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

Did you have the expectation that after seeding the search terms it might have been impolite to shape the follow-up research, Arabella?

am a little taken aback that someone claiming strong views on the subject would have not heard of all the research and writing on it, tbh.

I think the new term is 'fact shaming', which basically means providing evidence to prove your point against someone else's preferred interpretation is... mean, or something.

Not only do women now have to fight to be allowed to be biological realists (and this not be a hate crime), but also to be factual realists.

And who/what agenda is this serving?

Why a sex based one that prevents females saying no to males who wish to make use of them for their own reasons. And this is what it is I'm afraid, however uncomfortable that may be to face. If it was the space that was the target and not the people, if 'inclusion' was actually sincerely meant as opposed to being a veneer of respectability, then third spaces would be the obvious answer and we would not be in a sex based situation where male people have zero respect or care for females. And woe betide any females who think their little lives and reasons mean they ought to be able to say 'hang on a minute, this does not work for me'.

The gaslighting on top that sex isn't a thing here.... well it's just got silly now.

providing evidence to prove your point against someone else's preferred interpretation is... mean

'Fact shaming', blow me down.

Just to check:

• TW offer personal views and anecdotes of their experience as this is something deeply personal to them.

• Women who offer personal views or anecdotes of their experience are 'vile'.

• Pointing to stats, data, or evidence is rude.

So we are not to offer personal views or anecdotes, nor share evidence of general facts.

What are we allowed to say? When are we allowed to say 'no, thank you'? Are we allowed to say 'I do not want to share a confined space where I am vulnerable with a male'?

Generally speaking, women should just shut up, is that the gist of it?

'Women have all the rights they need - the right to remain silent'.

Fact shaming. Interesting idea. It's clearly a thing. Helpful to put a name to it.

There's a male (married with kids) contestant on French Bake Off at the moment who has an unusually high-pitched, squeaky voice. He spoke in one episode about how difficult it had made his life as a man.

@ArabellaScott

providing evidence to prove your point against someone else's preferred interpretation is... mean

'Fact shaming', blow me down.

Just to check:

• TW offer personal views and anecdotes of their experience as this is something deeply personal to them.

• Women who offer personal views or anecdotes of their experience are 'vile'.

• Pointing to stats, data, or evidence is rude.

So we are not to offer personal views or anecdotes, nor share evidence of general facts.

What are we allowed to say? When are we allowed to say 'no, thank you'? Are we allowed to say 'I do not want to share a confined space where I am vulnerable with a male'?

Generally speaking, women should just shut up, is that the gist of it?

'Women have all the rights they need - the right to remain silent'.

That's right.

You're not allowed to say anything, and your silence is evidence that you have nothing to say.

It's the same thing as you're not allowed to generalise, but you mustn't be specific either.

@ArabellaScott

Yes. Women's silence is interpreted as support or acquiescence.

In reality, women are silent because of threat to safety or personal reputation.

Then women's silence is used as evidence that there is no risk to safety or personal reputation.

So long as you stay quiet, nobody gets hurt.

This board is an anon internet forum (for the most part). So women are less at risk, and can state the truth.

This will be painted as being rude/mean/horrible etc.

Because for women to speak on this subject, offer their true feelings and thoughts, without fear or risk, is seen in itself as being unacceptable.

This is so true, and I am very troubled by it.

So many examples in life where men behave unreasonably (or downright abhorrently), yet it’s the women pointing it out that criticised.

@ArabellaScott that's interesting. I play a wind instrument and had terrible trouble when I was pregnant because something happened to my soft palate (!) and made the air snort out of my nose. Really weird, never happened before or since in years of playing.

Pregnancy affects almost every aspect of our body, Keflavik. Maybe something to do with relaxin/the hormone that softens ligaments and soft tissues?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relaxin

I mean, I have no idea, just a wild guess!

So long as you stay quiet, nobody gets hurt.

Let's face it, the dramatic hyperbole has been extended to: because you women wouldn't stay quiet about losing your rights and being trampled all over you've caused those men to do these things and do harm!

It's staggering isn't it? Nothing you can ever say is enough to make some male people view your voice as having any meaning or importance they need to regard - but at the same time your voice is so horribly, terribly powerful that you are the cause of male people doing bad things!

A psychologist would say that while this on the surface looks like someone managing to hold two totally contradicting, illogical positions at the same time and not realising it - in actual fact, the words mean nothing because the purpose of speaking is to serve the same purpose: to control females to the male's agenda. Therefore anything said is consistent to the speaker because it all serves the same end.

So the question is not how are you supposed to make sense of and engage with these multiple conflicting messages all at once.

The question is: should females be a subordinate and lesser race to males, and under their command? Females, are you for this? Would you vote for this? Enable those who think like this?

