How is it "gender critical" to impose rigid binary social categories based on sex?

[CuriousPanda]

For most of history, the whole point of feminism was to oppse sex-based segregation and restrictions that were imposed by patriarchal society.

So I don't see how supporting strict gender categories, and simply calling them "sex-based" instead, in any way leans itself to "gender abolition".

One might get impression that "gender" is simply being used to mean trans people existing, and "gender abolition" simply means restricting trans people from being able to transition and use different gender labels. And basically nothing else.

With "sex-based rules and restrictions" being basically just gender roles but trans-proofed.

For most of history, the whole point of feminism was to oppse sex-based segregation and restrictions that were imposed by patriarchal society.

Still is. If you are posting Katy Montgomerie's weird and wonderful thoughts on "GC" you are bound to be confused though.

I suspect KM writes this Alice in Wonderland stuff because feminism actually can't do anything for KM and KM can't do anything for feminism and this is just a way of retaliating.

"man", "woman", "he", "she","mother", "father", etc.

All sorts of gendered words and terms

And we need many of these for the legislation for the protection for females against the millennia of sexist discrimination faced because of our female sexed bodies.

You start blurring the meanings of these words you can no longer specify those projections. They become meaningless.

I have seen this explained time and time again. Sex matters sometimes, at sex class level to protect the individual. Gender seems to be all about the individual.

Call yourself what you wish as long as when material reality matters it can be legally defined, clearly and specifically. Call yourself what you wish as long as doing so doesn’t mean you expect the rest of society to be coerced to dismiss material reality in doing so.

Hi OP, hope this helps you understand:

Gender critical and radical feminists see 'sex' as the concrete biological difference between male and female bodies (men have testes, women have uteruses), and 'gender' as the two sets of constructed social roles that are imposed on each sex respectively, by means of socialisation (boys like blue, girls like pink).

We're 'gender critical' because we believe that it isn't the first sex distinction between men and women that's harmful: it's the social roles (gender) imposed on them afterwards. These roles disproportionately hurt women, and also disproportionately hurt people who are very likely to identify as trans - butch lesbians and feminine gay men. We want to get rid of these roles, thus helping trans people, while still acknowledging the biological differences between men and women.

Instead of putting trans people on a path to lifelong, untested medication and lining the pockets of pharmaceutical companies, we would prefer them to do something more radical: to own their natural biology while still embracing everything that makes them, them. Instead of seeing your hatred of female gender roles as something that makes you male, you'd see it as something that makes you brave, a trailblazer and an activist.

In a truly gender critical world, nobody born female would even consider opposing the term 'woman' to describe themselves because it will be completely neutral, with no implications: it will say nothing about their values, interests, personality, likes, dislikes, career or fashion taste, and simply describe the capabilities of their natural body, only having relevance in matters of medicine, sexual intercourse, sports and safeguarding. The same would be true with the term 'man'.

If you have any questions I'm happy to answer.

And this brings me back to the question in the OP. What is "gender critical" about strictly assigning these labels based on someone's genitals?

I just need to check something. OP, are you using the word gender as a polite euphemism for sex?

There are two sexes, male and female. Sex is material and immutable. You can't change the sex you're born and trying to pretend you can just creates a fiction that the rest of the word won't support you in.

Gender is a social construct — the way that society dictates that women ought to behave (pink, submissive, helpful, quiet etc) and men ought to behave (blue, brave, noisy, strong, dominant etc). Gender critical feminists are critical of the whole concept of gender and its constraints on men and women. Gender is a straitjacket: we support men and women to defy it and we fight gender expectations via our feminism.

Declaring yourself non-binary isn't defying gender constraints, it's just opting out of the fight. You are a man or a woman, XY or XX, down to every cell in your body. Your pelvic bones will tell an archeologist what sex you were in 2000 years time whether you approve or not. Your sex will have dictated certain things about you from your birth, including your height, your earning power and how long you are likely to live.

You are part of the binary whether you like it or not. You can't opt out. Being truly gender defiant involves refusing the concept of gender completely and being yourself, in your sexed body.

You can call yourself what you want, pretend to be what you want. No one will stop you. What you can't expect is that anyone else will go along with your fiction. You can't make the world do what you want it to do.

I think you're getting a bit confused between sex and gender.

Sex - binary, unchangeble, comes with physical attributes.

Gender - masculine and feminine stuff.

Gender critical people are critical of the gender stuff - anyone should be able to wear what they want, enjoy their hobbies, have their hair however they want. Forcing people into narrow boxes of how they are allowed to behave based on their sex is harmful, and they are critical of this.

Gender has nothing to do with sex-based rights and they have been deliberately conflated, to the detriment of women.

[quote CuriousPanda]@Ihaventgottimeforthis
Gender critical recognises that our sex in no way dictates our feelings or outward expression or identity or character.

Numerous people here have said, countless times, that being born "male" makes people inherently more dangerous and predatory purely by the virtue of their sex.

Sounds to me like many of you do believe sex dictates character.[/quote]
There is more to sex than genitals (though men are the only people with the necessary equipment to commit the crime of rape). Hormones affect behaviour. Human males are bigger and stronger than females. These are biological factors.

This book, called Testosterone and published a couple of days ago, answers any questions you may have about male behaviour and what you call 'male personality'

]]

Worth a read.

