Prospect Magazine: Kathleen Stock v Robin Moira White

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

Great discussion.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/essays/gender-wars-two-opposing-perspectives-on-the-trans-and-womens-rights-debate

Gender wars: two opposing perspectives on the trans and women’s rights debate
A lawyer and philosopher respond to seven propositions—ranging from single-sex spaces to puberty blockers for children

You (general you) have basically invented the scenario where you imagine female solicitors, barristers and advocates are overwhelmed by the manly gravitas of manly voices. It's nonsense

I wasn't really focused much on that tangent, but I thought the observation being made was that those men sitting and hearing the cases might be subconsciously swayed by male voices, not that female legal professionals arguing cases felt overwhelmed by encountering a male voiced counterpart.

I see no sexism in realising that women encounter sexism. I think such sexism could be classified as a subtype of testimonial injustice. I have seen "testimonial injustice" defined as the widespread shared preconceptions that lead to some people being considered less credible than others for personal characteristics beyond their control; for example, having higher, feminine voices.

When I am at my local supermarket on a Saturday morning and need to pee, there is no good reason to exclude me from the female lavatories

Yes, no "good" reason. Female privacy, dignity, safety, comfort that is gained through single-sex loos is not a good enough reason, says the male.

I thought this was why the EA and building regs etc all made certain spaces (loos, changing rooms, prisons, sports, hospital wards, etc) single-sex by default - because of every spaces and every male had to be considered on an individual case-by-case basis, then there would always be some men who thought there wasn't a good enough justification or that they, or that provision, should be an exception and males/that male should be allowed because they're no harm/ a Nice Guy/a small guy/a married man/a gay guy so I wouldn't be looking anyway/etc.

I always think that it's the males who insist that women and girls shoud not have spaces where males can't go who are exactly the males that boundary is there for. The ones who just can't give any significant weight to women's needs where they conflict with their [the male's] own.

I see no sexism in realising that women encounter sexism. I think such sexism could be classified as a subtype of testimonial injustice

www.legalcheek.com/2020/02/over-half-of-female-lawyers-have-experienced-or-witnessed-sexism-at-work/

www.counselmagazine.co.uk/articles/gender-at-the-bar-fair-access-to-work-(4)

Will you not answer my question, Robin?

Why does your desire to use female spaces trump my need to have a space free of males?

Women don't want mixed sex spaces. So why are we being forced to accept them?

@CheeseMmmm

'when going into female toilets and when speaking from a personal perspective.'

Totally understand that and yes I have felt the same way a fair amount.

After years of discussing this I have noticed something interesting.

Majority of the time.
Women in general on this topic talk about groups. Made up of lots of individuals. It's not personal. It's about this general risk, behaviour etc. And it's about males. Not just males who identify as trans.

Invariably the trans individual who has come to talk focuses on themselves.
The points a that are about how males in general could/ will use this for dodgy reasons are addressed from a personal perspective.
I have had xyz experiences I need to be with women to be safe.
I don't do X and y because I don't think I should.
I do go a and b because of c and d.
Why do you want to stop me doing these things?
Why do you think I'm s risk?

Whether engaging in good faith or not, this IME is how it always goes.

It's always essentially why I am ok, why I should not be denied this.

The approaches. General v personal. Massive general groups (male/female) thinking about all women/ girls etc.
Vs why I should be accepted.

That's s huge barrier, as totally different things.

I have seen more than once, way more. Why do you care about women in prison? You're not going to go to prison.
Do you play sport?
Why do you care?
Etc.

I mean. What? But, that said about loads of things.

It is an ideology based upon group submission to an individual's belief about themself.

As how on earth would you know what it was like to be trans if you weren't?
Alternatively...
As how on earth would RMW know what it was like to be female if RMW weren't...

Why is it men can be all they want to be, in the same interview, and yet women aren't even allowed to use the facilities without men/trans/women there?

The utter hypocrisy of some posters who cheer lead these men/trans/women on.

*by 'men/trans/women' I mean people who in one article seem to claim to be all three for the varying benefits they offer as and when it suits them.

Have we found out what a 'female diaspora' is yet?

