Future of legal gender and mumsnet

[Strangerthantruth]

Davina Cooper responds to Mumsnet critics.

futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk/2020/04/30/responding-to-gender-critical-feminism-on-gender-sex-and-a-generous-feminist-politics-in-anxious-times/#more-1141

I haven't read it all as it's long and mostly unoriginal. I will try to go back to it but if anyone else wants to read cutting edge thoughts on why men can claim to be women, here you go.

i am extremely bored of childlessness being dragged into this. I am not any less a woman because I cannot have children - no not all women experience becoming a mother, it does not mean they are not women

its basically 'well we couldground it in biology but that would negate our belief that feels are mor eimportant so we're going to wang on about some pseudo class based societal interpretations instead PS MN feminist are not feministing properly'

”the growing refusal, among many feminist, to recognise versions of feminism that do not centre sex is perturbing”

Do not centre sex?

I read thus far and then threw in the towel. Not worth my time to read such incoherent garbage

That's genderwang.

feminism that do[es] not centre sex

Remove the 'femin' bit, then. You've got an ism of some sort, but it isn't feminism.

Gism?

She’s an idiot. Who even gives a shit about this stuff anymore? Coronavirus clearly doesn’t give a shit about feelz when it kills males more than females so it disproves all the nonsense that all that matters is personal perception of one’s identity. Added to that, we have a country that will be on its knees financially. In the post-Covid future, do we want three quarters of a million of public money going to ludicrous projects like Professor Cooper’s one?

feminism that centres on reproductive capability

Twaddle. If you wanted to be accurate, you could perhaps say gc feminism centres on chromosomal sex, I suppose? It's certainly not reproductive capability, that's a (wilfully?) skewed idea and I'm not quite sure how the writer managed to derive it.

being men or women, masculine or feminine gather meaning, relationally and unequally, largely from each other

Eh? How so? Does she mean, like, feminine hair is longer than masculine hair?

Anyway, some of this actually looks interesting and I'd like to read it carefully, only I've got childcare to do on top of workingfrom home, so no time.

Looking on the bright side, in about 100 years’ time some researcher will have an absolute treasure trove of contemporary data about how the whole concept of gender was argued into existence and the underpinning rationalisations. It is a gift to future generations.

I’ve read some of her other work and lets just say that her style of expression makes Judith Butler’s work look accessible.

She’s an idiot.

There isn't really much else to be said.

It's all about as deep, meaningful, inclusive and useful as that BACP guide that non binary Freemason Edward Lord's partner Meg John-Barker wrote, in which it was stated that working class northern women's "femininity is associated with strength and aggression" and therefore fails in "adhering to social norms of femininity, such as being nurturing, caring, social, emotional, vulnerable, and concerned with appearance."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3339137-BACP-Gender-Sexual-and-Relationship-Diversity-by-Dr-Meg-John-Barker

i am extremely bored of childlessness being dragged into this. I am not any less a woman because I cannot have children - no not all women experience becoming a mother, it does not mean they are not women

It seems crazy, but I think a lot of people take this seriously. Their logic is, if someone is a woman but isn't a mother, or a man but not a father - and not even potentially due to infertility - then reproduction can't be at the centre of sex.

You sometimes used to see a similar argument about sexuality, saying that since some people are homosexual which is not a reproductive combination, therefore sex can't be about reproduction.

In both cases there sometimes also seems to be a fear around saying that our sex, or sex generally, is about reproduction.

There is a logic there, but there is something important missing, and many, many people seem not to understand that. I think it points to something that may really need to be addressed for a lot of people.

I thought that was really interesting and has given me something to consider. I don't know much about serious feminism, so can see I may be being naive, but naive and thinking at least!

There are two things I think I don't grasp well enough; gender and feminism. I see women as massively disadvantaged due to sex, and I had thought feminism was the thing which addresses this.

I can see, though, that the societal impacts on women are because of gender stereotypes. In my case they affect me in a tangible way more than my actual sex. I grew up in the 70s and we seemed to be moving away from the stereotypes, so I suppose most of my frustration is that they have reappeared and that most people casually accept them.

In all of this, I don't care how people look or dress, and I struggle with the idea that just because you look better in a frock than me you must be a woman. Because that's irrelevant. And I just don't buy that female stereotypes are applied to anyone other than women. I get that trans people are treated badly and that should not happen; but I don't see that as being about gender.

I don't think I understand gender very well. Any suggestions for further reading would be welcome?

