The main flaw in the 'trans rights' argument

[OrdinaryWoman]

The main argument that single sex spaces 'violate' trans rights is entirety moot, as being trans is gender based, which is socially constructed and nothing to do with sex based rights.
It is the lack of provision tailored to supporting trans people which is potentially in violation of gender based rights.
It makes me wonder why this aspect appears to be wilfully ignored and why there are no campaigns for holistic trans services.
Instead, there exists an excessive and baffling fixation with aggressively targeting sex based rights in the name of 'trans rights'.

One might almost think that society hated women or something...

Women, cis and trans

Can you define what are the qualities of each? Otherwise I'm assuming you're saying "women, those who are female and some who are male and have said that they are "women""

@OrdinaryWoman

The main argument that single sex spaces 'violate' trans rights is entirety moot, as being trans is gender based, which is socially constructed and nothing to do with sex based rights. It is the lack of provision tailored to supporting trans people which is potentially in violation of gender based rights. It makes me wonder why this aspect appears to be wilfully ignored and why there are no campaigns for holistic trans services. Instead, there exists an excessive and baffling fixation with aggressively targeting sex based rights in the name of 'trans rights'.

One might almost think that society hated women or something...

Simple. The phrase "sex-based rights" itself did not even exist before this "debate", and was coined specifically to attack and exclude trans people.

@tabbycatstripy

Because they believe ‘trans rights’ means the denial of the relevance of biological sex in categorising humans.

And what's the problem with that? Why should we be socially segregated by sex in the first place?

@Circumferences

Sex-based-rights activists have suggested gender neutral spaces in addition to same sex spaces to cater for transpeople, since the beginning.

These pretty sensible and benign suggestions have been met with frothing cries of "transphobe" and violent threats .

It is literally as though it's not about the spaces at all. It's seems to be about pure domination, abusing and subjecting women.

Or maybe trans women just don't like being alienated, excluded, and othered.

It could just be trans women wanting to be treated as equals, rather than some malevolent conspiracy to subjugate women or whatever.

In what way are transwomen not treated as equals? They have the exact same rights as any other male human being. Do you mean transwomen want to be treated as equal to women? In what way? How is making all spaces mixed sex going to help either women, men or transpeople? If transwomen are in danger when using male facilities, wouldn’t they be in danger when using mixed sex facilities?

The term sex based rights may be relatively recent. This is because those rights were associated with being a woman and it is only relatively recently that the word woman has started to be redefined from underneath our feet, without discussion or debate. If you change the meaning of the word woman so that it is no longer associated with our sex, we female women will feel the need to point out that all of the rights and exceptions that were given to us because we we are women were given because of our sex, not some serious notion of gender identity.
We do not accept the redefinition of the word woman, but for clarity are pointing out that the important difference, the one embodied in our existing laws, is sex, not gender.

Obviously that should read spurious notion, not serious notion.

@Enough4me

They are different though. Sex occurs at conception, it isn't assigned at birth but is evident at birth if not before. I knew the sex of both my DCs in their 20 week scans. Where was I supposed to look for gender?

When I ask them now and they laugh and say they don't join in with that or the pronoun stuff, I guess like most people life goes on as before. They also don't follow stereotypes and it's a good thing young people aren't pigeonholed.

Perhaps there should be sex based toilets for men and women and gender fluid for anyone with dismorphia?

My Maternity Wing uses the word Gender when saying that the 20 week scan will show whether a baby is make or female. Well aware sex occurs at conception. I've also been to a 'Gender Reveal party'.

When did gender become different to sex, because this has been news to me. Isn't it a bunch of beard stroking academics that have argued a distinction?

Again I would argue they mean 'gender stereotypes' than the true meaning , i.e. adult human make it female.

Why should we be socially segregated by sex in the first place?

That is an excellent question. But strangely enough I am unable to think of any society on the planet, at any time, which has not distinguished between sexes on the basis of their biology. Some of that distinction has served to protect women against sex based violence. Some of that distinction has served to oppress and control women mainly on the basis of their reproductive abilities.

But if we are going to change this we should have an open and honest debate about the pros and cons. Change should not be introduced by the back door and forced on the overwhelming majority who want to keep sex segregation in some areas by a bunch of self appointed zealots who have no support outside their self reinforcing bubble.

