Sex/Gender Wars - What would be a win?

[joolzfromyork]

As the Title ...

What's a win? for you individually?

I read here .. on Twatter and one or two other places and it is clear that for some GC Women (and Men) a win would be the banning of Puberty blockers being given to those you see as being children...

At the other extreme ... the banning completely of Transition and any medical interventions to help Transsexual people...

It's reasonable to believe that the majority view falls somewhere between these two points ... but where?

There is no real consensus that has emerged which all GC people subscribe to ...

So, I wonder ... what's a win? what would make you believe that this issue had been solved/dealt with to your satisfaction ?

Anyone like to have a stab at this one?

The question involves no trickery, Honest opinions - however blunt - are sought (Hopefully the mods will adopt a light touch ...) but I am interested because I remain convinced that a path to compromise exists ... and whilst we won't find it here on MN, I would like to understand better what people 'really' want, as distinct from what the loudest voices claim they want ... what do you want to happen?

Of course, since I am asking the question, it goes without saying that extra credit can be gained through the use of 'Flippancy' and 'Sarcasm' ... so, by all means, Have at it.

But if anyone could/would have a go at answering the question, I'd be grateful

Goady, much? You are looking at the question the wrong way round, OP. GC feminists are fully supportive of transgender people’s human rights. We simply wish to deny them the “extra” right of entering opposite sex spaces on the basis of self ID. Our remit is the safeguarding of women’s and children’s rights.

This.

I don't support the 'right' of any and all men who choose being legally recognised as female.

Artichokes is spot on.

There is never a different style from such posters who come here convinced that FWR is a gaping maw of education deficit on this topic that can be saved by the faux tolerance of a self-ascribed superior intellect.

@EmbarrassingAdmissions

Sorry, but I'm a little (alot) distracted today by reading another thread on MN

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/4369042-what-s-the-strangest-thing-you-have-been-told-off-for-at-work?pg=1&messages=100

Which perfectly shows the insecurity of an average boss ... its by turns kinda tragic and also really Funny at the same time.

However, I digress

Whatever are you talking about?

All I did was ask a question ... Then tried (honestly) to answer questions posed to me in return.

I have no interest in educating anyone other than myself. (and the idea of myself as a superior intellect - self ascribed or otherwise is really very funny )

So, I asked a question ... that's all ... you wanna help me with this?

So, I asked a question ... that's all ... you wanna help me with this?

If you are genuinely interested there are books that you can read:

Trans: Helen Joyce
Material Girls: Kathleen Stock

Both are about Gender Ideology and it's impact

Invisible Women: Caroline Criado Perez

Practical impact of ignoring women and their different needs in policy, legislation, product manufacture and medicine.

I think you have received plenty of replies from people who have tried to explain their position. You don't seem to disagree with many of the opinions expressed.

I don't see how there can be any resolution if it can't be accepted that there is a conflict of rights. However, it is not in the power of anyone on this board to change policy at Stonewall etc.

Happy reading.

Yes to Artichokes whatkatydid and highame for starters.

I obviously wasn't the only one whose instant opinion of the op was borne out fairly quickly.

And personally, If I had my way, I would ignore, for the time being, the results of transgenderism and go straight for the cause.

Until we find out why this ideology is being forced on people, who it benefits, and why our children are being instructed in it, tackling the results piecemeal is just looking at the symptoms.

What makes men want to identify as women? Whether it's rejection of being male, or a sexual fetish.

To me, the answer to that question would instantly make people challenge the results we are seeing. All of them.

What makes young girls desperate to escape womanhood?

Again, tackling that, would, to me, make accommodating their transition something that people would be very wary of indeed.

I absolutely agree that the results of this ideology need addressing, but that is being hampered with stalling, going round in circles, talks of civil rights and deliberate obfuscation. Which will continue until people are clear about the reasons they are there in the first place.

Very many women are getting highly pissed off with becoming involved in conversations about whether they should or should not have rights, where those rights begin and end, how they manifest and how many men agree with them.

No.

Let's throw all the money, time and resources and ask the question why are people saying they're transgender?

