Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

An inclusive way to be gender critical?

882 replies

pensivepigeon · 27/02/2021 07:57

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?

OP posts:
RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 20:02

@Ereshkigalangcleg

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.

Necessary to be so rude?
RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 20:03

@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.

Also, I'm a feminist.

But not everything in my life revolves around what I'd lose, because I think about more than me.

And no, I haven't got a problem, other than with 🙄 at your 4? At last count posts basically saying IM RIGHT NA NA NA.

Convince you? What do you think this is? You're in some authority and it's my job to plead to you?

Justhadathought · 03/03/2021 20:31

Necessary to be so rude

I think it is exasperation, pure and simple!How many times do people need to say "no"; to draw their own boundaries?

Third spaces and provisions are the way forward. That way everyone gets their basic safeguarding needs met, without trampling over others.

Justhadathought · 03/03/2021 20:34

But not everything in my life revolves around what I'd lose, because I think about more than me

Good for you! But you don't have the right to remove the existing safeguards and provisions that others have fought for and value.

Do you have daughters, I wonder? Because I'm sure if you do then you naturally are thinking beyond just yourself, and towards another generation of girls and young women.

Justhadathought · 03/03/2021 20:37

Your questions are literally the equivalent of transwomen standing in your toilets saying I don't care about you. Why should I leave

But effectively, that is the proposal isn't it? that no care or consideration needs to be given to women; because women should automatically "be kind and think of others" before themselves; their own needs for privacy and dignity; and for their own comfort.

But as we all know it doesn't stop with toilets; it extends into every area of women's life; into women's sporting categories; into women only short-lists and so on.......

Justhadathought · 03/03/2021 20:39

I agree

I disagree. Sex and the role of motherhood are inextricably linked, for one.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 03/03/2021 20:40

But not everything in my life revolves around what I'd lose, because I think about more than me.

Sometimes we have to stand up for what we believe in, and I haven't noticed you make a coherent case for why women and girls should lose their established rights in favour of trans ideology.

And I don't personally believe the word for what you believe is "feminism". Feminism is the rights movement for women and girls.

Justhadathought · 03/03/2021 20:40

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

Feminism centres women. It is about women. But as human beings, of course, it is possible and usual to care about other things too.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 03/03/2021 20:43

Indeed. So do I. I call myself a feminist because the rights of women and girls are a primary concern for me, not because it's a nice label I can use.

CorvusPurpureus · 03/03/2021 21:26

And no, I haven't got a problem, other than with 🙄 at your 4? At last count posts basically saying IM RIGHT NA NA NA.

Convince you? What do you think this is? You're in some authority and it's my job to plead to you?

Well, I haven't said that 'I'm right'. I've said that you haven't convinced me that you have a position of merit. If you do, you should be able to argue it - & you can't, or you haven't.

You're asking me to set aside established rights & you are being asked to come up with a good reason as to why I should acquiesce to that. You haven't yet found an argument that's coherent.

What I'm saying is: come back to me with an argument. Prove me wrong.

I'll wait.

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:39

@CorvusPurpureus

And no, I haven't got a problem, other than with 🙄 at your 4? At last count posts basically saying IM RIGHT NA NA NA.

Convince you? What do you think this is? You're in some authority and it's my job to plead to you?

Well, I haven't said that 'I'm right'. I've said that you haven't convinced me that you have a position of merit. If you do, you should be able to argue it - & you can't, or you haven't.

You're asking me to set aside established rights & you are being asked to come up with a good reason as to why I should acquiesce to that. You haven't yet found an argument that's coherent.

What I'm saying is: come back to me with an argument. Prove me wrong.

I'll wait.

Ignore that last one.

I'm on two similar threads (and have clearly lost the inability to read and write posts).

My point still stands though. It's not about making an argument to sway you. My only issue is about the ferocity of anti trans.

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:39

@Ereshkigalangcleg

But not everything in my life revolves around what I'd lose, because I think about more than me.

Sometimes we have to stand up for what we believe in, and I haven't noticed you make a coherent case for why women and girls should lose their established rights in favour of trans ideology.

And I don't personally believe the word for what you believe is "feminism". Feminism is the rights movement for women and girls.

Right.

And what have I said that means I can't be a feminist?

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:40

@Justhadathought

But not everything in my life revolves around what I'd lose, because I think about more than me

Good for you! But you don't have the right to remove the existing safeguards and provisions that others have fought for and value.

Do you have daughters, I wonder? Because I'm sure if you do then you naturally are thinking beyond just yourself, and towards another generation of girls and young women.

What about young women and girls who are transgender?

What about other people's daughters who are transgender?

When you start claiming to only care about biologically born females, feminism is looking a bit shaky

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:41

@Justhadathought

I agree

I disagree. Sex and the role of motherhood are inextricably linked, for one.

