What do you expect transwomen to do then?

[Blibbyblobby]

@JohnHuffam1812 asked me a question on the woke thread that I think deserves an answer. The thread closed before I could post it but I’m answering here and hope that JohnHuff will see it and maybe give his/her/their thoughts.

What do you expect transwomen to do then? Should they not just be extended as much as they possible can within reason?

I expect trans women to acknowledge they are not female and that female experiences are also valid. I expect them to take as a starting point that the existing female-only spaces - ie everything defined as “women-only” when woman was synonymous with female - remain single sex for now. And then we work together, case by case, to see what can be reasonably opened up as mixed sex/single gender, and what might justify some third provisions, and what is just plain female and doesn’t really intersect with trans women’s needs and lives full stop.

I don’t know where that conversation will end up, and I don’t need to know. Maybe we will come to an agreement that “woman” becomes an entirely gender term that coexists with an entirely separate name for the female-bodied. Maybe, as trans women learn more about female people’s lives, they will decide the thing they recognise in themselves is not womanhood and the journey goes somewhere else. Maybe we will see a way forward that reduces the importance of both sex and gender for everyone and as we gain a more truly equal culture, the need to be seen as the “gender” one “truly is” just seems less and less important.

The point is, the first step is to communicate fairly, respectfully and openly. Without that we won’t be able to find reasonable solutions. But once we do communicate fairly, respectfully and openly, reasonable solutions will be surprisingly easy to find.

Basically, I expect trans women to respect our differences, and I expect us all to respect each other, speak honestly, listen with acceptance, and take it from there.

The insistence that this feeling is minority and the vast majority are 100% comfy in sex role is plain wrong.

What is true is that hardly anyone who feels that way would describe themselves as trans. They understand that people are all different and stereotypes/ ideals of male female are not how it works in real life. Even those who insist that certain stereotypes are 'natural' etc.

They do not think that's my gender identity and that makes me somehow a mixture of man/ woman, or neither, or the one that's the opposite sex to me.

Most people don't think about it, just do their thing knowing that it's stereotype- roles. Not rules! Not being like stereotype in all ways does not mean not a member of group those stereotypes apply to.

Is this not just obvious?

@foxgoosefinch

Except a lot of what trans people say about rejecting their birth sex is half about gender and half about sex - eg. being uncomfortable in their sexed body, having “gender dysphoria” about the body, and so on. So is it really discomfort with sex roles, or is it about sexed bodies? Is body dysphoria “gender” dysphoria or sex dysphoria? It all gets mixed up together in the gender ideology narrative, so I don’t think it’s remotely as simple as just rejecting the patriarchal constructs of gender.

Although some of the rejection of the sexes body can be driven by the association of that with the specific role

Abs for girls sexualisation and abuse can play a part , which is again society driven

But yes complex

@CheeseMmmm

Is this not just obvious?

Yes Cheese, that's exactly why I think we should be talking and listening to each other with respect. Not because there are vast gaps of difference but because I think there are likely a lot of the same insights and feelings of mismatch being hidden under different names and the best way to defang Genderism is to get that out in the open.

I'm dropping out now. There's been some good discussions but probably gone as far as it can here, at least for me.

I might link to the thread now and then to prove FWR isn't an echo chamber even for the regulars.

Basically, I expect trans women to respect our differences

OP, you’re taking a decent and tolerant stance. But their whole ideology rests on not respecting our differences.So despite all women’s efforts to be kind while maintaining some boundaries, we’re not going to get that respect.

Trans identities, being at heart a rejection of the dominant gender/sex constructions

They are at heart a partial rejection of some of the dominant whatevers. And some trans identities reject some constructions, some of them reject others. A bit like camp in a way - also a rejection of the dominant gender/sex constructions that often manages to be very misogynist indeed.

So is it really discomfort with sex roles, or is it about sexed bodies? Is body dysphoria “gender” dysphoria or sex dysphoria? It all gets mixed up together in the gender ideology narrative

If you assume the narrative is in part shaped by autogynephiles the confusion makes sense. There’s physiologic/ body-focused AGP and AGP that is more focused on social interactions and being treated like a woman. I forget all the different types, but considering that as well as different types of AGP all kinds of other motivations/etiologies for gender dysphoria are lumped under “trans”, the incoherent narrative is only to be expected.