That's the key issue of the day if you're biologically female.

So long as you stay quiet, nobody gets hurt.

Problem is that won't always work. There's risks either way.

*Oh fgs. Firstly "those men" are likely to be women.

And that really isn't how a court or tribunal works but carry on belittling, well I suppose everyone involved.*

I agree, some of those people will be women. But they are also influenced by unconscious bias.

BTW belittling seems to be your forte right now.

I find it interesting that not allowing some male people into female only spaces is considered to be " removing protections from" and "exclusion of " these people and that stating that they are not the sex for whom these spaces are provided is "othering " them.

It's interesting. Apparently we aren't allowed to comment on transwomen's appearance. And the result is that transwomen can insist that no-one notices they are trans.

It's exactly the same as not being allowed to "misgender" someone, and then them claiming that the fact that others use the "correct" pronouns means they are accepted as actually being that sex.

It all comes back to the "pronouns are rohypnol" argument - I would add that "not challenging" is also roypnol.

Robin's insistence that Robin has the right to go into women's spaces means all of Robin's actions are aggressive and dismissive of women.

TurquoiseBaubles

Hard to see it any other way since once a male realises that there are women who are harmed (through retraumatisation, or being fearful) with their presence in toilets and changing rooms, they are in fact doing so with deliberate intent.

It must be quite hard to reconcile it within yourself if you have genuinely believed you are ‘entitled’ to be there but realise that it was a false entitlement. Even if the law has been interpreted to support you, finding out that the reality of your presence may be an uncomfortable truth. Which would be why people don’t want it discussed. And certainly, can never be acknowledged that it is not based in hate. That actually, many women, very reasonable women hold this belief. Not hateful bigots after all.

Well, we know from several surveys that the majority of people do not support males accessing female services and spaces.

So males who do this do it in the knowledge that a majority of women have not given consent and actively don't want them to be there.

...

• I can, if anyone is unable to, source and cite those surveys, but I have a pile of work on today and so delivery of this helpful service might be delayed, for anyone having trouble doing this work for themselves.

I wouldn't bother Arabella. The chances of
you doing that, simply to find your efforts going unread and scornfully dismissed are high. Previous experience has shown that these kind of requests are often a deliberate attempt to both control and waste other people's time.

There was a recent video of a trans woman assaulting a girl who challenged her in a female toilet - can't remember what country it was in, but it wasn't the UK.

This is why women rarely challenge obviously male people in their spaces.

(I can't find it now, unfortunately - thanks to Google's algorithms, all the searches turn up heartrending stories of poor trans women and how hard it is for them when the old meanie feminists stop them using women's toilets.)

@Whatiswrongwithmyknee

*Oh well , that's me proved wrong. I mean there's research in 1970 says so.

As opposed to actually dealing with this in real life.*

That's hilarious! You really don't understand how research works? It's not as easy as asking people whether something is a problem or not. That's kind of missing the unconscious bit? Before consciousness raising events, if you asked white people if racism was a problem, most would say no. If you ask black people, some would also say no. We internalise societies prejudices. They are most effective when we don't see them. Your own personal reflections on the small number of places you've worked (small compared to the number which are out there), absolutely does not trump research which has been going on SINCE 1970.

What is hilarious is the lack of understanding of how courts and tribunals work.

Robin's voice with its "manly gravitas" didn't come to much in The Times Scotland Employment Tribunal case.

Robin isn't successful in a case therefore bias towards male voices doesn't exist. You sure do save researchers a lot of time.

I assume Margaret Thatcher becoming prime minister proved having children doesn't affect women's careers generally as well.

Robin's voice with its "manly gravitas" didn't come to much in The Times Scotland Employment Tribunal case.

So why does RMW feel the need to keep their manly gravitas then?

@RoyalCorgi

There was a recent video of a trans woman assaulting a girl who challenged her in a female toilet - can't remember what country it was in, but it wasn't the UK.

This is why women rarely challenge obviously male people in their spaces.

(I can't find it now, unfortunately - thanks to Google's algorithms, all the searches turn up heartrending stories of poor trans women and how hard it is for them when the old meanie feminists stop them using women's toilets.)

Brazil, I think. The young woman who had done the challenging was being beaten in the school or college corridor, a male student broke it up, and many people noted the advantage his male biology gave him in the strength to do so.

@ArabellaScott

...

• I can, if anyone is unable to, source and cite those surveys, but I have a pile of work on today and so delivery of this helpful service might be delayed, for anyone having trouble doing this work for themselves.

This one?

TRAs like to cite the top results but the important ones are lower down, when people are asked their views if the trans person has not had surgery and a different picture emerges.

yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2020/07/16/where-does-british-public-stand-transgender-rights