I've heard of words like sex-based rights, sexual discrimination, sexual stereotyping, sexual harrassment, sex pay gap, sexual preferences, heterosexual, homosexual through my life. Along with the normal meaning for male and female. These words didn't start to appear to prevent people identifying as trans they were there first.

Trans people are trans people. They need respect and specialist and relevant trans healthcare and facilities. A TW does not need a smear test for example, but does need a doctor to support medication if the choice to take this occurs. I don't need this doctor's advice because, as a woman, I won't need to discuss choosing to reduce testosterone as I don't produce it at a high male level.

But if we are going to change this we should have an open and honest debate about the pros and cons. Change should not be introduced by the back door and forced on the overwhelming majority who want to keep sex segregation in some areas by a bunch of self appointed zealots who have no support outside their self reinforcing bubble.

Completely agree.

The phrase "sex-based rights" itself did not even exist before this "debate", and was coined specifically to attack and exclude trans people.

It actually did in some countries. I studied industrial relations at university in the 90s and we certainly used the term then.

The phrase "sex-based rights" itself did not even exist before this "debate"

Yes it is a debate whether males can ride roughshod over women's rights, sorry and all.

No. Many transsexual people don’t want to be recognised as trans anything. They want to live and be recognised as the men and women the feel they are and have transitioned to.

And therein lies the issues.

Trans people transition to the gender they identify themselves as but are materially not. And there are so many genders these days.

A transitioned male transitions to what their perception of a female and their perception only. They do not transition to the material reality of a female’s lived experience based on their life since birth.

And what about a transitioned female who is non-binary or one of the other very many genders? What rights do they need?

In the case of the female, they still need sex-based rights. Even if they are ‘cat gender’ they still need sex based rights.

There are conflicts and it is ridiculous to deny there is conflicts. And there is also this confusion where the ‘woman/man’ genders seem to get all the priority. But when you start to unravel it, it is far better that trans people have their own rights that reflect their needs, but they retain sex based rights if they are female. Because if you take this argument that ‘transitioned males should have access to female sex based rights’ where does that leave the non-sexed genders? Does that create a hierarchy there that definitely should not be allowed to exist?

Transitioned males should have access to trans rights but not female based sex rights and protections of having single sex spaces, the right of having equal and sex specific representation, the opportunities set up to encourage female achievement after centuries of negative sexist discrimination (that still is around in abundance), in sport, education, employment etc.

Those sex based rights and protections came into being because of females having a body formed around one reproductive function whether that function is/has/can ever happening/happened/happen.

People (and many other biological organisms) have sexes. A stark, hard, binary reality, in the same way a magnet pole can either be N or S, never both and never neither. Yes, sometimes the earth’s magnetic field shifts but N & S always remain 180 to each other.

Gender is the cultural phenomena (material objects, colours, activities, interests, skills, behaviours etc) that become culturally coded and have a tendency to coalesce on the social level around the dimorphic human sexes on an aggregate scale. So, one individual woman liking, say, combat pants and carpentry, isn’t indicative of anything, other than just liking what she likes. But at a larger scale, through the lens of pattern recognition, it’s observed that it doesn’t fit the typical gendered mould of cultural phenomena that are layered up around the empirical reality of the sexes. Just means that humans are unique and complex individuals (personalities!) with a variety of culturally coded interests that says very little about their sexually dimorphic status.

Making a distinction between sex and gender has allowed the lines to become blurred - gender and sex have been interchangeable it is only in the last few years as this issue has developed that some people are now saying the are different. I continue to believe you have male and female and can't change that sex or gender. Of course you have traits that are from the opposite gender/sex but that does not make you either non-binary or the opposite gender/sex in my view

@Helleofabore

No. Many transsexual people don’t want to be recognised as trans anything. They want to live and be recognised as the men and women the feel they are and have transitioned to.

And therein lies the issues.

Trans people transition to the gender they identify themselves as but are materially not. And there are so many genders these days.

A transitioned male transitions to what their perception of a female and their perception only. They do not transition to the material reality of a female’s lived experience based on their life since birth.

And what about a transitioned female who is non-binary or one of the other very many genders? What rights do they need?

In the case of the female, they still need sex-based rights. Even if they are ‘cat gender’ they still need sex based rights.

