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?

..on a previous thread.

@Ereshkigalangcleg the problem is that I get the sense from your previous posts that you don’t actually want to understand, you just want to feel like you’re winning an argument.

If do genuinely want to get to the bottom of things, it would be easier to discuss directly than in writing. I would happily chat via phone or video call if you would like to.

If do genuinely want to get to the bottom of things, it would be easier to discuss directly than in writing. I would happily chat via phone or video call if you would like to.

It's probably escaped your notice, Helen, but women don't tend to out themselves, given the death and rape threats.

@ThomasPenman
I’m curious, I don’t suppose you could direct me to the thread? And what is a RMW?

@Datun
I’m a little hesitant myself, for fear of being ‘outed’ - but willing to trust that @Ereshkigalangcleg wouldn’t do that. I would hope from the way I’ve conducted myself here that it was clear I’m not looking to attack anyone.

Anyway, it’s possible to have a phone call without giving away your full name or other personal details.

[quote Helen8220]@Datun
I’m a little hesitant myself, for fear of being ‘outed’ - but willing to trust that @Ereshkigalangcleg wouldn’t do that. I would hope from the way I’ve conducted myself here that it was clear I’m not looking to attack anyone.

Anyway, it’s possible to have a phone call without giving away your full name or other personal details.[/quote]
People will go out of their way to identify gc women in all sorts of ways. Best not encourage it.

I'm perfectly genuine, I don't see any need to take anything offline. You made a comment about "sanctions" which potentially affects me, as a gender critical feminist, I'm just asking you to elaborate on what you meant, because it could mean a fairly wide range of supposed transgressions.

I guess I want to understand where you are coming from. I don't need a private chat, but if you don't want to discuss it on the thread, that's up to you.

Your comment (my bold):

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.

@Ereshkigalangcleg
I respect that you don’t want to talk offline. I hope you’ll understand that, given the dismissive and snide comments you have repeatedly directed at me on this thread and others, I don’t want to carry on discussing with you in this way. It doesn’t feel like it’s achieving anything.

That's fine Helen. I just find it odd that you don't want to discuss what you think GC people should face sanctions for, when you yourself made the comment on the thread. And you have yourself made some rather sneery and dismissive comments to people , btw.

RMW- I believe it's Robin Moira White, trans lawyer and fairly frequent poster.

[quote Helen8220]@Ereshkigalangcleg
I respect that you don’t want to talk offline. I hope you’ll understand that, given the dismissive and snide comments you have repeatedly directed at me on this thread and others, I don’t want to carry on discussing with you in this way. It doesn’t feel like it’s achieving anything.[/quote]
It's not only Eresh that would like to know the answer to that question. It's a very important question. The answers would be illuminating and informative.

* 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.*

What GC views should not be expressed?

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.

Well, unless it meets the legal threshold of harassment, legally they can.

Remind me who it is who wants to remove rights again ?

I think what I've just read- if I understood it correctly. Is that the words lesbian & gay (man) can mean whatever the person using them wants them to mean.

So a male can be a lesbian. And a female can be a gay man.

This does leave a lot of questions about the entire gay rights movement.

I don't really know how to put this.

The gay rights movement came about because of a lot of things but criminalisation was a big thing.

The suggestion that that history, the experiences and groups affected. Is to be sort of disregarded because now a male and female couple can be a gay male or lesbian couple is just really off.

Around the world, there are still laws criminalising homosexuality. Gay men and lesbians are murdered. Homosexuality is totally unacceptable in society and has to be hidden. All that.

Who is affected by that? Male female couples who identify as a gay male or lesbian couple?

It's just crass and this sort of thing is where the homophobia accusations come from.

The idea that if I ID as male. Then my husband and I are part of the gay community. Have gone through the same feelings. Have the same experiences of a range of poor treatment. That in some countries we would be scared of arrest.

It's offensive rubbish quite frankly.

I find these threads fascinating to read and I get to read both arguments. It's all done in a safe space where people from different walks of life can air the views. When I go out I don't see it, feel it, or hear about it. I learned that we had a new name "cis" through mumsnet what is wrong with keeping our title woman or women. It does feel to me the more I read into this argument that trans women want to take ownership of it and we get called "cis". We get called cis women no only woman thank you very much I don't want to be called cis. From when I was young I was told I was a girl and then a young lady and before I knew it I was a woman. No one told me in that time that I was a cis.

