How did this happen?

[Darcinian]

Sunlight is increasingly shining on the conflict between women's rights and trans rights.

I am now comfortable talking about the issues with friends and family. Previously I would drop things into conversation but only continue if others picked it up, mostly they didn't or kind of looked at me like I am made because obviously nobody would ever put men into women's prisons or let men into women's weightlifting competitions.

Interestingly in the last couple of weeks people want to talk about it. Men in particular are saying to me "How did this happen?" and "What has been going on that I didn't notice?" Some lib-fem friends are starting to go "Hang on a minute, what is happening? How did I not see this?"

I end up rambling with too much random stuff about Stonewall, Keira Bell, lesbian erasure, AGP, non-crime hate incidents, the Connecticut runners, cotton ceiling, sex is not binary, ROGD, etc.

Please help me form simple explanations that I can use when somebody wants to engage but knows bugger all except the bits that have recently made it into the news.

I have noticed that the men have no doubt that AGP exists, some other men are utter bastards, they are bigger and stronger than women, sports matters, safety and dignity of their daughters matters, bad men will do anything to get at women (especially in prisons and gyms)

The women seem to get AGP, ROGD and cotton-ceiling quickly. They are seriously concerned about the affirmation only approach with children. They are terrified of being labelled as bigots.

Everybody is completely flummoxed as to how this has happened in a secular liberal democracy like the UK and, crucially, without them noticing and without politicians and "feminists" talking about it. As someone said "No way our politicians would have accepted #nodebate, you must have misunderstood"

Help me explain, frame and simplify?

I was thinking about this after the 50:50 parliament thread and the people who posted on there.

There has been such forceful aggressiveness around the language to do with this issue:

-I am a woman because I say I am and if you object you are an evil bigot.

-Repeat after us: Transwomen are women.

-TERFs

-Misgendering is literal violence/a hate crime

• Constant references to suicide

-A woman who believes that woman is more than a simple declaration from any human, deserves to be sacked from her job.

-And most recently from the fragrant Alex Sobel - do you believe that women should be entitled to single sex shelters, prisons, sport? No.

I have always sort of wondered why there has been this aggressive rhetoric, this absolute flat out refusal for any other view to be aired that you just don't see in other areas of social issue. The contradictions, the tying up in knots, the appropriation of any group at all to prop up the argument - black women, intersex people, women who have had vaginal surgery, infertile women, trans sex workers in South America.

Sure, people are passionate about other issues, but I can't think of another issue with this sort of discourse.

And I've come to the conclusion that it's just about power. If TRAs give just an inch on this, then they won't be able to gain parliamentary representation as women because people might question it, they won't be able to compete in women's sports because people might question it, they won't be able to gain awards and positions meant for women because people might question it, they won't be able to control language around women's health because people might question it. And so on.

Any deviation at all away from the 'I am a woman because I say I am and am therefore entitled to everything meant for women' will mean these things won't happen. And they need for these things to happen. Because otherwise, only females will get these things.

I feel desperately sorry for transsexual people with gender dysphoria who were trying to live their lives the best and most comfortable way they could, without encroaching on anyone else. There are plenty of people who never wanted any of this.

Often men (my dh included) are immediately suspicious of other men and their motives probably as they are there when women are not and see behind the facade of the “nice guy”. So dh would be automatically 🙄 about self Id and the push to open up women’s spaces. Plus he is Lionel Shrivers biggest fan and she has written about this recently.

How would you describe how ideological capture of the media and public institutions came about without descending into a rant (or maybe it's only me who goes like that

In a word, people are lazy. There are hundreds of things that companies/organisations could do that would make their businesses more inclusive/accessible. But all of that takes time, research, money etc and no one wants to be the first to abolish regular working hours to allow for parents to take their kids to school then come to work, or even work.from home and as long as its all done by X time it's all good etc or above average maternity amd paternity packages etc There's no elevated status for improved access fir disabled employees/customers etc no ones actually interested in doing anything behind the scenes with no one noticing. It's all instant gratification on social media.

I must get an article to hand about Laurel Hubbard winning gold in the weight lifting. That photo of the true bronze medal winner standing at the back was powerful especially when you know their respective back stories. That I can't easily locate that woman's name is rather shameful.

I like a v mainstream outlet for sharing. I have found a Reuters one which is pretty good on this. www.reuters.com/article/us-weightlifting-newzealand-hubbard-idUSKCN1UP0F0

But where is the picture of Hubbard on the podium?