I saw RMW claim a success when arguing that a transwoman could claim all the maternity leave after the transman partner had given birth
No recognition of recovery required by the female partner. It seems females are only there to validate transwomen identities and provide the services they can't
I don't believe RMW has any interest in females other that for those purposes

One of the many dis-incentives for trans people to engage publicly with any form of discussion, is the general vileness we are exposed to on forums such as this, which go far beyond comments on the substance of what we say

What do you want to say?

I find males in female toilets generally vile. I don't know why they are there. Nobody does. But we aren't allowed to make a peep about it otherwise the male might turn on us. But you flip flop taking all the advantages of being male/trans/female as and when you want and we aren't allowed to challenge that?

I worked with a nationally recognised voice coach but to raise the pitch of my voice sufficiently left me in a position where to produce enought power to hold a court room was too much of a strain. We are all different and the same might not be true for another transwoman.

The relevant vocal-cord tightening operation has a number of associated risks and I decided that they were risks too far.

And…. Your post actually confirms what I was talking about. And in a way, what everyone is talking about. Because it is based on the same thing. The power to project your voice.

I teach and for me to hold a classroom full of students, in a room that is larger than something the size of a small boardroom, is difficult. Because when you say hold a courtroom, you are talking about the ability to project your voice to be heard. And if you are not heard clearly, people stop listening, or at best only pick up part of what you are saying. To be able to project a voice without a microphone to maintain attention - that is ‘power’.

It did NOT come naturally to me at all. Males have larger lungs… so tend to be able to produce and sustain louder voices when needed.

I still can’t for more than a sentence or two. And by raising the volume of my voice, it seems to raise the pitch and the pitch becomes quite high and I believe that would not be conducive to listening for long periods. So I have been told anyway.

So, Robin. THAT is male power! And I do think you understand it. Despite your ‘denial’. Being able to maintain the volume for a length of time does then convey authority. Or are you also going to dispute that?

Because I have also tried to teach in larger rooms without a microphone and my voice was a squeak after my section. My male colleagues had no such issue.

I cannot imagine how I was judged effective I was considered in comparison to the males.

So, you say hold a court room.

Sorry…. What about that is not acknowledging that a male with greater lung capacity has that ’power’? I still struggle with my natural voice to hold a room the size of a court room. It is exhausting and it is distracting for me.

I am happy to be told by a professional voice coach that I am speaking bollocks, if any are reading and wish to correct me.

Not only that, but are you also then acknowledging, Robin, that a person who would have a disability (either born with or via trauma) which effects their projection power of their voice would be at a disadvantage?

@NoNotMeNoSiree

I took *@robinmoirawhite* 's comment about voice and power to mean that to have it altered would affect her voice strength wise, which wouldn't be good if you use it a lot for work. Nothing to do with being male pitch which others are jumping to. I find it fascinating how people' s minds interpret the same things completely differently.

It IS amazing how some people’s mind interpret things isn’t it?

Have you ever wondered why a male has greater ‘power’ in a court room? In the post just after your’s Robin used the words holds a court room.

I believe Robin knows that power comes from being able to project voices for sustained lengths of time in a way that still can be very well understood, and in a way that holds attention.

Do you not think males have a natural advantage to do this? I see it regularly across different jobs I have worked in. And that females may have to work harder to learn this, maybe even work with voice coaches which costs money (and let’s face it with pay disparities, that is yet another burden)?

Have you thought about the connection of pitch/projection before?

You seem to see commenting on someone's appearance negatively as '' well they're trans and therefore we need to be able to say what we like about voice and looks as because trans and we need to know we're safe!''

Nope. Because its not about them being trans. Transmen don't go onto men's forums and claim men cant tell they're in their loos and changing rooms.

This has nothing to do with the trans aspect. Its to do with sex, not gender.

I see people as people instead of othering or thinking threats round every corner.

Identifying sex isn't 'othering'. Males commit 98% percent of all sex crime, with women being the overwhelming percentage of victims. What you call 'othering', is acknowledging and mitigating risk as a safeguarding measure.

Im still baffled by the idea that TW think that just because women don’t point & go “loooook a man in a dress!!!!!!” that we don’t notice. The norms of society dictate that generally speaking people don’t behave like cunts with no reason so we don’t tap men dressed as women going about their daily lives on the shoulder and say “excuse me you’re a man” I mean ffs!!

