I don't have any feelings of gender - is there a Stonewall friendly term for me?

[vivariumvivariumsvivaria]

Still debating my rights to single spaces with colleagues - if you didn't see my previous thread (which filled up, my first 1000 post thread on MN!) - they are trying to remove my single sex toilet.

They tell me I am "cis" because I am not trans or NB.

Google tells me that cis means that my gender aligns with my sex.

I have no feelings of gender. I appreciate others do, and for some gender is a huge influence on their life - but gender, whether I am masculine or feminine, is just not something I think about.

I could "pass" as NB today because I'm WFH and have on men's joggers, my husband's sweatshirt, no make up, my hair is short and I really should get the veet out to tackle my tache before I am back in the office. When in the office I am Smart, rather than feminine, I'll wear earrings and a bit of makeup (enough to make me look less fucking knackered) and unfussy, well made clothes bought from a shop which markets to women. Im not making a political statement from my style - I'm dressing for the job I want rather than the job I have, which is arguably a masculine approach to the workplace.

My colleague's tell me that my lack of gender makes me a-gender, but surely that means that I actively reject gender? That's not me, I don't reject it, it's an irrelevance.

Other things which are irrelevant to me are formula one racing, Little Mix, and dogs - along with an infinite number of other things. I appreciate that those things are very important to some people, and that for a few people their whole lives revolve around those things, but, I'm not expected to describe myself as a-dogs in my workplace or in my personal life - so, why am I being forced to describe myself as a-gender?

So, is there a term I'm missing? Something that describes people for whom gender is just not relevant? I'm told that "woman" is not sufficient.

I'm absolutely furious and I am standing up for myself - and in doing so I am standing up for the women in our office whom I know really need that toilet to be single sex because they have confided in me. They should not have to disclose personal history or circumstances in order to retain their legal provisions. To discuss their reasoning would be in itself be traumatising and bad manners. I am a good manager and a decent human being, it is not reasonable to expose their history as currency to justify what the law says they are entitled to. It requires no justification, it is law.

I have learned, through this tedious exercise, what 'privilege" means - I have privilege because I do not have trauma, am an expert in my field, senior in our organisation, work at a national level and know fine well that if I resigned over this it would cause a ripple in our professional bubble and I'd walk into another job tomorrow. I'm far from "don't you know who I am?" status, but, if I left this organisation it would feature in the professional press because I'd phone my friend who's the editor in the biggest professional magazine who agrees with me and my employers would like to keep me because I have an unusual skill set and will be difficult to replace. Plus, I'm really fucking nice, and great on a Christmas night out.

This combination of professional skills and people skills, robustness, luck and sense of humour means I have the freedoms to say "fuck off" to these loons who seem to be unable of critical thinking, think that repeating Stonewall mantras constitutes professional debate, or that it is correct to try and negotiate my rights in law away from me.

So, my question is - if I am not cis and I am not a-gender and I am not allowed to describe myself as "woman" - what am I?

Apart from "fucked off", that is.

@OldTurtleNewShell

I believe 'agender' is everyone else beings in a gender box, except me. If you think no one belongs in a gender box, then you get labelled a terf. I'm also bemused by the idea that a bunch of women on a feminist board might not have thought much about sex and gender.

They have thought a lot about it, and decided the 'gender' part is bullshit.

@Catnuzzle

I don't know, but i'm the same as you

Another one here > waves <

Also, and slightly off topic, I really enjoyed your writing style OP

If you have no strong sense of gender, you can't be trans, can you? Trans is transitioning, which means between two different states. If you're not in a state and don't recognise states, what are transitioning from or to?

I don't have a strong sense of gender but I do have a strong sense of justice! I call myself a woman with a personality and opinions, like most of us I guess.

Non binary doesn’t have to be accompanied by an androgynous appearance.

I think you are agender and non-binary.

And Stonewall is never going to have a respectful, honest name for us because, not only are we not generating money for them, we're speaking out about our taxes funding their anti-women lobbying.

@CatKittyCatCatKittyCatCat

Non binary doesn’t have to be accompanied by an androgynous appearance.

I think you are agender and non-binary.

Both of which would require identifying herself according to ideology she hasn't chosen and adopting the labels it presents.

The answer's a lot simpler. It's just no.

Not a believer. End of.

To get back to the OP, you could tell them that you object to them making assumptions about your gender identity, it's none of their business and you are distressed by their continual insistence that you conform to their assumption. And that it has nothing to do with the provision of a separate toilet based on sex, which is the law.

I will accept other people’s explanation of their identity.

But you don't. You have limits. So do we. My limit is that acknowledgment of biological sex is important to women.