There are conflicts and it is ridiculous to deny there is conflicts. And there is also this confusion where the ‘woman/man’ genders seem to get all the priority. But when you start to unravel it, it is far better that trans people have their own rights that reflect their needs, but they retain sex based rights if they are female. Because if you take this argument that ‘transitioned males should have access to female sex based rights’ where does that leave the non-sexed genders? Does that create a hierarchy there that definitely should not be allowed to exist?

Transitioned males should have access to trans rights but not female based sex rights and protections of having single sex spaces, the right of having equal and sex specific representation, the opportunities set up to encourage female achievement after centuries of negative sexist discrimination (that still is around in abundance), in sport, education, employment etc.

Those sex based rights and protections came into being because of females having a body formed around one reproductive function whether that function is/has/can ever happening/happened/happen.

See I'm not sure anyone can state that there are many different genders. This seems to be something said as fact by University students and I believe to be the heart of gender ideology.

If there are new genders then there would have to be new sexes, as gender is fundamentally a statement of material fact first and then secondly a bunch of stereotypes.

Aren't there just more 'identities', and more people are simply 'identifying' as the opposite sex rather than becoming. I read say 'non-binary', (a term I might well have used) just an identity much like a punk, mod, skater, rocker, chav, goth.

Aren't gender identities just the new trendy tribes that kids and teens have always had and which they are furiously guarding in the way they always have?

Musomama1

Yes. Well. Acceptance without exception!!!

That is what our lawmakers and policy makers / influencers have also been told to follow.

So, while you may believe that, and I might or might not believe that, we are told we have to accept without exception. To question someone’s gender identity is to not believe they exist.

The fact that those activating for males to access female sex based rights and protections are the same ones stating acceptance without exception haven’t seemed to understood their cognitive dilemma is quite a feat really. It shows their motivation clearly though.

Aren't there just more 'identities', and more people are simply 'identifying' as the opposite sex rather than becoming. I read say 'non-binary', (a term I might well have used) just an identity much like a punk, mod, skater, rocker, chav, goth.

Yes, exactly. But saying you are "trans" covers all this and it is automatically taken seriously.

There aren't multiple genders - its an invention , it is a trend and one that hopefully disappears. We shouldn't have put this into law in the first place - the problem is that it has crept up on the majority who are now too afraid to speak out.

Simple. The phrase "sex-based rights" itself did not even exist before this "debate", and was coined specifically to attack and exclude trans people.

Nonsense.

The point of race- and sex-based civil rights law was to treat everybody the same;

Have a guess when that sentence was written and in which context, Cayeli.

I'll help you out. It's from an article written in 1995 about a disability law proposal and that phrase "sex-based civil rights law" is used entirely without definition or elaboration because the audience is wholly familiar with that term. Given that Ruth Bader Ginsburg made her career arguing about sex-based discrimination that's only natural.

reason.com/1995/08/01/unreasonable-accommodation/

The phrasing "sex-based" and "based on sex" in reference to women's rights has been used in legal discourse since at least the 1950s in the US to give you just one example. Women's rights campaigners have used this phrasing even longer.

Women have been oppressed, discriminated against and disadvanted because of their sex. The fight to redress these inequalities has always necessitated talking about the fact they resulted from our sex being treated as inferior. That's why being able to refer to sex is so important to our rights.

As it is for all other equality issues - if you are not allowed to refer to race, religion, sexuality, disability, poverty, age, you cannot discuss discrimination based on these characteristics. It's impossible to redress such inequalities by denying they exist and are the basis for the inequalities to exist in the first place.

As I said Charlie, it was all through my course at uni in the 90s.

Those stating it is 'new' seem to be drawing that off twitter discussions and not actual fact.

@Crcohetmonster

In what way are transwomen not treated as equals? They have the exact same rights as any other male human being. Do you mean transwomen want to be treated as equal to women? In what way? How is making all spaces mixed sex going to help either women, men or transpeople? If transwomen are in danger when using male facilities, wouldn’t they be in danger when using mixed sex facilities?

Why do you need to specify "male" human being? Could it be because it turns out it's not so equal when you compare with someone outside a specific "caste" that you impose on trans people?

@twelly

There aren't multiple genders - its an invention , it is a trend and one that hopefully disappears. We shouldn't have put this into law in the first place - the problem is that it has crept up on the majority who are now too afraid to speak out.

It's an "invention" that existed across numerous cultures, which you're content to ignore and erase.

When Mary Wollstonecraft wrote on the rights of women she didn't mention gender once. She died in 1797.