Why r/GenderCritical was banned by Reddit

[MadBadDaddy]

Hi! TRA here! Thought I'd take a quick breather from all the crowing, high-fiving, etc. to throw a lifeline to any actual open-minded critical thinkers wondering why Reddit banned r/gendercritical. Basically, you have 2 options when it comes to what to believe:

1. It's a true conspiracy: silicon valley, hollywood & the media are in the thrall of the well-funded TransAgenda, the need for woke points, child-groomers, women-haters, MRAs, etc. etc.

1. r/GenderCritical was hateful - if you want evidence then go to r/GenderCynical which existed to harvest said hatefulness. Read their strictly enforced rules about hate speech, misogyny, anti-feminism, pile-ons, doxxing, etc. (NB: abbreviating "trans exclusionary radical feminist" is not considered hate speech on this subreddit) and then sort their posts by "top" and "all time" and judge for yourself.

The trans men, trans women and non-binary people of Reddit do not hate women and do not tolerate abuse. Have a better day. x

Oh no not you specifically sorry, I meant the thread generally and all the posters being sceptical about OP feeling themselves when dressed.

The thread has been quite thought provoking

And more importantly, why this access includes anyone who says that they require it regardless of presentation? And why this access for all is more important than safeguarding?

Yeah exactly. OP hasn't responded to say whether they recognise people's concerns about this

CoffeeTeaChocolate

I can talk about the phenomenom of being trans, but anything else is conjecture. Biology? Caricatures? Socialisation? Wearing a frock and twirling a parasol versus wearing jeans? I honestly don't know what to tell you. I'm not dismissing these ideas so much as I don't have a strong answer or, to be frank. interest in them. I'm not going to 'logic' myself out of being trans, I'm not seeking validation, here or elesewhere.

I was asked about feeling a certain way 'from a young age'. I recognise a lot of the curiosity and feelings that I see directed at me in this thread, if not the hard-hitting feminist insight, as the stuff I wrestled with over my formative years, mixed up with a dose of shame and secrecy. This had the effect of subtly distancing me from life and other people (although I resent the assumption that I inherently 'disregard other's needs'), which isn't unique in itself but that was my experience (want to ralk about being 'born a goth?). I came to realise that this was here to stay and that the only choice I had was to accept or deny it. That and what I was going to DO about it. As much as it sucks to say it, these are societies options also.

The left handed thing? They used to punish lefties in school by hitting their knuckles or even tying up their hands. It is the origin of the word of the word 'sinister' and I still think it apt.

I think we should all express/present ourselves in a way that we feel is authentic for ourselves.

However, this has an impact on single sex spaces. Therefore I think it is very useful to have an open discussion about this, for my own (developing) understanding and for others’ and for potential lurkers.

I propose to define woman by biology, the OP appears to reject this.

The OP brings up socialisation, something I am not that familiar with. Fair enough, explain it to me and let’s discuss .

I don’t really believe in female brains etc, but I am definitely interested in discussing!

Ideally, I would like to see a list of all research in this area and a list of the markers for male and female socialisation. These markers should then be colour coded based on the weight of the accepting research journal and amount of citations. Using this, I would like an anonymous Venn diagram of the OP. I will be happy to provide one of myself. For me, this would be a good starting point for discussing socialisation. This is how my “female” brain works.

I think it is very important that these kind of discussions are open and that we are very precise in our wording of terms which may be unfamiliar. I am sure we all agree that getting this wrong would be devastating.

Sorry OP, cross post. I will read your post and get back when I get home.

I think we should all express/present ourselves in a way that we feel is authentic for ourselves

When i worked in a slightly more expensive high street dress shop we had two regular Transwomen Customers

But we also had a man with a very ‘manly’ job, who looked very manly and was obviously a man who loved wearing pretty dresses

He went to a wedding in a 50’s style prom dress that cost about £200, everyone he knew at work and friends and family knew he liked pretty dresses and apparently he had never had any issues with the general public

Just to tack onto the above, the 'Self-ID' thing is a whole other can of worms and, like childhood transitioning, and sports, I can't pretend I don't have a pile of conflicting thoughts and feelings about the subjects. Answers? Less so, sorry.

Sure, the way they present is integral to their being.

