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

Western capitalism no longer needs that to the same extent and I think that supports a materialist basis for the breakdown, or weakening of gendered assumptions about what work we do.

It doesn't matter what western capitalism wants, women still need contraception to control their fertility, and are restricted to domesticity if they can't stop having babies.

On the other hand all men need to avoid the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy is feet.

I think this is something that equally applies to trans women, as does the ever growing pressure to adhere to capitalist beauty standards.

Beauty standards, capitalist or otherwise change. The consequences of having a male or female body don't.

jj1968
I'm not saying gender is the root I don't think, I accept it is underpinned by sex, but as you say gender is the tool, gender is what justified women not being allowed to be pilots, and as gender expectations changed so did that assumption.

Your viewpoint seems to be that women's right to equality just appeared out of nowhere. As if men all woke up one morning, slapped their foreheads and realised how daft they have been to think you need a penis to fly a plane.

You ignore the decades of campaigning, and the harassment that women's rights campaigners went through to get equality laws put in place.

''Gender expectations'' haven't changed. Men still use 'get back to the kitchen' as a combined threat and insult. Women still have smaller pension pots than their husband. We are the ones who lose our career when we have kids.
Its only the equality laws that allow us a toe in the door, and activists are hell bent on dismantling them.

I think the fracturing of gender amongst younger generations, in the sense that it is breaking down the traditional narratives of masculinity or femininity linked to physical sex, is very much a step forward.

It's not breaking down the traditional narratives at all. It's saying that if you have a 'feminine' personality you are a woman (regardless of your sex) and if you have a 'masculine' personality you are a man (regardless of your sex). In either case the goal seems to be to match the body to the personality. How is that a step forward?

What's wrong with 'have any personality you want, but you can't change your sex'?

@NiceGerbil

'Where we almost certainly differ is that I think the fracturing of gender amongst younger generations, in the sense that it is breaking down the traditional narratives of masculinity or femininity linked to physical sex, is very much a step forward. Not the endpoint, not the revolution, but a necessary part of the process.That link between gender and physical sex had to be smashed , it may not be perfect, but I think it offers some hope and is a step on the journey to something better.'

But that's where we were heading in the 70s and 80s until backlash and the boys all took off their lipstick and lad culture hit.

Feminists are all for this. Let's do it.

The bit where it falls down is where it goes 'That link between gender and physical sex had to be smashed' but then on to, gender is key, sex is meaningless, and if you relate to the current social expectations around female gender then you are a woman full stop.

Which brings us full circle.

@NiceGerbil

But that's where we were heading in the 70s and 80s until backlash and the boys all took off their lipstick and lad culture hit.

As someone who was gender non-conforming in the 80s I promise it really didn't feel to me like we were heading that way.

Well we had different experiences growing up then. Maybe due to different locations or different sexes or both.

I am still interested in how your points support the idea that if a male says he is female then he is female. This conversation is all well and good but you seem to be advocating for people to be free of gender norms. That great. But what does that have to do with trans?

Its only the equality laws that allow us a toe in the door, and activists are hell bent on dismantling them.

Exactly.

When Johnson became PM everyone guessed that he might have another child, and it had nothing to do with gender or capitalism, and everything to do with the sex of his partner, there relative ages, and the knowledge that his contribution to the process could be very limited.

Carrie Symonds was protected by legislation that gave her access to contraception, legislation that did not allow her employer to sack her because they thought she might become pregnant, (I'm skipping over the fact that I can't remember her employment status at the time), access to health care when she did become pregnant and maternity leave. She will continue to need those protections.

On the other hand most people (possibly including Johnson) couldn't say how many children Johnson has.

I don't think young women who think they don't need sex based rights are progressive. I think they are in denial.

@Thelnebriati

Your viewpoint seems to be that women's right to equality just appeared out of nowhere. As if men all woke up one morning, slapped their foreheads and realised how daft they have been to think you need a penis to fly a plane.

