Gay/trans false equivalence

[Toblerone345]

Not really sure how to word this but hoping someone slightly more eloquent than me can help me get my thoughts in order. This is something I've seen people bring up time and time again, and it frustrates me that I find it difficult to construct a decent argument against it despite feeling instinctively that it's a load of rubbish.

I often see people compare the treatment of gay people to the treatment of trans people. For example, I've seen people argue that saying trans women aren't women is the same as saying a gay person is just going through a phase. I've also seen people argue that suggesting the best thing for a young 'trans' person might not be to start taking hormone blockers or have surgery is similar to advocating for conversion therapy for gay people.

I don't believe these things are particularly similar but find it difficult to verbalise why. I think at its core it's that the only requirement for being gay is being attracted exclusively to the same sex, and that feeling is completely internal - nobody other than you can say whether you are or are not gay. Being trans, on the other hand, is related to physical reality and claiming to be a woman when you biologically aren't one isn't correct. Can anyone explain simply why the comparison doesn't work?

But then again many other women wouldn't either.

Yes, I'm sure most women wouldn't class you as a radical feminist.

Equality of opportunity is basically saying 'well go on, no one's stopping you' whilst completely failing to take account of axes of oppression and disadvantage.

It's what brought us choicey choicey third wave feminism and brings us 'all lives matter'.

It's really not very progressive.

This. With bells on

@ChakaDakotaRegina

Wouldn’t outlawing ‘positive action‘ have an impact on forming LGBT shortlists or committees or diversity champion roles? Or disabled Or minority

Well, adjustments for neurodivergent candidates or those with disabilities would be out unless everybody else got them too.

*Milady
*
Thanks for responding again, I appreciate that you're getting a lot of questions.

So it seems like you believe in a meritocracy, where we are all judged solely on our own achievements.

Does that mean that you believe that disadvantage and inequality don't exist? Do you think that we are all born equal, and have exactly the same chances of success?

Is that your experience? That life is completely fair?

It's not mine. I'd like to give you an example. I applied for a promotion, and my line manager told me that I wouldn't get the job, because I had got married recently and everyone assumed I would start having babies soon. He said that I probably wouldn't get any more promotions or opportunities until I'd had all my babies so I should get on with it. I didn't get the promotion. My husband (also recently married!) worked for the same company in a different department and he did get promoted that year. In fact he got 3 promotions in the time it took me to get 1.

Do you believe me? Do you think my husband was honestly 3 times as good at his job as I was at mine?

That's one example, I've got lots more. I'm sure other posters have as well.

This thread is gold. I'm so glad my 'privilege' means that having had a great, well paid career prior to having children, producing the next generation mean that my career crashed and burned whilst my now ex husband's skyrocketed because he refused to even ask for any kind of flexible working. I have all the childcare issues. I can't take opportunities that come up because I have to centre my children's needs. I have been directly and indirectly discriminated against as a direct result of my SEX. Not my gender. I've been asked in interviews if I'm planning any more children. That shit is based on my SEX. Not my gender, because being an adult human female comes with distinct disadvantages which absolutely are and continue to be exploited by manipulative men who hold the opinion that by virtue of their SEX the are of less value and more of a risk than male counterparts. Your views are exactly what I'd expect to hear from an aging 80's throwback with a deep seated dislike for women.

No, but I'd replace it with an Equality of Opportunity Act, which would outlaw all forms of discrimination, including so called "positive action."

And that would help disabled people how exactly? Making discrimination illegal isn't enough, you actually have to do something about preventing it as well you know. Something like the "positive action " that means when applying for certain jobs disabled people are guaranteed an interview when they declare their disability.

Anyone who thinks that women’s sex based rights are a) no longer needed and b) are privileges have no experience at all in being female.

And what about women’s sports by the way? Or is that just a privilege too?

milad do you live in a utopian society where everyone has been equal since birth and therefore have no need of laws protecting their rights and opportunities. Please let us know where this is... your utopia might get a whole slew of new citizens.

No, but I'd replace it with an Equality of Opportunity Act, which would outlaw all forms of discrimination, including so called "positive action.

How does this work with safety and fairness in sport?

OK well I’ll make myself clear. If you, as a lesbian are not attracted to, or interested in a relationship with, transgender women, this does not make you transphobic. Argue against a phantom who believes it does by all means, but it is unhelpful to equate that phantom with me or trans women in general.

I specifically created a thread of evidence of this "phantom" phenomenon

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3294339-cotton-ceiling-evidence-thread

Hi @withgraceinmyheart

Not everyone is born with the same opportunities, and you could only achieve a pure meritocracy with a weird dystopia where children are confiscated from their parents and raised by the state. Meritocracy is, however, an ideal we can work towards, for example with laws against discrimination which I fully support.