I don't understand why how you identify must be respected. Unless you're a bog standard woman in which case you're being called this where you like it or not. (And many don't, for s load of reasons).

@Ereshkigalangcleg
RMW- I believe it's Robin Moira White, trans lawyer and fairly frequent poster.

Thanks for clarifying, I think I’ve seen her on Twitter but wasn’t aware she posted on here.

[quote Helen8220]@Ereshkigalangcleg
RMW- I believe it's Robin Moira White, trans lawyer and fairly frequent poster.

Thanks for clarifying, I think I’ve seen her on Twitter but wasn’t aware she posted on here.[/quote]
Yes, I can't remember the exact thread. It was a really long one. RMW was rather dismissive of women saying no to males in female spaces and there was a brilliant post by Barracker about men taking women's places in work and politics and stuff and how women aren't allowed to point at these people and say 'that is a man'. Anyone else remember it?
I just thought you had the same arguements Helen.

@TabbyStar

There was this though from another thread!

Parklife.

Oh you bloody thing. Thé image is gone.

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/trans-woman-repeatedly-misgendered-rail-24334640.amp

Referring back to the original question about gender stereotypes - I saw this in the news. The person in question feels they were misgendered because male pronouns were used despite the fact they presented as stereotypically female.

“I was literally standing in front of him with a ponytail, acrylic nails and a bra on - all the signs were there.”

Do those “signs” make someone female? I don’t have any of those signs - what does that make me?

There was a thread about that Tobermorie. Based on the article it sounds like the staff were incredibly rude. I know there are two sides but if you're in customer services deliberately winding someone up or being rude wouldn't be doing your job properly, whatever you believe.

I think there is a lot of confusion because on the one hand, getting a GRC requires e.g. a male person to 'live as a woman' which basically requires reliance on gender stereotypes (because - what else is there to 'live as a woman')? And obviously a lot of trans people want to be 'read' as the opposite sex, to be assumed to be the opposite sex.
On the other hand you have TRAs who say gender is such an innate personal thing that simply holding that gender in your mind makes you transgender (which is a logical conclusion really) and people shouldn't rely on gender stereotypes, can present as masc/fem as they like. Therefore 'being trans' won't be obvious (as the thread on Danielle Muscato discusses).

But if someone tells you their gender, as the train ticket person did, then that is what they identify as.

@AmIPeriOrAreYouJustAnnoying

* 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.*

What GC views should not be expressed?

Also, isnt it rather important "who" decides which views should not be expressed?

Don't all mature adults know that there are times and places where we don't bring out our personal views, at least unless there is a good reason to do so? Places where it's not really appropriate to get into potentially fraught conversations about politics or religion or social controversies?

I don't do this at my job, because it would make for an uncomfortable workplace for all f us, because we differ politically pretty significantly. And that should work both ways, really, though it doesn't particularly in some workplaces.

A woman I was at university with who is a very dedicated member of the Orthodox Church, quite unassuming and kind, has had more and more trouble because of the expectation in her workplace that she be involved in supporting initiatives, not related to the job, that aren't really in line with her beliefs, including walking in the Pride parade with the organisation. She's never talked about her view of things like same sex marriage at work, because she knows it wouldn't be the right place to do so - but they've increasingly forced her to push back and make her line clear.

This taking your whole self to work stuff is not so compatible with the "shut up about your socially backward views or else" approach.

Don't all mature adults know that there are times and places where we don't bring out our personal views, at least unless there is a good reason to do so? Places where it's not really appropriate to get into potentially fraught conversations about politics or religion or social controversies?"

Yes and no.

On the one hand, biting your lip at work makes sense if the alternative is day in day out telling the person on the desk next to you that they will go to hell for sodomy.

On the other hand if the person next to me was someone who had once, in the pub, claimed that the age of consent should be lowered to 5 or 10 I would have absolutely no problem with continually reminding them that I think that they are a repellent, horrid and likely extremely dangerous individual.

I think that the GC vs Trans debate sits in the middle somewhere. I think that there is a very strong argument that tolerating the fantasy is to condone it and undermine women's rights. There is an argument that you are actively fighting the GC cause or you're standing by watching women's rights disappear.

Every week that goes by I am more and more convinced of the ludicrousness and danger of the TRA position. TWAW is such a powerful statement that easily cons people into a "be nice" position. If you're not actively fighting back against the words then you're watching reality slip away in silence.