerned about is the effect all this will have on trans kids. I am sure they really do believe that they can change sex because that is the lie they have been fed by every adult and person in authority.

I've been strongly GC for quite a while and it's just been recently I've felt my attitude start to change, and my discomfort with Posie Parker, the emphasis on the Daily Mail, the applauding of Trump, has grown. I know people will disagree with me, and I don't really want this to become one of those threads where posters endlessly ask what the definition of a woman is.

I was just wondering if anyone else feels the same as me. I might be all alone and that's ok! :)

Is it that you're tired of the same arguments, or that you don't agree with them?

Is it discriminatory to say you aren't tall because you're short?
Or to say that you don't have a degree because you never went to University?

They're saying that there's nothing fundamentally different between men and women apart from their reproductive organs and the physical consequences of sex hormones.
So, are you saying men and women are intellectual and emotionally different?

Trans gender perspective is inherently sexist. It must be pointed out.
How do you suggest it should be?

Yes I also am worried about children of course. That's one of those discussion we 100% need to be having.

I'm just not sure how Posie Parker saying India Willoughby shouldn't be indulging in delusions on national TV is helping that argument. It just strengthens the argument that gender critical people are intolerant.

If you believe that women have penis' then I strongly suspect that you weren't that gc in the first place.

I think the ‘women don’t have penises’ angle is incredibly helpful. It cuts the debate down to four words, a basic fact that makes anyone who disagrees with look bonkers. You don’t need a full understanding of all the ins and outs of the debate. Someone staying ‘women don’t have penises’ is someone stating something so blindingly obvious that there is just no rational, fact based argument against.

but the current angle of "women don't have penises" isn't helping that at all

I know right. Saying 'women don't have penises' is like soooooooo extremist and bigoted, who could possibly be hateful enough to think that way?

I feel uncomfortable with the debate in general. That’s because I wish it was t happening- I wish women weren’t being gaslighted and manoeuvred into giving up our rights and protections. Into giving up our language.

That the debate is needed at all makes me uncomfortable. But I can’t accept those feelings of discomfort as more important than the black and white truth that definitions are important in law and we can’t just agree to Be Nice About Trans People.

I am nice about trans people. I just don’t think the law is right.

So hang on

if the Daily Mail says something then regardless of what it is you're uncomfortable agreeing? Even if it's something like 'the murderers of Stephen Lawrence should face justice'?

I'm not clear what is changing for you

do you think women deserve less safety privacy and dignity because the Daily Mail has printed some articles or because Trump has decided to define sex in american law?

I think TRAs need to reframe the discussion in order to allow us to move on.

If they want to discuss supporting trans people to feel safer and more comfortable in society, then I'll happily join in.

While they are saying that male bodied people can be women, then there is no compromise available. I cannot reach peak GC while that is still the way the debate is framed.

I do agree that we are lined up with some odd people on this, and that makes me uncomfortable. I dislike the vitriol that surrounds the debate. Unfortunately TRAs have set that tone, attacking people physically and being verbally abusive.

You seem a bit hung up on Posie Parker if I may say so OP

No it's not that at all. Look, I feel like my words are possibly getting a bit twisted (which is probably my fault btw! I'm not very good at explaining myself at the best of times). I just wondered if anyone else was struggling with it a bit. I'm sorry, I'll step back.

A degree of intolerance on both sides I would think, certainly irritation.

Facts are facts though, women do not have penises. Men don't have wombs. It is not possible to change one's sex, only to change gender and that comes from a way of thinking, aided and abetted by a lifetime of drug treatment and sometimes surgery.

You seem a bit hung up on Posie Parker if I may say so OP

Can you not see the irony there? She's talked about a lot on this board, just because I disagree with some aspects of what she says, or rather how she says it, doesn't mean I'm "hung up".

look, good heavens it's fine to be sick and tired of this whole thinhg

god knows I am

i don't want to spend my weekends bothering people on the streets with leaflets or filling in tedious government consultations

but I don't understand how that would weaken your understanding of basic biology or belief in the rights of women and girls to safety, privacy and dignity?

I don’t agree with everything, every GC person says. But that doesn’t mean it makes me reach “peak GC”.

“Women don’t have penises” is the very essence of our argument and is extremely useful.

I'm just not sure how Posie Parker saying India Willoughby shouldn't be indulging in delusions on national TV is helping that argument. It just strengthens the argument that gender critical people are intolerant.

Well it is a delusion that some women have a penis. It is a delusion that humans can change sex because some fish can.
It is a delusion that there are sexed brains or that you can be born in the wrong body.

It is not intolerant to say that promoting such delusions is harmful. You may not like her delivery but can you actually say she is wrong to call out the lies being promoted?

It’s good that you’re clear about your views.
Please could you answer this question for me. I don’t think it’s been answered by someone who believes that women have penises.
What is a woman?

I have had moments of doubt, when tribal identity has kicked in and I wonder why I’m on the other side to the guardian, BBC, etc. But the truth is, the premise that they’re selling, that trans rights come before all else and women have to dismantle their boundaries, I’m not buying, and it makes me even more fearful that women are being badly let down by people and organisations who would consider themselves champions on the being-kind-to-everyone front. It’s their illiberalism that has fostered this toxic, authoritarian landscape and they’ve shown clearly how little they value women’s rights.

I do agree that we are lined up with some odd people on this, and that makes me uncomfortable. I dislike the vitriol that surrounds the debate. Unfortunately TRAs have set that tone, attacking people physically and being verbally abusive.

That might be it. Thanks, I just wondered if it was just me that was uncomfortable. Interesting bedfellows indeed, but I do understand that that alone doesn't make it wrong.

What exactly are you struggling with?
The argument or how many times it has been used?

TRAs aren't using a "you should respect that we don't conform to gender stereotypes".
They're using a "we prefer to conform to gender stereotypes of the other sex, so we must be seen as the other sex".

It is being forgotten that for the most part men and women don't feel like whatever sex for any other reason than their sexual organs.
I certainly don't.