Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Gender Critical = fundamentally right wing (according to Vox)

574 replies

TheRealMcKenna · 29/09/2020 17:34

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

OP posts:
HecatesHat · 29/09/2020 19:25

@CloudyVanilla

No in this case it made me look further into the issue and I now have a completely different perspective, I wouldn't say I agree anymore at all with a lot of stuff I previously believed to be merely gender critical.

I just thought I'd comment on this thread as the article is about those alignments of views and I did find that to be true in my experience.

What don't you agree with any more?
CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 19:27

Nope. I'm not saying we shared the exact same views, but at that time due to MN I defined myself as "gender critical" and when in a discussion over feminism (basically him thinking "feminists are harmful") that the one thing we could agree on was basically thinking being trans was essentially BS.

I am not proud of that. We had an in depth discussion on what our thinking was so no I can be sure in saying that I was completely aware of his views and naturally was aware of my own views and so can say with certainty that they aligned. It is literally the same stuff you see on here but I imagine with a different root cause.

Looking into it it is widespread. A lot of MGTOW types though have their trans views rooted in either sex essentialism or as an extension of homophobia, which is obviously different in many ways to trans exclusionary feminist ideology but not in all ways IMO. But essentially their views that it's not a valid state of mind of being is the same

CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 19:29

@HecatesHat I no longer agree with what on here is called gender critical feminism. I do not fit into the category anymore. I don't know what you would call it. A TIF?? Or just a feminist. Idk.

HecatesHat · 29/09/2020 19:30

[quote CloudyVanilla]@HecatesHat I no longer agree with what on here is called gender critical feminism. I do not fit into the category anymore. I don't know what you would call it. A TIF?? Or just a feminist. Idk.[/quote]
What specifically do you take issue with?

FWRLurker · 29/09/2020 19:31

I would also like to add this: it is true that a small number of people have historically been able (in the case of sex, often with medical assistance) to pass as someone of the opposite sex / different ancestry/ethnicity. In so doing, these people have been able to an extent to change the type of oppression they are currently subject to. Eg in The US a black person passing as white.

No one believes that a black person (usually of mixed ancestry but seen as black in the us) passing as white has changed their ancestry - only their racial presentation, and often not permanently. Yet some TRAs argue that a trans woman has changed her sex (though others will deny that sex is ever in question). In reality she has changed her gender presentation only.

MotherofPearl · 29/09/2020 19:33

GC academics have a terribly large amount of power and influence.

🤣

If only. Most GC academics I know are really anxious about speaking out.

FWRLurker · 29/09/2020 19:33

“their views that it's not a valid state of mind of being“

What is “a valid state of mind”? All states of mind are equally “valid” as they are all equally immeasurable. Or to reverse it, what constitutes an “invalid” state of mind?

CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 19:35

@HecatesHat what's the point in sharing my views? My views on transgenderism, no doubt like yours, will not be changed. They have been changed.

I'm here to comment on the article and the subject of exclusion of trans people being similar amongst both feminists and groups widely considered misogynists.

My views clearly differ from yours in that I do not exclude trans women from feminism. I do not wish to engage further in the particular ins and outs of why that is so, because literally every thread on here is about what makes trans women not women to you. So it's unnecessary to go into it further when I fundamentally don't agree with that and you fundamentally do.

CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 19:40

@FWRLurker I would have thought that was obvious. Telling somebody they are not who they fundamentally identify as on a deep personal level is naturally asserting that their state of mind is not valid.

I think it's important to note I'm not a trans woman. I do think though if you're to quibble over the semantics of whether I've used the right phrase (state of mind, state of being, identity, etc) then I don't really see it as a beneficial discussion. Whether you agree with me or not, you know full well that trans people identify as trans for some reason. Whether that reason is valid to you is not my job to either debate or sway.

MichelleofzeResistance · 29/09/2020 19:42

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 19:43

I never said that. I find it interesting that the views align so well. That's what I said.

PigeonToe · 29/09/2020 19:53

What's the point in coming onto an internet forum to say that you disagree with everyone there, if you don't want to say why or on what grounds?

Wish I could put the Alan Partridge shrugging gif in here.

CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 19:58

Excuse me, I am a feminist. I am allowed and fully within my rights to comment on and discuss things posted on a feminist board. Or is this just an echo chamber for TERF ideology?

Just because I don't want to discuss specifically the well trodden subject on here of why trans women aren't women, which I disagree with, doesn't mean that I can't comment on a specific article about a specific issue.

Kit19 · 29/09/2020 19:58

@PigeonToe

What's the point in coming onto an internet forum to say that you disagree with everyone there, if you don't want to say why or on what grounds?

Wish I could put the Alan Partridge shrugging gif in here.

