Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

How do we provide a face-saving way back to reality for the politicians / public figures who are currently transactivism's minions?

103 replies

WhereYouLeftIt · 03/09/2021 17:15

I feel the tide is turning. Mainstream media are running articles on the current craziness and not just repeating verbatim whatever guff they are handed. Corporations and government departments are starting to distance themselves from Stonewall, and there have been some wins in the courts.

Sunlight is being allowed into the room, and the pigeons are coming home to roost.

But - many have publicly painted themselves into the TWAW corner. Very publicly. And if we're ever going to get them out of there, some, particularly the politicians, are going to need a face-saving way to get out of that corner, their political careers depend on it. And whilst I don't give a stuff for their careers, them saving face and stepping away from their current position will take far fewer years than replacing them with new and unbeholden politicians.

I really don't believe that many of them are True Believers Of The Faith (those who are we can probably do nothing about), just people trying to do a pressured job where time constraints have led them to take as fact the opinions presented to them by lobbyists.

So - what will make these people step out of that corner? What would make that look like a possible, even attractive, path? Carrot? Stick? Even shinier cause to espouse?

OP posts:
WhereAreWeNow · 06/09/2021 16:44

I think this is a really interesting post. Thanks for posing the question OP. As much as I'm tempted to say "fuck 'em all, they don't deserve a lifeline", I know that it's important to give people a way back. I don't know how we do it though. Build bridges, seek common ground, avoid temptation to crow or say "I told you so"....?

ArabellaScott · 06/09/2021 17:35

@Cuck00soup

Something I think would be really powerful would be to stop using gender to refer to sex. So broadcasters, politicians government & public sector documents use the correct language. Every single time.

Occasionally they could try using the word woman too.

If only we could reclaim the language, I genuinely believe people themselves will start quietly reversing.

I think this is crucial.

There has long been a tendency to use 'gender' when we actually mean sex, partly out of a sense of it being more 'polite'.

I am now careful to always use 'sex' and be very clear in my language. So when discussing issues with school, I say for example 'Just so long as we're all clear it's not possible to change sex'. Nobody can deny that, and I think once that kind of basic, simple scientific fact is agreed upon much of the rest of gender ideology show itself up for what it is - personal beliefs around stereotypical behaviour.

teawamutu · 06/09/2021 18:01

I'd like to see an end to the 'both sides are toxic' trope.

DH, as good a man and ally to women as you'll find, agrees with me on women's rights but says the debate is hopelessly toxic.

I have been quite clear on the difference between 'women saying no' and 'rape and death threats and trying to get women sacked for opinions', but if even he didn't get it...

Blibbyblobby · 06/09/2021 18:09

I am now careful to always use 'sex' and be very clear in my language. So when discussing issues with school, I say for example 'Just so long as we're all clear it's not possible to change sex'. Nobody can deny that, and I think once that kind of basic, simple scientific fact is agreed upon much of the rest of gender ideology show itself up for what it is - personal beliefs around stereotypical behaviour.

I think, if we can re-establish clear language around sex and an acknowledgment that sex exists and at times is more relevant than gender, we don’t need to worry about exactly what gender is.

While I may not see the need for gender, clearly there are people for whom it is important and helps them understand themselves and their place in the world. Strip away the TRA agitation and rhetoric and there is a movement of people for whom the language of gender and gender exploration has become a language of freedom and possibility, and I don’t want to take that away from them.

I personally might think the freedom they are finding in expanding variations of gender is really the old feminist freedom of realising social gender roles are bollocks, but really if the end result is that people are no longer constrained by gender, does it really matter if that’s expressed as there being no gender, or an infinite variety and the freedom to move between them?

The only reason I care about the gender identity of others today is because it’s being conflated with sex, and therefore (1) overwriting and silencing the practical provisions and social and political analysis that I believe is crucial to feminism and for female people, and (2) causing people to make permanent body modifications in the hope of addressing a discomfort that is not in fact coming from their body but their mind. (I don’t have any issue at all with people who have no discomfort but want to make modifications simply because they find them exciting BTW as long as it doesn’t spill over into setting up bystanders to be involved/witnesses without their explicit, pre event consent)

Break that connection, free genderism to be a social movement of breaking stereotypes and exploration in its own right entirely independent of sex, and I think it could be in many ways a good thing.

ArabellaScott · 06/09/2021 21:04

if we can re-establish clear language around sex and an acknowledgment that sex exists and at times is more relevant than gender, we don’t need to worry about exactly what gender is.

Absolutely. I think holding very clearly to the importance of sex ('sex matters') means we can be pretty free to say 'anyone can be any gender they like, no one cares'.