But so what? That doesn't make them a man or a woman. It cannot, because it means anyone not doing that, isn't a man or a woman.

If being a woman means presenting as X then logically not presenting as X means you're not a woman.

But plenty of women don't present as X. So they aren't women to OP. Not to mention it is blatantly stereotyping what OP is doing, and in a sexist manner.

What I don't understand is the leap to thinking that means they are a woman. I really wish people were "widening the bandwidth of man" by wearing stereotypically female clothes/make up etc. I think that would be properly brave.

This!!! I would stand shoulder to shoulder and fight for your right to be yourself as a man who loves dresses, makeup etc. Your right to be safe in doing this, not have to fear male violence.

Wearing trousers never turned women into men a hundred years ago. I don't see how wearing dresses turns men into women today.

Omg MadBadDaddy you're a T*rf!!! You can't say things like that.

Thank you @MadBadDaddy, that is very helpful. As I said before, I am just happy for you that you have found a way to express yourself which feels authentic for you. I really hope I didn’t come across as trying to logic you into change anything about yourself.

The only reason I was pressing for definitions (you did bring up socialisation) is due to things like single sex spaces, sports and childhood transitioning.

I personally spend very little (if any) time in single sex spaces and most of my life is outside them. I think that it is possible to live a full life mainly outside them. That is why I don’t understand why this access is so important to trans women, why there cannot be a third space? And why Self ID is so important in this access demand, especially as this increases the risk of (non-trans) predators so dramatically? And in situations where some already vulnerable biological women and girls are particularly exposed?

I think I was the one who said that you disregarded others needs. This was only in relation to access to single sex spaces, particularly based on self ID. I believe that anyone who finds their access more important than the safety of extremely exposed, vulnerable biological women and girls does focus on their own needs and disregards others. As you have mixed feeling about this and consider it “a can of worms” it doesn’t appear to apply to you . I hope I phrased it as “comes across as”, if I stated it as an absolute fact, I apologise.

"I can't understand the efforts to gaslight it as some kind of proud martyr to women's rights"

I really don't think "gaslight" is the word you are looking for there. In the context it is meaningless, and I am sure you must have intended to mean something.

==============================

If a male were truly socialised as a female, he would not want to butt in to places where he was utterly unwelcome; he'd be ashamed to. Therefore no male-bodied person who insists in intruding into any woman-only space is truly socialised as a female; and if he is not socialised as a female he definitely ought not to be infringing on such a space.

If the law is altered so that he (and someone with male genitalia and secondary sex characteristics such as a full beard is male, whatever he may feel about his sexuality) can insist on his right to enforce his presence in spaces where he is neither welcome nor properly speaking entitled to be, he will clearly prove every time he insists on going into one that he is not actually female.

@AskingQuestionsAllTheTime (or anyone else?) could you maybe point me in the direction of some research on socialisation? I genuinely believe in biology (female = XX), but would like to know more about socialisation theories if these are being used in the debate.

The above (from CoffeeTeaChocolate) sums up my feelings about this issue perfectly (thank you CTC).

I wouldn't describe myself as a GC feminist - I'm just a middle-aged SAHM who wandered in here a year or so ago and became increasingly horrified and angered by the current trans idealogy.

My female socialization (if that's what it is) is very strong. I was raised to believe I should be kind and considerate and put others needs ahead of my own, and have often compromised my own feelings and safety because of this. I was sexually abused as a child because I had to 'be kind' to my neighbour's teenage son, who had a learning disability, and as a young women, I fell for many a 'sob story' from men who were trying to get into my knickers (and I don't mean wanting to wear them). So I know, first hand, how manipulative men can be and I've no doubt that some will take advantage of self-ID to abuse women and girls.

On the other hand, my natural instinct is to be sympathetic to people who have gender dysphoria, and to anyone who is abused or shamed because they don't fit into the usual gender stereotypes. So I often find myself wondering (as in that David Mitchell meme) if I'm the bad guy.

But, in the end, as CTC says (much more eloquently than I'm managing to) the safety of women and girls is more important than the validation of transwomen's feelings - and if transwomen really do consider themselves women they should understand that. Some do of course. I've watched some of the Blair White and Rose of Dawn videos - and they clearly get it; but many others are just 'me, me, me' and couldn't seem to give a toss about the genuine and reasonable concerns of natal women - while expecting us to fall over backwards to accommodate them. Seems like fairly typical male behaviour to me.

