An inclusive way to be gender critical?

[pensivepigeon]

My thoughts on gender and sex are thus:

Gender is a social construct. It is how society and individuals view the presentation of the sexes - in fashion, interests and work roles. Whereas sex is biological, we cannot change it even though we might surgically change our appearance and take artificial hormones which affect our bodily functions.

However because gender is a social construct and we are part of society we can define it. I define gender as

Female = adhering or not adhering to traditional stereotypes regarding names, fashion, interests and work roles.
Male= adhering or not adhering to traditional stereotypes regarding names, fashion, interests and work roles.

If everyone took this on board it would mean safe single sex spaces could be preserved, as people could present themselves however they want, wear what they want but use the single sex space appropriate for their sex without conflict. Uniforms would offer everyone both traditional female and male options which either sex could wear. Ditto with sports, competing takes place within the appropriate sex classes but competitors can wear either the traditional male or female competition uniforms. There would be no confusion and need to agonise over language when providing medical care.

Taking this stance stance means I have no problem when it comes to saying I am of female sex with a female gender.

So am I gender critical? Is this inclusive?

I think too many people are a bit too 'trigger happy' with this style of rhetoric, on here and in real life. It hinders discussion and creates division where there was none previously

Trigger suggests impatience. People have been very patient. I sense you are projecting your own "trigger rhetoric" onto others, while hiding behind a facade of temperance.

Conflict and division exist; even within yourself. You are going to have to accept that.

This seems nit picky. It is clear through their tone that of a lot of posters on this thread aren't prepared to have people with an even slight difference of opinion express their views without accusing them of being 'confused', 'defensive', 'naive', lacking in clarity

People have been prepared, and very patient. The fact that most find you lacking in clarity, confused and naive - if not downright manipulative, really is your issue to deal with.

I agree most of the time you are likely to win more hearts and minds by gentle reasoned conversation dropped in at opportune times, rather than (verbal) brute force.

But when the other side are beating down the doors to your house (toilets, sports provision, language) you do need to stand strong and resist and call for re-enforcements and shout loudly rather than open the door and say come on in we'll chat.

I would agree with this but I just think the balance needs attention. I am clearly not beating down any doors! By being too aggressive in tone people, too frequently, any emphasis is lost. It all just becomes like white noise.

I think there needs to be more work done with the 'fluffy stuff' in order to get more people on side. The TRA have done this with their rainbows, infiltration into popular culture and our education system they are fashionable. They have used many feminist's rejection of anything which is stereotypical seen as 'feminine' to their advantage.

People have been prepared, and very patient. The fact that most find you lacking in clarity, confused and naive - if not downright manipulative, really is your issue to deal with.

Case in point...

I call bad faith.

But if they actually biologically became a woman and took the place of a woman within society they would then experience a women's oppression from the time of the transition.

I think a lot of women’s oppression comes from being socialised to be nice, put others first, don’t get angry etc. This starts from birth.
Boys are socialised to be competitive, stick up for themselves, be leaders... Transitioning is not going to erase that, even if they experience all the other shit that goes with having a female body.

*Boys are socialised to be competitive, stick up for themselves, be leaders... Transitioning is not going to erase that, even if they experience all the other shit that goes with having(

Quite possibly. However, if 'nice' etc is what they identify with and the way they choose to be they might well experience oppression if they were able to biologically become a woman.

I call bad faith.

Please elaborate what you think faith has to do with this...

@Shedbuilder

I call bad faith.

Yep.

As I have said, explain...

I am very clear about sex. What is confusing is the now fluid definition of Gender.

Sex, to me, is based on your chromosomes (DNA) and primary sexual characteristics. So I am female.

Gender is how society treats me, both socially and legally. Until recently this was also based on my sex. So I am a woman because I am female. Now, with transgenderism, I am a woman only because I say I am. Or at least that is how it seems to be, as males can now also be women. So I am confused.

I am also confused (and concerned) that it seems like males can now change their sex, legally at least. But what I don't understand is how they can do this, since they can't change their DNA? A lot of the time this isn't really an issue, except when it comes to female safety. It matters in any situation where females are at risk of male violence. It matters where medical outcomes are different for males and females. It also matters when people brought up as men, claim to speak for those people brought up as women.