OP, msny of us here believe that woman is a word that simply means "adult human female". No one can force a woman to be a man or vice versa, in the same way that no one can force a human to be a fish, or a dog to be a cat. All that GC feminists are doing is insisting that the correct definition is used. Incidentally, what do YOU think a woman is?

@ParsleyDill

You seem deeply confused, OP. So much so that I conclude you’re just amusing yourself trying to make people explain the difference between sex and gender over and over.

Ding! Ding!

Since time immemorial we've lived in a patriarchal society, this doesn't mean that the status quo should not be challenged

Adult males telling us that 'woman' is nothing but a feeling that they can have too, that we must give up our spaces, sports etc for them and we must use only words approved by them? THEY ARE THE FUCKING PATRIARCHY! They aren't challenging it, they are enforcing it.

The male entitlement is off the scale.

No one gives a flying fuck what anyone 'identifies' as, but gender isn't sex, so why do females need to give a shit if a group of males don't like the fact they were born male? That doesn't entitle them to claim to be a member of our sex class.

We are not there to provide validation or protection to males. Our safety, privacy and dignity is provided for by segregating by sex not personality.

Whoops: not sure what happened there:

]]

It's worth noting OP that many women here started their lives in a much more stringent and sexist society and have lived through changes to that, being the necessary change ourselves.

We don't need lecturing on gender as if we've sat at home admiring the kitchen appliances our husbands bought us with his "family man wages" (yes that was a thing).

We have proven we are capable of the same things as men, but UK Equality law recognises the fact that our female sex matters in some cases. Simply saying that males are female because "gender" is never going to work I'm afraid.

We are not daft. Don't address us as if we are.

Wow: I seem to be unable to post the Amazon link to Caroline Hooven's book testosterone. It looks fine when I insert it, but when I post it it does that...

Its full title is
Testosterone: The Story of the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us

so 'you do you and we'll call you whatever name/pronoun you like' and you also won't used compelled language...

am I missing something here..?

Yes fundamentally. I am happy to call you whatever but I won’t be MADE to call you whatever through threats and coercion. That’s the missing part.

Isn't it just more of the old trying to rewrite history to match your narrative?

Gender is now being used to replace the word sex. So, if you have an agenda, you can pretend that they are the same.

They aren't.

We see you.

Lets try;

''While most people agree that sex differences in human behavior exist, they disagree about the reasons. But the science is clear: testosterone is a potent force in human society, driving the bodies and behavior of the sexes apart. But, as Hooven shows in T, it does so in concert with genes and culture to produce a vast variety of male and female behavior.
And, crucially, the fact that many sex differences are grounded in biology provides no support for restrictive gender norms or patriarchal values.''
www.amazon.com/Story-Testosterone-Hormone-Dominates-Divides/dp/1250236061?tag=mumsnetforu03-21

Looks interesting. I will read it.
Thank you

www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B08PF8FHWH/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1&tag=mumsnetforu03-21

Today, OP, police in Canada are appealing for information after someone sexually assaulted a child. They believe the perpetrator may have attacked other children.

A woman is facing charges after she allegedly sexually assaulted a child in a Toronto park two months ago and police believe there may be other victims.

According to police, a six-year-old boy attended the Walter Saunders Park, near Dufferin Street and Eglinton Avenue West, on May 20. At that time, the boy was sexually assaulted, police said.

An investigation was launched by the Toronto Police Service’s Child & Youth Advocacy Centre. As a result of their investigation, 33-year-old Toronto resident Ruby Eby was arrested on June 8, police said.

She is charged with sexual interference with a person under the age of 16 and sexual assault. Eby is set to appear in a Toronto courtroom on July 21.

In a news release issued on Tuesday, police said investigators believe there may be other victims.

Police are asking anyone with information related to the investigation to contact investigators or Crime Stoppers.

Do you think the verbal description of Eby is helpful?

beta.cp24.com/news/2021/7/13/1_5507641.html

@Thelnebriati

suggestionsplease1 am I missing something here..?

Yes you are.
People are saying they'll use the pronouns you prefer, by their own choice to be polite. And they will not stop using sexed language.
You can use whatever name you choose, but you cant choose the terms others use for themselves.

Ok good to know - I had previously read on these boards that people were saying it was compelled speech/language for someone to be obliged to use female pronouns for a trans woman who still had male genitalia, but you have clarified it's nothing to do with that.

OP I have drawn you a diagram:

sharks wins the thread.

Beautiful diagram, sharksarecool.

Shark does indeed win this thread and the Internet for today.

@WrongWayApricot

It's gender critical because it removes gender as a way to label and segregate people. I would love to know what you think gender critical means, maybe you'll get better answers when you've defined it. I honestly find it really hard to understand how anyone that understands gc theory could want to keep gender. Don't you just want to be you, as you are, with no societal expectations based on your genitals? Wouldn't that be wonderful?

'It's gender critical because it removes gender as a way to label and segregate people'...

Only it really doesn't does it? A lot of GC feminists are hugely invested in the gender distinction - it is their raison d'etre. They might say out loud that it is purely sex but what they're really referring to are the characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between, femininity and masculinity - and namely likelihood of increased aggression in males.

I mean it would be hugely weird if it was just based on what was swinging between legs and that had no material reality, right? In fact, wouldn't that be like discriminating between someone who had a large nose and someone who had a small nose? Or someone who had hairy feet or smooth feet?

I mean, it doesn't mean anything - it's just a nose size, it's just the hairiness of feet, it's just sex - there's nothing else going on.