Instead of just assuming that it's completely accepted and being told to deal with the consequences.

what an amazing post from ArtichokeLeaves at 8.26 on 8 October

I noted that when the OP finally replied to questions, the response was very, 'I'll let women have some spaces, but there must be some special men always allowed to enter them'

that's not freedom, it's the master's indulgence. and the OP clearly can't understand that. It's not surprising, as the OP didn't grow up as a girl dealing with the sea of misogyny. disappointing but not surprising, as ever

Any ‘compromise’ means women having to give up some of our rights. So it’s not meeting half-way, it’s just trying to negotiate how much of what is ours we will be allowed to keep. We lose in every outcome.

Because we are not demanding anything from men. We get no benefit from anything about genderism. (Teenage girls’ fear of growing up to be women, in a world disfigured by violent porn, is not relieved by taking testosterone.)

Why should we agree to any loss? Whether it’s a loss of privacy, of safety, of sporting achievements, of roles or awards — these are all things our foremothers earned for themselves and for us.

These are not privileges. They do not give us an advantage over men, but help to reduce the advantage men have over us.

A win would be men accepting that women aren’t some strange and magical Other that exists for men’s sexual enjoyment. We are simply human beings with a few biological differences from men.

A win would be men accepting the fact that humans cannot change sex or be ‘born in the wrong body’. And accepting that men are not and never can become women of any kind.

We are not trying to gain anything from men here. A win would be simply not having to give up any of our rights.

The problem with the 'war' analogy is that war is always a negative sum; everybody loses, but one side prevails. We should not want that.

There is another discourse that sees a zero-sum game: One side's gain can only come from the other's loss.

We need to think of a positive-sum outcome; let's all agree that reality is real and everyone deserves respect for being what they are, really.

Joolz, you sound nice and reasonable. You know that women are not trying to make life harder for men who are unhappy with their body, and their sex. By all means wear whatever feels feminine to you, present yourself as you like. If men make you feel uncomfortable, join forces with sympathetic men for safety in numbers.

Coping with the risk of male aggression is part of women’s everyday life. You are no worse off. We don’t make a big thing of it because we grew up with it, it’s as familiar as the weather. We adapt so we don’t even notice that we chose this well-lit route home rather than that more convenient but darker one.

Any man intruding into a women’s space immediately makes all those spaces risky for women. Your harmless intentions are irrelevant. Your presence has allowed other men in. You have already whittled a bit away from our safety and therefore from our freedom.

We need to think of a positive-sum outcome

yes

in the long run, pretending someone is something they're not is never kind. not to them, and not to others.

the only way society as a whole wins is for us to articulate and solve what's really happening here.

• why do so many teenaged girls want to be male? Given that this is impossible, how can we help them?

• why do a small but significant cohort of middle aged men suddenly feel an over whelming desire to be seen as a woman in mid life? again, this is impossible. how can we help them process this desire?

• why do some parents feel that if their children want to play with toys generally associated with the opposite sex, their child must be trapped in the wrong body? Given that there is zero evidence for gendered souls, so this is not true, how can we help those parents to accept and love their children just the way they are?

with the blind affirmation approach, everyone loses out in those scenarios. we need to to it differently

Basic theory.

Be who you want, do what you want, present how you want. If you're a legal adult, make whatever changes to your body that you like.

The one rule: you cannot in the process of doing this, remove any existing right from someone else because it presents a boundary to you, or exclude someone else from a space because your presence makes it inaccessible. And their say so on what is accessible and what isn't, and what they need, is equal and matters as much as yours does.

Inclusion and diversity says: great. Make new spaces. Additional spaces. A wider variety of spaces. Create more options so everyone has equity of access and freedom. And accept that there are boundaries to your wishes, wants and needs are not the same thing, and not everyone can have access to everything all the time.

Oh and Everyone gets to play this game on equal terms.

It is not a game male born people play while female people are the pawns on the board. Because fuck that.

As I've said, I'd like men to stop waging war. I'd also like them to stop and reflect about the use of conflict based language. It dictates a mind set that values aggression, 'winning' and 'losing'.
They see the person who capitulates as a 'loser'.