Yes scully I think that's a good description. Anyone who has worked in organisations wanting to manage their public image will recognise the desire to chase easy woke points.

Busy leaders and busy-body SJWs saw it could make them look inclusive and progressive so they started using the slogans. It would have seemed harmless at first. I mean everybody knows humans cannot actually change sex so it can't do real harm. Or so they thought.

I have always sort of wondered why there has been this aggressive rhetoric, this absolute flat out refusal for any other view to be aired that you just don't see in other areas of social issue. The contradictions, the tying up in knots, the appropriation of any group at all to prop up the argument - black women, intersex people, women who have had vaginal surgery, infertile women, trans sex workers in South America

The appropriation of other groups is desperation IMO, laced with a total self-obsession that blinds them to the dreadful things they sometimes say eg Abigail Thorn (?) and the comment about black women’s facial hair, and other racist and horrible comments.

I think this was planned. They put TWAW out there and everyone assumed they meant that TW should be treated as women out of kindness and in social situations. Once that mantra took hold, they carefully made it very black and white - ie if you don’t think TWAW, you’re an evil bigot. They assumed most people would be mortified and go along with TWAW, but they underestimated GC women.

Then they moved to No Debate. If we weren’t going to nod along with their mantra, we wouldn’t be allowed to even discuss it. That served a second purpose of stopping any awkward questions.

Once SW came on board, it was easy. SW are ‘experts’ so their guidance is given credence.

OP, I’d start from what your friends know and are interested in - sport? Keira Bell? JKR? Don’t overwhelm them with too much information. It’s a gradual process, thinking and re-examining your beliefs.

I think the number one misconception with the trans issue is that people new to this or unaware of it mainly think that transgender women have all 'had the op'. Feelings and shock come quickly to people when you tell them that most TW keep their penises.

I would learn the Staniland question off by heart.

I would have a few examples of sex offenders in women's prisons to hand. Plus photos.

Examples of men on women's sports teams or beating women at wrestling or weightlifting to hand, plus photos.

Ask them if they think Eddie Izzard is a woman.

Ask them if they consider Lesbians and gay men to be transphobia if they are not attracted to people with penises/vaginas.

Start with these things, if they bite you can expand.

*transohobes not transphobia.

I also think this film is a great way in for people who know a bit but not what's been going on out there in Internet land.

Busy leaders and busy-body SJWs saw it could make them look inclusive and progressive so they started using the slogans. It would have seemed harmless at first

I think some of it borders on exploitive tbh we have seen plenty of times on twitter, trans people telling them to pack it in, and to stop alienating women and the customers in their name. It's not helping the cause in the slightest and it must be frustrating for people who have been trans longer than some of these activists and those in charge of the social.media pages have even been alive. I think.it stopped being about the very people they claim.to be supporting a long time ago. And trans people will be picking up up pieces long after the companies and allies move onto the next cause

It's good to raise, to begin with, the 'no debate' stance, and how many women who have spoken up have lost jobs, been threatened, etc. Why are women not allowed to discuss women's rights? Why are meetings held in secret? Bomb threats, for feminist meetings, death threats for Joanna Cherry, what is going on?

JKR is a good example. It's worth asking what she has said that is actually transphobic. Still yet to hear that.

I think three big things (off the top of my head):

1. Hitching it to LGB and making constant analogies with gay rights, appropriating the language of civil rights movements, so that the unthinking observer thinks it's basically the same thing.

1. The people who have time on their hands to trumpet this stuff all over social media etc are the very young and privileged. They are less likely to have been affected by the real-life issues that come under protected characteristics, or to have come into contact with those who have. They find it easy to identify with a narrative that's all about self-expression, finding your true self, being kind, sparkles and rainbows, and older people being mean bigots.

1. The internet accelerates everything, and the "democratisation" of ideas means an anonymous teenager in the US is given as much credence as anyone else. Some MPs spend a lot of time on Twitter, which is completely unrepresentative of their constituents.

Hello OP. I mostly lurk, but I’d like to offer another points that haven’t been discussed:

Some very very very powerful AGP billionaires have been pushing and funding this this for years. You can check out the 11th Hour blog by Jennifer Bilek to see more

WPATH seem to be responsible for many of the policy changes

Look for James Kirkup (from the Spectator) and ‘the Denton’s document’. This is how they’ve gotten it in law under the radar in many places

Queer Theory for 30 years in Universities

I hope this fleshes out the foundations for you.