Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Scared I will lose my best friend of many years ...

90 replies

Bobkitten · 15/07/2020 14:14

I have for the first time stated I’m in agreement with J K Rowling and my best friend was, I think, quite shocked and responded with ‘trans women are women.’

We had a long calm discussion (not argument) in which I put forward my viewpoint and we agreed that I would send her a few links, so she can see for herself what I’ve been reading.

I’ve done this, but I got the sense she’s horrified and I feel really worried she will write me off as a ‘transphobe.’

Not much point in posting really, but feeling on the verge of tears right now (god knows how J K Rowling is feeling).

OP posts:
Griefmonster · 15/07/2020 19:53

@Bobkitten If you're both able to have a reasonable conversation about this then I wouldnt go in too strong. I have a friend that we can discuss this while coming to different conclusions. I just pass on info when I see something well argued and reasonable.

But I would really endorse this:
*I take it she's actually read JKRs essay then?

You have checked?*

My friend had opinions on the essay but when I checked (as she wasn't making much sense) she hadn't!

OvaHere · 15/07/2020 20:01

It seems crazy that people are losing life long friends for knowing biology is real and women exist in our own right.

If ten years ago OP you had said to your friend 'one day we will fall out because you will no longer believe biological sex is real and women are female' she would probably have asked you if you felt okay and needed to see a Dr.

cheezy · 15/07/2020 20:18

I had a similar lengthy conversation with a very old dear friend, who is also sensible and compassionate.

It was the first conversation I’ve had ‘in real life’ about these issues and it’s really made me question my stance.

I am now not sure that we’re on the right side of history. I really worry that, deep down, I do harbour some anti-transgender prejudices.

OvaHere · 15/07/2020 20:25

I am now not sure that we’re on the right side of history

There's a saying that history is generally written by the victors!

If you are on the wrong side then logically that puts rape & death threats against women, porn posted at children, rapists in women's prisons and the dismantling of female sport on the 'right' side.

PumbaasCucumbas · 15/07/2020 20:49

Cheezy, I know the feeling. Most of us are kind people, we want to ‘check our privilege’ and try to imagine what it’s like to feel we’re in the wrong body and be desperate to be accepted for what we’d like to be.

The nearest experience I can draw on in my own life is a period of infertility where all my friends were having babies and I could think of nothing else, feeling depressed and barren, especially around my period.

But, I acknowledged I had a choice in my attitude, I could get angry, resentful and avoid my friends, or I could see that they were struggling too in their own ways, newborns with reflux or older ones having meltdowns. So instead I bought nice gifts and offered to bring meals and provide childcare for a few hours off. It was hard, but it was not their fault and bitterness was not good for me either, it takes a village to raise a child etc.

I see this kind of behaviour in people like Fionne Orlander who does not seem to hate women. Who acknowledges the needs specific to the female sex.

The aggressive TRAs who think their womxnhood takes precedence and women’s biological needs are irrelevant and transphobic have completely lost any sense of empathy beyond themselves. You can’t reason with this. There are lots of sensible conversations to be had to solve the trans rights issues If women were at least considered in the conversation or #bekind wasn’t completely one sided.

When campaigns to protect extremely vulnerable teenage girls from FGM are shut down as transphobic and rats are nailed to the door of dv shelters, it makes me feel that reasonable, understanding debate is impossible.

Kit19 · 15/07/2020 21:19

Cheezy what did they say that made you question your stance?

HereForTheFeminismChat · 15/07/2020 21:37

I share your concerns, @Bobkitten.

If she is open to it, I might try questioning my friend about the logical endpoint of the statement TWAW. Is it completely unqualified? If not, what are those qualifications? When does the statement run out of steam?

So for instance, let's say there is a clinical trial for a new Covid treatment. If a trans woman is a participant in the trial - let's say one who is not taking any hormonal interventions and who has not had any other medical procedures - should she be recorded as female or male?

Covid is interesting, as there seems to be a pronounced sex-based difference in mortality - but as many have joked, identifying as a woman is unlikely to help.