I did an in person interview for this study which took about 2 hours, with a woman and an apparently gender diverse female student

Reproduction isn’t at the centre of sex. The point is that women and men are treated differently in society. The way that this discrimination/oppression is applied to people is according to their sex. It doesn’t matter if they’re parents. Women are discriminated against for being mothers and for not being mothers (remember Andrea Leadsom-gate). Therefore, to say oppression is sex-based has nothing to do with the actual biological processes.

Other than in exceptional circumstances, TW are not perceived as women by the rest of society and therefore any oppression they face is not due to female sex.

goosefoot

im genuinely baffled by that argument

I cant have children because my fallopian tubes dont work properly. my chromosomes are still female though, im still a woman, how could I not be?

the fact that I have not reproduced doesnt change my sex, the fact that my husband is not a father doenst change his sex either

baffled of somerset

Kit19 totally. Sex is binary. If you weren’t a woman, you’d be a man. You clearly aren’t. When people talk about motherhood and being a ‘real woman’, that’s solely gender stereotypes. Interestingly, few people tend to say that childless men aren’t real men.

I am sure Prof Cooper understands this stuff but enjoys complicating things because after all it brings in the cash. It harms women though but hey ho.

Remove the 'femin' bit, then. You've got an ism of some sort, but it isn't feminism.

It's genderism.

Which, it turns out, looks an awful lot like sexism.

working class northern women's "femininity is associated with strength and aggression"

I'd forgotten about that particular gem!

therefore sex can't be about reproduction.

Have they never heard of the term "sexual reproduction"?

Cooper uses the words capable of reproduction when describing a definition of sex she wants to undermine. Men are also capable of reproduction too, the process requires a sperm and an egg. The position she is avoiding mentioning by diverting into "capability" is reproductive role of course. It's not complicated.

for anyone who got through that twaddle.

I got as far as the bit about second wave feminism becoming popular in the seventies and eighties. Presumably like big hair and shoulder pads.

Cooper really hates women.

It's genderism.

Which, it turns out, looks an awful lot like sexism.

^^This.

Reproduction isn’t at the centre of sex.

This idea is why people find the argument that reproducing doesn't make you a woman convincing.

It's interesting - I'd have assumed all GC people were cognisant of this.

We have sex - sexed bodies, for the purposes of reproduction. It is the same reasons that lions come in two sexes, or nettles. It is to accomplish reproduction. Even homosexuality would not exist if we did not reproduce sexually.

If, like an amoeba, we all just divided into two identical beings at a certain point, we would not exist as men and women, we would have no sex, no one would be interested in sexual activity. There would be no sexism because there would be nothing to e sexist about.

Even in people that never reproduce, or can't, they are sexed because we are a sexually reproducing species.

I also remember Cooper's slippery, disingenuous twitter spat with Julie Bindel. She is fully wedded to trans ideology, however objective she purports to be.

Below in this 2016 article, along with lots of references in other places in the text to "anti trans" feminists, is how she framed male trans activist Kimberly Nixon's court case against Vancouver Rape Relief, who had denied Nixon the chance to work as a volunteer rape counsellor in a female only refuge:

In Nixon, the court refused (or deemed themselves unable) to stop the rape counselling organisation from excluding the claimant, despite the fact she was legally defined as a woman, because the organisation had the right, according to the court, to not recognise her as a woman (or, in their terms, as the “right” kind of woman).

https://www.academia.edu/29907082/Ifthestatedecertifiedgenderwhatmighthappentoitsmeaningandvalue

Goosefoot you misunderstand me I think. Sex is reproductive capacity yes, but whether or not it is exercised (given that humans have a large degree of choice over whether to do so) is not relevant to whether a person is of a particular sex. Nor does a malfunction of reproductive capacity mean that a person is not the sex they are. My cat was spayed at a young age but presumably nobody would say she wasn’t a cat.

It’s presented as a complex argument but it’s actually not. 99.9% of the world’s population can be divided into one of two sexes and are perceived as such. One sex is disadvantaged compared to the other. Sex also has an impact on medical treatment and many other bodily experiences. Feeling that you are really a woman (when you are male) doesn’t change anything materially and nor, apart from in very few cases, does it make you appear female to the surrounding world.

Ereshkigallangcleg she’s awful. She’s had a very privileged academic career and has never had to deal with any of the shit that many less privileged women have to. Therefore she can pontificate about the safety of rape-victims and conclude that it’s more important for a man to gain validation of his identity.