When you spend your life avoiding conflict, it must be very easy to see dissent as an act of aggression against your Self.

When you spend your life avoiding conflict, it must be very easy to see dissent as an act of aggression against your Self.

When you spend you life in the midst of conflict, it must be very easy to meet dissent with aggression in order to protect your Self.

@Jaxhog, yep those are the issues at hand.

Boys are socialized to be competitive, stick up for themselves, be leaders... Transitioning is not going to erase that, even if they experience all the other shit that goes with having a female body.

While this is a generalization, it is largely correct. Surely the answer is to socialize boys and girls more equally, according to their individual personalities; and not encourage children to transition if they don't fit the stereotype?

It never ceases to amaze me how many men twist self defense into aggression. ''When you are accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression'', as the saying goes.

''Self defense is no offense'' as feminists say.

Surely the answer is to socialize boys and girls more equally, according to their individual personalities; and not encourage children to transition if they don't fit the stereotype?

^^This. It seems that most people agree that stereotypes are 'a bad thing'. I really don't understand how the answer can be to label people according to how much they identify with them.

You're posting in bad faith, Pensive Pigeon. You're sea-lioning.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4164702-Bunbury-s-Eighth-Sealion-training-for-beginners

Nope you're wrong, @Shedbuilder, there. Cwenthryth, if I recall correctly, actually suggested I posted a thread about this topic off the back of another thread.

they might well experience oppression if they were able to biologically become a woman

However, as they can't biologically become a woman they don't experience the same oppression. As male people they may experience discrimination because they don't fit the male " mould" but this is nothing to do with any oppression women experience.

However, as they can't biologically become a woman they don't experience the same oppression. As male people they may experience discrimination because they don't fit the male " mould" but this is nothing to do with any oppression women experience.

No argument there. It was a science fiction orientated musing.

So how can we be more inclusive? Is it possible to include a subset of the male sex into single sex spaces? If males of all gender types, including transwomen, share the same pattern of criminality with regards to violence and sexual offending how can it be logical to say that any male can safely be included in spaces where women are vulnerable to male violence. Is this dilemma ever acknowledged by those who would like women to be more inclusive? What solutions do they have for dealing with this conflict? Until the group asking for inclusion can put forward solutions how on earth can they expect inclusion?

Is this dilemma ever acknowledged by those who would like women to be more inclusive?

@334bu, yes. As I have stated in my opening posts. Single sex spaces are made safe spaces for a whole multitude of genders but remain single sex. Sports categories are single sex but multi gender, uniforms allow for this etc etc. More is done to protect against trans phobic violence from their own sex within these safe spaces.

@pensivepigeon

Nope you're wrong, @Shedbuilder, there. Cwenthryth, if I recall correctly, actually suggested I posted a thread about this topic off the back of another thread.

I saw my name crop up scrolling TIO, I have not been keeping up with this thread otherwise since my last post here.

Yes I suggested that you stop sidetracking a thread where those of us who reject gender discuss how to respond to the census, where you wanted to discuss gender and suggest an alternative to rejection (ie not respecting our position) and I requested you take it elsewhere as it wasn’t relevant there. It was interesting to read you try to explain your ideas a bit more, but sorry I am still with everyone else who has found your position confused, inconsistent and yes, naïve, which is understandable because you repeatedly demonstrate that you haven’t actually fully understood what the issues are that we are facing, and seem to think if we were all just nicer then we might get a better response from those who have a completely different worldview and purpose/goal than us.

The fact that I suggested you start your own thread to stop derailing another doesn’t prove or disprove either way whether your intent here is genuine or in bad faith tbh. I hope the former but I would definitely recommend you take a step back for a bit and do a lot more reading and listening to others.

334bu, yes. As I have stated in my opening posts. Single sex spaces are made safe spaces for a whole multitude of genders but remain single sex. Sports categories are single sex but multi gender, uniforms allow for this etc etc. More is done to protect against trans phobic violence from their own sex within these safe spaces.*

What? This makes absolutely no sense.