Gender argument - caught in the middle

[Baggingarea]

I feel totally caught in the middle in this brave new world of gender ID and I guess I’m just looking for somewhere to vent without getting piled on.

I just think the argument has become so unbelievably divided that there’s no room for mediation any more.

On the one hand I see a mean girls club basically bullying trans women online and selectively finding examples of criminals etc to prove a point.

On the other I think the sports industry / politicians are so scared to put a foot wrong they are throwing trans women to the wolves. Like surely there should be some debate and policy making going on. You can’t have trans women dominating womens sports as they have an unfair advantage. Professional bodies should be having serious conversations about this.

In terms of changing rooms etc we need to make sure everyone is happy and feels comfortable. Personally I hate changing in front of others regardless of their gender at birth - why can’t we more provision for individual changing rooms for both men and women?

Like I get how women are so protective of their rights but it’s not like trans people haven’t faced discrimination and prejudice too.

I just hate how I can’t feel like I can’t say these things publicly without being branded a terf or a gender traitor. Stifling debate like this is not healthy!

There is an abject refusal on the TRA side to discuss the impact self ID has on women's rights. You try to discuss it and you are committing "literal violence " and "denying the existence of trans people " and " driving people to suicide " and other hyperbole. It's why people tried to Be Kind.
And that policy has failed everyone.

@Waitwhat23

Here's a reply from a SNP Councillor in response to an invitation to a public meeting to discuss women's rights in Motherwell -

'Good afternoon,

I am delighted to advise that I will not be attending your meeting where you state you will discuss Gender Recognition reform but do not advertise any transgender speakers, just as I would not attend a meeting about disabled issues where none of the invited speakers had lived experience of disability.

As Gender Recognition reform is a matter for UK and Scottish Parliament legislation in which local councils have no locus, I can only assume that the purpose of your email is to identify those who support trans rights and add them to one of your wee lists – Hi!

You know very well that the proposed reforms to the GRA do not offer new rights to trans people nor do they remove rights from any women. “The potential effect on children and young people from the proposed gender recognition reform” is very emotive isn’t it? Especially when you consider that the proposed legislation does not include any changes to the rights of children.

You do not speak for me. I support the rights of all women.

To be clear, please feel free to add me to your so-called ‘women’s rights campaign’s’ list of women candidates that you intend to encourage your ‘gender critical’ associates not to vote for in the council elections.

Wishing you the day you deserve

Councillor Janine Calikes (She/her)'

This is an elected representative.

Wow. Imagine if elected representatives took the time to listen to the voices of different people in their communities, not only the voices they agreed with. She sounds out of her depth in this role.

That's awful WaitWhat.
but do not advertise any transgender speakers

Sounds like she's advocating for people to out their gender identity publicly? That's really bad form.

You know very well that the proposed reforms to the GRA do not offer new rights to trans people nor do they remove rights from any women. “The potential effect on children and young people from the proposed gender recognition reform” is very emotive isn’t it? Especially when you consider that the proposed legislation does not include any changes to the rights of children.

This is so disingenuous and demonstrates exactly why debate is needed ffs!

I do agree with you OP apart from one point. Why is it that some of these trans women feel they need to compete with women in sports even if they do have the right to. There is such a thing as morals and frankly i think they should be accepting of the fact they are male - therefore not a woman but a transwoman and that means they need to be treated differently. Any transwoman that feels its right to invade womens sports and womens spaces (and not all of them do) has to take responsibility for that. Lia doesnt have to compete against women - she chooses to. She could compete against men or campaign for a mixed group. People like her are part of the problem

@Baggingarea

Sorry I meant somebody born male. I just don’t get why saying let’s not be horrendous to an individual is oppressing womens legal rights? There should be a middle ground where everyone (or at least most of us) are happy. Sorry if I’m naive.

Any middle ground has to start with intellectual honesty and clarity, such as sex and gender being mutually exclusive. Those are words with actual definitions, and they are not interchangeable. Any middle ground has to start by using those terms properly.

There can be no productive discussion, let alone any middle ground found without acceptance and acknowledgement that biological men and biological women are physically different, and that trans men are biological women, and trans women are biological men.

People like her are part of the problem

Using her for a male is a big part of the problem.

I was reading an article about Emily Bridges (sic?) earlier. I know eb is a man because of fwr.

However, the whole article called her she, trans and constantly referenced hormone levels. If I didn't know better I'd have assumed she was a trans man (so a female) or a female with a dsd.

I studied language as part of my degree. We looked at how words can shape someone's opinions and absorption of information. Eg. Using slaughter instead of killed and the emotive response resultant from that.

You can't tell me that using she and her, most marginalised, vulnerable etc etc is not having an impact on how far this has been allowed to go.

Because it absolutely has.

It is key.

So no, op I won't be calling Lia anything other than a male, because to skate around it is misleading and damaging and worth a lot more than the hurting feelings of someone who is engaged in an immoral act.