Hierarchies are based on aggression; communities on conflict resolution. The victims of aggression cannot be the ones to resolve the aggression; their choice is to resist or capitulate. Its up to the aggressors to change their behaviour.
De Bono's Thinking Course is a good place to start to challenge your thinking patterns, its only a couple of quid on Amazon.

Any ‘compromise’ means women having to give up some of our rights. So it’s not meeting half-way, it’s just trying to negotiate how much of what is ours we will be allowed to keep. We lose in every outcome.

This. I want a solution that gives equality and dignity and safety to all, but I'm no longer interested in compromise.

Thanks to the TRAs I'm now a hard NO to any biological males in women's single sex spaces. Having seen the miles that the TRAs have taken, I want the inch back too, to make sure this doesn't happen again.

For compromise, you're going to need to take it up with the TRAs.

This conversation appears to have left its point a long way behind us ...

You don't like/trust/care/give a shit for transsexual people ... ok

I don't mind ... crack on with that - and I don't say that in the usual 'Harrumph, I dont give a shit what you think' kind of way, but rather, accepting that your thoughts and opinions are your business, nothing to do with me ...

But I don't always understand what motivates people around me ... I dont always understand why there is such bitterness around (for instance) this issue. So, I ask questions. It's the only way I know to become better informed about anything (well that and reading a book now and again).

And I asked a question here ... Foolish of me? perhaps ...

But what's the alternative?

Blithely carry on, secure in my own ignorance?

I don't think so ...

(and a sincere thank-you to everybody who took the time to offer an answer to my original question)

You asked the question " What would be a win for GC feminists? " There is no win, because we are not seeking anything. We are only trying to stop people taking away our rights ; our right to safety, dignity and privacy, while going about our daily lives, the right to name ourselves and organise as a discrete group, the right to have our sex's physical needs met, the right to not be discriminated against because of our sex etc.
Perhaps your question should have been, " What do women have to lose, if gender becomes more important than sex?

You don't like/trust/care/give a shit for transsexual people ... ok

I'm really confused how you got that from the last few posts.

Blithely carry on, secure in my own ignorance?

Judging by the fact that your response to women's valid concerns is the above, I imagine that this is just what you'll do anyway.

I get the feeling you've posted because you want people to agree with you. And they do on many points. Yet your focus is on the concessions and privileges you want ringfenced for yourself. And thus you are reading 'no' as unfair and aggressive. It's really not.

Seems to still be on point to me.

So you've read all the answers and you still can't figure out why women might be a tad bitter?

@334bu

Perhaps your question should have been, " What do women have to lose, if gender becomes more important than sex?

yeah, perhaps it should have been ...

joolz do you think it is OK that Barbie Kardashian is in a women's prison? Do you think our collective sense of horror at this situation, given BK's history, is purely from a place of anti-transsexual sentiment? Do you not understand why we don't want to give up any rights for women to have safe spaces away from dangerous male bodied people like BK, or Karen White? Or any male at all to find another lawful way of being alone with a woman, no matter how vulnerable and traumatised she may already be?

@PickAChew

do you think it is OK that Barbie Kardashian is in a women's prison?

Absolutely Not

Do you think our collective sense of horror at this situation, given BK's history, is purely from a place of anti-transsexual sentiment?

No

Do you not understand why we don't want to give up any rights for women to have safe spaces away from dangerous male bodied people like BK, or Karen White?

I understand that perfectly

Or any male at all to find another lawful way of being alone with a woman, no matter how vulnerable and traumatised she may already be?

Obviously, I understand all of this (and support it)

@highame

A Statutory Public Enquiry would be my idea of a win.

An Enquiry that looked at how our democracy has been undermined, that looked at evidence of the effects of legislation including the GRA, the effects of any future legislation, that looked at the impartiality or lack in our public services and its impact on women and girls. I would also want the enquiry to look at Trans-healthcare using real evidence and a look at how trans-rights could be enhanced without affecting women adversely. I would want a real in-depth look at language and its impact especially on women and girls.

