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?

Oh my....what do you think transgender means?

Someone who does not believe they conform to gender norms, as they perceive them and starts to express/present themselves according to how they feel.

Ummm nope. Has the whole 'Transwomen are women' thing somehow passed you by, then? It seems a bit odd to post a thread which you think somehow magically solves the problem when you patently don't actually understand what the problem even is.

"Someone who does not believe they conform to gender norms, as they perceive them and starts to express/present themselves according to how they feel."

OP, this is not a definition used by most trans rights activists and certainly not by lobby groups. Gender non-conformity is not the issue here; quite the opposite. Expressing or presenting yourself as your inner gender is not a requirement either.

RagzReturnsRebooted

I hope you have some support to help you with your sister's decisions. Transgender Trend have just put a testimony from a recently detransitioned woman and her sister on their sitee*, and it all sounds like it has been very difficult for them both

(it's twitter's @ImWatson91)

That's....sort of everyone though, isn't it?

@Gerla, well, it depends on how you perceive gender norms. With my own definition, I am not trans because I believe a femininity can conform or not conform to traditional stereotypes.

The part I struggle with, as comes up here a lot, is that all of these people I know can only define their gender using stereotypes yet will assert that there's more to it that I cannot possibly understand because I don't have a gender identity that differs from my sex. My sister was bragging about 'learning man stuff' because their landlord was teaching them to change a tyre and erect a shed. I was appalled as I can do both these things and try to raise my children to see that there are no Man jobs and Woman jobs. It just feels really regressive.

I would struggle with that too. But I don't think any amount of aggressive arguing would change the situation, unfortunately.

However, unless you conform to the restrictions of a label these days, you cease to exist

Wow! Existing but not sounds almost supernatural!

Maybe not, but it certainly should be! Which is why the whole gender ideology frustrates me so much.

Sort of what I'm pushing for but calling it normal rather than trans.

"Assigned male at birth" suggests that sex is not a scientific fact - it can be assigned - and thus also wrongly assigned (and so changed). "Identifies and lives as a woman" - how can you describe what it means to live as a woman without falling back onto stereotypes. Women (and men!) are incredibly diverse.

I agree with this. However, I also acknowledge gender as a cultural phenomenon. The way to change things, I think is to address and change the culture so gender ceases to be important within it rather than simply tell people gender is not important.

If you say that is body dysmorphia then Stonewall, Mermaids, many politicians, many organisations, many celebrities - in other words a whole lot of people with very loud powerful voices will call you transphobic and people have lost their jobs, safety and ability to speak freely for saying similar. I'm afraid you're about 10 years behind what's been creeping in - this is why we're saying there's no middle ground, it's already been taken.

I can quite believe this within certain circles. However, changes do occur within society and not all changes are fuelled by outright conflict.

Why? I don't understand how this helps. People can dress how they like already. The trans lobby isn't fighting for the right for transwomen to dress as women but continue to use men's facilities. That's not what they want.

As I understand it, some of that argument is made because men's facilities are deemed unsafe. If gender diversity was truly accepted then this would not be the case

Ummm nope. Has the whole 'Transwomen are women' thing somehow passed you by, then? It seems a bit odd to post a thread which you think somehow magically solves the problem when you patently don't actually understand what the problem even is.

It hasn't passed me by. I just tackle it side on.

OP, this is not a definition used by most trans rights activists and certainly not by lobby groups. Gender non-conformity is not the issue here; quite the opposite. Expressing or presenting yourself as your inner gender is not a requirement either.

I said earlier that I am not talking about engaging with TRAs but getting more moderate people onside. I assume more moderate people are in the majority.

This might be worth reading - relates to why telling women not to be so aggressive just doesn't work -
tinyletter.com/Glosswitch/letters/the-ok-karen-23-no-is-the-wrong-answer

And do you think “more moderate people” do not agree with rejection of gender stereotypes?

@pensivepigeon

OP, this is not a definition used by most trans rights activists and certainly not by lobby groups. Gender non-conformity is not the issue here; quite the opposite. Expressing or presenting yourself as your inner gender is not a requirement either.

I said earlier that I am not talking about engaging with TRAs but getting more moderate people onside. I assume more moderate people are in the majority.

So how do we get more moderate people onside about a compromise with a group when we're not using the definition that group has for themselves? This makes no sense.

You can try all you like to find ways to blame women for why 'GC feminists' are being labelled all kinds of appalling things, but it's not about not trying to be fair or nice. It's about not being doormats. It's about saying no. You can convince yourself that the meanies just haven't been going about this the right way, and that people just don't understand. When you see the way women have been demonised for saying reasonable things politely - like Scottish poet Jenny Lindsay, objecting to violent threats from activists - it's enraging. This is an extremist movement and it's dangerous.

@notyourhandmaid , just read it. However it has not dissuaded me. I too have lived through abuses. One thing it comes down to, for me is persistence. I will not let a radical feminist define how I should be any more than I would let a misogynistic abusive man. I will not let the abuse I suffered make me bitter which I do perceive as a weakness of sorts. It prejudices you and stops you seeing clearly. I am still happy to look for good in the world and engage with all sorts of people. I am not terribly young and inexperienced as some have surmised on this thread. I am nearing 50 and have lead a full life.

So how do we get more moderate people onside about a compromise with a group when we're not using the definition that group has for themselves? This makes no sense.

How have TRAs managed? Ideology.

I believe a femininity can conform or not conform to traditional stereotypes

So? I don't get why this is even important. As I pointed out above "traditional" stereotypes change according to place and time. They should be no basis for law.

I said earlier that I am not talking about engaging with TRAs but getting more moderate people onside. I assume more moderate people are in the majority.
You seem to think that there are plenty of people out there just waiting for a moderte debate. The problem is that views far more extreme than the ones you are suggesting are already out there and being circulated in our schools, among our police force, influencing law-makers. Being moderate, being kind, presuming that most people are acting in good faith has not worked so far - we are already rolling back women's rights. We are already seeing women being shamed, being silenced for believing scientific facts.

I will not let a radical feminist define how I should be any more than I would let a misogynistic abusive man.

You continually seem to misrepresent what radical feminists are supporting. Why do you think a radical feminist would tell you how you should be? Nobody is saying that.

I will not let the abuse I suffered make me bitter which I do perceive as a weakness of sorts. It prejudices you and stops you seeing clearly. I am still happy to look for good in the world and engage with all sorts of people.

//////

OP I'm sorry you were a victim .

Whilst your healing has allowed you to now have the above mindset many more women will be unable to look for the good in particular in those of the sex class that have hurt them. This isn't bitterness its self preservation and it's disrespectful to say otherwise.

Laws to protect women and children are made to protect those who are weakest. If you feel you don't need those protections that's great. Thankfully it's still there for those who do.

Being moderate, being kind, presuming that most people are acting in good faith has not worked so far - we are already rolling back women's rights. We are already seeing women being shamed, being silenced for believing scientific facts.

I think it is necessary to play the long game. And the young people I know certainly believe scientific facts. So I don't catastrophise. They are the future. I don't underestimate women's influence on society even when they don't shout and scream.

OP I'm sorry you were a victim

Thank you but I don't view myself as one.

. This isn't bitterness its self preservation and it's disrespectful to say otherwise.

Well, then I apologise. However, I think over prioritising self preservation can be harmful and make someone miss good opportunities.

Laws to protect women and children are made to protect those who are weakest. If you feel you don't need those protections that's great. Thankfully it's still there for those who do.

I have maintained, throughout this thread, that I believe in upholding and protecting these laws.