FB Groups and JK

[SusannaQueen]

Ok, I'm just having a rant and I know FB groups are free to set their own rules.
I've been following a fab FB group, (Home for Peculiar Artists 2), post goes up from admin saying this is a reminder, we don't allow anything Harry Potter or JKR related, if you don't know why then educate yourself. Lots of supportive replies.
I'm on the group in my real name, so I'm not going to weigh in, but it hugely fucks me off, so many people just believing lies with no dissent allowed. Just makes me think this whole thing is insurmountable.

Your gender identity (describing yourself as a "man" or "woman") is quite literally on the same side as what you were assigned, and is in alignment with the label that is socially mandated based on your physical characteristics.

You are making the assumption that we all have a gender identity. I don't have a gender identity.

If you aren't cis, i.e. your social identity doesn't match the category you were assigned at birth (whether or not you believe it's just the word for what was "observed"), then you don't have to be cis at all.

So I'm not 'cis' because I don't have a gender identity. Nor do most people.

The thing is, you want other people to act like you're something special, some great defier of gender roles, while you're staying perfectly within the confines of the socially mandated categories (and aggressively attacking those who don't stay within theirs).

How can you possibly know that about all the people posting on here?

@OldCrone

Not really, we just want you to accept trans people as equal. And yes, that involves accepting trans women as women.

I'm happy to accept trans people as equal, in the sense of having equal rights with everyone else.

Accepting 'transwomen' as women is different from trans people having equal rights.

In order to be a 'transwoman' a person has to be born male. So you want me to accept that a male person is a woman. But a male person can never be a woman because humans can't change sex.

Nope, if you're not accepting of trans women having the same rights as cis women, then you are not in fact accepting trans people as equal.

To regard trans women as "male" and demand them to be socially and legally categorized as such is to oppose trans equality.

@Wavedancer99

"Cis is a made up nonsense term. It's a Latin prefix which means 'on this side of' which has been co-opted (incorrectly) as an antonym for trans."

How is it incorrect? Your gender identity (describing yourself as a "man" or "woman") is quite literally on the same side as what you were assigned, and is in alignment with the label that is socially mandated based on your physical characteristics.

"while simultaneously telling us that we must refer to ourselves as 'cis'?"

You don't have to, though? If you aren't cis, i.e. your social identity doesn't match the category you were assigned at birth (whether or not you believe it's just the word for what was "observed"), then you don't have to be cis at all.

The thing is, you want other people to act like you're something special, some great defier of gender roles, while you're staying perfectly within the confines of the socially mandated categories (and aggressively attacking those who don't stay within theirs).

Not one word of this post isn't word salad nonsense.

We don't have to refer to ourselves as 'cis' but only if we aren't cis.

I won't be referring to myself by an enforced, made up term. Couldn't care less how you refer to yourself but I don't subscribe to your ideological belief system.

No, thank you.

"You are making the assumption that we all have a gender identity. I don't have a gender identity."

"So I'm not 'cis' because I don't have a gender identity. Nor do most people."

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

Even if you consider it non-existent simply because it's the socially mandated "default".

You're like a straight person insisting they have "no sexual orientation".

Speaking of rejecting labels, since you want to "reject gender", why don't you refer to everyone with gender-neutral terms like "they", "person", etc.?

Because in English, pronouns refer to sex, not 'gender'. We all have a sex and it can't be changed.

Almost like you're not actually "rejecting gender" but simply conflating it into sex, rebranding gender categories as "sex classes".

What do you mean by 'gender categories'?

Trans women are biologically male. This why they are trans.

Gender identity is a belief, I have no issues with other people having this belief but I don't share it.
I won't participate in compelled belief of any sort, I don't live in medieval times.

To regard trans women as "male" and demand them to be socially and legally categorized as such is to oppose trans equality.

But you're making the assumption that males being categorised as women has no effect on anyone else. It does. It affects women. So to make demands for these males without consulting women is treating those males as superior and women as an inferior category of people who are not allowed a say in how society is run.

@Wavedancer99

"The labels remain the same; you are just shuffling them about and pretending that’s some kind of self-determination. If you really wanted self-determination, wouldn’t you just reject the labels…?"

Everyone gets to use the labels they feel most comfortable with, and those who don't like either masculine or feminine labels can use neither.

Speaking of rejecting labels, since you want to "reject gender", why don't you refer to everyone with gender-neutral terms like "they", "person", etc.?

Almost like you're not actually "rejecting gender" but simply conflating it into sex, rebranding gender categories as "sex classes".

If labels are meaningless then why do you care so much what labels are used in the first place? Why are some of these labels mysteriously crucial but others aren’t? Why are you keen to depend on dictionary definitions of terms when it’s “cis” or “bimodal”, but not when it’s “stag” or “woman”?

You sound very much like an undergraduate who has read some garbled secondhand theory and thinks it’s very clever, when in fact you aren’t really able to follow your arguments through to their logical conclusion.

Some of the things you suggest may well be true, but you’re arguing for several mutually incommensurable positions at the same time, which renders your argument incoherent. If you pick one idea and follow it through to its conclusion, you might be able to better see what you are arguing.

You also haven’t responded to some of the requests for definitions and clarifications. Can you define “identity”? How can “nonbinary” exist, and where does it exist? How is gender any different to other kinds of “identity”? Is it socially constructed or in the mind?

@Wavedancer99

"You are making the assumption that we all have a gender identity. I don't have a gender identity."

"So I'm not 'cis' because I don't have a gender identity. Nor do most people."

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

Even if you consider it non-existent simply because it's the socially mandated "default".