This is actually part of a bigger issue for women, as we have often been excluded from medical trials and research. This means a lot of medical information - clinical indications, side effects of drugs, etc - is based on men. For a recent example, look up heart attack, where it has been suggested that women experience certain symptoms more so than men (and write off these symptoms as flu).

There are numerous other examples you could give. If someone requests a female practitioner to perform a cervical smear, is it ok if any current or former penis-bearing person performs the test, so long as that person identifies as a woman? Should anyone who self-identifies as a woman be able to compete in women's sport?

It concerns me that people who proclaim TWAW rarely address any specific points about sports, medicine, etc. Thinking about the response to JK Rowling's thoughtful essay, there were many who accused Rowling of hate speech, and some who identified minor issues (such as a slight factual inaccuracy in the description of the Maya Forstater case), but no-one really addressed the essence of Rowling's concern. The more I read and think, the more hardened I become in my views, because the other side doesn't have a case, it just has assertions.

FreddoFrogAddict · 15/07/2020 22:50

I'm in this situation with my 23 year old daughter and it breaks my heart. She's living here with us while she's furloughed and, knowing her as I thought I did, I happily mentioned I'd emailed JKR in support and had received a lovely acknowledgement from her office. DD had a hissy fit, said JKR was 'vile', TWAW, and stormed out of the room. We're both making an effort to get along, but I just can't see her in the same light anymore. She's joined a cult as far as I'm concerned. All of my friends are GC as far as I know, thank goodness.

quixote9 · 15/07/2020 23:09

A few commenters have mentioned differences of opinion. This really isn't that. On one hand you have women's foundational right to physical safety (I mean, you can kill in self-defense, there's no right more basic than physical safety), as well as determining who's in their group (which all other groups get). On the other side are people who would like validation.

The degree to which we should be providing validation is a difference of opinion. Disregarding basic rights is a lot more than that. That's why there are usually criminal penalties attached to it.

This is the giveaway as to what's going on here: "
The thing that really struck a nerve with my friend was asking her whether she thought lesbians who didn’t want to date a person with physically male body were transphobic. Likewise gay men not wanting to date female-bodied people. While she initially began talking about tolerance, when I pointed out the homophobia, it suddenly dawned on her that this was plain wrong. "

When it affects gay sexuality the wrongness of erasing sex becomes more obvious to people. Erasing women's sex is invisible.

Just as women's basic rights somehow don't register. The simple reason is that women really don't register as actual human beings. Worrying about their fear or pain or dignity or desires when anyone else is involved (i.e. a man, since that's the only alternative) would be like putting the convenience of sheep ahead of commuters' need for a new road. Ridiculous. Unthinkable, meaning people just can't even think it. Certainly, you wouldn't want to be gratuitously mean to sheep for no reason. But they're not even on the map when the needs of actual people are in question.

Just look slowly and in detail at the people insisting on TWAW and "kindness" and the safety of transwomen (at the expense of women dealing with predatory men). The bit in parentheses isn't even on the map. Because women aren't.

EdgeOfACoin · 16/07/2020 05:55

@Kit19

Cheezy what did they say that made you question your stance?
I am curious too, @cheezy.
cheezy · 16/07/2020 06:43

Well, the fundamental difference in opinion is that she believes TWAW and I don't. She couldn't see why it really mattered if someone identified as female, what difference it made to her. She felt that the camp of womanhood was big enough to include everyone. That womanhood is difficult to define and she might in fact have more in common with a transwoman than a Sudanese refugee.
She couldn't understand why JKR had used her platform to campaign against a vulnerable group.
That people do not come out as transgender unless they absolutely have to (rather than for nefarious reasons)
That of course a small minority will masquerade as transgender but we mustn't use this against genuine transpeople who are the underdog, the downtrodden - the sort of people my friend and I have always championed - and who suffer more for different reasons than the average woman in the UK.
And she said that yes, there are parallels with the resistance to gay rights.
We have always been on the same page on human rights and so this conversation was interesting (and troubling) She did concede that there were issues with womans sport and children transitioning too young.

BaronessSlighterThanThou · 16/07/2020 07:50

Quixote9 - excellent post.

