Thank you stonewall - now I know who to avoid

[Kit19]

136 businesses come together to support corporateWall sorry stonewall on trans ‘rights’

Like everyone on fwr I fully agree trans rights are human rights but what they are not is women’s rights. They are reserved for biological women

Also they must be rattled if they’ve got the city bods on their board to do a ring/email round to do a show of support

I don't think Stonewall were campaigning for gender identity to replace sex. Just that they wanted it added as a protected group. I can see the reason for that, it's pretty outrageous that someone could be denied a job or housing for being nonbinary or gender nonconforming in some way

This is what they were lobbying for:
A review of the Equality Act 2010 to include ‘gender identity’ rather than ‘gender reassignment’ as a protected characteristic and to remove exemptions, such as access to single-sex spaces

www.stonewall.org.uk/women-and-equalities-select-committee-inquiry-transgender-equality

Long time lurker, gender critical, first time poster on the feminism board.

I work for one of these organisations and was so dissapointed when I got the internal razz matazz email about it this morning. It's made me feel anxious and ashamed to be associated with this and it's a company I was previously proud to say I worked for.

Simultaneously they've recognised they have a massive under representation of women and made it a focus for the next year. I'm leading recruitment/retention initiatives for my department! What a mess.

I know there were androgynous subcultures in the past, but they were very limited and in many cases despised. You couldn't go walking through the city I was brought up in safely looking like Boy and you wouldn't get a job. Even girls wearing trousers or boys having long hair were massive points of contention at my school in the 80s. I think things have progressed a long way on that front.

I'm a bit older than you (left school in the 70s) and I don't recognise that description of the 80s at all. Which country was this in? I don't agree that things have 'progressed' either. In the 80s men with long hair were everywhere, as were girls and young women with short hair. Both much rarer now. And trousers were perfectly normal attire for women well before the 80s (not allowed for girls at my school, though - but that was a 'uniform' restriction).

You mentioned 'fears about gender nonconforming people'. I don't think this has been the case in my lifetime, not in the UK anyway. Most of the long-haired men I knew in the 80s had jobs, and I don't think 'gender nonconforming' as far as women are concerned has been much of an issue in my lifetime. Unless I just misinterpreted 'fear of gender nonconformity' as plain old-fashioned sexism.

It would effectively make the UK an international no-go area for trans and gender nonconforming people.

I'm concerned that it is already becoming like this. Gender nonconformity seems to be very rare now compared to the 80s.

Section 28 meant that is was irrefutably difficult to be gay in the 1980s, but being gender non conforming and being gay are not the same thing.

Women have been doing things that are 'gender non conforming' according to the standards of their time for centuries. It would be good if men could catch up a bit.

I'm surprised at the army. They have different requirements of fitness for male and female. Very surprised.

From me memory, women get about 11 minutes and men get about 10 for a mile and a half run. If a man fails it can he just identify as a women and pass?

Because of biology.

Right, so if I'm understanding this argument, powerful corporate backing is a signal of moral worth, feminism is not going to be concerned with sexism after the older women die off, and Stonewall are not campaigning for the removal of single sex exemptions (despite their website saying they are doing just that).

If I may sum up - Cobblers.

@FloralBunting

Right, so if I'm understanding this argument, powerful corporate backing is a signal of moral worth, feminism is not going to be concerned with sexism after the older women die off, and Stonewall are not campaigning for the removal of single sex exemptions (despite their website saying they are doing just that).

If I may sum up - Cobblers.

Thank you Royal Corgi I thought I was going nuts. I was trying to work out how to address the twaddle that has been written but you have done it better.

Do you really think this movement is driven by young people?

Very much so. Every single person I've spoken to under 30 is absolutely baffled at the hostility towards trans people and fully in favour of inclusion, I find it hard to believe they will all change their minds en masse in middle age.

I asked you if you thought it was driven by young people, not supported by them. The driver for this movement is very much middle aged men. Many young people are supportive, but they're not the ones driving the agenda.

@FloralBunting

Right, so if I'm understanding this argument, powerful corporate backing is a signal of moral worth, feminism is not going to be concerned with sexism after the older women die off, and Stonewall are not campaigning for the removal of single sex exemptions (despite their website saying they are doing just that).

