Help me reply to my "BeKind" brother in NZ, please!

[Fubbs]

I'm in a WhatsApp group with my Dad (in Ireland, as I am) and brother (in NZ for years). I've been trying to explain what's been happening to women's rights but it's ended up that they have expressed compassion for Barbie Kardashian so I've plainly failed (although my Dad did post that Monty Python "because I say I am" speech so I think he's not totally on board).

(Bit of a lead up to it, before that particular part of the conversation, I got the "KJK is a Nazi, not welcome here" line from my brother. I pointed out she'd been attacked and Nazis were in Australia and he didn't mention that and denied the Nazis were there and said there were more protesters than attendees at the Auckland Let Women Speak meeting (I think that proves KJK isn't popular for him). He didn't bother reading thecountess.ie for a very good summary of the issues. He's married with a wife, two boys and a girl. I'm married, two boys).

I asked why it was okay to house a violent man (to be fair, my brother hasn't tried to correct my sex-based pronoun use) with women and he gave me "prison authorities are doing their best for everyone), I countered that women have rights too and that includes single sex spaces. Final message so far (there's quite a time delay) and woke up (I'd my phone on silent, I've been waking at night in turmoil that he doesn't see it and is happy to basically throw me to the wolves):

"Yes, your position has been made clear.

need legal (legislative, judicial, enforcement) society/facilities/legal institutions to figure the mess out for all.

An example I shared earlier about professional level sports bodies [athletics] making a deision, regarding competing, shows it is possible but even that is not the end of it but a single step in a conversation, a process, an evolution.

It will not be straightworward nor easy nor quick but it will requre a lot of hard work from everybody on a good faith basis, because that is where most of us are and I hope not in a bad actor basis because that is the horrific but rare example, abhorrent to all"

Sorry it's so long!

I was thinking of replying that women's rights are to protect ALL women from ALL men. Not all women need protection and not all men are a problem but the protections are required (like children should be protected from all adults). These rights are based on sex.

Women's rights are not there to be coopted by anyone not a woman, once a single biological man steps over that boundary, there are no more women's rights. Like biological males in female sport mean there is a male category and a mixed category.

Women's rights make it easier to see the wrong uns - good men stay out so bad men stand out.

Women's rights do not exist until a man decides otherwise, for whatever their reason. Why are women's rights the ones to suffer?

Single bad actor? As if! And why do women have to be the ones to prove who is a good or a bad actor?

You see, I'm getting a bit incoherent, I'm so tired! Please help me put it as clearly as possible and as concisely as possible so I might get some sleep!

Forgot to say, emphasis in DBs message his own.

Don't stay up arguing over text just to have the last word or be right.

Go to bed, sleep and formulate arguments for any future discussions when you're well rested.

It's a long fight, you don't need to convince him today.

Oh, tbh, I'd just not bother discussing it with him! He's doing that thing that men often do, which is to intellectualise in order to enjoy having a clever debate. Totally ignoring the fact that it impacts on women's actual lives. Whilst also, in a somewhat sexist manner, imply that women activists are not acting in good faith.

Ask him how women are supposed to identify the males in our spaces who pose a threat and those who don’t? We want all males excluded from single sex spaces because there is no way of knowing which ones are dangerous.
Has he thought about the impact on women who for cultural or religious reasons can’t share spaces like changing rooms with biological males. Many of those women will be ethnic minorities- is it kind to effectively exclude those women to support the feelings of a person born male?
Does he realise that the vast majority of trans women retain their penis (80%+)? Is he happy with young girls being in the swimming pool showers with intact males just because those males say they are female?
Does he think rape victims should be allowed same sex services?
Can he define a women without using regressive misogynistic stereotypes like emotional, nurturing, pink and swishy?
Does he support the medicalisation of children which may lead to bone and cognitive damage (puberty blockers) and total loss of sexual enjoyment (cross sex hormones)?
Does he think it is fair and kind that women’s safety and success is being undermined by biological males in women’s sport. (It was sport that peaked quite a few of my male colleagues- my rugby playing sons have no doubt about the dangers of biological males competing against women). What does he think would happen if an ex All Black decided he was female and played in a woman’s team?

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude Or a current All Black. Or indeed Ireland player.

' I can't make the squad since my cruciate knee injury. There again I've always liked pink. Hmm...'

But I tend to agree with PP who advised leaving it for now. He is probably feeling defensive about his adopted country too. Best to get some sleep and just wait for the dawn of comprehension.

I would leave it. You've raised your point, it's in his head. Next time he sees it, reads something, your words will be there. Let him get his head around it himself.

If he is the kind of man to think it through and come out the other side, he will do it. If he isn't then all your prooving won't change a thing.