@Blibbyblobby

Not because there are vast gaps of difference but because I think there are likely a lot of the same insights and feelings of mismatch being hidden under different names and the best way to defang Genderism is to get that out in the open.

It is out in the open. Its long been noted that anxiety about societal imposed sex specific roles is common. As is girls' concern about their developing bodies in a sexualised world.

The fundamental difference with transgenderism is it doesn't bust gender by breaking out of the roles. It reinforces them by claiming the person must be the other sex because of the way they personally feel about their gender roles.

They assume it is they who are 'wrong' for disliking it, not society for forcing it on them.

No amount of telling trans people that this isn't the case, that these roles are imposed, works. They believe its innate and they have the wrong set.

It's a cornerstone of feminism to expose this - hence gender critical. Long before transgenderism existed, feminists were criticising the roles and expectations imposed on women.

It's necessary because women are oppressed on the basis of their biology and gender (imposed roles and expectations) is the way it's done.

Transgenderism agrees with gender - it just claims that some people have the wrong one.

It has to reinforce the boxes in order to force society to accept they are now in a different one.

You definitely see the problem. You see how it's happened. What I don't think you're getting is that the 'solution' transgenderism has provided perpetuates it to dizzying and dangerous levels.

A tiny example was from a transwoman on here, years back. They said they could only feel 'colourful and vibrant' presenting as a woman.

Feminism says anyone should be able to be colourful and vibrant. Its not sex specific. (That's gender busting).

Transgenderism says only women can, therefore this man must be one (that's gender reinforcing).

(Actually, I think 'vibrancy' was a euphemism for something else, but he had to say something. 😁)

When feminists pointed out that actually it's sexist to believe that these gender roles are innate and if you feel a certain way you must be the opposite sex, proponents of transgenderism stopped talking about it in that fashion, and started to talk about being born in the wrong body, or having an inner essence.

It goes out of its way to reinforce gender but as soon as you start asking questions about what that means, specifically, you get zero answers.

Try it. Try asking a transwoman what are the top three things that make them think they're a woman.

You'll either get sexist stereotypes, or absolutely nothing.

But their whole ideology rests on not respecting our differences.

More specifically, the "transwomen are women" ideology rests on not respecting our differences - physical, social, experiential. Agree to give that one up and I'll listen. Or is it a necessary part of "transgender ideology"?

I think there are likely a lot of the same insights and feelings of mismatch being hidden under different names and the best way to defang Genderism is to get that out in the open.

But the different names serve different purposes and they benefit different people, so good luck going getting that out into the open and staying in one piece.

If you assume the narrative is in part shaped by autogynephiles the confusion makes sense.

And that, of course. AGP fetishises women's gender roles. It doesn't just inhabit them, it takes it to another level.

It absolutely needs, one hundred percent, for them to remain. Hence the unbridled fury at feminists.

Just as speaking fluent French does not make you French. You are never native.

To continue the analogy, many of them speak French about as well as Del Boy. Mange tout.

If you assume the narrative is in part shaped by autogynephiles the confusion makes sense. There’s physiologic/ body-focused AGP and AGP that is more focused on social interactions and being treated like a woman. I forget all the different types, but considering that as well as different types of AGP all kinds of other motivations/etiologies for gender dysphoria are lumped under “trans”, the incoherent narrative is only to be expected.

This, exactly.

I understand exactly where you are coming from by saying “not my problem” and in a black and white world you’d be right,
I know you said you were leaving the thread but, in case you're still reading, I see it the other way round. I think that in a black and white world there might well be a chance of reaching solutions because in such a world, it might be possible for us to state our boundaries and to say 'no' and to have that respected.
Instead our politeness and reticence have been construed as acceptance, and our questions and challenges dismissed as bigotry.
As long as that continues - and I don't think it's within our gift to change it - then I no longer think good faith discussion is possible.

The discussion earlier on this thread about nightclubs giving free drinks for women on "ladies' night" makes me wonder if this practice is still common, as I'm sure it's against the Equality Act, and I think it's specifically mentioned in guidance as such.

If it does still happen, has anyone complained? Has any action been taken against establishments that do this?

*Trans identitifying people reject the gender constructs attached to their birth sex. That’s the fundamental driver. IMO the (mis) identification with the opposite sex comes after.