If I may sum up - Cobblers.

I never said it has a moral worth, I thought I was arguing the opposite, these companies have no morality beyond profit.

I think feminism is still very concerned with sexism. I see a huge amount of awareness of things like rape culture, women's representation in the media, concerns about funding cuts that affect women in housing, the VAWG sector and the benefits system . The metoo movement is a reflection of that. I just don't think feminism will necessaril be so fixated on the trans issue in coming years. That'sa pretty new phenomena, and one largely restricted to older generations in the UK.

Personally I just can't see them all suddenly turning on trans rights in middle age, they've got trans friends and family, they've grown up around it unlike us, and it doesn't seem to faze them a jot.

Have you seen anyone on here saying that trans people shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else? I'm not against trans people having the same rights as everyone else, but I don't believe people can change sex, I don't believe anyone is 'born in the wrong body', and I don't think a man should have the right to use women's spaces or compete in women's sports just because he thinks he's a woman.

I don't think Stonewall were campaigning for gender identity to replace sex. Just that they wanted it added as a protected group. I can see the reason for that, it's pretty outrageous that someone could be denied a job or housing for being nonbinary or gender nonconforming in some way.

But 'gender identity' as a protected characteristic wouldn't protect gender nonconforming people who didn't have a gender identity. Protecting gender nonconformity would make more sense. But then people might start asking why this is even still an issue in 2020, so Stonewall would never campaign for that.

@OldCrone

Do you really think this movement is driven by young people?

Very much so. Every single person I've spoken to under 30 is absolutely baffled at the hostility towards trans people and fully in favour of inclusion, I find it hard to believe they will all change their minds en masse in middle age.

I asked you if you thought it was driven by young people, not supported by them. The driver for this movement is very much middle aged men. Many young people are supportive, but they're not the ones driving the agenda.

@OldCrone I asked you if you thought it was driven by young people, not supported by them. The driver for this movement is very much middle aged men. Many young people are supportive, but they're not the ones driving the agenda.

I don't think that's the case at all. It was almost all young people at the recent trans rights protests, most of the activist groups like Sisters Uncut has come from young people, as has all the stuff in universities. Organisations like Stonewall and GI seem to have pretty young staff. It's certainly predominantly young people who have driven the explosion in non-binary and other gender identities, I'm not really sure who you think these middle aged men are. As I've alluded to, I don't really buy into a conspiratorial view of history, there has been a generational shift in how gender is viewed, it hasn't happened because of secret plots. I just don't think society works that way. There's no way that a few old time trans activists could have caused such a radical generational shift.

@OldCrone

Personally I just can't see them all suddenly turning on trans rights in middle age, they've got trans friends and family, they've grown up around it unlike us, and it doesn't seem to faze them a jot.

Have you seen anyone on here saying that trans people shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else? I'm not against trans people having the same rights as everyone else, but I don't believe people can change sex, I don't believe anyone is 'born in the wrong body', and I don't think a man should have the right to use women's spaces or compete in women's sports just because he thinks he's a woman.

@OldCrone

I don't think a man should have the right to use women's spaces or compete in women's sports just because he thinks he's a woman.

Well clearly a lot of people do think that. Including the signatories of that letter.

*I'm a bit older than you (left school in the 70s) and I don't recognise that description of the 80s at all. Which country was this in? I don't agree that things have 'progressed' either. In the 80s men with long hair were everywhere, as were girls and young women with short hair. Both much rarer now. And trousers were perfectly normal attire for women well before the 80s (not allowed for girls at my school, though - but that was a 'uniform' restriction).

You mentioned 'fears about gender nonconforming people'. I don't think this has been the case in my lifetime, not in the UK anyway. Most of the long-haired men I knew in the 80s had jobs, and I don't think 'gender nonconforming' as far as women are concerned has been much of an issue in my lifetime. Unless I just misinterpreted 'fear of gender nonconformity' as plain old-fashioned sexism.*

This was in northen England. I knew kids who were gender non-conforming, mostly goths back then. They couldnt walk through the city centre safely on a saturday night, and they got beaten up regularly. At school any trace of gender nonconformity in boys led to social violence and bullying, queer bashing was rife and people had to leave the only gay club in the town in large groups for safety. Social discomfort with gender nonconforming girls was I think more structural, it was unusual for women to have certain jobs, neither of my male grandparents would get in a car driven by a woman, women couldnt serve in the army, and even female bus drivers were controversial. And of course Saturday night TV was Benny Hill chasing round young women in their underwear. I think theres a certain amount of rose tinted spectacles going on here.

there has been a generational shift in how gender is viewed

Yes - people have regressed.