Not at all, Im really sorry if thats how I've come across. I fully acknowledge the role played by feminism and the struggles of women in the preceding decades that led directly to a lot of that shit being overcome, even if I don;t agree with some of those feminists on the subject of trans rights now. Equally I'm not prepared to dismiss the achievements of young feminists today which I do think deserve to be ackowledged. Yes metoo was not perfect, but I do think it exposed something that had long been hidden. And you may not agree with them about trans rights but surely you acknowledge Sisters Uncut and similar have done good work exposing and fighting against cuts to the VAWG sector whilst other young feminists have been active around housing and supporting lone parents. Even a lot of the stuff targetting representation of women in culture I think has been postive, if only that it's brought things that were only discussed in feminist circles into the mainstream. I think both second and third wave feminism made progress and whilst gender expectations haven't been eradicated I don't think they are anything like they were in some areas, such as when there were arguments about whether its okay for women to drive or go to work, or whether its just a bit of fun if a man sexually abuses a woman. And those gains have been made by feminists across the generations I think.

Good grief.

That's changed to some degree, but now women's sexuality is commodified and exploited through porn, sex work etc. I think this is something that equally applies to trans women, as does the ever growing pressure to adhere to capitalist beauty standards.

This is quite an old fashioned view of the average MTF trans person. Most of them aren't the feminine presenting homosexual males you seem to be imagining. I won't say what I perceive them as, but they have very little obviously in common with most women I know.

@NiceGerbil

Well we had different experiences growing up then. Maybe due to different locations or different sexes or both.

I am still interested in how your points support the idea that if a male says he is female then he is female. This conversation is all well and good but you seem to be advocating for people to be free of gender norms. That great. But what does that have to do with trans?

@NiceGerbil

I am still interested in how your points support the idea that if a male says he is female then he is female.

I don't think I ever said they did did I. I think woman/man (as opposed to female/male) are not just physical realities but also social and political roles under patriarchy which like it or not is what we live under. They also represent genders whether we like it or not, gender is still a very strong force in society. I think if someone born physically male sees themself as a woman, 'lives' as a women, in that they are potentially vulnerable to gender based violence, and other oppressions connected with being a women under patriarchy, then it's not uncomfortable to me to include them in the category of women without feeling I'm denying physical reality. I know you''ll say you're a man now, you don't get to say, and thats kind of fair enough, but its what I think. I don't really see myself as a man as it happens, or as a woman, more as a bit of a splurge, and I've certainly benefitted from aspects of male socialisation, but I've also been sexually abused and harassed on the basis of my gender being perceived as a woman. Had or if I ever chose to live in that role all the time then there may come a point where I would think it's not unreasonable to be considered in the social role of women.

In addition and I'm not sure, but part of me suspects gender dysphoria and maybe gender identity has some kind of biological basis, not in the sense that ladybrain exists or anything like that, but perhaps in how we perceive our bodies, and perhaps in how we seek role models when young. I really really wanted to be Madonna when I was 9, I think she was the coolest thing on earth and I wanted to look like her and have a body like her. I don;t know why, but I don't know for sure that most little boys didn't feel like that. I did actually when I was younger than that that most boys wanted to be girls really, and that it was some terrible unspoken secret that must never be uttered, and I was probably about 8 or 9 before I started to realise that wasn;t the case (after asking probing subtle questions to my male friends and ascertaining that actually they really didnt want to be girls). But who knows, maybe we'll never know, but I don't think it could be said to have been unequivocably scientifically ruled out that something approaching gender identity exists.

This conversation is all well and good but you seem to be advocating for people to be free of gender norms. That great. But what does that have to do with trans?

I think trans people have a unique and acute struggle under patriarchy. It may well be if gender was smashed then the phenomena of gender dysphoria would disappear, who knows, personally I suspect not but in any case patriarchy is sadly alive and well and I think trans people deserve the right to live safely and with dignity and one way to achieve that is to recognise them as the gender they say they are. I honestly don;t think that represents the threat to women that some people fear, again I know youll all say fuck you man now, but I discussed this on the other thread I posted on at length and again its what I think. I understand why there are fears trans inclusion might present a threat, but I dont think where trans inclusion has taken place that threat has really manifested.

Anyway thats a long way off fromwhy google support trans rights and im not sure i have the energy for another discussion pages long about it. Off to bed now anyway, thanks for the discussion.

I don't think young women who think they don't need sex based rights are progressive. I think they are in denial.

This. They're naive, and in many cases have been sheltered by not really understanding how the world works for many women.

I don't really see myself as a man as it happens, or as a woman, more as a bit of a splurge

That's just meaningless. You're a man, because you are an adult human male. You can't pick and choose your sex or how people see your sex and make judgements about it based on your personality. It's absurd.

