Gender Critical = fundamentally right wing (according to Vox)

[TheRealMcKenna]

I know it’s Vox, I know it’s not a ‘reputable’ news source, but this is hilariously bad.

Main points:

• TERFs calling themselves ‘gender critical’ are akin to white supremacists calling themselves ‘race realists’.
• Women are oppressed based on gender identity and not biological sex.
• Most ‘decent’ feminists include trans women in their movement, but a horrid bunch of conservative-allying pro-life supporting homophobic white supremacists don’t.
• GC feminists Who rely on ‘science’ have abandoned the idea that chromosomes determine sex (this is news to me)
• GC feminism is mainly a UK phenomenon and is ‘whipped up’ by the horrid Mumsnet site. Everyone else in the world is lovely (apart from those far right pro-life conservatives).
• GC feminists cite a tiny number of high profile cases to whip up fear and hatred of trans women.
• GC advocates bully people online, especially on Twitter.
• GC academics have a terribly large amount of power and influence.

www.vox.com/identities/2019/9/5/20840101/terfs-radical-feminists-gender-critical

And sport? The ignorant minimizing of safeguarding risks (I noticed cloudy has not addressed the jail statistics at all. It is like always, those stats are hand waved away as anomalies.

Yes, Winesalot. WellBehavedWoman clearly spent a great deal of time providing stats and hard data about the risks this ideology poses to women. Neither Cloudy nor turnitonagain have addressed these points.

I agree that focussing on the extreme TRAs like Jessica Yaniv does not always help the gender critical argument. Of course most transwomen are not pretending to use tampons or suing salon owners for refusing to wax their balls! We know that the vast majority of transwomen are not like that and we aren't trying to say that they are.

However, they do exist. While most transwomen are indeed perfectly nice and normal (Blaire White*, Rose of Dawn etc), there are some who aren't. The some who aren't pose a greater risk to women than natal women (because they have male bodies). How do you write law that allows for the inclusion of nice transwomen and protects women from the not-so-nice ones?

• For those who don't know, Blaire is a Trump supporter, which is interesting in the context of this discussion. If I believe in the same things as Blaire, does that make me transphobic?

I also want to know what an innate sense of gender is. How is it defined? What thought processes, behaviours and characteristics point to having a specific 'gender identity' and, more importantly, why should this take priority over biological sex?

For instance, I am a straight woman. I know this because I am sexually attracted to men. I have no interest in pursuing a relationship with a woman. However, if I did not fancy men and wanted to pursue a sexual relationship with a woman, I would know that I was a lesbian.

I know that I am female. I know this because I have a vagina, periods and secondary sex characteristics such as breasts. My body conforms to that of a standard female human being. That's how I know I am female.

So, in a sentence or two, please could someone explain to me how can I know what my gender identity is. What do I have in common with all women and transwomen that I do not have in common with men and transmen?

I can honestly see the ways in which the rights of women are put at risk from trans ideology. I don't even mean physical risk, necessarily - I mean things like the loss of language to describe ourselves, loss of sporting scholarships, loss of meaningful statistics, loss of ability to call out sex-discrimination etc. etc.

Why can we not interrogate the basis for these loss of rights - i.e. gender identity - without being deemed transphobic?

Brilliant post edgeofacoin, I don't know what a gender identity is either.

To me it's a bit like when people talk about worshipping God, I don't know what they mean by it, but I don't have to because no-one expects me to take part.

I haven’t addressed the points about jail because I posted here to engage with the OP, which about whether or not GC feminists are aligned with the right wing and if that’s problematic.

To be honest prisons in America are so rife with human rights abuses that the potential risks from trans inmates don’t rise to the top.

For example the hysterectomies of women in detention centres.

www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-54265571

Turnitonagain you know this is a site based in the UK?

@Cocothefirst

Turnitonagain you know this is a site based in the UK?

Looks like someone didn’t read the article this thread is based on...by an American writer...from an American website...

But sure I’m the wrong one. Easier than engaging with the topic I guess.

whether or not GC feminists are aligned with the right wing and if that’s problematic.

This is where I activists for trans rights lose credibility. We are concerned with women’s rights. One area is continuing the fight against sex discrimination in employment. This is certainly not a right wing issue, unless I have had this wrong for decades.

Or it is just another area women are being gaslit?

You know, take away our language to describe ourselves one day, and then right to freedom of speech and political party alliances the next to perpetuate the forced capitulation. All by telling us it is for our own good and for our children’s own good.

