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?

Every reputable international and national psychological and medical organisation

Every reputable medical association doesn't believe in gender identity ideology. But they do pander to activists. I promise you, that many (probably most) medical doctors have little truck with it. It doesn't have the solemn status you think it does.

Your own disbelief in scientific evidence is not my responsbility. If you can answer yes to the question "Am I a woman?" then your gender identity is woman, by definition

Only in your mind. A woman is an adult human female; nothing to do with identity. Rather to do with material reality, acknowledged the world over - for good or for ill ( especially if born a a human female in some countries).

It is like suggesting that being black is an identity. I'm sure there are some cultural and social aspects to the black experience which people hang their identity hat on, but being black in itself is just a statement of fact. An obvious material, physical reality.

Identities shift and change throughout one's life. They are not set in stone. An identity is something, or a quality, you associate yourself with; which you relate to in some way.

It's very very simple. If you answer the question "Are you a woman" yes, that's your gender identity

Only if you embrace that way of thinking, or that particular ideology. You cannot force an identity onto someone in order to bolster your own.

Trans women and non-trans women suffer from sexism and misogyny

Why on you insisting on calling women ," non trans women"? As i mentioned earlier, all you need to doto honour everyone is to name women, women, and name transpeople, trans. These are both accurate descriptors.

It's very very simple. If you answer the question "Are you a woman" yes, that's your gender identity

I'm pretty sure this relies on question begging as well as sleight of hand between different meanings of 'woman'.

I'm pretty sure this relies on question begging as well as sleight of hand between different meanings of 'woman'

Yes.

@pensivepigeon

My proposal is fairly simple centred around this idea:

                                     <span class="italic">There is no causal link between sex and gender.</span>

I agree.

@RedToothBrush

Women women women women women

Strange that.

This being 'feminist chat' on Mumsnet

Do you need to be a woman to be a feminist? Do feminists only care about women?

[quote CorvusPurpureus]@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. [/quote]
I don't want to buy you.

Again, inflated sense of importance.

I just don't agree with these 'we as women say X so therefore that's that's.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Well, when you present your stance so arrogantly

Women refusing consent to males is arrogant, now.

Why do we always have to be so emotive? And try to shoehorn everything? Yes, I get your implied connection about men treating women badly, but that has nothing to do with anuthing. The fact the post was arrogant is jack shit to do with the fact she's a woman. this consistently linking back to 'poor us, we are victims don't you know' is tiresome. It really is.

Do you need to be a woman to be a feminist? Do feminists only care about women?

I care about a myriad of things. As an environmentalist I care about the natural world. As a socialist I care about poverty and class. As a cook I care about provenance of the food I prepare.

But as a feminist I care about women.

@Justhadathought

Why on you insisting on calling women ," non trans women"? As i mentioned earlier, all you need to doto honour everyone is to name women, women, and name transpeople, trans. These are both accurate descriptors.

A trans woman being a woman takes nothing away from you being a woman at all, any more that marriage equality takes anything away from heterosexual marriage.

The only context I would talk about non-trans women is when we are discussing transgender issues, in particular gender identity, otherwise "woman" would do just fine. I avoided the medically and psychologically recognised term "cis" because I thought it would hurt your sensibilities.

I will re-state my question, Rooty.

What do women stand to gain from confusion about how we are defined? If we are not, simply, adult human females, but something more nebulous & arranged around subjective ideas of identity - what do we gain?

What would my teenage daughters gain?

Every feminist on this board can tell you what we'd lose.

So you need to pitch this idea: what's in it for us?

& until you do, & do so convincingly, I'll be holding the line for my daughters, my female students & all the women & girls I don't know.

That, to me, is feminism. It's about defending & promoting the rights of women & girls.

So far, you haven't convinced me that you've anything to offer us.

@JosephineBaker

Do you need to be a woman to be a feminist? Do feminists only care about women?

I care about a myriad of things. As an environmentalist I care about the natural world. As a socialist I care about poverty and class. As a cook I care about provenance of the food I prepare.

But as a feminist I care about women.

Right.

But as a woman, do you not care about other people?

@CorvusPurpureus

I will re-state my question, Rooty.

