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?

Bowie is a good example of someone experimenting with clothes and not calling himself a woman because of it.
This observation doesn't mean GC feminists have to agree with any other aspect of his life. The white Duke phase, drugs etc are problematic.
But it doesn't change the fact that the man could wear long hair and a blouse without insisting he'd changed sex.

And similarly I can observe that Beckham wore gender non conforming clothes without 'changing gender'. That doesn't stop me from thinking the way he treats his wife is awful.
This is the problem with black and white thinking.
I think it's an interesting point, Assassinated, I'd also say that Harry styles and Sam Smith are insulated from the consequence of gender non conforming in the same way. I'd be interested to know how many men compared to women identify as non binary in the populace. It seems to be a female heavy led movement on the ground, with some celebrity male outlines.
This is pure conjecture as I have no data to back it up. I'd be interested.if anyone has any though.

I wonder if you'd be so dismissive of a female football player or sports woman who had a similar stellar career? Beckham is the second highest capped England Internationalist and was England captain for 6 years as well as playing for 3 of the most successful teams in the world.

You might not be interested in football as such- no reason why you should be- but describing Beckham as "just a not-particularly interesting young man" is bizarre.

@MouseyTheVampireSlayer

Bowie is a good example of someone experimenting with clothes and not calling himself a woman because of it. This observation doesn't mean GC feminists have to agree with any other aspect of his life. The white Duke phase, drugs etc are problematic. But it doesn't change the fact that the man could wear long hair and a blouse without insisting he'd changed sex.

The sex with underage groupies is just an unfortunate blip?

Because they love labels.
You can't be special unless you have a label to tell everyone you're special.

The observation was based on clothes. It's not a value judgement on the person.

And personally, I am interested in football and think Beckham is a good player. I don't endorse his attitude to relationships though.

But I can observe he's worn some non traditional items of clothing without it being a ringing endorsement of every facet of his life.

Sam Smith and Harry Styles are interesting examples. Sam identifies as non binary, Harry (afaik) does not.

And Harry looks better in dresses and skirts

I was mistaken it seems about Styles.
Interesting quote from him.
"I'll go in shops sometimes, and I just find myself looking at the women's clothes thinking they're amazing," Styles told Vogue's Hamish Bowles. "It's like anything — anytime you're putting barriers up in your own life, you're just limiting yourself. There's so much joy to be had in playing with clothes."

He added: "I've never really thought too much about what it means — it just becomes this extended part of creating something."

Sounds like he's a gender non conforming man.
Is it acceptable to use him as an example or is his bad relationship with Taylor Swift a reason why I can't observe he wears a skirt on occasion without saying he's a girl.

Feminism requires that sex is considered but gender can be discarded.
Gender ideology requires gender is considered and sex is disregarded.
This is worth repeating. As a feminist I don’t see any difference between myself and a man (other than the obvious physiological differences). Whereas trans activists need to promote the idea there is a difference, because if everyone is the same then transition is meaningless.

Interesting the backlash Harry Styles received for his Vogue cover. Apparently an gendet non-confirming/gender fluid man is taking something away from trans, queer and non binary people. (Alok is quoted here.)

www.google.com/amp/s/www.insider.com/harry-styles-vogue-cover-backlash-trans-representation-nonbinary-fashion-2020-11%3famp

I don't know enough about Styles to give a ringing endorsement of every factor of his life. --Because apparently that's what's required to point out someone is GNC.--

But I do have to admire his stylewhich is far better than mine

@KimikosNightmare I made no comment whatsoever about Beckham's career or his footballing prowess. I also made no comment about football and my interest in it. My point about him being just a not very interesting young man was a comment about him as a person. During the sarong wearing era he wasn't making political statements, nor campaigning for anything nor making any other kinds of comments about life, society, the universe. He was a good looking young man who was incredibly high profile due to his hard work at playing football. Just like many other young male footballers of the same era.

Sounds like he's a gender non conforming man
I would say Harry Styles is a gender non conforming man. The point is that he doesn’t deny he’s a man. He just wears what he wants and acts how he wants. He has received a lot of backlash for it though. People are complaining he’s too rich, white and cis to be allowed to do that.

@paddingtonbearmeetsdeadpool

20 years ago I thought David Beckham was a pointless attention seeker. If he were to be wearing that sarong as a new thing today I'd argue that he was a cutting edge progressive trying to show vulnerable trans teens that gender expression and identity do not need to be welded together.

He's only a footballer nothing else between the ears. He was messing about. David Bowie is more interesting than him.

