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?

You're not getting hostility. You're getting confusion and frustration, because you are writing as if you've come up with something new. I'm bowing out now, because you seem to be determined to find an argument where there is none.

You're getting confusion and frustration, because you are writing as if you've come up with something new.

So, I'm being confusing because I'm expressing a widely heard and well understood opinion?

I'm bowing out now, because you seem to be determined to find an argument where there is none.

So you agree! Great!

I think I understand OPs point.

We need to be verbally and on the surface very kind, go along with whatever gender people suggest they have (including furries) and state our complete acceptance of these.
Extra bonus if we bore them to tears in the process.

Meanwhile, we fight as mad women underhand and sneakily with all available methods to keep single sex spaces.

I like your thinking OP.

The only negative I see is that the language and threats the TRAs are using are increasingly peaking more and more people. I do think the discussions are good to have to really display the worst inconsistencies for what they are.

The only negative I see is that the language and threats the TRAs are using are increasingly peaking more and more people. I do think the discussions are good to have to really display the worst inconsistencies for what they are.

I understand that people want to vent but the inconsistencies are so obvious is there really need to keep discussing them?

But then I am not much of a venter, especially in recent years. In real life just tend towards quietly acting without the venting and moving on. People don't tend to notice my part in things only the results.

What the thread boils down to is the suggestion that if only women would stop being aggressive & oppositional, they could re-frame their thinking; their conceptual understanding, and their experience of what it is to be a woman; to be female; and bring it more into line with what many trans people would like, the problem might be resolved.

Third spaces and provisions, pigeon. Please discuss.......

So, I'm being confusing because I'm expressing a widely heard and well understood opinion

Yes!

Your sentences of full of illogical inconsistencies - which one has to conclude reflects your muddled thinking.

What the thread boils down to is the suggestion that if only women would stop being aggressive & oppositional, they could re-frame their thinking; their conceptual understanding, and their experience of what it is to be a woman; to be female; and bring it more into line with what many trans people would like, the problem might be resolved.

Erm...no

As, many have commented. TRAs would not like my stance all all, which is largely gender critical, albeit in a quieter less confrontational way.

Third spaces and provisions, pigeon. Please discuss.......

Fine. But what about 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th etc ad infinitum...for the multitude of (non conforming) genders there are?

Your sentences of full of illogical inconsistencies - which one has to conclude reflects your muddled thinking.

Hmm, really....

Fine. But what about 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th etc ad infinitum...for the multitude of (non conforming) genders there are

Being non conforming is absolutely no issue. But people use the provision that is available for their sex, or else a third space.......if they feel that they need a more safe space away from potentially aggressive males. This really is for these gender identity people to create and push for themselves though.

Do you really not see that the conflict that you are arguing against could so easily be resolved if trans people campaigned for their own services and provisions, just like every other marginalised group has had to do.

Hmm, really

Yes, really!

Do you really not see that the conflict that you are arguing against could so easily be resolved if trans people campaigned for their own services and provisions, just like every other marginalised group has had to do.

No, because this creates further division. We need to protect each other. These people are people's children.

@Justhadathought

So sorry, but I think you miss how effective this can be. This is how we need to argue with the frequent flyers. Exactly like this. And we need to throw in a few “yes dear”, “your feelings are completely valid” and “how many genders do you have - we will validate all of them”.

And then we go back to discussing single sex spaces. I think the rage that will follow will get some people deleted.

Do you really not see that the conflict that you are arguing against could so easily be resolved if trans people campaigned for their own services and provisions, just like every other marginalised group has had to do.

Exactly. Don't just take another group's provision, because that is not kind, or right, or fair.

@Justhadathought

What the thread boils down to is the suggestion that if only women would stop being aggressive & oppositional, they could re-frame their thinking; their conceptual understanding, and their experience of what it is to be a woman; to be female; and bring it more into line with what many trans people would like, the problem might be resolved.

It feels very much like this. Why can't you just agree that your gender matches your sex and keep them happy? You'll know that you're redefining 'gender' to mean 'any possible combination of human qualities and personality traits, whether traditionally masculine or feminine', and by that definition it isn't untrue - and that way nobody will get upset at the thought of you stridently suggesting that gender itself is the problem. Find a way to fit in with their ideology, don't cause conflict!

No, because this creates further division. We need to protect each other. These people are people's children

I get it; you are really a comedian. haha!

and by that definition it isn't untrue - and that way nobody will get upset at the thought of you stridently suggesting that gender itself is the problem

By widening the gender boxes so there ceases to be divisions (over what is seen as normative or feminine/masculine) left, gender will cease to be a problem. It would simply put circle around one of those 'gender' scales so it is no longer seen as a scale and more just pictures of people in different clothes with different hairstyles. So there will be no need to suggest gender is a problem because it won't be.

As I said in my initial posts, gender is defined by society. If people are finding gender restrictive within a climate of a huge societal interest over it, then one way to tackle this is to redefine gender (as we are part of society, all you need is a big enough consensus) so it is no longer restrictive. It can be easier to steer discussion sometimes than silence it. Conversely sometimes the steering ends up resulting in silence. Both can be good.

And I suppose I could offer my services to the cause in boring dissenters to death!

I haven't RTFT but it's occurred to me that a huge part of the problem is that while we're on here constantly arguing debating how we can work it out so that laws and society are inclusive of trans people at the same time as ensuring women's rights are upheld, I have never seen any post on here, twitter, reddit or elsewhere by a trans activist asking how they can make sure they're being inclusive of women's rights.
It's always so one-sided.

@JustTurtlesAllTheWayDown trans people don’t give a crap about being inclusive of women’s rights. Not one iota. They would be very happy to abolish women’s rights (and replace them with trans rights that include women not being allowed any safe spaces away from them).

@JustTurtlesAllTheWayDown

I'm really aiming about getting more moderate people who might sympathise with the trans cause but consider themselves feminist onside. That way the more radical minority have no audience or sway.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=37iHSwA1SwE

I think this is what OP is aiming at. Watch this “yes minister” clip.

replace (in your head) European Union with gender ideology, foreign office with GC women, civil service with feminists and the various countries with the 109 (or whatever) different genders...