There's lots more I would want to include but it would be out in the open, no hiding and the lies and obfuscation shown for what they are. Then if this enquiry finds women's rights are not being trampled on and there are no adverse effects, then I would, (so long as I had trust and it was all public) bow to the conclusions. However, I would expect all trans-rights activists, Stonewall, Caroline Noakes et all to also abide by the decisions.

Yeah, I think that's an interesting idea.

There needs to be some real reflection about how this has come to pass, and for government it needs to happen formally. How did this stuff get pushed without it coming into the public consciousness. That article by DH this part week about the Council of Europe is the kind of thing that needs to come out and be revealed. But it would be hard, many don't want people delving into this kind of stuff for reasons of their own.

Universities need to be doing the same thing, NGOs, and the medical establishment.

You don't like/trust/care/give a shit for transsexual people ... ok

Women say no, respect my rights, I am not a prop in any male person's life, I will not give up my equality, other solutions will have to be found.

You hear 'you don't like, trust or care about me'

There's the problem right there. I will not be your solution. You cannot have my rights and my equality to make yourself happier. Women not doing what you want are not 'not liking you' or 'not caring about you'. I pointed out way back in the thread you are acting from a core belief that you have a right to service and compliance by women, and you came here seeking co operation on the grounds that you were asking for that compliance nicely and with some gestures towards being nice while asking for compliance.

The issue is that women do not owe male people compliance. At all. Ever. Being born female is not a life sentence of subordination. And I will not bloody identify as a man to make other male people accept that.

But what's the alternative?

That you talk less about respecting and caring for women and actually do it.

That TW accept that they cannot meet their needs by making use of and removing rights and equality and inclusion from women. That they find a third way for themselves that does not require harm to others.

Break this down: seriously.

TW - we want your resources, rights, spaces, language, identity, inclusion, equality and protections under law, and if you don't give them to me you don't care about me, and it's ok that some women get hurt in meeting my needs because I matter more than they do.

Women - no. Meet your needs by all means but you can't have our stuff. No, you cannot take stuff off us. We're doing nothing to you but existing with stuff you don't like us having.

TW - you hate and don't care about us, you have to fix this, until you give up your stuff you're making this toxic and it's all your fault that people in our name are threatening to rape you, kill you, doxxing you, trying to get you sacked, threatening your kids. And now look! You're unreasonably mad about it!

I mean for pete's sake!

@Artichokeleaves

You don't like/trust/care/give a shit for transsexual people ... ok

Women say no, respect my rights, I am not a prop in any male person's life, I will not give up my equality, other solutions will have to be found.

You hear 'you don't like, trust or care about me'

There's the problem right there. I will not be your solution. You cannot have my rights and my equality to make yourself happier. Women not doing what you want are not 'not liking you' or 'not caring about you'. I pointed out way back in the thread you are acting from a core belief that you have a right to service and compliance by women, and you came here seeking co operation on the grounds that you were asking for that compliance nicely and with some gestures towards being nice while asking for compliance.

The issue is that women do not owe male people compliance. At all. Ever. Being born female is not a life sentence of subordination. And I will not bloody identify as a man to make other male people accept that.

But what's the alternative?

That you talk less about respecting and caring for women and actually do it.

That TW accept that they cannot meet their needs by making use of and removing rights and equality and inclusion from women. That they find a third way for themselves that does not require harm to others.

Break this down: seriously.

TW - we want your resources, rights, spaces, language, identity, inclusion, equality and protections under law, and if you don't give them to me you don't care about me, and it's ok that some women get hurt in meeting my needs because I matter more than they do.

Women - no. Meet your needs by all means but you can't have our stuff. No, you cannot take stuff off us. We're doing nothing to you but existing with stuff you don't like us having.

TW - you hate and don't care about us, you have to fix this, until you give up your stuff you're making this toxic and it's all your fault that people in our name are threatening to rape you, kill you, doxxing you, trying to get you sacked, threatening your kids. And now look! You're unreasonably mad about it!

I mean for pete's sake!

This every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

Especially this:

That you talk less about respecting and caring for women and actually do it.

That TW accept that they cannot meet their needs by making use of and removing rights and equality and inclusion from women. That they find a third way for themselves that does not require harm to others.