It sounds like your employer was pretty rubbish when it came to equal opportunities. That's not good (and I'm guessing it ultimately harmed their bottom line) but it's not an argument against equality of opportunity as such.

Finally, don't you think gender fluidity might make this sort of discrimination impossible in the future? If you're employer can't even ask you your "biological sex" how are they going to discriminate on that basis?

@JanMeyer

Please do yourself a huge favour and read some Ayn Rand.

Finally, don't you think gender fluidity might make this sort of discrimination impossible in the future? If you're employer can't even ask you your "biological sex" how are they going to discriminate on that basis?

How do you think they possibly manage to discriminate now? Given the prohibition on discrimination on the grounds of having the protected characteristic of sex in the Equality Act? it's very strange how they can do that when it's illegal.

Please do yourself a huge favour and read some Ayn Rand.

Please do us unworthy ones a favour and summarise your argument.

Finally, don't you think gender fluidity might make this sort of discrimination impossible in the future? If you're employer can't even ask you your "biological sex" how are they going to discriminate on that basis?

When it comes to who to pay less and who to take less seriously they know exactly what sex a person is...

Funny that

The greatest achievement of the TRAs was to hook the T on to the LGB when in fact it’s something entirely different.

Quite. TRA rhetoric is actually hugely homophobic. Its amazing really that they managed to get 'in' so to speak with LGB people whilst being completely against anything to do with acknowledging sex, including same sex attraction which is now bigotted and wrong according to pink news and stonewall. Sex shouldn't matter, it should be all about hairstyle and clothing choices seemingly

Was a clever move though, I say reluctantly. Because of course the huge majority of people have absolutely no issue with people being gay/bi and many have seen the struggles they faced over the years too and want to support them. Hitch T to this group, and suddenly saying that you think a woman is an adult human female and that lesbians should be able to not shag male people without being shamed..means you are a homomphobe, aswell as a nasty transphobe.

Clever move, TRAs/MRAs. Ca'n't decide which is cleverer, taking over LGB orgs, or selling new brand 'liberal feminism' to the woke younger people..'feminism' that centres mens wants/needs at all times, and seeks for feminists to solve the problems of men and every other group on the planet before thinking about female people.

• Not ALL TRAs disclaimer. Of course not all. But seemingly a lot, and the very loudest of the group.

Please do yourself a huge favour and read some Ayn Rand

Why can't you in your own words explain why your idea is so great? Please tell me how reading Ayn Rand would help me understand the issues disabled people face in regards to discrimination more than actually being disabled will.

Finally, don't you think gender fluidity might make this sort of discrimination impossible in the future? If you're employer can't even ask you your "biological sex" how are they going to discriminate on that basis?

Employers can’t now but they do ask about the ‘family situation’. And how would they tell? Well, when I told my employers I was pregnant it did not stop them finding a clause they could legally use to sack me. So, I guess when females turn up to work showing a pregnancy or having to have time off for morning sickness or even, you know, asking for period disposal units to be in the unisex loos they will understand what sex even a gender fluid person is. Because sex doesn’t change.

I also intensely dislike the trans conversion therapy argument.

Because quite simply, its actually gay conversion therapy to be putting young kids who follow the wrong stereotypes onto blockers and thus a self fulfilling prophecy. When the data and such appears to say that when left alone, these kids will 'grow out of it' in most cases, and will generally turn out to be gay.

Still no thoughts about ramps milad?

Exactly the same group- non conforming 'feminine' boys that were pushed into gay conversion programs are now being pushed into trans programs if they express a preference for girls toys/clothing.

Sorry, should have read further on before posting..I always do that.

But this^

Kids who would have been forced through gay conversion therapy, are now..getting gay conversion therapy in a different guise. And some just blatantly refuse to see this though it seems obvious?!

Finally, don't you think gender fluidity might make this sort of discrimination impossible in the future?

And how will this protect females from FGM, period poverty, female infanticide, abortion issues and the wide range of sex based abuses that only females experience? You know, ones that may come under those sex based rights that are not needed by males. At all. Or are they too privileges?

OK, you want Objectivism 101. Fine

If you distribute resources on the basis of need rather than merit, you get a lot of people with expensive needs and nobody who produces anything.

When it comes to who to pay less and who to take less seriously they know exactly what sex a person is...

Oh no but that's only because we write our sex markers down. That will totally disappear if we don't because they won't have any idea what sex we are!