However, young women have ALWAYS been wary of being classified as feminists. That is nothing new.

It can take a few years to come to terms with the fact that you need specific sex based rights.

Who wants to be awkward? Its much easier to be a cool girl for a few years - or one of those feminists who just wants to help everyone else.

I just don't think feminism will necessaril be so fixated on the trans issue

Most feminists I know, self included, don't give a shit about trans issues beyond where they affect women. We stand against male entitlement and the dismissing of the things women have fought for to enable us to travel through this world without the disadvantages piled against us. Trans is one of the current wedges being used to push that oppression.

What's your point about profit making companies supporting the erosion of women's rights by signing up to trans PR slogans? I mean sure, that's what is happening, are you suggesting it's a good thing?

As for your point about the age of the women who are not onboard with this; broaden your bubble. I know lots of teens who have no time for what the TRAs and other wokesters are selling bit still have an interest in the other topics. Most recently the teen girls of my acquaintance have been very vocal about a local issue with cat calling and objectification, and more than one is a consistent supporter of JK Rowling.

Your ideas about gender nonconformity and trans acceptance are wonky too - I've rarely seen a generation so wedded to gender conforming appearance as the current teens. I'm Gen X and sport suits and ties, no make-up and a sharp fade cut.

And I'm glad it changed. I'm glad that metoo means sexually abusive men have been challenged and called out rather then it being accepted as part of life or swept under the carpet as it was in the 80s. I think young feminists have achieved a lot, although of course there is a long long way still to go.

Worth looking up the Yogakarta principles and who exactly was present and involved in producing them. It wasn't students and youngsters producing something organic, and that this hasn't been grass roots funded is open information in the public domain.

I think theres a certain amount of rose tinted spectacles going on here

No, everything you say happened. It's just that you only seem to have seen a small part of what was happening.

And of course Saturday night TV was Benny Hill chasing round young women in their underwear.

That hasn't gone away. It's just on social medial instead and probably worse.

I'm glad that metoo means sexually abusive men have been challenged and called out

In practical terms very little has changed.

Yy to comments about regressing, not progressing. Porn tropes are now commonplace depictions of powerful women. Surrogacy is gaining ground, prostitution is sanitized, FGM still isn't punished despite actually having legal consequences, abortion is still a precarious liberty, and women are still being abused on a horrific scale.
A few more news articles about a pay gap and a hashtag or two mean fuck all in the grand scheme.

@MichelleofzeResistance

Worth looking up the Yogakarta principles and who exactly was present and involved in producing them. It wasn't students and youngsters producing something organic, and that this hasn't been grass roots funded is open information in the public domain.

The Yogakarta principles were issued in 2005 after decades of grass roots LGBT campaigning and a major social shift in societies view of LGBT people. The principles were the result of that, not the cause.

@merrymouse

I'm glad that metoo means sexually abusive men have been challenged and called out

In practical terms very little has changed.

I don;t think that's true. There was a sexually abusive teacher at my school. Everyone knew it, including the staff. Nothing was done other than girls were warned to try and not end up on their own with him. He molested countless girls. There was also a hugely misogynistic teacher who made jokes in lessons all the time about a womens place being in the home etc. I don't think either of those men would get away with behaving like that in a school today. But I do agree there is still a long way to go.

Social discomfort with gender nonconforming girls was I think more structural, it was unusual for women to have certain jobs, neither of my male grandparents would get in a car driven by a woman, women couldnt serve in the army, and even female bus drivers were controversial.

I would have seen all these things as sexism, not 'discomfort with gender nonconforming girls'. Are you male?

Ah, so dismissing well documented lobbying as 'conspiracy theories', but la la land about how much better things are for women and girls even though the safeguarding systems that are still in relative infancy are being targeted and undermined?

Keep doing the three wise monkeys schtick. The rest of us'll carry on regardless.