Fell out with oldest friend over trans issues discussion

[Babyloniaroma]

I'm so upset. Was at her place at the weekend and the subject came up in conversation. She refused to believe that traditional single-sex women only spaces are under threat from trans activists and all the rest of it. At the height of the conversation, she told me "not to believe everything you see on the internet". I explained to her that "the internet" also included on-line access to a variety of newspapers etc. At this point she walked off, saying I was insulting her intelligence. I felt she had insulted my intelligence by implying that I took information at face value from on-line sources (eg facebook?) and applied no critical thinking of my own.

I did follow her through to the kitchen and said I was not implying that she was stupid etc.

We got through the rest of the evening with our partners and had a civilised and outwardly friendly time, but inside I was so upset and currently I don't know how I feel about my friendship with my oldest mate anymore (40+ years).

I have not written out here the ins and outs of the conversation itself as it would take it too much space. But I am so sad and disappointed that a mature and otherwise very sensible and aware woman can be so dismissive about the trans debate. She is also an avid reader and writer and claimed to be unaware (or did not care) about all the abuse aimed at JK Rowling and other prominent women. She had walked off before I could get around to mentioning Kathleen Stock, Maya Forstater, etc etc.

Both our partners responded differently to the debate as it played out. My friend's husband kept disappearing into the kitchen as he clearly did not want to get involved. Mine did back me as he understands the trans issues. Afterwards I asked him what he thought about the outcome. His view was that I had a better argument as I presented several facts and references, but she lost (and could not refute points) which is why she resorted to a cheap jibe about my getting information from the internet and then walking off in a huff.

This whole trans debate can be really difficult to handle, yet I feel it is wrong to avoid airing the issues in company, for the sake of a quiet life and not risking falling out with friends. But I have come to the conclusion that there are many women who wish to deny or ignore the issues that are out there - and these women would describe themselves as modern, intelligent, self-aware and feminists. I feel at a total loss and very sad.

That is remarkable!

And yet... if misogyny, or even a fraction of the hate crimes against women were included under hate crime, what do you think that the increase with be there?

Either way, readers might also find this pertinent and interesting.

www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2021-to-2022/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2021-to-2022

"due to significant improvements in police recorded crime made in recent years, it is uncertain to what degree the increase in police recorded hate crime is a genuine rise, or due to continued recording improvements and more victims having the confidence to report these crimes to the police"

Plus:

'Transgender identity hate crimes rose by 56 per cent (from 2,799 to 4,355) over the same period, the largest percentage annual increase in these offences since the series began. Transgender issues have been heavily discussed on social media over the last year, which may have led to an increase in related hate crimes.'

and

"A hate crime is any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person to be motivated by a hostility or prejudice based on:"

a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender, including people who are transsexual, transgender, cross dressers and those who hold a Gender Recognition Certificate under the Gender Recognition Act 2004

Considering we already know of several people who have indeed been reported for 'hate crimes' due to their social media activity which does include being untowards to paedophiles and for stickering and using words that people don't like, I think that you might want to revisit your assertion of "we're the ones who need to do proper research."

You have misgendered trans women on this thread multiple times

Circumferences has??? Really?

I think you are mistaken. Or are you treating Circumferences as everyone on this thread? Like everyone is just one dehumanised entity?

Either way, please do report any hate, or any misgendering, here on this thread. If the posts still stand, then it is not really 'misgendering', it is just you not liking the words people use.

And have you flounced, or are just going to stop engaging with Circumferences?

Your post is incoherent as well as very hyperbolic.

So much so that "You don't seem able to defend your opinions in an intelligent evidence based way, or without resorting to outright discriminatory remarks" seems to be just projection.

So if it makes it easier for some people to live their lives, and negotiate the gendered norms and expectations placed on them by society, if I call them by a different name and pronouns, and accept that they are - at least for some purposes - a man (in the case of a trans man) or a woman (in the case of a trans woman), then I am more than happy to do that.

You might be. Many people are not, it's simply not realistic to expect that everyone will validate your identity. It's not kind to pretend that most people see them as the opposite sex.

Neither of those things qualify as hate crimes, but yeah, we're the ones who need to do proper research.

What do you think qualify as hate crimes? Because I think you'll find you can use certain laws (harassment, malicious communications, public order) to cover quite a lot.

And they'd likely be dwarfed by the tsunami of hatred towards women, which conveniently doesn't qualify.

which despite what you see online is actually the majority of the population, including the majority of women.

Again, the devil is in the detail. Most women support the woolly idea of "people being allowed to identify as another gender" (who would stop them) but when it comes to legal changes or intact males in women's spaces, they are less enthusiastic, and it's a resounding no. Do your research.

I've had similar situations with an old friend (male) who worked for a very 'progressive' london agency with young staff and was full one TWAW/ just Be Kind etc.
My politics have always been right of his, but on this issue he just wouldn't accept I was anything other than a full-on bigot.