You're like a straight person insisting they have "no sexual orientation".

In that case, when I tell the vet I want to book an appointment for my dog, that's a gender identity. Presumably if I call my companion animal a cat, that will mean she needs less food each day and smaller doses of medication?

I'm perfectly able to, I just don't care to answer the same time-wasting question for the hundredth time.

Sure you are.

But you're making the assumption that males being categorised as women has no effect on anyone else. It does. It affects women. So to make demands for these males without consulting women is treating those males as superior and women as an inferior category of people who are not allowed a say in how society is run.

Exactly. We're being told to accept trans superiority, not asked to "support trans equality".

@Wavedancer99

"You are making the assumption that we all have a gender identity. I don't have a gender identity."

"So I'm not 'cis' because I don't have a gender identity. Nor do most people."

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

Even if you consider it non-existent simply because it's the socially mandated "default".

You're like a straight person insisting they have "no sexual orientation".

I am a woman. That means I am an adult human female. It doesn't mean I have a gender identity. It's simply a label denoting sex. Are you using 'woman' to mean something other than adult human female? If so, what is your definition? If you can't define 'woman' I will assume that you mean 'adult human female' which is the dictionary definition.

Perhaps you could also define 'gender identity'.

I can also deal with the ongoing deer overpopulation issues by assigning them all as does.

No more fawns then!

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

You're performing a disingenuous sleight of hand here, conflating "knowing what sex you are" with "having a mysterious woman essence feeling".

"Cis is a made up nonsense term. It's a Latin prefix which means 'on this side of' which has been co-opted (incorrectly) as an antonym for trans."

How is it incorrect? Your gender identity (describing yourself as a "man" or "woman") is quite literally on the same side as what you were assigned, and is in alignment with the label that is socially mandated based on your physical characteristics.”

I don’t fucking have a gender identity (same as most women on this thread I suspect), so how can it match my sex?

I know that I’ve been treated like shit at various points because of my sex, don’t see what it’s got to do with my gender identity/ lack therefore of.

*there

It's odd how some people who use the word 'woman' to mean 'person with a feminine gender identity' have such trouble understanding that those of us who don't believe in gender ideology use it to mean 'person of the female sex'. I'm a woman and I don't have a gender identity. I experience gender as oppressive and limiting and so I don't identity with it, I reject it.

In relation to the OP, I'm in a particularly geeky fandom circle, and I once came across a site stating that anything Rowling-related wasn't allowed because of her views. All other authors were allowed, including those who were appallingly, undeniably racist or sexist in their writing. At that point it isn't even purity spirals/cancel culture. It's just an excuse to hate her.

How do you feel about this definition of a woman Wave? I’m not keen personally

I prefer ‘adult human female’ because it presumes nothing about the way I dress, the activities I enjoy, my personality type...

@Ereshkigalangcleg

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

You're performing a disingenuous sleight of hand here, conflating "knowing what sex you are" with "having a mysterious woman essence feeling".

What about those who don't know what sex they are, I wonder.

For example, when I'm asleep, do I continuously flicker between a state of maleness and femaleness?

What if I'm in a coma?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

If you're calling yourself a "man" or a "woman", then that is your gender identity.

You're performing a disingenuous sleight of hand here, conflating "knowing what sex you are" with "having a mysterious woman essence feeling".

You're the one who refuses to acknowledge or understand that the word itself is effectively a social identity.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

But you're making the assumption that males being categorised as women has no effect on anyone else. It does. It affects women. So to make demands for these males without consulting women is treating those males as superior and women as an inferior category of people who are not allowed a say in how society is run.

Exactly. We're being told to accept trans superiority, not asked to "support trans equality".

Do you think it was "black superiority" to end racial segregation without paying any regard to the "concerns" around letting black people into "white spaces"?

Nope, if you're not accepting of trans women having the same rights as cis women, then you are not in fact accepting trans people as equal.

This is baffling. “Rights” are not the same as “equality”. A child or a non-British citizen is not less equal to an adult U.K. citizen when they do not have the “right” to vote. A man is not less equal to a woman because in general it’s accepted that he shouldn’t go in the ladies’ loo.

You’re inadvertently arguing both that men and women aren’t equal in the first place (because a trans woman retains all their legal rights anyway); and also conflating social norms (there often to protect women) with “rights”.

I don’t have a “right” to go in the John Lewis ladies’ loo in the first place. It’s a service provided to me but I don’t have a “right” to it. There are social expectations that women will use one set of loos and men another. If a man wants to call himself a woman, he doesn’t suddenly acquire or lose any “rights” about those loos. Other people don’t have to believe in his new label as if it is fact. They can self-determine too, and why should they rearrange their social expectations based on someone else’s new label? After all, you’ve told us labels are meaningless.

To regard trans women as "male" and demand them to be socially and legally categorized as such is to oppose trans equality.

Equality does not mean “the right for my own labels to be taken as fact”, does it? Especially if labels are meaningless and socially constructed. Because then anything I decide to label myself is the basis of law. If I say I am a disabled Venezuelan woman do I get to access scholarships on that basis or complain I am not being treated “equally”?

Equality in law refers to fact, not imagination. I can’t identify into other protected characteristics. Why not?

People in glass houses can't answer questions eh @Wavedancer99?

To change to something

1. the thing to change to has to exist (2 sexes exist)
2. Changing has to be possible...

XX and XY exist, but no, they aren't interchangeable.

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

I can also deal with the ongoing deer overpopulation issues by assigning them all as does.

No more fawns then!

You are the only oned making a connection between gender categories and reproductive function.

*ones