I flew from Heathrow the other week. There is a TW working there. Obviously at no point did I say “you’re a bloke & we can all tell” because that would be twattish

Frankly the idea that women would say something is full of male privilege. Men are socialised that their thinky thoughts on any subject are very important and must be said!! They don’t belong to the female half of the human race which as a class is smaller & weaker and easily physically outstripped and they don’t tend to worry about the threat of sexual violence. There are good reasons why I’m not going to challenge a 6ft TW in toilets or changing rooms; it’s not because they pass, it’s because I’m bloody scared of the reaction

And only someone brought up male wouldn’t understand this

What about that is not acknowledging that a male with greater lung capacity has that ’power’?

Add to that the shocking hypocrisy of a person calling themself a “woman” but not giving up male biological advantage. Cherry picking, hypocritical, and deeply bad faith.

And we’re expected to share intimate spaces with people who behave like this.

It is a fine line though, I agree, because on the one hand the comments are a frank discussion of a book we are invited to read but they are also personal to someone also reading the thread. So I feel a bit queasy reading some of the posts

This is why we have got to this awful position where an ideology that harms women has been allowed to take over - because people 'feel queasy' not to #bekind to men even though by doing so they are being anything but kind to women. It is quite clear RMV does not consider the need to #BeKind as they saunter into the female toilets. The appeal to a non-existant vulnerability is part of this so we say 'poor thing we must help them'. When we don't they switch to typical male aggressive to try fear as a persuader instead.

because that would be twattish?
What, you think just because you as a woman wouldnt be twattish, that and go up to someone saying that, that automatically means all women aren't twats and would never say anything twatty like that?
Cos we're all the same?
Yeah, no, it doesn't really work like that.

when we don't they switch to personal male aggressive
Where has she done that?
None of Robins posts have been aggressive?

@NoNotMeNoSiree

because that would be twattish? What, you think just because you as a woman wouldnt be twattish, that and go up to someone saying that, that automatically means all women aren't twats and would never say anything twatty like that? Cos we're all the same? Yeah, no, it doesn't really work like that.

Eh? If women are going up to transwomen and pointing out their sex then they wouldn't be claiming no-one can tell, would they?

This is what happens when you disagree with women for the sake of it. You lose sight of the entire issue!

Frankly the idea that women would say something is full of male privilege.

It really is. Challenging a man in your space, who is currently demonstrating his total willingness to violate your boundaries, isn't something women do.

I am disappointed that there has been no response to the questions regarding the suppression of puberty in children which Robin seems to wish to be the norm for gender questioning children. Given that the onset of puberty is just the beginning of a child developing to adulthood, how is it possible for such a child to understand a possible loss of fertility and sexual function?

Im still baffled by the idea that TW think that just because women don’t point & go “loooook a man in a dress!!!!!!” that we don’t notice

Exactly, I don't think I have ever mentioned to a man that he's obviously a man. Why would I?

However, had it been an option for me not to have endured male puberty, then I would not face this difficulty, which is one reason from personal experience why I support tht being an option for trans young people who are sufficiently mature to take that decsion.

It has been said before, but I will say it again.

A person being ‘mature’ enough to make that decision, is one that is well past puberty. So, your point is misleading.

But obviously, also ignores the plight of young females who have arguably greater health risks through the use of this treatment. It needs to be acknowledged that the posts we do see in wholehearted support of use of these drugs tend to come from those who are males and who have not used them. So it is always based on wishful thinking of what might have been than actual life experience. And continues to ignore the impact on young female bodies.

And it should also be acknowledged that usually those posters may have a higher tendency to use shaming tactics to control discussion amongst women discussing the rights for females and children.

Yes. Either women are being twattish pointing it out, and transwomen wouldn’t claim “you can’t tell” and would need to acknowledge that everyone can, or women can tell but don’t say anything, and transwomen wrongly take this as evidence that women can’t tell.

I know which option I think is more likely.

Exactly NotBad - if we did point it out we’d be being mean so because we don’t point it out, it’s taken to mean we can’t tell

As usual another lose lose situation for women

Women don't point it out when we are in a female space as it's intimidating.

Pointing it out at Heathrow might be twattish depending on the circumstances, but a male in a female space is in and of itself a violation of women's boundaries.