What's that got to do with anuthing?
334bu · 03/03/2021 21:48

What about other people's daughters who are transgender?

Of course feminists are concerned about anybody's daughter even if they are transgender and identify as men
They will still face the same discrimination as any other female sexed person

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:50

@334bu

*What about other people's daughters who are transgender?*

Of course feminists are concerned about anybody's daughter even if they are transgender and identify as men
They will still face the same discrimination as any other female sexed person

Right....and why is that?
334bu · 03/03/2021 21:53

Because they are members of the female sex class even if they identify their gender as men .

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:55

@334bu

Because they are members of the female sex class even if they identify their gender as men .
Right. But what about women in general makes us vulnerable to men?

What I'm getting at is, accepting women as men but not men as women is a slippery slope.

If we accepted men as women but not women as men the misogny cries would be out ASAP.

And if your theory is biologically that men are stronger etc, would you allow a transitioned transman?

OldCrone · 03/03/2021 21:57

[quote DadJoke]@NotDavidTennant
The third paragraph in, the authors state "Every person has a gender identity", but provide no citation or supporting evidence.

Can you cite any evidence that all people (or even most people) have a gender identity?

Their are multiple cites in the paper. Follow them. It's like asking for cites for the statement "every person has a sexuality." You really don't need me to do that work for you.[/quote]
I've had a look at the paper you posted a link to.

It doesn't give any evidence that everyone has a gender identity as far as I can see. The first paper referenced is by Stoller, from 1968. I can't find a full text version of this, but I would hope that any real evidence that everyone has a gender identity (if true) would also be found in more recent papers.

The next reference is to the 'Guidelines for psychological practice with transgender and gender nonconforming people.' from the American Psychological Association. There is no evidence there that everyone has a gender identity and only a fairly woolly definition of what it is.

The next citation is in a section headed 'Gender Identity': Every person has a gender identity. Children typically become aware of gender between the ages of three and five (Ruble et al. 2007).

This is the paper: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17650129/

There's a link to the full text on google scholar

It's clear that the authors aren't actually talking about 'gender identity' as an identity which has nothing to do with one's sex, it's talking about 'sex identity', in other words, the understanding a child has that they are male or female, and that this is a fixed attribute (my bold).

One of the most compelling yet controversial ideas in the gender literature is ‘‘gender constancy.’’ As proposed by Kohlberg (1966), children’s developing understanding of the permanence of categorical sex (‘‘I am a girl and will always be a girl’’) is a critical organizer and motivator for learning gender concepts and behaviors. Slaby and Frey (1975) demonstrated that children move through a series of stages: first learning to identify their own and others’ sex (basic gender identity or labeling), next learning that gender remains stable over time (stability), and finally learning that gender is a fixed characteristic that is not altered by superficial transformations in appearance or activities (consistency). Thus, children are thought to reach a full understanding of constancy once they recognize that they will always be the same sex, across time or change in situation (e.g., a boy who puts on a dress and a long-haired wig is still a boy even though he resembles a girl). These stages have been confirmed in other research, including cross-cultural studies (e.g., De Lisi & Gallagher, 1991).

This is from an article by Katie Alcock (child development specialist) about how the language has changed over time:

What this also means is that terminology has changed. When this area of research first started, everyone knew, and was clear, that they were talking about children’s knowledge of biological sex. The terms “sex identity” and “sex constancy” were used, to mean children’s knowledge of whether they were a boy or a girl, and whether they or others could change into the opposite sex. Around the 1990s everyone started getting squeamish about the word “sex” and started using “gender” as a euphemism. Researchers, however, still meant a child’s knowledge of biological sex.

That paper doesn't seem to contain any evidence for what you are claiming.

334bu · 03/03/2021 21:57

And if your theory is biologically that men are stronger etc, would you allow a transitioned transman?

??????

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 21:59

@334bu

*And if your theory is biologically that men are stronger etc, would you allow a transitioned transman?*

??????

Take the toilet example - you want to protect transmen, yes, so would you allow them Inn your toilets?
CorvusPurpureus · 03/03/2021 22:02

Wait, what?

What I'm getting at is, accepting women as men but not men as women is a slippery slope.

Who is imagined to be doing this?

RootyT00t · 03/03/2021 22:03

334bu said as a feminist she is also concerned for women transitioning to men.

But I can only presume that concern doesn't stretch to men.

sanluca · 03/03/2021 22:03

I see we are back at the discussion about what is the definition of the word 'woman'. As usual the argument are that female humans should have a word that is only for them and not for any male, so they can effectively fight sexism and keep existing rights based on the fact they are female and not male, versus anyone can be a woman therefore female humans have no word to define themselves, fight sexism and keep existing rights based on the fsct they are female and not male.

Well, makes a change from 'you have always shared toilets with transwomen and never noticed' argument...

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread