Why aren't transactivists gender-critical?

[oxcat1]

Please go easy on me if this is a stupid question.

If gender is simply the socially constructed expectations of how people should behave and dress, why isn't the trans movement gender critical? Surely to break down these societal expectations is in their interests (just as it is in the interest of women, feminists argue)?

Instead, the trans movement seeks to enshrine in law the very structure that makes living their own lives as they wish, free from constraints of societal expectations, so very difficult.

Why is that? Or have I totally misunderstood?

@TabbyStar

There was this though from another thread!

However, the state of being trans seems to be about womanhood. If a man desires to be a woman, then they say they are a woman, whereas being trans for women (or more to the point, girls) seems to be about the desire to not be a woman rather than than the desire to be a man.

Yes! In a lot of cases it seems that TW are attracted to womanhood by its superficial, stereotypical characteristics (the ones that actual women have largely been trying to shake off for decades, or at least refuse to be defined by). While (often young) women are queuing up to escape from womanhood for much more serious reasons - i.e. the desire not to be sexually vulnerable, exploited, mistreated, physically attacked and objectified.

a self-defined trait of oneself usually in association with the gender of people around you

Anyone else want to hazard a guess what PP meant in regards to the significance of the 'gender' of people around means to a persons self-definition?

Isn't this, I see how everyone else does things and cherry pick what I want and use it to define myself.

or I see how everyone else gets treated and choose to cherry pick those traits that got the best results for me.

or I see how everyone else acts and reacts to the world and this influences me and my choices for myself.

I mean, they are all saying pretty much the same thing and refer to socialisation and stereotypes in my view, but I must be getting it arse about face because PP spent hours telling us it had nothing to do with those two concepts.

@lazylinguist

However, the state of being trans seems to be about womanhood. If a man desires to be a woman, then they say they are a woman, whereas being trans for women (or more to the point, girls) seems to be about the desire to not be a woman rather than than the desire to be a man.

Yes! In a lot of cases it seems that TW are attracted to womanhood by its superficial, stereotypical characteristics (the ones that actual women have largely been trying to shake off for decades, or at least refuse to be defined by). While (often young) women are queuing up to escape from womanhood for much more serious reasons - i.e. the desire not to be sexually vulnerable, exploited, mistreated, physically attacked and objectified.

Which why I disagree profoundly with the entire thing. It's driven by sexism. Men embracing it and women trying to escape it.

I couldn't agree more, Datun. Are there any useful statistics about the typical age and characteristics/background (e.g. mental health) of transwomen vs transmen? The impression I get is that the typical tw profile is middle-aged men, probably mostly nt, with a possible history of cross-dressing, and the tm profile is very young women, often autistic or with a history of abuse, trauma or mh difficulties. But is there actually much evidence that bears that out?

I see how everyone else gets treated and choose to cherry pick those traits that got the best results for me
This is absolutely what I’d have done if I was a teenager now. I’d cherry pick whatever traits achieved my goals.

-Escape from the bitchy girls who rejected me because I wasn’t feminine.
-Be accepted to socialise with the boys I had more in common with.

• Not be alone and excluded by both sexes.

-Be accepted by my Dad, who was glued to me until I was about 12 then refused to take me with him to his activities because my developing female body made him and his mates feel uncomfortable. -Be allowed to do “male things” that were considered too dirty or dangerous for girls to do. -Not feel at risk of sexual exploitation and physical attack. -Not suffer the pain and disfigurement of pregnancy. -Not be the primary carer and have to dial back my career ambitions, and not be told I’m a bad selfish person because I have no desire to be the primary carer. -Not have to go through menopause (which I’m still terrified of).

I’m not male but no doubt I’d be told I was, even though the reasons for me not wanting to be female are largely a product of how society treats me as a non-gender-conforming female.

It's a series of fairly incoherent statements, which refuse to acknowledge the implications or even existence of sex. Whilst transitioning from one to the other.

Yes, this thread is a good one to bookmark for when people say things like "no one is saying that biological sex doesn't exist!". Because some people are, and this thread is an example.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It's a series of fairly incoherent statements, which refuse to acknowledge the implications or even existence of sex. Whilst transitioning from one to the other.

Yes, this thread is a good one to bookmark for when people say things like "no one is saying that biological sex doesn't exist!". Because some people are, and this thread is an example.

What's worse?

Some people denying the fundamental reality that enable their literal existence on the planet, and then trampling over the rights of women based on 100% provably incorrect BS.

Some people acknowledging the fundamental reality that does exist, and then trampling over the rights of women because they believe that their inner sense of their own identity trumps the rights of half the planet.

I think that I almost prefer those who are completely delusional to those who have some sense of reality yet still come to the same nasty conclusions as the delusional.

The end game is the same, so I don't care.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

The end game is the same, so I don't care.

Fair response

@lazylinguist

I couldn't agree more, Datun. Are there any useful statistics about the typical age and characteristics/background (e.g. mental health) of transwomen vs transmen? The impression I get is that the typical tw profile is middle-aged men, probably mostly nt, with a possible history of cross-dressing, and the tm profile is very young women, often autistic or with a history of abuse, trauma or mh difficulties. But is there actually much evidence that bears that out?

I don't think there are official statistics, no. But the information comes from all over the place, really. The fact that it's overwhelmingly young girls showing up at the Tavi. And they appear to be the most affected by ROGD, 'coming out' in groups at school, etc.

It's unbelievable, I know, but the Tavi didn't even collate how many children had autism, other than it was 'lots'.

Then there's the fact that it was originally estimated that there were only about 5000 HSTS (homosexual transsexuals) yet the number of trans people has now risen to half a million. And appears to have coincided with Stonewall changing the definition to include cross dressers and transvestites.

I honestly don't see how you could even analyse the statistics, now. Asking what your sex is would give you any number of answers, as would sexual orientation, as would why do you identify as trans.

Thanks. Yes, although it's heartening to see the recent progress made, it's so worrying to think about how much muddying of the water has happened already in data/statistics and the reporting of them in the media, and how hard it would be to go back and unpick, even if the tide fully turned, as it were.

People think that when you're trans that you've wanted to be a girl your whole life; yes, that's partly true [for me], but it's also true that I've wanted to be male my whole life to fit into what society deems as normal. But, that isn't my truth, and I'm daring to take this on. I tried to be male and be in-between and nonbinary. The truth is I'm a feminine entity and I can live this life.

But it's never about stereotypes or being feminine vs. masculine.

ew.com/tv/rupauls-drag-race-laganja-estranja-comes-out-trans/?utm_campaign=entertainmentweekly_entertainmentweekly&utm_content=manual&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_term=60c902a38d75120001bf5cb1

"I do want to be able to express this at all times," she continues. "I just got my haircut - a very feminine cut - and in one week already, my life has changed. I'm able to come off stage and take my makeup off and still see a beautiful woman in the mirror. It's powerful."

and

"I'm so happy. I feel so beautiful and empowered,

You are right manatsu. it is never about stereotypes is it?

And all the examples that we can post, will never be refuted with counter evidence. It is rather dishonest isn't it?

@Cwenthryth
Interested to hear more about how you think your views are different from ‘GC’ because your second paragraph sounds entirely consistent with what I and every gender critical feminist I’ve ever discussed this with would agree with as one of the possible explanations for desire to transition.

I think, from what I’ve read on here, some of the points where many GC people would probably disagree with me are -

• i think that using language in a way that reflects and respects people’s feelings about their own gender is a good and important thing - whether that’s using their chosen name or preferred pronouns, or more generally using language in a way that’s more inclusive, eg talking about pregnant people rather than pregnant women, or not using language in relation to sanitary products that assumes only women menstruate.

• I don’t think there is a powerful and militant trans lobby, led by organisations such as Stonewall and Mermaids, that is at best completely indifferent to issues affecting women, and at worst deeply misogynistic. I don’t think these organisations are perfect, but overall I think they are a force for good.

• I think the default starting point in relation to all spaces and services is that they should not discriminate against or exclude anyone on the basis of their sex or gender. There are situations where single sex spaces and services are merited, but this should only be allowed where it is a necessary and proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is always fact-specific. Where a space or service is single sex and a trans person needs to access it, a very careful weighing of the competing interests of the trans person and others who use the service needs to be carried out. Sometimes there is no easy or straightforward right answer.

• I don’t think that people should always be able to express ‘GC’ views in any way they want, in any context they want, without any detrimental consequences to them. Protecting free speech is obviously important but is not without limits. Just as I think it’s sometimes justified for people in public office or high profile positions to face sanctions for expressing negative views about same sex relationships or same-sex attracted people, I think it is sometimes justified for people to face sanctions for expressing views that are detrimental to trans people.

So I guess it’s not so much my understanding of gender or what makes people want to transition that differs from most other people here, it’s about the conclusions I draw from that about how society should operate and how people should be treated.

I think, from what I’ve read on here, some of the points where many GC people would probably disagree with me are -
i think that using language in a way that reflects and respects people’s feelings about their own gender is a good and important thing - whether that’s using their chosen name or preferred pronouns, or more generally using language in a way that’s more inclusive, eg talking about pregnant people rather than pregnant women, or not using language in relation to sanitary products that assumes only women menstruate.

I can't speak for others but I think the muddying of language puts disadvantaged groups like those with learning difficulties and those with english as a foreign language at a disadvantage. I also don't think feelings should trump people's ability to be clear, and simple language is best for this. My main issues with being referred to as a menstuater is: the above, it's inaccurate, it's dehumanising and it indicates my feminist views are unwelcome.

• I don’t think there is a powerful and militant trans lobby, led by organisations such as Stonewall and Mermaids, that is at best completely indifferent to issues affecting women, and at worst deeply misogynistic. I don’t think these organisations are perfect, but overall I think they are a force for good.

*I won't address this too much, as it will get very tedious, but, suffice to say organisations are waking up to the damage inflicted by Stonewall at present.

• I think the default starting point in relation to all spaces and services is that they should not discriminate against or exclude anyone on the basis of their sex or gender. There are situations where single sex spaces and services are merited, but this should only be allowed where it is a necessary and proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is always fact-specific. Where a space or service is single sex and a trans person needs to access it, a very careful weighing of the competing interests of the trans person and others who use the service needs to be carried out. Sometimes there is no easy or straightforward right answer.

- I think the default starting point in relation to all spaces and services is that they should not discriminate against or exclude anyone on the basis of their sex. I think this because I know many vulnerable women need their own spaces and services. I also have yet to see a compelling argument why trans women can't use and campaign for spaces tailored to their own need.

• I don’t think that people should always be able to express ‘GC’ views in any way they want, in any context they want, without any detrimental consequences to them. Protecting free speech is obviously important but is not without limits. Just as I think it’s sometimes justified for people in public office or high profile positions to face sanctions for expressing negative views about same sex relationships or same-sex attracted people, I think it is sometimes justified for people to face sanctions for expressing views that are detrimental to trans people.

*We agree in principle, but I don't think those pointing out safeguarding issues etc are being transphobic. However, actual transphobia (there's a therad about a train company staff member being rude for example today) is of course wrong and should be dealt with.

So I guess it’s not so much my understanding of gender or what makes people want to transition that differs from most other people here, it’s about the conclusions I draw from that about how society should operate and how people should be treated.

I'd encourage you to consider why their views differ from yours. My own stance has developed from defending the vulnerable

On the spaces thing I often remember fight club and the Helena Bonham carter character going to the testticular Cancer support group!

I suppose some of my thoughts in reply would be

'talking about pregnant people rather than pregnant women, or not using language in relation to sanitary products that assumes only women menstruate.'

Periods are still pretty Taboo. Most women I know will hide their pad up their sleeve at work. Certain religious groups see periods as unclean. In some areas periods means stopping school, having to go to menstrual huts. It is the sign that a girl is now a woman around the place- consumed sometimes openly and sometimes less so (society says no but lots of men are still interested). I'd say embarrassment for girls is still pretty common. And it's a big deal. Mine both started theirs before the last year of primary school. So young. And it's such s change, it's messy, you worry about leaking etc etc. Boys definitely still shame/ make fun of girls over it in school. Men definitely still say oh hormonal time of the month etc. Donald trump did it didn't he.

Anyway in the main my point is that menstruation has a host of stuff around it much of which is not good.

So referring to human people who experience this. As menstruators. Defining them by that very thing. Is shitty tbh.

For some girls the commencement of periods means major negative serious consequences.

It's not a neutral term.

I note that most charities when trying to raise funds around this talk about girls. Usually with pictures of sad children overseas. To pull the heart strings. It could be your daughter.

How does please help menstruators sound?

And when talking about the particular issues for girls. It would be juvenile menstruators? Not sure.

Is this an improvement in language?

I don't think so at all.

' I think the default starting point in relation to all spaces and services is that they should not discriminate against or exclude anyone on the basis of their sex or gender. There are situations where single sex spaces and services are merited, but this should only be allowed where it is a necessary and proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is always fact-specific'

This is what the current EA allows for. And that stonewall want to change. And that has been undermined unlawfully by the spread of incorrect information about the law.

'it’s about the conclusions I draw from that about how society should operate and how people should be treated.'

This is an interesting point.

How many transwomen, having grown up male, really understand how women are treated?

I have seen a fair bit of stuff about poor treatment by the public etc that sounds like day to day normality tbh.

Stuff like being verbally abused, mocked. Feeling vulnerable, being threatened, being attacked.

I'll never forget the plea for money to get transwomen cabs home at night. It said, can you imagine what it feels like to feel unsafe walking home at night?

Squillions of women said. Yes, of course! Are you serious?

And when it comes to who is doing the belittling, verbal abuse, physical abuse.

It's men isn't it.

So why are women who disagree seen as the most serious enemy?

@MouseyTheVampireSlayer

I can't speak for others but I think the muddying of language puts disadvantaged groups like those with learning difficulties and those with english as a foreign language at a disadvantage. I also don't think feelings should trump people's ability to be clear, and simple language is best for this. My main issues with being referred to as a menstuater is: the above, it's inaccurate, it's dehumanising and it indicates my feminist views are unwelcome.

I completely agree about the importance of clear and precise language - I’m a lawyer so it’s also crucial in my work. I do think it’s possible to use language in a way that is both clear and accessible and also inclusive of trans people - but it does require careful thought in each case about the context and audience, and I don’t think that always happens in practice. I’m not a huge fan of being called a ‘menstruator’ (I don’t think I’ve seen that used or recommended in practice) but I have no problem with being referred to as a person who menstruates, or who has periods - assuming the context is about menstruation.

I won't address this too much, as it will get very tedious, but, suffice to say organisations are waking up to the damage inflicted by Stonewall at present.

I’ve seen a lot about it here anyway. My personal experience, being both a long term personal supporter of Stonewall, and also the co-chair of the LGBT+ network in an organisation that is a Stonewall Diversity Champion, and so having worked with them a bit and attended their conferences, is that generally they do good work.

I think the default starting point in relation to all spaces and services is that they should not discriminate against or exclude anyone on the basis of their sex. I think this because I know many vulnerable women need their own spaces and services. I also have yet to see a compelling argument why trans women can't use and campaign for spaces tailored to their own need

I have argued this one quite a lot on here with various people. All I can say is, my view is that there always has to be a careful balancing of the needs of different people, where they potentially conflict. I know that sounds like a wishy-washy liberal non-position. There are lots of grey areas and edge cases, but if the position you’re advocating means that a trans woman who has had hormone and surgical interventions, considers herself to be a woman, and is perceived to be a woman by most people they interact with, is excluded from accessing a refuge having been the victim of domestic violence, simply because they were born male - I can’t accept that’s the right outcome. I know that’s the extreme and most clear cut case, but it’s still the logical conclusion of what I understand your position to be.

We agree in principle, but I don't think those pointing out safeguarding issues etc are being transphobic. However, actual transphobia (there's a therad about a train company staff member being rude for example today) is of course wrong and should be dealt with.

I agree that what should and shouldn’t be allowed to be expressed in any particular situation is extremely up for debate.

I'd encourage you to consider why their views differ from yours. My own stance has developed from defending the vulnerable

I think about all of this a lot, including why I believe what I do, and discuss it with friends and colleagues whose views cover a fairly broad spectrum. I would say my position has developed partly from the beliefs I’ve always held very strongly about gender (that the vast majority of the perceived differences between men and women are socially constructed and that those perceptions are deeply ingrained and largely harmful to both, and that it’s usually unhelpful and wrong to make generalisations and assumptions about the likely behaviour of individuals on the basis of their biology) and also from hearing the stories of trans and gender non-conforming people.

but if the position you’re advocating means that a trans woman who has had hormone and surgical interventions, considers herself to be a woman, and is perceived to be a woman by most people they interact with, is excluded from accessing a refuge having been the victim of domestic violence, simply because they were born male - I can’t accept that’s the right outcome.

Then you are wrong, no two ways about it, no middle ground, just wrong.

All very laudable Helen8220, but when you support an organisation says men are lesbians, it's all incoherent.