The difference between sex and gender needs to be spelled out very, very clearly. It's been noted many times how legislation was written with the two words used interchangeably; this has to be fixed. It has to be explained very straighforwardly and clearly that there is a difference, and what the difference is.

Kendodd · 06/09/2021 21:26

That's a really good question.

Not just about trans but other big political issues as well and not just for politicians, for the public as well.
Why is it so difficult for people to just admit 'I was wrong'?

CBUK2K2 · 06/09/2021 21:39

As a man its been quite amusing to see the reaction of women now they are on the wrong side of the Woke Mafia and the perpetually peeved Twitterati.

We've had decades of these people blaming men for increasingly bizarre social issues whilst women stood by and watched.

Now women have been on the receiving end of being told to shut up for the sake of equality/diversity etc. hopefully some will reflect on the other divisive bile these people spread.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/09/2021 21:41

@ArabellaScott

if we can re-establish clear language around sex and an acknowledgment that sex exists and at times is more relevant than gender, we don’t need to worry about exactly what gender is.

Absolutely. I think holding very clearly to the importance of sex ('sex matters') means we can be pretty free to say 'anyone can be any gender they like, no one cares'.

The difference between sex and gender needs to be spelled out very, very clearly. It's been noted many times how legislation was written with the two words used interchangeably; this has to be fixed. It has to be explained very straighforwardly and clearly that there is a difference, and what the difference is.

Excellent post.
EmbarrassingAdmissions · 06/09/2021 21:42

Why is it so difficult for people to just admit 'I was wrong'?

There was some research that indicated that acknowledging you were wrong was a disadvantage because it was taken as a lapse of integrity.

More recent research indicates that it's rather more complex than that. However, it seems there are no obvious advantages to admitting error.

Jon Haidt has a somewhat related thread on apology and why it doesn't always work (it is never enough for some people and just triggers some people to want others to join in the punishment).

When someone commits sacrilege, you don't want to forgive them after an apology, you want others to join you in punishing and banishing.

twitter.com/JonHaidt/status/1188458364201771010

PlanDeRaccordement · 06/09/2021 21:44

They’re politicians, they don’t need to save face. They can just tell everyone that they were misunderstood.

I was laughing the morning after Brexit when Nigel Farage was saying that the Brexit bus “lets spend £350m/week on the NHS” was merely a “suggestion” and wasn’t a promise.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 06/09/2021 21:48

That's really interesting Embarrassing. I dislike the 'pointless' public apologies that are evidently meaningless - "we'll try to do better" when you know they won't.
But a personal apology is different I think. We all screw up at times and have to be able to make it right. I also worry about the trend for pillorying people for stupid things they said when they were younger - holding them to account 10 years later for something said when they were a teenager?

ArabellaScott · 06/09/2021 22:15

Some common ground:

Women's reproductive rights (sex based by definition)
Support for mental health issues - this needs massive improvement, especially for C&YP.
Tackling male violence.
Protecting politicians from rape/death threats - fostering civil debate

Common ground is good. It reminds us we're all human.

PerkyBlinder · 07/09/2021 01:46

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

most people (the Jameela Jamils, the Stephen Kings, even the Laurie Pennys) will just .....go quiet. No climb down, but no more saying that they believe men can become women either

I suspect that Owen Jones won't be able to let it go and will find himself quietly sidelined in the way Graham Linnehan has now

in my slightly tinfoil hat view, the only explanation for the single minded pursuit of genderism by scottish politicians is that money has changed hands, or some sort of promise of power. therefore i don't think they're going to be able to go quiet easily. i think they will in the end though

Their way out I could be to incorporate Shahrar Ali of the green party’s words just adding clarity with the addition of ‘by gender’ to transwomen are women and that means they can say ‘of course that’s what we always meant by TWAW’
coolasfcuk · 07/09/2021 02:31

I have wondered about this a lot. I think the pp who said homophobia might be the way out for some people is probably right.

I've thought for a long time that whatever the way out is, for some people it will have to be something that somehow lets them keep GC feminists as the baddies in some way. Something that focuses on homophobia and uses avoiding that as a way to rein in some of the more batshit trans activism, but which lets people still despise GC feminists as nasty, might well work, and there are certainly more gay men commenting these days.

It's a bit unfair on the GC feminists, but that's how it is. If the people who previously supported self-id without thinking are to move forward to admitting it's probably not a good idea, then being able still to call out GC feminists as 'nasty and prejudiced' could be the thing that lets them think of themselves as having been right all along in some way and helps them save face.

