Transmaxxing

[pattihews]

Article in Unherd by Mary Harrington about 'transmaxxing', a phenomenon in which young men transition because they can, not because they have dysphoria but in some vague hope of having sex with sympathetic women.

It's reminded me of Ollie London, who assumed that just because you can do something (in his case have surgery to make him look Korean) it's okay. No ideological awareness, no ethics, just a why not? kind of attitude.

unherd.com/thepost/why-are-incels-turning-themselves-into-girls/

The thing is, @EastLondonObserver We know the Canadian teacher is a man in comedy boobs but the Canadian authorities are taking his 'gender expression' seriously. We know Dylan Mulvaney is a man taking the piss out of women but President Biden took him seriously. We know that Karen White is an extremely dangerous sick joke but the prison authorities take his 'transwoman' identity seriously. Seeing as you can also see the joke in all this, perhaps you could be the one to point it out to the chaps in authority who haven't figured it out yet?

I see outliers as inevitable, and through working on better safeguards and policy any issues they present can hopefully be overcome.

You guys see them as intractable barriers that invalidate self-ID, trans people in trad women’s spaces etc.

It’s not my job to have all the answers. But it is my perigative (as it is yours) to decide which course of action I want to support. For me, this is greater accommodation of trans people in society.

Luckily, the western world increasingly agrees with me, whatever jargon-heavy sniping goes down here and in other snake pits of the internet.

For me, this is greater accommodation of trans people in society.

Well, of course. Transmen present no threat to you whatsoever.

Women are at risk from males, but that's a sacrifice you're willing to make.

It’s a “sacrifice” I think that can be worked through so it doesn’t become one.

You guys have already decided it can’t be.

Again, the wind isn’t blowing in your favour.

But, @EastLondonObserver If you allow one man to say he is a woman and therefore allow him into women's spaces you cannot discriminate against ANY man who says he is a woman. It doesn't matter why he says he is a woman, whether he believes it himself or not, whatever his personality or motivation, you cannot discriminate. You therefore have to allow all of these 'outliers' the same right as other men to say they are women unless you can decide on a cut off point or some rules. As we saw in Scotland, any suggested rules or safeguards were rejected because trans activists cannot accept anyone who says they are trans being told 'no'.

I have no problem with people being gender non conforming, in fact I celebrate it. What I have a problem with is people lying about their sex and expecting others to go along with that lie. There really is no practical reason why a man NEEDS to say he is a woman and use single sex spaces or compete in women's sport when he can maintain a 'feminine' identity and use male spaces or argue for a third space if he is not comfortable around other men.

ELO has made it clear he doesn't care about women, women's privacy, dignity or safety. It's bog standard misogyny.

I think more work can be done to manage and weed out outliers. You seem to assume I agree with every single piece of accommodation called for by the most ardent trans activists. I don’t.

The precise details of how every issue can be worked through isn’t my forte. But, as with the anxieties surrounding many prior social changes (some justified, some not), I see enough reason to believe they can be resolved around trans issues.

Gender-critical thinking is no less an ideology than queer theory. The most ardent supporters of both are never going to meet in the middle. In the meantime, more tolerant and practical people will develop solutions around the points of contention.

Yes some people were suspicious of homosexuality or felt a moral judgement that it was wrong. But the majority soon realised that gay people are no threat because the same rules apply to everyone; the same rules of consent, safeguarding, relationships.

The problem with the 'trans' debate is not the same. Take sport: the open and honest thing to argue would be: shall we change the rules so that men and women compete together in rugby, football, athletics? Is this the way forward? Should prisons be mixed sex? Maybe gay or disabled men would benefit from being in mixed sex prisons? Maybe this would be good for women too? Perhaps all rape support groups, all domestic violence refuges should be mixed sex? We could have an open and honest debate about this and balance out the pros and cons.

But no. Instead we have this bizarre situation where we say sport is single sex but if a man says he's a woman he can join in the women's team and everyone has to pretend not to notice he's a foot taller or is a balding 50 year old playing alongside 20 year old women. Etc etc. And women get shouted and spat at if we point out that biological sex is more important in certain areas of life than a 'gender' which you feel or choose or change.

"Luckily, the western world increasingly agrees with me, whatever jargon-heavy sniping goes down here and in other snake pits of the internet"

They really don't.

And gender critical thinking is not an "ideology".

It is based in science, and science is a FACT whether some people like it or not.
Those FACTS will still be true in 1000 years time.
Men cannot be women.

And nothing you and other followers of the ideology try to justify with your mental and linguistic gymnastics will change that.

@EastLondonObserver how is gender critical thinking an ideology? Don't you acknowledge that human existence relies on two sexes to create new life?