I found it really strange, as he has two daughters (now grown up), both of whom could easily have been sucked into being convinced they were transgender (one autistic/ geek), the other goth/ anti-pink girly stuff. Although they went through typical adolescent explorations of their sexuality, both are now in firmly heterosexual long-term relationships.

I just used to keep asking questions to try to make him think it through:

• why did he send his daughter to an all-girls school?
• why did he collect his daughter late at night and not let her walk home alone? What might have happened?
• Why did he not let his daughter go camping alone with an older male friend when she was 14/15? If the male friend announced they were a trans girl the week before the trip would that be OK?
• would he be happy with a transwoman giving intimate care to his elderly mother with dementia? What if that TW had a social media feed with lots of AGP content? Would that change anything?

He used to squirm and tell me 'not to be ridiculous' and get annoyed and say he 'wasn't going to be baited' etc and I'd just leave it there.

His wife is a very good tennis player and by this time she had come around to a more GC view of things, as she realised we were heading towards men winning women's tennis tournaments, but she wasn't willing to talk to him about the issue.

Bizarrely, it was only when something close to his own heart came to light that my male friend began to change his mind a bit. He was a rower at uni and highly competitive. A news report recently about TW taking women's places in a mixed team peaked him I think, and he started saying 'things had gone a bit too far' and some things 'needed to be thought through'.

No.

This is not 'just like gay people' at all.

That is a very weak argument that falls at the very first hurdle.

Ita not about being gender critical at all, it is the fact yer saying all the dsame things about trans people as people did about guys, it was bullshit then and its bullshit now

@Whippet so bloke is all 'be kind', until it starts to affect too close to home, then it's all 'hang on, not 'that kind'!'.

If anyone on this thread has blanket called all transpeople child abusers or 'dirty', the post should be reported. That isn't acceptable.

For instance sports, many female sports people have higher testosterone levels than transwoman.

Are you trying to bring in people with differences of sex development here?

Yes, SOME males have no source of testosterone and aim to have very small amounts. But, the sporting organisations that have set the limits at 5 or 10 nmol/L are much higher than female levels. If females have testosterone levels of 5, it is likely they are quite ill and may have a tumour.

Athletes such as those with DSD or VSDs that have been in the headlines for years, are males not females. Please do not spread misinformation. It is harmful to woman and girls to spread this false information.

My problem is that people are using the same arguments against trans people as they did gay people 30 years ago

FFS

Same sex attracted people did not demand language to be changed to suit them, they demanded equal rights compared to those people who were heterosexual. People making these comparisons have made a comparator error.

Homosexual males were not demanding that safeguarding risk assessments for their inclusion were less than other males. They were demanding, rightly, that they were treated as ALL males were treated. Trans people are demanding that they are treated as a special group of males where the risk should be considered to be at female levels, which is harmful to all females.

What else have you got?

Because currently your hit rate is pretty off.

"Alot of you seem to have fallen for the shite the MSM feeds you."

And projection again.... gosh. there seems of lot of this projection today.

maybe just maybe they are right and you are wrong?

Well, it's possible, certainly, but I haven't yet seen any compelling evidence that people can choose sex. If you have some, I'm willing to take it into consideration.

My problem is that people are using the same arguments against trans people as they did gay people 30 years ago.

They aren't though, are they? If you listened to the arguments that we're making rather than the wilful misinterpretation, you'd know that.

Good point, I have reported @Theeyeballsinthesky for above post including misgendering

How about we just keep our noses out of other people's bisi ess and let people live how ever makes them happy

Because it isn't all about them, and their freedom to swing their arms ends where my nose begins.

You are far more likely to be attacked by a heterosexual male than a trans woman even in a woman only space
So? You could also correctly say: You are far more likely to be attacked by a heterosexual male than a heterosexual male with a wooden leg even in a woman only space. The only reason your sentence is true is because there are fewer trans women NOT because of a difference in sex.

Sport, the trans lady earlier this year got beat by a cis woman so no not necessarily stronger.
So why does ONE example outweigh the thousands of examples the other way round? Why are men consistently faster and stronger in athletics? And why do you think women's sports don't matter?

How about we just keep our noses out of other people's bisi ess and let people live how ever makes them happy cause like is hard enough as it is
Does that include the girls who have no chance of winning against males but are expected to put aside their own dreams in the name of inclusion? Why arent they allowed a chance?

How about we just keep our noses out of other people's bisi ess and let people live how ever makes them happy

Are women included in the people allowed to make themselves happy? I've been reading about JK Rowling setting up an extra rape crisis centre in Edinburgh, to help the women there who are unable to use the current one because it mixes the sexes. There is a remarkable amount of pushback that basically seems to be saying those women ought to be left to be unhappy.

"Sport, the trans lady earlier this year got beat by a cis woman so no not necessarily stronger."