I sympathise, OP, my tendancy is towards peacemaking and finding practical solutions to move forward from polarised debate. It takes courage to reject the relative safety of either entrenched group and to stand in what Brené Brown calls the wilderness, and to get to the heart of the matter and form your own opinion rather than just picking a side. I think it's a good instinct to have.

When faced with a hugely polarised issue such as this, I get really curious about why people think or act differently from how I do and that helps me to understand where they are coming from, even if I still disagree.

Initially, though the concept of gender identity seemed to rely on sexist stereotypes and conflicted with my feminist beliefs, I too thought the rhetoric from some GC feminists was insensitive and unkind. I feel compassion for those suffering from body dysphoria and I thought the directness of referring to people by their unwanted sex characteristics was uncharitable and unnecessary. I wanted to be respectful of gender non-conforming people living their best lives, whilst critiquing the logic of adopting their dysphoric thinking as biological, legal fact given some of the (I thought) unintended consequences for women.

In the end, as I have learned more, and seen more consequences and outlandish demands and boundary pushing and downright hypocrisy the utter disregard for females, for how we wish to identify or organise ourselves - I have understood better why GC feminists are so focused on honesty and clarity and will refer to male bodies and attributes.

One of the main reasons for this is that language affects perception so much particularly combined with short circuiting logic like "TWAW". Something that can sound harmlessly inclusive of Transpeople in the disembodied online space, but completely impractical when dealing with physical sexed bodies in prisons, medicines or sports.

If you'd like to learn more I would highly recommend the book, Material Girls , or even better her audiobook read by the author. She is very compassionate towards trans people and dives into gender ideology and the consequences of this legal and social fiction.

Another book I would highly recommend for you, not directly about the conflict between women's rights and gender ideology but about the many ways in which women have been disadvantaged by our differing physiology not being accounted for in many areas of life and why all of this matters is Invisible Women . I thought I knew what feminism was needed for before that book but I had no idea really of how pervasive man as default human has been into all areas of human knowledge, technology work and life and the consequences of that for women today.

Growing long hair and a putting on a dress doesn't scratch the surface of what it means to be a woman. How could it possibly?

I meant to say, and I don't recall the origin of the quote, but something that sticks in my mind when people draw false equivalence about the abuse on both sides of the debate.

Men secretly fear women will laugh at them.
Women secretly fear men will kill them.

Women mocking males who have transitioned may not be kind but it is not the equivalent of the violence directed at females guilty of having an opinion males do not like.

That quote seems to be attributed to Margaret Atwood.

Men secretly fear women will laugh at them
Women secretly fear men will kill them.

Yes Fukuraptor. This feeds into my point regarding 'proportionality'.

Women are being shamed for being direct, and yes, some do cross the line in calling transitioned males their 'deadnames' and such. But it fades into the shadows of the magnitude of the threats that come from extremist trans activists.

Even on TikTok.

twitter.com/janeclarejones/status/1509487305425399814?s=20&t=dy7CGYoB1OFKKJhNV2VLBw

How is this ever considered OK? There was one recently done in the toilet that used that same kind of attitude. Basically, that no female who wanted single sex toilets should ever feel safe going to a public toilet.

There is nothing like this coming from feminists. Feminists may dissect something to the nth degree to understand it, but I have never seen a feminist make videos that threatened trans people with violent overtones like this.

It is just not proportionate. That is why 'both sides' is not only unfair and incorrect, it is dangerous. It emboldens males to make videos like this. It spreads the myth that feminists are making rape and death threats to transitioned males.

I always think of Germaine Greer's quote in respect to this debate - 'Women have very little idea of how much men hate them.'

The current woman hating rhetoric has been the ideal opportunity for all the incels and men who truly despise women to openly say what they really feel, and for it to be socially accepted, even encouraged.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

A line from the US Constitution no mention of women, or even people just shows how entrenched the belief is that men are the default, superior human.

Frankly, I am sick and tired of women being viewed as some form of sub human second class that has to give way and prioritise men all the time because men feel they are entitled to being so treated. The males in female sport is an absolute window on this, the rules re being decided by men for men and women are not worthy of consideration. The attitude that women are merely sub par men due to less testosterone ffs.

I wonder though if those declaring that it is sporting organisations that should be stepping up and that it is 'not the fault' of transitioned males who are participating in female's sports understand just how infantilising that is to those males. Those male have complete agency to make decisions.

Like we know that there are transitioned males who still use the male toilets. And do so without any issues other than some initial comments which they don't take offence to. Because they know that females have very real reasons for not wanting males in the toilets. Sadly, they seem to be the minority. But they are out there, being the very essence of 'expanding the bandwidth' of what it is to be male.

I agree with MyLittlePhoneyPony on pronoun use:

Using her for a male is a big part of the problem.

I make a point IRL of saying 'he' when talking about Lia Thomas or Emily Bridges if I am not using their name. It makes everything so much more straightforward. It jars a bit the first time you hear it/do it but once you get over that it is much easier to speak the truth. Emily Bridges is a man. Lia Thomas is a man. If Lia had walked poolside in speedos and with short hair the unfairness would have been even more obvious. Why are these men competing in the women's events? It is not right or fair.