And not based on any solid foundation of fact nor allow that foundation to build? Why? Is that because it is all based on pseudoscience? And falsehoods?

And no one can deny that the forced abortions are shocking and horrific! Are the abortions of the Uyghur women in China also done by the right wing?

You may be right. There may be cross over. Or maybe the US is a large democracy with its own unique issues. Blanket statements like ‘GC feminists are aligned to the right wing’ should be carefully looked at.

And it has been used in the UK to shut left wing and centrist women up.

I said the debate is WHETHER OR NOT they are aligned. I never said it as a statement of fact either way.

Honestly I’m a bit disappointed in the quality of debate on this sub topic. People are quite siloed in knowledge in one area and aren’t willing to be flexible. America is not Britain so if you don’t know or follow American politics, applying your views wholesale just doesn’t work.

The Republican Party is far to the right of the Conservatives.

Sigh.

GC feminism - or, you know, we can just call it feminism, as feminism rests on a critique of/rejection of gender - is not aligned with conservative essentialism of either the Republican or the TRA kind. Let alone the racial essentialism of either the far right or far left.

Feminists want to abolish gender.
Social conservatives and TRAs want to entrench gender - either 'natural' or 'innate'.

How difficult is it to see that the feminist position is in opposition to and not aligned with Trad or TRA positions?

US progressIves who centre male rights, because they believe internal gender is important and concrete, are far more aligned with Repubs than I'll ever be.

People are quite siloed in knowledge in one area and aren’t willing to be flexible. America is not Britain so if you don’t know or follow American politics, applying your views wholesale just doesn’t work.

Maybe I haven’t been clear in my posts. Women supporting the protection of women’s rights (those pertaining to females where we need them) come from all walks of life and all political parties. Why is this even an issue?

Blanket statements that say these women are right wing should be looked at closely. Often they are used to shut left wing and centrist women up (of which there are many, maybe even a majority). Whether it is in the US or the UK.

turn in one of your posts you told women on this board that if our position in supporting women’s rights also aligned with other agendas we should reconsider our position. I don’t reconsider my position on these issues based on whether or not another group I don’t agree with also has the same point of view. I reconsider my position as new evidence (ie not based in pseudoscience, not based on falsehoods) is published.

Again, anyone pushing this false alignment line is immediately suspect of silencing women. That is what Vox was trying to do in this article in my view.

Women supporting the protection of women’s rights (those pertaining to females where we need them) come from all walks of life and all political parties. Why is this even an issue?

^^This.

Blatant divide & conquer tactics.

And to deny people’s strongly held political identity - just hypocrisy.

I don’t reconsider my position on these issues based on whether or not another group I don’t agree with also has the same point of view. I reconsider my position as new evidence (ie not based in pseudoscience, not based on falsehoods) is published.

Ok so let’s apply this in real life.

You have a moderate Democrat in Georgia whose state is restrictive on transgender rights. Her platform supports some TWAW views but within the state there’s pretty much no chance in hell of those happening locally.

She’s running against a typical Southern Republican who campaigns on “protecting women” and introducing even stricter anti trans laws. This candidate is against abortion, paid maternity leave, and subsidised healthcare.

I want to know who people here would back and why or why not.

This by the way is a pretty typical choice for American voters.

Is it time for the Venn diagram yet?

@terryleather

Is it time for the Venn diagram yet?

Thank goodness.

The Venn diagram doesn’t change anything I’ve said.

How do you put your values into political power through voting if the party that backs your single issue concern is generally against most other feminist policy goals?

Do people here advocate a devils bargain on trans issues and just hope for the best on everything else? Or not?

@turnitonagain

I don’t reconsider my position on these issues based on whether or not another group I don’t agree with also has the same point of view. I reconsider my position as new evidence (ie not based in pseudoscience, not based on falsehoods) is published.

Ok so let’s apply this in real life.

You have a moderate Democrat in Georgia whose state is restrictive on transgender rights. Her platform supports some TWAW views but within the state there’s pretty much no chance in hell of those happening locally.

She’s running against a typical Southern Republican who campaigns on “protecting women” and introducing even stricter anti trans laws. This candidate is against abortion, paid maternity leave, and subsidised healthcare.

I want to know who people here would back and why or why not.

This by the way is a pretty typical choice for American voters.

God this is tedious. But I'll play.

Swing state where my vote matters? Dems.

Not a swing state? Depends how obnoxious the Dem candidate is on this. Very? I just won't vote. Mildly and doesn't abuse other women over it or support TRA rhetoric? Dem.