Allow me
Gender Critical = fundamentally right wing (according to Vox)
EdgeOfACoin · 29/09/2020 19:58

CloudyVanilla, I'm genuinely curious to know what changed your mind.

If there's anything that you read that struck a chord, or anyone that you heard speak, I'd like to know.

Lots of people on this board seem to have moved towards the GC position rather than away from it. It's interesting to encounter someone who's done the opposite.

CloudyVanilla · 29/09/2020 20:01

Obviously nobody actually posted here in good faith to discuss what the article is actually about so there's not point in me engaging further. I hope in future though to be able to discuss the actual topic. The thread was on topic until someone who isn't trans exclusionary posts and then it's all about me and my views. Why? The discussion was still fully possible to be about the actual content of the article.

HecatesHat · 29/09/2020 20:01

@CloudyVanilla

I never said that. I find it interesting that the views align so well. That's what I said.
How do?
HecatesHat · 29/09/2020 20:02

@CloudyVanilla

I never said that. I find it interesting that the views align so well. That's what I said.
How do they align?
PigeonToe · 29/09/2020 20:03

Excuse me, I am a feminist. I am allowed and fully within my rights to comment on and discuss things posted on a feminist board. Or is this just an echo chamber for TERF ideology?

Just because I don't want to discuss specifically the well trodden subject on here of why trans women aren't women, which I disagree with, doesn't mean that I can't comment on a specific article about a specific issue.

Don't be ridiculous, of course you can comment. I was just wondering why you bothered to say something so meaningless and refuse to be drawn any further. I was hoping you would elaborate so we could all benefit from your views and experience.

EdgeOfACoin · 29/09/2020 20:04

@CloudyVanilla

Obviously nobody actually posted here in good faith to discuss what the article is actually about so there's not point in me engaging further. I hope in future though to be able to discuss the actual topic. The thread was on topic until someone who isn't trans exclusionary posts and then it's all about me and my views. Why? The discussion was still fully possible to be about the actual content of the article.
Okay. So you agree that the majority of women on this board are right wing? That's what the article says.

That's on topic.

PigeonToe · 29/09/2020 20:04

@Kit19 thanks, much obliged!

FWRLurker · 29/09/2020 20:10

Whether you agree with me or not, you know full well that trans people identify as trans for some reason. Whether that reason is valid to you is not my job to either debate or sway.

for me the issue is that it is a priori Impossible to evaluate another’s feelings. One can only evaluate the validity of assertions based on measurable reality, which will allow assertions to be falsified If untrue (invalid).

Also, I am able To assess the validity of a statement, to take for example, “I am a woman” for example based only on agreed upon Definitions. If woman means adult human female and female means of the sex capable of producing large gametes, then we do have the ability to determine the validity of the assertion.

If woman means “Someone that identifies as a woman”, then the assertion is now empirically unfalsifiable As it is circular in the logical sense: “I am someone that identifies as a woman”

woman could also be redefined as “someone who is legally female”. In this case we can falsify the assertion By reference to legal documents, though now This simply pushed the issue down the pipe as “female“ needs to be redefined Under law and means something different for humans than for other animals. This is something that can and does get dicey when doing comparative work eg model animal studies. Also all trans people are excluded from “validity” until they Legally change their gender marker/legal sex.

I believe that someone’s experience of “feeling like a woman” is literally unfathomable to another person, whether the speaker is trans or not, and therefore can be Neither valid or invalid in the logical sense.

I agree that their Subjective feelings exist Just as any other subjective experience and are important to them. Beyond that basic empathy I’m not sure where to go or how to even form an “opinion”.

MichelleofzeResistance · 29/09/2020 20:10

I'm just stating my views as well, am I not allowed to have my views? Obviously I don't have to discuss or justify them, I can just stand here on the board having them.

Or something Confused

Cocothefirst · 29/09/2020 20:11

[quote CloudyVanilla]@FWRLurker I would have thought that was obvious. Telling somebody they are not who they fundamentally identify as on a deep personal level is naturally asserting that their state of mind is not valid.

I think it's important to note I'm not a trans woman. I do think though if you're to quibble over the semantics of whether I've used the right phrase (state of mind, state of being, identity, etc) then I don't really see it as a beneficial discussion. Whether you agree with me or not, you know full well that trans people identify as trans for some reason. Whether that reason is valid to you is not my job to either debate or sway.[/quote]
What does valid mean in this context?

FWRLurker · 29/09/2020 20:15

tl;dr

“I feel that I am a woman” is neither valid nor invalid, I acknowledge this feeling is important to many people and I empathize with distress this feeling might cause.

“I am a woman” is an assertion that may be invalid depending on the definition of woman and whether the speaker meets that definition.