TeaAndStrumpets · 16/07/2020 08:08

Quixote9 you nailed it.

EdgeOfACoin · 16/07/2020 08:15

Well, the fundamental difference in opinion is that she believes TWAW and I don't. She couldn't see why it really mattered if someone identified as female, what difference it made to her. She felt that the camp of womanhood was big enough to include everyone. That womanhood is difficult to define and she might in fact have more in common with a transwoman than a Sudanese refugee.

Would she have more in common with a Sudanese refugee woman or a Sudanese refugee transwoman, though?

Without an objective definition of 'woman', it all becomes meaningless. You can't write laws to protect women's rights if you can't define what a woman is.

It has absolutely nothing to do with how nice a particular transwoman may or may not be.

Lamahaha · 16/07/2020 08:26

She's joined a cult as far as I'm concerned. All of my friends are GC as far as I know, thank goodness.

I've known people in cults, or cult-like groups. I was once in a spiritual group that seemed to be growing cultish characteristics. I left, as did many of close friends -- but many other close friends stayed.
I always remained friends with the ones who stayed. We could always talk, just avoided certain topics. There was never any hatred or loss of friendship. I still visit one of them occasionally, or write her, or meet up (she lives quite far away). There is a level of love that cannot be disturbed, despute differences of opinion.

The difference between this and all the other well-known cults (Moonies, Osho, Jim Jones etc) is that there is not a charismatic leader. A charismatic leader, usually a man, who can speak boldly and with supreme confidence, and convince others of his leadership, and his wisdom and that he is RIGHT, is, to me, the main danger of a cult. It's really hard to pull oneself away from such a person.

The really dangerous thing about the TRA cult is that there is no leader. No one identifiable person (man) at the head who is determining the doctrine and the direction. It seems to be more a secret consortium hiding in the background. That is the scariest thing of all. I can well understand how a single powerful person can draw less confident people into a truth-denying web. But this thing is so -- so vague, so leaderless, so out there hanging in space.

It scares me that sensible people can fall for an ideology not taught by an identifiable leader. The latter, I can understand. Some people are really hypnotic and have a powerful magnetism. I've seen it myself. I just don't get this -- this thing.

How can one deny biological sex, when it is right out there in front of our eyes?

It really is like drinking the Koolaid, when Koolaid is not an actual drink but a set of convictions that won't be budged, however ridiculous they are; beliefs that are totally new and would never have been accepted as recently as five years ago. How can this happen?

ChattyLion · 16/07/2020 08:56

OP I had a conversation with someone who really believed that trans people needed rights and didn’t have any in the UK. That transgender people didn’t have access to healthcare. This is what people are being told. It’s complete nonsense if you look into it at all but people are kind, but busy and gullible. People are used to seeing other people as baddies and writing them off- which is a fair reaction in some situations - Trump- but has got people a bit too used to letting others make the assessments for them, and agreeing with those assessments becoming a badge of identity. Think of things like Brexit. Few people I know (me included) could really take the arguments apart but we all know where we stood on the vote). So a third party asking us politely to look again at what we’ve assumed to the true can be quite emotionally challenging. Even though it maybe wouldn’t have been in other less divided political times. I don’t know. Maybe being politically blinkered by the current culture is a very normal state of the human condition.

Anyway IME people (men and women) who believe this don’t ever really think TW literally are W, because they accept biology, but they want to be kind and inclusive and respectful ‘to everyone’ and haven’t thought about what that means for women.

They can’t ever say what ‘rights’ trans people don’t have and then they start talking about school toilets and public toilets and just wanting to pee in peace.

Then you’re on to women’s rights not to feel afraid or uncomfortable in their own spaces and the class aspect of this that many people glibly taking down single-sex provision of every kind are not people who will ever be using these single sex spaces or services. And that protecting minorities abilities to use public services is exactly what ‘being inclusive‘ really actually is. But that isn’t at the expense of others, third spaces can be made if necessary.

Then I mention female powerlessness and how we need to speak up in forums where we aren’t at personal risk for doing so- Female prisons is a classic example. that’s why JKR doing so in public is such a big deal.