I appreciate that you are being a bit more nuanced in your thinking and trying to consider accomodations that could make acceptance of self ID workable but I went from being twaw to thinking there must be a compromise and thought lots of situations through to their logical conclusion until I got to a point of realisation that in some situations honesty about sex matters and that doesn't mean hating trans people or dismissing the mental anguish some of them feel, but we all have to live within certain boundaries and women have the right to preserve some spaces for ourselves.

Whether men can be women and on what exact terms snd the precise causes of transgenderism aren’t the key issues.

The fact is that there are people who identify as a certain gender. Doing so makes them happier. The groundswell of opinion (certainly among those in positions of power or likely to soon be in power - eg Labour) to to accommodate them more.

This is what is happening while you guys talk amongst yourselves on Mumsnet.

Thanks for that reply.

I disagree. Supposing gender ideology is adopted 100% by society; gender identity relies on gender stereotypes. These change with fashion. Even the traditional 'transwoman'' stereotype is seeming old fashioned with younger men with beards saying they're women. Over time more and more people will be 'gender neutral ' in their appearance or male/female clothes will be worn by both sexes until we come full circle and realise that the only real difference between humans is the practical reality of sex and we'll have to organised things all over again to make the world safe, practical and medically appropriate for those of us who produce the sperm and those of us who produce the eggs.

Sigh.

How do you know it's an idiot with ridiculous fake tits?

Wheres the line between normal and ridiculous?

You appear to know the answers. Share so we too can know.

As usual when faced with questions about trans rights an attempt by TRAs to derail the conversation is made, believing that this will suddenly stop all arguments.

People seem to struggle to define who is trans, and give little thought to how a lack of gatekeeping will lead to more people deciding to medically transition, only to regret the permanent changes to their body a few years later.

Gatekeeping prevents stupid people doing stupid things.

I beg to differ Sir.

Anyway will you be paying by cash or card?

And please for the love of god tell me you plucked that from thin air and you aren't currently in the room next to me?

The problem with this accommodation is that other people also exist and have needs.

So it makes some men happier to identify as women. This doesn't make them women and doesn't mean that women's need for single sex spaces ceases to exist.

The problem with this idea of everyone identifying as whatever they want is that this doesn't occur in a vacuum. Other people also exist.

To take one (extreme, but realistic) example. A rapist in prison identifies as a woman. If we take this at face value and say that he is therefore a woman and can be transferred to a women's prison, what about the women in that prison who are now put in danger from this rapist who self-identifies as a woman? Lisa Nandy thinks that the rapist's desire to be in a women's prison should override the women's need to be safe from rape in prison.

What do you think?

The fact is that there are people who identify as a certain gender.

Thing is, ELO, you type out stuff like this, but you don't know what a "gender" is. What do you think it is?

The groundswell of opinion (certainly among those in positions of power or likely to soon be in power - eg Labour) to to accommodate them more.

This is what is happening while you guys talk amongst yourselves on Mumsnet.

So, what brings you to this backwater of irrelevance, ELO?

Our poor gatekeeping.

Look, I'm trying my hardest, but he keeps giving me the slip. I chase him down one corridor only for him to appear in another.

Seriously its like whack a mole.

I see we have reached the next stage.

miniscule
fake
satire
who cares
sparple/distraction

Now it is the ‘it’s happening anyway’ stage.

Based on lies on one hand and then the twist of a threat in one sentence.

“The groundswell of opinion (certainly among those in positions of power or likely to soon be in power - eg Labour) to to accommodate them more.”

The first part has been resoundingly proven false. Every poll done by different organisations that sample across the general population has shown the exact opposite. Especially the polls tracking opinion on transgender issues.

Face it ELO, your credibility is dropping even further now.

I have been out leafletting on the street and the ‘public’ are rather more aware of the conflict in rights now than even six months ago. And that was before the ‘merkin’ protest. The effect of that bill has caused a widespread increase in general awareness in the conflicts with the rights and protections of women and girl’s rights.

So no. Your ‘society supports us’ move is based on your wishes only.

And it is a very long time before the next election, I hope. And more labour MPs will have found out by then via letters and live discussions how women are deeply concerned and that platitudes don’t work anymore.

There will be some die hards in the Labour Party, they have to survive their electorate’s polling and then they have to exert enough power to pull this through the parliament.

Do you think that all the violent protests where women are peacefully protesting and angry masked most male people aggressively counter protesting will win the hearts of the public? If you have that view, you must be very naive or just lying to yourself.

Each women’s rally is now targeted, because a part of the population hate women so much that they need to not let women speak. Because that is all that is left. Using fear and disruption to get their way.

It raises the awareness alright.

That society do not want these people to enter even the toilets and changing rooms set up to protect the female half of the population! Let alone prisons and refuges.

But do keep trying to spread the lie that the groundswell of opinion is fully supportive. Because it is another lie that is easily shown to be false.

Sorry, I can see I missed a step.

miniscule
fake
satire
who cares
sparple/distraction

Then ‘both sides’
Then ‘happening anyway’