I'm sure you're not the only one who isn't eager for another long discussion about your perspectives.

Had or if I ever chose to live in that role all the time then there may come a point where I would think it's not unreasonable to be considered in the social role of women.

What is the 'social role of women'?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I don't really see myself as a man as it happens, or as a woman, more as a bit of a splurge

That's just meaningless. You're a man, because you are an adult human male. You can't pick and choose your sex or how people see your sex and make judgements about it based on your personality. It's absurd.

It may be meaningless to you but then presumably you dont have gender dysphoria. I know I'm an adult human male, believe me, I was talking about some kind of internal sense of myself that you can either try or not try to understand. But either way Im not making it up and I've felt like this as long as I remember.

I understand why there are fears trans inclusion might present a threat, but I dont think where trans inclusion has taken place that threat has really manifested.

386 posts of things that never happen.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3348290-It-will-never-happen-resource-thread

I accept gender dysphoria exists for some people. Like other forms of body dysmorphia. I don't accept it has any bearing on your biological sex, which is what you're talking about. People don't perceive "gender" it's a term of academic theory. They perceive your sex. It's your sex that they base their expectations on.

in that they are potentially vulnerable to gender based violence, and other oppressions connected with being a women under patriarchy

the definition of woman is not somebody vulnerable to gender based violence and other oppressions.

It's not a catch all term for people who suffer abuse.

386 posts of things that never happen.

Not to mention privacy, dignity, boundary violation, sexual harassment, feelings of fear, humiliation, discomfort; all things that this expert on women's needs has completely ignored.

I've also been sexually abused and harassed on the basis of my gender being perceived as a woman.

Are you saying here that you think you 'pass' as a woman, or that you were harassed because you were perceived as an effeminate male (like the queerbashing you talked about earlier)?

I think if someone born physically male sees themself as a woman, 'lives' as a women, in that they are potentially vulnerable to gender based violence, and other oppressions connected with being a women under patriarchy, then it's not uncomfortable to me to include them in the category of women without feeling I'm denying physical reality.

Weigh in all you like but our sex-based rights not gender-based are not yours to give away. You are not female, thus you do not get to define womanhood or explain (from your male limited perspective regardless of your gender identity) what a woman is to adult human females and expect us to capitulate. Your posts are very gaslighty to those of us that live in reality.

Please answer my questions below, I'd appreciate it!

What is it to 'lives' as a women?

How does a male become potentially vulnerable to gender based violence, and other oppressions connected with being a women under patriarchy when being vulnerable to these things requires being female as violence and the oppression of girls/women is sex-based and not gender-based?

How can a born male sees themself as a woman when they are seeing themselves through male eyes looking at a male body coming from a male life experience and perspective? Do you realize how incredibly patronizing that sounds? How can one sex even begin to assert that they know what it is to be the opposite sex unless they see what they 'identify as' to be mutable and open to interpretation and without material basis?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

I accept gender dysphoria exists for some people. Like other forms of body dysmorphia. I don't accept it has any bearing on your biological sex, which is what you're talking about. People don't perceive "gender" it's a term of academic theory. They perceive your sex. It's your sex that they base their expectations on.

100%

' I think if someone born physically male sees themself as a woman, 'lives' as a women, in that they are potentially vulnerable to gender based violence, and other oppressions connected with being a women under patriarchy, then it's not uncomfortable to me to include them in the category of women without feeling I'm denying physical reality'

Erm

Risk of pregnancy
Need for abortion and consequences when it's not available
Physical and mental toll of pregnancy and childbirth
The fact of on average being smaller and weaker than men and the knowledge that male sex offenders are 2 a penny

Things like this

'Nearly 70 000 women die each year due to the com­plications of unsafe abortion'.

The numbers for injury etc are terrible.

And other consequences.
This seems like a pretty big oversight.

The idea that

1. The word woman isn't adult human female but some bunch of ??? that is disconnected from physical sex

And that

1. The issues women and girls have are somehow disconnected from their physical bodies (periods, pregnancy, childbirth, menopause etc) so they don't form part of the new definition

Is an utterly male perspective.

Zero insight.

Well you would said that wouldn't you. But the first point has been discussed in some form across the range of Feminist thought from Dworkin to Firestone to Butler so I'm not convinced it represents an utterly male perspective.

The second point I haven't argued.