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?

Nah. It really seems that after listening to activists actually tell us ‘who they are’ it becomes apparent. They want to be called women but will never stand with women in the real world.

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?

A) it's already illegal, but still happens all the live long day.

B) with their eyes. And see A).

Sarcasm Spartacus? You fiend Add EHCPs to your list if you can bear it. Who could justify giving children help to reach their potential and pay tax as an employed adult.

If we're talking need rather than merit, presumably no guests of HMP will be getting NHS reassignment surgery courtesy of the tax payer either.

"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?"

🤣 🤣 🤣

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

🤣 Bless.

In the past I read some books by Ayn Rand.

Milad, you are so funny. Thanks for the laugh.

Hi again Milady

I think there's a difference between saying 'this is the world we wish we lived in' and pretending that we live in that world now. It would be great in everyone was equal but we're not, and it's dangerous for people who are more vulnerable if we try to pretend that we are.

As you've said yourself in an earlier post, people with privileges don't want to share them. Do you accept that some people have natural privileges, and they don't want to share those? For example, physical strength, the ability to have a family without needing medical care or time off work, financial advantages. Do you accept that men have all of those advantages over women? Do you think men, as a class, are willing to share those advantages?

Yes, I think my employer was 'rubbish' about discrimination. I think they are the rule rather than the exception, as I know lots of women have similar experiences. What he said to me is already illegal. You're right that he wouldn't have been able to say it if he hadn't known I was female, but at the point I got pregnant he would've known. I think the idea that sex doesn't affect people's experiences of life is a very male one.

@Kit19

This would be funny if I didn’t think Mil didn’t seriously believe women are not disadvantaged in the world just by the pure fact that they’ve women

As it is it’s not funny, it’s enraging

No affinity, no empathy at all

It’s almost as if milady has no experience of being a woman isn’t it?

I’m not enraged at all. Unusually for TRAs,, Milady is actually being honest about their agenda and admitting they want to take away women’s rights - as we’ve been saying along.

I can’t believe any woman (or any non-MRA man) would support this. And there will be lurkers a-lurking.

Thank you Milady.

Well I wouldn't necessarily classify myself as a radical feminist.

malady

Since you mention you follow Rand, would you please explain how your concept of feminism fit into your following of Rand please?

Do you also go so far as to believe that women should only look after their children as an investment in the future for instance?

And how do you logically extend a philosophy of ‘just work harder to get ahead’ to sport? And to abuse victims? And to females living under regimes where they cannot even give their names to medical staff without suffering horrendous abuse from their husbands (who they are likely not to have had a choice to marry in the first place.)

Or does your own feminism focus solely on progressing you as an individual, hence your anger at females not wanting to ‘share’, I think were your words’ the rights they need. Rights which are there in law but as many females will attest to on this board, are quite easy to negate.

If you're employer can't even ask you your "biological sex" how are they going to discriminate on that basis?

@MiladyRenata why have you put the words biological sex in quotes?

So Milad as somebody who considers themselves a woman, do you not like to see increased numbers of females in higher powered jobs and greater positions of power? You know, the females who are in these positions as a result of the positive discrimination measures you so disapprove of? Or is it that you only like to see women in the toilets and changing rooms?

And getting back to the theme of the thread. I think that malady’s belief that women’s sex based rights are privileges and not needed is a good example as to why the gay rights movement and trans rights movement are a whole world apart.

LGB is nothing like the T.

T are often oppressing LGB, by ignoring what qualifies as same sex relationships. So much homophobia.

@Winesalot

And getting back to the theme of the thread. I think that malady’s belief that women’s sex based rights are privileges and not needed is a good example as to why the gay rights movement and trans rights movement are a whole world apart.

YY

@Winesalot

And getting back to the theme of the thread. I think that malady’s belief that women’s sex based rights are privileges and not needed is a good example as to why the gay rights movement and trans rights movement are a whole world apart.

Spot on.

I’m sure this nonsense comes from the idea that women are teaming with privilege because they have “power” over heterosexual men. Which falls apart as soon as you expand it beyond an individual’s time specific experience.

@Winesalot

And getting back to the theme of the thread. I think that malady’s belief that women’s sex based rights are privileges and not needed is a good example as to why the gay rights movement and trans rights movement are a whole world apart.

This.

I saw a good micro example of the privilege vs basic rights principle on a Twitter thread last night. Teenage daughter (hard of hearing) was taking liberties in the evening, spending hours on the phone chatting to her friends. Dad on AITA (am I the asshole reddit board) was contemplating taking away the batteries for her cochlear implants to control/punish her for excess phone use.

