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 posters like @RedToothBrush are sharper than a scalpel specialising in lemon shaving tbh, OP.

Gender beliefs/stereotypes/whatever are a thing. We get it.

On the whole we are Down With That Sort Of Thing because no good comes of it.

There's no 'nuance' when we are defending our rights as women. It's not for us to find reasons why we should compromise our rights.

The genderists can look to how they can come & talk to us, & explain how their proposals are good news for women.

So far, I'm not seeing anything convincing.

It demonstrates sex is material reality that lots of people recognise

Myself included as I have very clearly stated on this thread and numerous others.

some people try and talk bollocks to avoid and disguise.

Never disputed that either and it is not what I am doing. The purpose of continuing dialogue is to expose the truth as it enables the untangling and unraveling of people's ideas.

@CorvusPurpureus

I think posters like *@RedToothBrush* are sharper than a scalpel specialising in lemon shaving tbh, OP.

Gender beliefs/stereotypes/whatever are a thing. We get it.

On the whole we are Down With That Sort Of Thing because no good comes of it.

There's no 'nuance' when we are defending our rights as women. It's not for us to find reasons why we should compromise our rights.

The genderists can look to how they can come & talk to us, & explain how their proposals are good news for women.

So far, I'm not seeing anything convincing.

It's not for us to find reasons for you why it's good news, either.

Because not everything is about you.

(Hence why everyone should 'compromise').

It's not for us to find reasons why we should compromise our rights.

And the compromising of women's rights is not what I'm advocating. There is no reason to compromise them because they stand up to scrutiny and are protected in law.

What I am proposing is merely a recognition of gender as a cultural phenomenon alongside with redefining and clarifying more accurately what it actually means in today's society so that every variety of gender identity and expression is deemed appropriate for either sex.

@pensivepigeon

One thing this thread certainly does demonstrate is that tribalism isn't exclusively the preserve of people with a gender identity....

👏👏👏

Every thread ends up that way.

@RootyT00t that's really not an argument, is it?

We would like to retain our rights as women, as a sex class.

How many women saying 'no' do you need to hear?

You want to take those rights away? The onus is on you to explain a) why women would be better off &/or b) well, they wouldn't be, but here's reasons why they should suck it up anyway.

I'm not finding either set of arguments, or their disingenuous overlap, at all persuasive.

[quote CorvusPurpureus]@RootyT00t that's really not an argument, is it?

We would like to retain our rights as women, as a sex class.

How many women saying 'no' do you need to hear?

You want to take those rights away? The onus is on you to explain a) why women would be better off &/or b) well, they wouldn't be, but here's reasons why they should suck it up anyway.

I'm not finding either set of arguments, or their disingenuous overlap, at all persuasive.[/quote]
Well, when you present your stance so arrogantly, we all say no and therefore no, why should we give anything up etc etc, I'm not entirely surprised that people find it difficult to persuade you, or indeed want to. You have an alarming inflation of your own importance in dictating what people do in the world.

Well done RedToothBrush.

(Hence why everyone should 'compromise') What, is Compromise two stops along from Be Kind Central?

Sex exists. Gender is just words, some of which are harmful to women. Reality matters, and women's lives are not to be spent ensuring others' feelings aren't bruised.

disingenuous

I am entirely sincere. However, you don't need to believe me. It will become evident sooner or later.

@ChewtonRoad

Well done RedToothBrush.

(Hence why everyone should 'compromise') What, is Compromise two stops along from Be Kind Central?

Sex exists. Gender is just words, some of which are harmful to women. Reality matters, and women's lives are not to be spent ensuring others' feelings aren't bruised.

Women women women women women .

Gender is just words, some of which are harmful to women. Reality matters, and women's lives are not to be spent ensuring others' feelings aren't bruised.

So take out the harmful words and replace them with beneficial ones. We have words. Let's use them constructively instead of trying to silence everything we think we might not like before we have even attempted to listen properly. This thread is like trying to argue with children who are only interested in playing a whispering game.

Culture frames reality and people's perception of it. So I am more than willing to engage with it.

Women women women women women

Strange that.

This being 'feminist chat' on Mumsnet

@RootyT00t

What's your proposed compromise, & how would it benefit women?

Because I think you're misunderstanding the word, 'compromise', massively.

What are you offering that would make women think 'oh ok, fair enough, we should probably stop advocating for our own rights because Rooty says we can trade them for .'

You can't buy us. You have nothing to offer in this scenario.

Well, when you present your stance so arrogantly, we all say no and therefore no, why should we give anything up etc etc, I'm not entirely surprised that people find it difficult to persuade you, or indeed want to.

'Arrogantly'.

Women wanting to maintain their sex based rights OR even to hear a bloody good reason why they should surrender them: arrogance.

Compromise = women exposed to a higher risk of rape / harassment / abuse in places which were previously single sex.

No.

Just no.

Women women women women women .

Yes, and....? My life is mine, not to be spent seeing to men's needs and changing anything about me because it would be more satisfying to men. I did that far too often in the past, but no more. The future for girls and younger women is not going to be as dire as it was for me and other women in the past.

There will be no compromise unless it benefits (guess who) women, women, women.

There will be no compromise unless it benefits (guess who) women, women, women.

And my proposal will benefit women without compromising any of their rights.

@pensivepigeon

There will be no compromise unless it benefits (guess who) women, women, women.

And my proposal will benefit women without compromising any of their rights.

No.

It won't.

Next.

Because our female (and male) children are exposed to discussions concerning gender identity. They need to be given the tools to negotiate their way through them, what they mean and the implications for our society.

No.

It won't.

Next

Yes, it will. La, la, la....I'M IT!!!!

Well, when you present your stance so arrogantly

Women refusing consent to males is arrogant, now.

Women women women women women

Well, yes. That's what FWR is for. Magnificently and unapologetically.

Gender is a tool used to enforce a hierarchy based on sex. History shows that women dont get a say in how gender is defined.

When men enter a profession the wages rise.
If they leave the wages fall.

Yes, and....? My life is mine, not to be spent seeing to men's needs and changing anything about me because it would be more satisfying to men. I did that far too often in the past, but no more. The future for girls and younger women is not going to be as dire as it was for me and other women in the past.

There will be no compromise unless it benefits (guess who) women, women, women.

Well said.

. History shows that women dont get a say in how gender is defined.

Historically maybe. But this needn't be true of the future.