The Guardian does it again: trans, gender, and sexism.

[Bmidreams]

I forgot how to cry as a man. HRT gave me a range of emotions I never thought possible

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/jul/20/i-forgot-how-to-cry-as-a-man-hrt-gave-me-a-range-of-emotions-i-never-thought-possible?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

Are they doing it on purpose??

But they also published this: www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/jul/19/transwomen-face-potential-womens-rugby-ban-over-safety-concerns.

I was very surprised to see this!

Women's hormones make them emotional ??? Can't they be done for that kind of crap?

I am a woman. I find it extremely hard to cry. Last time I remember a good sob was 10 years ago when dh was an arse the day I brought my youngest child home.

Am I not a proper woman then?

That is a cringy article

At first I wondered if the author meant he was numb because he was depressed. But then he moves on to talking about his sex drive reducing after hormone therapy.

One thing I don't get. If taking hormones alters someone's feelings and personality, how did they know they were supposed to be the opposite sex before taking the hormones? They had the feelings and personality of their own sex, didn't they, at least according to people like Candace?

I took HRT for years and it had the opposite effect, so perhaps it had nothing to do with HRT, and the same for the person in the article

Interesting that she said hormones/by implication, women don’t have to suffer arousal as men do. Though she admits to some strange things having aroused her when she was a man. I think the mistake she has made is the conflagration of her experiences with all trans experiences, and the subtext that this is what being a woman is. It just feeds into the view of feminine stereotypes which annoys so many women so much and undermines us.

@FredaFrogspawn

Interesting that she said hormones/by implication, women don’t have to suffer arousal as men do. Though she admits to some strange things having aroused her when she was a man. I think the mistake she has made is the conflagration of her experiences with all trans experiences, and the subtext that this is what being a woman is. It just feeds into the view of feminine stereotypes which annoys so many women so much and undermines us.

Absofuckinglutely

They're trying to present both sides.
In my humble opinion, that's a good thing.
People will see both articles and make up their own minds. It will inform and encourage debate.

Voluntary evolution is the hallmark of humanity. Gender affirmation, through hormone replacement therapy, is an awesome celebration of that quality. Trans and gender diverse people today are in the forge of evolution, we are wayfarers, nova heralds. We seek out and discover new ways to be.

I don't think they understand evolution.

What kind of "new way to be" involves major surgery and lifelong medication?

According to the second article, there now appears to be hard evidence available:

"
The Guardian can reveal that in a 38-page draft document produced by its transgender working group, it is acknowledged that there is likely to be “at least a 20-30% greater risk” of injury when a female player is tackled by someone who has gone through male puberty. The document also says the latest science shows that trans women retain “significant” physical advantages over biological women even after they take medication to lower their testosterone."

I can’t believe that’s even newsworthy.

Both sides of the arguments my arse.

Another moving work by the same author (warning, it is actually pretty disturbing)

imisspockets.com/my-bumhole/

Another batshit article from The Guardian... seriously though, how can they print this garbage? Talk about stereotyping. I think I’ll go and put something pink on, do my nails and have a little cry

I think I'll ignore it because it doesn't interest me at all and it's not relevant to me...

The rugby article is ridiculous
It took new research for them to realise that men's arms don't get shorter or their hearts shrink after taking hormone therapy 🤔
I refuse to call it HRT. They are not replacing natural hormones

To feel that range of emotions was something I never thought would be possible, and yet it’s now a monthly occurrence.

Monthly occurrence?!! Just seems a bit coincidental wouldn’t you say?!

@DrinkFeckArseGirls @Tanith one is actual news and the other is a load of gender stereotyping nonsense by a disturbed individual.

@ThousandsAreSailing I know, right? Still, it's evidence based research and, hopefully, it's impact will be far reaching where more sports bodies will follow.

Why was my comment deleted? I called the article bollocks. With a couple of appropriate intensifiers.

I’m just amazed they could bring themselves to publish the rugby article. Up till now that would be inconceivable pf them to do so. I wonder why the change of tack.

So I've re-read the Talk Guidelines and the extra-special FWR moderation principles and am yet to see anything that suggests that my post contravened any of them. @MNHQ what gives? Who have you pandered to and what on earth did they say to make you think that contravened guidelines?

I wonder why the change of tack.

Loss of subscribers/readers. They've had their begging bowls out. Jobs are being lost.

I think they are starting to realise that by backing the TRA's they backed the wrong horse.

Turns out that people, especially women, don't like being told how they should define themselves. So they have shifted their spending elsewhere. Who would have thought this would happen... oh...

If I had been told twenty years ago that sexist stereotyping will be supported by left-wing papers in 2020 I would not have believed it.

The rugby article at least addresses the issues, though some of the language is based on definitions forced on us by a very small minority, however marginalized. I am not "cis" but a woman.

On sex vs. gender in sports, the true underlying reason for sex-segregating many sports is that the male and female bodies differ, on average, and that trans women will have characteristics from the male distribution, not from the female distribution. The segregation has nothing to do with one's gender identity. Indeed, it would be meaningless to segregate sports on that basis alone.

I understand that the problems all this creates are difficult and involve competing rights, but the rights of millions of girls to have fair competitions surely should matter just a little, too.

The potential rugby ruling has huge implications because if it is agreed in law that trans women are advantaged in rugby, then they are advantaged one other sports too. Ergo women are disadvantaged in all sports in their own sex class when competing against trans women. Which is what many have been saying all along.