Self-id might not be perfect, they might say, but they'll tell themselves that they decided that for themselves because of new information from gay people, perhaps - not because those nasty bigoted GC feminists. The 'nasty bigoted GC feminists' will end up being spun as people who may have been right, but of course it was for all the wrong, prejudiced reasons. Women will still be in the wrong.

coolasfcuk · 07/09/2021 02:41

I comfort myself by thinking that that will just be the surface spin, we'll all know what's really going on, and most importantly, they will know we know Grin

humanitariancrisis · 07/09/2021 05:06

Common ground is good. It reminds us we're all human.

harpercollins.co.uk/products/fractured-why-our-societies-are-coming-apart-and-how-to-put-them-back-together-again-jon-yates?variant=32847876423758

This is a good book

EmbarrassingAdmissions · 07/09/2021 05:45

If the people who previously supported self-id without thinking are to move forward to admitting it's probably not a good idea, then being able still to call out GC feminists as 'nasty and prejudiced'

Men will only take this seriously when other men tell them about the issues involved and it will definitely have been the fault of GC feminists for not being visible, not signalling that this was happening etc. (What do you mean they were deplatformed by social media - you're sounding like a conspiracy theorist. It's obviously just been some misunderstandings on your part.)

We'd have got there sooner had it not been for their hateful rhetoric, squeaky high-pitched voices, and the fact that they ruined all their decent arguments with woolly-thinking sort of thing? (Elaborating on Helen Joyce's expectation here.)

Waitwhat23 · 07/09/2021 05:55

There seems to be an increasing amount of men (and women) in the public eye who have just become aware of what is going on , saying 'why aren't women/feminists doing anything about this?!'. You're right @EmbarrassingAdmissions - even if women point to the silencing, deplatforming, doxxing, and threats, it'll still be minimised as women not trying hard enough, or being hysterical, or being conspiracy theorists.

EdgeOfACoin · 07/09/2021 06:07

There seems to be an increasing amount of men (and women) in the public eye who have just become aware of what is going on , saying 'why aren't women/feminists doing anything about this?!'.

It really, really doesn't help that so many women and 'feminist' organisations have gone along with this. We've also had politicians like Jo Swinson, Lisa Nandy and Nicola Sturgeon espousing policies that are harmful to women's rights.

Franca123 · 07/09/2021 07:36

You've reminded me to contact my MP today to see if she's received the copy of Helen Joyce's book I had sent to her via sex matters. Curious to see if there's been any change of mind since I last contacted her on this issue. I won't be voting for her again either way.

ArabellaScott · 07/09/2021 08:39

@Waitwhat23

There seems to be an increasing amount of men (and women) in the public eye who have just become aware of what is going on , saying 'why aren't women/feminists doing anything about this?!'. You're right *@EmbarrassingAdmissions* - even if women point to the silencing, deplatforming, doxxing, and threats, it'll still be minimised as women not trying hard enough, or being hysterical, or being conspiracy theorists.
ngngngnngngn
Tanith · 07/09/2021 08:54

"Now women have been on the receiving end of being told to shut up for the sake of equality/diversity etc. hopefully some will reflect on the other divisive bile these people spread."

What are you talking about?! Women have always been talked over and told to shut up.
You may find it amusing to sit back and watch women being attacked yet again; we find it contemptible that certain men continually take the "well it serves them right!" attitude and happily let it happen.

AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken · 07/09/2021 08:57

@BernardBlackMissesLangCleg

most people (the Jameela Jamils, the Stephen Kings, even the Laurie Pennys) will just .....go quiet. No climb down, but no more saying that they believe men can become women either

I suspect that Owen Jones won't be able to let it go and will find himself quietly sidelined in the way Graham Linnehan has now

in my slightly tinfoil hat view, the only explanation for the single minded pursuit of genderism by scottish politicians is that money has changed hands, or some sort of promise of power. therefore i don't think they're going to be able to go quiet easily. i think they will in the end though

I agree. I think there will be a clear divide between those who just wanted to be seen to “be kind” and “liberal” and, frankly, on trend and those who saw this as an opportunity to denigrate women even further. I think OJ genuinely is a misogynist and deeply dislikes women. He won’t be able to empathise or apologise for his actions.
RufustheBadgeringReindeer · 07/09/2021 09:41

@Tanith

"Now women have been on the receiving end of being told to shut up for the sake of equality/diversity etc. hopefully some will reflect on the other divisive bile these people spread."

What are you talking about?! Women have always been talked over and told to shut up.
You may find it amusing to sit back and watch women being attacked yet again; we find it contemptible that certain men continually take the "well it serves them right!" attitude and happily let it happen.

