This is a good thread about female trans allies

[Doyoumind]

twitter.com/overpow_erin_g/status/1156003798898241543?s=19

Thoughtful insights into how some women get drawn into the wrong side of the debate.

I thought the discussion was about gender identity, not gender dysphoria. I thought gender (or sex) dysphoria was about someone perceiving their body as physically 'wrong'. Surely this is quite different from someone 'feeling like a woman/man', which is what gender identity seems to be about.

Indeed. Gender identity under the umbrella includes gender daytrippers like Bunce. And plenty of what we're old school cross dressers who have a kink not gender dysphoria. People who have no inclination to medicialise in anyway, just to inhabit women's spaces and declare themselves women. And don't get me started on the prison population. And people like Janiv, who suddenly get disowned as not being 'true trans' when they start saying things which are a big difficult and show up this dark side which no one wants to even acknowledge exists, and can be merely explained away without any critical thought.

@nonnymouse1337 yes, that's where the line kind of is for me at the moment too. Religious people should be able to go to church and practice their faith openly but I shouldn't have to go to church or recite psalms or whatever. But if a religious person says they'll pray for me (used to happen a lot but seems to have dropped off lately) I just say thank you. That's how I want it to be with trans as well. Like, polite and vaguely supportive.

Very recent article
mbmpolicy.wordpress.com/2019/07/29/losing-sight-of-womens-rights-article-for-scottish-affairs/

And does look at the prison population

I thought gender (or sex) dysphoria was about someone perceiving their body as physically 'wrong'. Surely this is quite different from someone 'feeling like a woman/man', which is what gender identity seems to be about.

Yes. I don't see anyone denying that some people suffer sex dysphoria any more than I see anyone denying that anorexics genuinely view themselves as fat or that my schizophrenic brother in law when off his meds genuinely thinks we're all out to get him to the point of stopping eating as everyone's trying to poison him.

We know some people's self perception is wildly out of whack with reality and that can cause enormous distress.

Demanding that the whole rest of society must have a 'gender identity' in order to explain why a very small minority of people's perceptions are off is not helpful. Not least to the sufferers themselves. If spending my entire adult life dealing with schizophrenia has taught me anything it is that pandering to delusion is down right dangerous.

Yes it’s very noticeable that the genderist voices never pipe up on threads discussing the consequences of their beliefs and actions

Threads about Katie Dolotowski or Karen White

Threads about Jessica Yaniv

Threads about the Tavistock

I wish people would deal in reality, in consequences

"Demanding that the whole rest of society must have a 'gender identity' in order to explain why a very small minority of people's perceptions are off is not helpful."

No, but a lot of women do identify as women. Roses is one example, but I've met others in real life who say that too. So it's not just an invented idea.

No, but a lot of women do identify as women. Roses is one example, but I've met others in real life who say that too. So it's not just an invented idea.

Isn't it?

If you are a woman you are a woman.

You may or may not identify as a woman if you are a woman. It doesn't stop you being a woman.

Equally a male can identify as a woman but that doesn't stop him being a man.

What you identify as, has absolutely no baring on what you actually are, since what you are is unchanging, fixed and non negotiable.

The idea that you can be anything else is absolutely an invented idea or fantasy. Precisely because its impossible to change bodies even if you pump yourself full of hormones or undergo surgery to mutilate a heathly body.

And bearing in mind that no one has explained what a masculine or feminine gender identity is , I’m pretty at the idea that it should be used as the basis for anything

How do we know that when women say they have a woman's identity they aren't just talking about personality?

There are traits of my personality and interests I hold that you could put into a gender box called female but I'm acutely aware that we don't develop in a vacuum and our personalties to an extent are shaped by external influence from infanthood.

The only thing that actually makes me a woman is my biology. You could could put my personality into a man and he'd still be a man (a man who isn't interested in sport and likes baking - I'm fairly sure they exist!)

So it's not just an invented idea.

Even if I did agree with this it wouldn't change the fact that many people do NOT have a gender identity, so how can we sensibly legislate around this beyond saying 'you're entitled to your belief but not to impose it on others'.