It’s made me more certain than ever that it’s women’s rights (and children’s safeguarding) that we cant talk about. Let that sink in. That’s a shock right there at first, in this day and age. We all like to think of social progress going forward so It can be hard to accept that it can go backwards too. And ‘on our watch’.

This all makes me more sure than ever that this is a male sexual entitlement movement we are dealing with. The ubiquity of porn and how viciously women are treated in it is adding to the toxic atmosphere for girls growing up, the stigma that has been attached to lesbianism while T is celebrated in the LGBTQI+. ‘Intersex’ (‘I’) people, meaning people born with disorders of sexual development being unwilling coopted into an identity campaign. While same-sex attracted LGB people are being told they are transphobic for their sexual orientation. But specifically it is lesbians being harassed by men with the disgusting concept of the ‘cotton ceiling‘.

It’s no wonder that increasing numbers of girls and young women want to find a way to escape from all the sexism and the lesbophobia by transition. I see all the time how even for girls seemingly managing to navigate this culture in relatively non-self-destructive ways, and who have grown up always in mixed-sex environments, it’s at the expense of much of a sense of female solidarity and this isn’t an experience they have been able to have.

The ‘not being like other girls’ cool-girl trope really needs careful unpicking because that’s just another way to get by in a misogynistic society. All of these reactions to misogyny are rational and understandable on some level, it reminds me of all the different strategies that people can try to escape bullying though.

We live in a massively sexist, misogynistic culture. That is what has to change.

HandsOffMyRights · 16/07/2020 09:02

Thanks to the pp for the Jenn Smith link - that is useful.

I'm dreading this conversation with a family member. I just know she will be unreasonable and insist she knows everything. She's intelligent and articulate on so many issues, but on gender politics I know she will turn into the kind of person she'd normally take task with for not basing arguments on fact and science, for not supporting the actual oppressed group.

What I find childish is that I will not fall out with friends or family who insist that men can be women. I won't demonise them for supporting a regime that denies females our rights. I won't gasp in horror that they find it acceptable that girls lose places on sports teams or that males should access women's refuges and prisons.

Yet, when the boot is on the other foot, those of us who are GC are often deemed unreasonable, lambasted for wanting to protect our rights, for NOT wanting children to be prescribed off label drugs and recommended for plastic surgery. And I find it ironic because lots of those advocates of gender pride themselves on "being kind" or progressive.

bebanjo · 16/07/2020 10:00

I think I must be on my own here.
Maybe I am just childish.
When it became obvious that a friend of mine was a convert to the TWAW cult, I found it very difficult to be around her. She believes in the transient of children. Believes that women can have penises and to say otherwise is hate speech. She posts about gender critical being akin to natzis. So I have distance myself from her.

DappledOliveGroves · 16/07/2020 10:53

No, not just you Bebanjo. I find it extremely hard to be around people of the 'TWAW' view. I cannot respect them, I cannot understand them and I wonder about their ability to think in any kind of logical fashion, when their belief is based on an out and out lie, with no basis in material reality whatsoever. I find I just cannot trust such people - what else will they come out with?

I think this is really the only debate that alienates me from others. I'm perfectly happy to disagree on political stances, climate change, Trump as president, different beliefs over religion or atheism. I have many friends with radically different political views and it's never been an issue. But when someone tells you 'black is white' and calls you a bigot for failing to go along with that lie, then that's a line drawn for me. If a 5ft, Caucasian female friend, insisted that they were a 6ft ethnically Chinese man, I'd suggest they needed psychiatric help. If a post office worker insisted they were a cardiologist and sought to practise open heart surgery, they'd be arrested. Yet a man with a penis and testicles insists they're a woman and should be welcomed into the women's changing room and my refusal to accommodate this is somehow bigotry? No, no and no.

I refuse to live in a 1984 world where there is no objective truth or facts. And I cannot tolerate those whose critical thinking faculties have been removed to allow this nonsense.

DonkeySkin · 16/07/2020 13:19

when someone tells you 'black is white' and calls you a bigot for failing to go along with that lie, then that's a line drawn for me... I refuse to live in a 1984 world where there is no objective truth or facts. And I cannot tolerate those whose critical thinking faculties have been removed to allow this nonsense.