Basic fundamental rights = cochlear implants/batteries

Privileges = having a smart phone/screen time/wifi access

One offers the opportunity to close the gap between people with a disadvantage and the default class of people in society (in this case hard of hearing), denying this is oppressive/abusive. The other is an optional nicety that you earn. Women need equity policies (NOT equality) to account for the fact that we are the only class of people who birth the next generation of humans. Not all women can/do give birth, but all who give birth are women. The perception of potential pregnancy, actual pregnancy, birth and infant care are a burden to us, and we need equity laws to achieve parity with men. Upholding the principle of equality of opportunity means you merely uphold the extant power structures in society and nothing substantive changes. Women get hobbled in their careers/academic research etc as they're perceived as a pregnancy risk. Or they get pregnant in the context of coercive control and find they can't get a termination due to male politicians and clerics having an opinion on what a woman does with her body.

Almost every single woman out there from adolescence to middle age has had to navigate the risk of pregnancy in relation to her ambitions about her life path. No transwoman ever has. It is not a "privilege", it is a sword of Damocles. Maybe if TW could actually change places with us for the day, including the risk of pregnancy and maternity discrimination, they might lose the taste for the "festivities" at the banquet of womanhood as did Damocles.

I think too that when someone born male can dismiss the issues affecting females and the things they need to be able to participate in public life as mere, trivial 'privileges' and imply they're behaving like spoiled children not wanting to share - it repeats, again, how those born male have so little interest or awareness in the realities of being female because these are issues that don't affect them. They're not on male people's radar or realm of experience at all. Male socialisation means the privilege of being able to be oblivious to all this and to see it as petty little nonsenses that don't matter. Because it never bothers them. The experience of being born biologically female is only truly understood by other biological females.

And the superiority of dismissal when people born female try to explain, the sheer deafness of sexism to female voices trying to explain inequality demonstrates all over again why female people must have female only spaces and facilities and legal boundaries that males cannot get past. It is because there is this systemic inequality. Here it is. Happening in real time.

YY Michelle... "Nothing about us without us"

This is the part I think confuses many female people.

You can split all the various facets of womanhood into two groups. Those that people born male are vocal and active about participating in and the need to be included in. Many of these facets are optional and not all female people choose to participate in them.

And then there's that damn great heap of facets of womanhood over there that no one born male wants to participate in, which are derided as trivially unimportant (despite anything female people can say about it), or not part of womanhood, or argued not to even exist at all. Strangely enough, these are the bits that cannot be identified out of.

The difference in who has to deal with pile two without any choice about it, is based on whether you are born biologically female or not. The reasons why no one born biologically male is keen to be a part of or an advocate for pile two are something that need to be much better understood before as a society we decide biological females are something that no longer exist.

Well one difference would be that being trans requires the cooperation of others whereas being gay is something you are even when alone.

If I were stranded on a desert island with a gay man he'd still be gay even though I'm not. He would still be gay if he didn't tell me he was. It doesn't require my approval. He might even find me attractive (if he has poor eyesight ) but that still doesn't require anything of me.

But a transgender person would need me to acknowledge their transness. Especially if we were stranded without clothes, makeup etc. Without the trappings there would be no way for him to live as a woman.

So being gay is in you while transgender is something that takes place in part or all between people and pretty much requires that cooperation.

That's a good point LTE, I saw this happening in relation to covid lockdown... Transwomen were complaining about being stuck at home in lockdown, as per everyone else, but they felt denied their validation as women by not being out in public space and being seen by others. "Sex" just is... it's a material empirical state... "gender" is relational in that it requires perception and interpretation by others to give it validity.

Transwomen were complaining about being stuck at home in lockdown, as per everyone else, but they felt denied their validation as women by not being out in public space and being seen by others. "Sex" just is

Also worth pointing out I think that there was also a thread talking about several teenage girls who away from their schools and affirmative adults, desisted. And were happier for it.

Needless to say this happened despite digifests and zoom meetings and education packs drawn up by lobby groups probably in an attempt to keep their grip on children now they were out of a system thats been trained to affirm and keep secrets

Well, if there were no rights, special dispensations or treatments available to people because of their identity or biology then that would also apply to transpeople. Milad would be a man who may or may not present as a woman but that would be it. No hormones, surgery, hair removal or voice coaching on the NHS; no legal recourse if every employer in the country decides they don’t want a bloke who dresses in womens’ clothes working for them; no uplift in sentencing if some random beats you up because they don’t like blokes who dress in womens’ clothes. It works both ways.