So..... let us be very clear. Just because a male is a mediocre athlete, it is ok for them to compete as a female.

Do you even say what you write out loud?

To extrapolate out your line of thought, a race where males get podium places in a female event is fine if a female still wins? Forget about all the other females and their right to have fair competition.

Shall we look at other categories athletes from other categories should be allowed to enter if they identify with that category?

How about a cycling race where a cyclist with an electric motor on the bike doesn't win but gained a place that should have gone to a cyclist using leg power?

Is that ok crazieladie?

How about a person who dopes? Is that ok? If they don't identify as a doper?

How about a 25 year old competing in an under 12's sports category? Is that ok if they don't win?
How about that same 25 year old competing in the over 75 year old category? Is that ok because they don't win?

How about a person who has perfect vision competing in a blind person's category? Is that ok because they don't win?

If you had any understanding of the human body and puberty at all, you would understand that a weakened male still has advantages that a female body does not have and many other advantages.

Just because they have deliberately weakened themselves doesn't mean they can compete against a 'weaker' category.

And did you miss the IOC's statement that they realise there are advantages but they seek to prioritise inclusion over advantages?

Perhaps you need to start reading more widely.

Sure. At least you will know what 'misgendering' covers these days. I am sure that eyeballs who has been posting on this site for years wants to know what misgendering covers these days too.

Misgendering has moved on a great deal in the past 12 months. You might not like it, but I think you might find that people are no longer accepting compelled speech for many reasons.

Saying a person is a man when they are male as per the dictionary definition might seem horrific to you, but to others it is a belief that they have stated. You have stated that you are more than happy to support people in their belief they have indeed changed sex.

Each of those issues involves different factors and risks that have to be carefully considered and weighed by those best qualified to do so.

I happen to believe that women are also best qualified to assess and consider how these issues impact them. If they do not wish to support someone in their belief that they are 'just like them' as a woman, and chooses not to use the language that is not 'requested' but demanded (as per your action of reporting) then that is their decision. I find those who have a hardened stance have seen the demand creep and are rejecting those demands.

I happen to believe that women are also best qualified to assess and consider how these issues impact them. If they do not wish to support someone in their belief that they are 'just like them' as a woman, and chooses not to use the language that is not 'requested' but demanded (as per your action of reporting) then that is their decision. I find those who have a hardened stance have seen the demand creep and are rejecting those demands.

This. I'm best qualified to decide that a female only space is something I need for my privacy and dignity at certain times.

"It probably sounds like you are a terrible bigot if you do that, and that is how it seems to your friend, or in fact anybody who stands for trans rights, which despite what you see online is actually the majority of the population, including the majority of women."

I do love it though when a poster has such an inept grasp of the realities of what the majority of the population think though.

As soon as you start seeing this bollocks in a post, you can pretty much tick off the bingo card for the rest of the post.

archive.ph/QYtYq

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/two-thirds-of-voters-oppose-snps-gender-reform-plans-d8wh3wh9w

Guess this post didn't really age well in light of yet another decisive polling.

"The poll found that 60 per cent of people opposed plans to remove the need for a doctor’s diagnosis of gender dysphoria, with opinion steady across both sexes, supporters of all political parties and every age group except those aged between 16 and 24. Twenty per cent of voters were in favour of the change, with 20 per cent unsure."

Just 20% of voters in Scotland were in favour of 'self ID'. 20%

Hardly a 'majority'. Unless 'majority' now means the opposite also...

what was that poster saying about doing research ......

"yeah, we're the ones who need to do proper research."

You know research requires you to look further than twitter, yes?

To get back to the OP

i have a pair of good friends that I have been talking to about this on and off for years

initially their response was very much ‘you’ve been radicalised’. It was suggested that I should stop reading the Times because it was manipulating me into being anti trans

they’ve both recently had trans ‘stuff’ crop up in their professional lives and they don’t like it much and are pretty clear it’s bonkers. They’re about where I was 4 years ago

I haven’t done any I told you so-ing because I value the friendship and I’m really, really mature.

but the fact that their go to assumption was that I was wrong and bigoted did hurt at the time. I don’t know what the answer is other than time. As the Overton window shifts, most people will shift with it, without even realising they’ve done it

The situation OP describes happened to me literally today. My close friend agrees that trans women should not be in women's sports, but as for the other issues around trans women in female prisons or changing rooms she basically is of the school of "show me the evidence that this happens and specifically that is happens here in the US". And this woman has worked with violent men and battered women for decades, but she knows some trans women she doesn't consider a threat so as far as she is concerned it doesn't happen.

For a supposed lawyer, you really are one of the most immature people I’ve seen on this board.

Oh the Emperor Has No Clothes crime of misgendering. It's so tedious and immature. There are slurs that denigrate people based on ethnicity, sex, race, religion and disability in order to put them down, make them seem evil or inferior. But correctly noting someone's sex must be considered on par with those wrongs. So very different.