I still don't share a gender identity with transwomen because I don't have a gender identity to share. I still don't share a sex with transwomen because they are male. There are still no, zero, zip, nada, not a single sausage circumstances where it is appropriate to group me with transwomen but not every single man on the planet.

How do we know that when women say they have a woman's identity they aren't just talking about personality?

It's nothing to do with my personality.
Or what I wear.
It's still there though.

Your perceptions of yourself don't necessarily correlate to reality. Lots of people post on here "identifying" as e.g. an honest or generous person whereas their actions show that their perception of what that means in reality is wildly off. If I identify as generous that doesn't make me so.

Again we come down to some undefinable notion of "soul". I honestly don't believe in souls yet others do.

Surely women merit, in law, a definition that protects them as well as Cornish pasties are defined and protected

Love this, I'm nicking it!

@Maniak the problem is that religious beliefs in general aren't always benign. They can incorporate all sorts of problematic ideas. When mixed with political power they usually have far reaching and devastating consequences.
It is important to be able to criticise or even make fun of religious beliefs. It's no surprise that countries that are hostile to atheists and apostates usually apply various forms of blasphemy and censorship laws.
While people have a right to their beliefs and practices, there are or should be limits to how far these beliefs can supersede and impact the rights of others.

I note caution about Cornish Pasties given their definition in law is also currently at risk...

More seriously though, protection for what we are in terms of sex is what the law is supposed to say (protected characteristic of sex in addition to one for gender resignment).

The problem is sex is being replaced / conflated with gender.

Thus what woman are is under threat from what people say they feel. It does not stop the issues that women have for their physical being. It just dilutes and hides those problems politically, linguistically, legally and socially.

That's the trouble.

It's still there though.

So what is it connected to if not your biology or your personality?

As pope says we are into the notion of souls at this point. If you feel you have a female gender identity that is not connected to anything concrete or definable then that seems to be what we are talking about.

At which point we are creating laws on the basis of something akin to religious belief held by a small section of the population. There is a reason that secular societies moved towards a separation of church and state because most people recognise that belief systems aren't a good basis for creating law.

Roses Men are NOT described by their biological functions. Information programmes regarding prostate cancer do NOT start with the line "Anyone who has a prostate", no-one has ever said that the House of Commons has x number of Ejaculators. You are being wilfully blind and sanctioning that only ONE class of human has de-humanising, infantilising and downright insulting language applied to them. Ask yourself WHY that class is expected to accept that language, WHO is driving it and WHAT are they trying to achieve by it and WHO benefits from it?

How can you 'identify' as something or 'match up' with something if you cannot define what the criteria are that you are identifying as or matching?

Unlike others I know NO adult human females who 'identify' as women, they just ARE women due to meeting the criteria of adult human female. Likewise I know no adult human males who 'identify' as men they just ARE men due to meeting the criteria of adult human male.

If there is some unidentifiable indefinable criteria existing for what a woman is how can you explain the oppression that women have faced throughout the centuries and still face today if the oppressors could not clearly identify the ones they oppressed and still oppress.

If there is no definable, identifiable criteria for women then on what basis are laws made in regard to them?

I don't think it's necessary to say there is no such thing as identity. There is a heck of a lot of psychological writing about it and how we build it. I don't think it's very plausible to try and argue that it is made up.

What I find odd within the discussion of gender is that people seem to want to talk about gender identity as a different kind of thing that tribal identity, or national identity, or any of the other kinds of identities we have.

People don't have all the answers yet....

....but are very willing to tell the rest of us that we're totally wrong about what a woman is 😂

I have no confusion about my own identity, please respect it. My rights are dependent on it and I need them.

....but are very willing to tell the rest of us that we're totally wrong about what a woman is

OK, where have I told you you're wrong?
I'm telling you what it is for ME. It's just biology for you. That's fine.
I didn't say you were wrong.

I don't think it's very plausible to try and argue that it is made up

Same

I'm telling you what it is for ME.

No you aren't. You have said that your gender identity and your sex matches up with your sense of self as woman.

You have neither defined your gender identity nor woman as categories nor how your sense of self matches either.