Well said tanith
RedToothBrush · 07/09/2021 09:56

If the tide turns and there are lots of scandals, celebrities and politicians will reverse ferret because public opinion will force them to. The public won't vote for people still insisting that men exploiting the loopholes for safeguarding reasons and the denying homophobic trojan horse publically. Its more likely that politicians will slowly just go silent on the subject or change the subject where possible. Of course if you've firmly hitched your eagon thats more difficult in which case a good old fashioned reverse ferret and public support for another worthy cause is a good plan. Celebrities who called for cancel culture could find themselves cancelled for backing the wrong horse and becoming irrelevant unless they too find another moral issue to self publicise with.

Business who are cashing in on the morality cash cow will ditch Stonewall and have green branding and certification to demonstrate how wonderful they are instead. They won't stay tied to a ship thats sinking.

Green issues - it will 100% be green issues with those promoting it appear daily in a new fashion out fit and claiming its part of their job to sell fashion and flying around the world for their essential job whilst telling everyone else that holidays abroad are dreadful affairs.

People like these just on a bandwagon and just wait for the next one to come along. They just can't help themselves.

There will be a section of the public who are also just a fickle and will follow the herd who are tuning in to the latest influencer.

Meanwhile you will have the die hards who wont go away. Particularly those who have signed up personally because they can't admit they have deeper issues which haven't been dealt with. The high levels of comorbidity with mental health issues and autism are going to rear their ugly head. I don't think a golden bridge will make any difference to this group.

And then there's those who come to the dawning revelation about how they have been conned. Some will quietly implode but others will go after the public cheerleaders as the scandals gather pace. Especially if there is compo on the table and its needed. (You ain't getting mental health support on the NHS easily for a good while - if you need it and want to go private...)

It will blow and blow for years. But young people will get older and women will have kids. Young people will just have life experience and realise that not all people are nice to you even if you are kind to them. Cos life is harsh.

We know that many people who were activists as students turn into accountants and over promoted middle management and move to suburbs to become gray and dull like their parents. Cos responsibility. And career prospects.

And what will the next generation have to rebel with / want to define themselves as? They won't want to be the same as this generation coming through. I think other political issues will raise to the surface as social issues bubble over - which will be much more practical rather than ideological. Many of these are well in progress. Housing issues being another particularly significant one.

This will happen in the UK before America because our culture war issues are different to the states. It wouldnt surprise me if it doesn't drive the Democrats out of the Whitehouse though. Biden isn't all that Democrats hoped for and continuing with this will not attract the moderates they need to keep out the Republicans. (Provide Trump doesn't stand as an independent). That huge sigh of relief, i fear may be more short lived than it should be. Traditionally the uk tends to lead cultural movements in a slightly different way to the us - music and fashion have tended to follow the pattern of being here today, gone tomorrow in a much more pronounced way than the US where it takes longer to build up and gain popularity and then longer to fade. Its why American artists come to London to get a break and be the next thing. We are more open to change. We are a more conservative (small c) country than we like to make out but we arent as tied to it as many Americans either. The nature of being an island.

I think you are more likely to end up with the forgotten and dumped. Like survivors of all sorts of other scandals. Sold down river and demonised when they are victims. They were over promised something that they could never have. (Noting the fears of many LGB individuals that they will be sucked into a backlash by association)

And extremists are often just people who would just be extreme about something else. The parallels between the more extreme trans activists and incels are interesting to watch. Social grievance isnt going to go away. Certainly not in countries with high levels of inequality.

I think once things are in law it becomes more difficult to reverse in the UK. England haven't completely crossed that. Scotland have. But then we also know theres a good political shit storm growing on that divide too. The US is slightly different because the Democrats slash lots of Republican doings and the Republicans slash lots of Democrat doings as a general rule. You have to keep an eye on dying Supreme Court Judges though. Places that concern me more are Canada, NZ and Ireland on that score. We shall have to see how it pans out...

Scandals can become all consuming and cross international barrier though. They can take 30 or 40 years to come through to that extent. The positive i take from the UK is whilst things are slow, scandals seem to be bubbling through at a faster rate than that....

So I'm not convinced we do need a golden bridge everywhere. That doesn't reflect underlying social trends and how society can be rather more fickle than that. The swinging 60s didn't last. The glam, unisex 70s didn't last. The yuppy culture of the 80s didn't last. The cool britannia of the 90s didn't last. Nor do any seem really appealing to the present moment because we are aware of their more dark sides. We know this is a cultural movement. It will have a legacy but it still remains a cultural moment only possible because various other issues in politics have aligned in a particular way. It arose at a certain time for a reason. And as politics change - due to events and social crisis - a new cultural movement will become more prominent because the political stars align.

The trick as a politician and celebrity is to see the next one incoming and ride that wave skillfully... Cos thats how western culture has worked for centuries. Its the thing that defines it. You can see the trend all through the Victorian era and into the 20th Century and beyond.

Make of that what you will.