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!

Historically sex and gender are used interchangeably in UK law, simply because they always used to mean the same thing. They both referred to sex, but the word gender was seen as politer as sex was seen as a rude word because it is also used to mean intercourse.

Now that gender has taken on a new meaning this conflation in law will need to be resolved at some point.

It is important to be clear when a law refers either:
Sex - women/men
Legal sex - women+transwomen with GRC/men+transmen with GRC
Gender - women+those that identify as women/men+those that identify as men and/or non binary etc

terfs
bullying
throwing trans women to the wolves
mean girls

Op was the one that set the tone so can't really complain when they receive a bit of heat back.

They seemed to almost desperately want them to be different though.

To me, it was almost like OP wanted reassurance that they were not like regular posters on this board.

That was what she basically said in the last paragraph of the OP. She didn't see why should be called a "terf". Well, you and me, both.

Even after OP cleared up their thoughts from some assumptions, they still continued. Some people were (imo) being deliberately obtuse and fine if thats how they want to crack on but it's not realistic to expect a real discussion to continue if that's the case and I would've also gone on the defensive. But anyway, doesn't matter, it's done now.

@Crazykatie

I will probably get this post deleted for expressing an opinion.

If any man wants to become female, fine, but he should also get his bits removed and become a eunuch, then I would have no objection at all to changing in the same space.

Emasculation I’m sure would reduce the number wanting to become trans dramatically.

The agitators' response to this is that 'what's in my pants is none of your business'. It's a fair point - Lord knows I have zero interest in their tackle - UNTIL you take into account the context. This toxic, abusive movement apparently sees no problem in helping themselves to what's in other people's pants, namely women's, considering how often they threaten them with rape for the smallest dissent. It's also odd that they apparently know exactly what a woman is when it comes to where they direct those threats.

Their second argument is that you can't police who can or can't enter women's facilities based on a genital inspection. I'll give them that one. So the best solution all round is NO natal males/people with penises, in women's spaces, no matter how they present their 'gender'.

OP @Baggingarea have you seen this?
m.youtube.com/watch?v=38cwRMuYJ6w

It's being discussed here... www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4518170--USA-vid-interview-with-male-prison-officer-regarding-male-trans-prisoners-Shocking

Maybe you can pop over and give your thoughts on it there? Do you find yourself falling on any one side of the fence or still caught in the middle?

Even after OP cleared up their thoughts from some assumptions, they still continued.

Not seeing that much "clearing up" to be honest. Or acknowledgment that the OP was simplistic, biased and goady.

@StrawberryLollipops I've already posted it so hope OP has watched it.

And the atmosphere was set by that OP.

They did grudgingly acknowledge that they set that tone. But then didn’t engage in a different way.

But they certainly set the tone with that OP. I considered it hostile as an opening post myself, and said so at the time. To me it wasn’t ‘clumsy’, it was telling us that they didn’t want to be considered a terf on a board where we are called terfs constantly.

That OP was not so different from posts that appear here regularly that result in posters being further denigrated within future posts. Often on the first page.

Sorry. I was too late.

I think the "yeah but both sides, trans people are oppressed but I sort of get why women want to keep their rights, although I think they're mean in how they express it" would be harder to maintain if OP watched the video Strawberry and I have both posted.

Eresh, I suspect that people using that ’yeah but both sides, trans people are oppressed but I sort of get why women want to keep their rights, although I think they're mean in how they express it" Have never watched prominent activists pile on Helen Stanisland using sexual harassment to try to stop her asking her question.

Have never actually thought about the activists posting porn on the Ickabog tweets where parents where showing their children Joanne Rowling’s tweets about their work.

They take a very detached macro view and cannot acknowledge the complete lack of proportion and the difference in intent between the two.

It comes across as sanctimoniousness while the rest of us actually are trying to do something about the issues being discussed. That may not be there intention at all, but that it the impact.

I tried to go through and work out where you thought op 'cleared up' their view.

It goes:
Says sports should be sex segregated but up to sports to do this. No responsibility for trans.
Changing rooms everyone happy.
Uses terf as a slur.

Blamed sports officials (ignoring all other contexts, one of which they themselves brought up in op)

Middle ground fluff. No substance.

Women and trans second fiddled comment. (Nice forced teaming.)

Both sides accusation.

Accusation of being attacked.

Mad hyperbole both sides accusation.

Posting pictures of Lia I'd hateful.

Etc.

What exactly do you think was cleared up.

The only thing clear to me is op has a very set mindset they don't wanna terf, whilst expressing some terfy views, but they play it safe by pretending trans women have no agency or are pushing for these things which harm women.

Clear as mud.

It was this.

I now know there is history to this that I wasn’t aware of

Of course, it was sandwiched between doubling down. But if you take an optimistic view, this is a some kind of acknowledgement.

They also then admitting they don’t like their posts being scrutinized and ‘pulled apart’.