So while I agree that the “really a girl” thing is very much a sex/gender construct, it’s the first part I am really interested in.*

I really think you are allowing the wool to be pulled over your eyes here. The trans ideology is "I don't feel like societies definition of a man, therefore I must be a woman". It's not "I don't feel like societies definition of a man". That does not a transperson make. Therefore you can't just focus on the first part of the statement and use that as an argument for common ground. To do so actually implies acceptance of the second part of the statement - and it is that which is literally killing women. So no, I will not see this as any sort of joint struggle. I will continue to see this as an abuse of power.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Just as speaking fluent French does not make you French. You are never native.

To continue the analogy, many of them speak French about as well as Del Boy. Mange tout.

More like someone who has learned "French" from 'Allo 'Allo , in some cases.

@Floisme

I understand exactly where you are coming from by saying “not my problem” and in a black and white world you’d be right, I know you said you were leaving the thread but, in case you're still reading, I see it the other way round. I think that in a black and white world there might well be a chance of reaching solutions because in such a world, it might be possible for us to state our boundaries and to say 'no' and to have that respected. Instead our politeness and reticence have been construed as acceptance, and our questions and challenges dismissed as bigotry. As long as that continues - and I don't think it's within our gift to change it - then I no longer think good faith discussion is possible.

Totally agree. I think there could have been discussions and debates about how to balance the needs of both women and transwomen, men and transmen at the beginning of all this.

But as Flo says, questions were interpreted as bigotry. Civil debate has never been possible because among some very vocal, very aggressive activists, there has never been any intention to listen to women. Just shock that we didn't immediately acquiesce and that shock morphed into painting women as evil for not immediately saying 'yes, of course!'

There's much talk of a 'golden bridge' but at this point, I agree with the point which Arabella made up thread - it's now up to the TQI+ community to negotiate what additional services they need, fight and fundraise for them (the same way that women had to do) and drop this colonisation of single sex spaces. It doesn't work.

And also trying to start this discussion in FWR makes it absolutely clear who the concessions are expected to come from. This is not the 'Talking about what trans people need' topic.

Free drinks on ladies night.

What reason could any profit driven business have for handing out free drinks restricted to women? Corporate facilitated access to women with reduced capacity for consent to paying predatory men.

Let’s bin that horror forever.

Free drinks for women on "ladies' night" belongs in the bin along with convincing men that having feelings makes them women.

I don't feel like societies definition of a man, therefore I must be a woman". It's not "I don't feel like societies definition of a man". That does not a transperson make.

Exactly. It's sexist claptrap.

I really think you are allowing the wool to be pulled over your eyes here. The trans ideology is "I don't feel like societies definition of a man, therefore I must be a woman". It's not "I don't feel like societies definition of a man". That does not a transperson make. Therefore you can't just focus on the first part of the statement and use that as an argument for common ground. To do so actually implies acceptance of the second part of the statement - and it is that which is literally killing women. So no, I will not see this as any sort of joint struggle. I will continue to see this as an abuse of power.

Agree.

There is nothing to be gained for women and girls and everything to be lost by seeing this as a "joint struggle" , it's not it's male supremacy and colonisation imo.

@RepentMotherfucker

But this isexactlythe type of conversation that I would like to see happening. And I would very much like to see TRAs put some effort into demanding trans women are welcome and safe at Ladies Nights up and down the UK.

No. I think this would be a stupid conversation and I have no desire to engage in it at all.

I think the overwhelming feeling on the thread is a lot more resistant to gender ideology than what you are proposing OP. And that's great. We don't need to compromise with unreasonable people.

Hands off Women's Spaces!

I'd hope OP meant, come on, make it a single gender night, transwomen welcome. And then let TRAs deal with the gobsmacked men who complain about there being no women.

Let the TWAW sink itself.

Maybe that's what it would take to make the whole gender thing collapse. Throw it back to the men to deal with.

@RepentMotherfucker

And also trying to start this discussion in FWR makes it absolutely clear who the concessions are expected to come from. This is not the 'Talking about what trans people need' topic.

The title came, I thought, from another thread. A thread that had at least 2 TRA type posters. This was an invitation to them to come and talk specifically about one question that was raised.

Somewhat predictably John has not bothered.