Can I ask those who have said that single sex toilets are the law to elaborate? My workplace has recently published a trans policy which states (in a more roundabout way) that there wont be any single sex facilities as they are all self ID. I don't like it but I am scared to speak up, but links to legislation would be useful I think

Just check they put san bins in all facilities or they are discriminating on sex , by saying facilities are for all but not making them suitable for all

Also they should probably be labelled unisex not given gender labels as there is no room under the equality act to provide different facilities ( ir discriminate) on the basis of gender , only sex .

@PosiePerkinPootleFlump

Can I ask those who have said that single sex toilets are the law to elaborate? My workplace has recently published a trans policy which states (in a more roundabout way) that there wont be any single sex facilities as they are all self ID. I don't like it but I am scared to speak up, but links to legislation would be useful I think

There are a few threads on this with a HUGE amount of up to date information and wmen reporting back that carefully worded emails regarding the legality of the specific provision has caused a u-turn, partial or otherwise... I'm on my phone ro I'd link one for you. But a quick search should bring one up.

My colleague's tell me that my lack of gender makes me a-gender, but surely that means that I actively reject gender?

Not having a gender identity is agender.
Actively rejecting gender is gender abolitionist (what I am)

^I'm also bemused by the idea that a bunch of women on a feminist board might not have thought much about sex and gender.*

How did you get that from this discussion, Turtle?

To some extent, people who want to stick a label on you will always do so, and they'll do it according to whatever framework they're happy to use, wether that label makes sense to you, or wether you agree with it.

I just call myself an individual, personally.

And I'm all for getting rid of the gender boxes, though I suspect people with a gender identity ... actually, I really don't understand the concept of gender identity. Which would be fine, except that it's the new religion, and you're not allowed to escape it.

I like anti-gender. As much as I am a liberal who respects the rights of others to see themselves however they want (so long as they don’t try and infringe on my rights) I also think the world would be a hell of a lot better if we stopped trying to enforce regressive stereotypes on each other and ourselves. I resent being told I have a gender. I fucking well don’t.

I like anti-gender, too! As a wave 2 feminist since 1970, pretty much all the agiatation and activism I've doen was around challenging and dismantling restrictive gender stereotypes and expectaions. I was in a great position for subversive activities as a teacher who could encourage and develop ability wherever I spotted it, challenge narrow minded thinking and help create an ethos where all were equally valued and listened to. Study after study shows us that boys in school get shirty and start complaining if they get less than 70% of the airtime and attention, so two stopwatches borrowed from the PE department came out to time which sex was contributing, for example. My own family started with girl/boy twins, so I had my own mini social experiment to explore whether the sexes 'naturally' favoured different activities or toys or whether those differences were pushed at them. (Result: 2 individuals emerged who played separately and together with a whole range of 'gendered' and neutral toys, mixed with each other's friends and grew up never hearing - at least at home - any "Boys don't.. Girls should.." statements.) They are both keen, analytical thinkers who always wanted to know "Why..?" about everything. It's a pain sometimes because they take my thinking apart, but it's good for me and I'm proud of them.

Nobody could get away with sticking a label taken out of an unscientific ideological box on me and they'd better not try. Bad enough being caled "Boomer" which will always means an adult intact male kangaroo to me!

Hey, Boomer!

I am confidence in myself as a woman, but have always felt outside looking in at gender norms. Which I guess is pretty common give they are restrictive and reductive. Perhaps half of Mumsnet will turn out to be Trans on the basis of the definition: 'the term describes people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth'?

I am the same as you. A TRA told me I was agender and therefor part of the trans umbrella

This is reminiscent of Northern Ireland during the troubles. Being an atheist would lead to “But are you a Catholic atheist or a Protestant atheist?”
How do we get it through the gender ideologists heads that we don’t buy into their dated sexist 1950s stereotypes at all, let alone want to have a participatory label?
We are women - adult human females, by dint of our sex. The rest of it is made up bullshit.

Gender is a bunch of stereotypes and an ideology that I don't subscribe to.

@Babdoc

This is reminiscent of Northern Ireland during the troubles. Being an atheist would lead to “But are you a Catholic atheist or a Protestant atheist?” How do we get it through the gender ideologists heads that we don’t buy into their dated sexist 1950s stereotypes at all, let alone want to have a participatory label? We are women - adult human females, by dint of our sex. The rest of it is made up bullshit.

This is exactly it!!!

Just because you don't identify as catholic or protestant, it doesn't mean you have to identify as muslim, sikh or jedi or any other religion.

Religion is really, really important to some people, but I am never going to agree that any of it is true.

@Gingerkittykat

I am the same as you. A TRA told me I was agender and therefor part of the trans umbrella

We're all trans now Ginger 🏳️‍🌈🦄