The fact (and I agree) that he is a "footballer with nothing else between the ears" is precisely why his "gender bending" (for want of a better term) is more relevant now (last 20 or 30 years) than Bowie. Bowie and Boy George won the "gender bending" wars in terms of progressive people years ago. Today it is not even 1% radical to be a gender bending pop star... but to play with gender stereotypes as a sportsman in the most popular men's sport on the planet potentially helps win other battles.

I agree that Bowie is infinitely more interesting than Beckham.

@Kanitawa

Sounds like he's a gender non conforming man I would say Harry Styles is a gender non conforming man. The point is that he doesn’t deny he’s a man. He just wears what he wants and acts how he wants. He has received a lot of backlash for it though. People are complaining he’s too rich, white and cis to be allowed to do that.

Which nicely underlines our point. For TRAs , being gender non-conforming is special: it's queer, it's trans, it's non binary.

I think who you find interesting as a figure is largely irrelevant to be honest. Different people will be interested in different things. Some value sports more than music.

@LewishamMum

It's all a mystery, isn't it?

You like knitting but are logical. No contradiction in that at all. I've never met anyone who knits or sows well who didn't have an idea about logic, maths, form and 3D. Or who is a good cook and doesn't understand the effects of heat, emulsions, process.

I like chess, online gaming and mathematics. I'm hopeless at cleaning. I'm still a woman (albeit badly dressed) and know from harassment and mansplaining what it feels like to be a woman.

I think most PPs are right. Transactivists and sadly children wanting to transition seem to be fascinated by the extremes of gender typing - pink and unicorns for girls and blue, sports and dinosaurs for boys. Instead of being told "that's fine" if they like things "belonging" to the other gender, they seem to find it easier to change sex.

[quote ScreamingMeMe]Interesting the backlash Harry Styles received for his Vogue cover. Apparently an gendet non-confirming/gender fluid man is taking something away from trans, queer and non binary people. (Alok is quoted here.)

www.google.com/amp/s/www.insider.com/harry-styles-vogue-cover-backlash-trans-representation-nonbinary-fashion-2020-11%3famp[/quote]
Yes, of course. Sartorially speaking, a gender nonconforming man robs female clothing of the fact that it's meant to belong to women.

You can't 'dress like a woman', if they're not women's clothes.

A cross dresser is getting a kick from appropriating the opposite sex, not from wearing something soft and floral.

Unicorns are just horses with a lethal weapon.

You can't 'dress like a woman', if they're not women's clothes
This is the crux of it. If you want to wear women’s clothes, you need to maintain gender division and stereotypes so that women’s clothes exist. Otherwise they’re just clothes.

@Helleofabore

Trans women, like all women, encompass a variety of presentations and interests. Some like long hair and makeup. Some don't. Some enjoy hobbies traditonally seen (or stereotyped) as feminine. Some don't.

So then, what makes them believe they are a woman?

Or is it merely the truly offensive belief that they are simply 'not a man'? And offensive, because that is how women have been described throughout history.

Even recent history when England Rugby defined a female as someone who had not had a testerostone driven puberty or some such twaddle.

And why should women agree then that that person is 'just like them'?

"Trans women, like all women, encompass a variety of presentations and interests. Some like long hair and makeup. Some don't. Some enjoy hobbies traditonally seen (or stereotyped) as feminine. Some don't."

"So then, what makes them believe they are a woman?"

I don't believe the first quote above. Trans women want to be perceived as women. Given that they usually fail when wearing dresses, long hair and make-up I really don't believe that many / any are happy to go around with short hair and no make-up. I do however believe that some transwomen engage in almost 100% male hobbies like train-spotting and model railways, probably because they are male and however much they want to be perceived as female they cannot get away from the fact that they're men.

Quote two. The million dollar question... it's not about the make-up (allegedly)... it's not about the sense of solidarity or shared experience with other women (from what I have read it is all very personal)... it's not about the biology... it's not about wanting to suffer period pain or lower wages... WTF is it then?

You can't 'dress like a woman', if they're not women's clothes.

Sad that Eddie Izzard did a 180 on this.

Sometimes I get the feeling that the stereotypes that are being busted within trans thinking is the 'stereotype' that if you're born male you have to be a man and born female you have to be a woman. And the 'stereotype' that a man's body has penis and balls and a woman's body has breasts and vulva.

@PumpkinSpiceWoman

Why do anti-trans activists keep accusing trans people of believing in gender stereotypes when you know that's untrue?

Can you give me an example of a relatively famous trans woman who identifies as a very masculine woman, rejects long hair, make-up and dresses and instead focusses on building muscle mass?

That's the aim but it's at the detriment to women.