You forgot the bit about women pointing out the issues for female people and providing evidence are piling on instead of respecting a 'different view' (that they shouldn't defend their rights).

I cannot imagine my first post on the cat lover boards implying that I didn’t want to be seen as a crazy cat lady* and then complaining bitterly that my post was not received well.

(*using this an analogy only)

You’re certainly confused if you think women are “bullying” trans people online.

It is the other way around. If a woman dares speak out to say they’re concerned about the safety of women and girls, they’re branded transphobic and cancelled. Which is why few are brave enough to speak in their own names, myself included.

You think someone with a penis belongs in womens spaces? Do you think rape victims and women fleeing from domestic violence should have to share spaces with males with penises?

Many TW take no hormones and have no surgery. You think these people belong in womens spaces?

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1395838117635149832.html

What about hospital wards (where a woman was raped by a TW and the hospital denied it happened) and prisons?

What about female sport? You think Lia Thomas and Emily Bridges belong in the womens events?

Any woman who isn’t concerned about this stuff should take a long hard look at themselves

A pp made a very good point upthread (apologies, can't remember who) in response to the accusations of 'meanness' for citing specific people/photos/news reports of crimes that, due to the obscuration of statistics in a general sense (rapists being recorded as female for example), we then do have to use specific examples.

And that is in response to MRA's demanding examples and then saying 'your examples are soooo mean!'

The reason I lurked for about a year was to understand the background of the discussion so I wouldn't wade in without the knowledge to back me up. The OP said in an early post that they are new to the debate but don't really have the time to read up on the background and is depending on others to inform her. Strange then that the initial OP and further posts by the OP have been so antagonistic.

@Waitwhat23 oh god the being told actual examples of people is mean drives me mad. Or they say it’s “just one” or “women commit sexual assault too!”

Do they think we’re morons?

Interesting reading so thanks for bringing it up @Baggingarea

Maybe another perspective to look at it would be this. Bringing this discussion right back to the forefront of what happens in peoples lives. Put yourself in this situation - and I'm going to personalise it so it really brings it back down to real life.

You personally go into a woman's toilet/changing room and you see MY husband standing next to you in there getting changed/coming into/out of the next toilet cubicle. I'm not there. It appears he is on his own. He's a stranger to you. You don't know him. But he's an outwardly presenting male. He's getting changed. There isn't any ambiguity in his presentation. He's not looking at you in any particular way not is he

How does that make you feel? How about if you had your teenage daughter with you? Would it make you feel any different then?

It's also quite striking that she felt she could "vent" here and imply that "terfs" (a misogynistic slur TRAs have used about many of us) are wrong, I doubt she'd feel so able to "vent" in a TRA space.

The mask dropped fairly quickly here, and should add the disclaimer that I am by no means a regular, but a sporadic poster who's been here a while. And I've seen how these arguments have developed. What some of those late to the TRA party might not have seen is that this oh-so-reasonable position is where most of us started. In accordance with our hard-to-break female conditioning we were reasonable, showed some sympathy with the (entirely separate) plight of transwomen as opposed to women, wanted a compromise and attempted to discuss ways to achieve that.

What we got? Cf. Maya Forstater. Cf. Kathleen Stock. Cf. Martina Navratilova, J K Rowling, Sharron Davies, Rosie Duffield, and even transsexuals like Miranda Yardley or Rose of Dawn, are ample evidence of that.

Rowling received enough death threats to paper her house, Forstater ended up in a tribunal, Stock was hounded out of her job, Yardley was sued by (get this) a non-trans-person for transphobia. Lewis Carroll couldn't have done a better job of turning it all topsy turvey.

Bearing the above in mind it's quite easy to see how the position has hardened in one-time moderates and formerly natural allies like me. Five years ago I'd have been most surprised to hear the epithet 'bigot' applied to me and who actively fought for and backed gay rights to the hilt.

Now, if I spoke my real views openly, I'd stand an excellent risk of being fired, and as a victim of certain male abusive behaviour might have to endure the (extremely triggering) experience of a rape threat.

Sorry - who was it you said were the 'mean girls' again? We've been where you are. Reasonable discussion and compromise won't work. It's all or nothing, or you too will be branded a [banned well-worn acronym deleted].

I haven’t disappeared just working.

The OP said in an early post that they are new to the debate but don't really have the time to read up on the background and is depending on others to inform her. Strange then that the initial OP and further posts by the OP have been so antagonistic.

It sounds at best that they want to outsource their thinking. I know that's very fashionable nowadays but not a good move in my eyes.

But seeing as how the op has taken hardly anything on board I doubt this was the real intention.

I think there is a lot of reaching going on in this thread! Can’t be bothered trying to have a conversation when some people are making assumptions about what I think with no clear evidence. Also I never said “cis gendered” so not sure where that’s come from.

There’s plenty of reading to be done on the sex and gender boards OP. Perhaps do some research before coming and insulting a load of women with a slur used to denigrate us by TRAs.