As for the cancelling of the Reddit site - I never really looked at it, as any time I've accidentally wandered into Reddit I've got the impression it's Incel HQ - and quickly wandered out again. Given how nasty it seems to be in there generally, it seems unlikely the GC bit was cancelled for nastiness per se - though I don't think it was misogyny either. Rather, it seems that trans people have some special status, which means they must be protected from all offence, but are allowed to insult, harass and even threaten 'cis' people, especially women, with impunity. So much for 'cis' privilege, hey!

If a male were truly socialised as a female, he would not want to butt in to places where he was utterly unwelcome; he'd be ashamed to. Therefore no male-bodied person who insists in intruding into any woman-only space is truly socialised as a female; and if he is not socialised as a female he definitely ought not to be infringing on such a space.

This this this.

If a male were truly socialised as a female, he would not want to butt in to places where he was utterly unwelcome; he'd be ashamed to. Therefore no male-bodied person who insists in intruding into any woman-only space is truly socialised as a female; and if he is not socialised as a female he definitely ought not to be infringing on such a space.

Indeed. Regarding the issue of whether or not women are OK with what you plan to do to them as essentially irrelevant is as male socialized as it gets.

The left handed thing? They used to punish lefties in school by hitting their knuckles or even tying up their hands. It is the origin of the word of the word 'sinister' and I still think it apt.

Lol, what the fuck?

CoffeeTeaChocolate, I was using the phrase as it has been being used here, rather than having a lot of data from detailed research as a basis for my usage. Sorry I can't really help you further.

Sites like this one
sites.psu.edu/academy/2016/04/07/the-effects-of-gender-socialization-on-men-and-women/
or this one
www.mariecurie.org/annals/volume3/crespi.pdf
or this one
www.papermasters.com/socialization-women.html
might be of some use?

I'm left handed. At school I was told to sit on my left hand and use my right. My returning to using my left hand felt natural for me, but the analogy doesn't work for women's rights.

The risk we are talking about is the dismantling of safeguarding and our existing rights, which is based on the ability to describe ourselves using precise language.

Its not empowerment to give yourself permission to have power over another group.
This is a fundamental tenet of both anti racism and feminism.

Thank you AskingQuestions.

To be fair to @MadBadDaddy , I am not sure they are insisting on access to single sex spaces. They have acknowledged that single sex space, self ID, female sports and child transitioning are a can of worms.

My impression (happy to bee corrected), is that they saw posts on reddit GC, regarding grooming, pedophiles, sex offenders etc and interpreted this as an attack on trans women in general. Obviously this was incredibly hurtful as they had spent years trying to finally be happy in the way they express and present themselves.

My understanding of reddit GC is that there were a lot of women who were incredibly worried about the impact on single sex spaces, female sports etc (much as the OP themselves). Being less severely moderated posters were potentially less precise in how this was expressed. They were concerned about males posing as trans and the (probably very low) proportion of trans women whom this actually applies to (there will be a certain proportion in all populations).

I believe that there are activists (not at all all trans women) who are trying to polarise the debate into a massive we and them and silence the women’s voices completely. That is why I find an open and very precise dialogue helpful for everyone. Both for the benefit of the people discussing and for lurkers / people who haven’t thought through the issues.

This thread could use input from transwomen like Scots Helen, who was on Talk Radio earlier this afternoon. She sounded thoroughly sensible and also totally considerate of the feelings of women in any woman-only spaces. (This was brought on by another thread, www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3957245-Talk-Radio-right-now-talking-JK-Rowling which led to me listening for a while.)

I want input from sensible trans women! I want discussion and dialogue, not polemic!

I want input from sensible trans women! I want discussion and dialogue, not polemic!

Yes. However, I'm not at all sure that FWR is the right board for that debate. We have had discussions with some of the more sensible transwomen, but my impression is that they've realised that while nowhere on MN is a 'women only space', their presence made here life harder for various women (perhaps most obviously the trans widows) and so they've had the courtesy to withdraw.

And here, on FWR, if there's a choice to be made between TW and women who've nowhere else to go, it doesn't matter whether I'm fine with the former if the latter aren't. Here, if nowhere else, we surely have to prioritise women.