Consider 'Poor Lia, she just wants to compete against and then get undressed in a communal changing room with the other girls' compared to 'Poor Lia, he just wants to compete against the girls and then get undressed in a communal changing room with the girls'

Subtle change in language, but in the first sentence it seems like the girls are unreasonable and unkind, in the second it is obvious why Lia should not be doing either thing!

uncommongroundmedia.com/banned-from-medium-pronouns-are-rohypnol/

[quote Baggingarea]@PrelateChuckles I’ve been ignoring you because you are quite antagonistic and quite quick to twist my words. You are also wildly leaping to conclusions about me which is tiresome.

I believe if someone wants to change gender they should be respected while they transition. I also believe all genders should have access to the privacy they want. In terms of competing with sport I think professional bodies need to sort this out. I’m not sure how else I can say this![/quote]
But what if transwomen don't want privacy? What if instead they want affirmation and validation, which they can only get by being accepted in female-sex-only spaces?

Is your solution to abolish (phase out) ALL single-sex spaces / services / roles / sports / etc. ?

I believe that as long as ANY single-sex space / service / award / sport / prize / role / job / etc. exists, there will be a transwoman claiming the right to it.

Which is unacceptable to me.

@tabbycatstripy

‘Tell me, why are Lia Thomas' pictures being posted as part of these arguments, if not to enforce certain standards of femininity?’

It’s not about femininity. The images just show that Thomas is male, and that’s the whole debate done.

They do not, in fact, show that.

[quote NancyDrawed]I agree with MyLittlePhoneyPony on pronoun use:

Using her for a male is a big part of the problem.

I make a point IRL of saying 'he' when talking about Lia Thomas or Emily Bridges if I am not using their name. It makes everything so much more straightforward. It jars a bit the first time you hear it/do it but once you get over that it is much easier to speak the truth. Emily Bridges is a man. Lia Thomas is a man. If Lia had walked poolside in speedos and with short hair the unfairness would have been even more obvious. Why are these men competing in the women's events? It is not right or fair.

Consider 'Poor Lia, she just wants to compete against and then get undressed in a communal changing room with the other girls' compared to 'Poor Lia, he just wants to compete against the girls and then get undressed in a communal changing room with the girls'

Subtle change in language, but in the first sentence it seems like the girls are unreasonable and unkind, in the second it is obvious why Lia should not be doing either thing!

uncommongroundmedia.com/banned-from-medium-pronouns-are-rohypnol/[/quote]
Yeah, you use the language you do for the purpose of alienating, othering, and villifying trans people, that is certainly clear.

One pp said that I’m not dealing in facts. Who made the rules that I should deal in facts and not emotions?

We all have feelings; who decides whose feeling should be prioritised? Do you think legislation should be based on facts or feelings? Can you see any problems with relying on feelings to inform policy? It's possible you feel attacked because facts will always demolish feelings no matter how strong the emotion is. I think "facts don't care about your feelings" neatly sums up how redundant emotions in constructive debate.

Yes, the thing about pronouns as a courtesy is for it to work everyone has to know that it's a falsehood.

With Lia for example, if you don't know the facts and read that the 'other girls don't want to change with her because she drops her towel' you might mistakenly think that's unnecessary bullying.

Or if I'm off on a business meeting and they say Pony, you are sharing with Jane. She'll be in with you for five days in a twin room, it hides what is at best socially uncomfortable and invasive, at worst a safeguarding risk.

And as someone who is very familiar with CRB checks and how fallible they are, I think dead names are a very dodgy concept.

“Yes, the thing about pronouns as a courtesy is for it to work everyone has to know that it's a falsehood.”

That's the thing; it isn't a falsehood. You've just come to associate feminine pronouns with certain body types and physical characteristics, but there's nothing inherently "factual" about that association.

Men are not women.
They are other. The other sex.
Sex based pronouns are sex based.
There are hundreds of neo pronouns to express whatever gender identity you want to express.
Most humans understand pronouns as sex based.
So you'd do well to find your own words.

Our words like our spaces are not up for grabs.

Following on from FOJNs point, I wonder if op has any questions regarding facts they would like to know. (That's assuming that they haven't read the Break it down thread.)

@VestofAbsurdity

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal

A line from the US Constitution no mention of women, or even people just shows how entrenched the belief is that men are the default, superior human.

Frankly, I am sick and tired of women being viewed as some form of sub human second class that has to give way and prioritise men all the time because men feel they are entitled to being so treated. The males in female sport is an absolute window on this, the rules re being decided by men for men and women are not worthy of consideration. The attitude that women are merely sub par men due to less testosterone ffs.

I'm pretty sure you're the ones most adamant about women being physically inferior (and therefore in need of a completely separate category), whereas trans people are the ones arguing that sex shouldn't matter and that all people should be treated as equal.

whereas trans people are the ones arguing that sex shouldn't matter and that all people should be treated as equal.

If sex doesn't matter and everyone is equal, what are they transing from and to?

Honestly this nonsense has to stop.