What do women stand to gain from confusion about how we are defined? If we are not, simply, adult human females, but something more nebulous & arranged around subjective ideas of identity - what do we gain?

What would my teenage daughters gain?

Every feminist on this board can tell you what we'd lose.

So you need to pitch this idea: what's in it for us?

& until you do, & do so convincingly, I'll be holding the line for my daughters, my female students & all the women & girls I don't know.

That, to me, is feminism. It's about defending & promoting the rights of women & girls.

So far, you haven't convinced me that you've anything to offer us.

It's not about you. It's really not. Your questions are literally the equivalent of transwomen standing in your toilets saying I don't care about you. Why should I leave ? You haven't CONVINCED me.

[quote DadJoke]@Justhadathought

Why on you insisting on calling women ," non trans women"? As i mentioned earlier, all you need to doto honour everyone is to name women, women, and name transpeople, trans. These are both accurate descriptors.

A trans woman being a woman takes nothing away from you being a woman at all, any more that marriage equality takes anything away from heterosexual marriage.

The only context I would talk about non-trans women is when we are discussing transgender issues, in particular gender identity, otherwise "woman" would do just fine. I avoided the medically and psychologically recognised term "cis" because I thought it would hurt your sensibilities.[/quote]
Oh no it takes absolutely everything away from women. Absolutely everything, and they're already victims in every single part of life. Apparently.

Watch with your use of that word. It gains strike, it's considered offensive.

@RootyT00t, who particularly do you have in mind? Because that looks like quite the disingenuous question.

A trans woman being a woman takes nothing away from you being a woman at all, any more that marriage equality takes anything away from heterosexual marriage

But as you know not everyone accepts this construction as a reality.

One obvious difference in the example of marriage equality, is that it literally is just about equal provisions; not about one group colonising the actual spaces, services, sports, and even universally understood language of another group. Equality embraces differences, whilst offering equal opportunity. We all have equal civil rights in the U.k now. Anyone can get married; everyone can vote; everyone has employment protections; and so on.

Trans is the most accurate description for transpeople. . Women is the most accurate description for women.

But I'm afraid it IS about me, Rooty, & my arrogant opinions, & my rights, & my concern for my daughters, & my female students, & every other woman & girl & THEIR rights.

If your response to women speaking about women's rights is 'it's not about you', then you aren't going to convince me that you've got anything to say that women speaking about women's rights should stop to listen to.

Do you see the problem you have here?

A trans woman being a woman takes nothing away from you being a woman at all

It takes away my gender identity. If being a woman isn’t linked to being female then I’m not one.

The only context I would talk about non-trans women is when we are discussing transgender issues, in particular gender identity, otherwise "woman" would do just fine. I avoided the medically and psychologically recognised term "cis" because I thought it would hurt your sensibilities

I'm big enough not to report you; and my sense of self not so fragile as to feel wounded.

However, what you need to understand is that what you are doing is imposing your personal ad favoured set of beliefs and constructs onto a situation, as if they are an absolute reality. That is the crux.

There is the real world of sex; and then there are ideological constructions.

The point of safeguarding is to be exclusive. We exclude the under 18s from drinking, driving, getting a tattoo. Women’s rights are there to protect women by excluding men. The only criteria for being a woman- is being observed female at birth. We can present any way we wish and have different beliefs, faiths and sexual orientation but we are all women. I totally understand that trans people need safe spaces: then build trans prisons, refuges and grate trans sports teams. Women, as determined by our sex, have the human right to exclude men irrespective of their ‘gender’ identity.

But I'm afraid it IS about me, Rooty, & my arrogant opinions, & my rights, & my concern for my daughters, & my female students, & every other woman & girl & THEIR rights.

If your response to women speaking about women's rights is 'it's not about you', then you aren't going to convince me that you've got anything to say that women speaking about women's rights should stop to listen to.

Do you see the problem you have here?

Well said.

Why do we always have to be so emotive?

There's no "we" here. I'm emotive because I'm angry. I think you have something of an empathy bypass.

She was refusing consent to males. That's literally what she was doing. And you called it arrogant. She was saying no. That's her red line. It's not about you.

you aren't going to convince me that you've got anything to say that women speaking about women's rights should stop to listen to.

I'll save you the effort. She hasn't.