I agree 100 per cent Dappled but is the issue ever presented this bluntly by the 'GC' side?

People don't think they are saying, 'Black is white' when they chant 'TWAW', they think they are being kind to a very vulnerable group of males who themselves pose no threat, being symbolically or actually castrated.

I think the kinds of arguments used by women who want to preserve single-sex provision are often weak and seem almost designed to enable people to preserve their cognitive dissonance on this issue. For instance, they say, 'predatory men will abuse this' (which is easily brushed off as a hypothetical, and nothing to do with 'genuine' trans people), or 'transwomen are transwomen' (which means what, exactly? It's a nonsense platitude).

I think GC'ers need to frame their arguments as starkly as HandsOff put it: '[You] find it acceptable that girls lose places on sports teams and that males should access women's refuges and prisons.'

That's what all these nice, kind lefty people are supporting, but they don't ever need to face up to it because they can hide behind the language of 'transwomen' and thus the notion that they are championing a marginalised minority. People will always choose to support a group of 'vulnerable' males over women and girls. They don't even have to acknowledge they are being sexist because they are supporting a group called 'transwomen'. It's men, they are supporting men's rights (or rather men's demands), but few people ever call them on it.

DonkeySkin · 16/07/2020 13:40

Sorry to bang on, but check out this thread from Guardian writer Ben Beaumont-Thomas to see the work that 'transwoman' does in obscuring sexual power dynamics:

twitter.com/ben_bt/status/1283705306611056640

There is no material difference between a man who identifies as a man and a man who identifies as a 'trans woman'. In terms of sexual politics and in particular which sex is at risk from the other, they are the same group of people.

At one point, Ben says: Men threaten women in so many ways. Trans women (often non-white trans women) experience the blunt, murderous end of that threat all too often. Again, these women need compassion.

Translated without Newspeak, that means:

'Men threaten women in so many ways. Men (often non-white men) experience the blunt, murderous end of that of that threat all too often. Again, these men need compassion.'

What's Ben's actual point here? That men threaten women, but that they also sometimes threaten other men? That isn't news, and it isn't a reason to end single-sex provision. Notice that none of the GCs arguing with him point this out - they implicitly accept the framing that 'trans women' and 'men' constitute two objectively different groups of people.

The language manipulation, whereby men are transmuted into '(adjective) women', allows people like Ben get away with this nonsensical argument again and again.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 16/07/2020 15:05

The language manipulation, whereby men are transmuted into '(adjective) women', allows people like Ben get away with this nonsensical argument again and again.

YY. Exactly.

highame · 16/07/2020 18:31

My very real worry is that this debate isn't real. It's a middle class debate. I don't know any middle class women who go to public lavs in working class areas and find out how vulnerable women are. They will be far more vulnerable if TWAW. Lavs in John Lewis do no constitute Lavs. Really haven't framed that well. Everyone talks about prisons but there are other spaces that need our attention. I think women in working class areas hold it in until they get home

HarryHarry · 16/07/2020 18:54

This happened to me too OP. It’s nuts. It was the same friend who stays silent when one of her other friends says racist shit but cuts me off completely for saying sex is real.

RedToothBrush · 16/07/2020 19:01

I'm going to stress this again; when this debate comes up in polite conversation the very first point to make, before any further engagement is "have you actually read what JKR has written", and the conversation goes no further until you get an answer. If the answer is no or I don't need to or I know what she said from everywhere, you go back to to "so you haven't read it, here let's look at it now".

Every attempt to not engage demonstrates a closed mind.

"If what she said is so bad, perhaps you can put it out in black and white and unpick her argument point by point so I can understand why she is wrong better".

This is about getting people to actually sit down and read what was said not what they think was said.

Remember that and your argument on this is strong and harder to avoid, and sows seeds of doubt.

JKR is eloquent and the power of her writing is her strength.

Use it.

Use direct quotes from what she said, but don't tell someone when you do. Get them to agree to the point then said, "we'll that's what JKR said too".

Swipe left for the next trending thread