Do you understand what feminists mean when they say they are politically homeless? Hint: it doesn't mean they've found a home on the right.

Have I passed your test? Am I allowed to do gender critiquing feminism now?

I despair of American politics, there is basically no one to vote for.

Not much different in the UK at the moment.

It reminds of when the children come to me with questions like would you rather be eaten by a lion or shot by a hunter who thought you were a lion?

What has happened to democracy? How can a 2 party system ever be truly democratic?

I have never even been to the USA but their culture and politics so dominates every corner of the world that it is hard to be completely ignorant.

How could I vote for either? Not only because of Biden’s stance on trans issues but because I have heard he is little better than Trump in his attitude to women although he has more awareness of appearing socially acceptable and understands better or cares more about how to play politics by the old rules. I understand turnout is quite low in the USA. Polling stations are far from where people live, hard to get to and with long queues. Sounds like it is made really hard to vote anyway. At some point I suppose the powers that be will stop paying any lip service at all to democracy, Trump already has. Seems too much like being forced to play a game that you can’t win.

@turnitonagain

The Venn diagram doesn’t change anything I’ve said.

How do you put your values into political power through voting if the party that backs your single issue concern is generally against most other feminist policy goals?

Do people here advocate a devils bargain on trans issues and just hope for the best on everything else? Or not?

People make up their own mind about what the biggest threat to women is.

Some will vote for Biden for reasons to do with abortion and birth control and fight like hell behind the scenes re: trans ideology.

Some will vote Republican because they believe that once women lose their right to define themselves, all other rights become tenuous.

Some will vote for Biden as President and the Republican party 'down ticket' to try and hold a stalemate. Others will vote Trump for President and the Democrats 'down ticket'.

Some will abstain or vote 3rd party.

There are no easy choices in this election.

If the Democrat Party changes its mind on trans ideology, will the ideology cease to be 'right wing', do you think?

Actually, I pretty much think it's abusive for all these Western left wing or centre left parties to tell women to suck up the damage genderism does to their existence as a sex class, and simultaneously tell them 'you're a Nazi if you don't suck it up and vote for us.'

How about parties in the left stop playing with dodgy, regressive, sexist, homophobic ideas of gender and earn our votes?

Maybe I haven’t been clear in my posts. Women supporting the protection of women’s rights (those pertaining to females where we need them) come from all walks of life and all political parties. Why is this even an issue?

It's a diversionary tactic, sling mud at GC feminists, hope the 'allied with the racist and bigoted right' narrative sticks, get in with undermining women's rights - rights to name themselves, claim spaces for themselves, even define themselves as feminists.

Like in the UK, you review what ‘protecting women’ or what exactly the other candidates offering means in policy and potential law and you make a decision based on what compromises you can and can’t accept. There are rarely perfect fits unless you are the candidate and have free reign on your platform.

if a policy is that important to you, you , as a citizen of a democratic country, then make an effort to shape the creation of those laws and policies you feel could be better at the level where you can influence and go from there.

political sloganeering is often misleading. It is marketing after all. You also need to look at whether those other policies are new, state based vs federal and as you say, do they have a chance in hell.

I never deride another person’s need for ‘voting for the devil you know’ vs an unknown who also doesn’t fit the direction you like. PartIcularly in a time of high instability like war, or you know a pandemic.

Are you trying to work this out for your own vote, police other’s votes for their local candidates or just blanket assumptions?

It's a diversionary tactic. It is indeed. And a divisive one.

For the millionth time I’m only speaking for myself. I’m not slinging mud or whatever. Helpful hint: don’t assume everyone who comes here and disagrees with the majority view has an “agenda.” I’m a working mother who honestly doesn’t think about trans issues much but I saw a few recent topics on American politics, which I do follow, so decided to join. No ulterior motive for gods sake.

All I’m doing is trying to scratch the surface as to what the beliefs you who are active in this topic actually mean in real life politics.

You can see why someone on the outside might be confused or alarmed at any connection between feminism and right wing politics.

@HecatesHat

Maybe I haven’t been clear in my posts. Women supporting the protection of women’s rights (those pertaining to females where we need them) come from all walks of life and all political parties. Why is this even an issue?

It's a diversionary tactic, sling mud at GC feminists, hope the 'allied with the racist and bigoted right' narrative sticks, get in with undermining women's rights - rights to name themselves, claim spaces for themselves, even define themselves as feminists.

'Get on with' not 'in'