If he believes there were Nazis at KJK's event, I think I would point out that it was the trans activists who assaulted both KJK herself and a 70 year old woman, and him how he thinks it looks when you attend an event where there are Nazis present and you behave worse than the Nazis.

In relation to sports and single sex spaces, I'd point out that there are two sexes and everyone is either one or the other. There are many different gender identities, and they don't all have their own toilets and sporting categories.

Take someone like Laurel Hubbard, for example. What does Laurel Hubbard's self-perceived gender identity have to do with any of the female athletes against whom Laurel was competing? Because if you say, "I identify as a woman, therefore I belong in the women's category", I think you need to be able to explain what exactly you think you have in common with those women and why you think it is relevant to sport. Did anyone ask the female athletes whether they agree that they share the same identity as Laurel Hubbard? No. But allowing Laurel to compete as a woman, despite the obvious unfairness, denied a female athlete her chance to go to the Olympics.

If you choose to take oestrogen and that affects your sporting performance (but not enough to reverse the physical advantages of sheer size and strength, having gone through male puberty), you should have to accept any negative consequences of that. You shouldn't get to compete with the women any more than a man who has hindered his sporting performance through smoking or drinking should get to compete with the women.

That the anti fascists ignored the actual fascists to shout at the women. That the police ignored the women (and for the most part the fascists) and kept their attention on where the violence was likely to come from, the 'be kind' mob. Obviously, not in NZ, the Police there couldn't be arsed to get out of their vans.

My sister is in California, I’m also in Ireland.

She’s full on TWAW, I need to educate myself, drag empowers women & besides intersex. I need to educate myself. (Because I’m obviously a poor ignorant gom living in a backwater rather than stunning & brave in California)

I refuse to discuss the issue with her. If she brings it up I change the subject. If she persists I disengage.

Oh I understand her point of view @VaddaABeetch . You are still in thrall to the Church. Those evil men in frocks.

Whereas she has found the one true Church of Twaw. The good men in frocks. She worries that you will not be saved.

I would keep it short.

Human’s are dimorphic and can’t change sex.

Most men could overpower and kill, with their bare hands, or rape and possibly impregnate most women.

This means women need safe places from men (however they may identify) when we are vulnerable.

If you don’t agree then you don’t care if women are attacked and overpowered by men.

Therefore you are a woman-hating, sexist, male-supremacist nobber and I am done having this conversation with you.

I got another message, I'm taken in by TERF! Finally happened!

Full message:
I have to be honest: the more I read and think on this the more I believe you are totally taken in by terf ideology pervasive in the UK and rife in the UK. I'll not be trying to convince you otherwise but I will point out that the intent of your points and position is to secure woen's spaces &c. The impact of our points and position is to tell a very small portion of the human population they cannot be. To sde hateful ideologies find an alignment with the views is a very bad sign.

Yeah, nope. No one is telling people that they can't "be". They just need to "be" elsewhere than single sex spaces that they don't qualify for. He needs to consider the "impact" of women losing single sex spaces and categories in situations where sex is relevant and important.

Also. He needs that Venn diagram that shows the overlap between feminists, gender ideologues and religious/right wing conservatives. I don't have it to hand but you've probably seen it on threads here.

Might be a case of pictures speaking louder than words - my top two picks for peaking people would be:

1. Pre-"transition" Adam Graham/Isla Bryson
2. The video clip of the elderly woman being punched on Saturday (this one: https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/1231r8n/elderly_woman_punched_in_face_by_transrights/ )

Other than that, might be wise to leave it, and agree to differ - as he said, "I'll not be trying to convince you otherwise". He may come round to your view one day.

Honestly, he sounds like a pompous twat and I wouldn't bother engaging with him on the subject.

there’s a line in todays Jordan Peterson essay “False Virtue masquerading as compassion”.

I must admit I have used a similar phrasing effectively: making the point that cheerleading children to amputate their genitals so that you can feel good about yourself is not the action of a friend or ally.
People can throw “Nazi” around all they like, but the rest of us see that they are users.

I wouldn't bother.

Tell him you'll pick the conversation up in five years time when you look forward to him realising what a knob he has been. Right side of history n all that.

Oh no, telling a biological male that he and his penis cannot be in women's spaces and women's sports. How very unreasonable. He can be in literally every other public space on earth but if he's not allowed in women's communal showers and women's categories at the Olympics he is terribly oppressed.

Your brother sounds like a right, what was the word? Dropkick.

I wouldn't bother.

I grew up with an extremely right wing, racist father. He enjoyed the argument - he enjoyed making me angry and he enjoyed enraging women. It was his entertainment and he never admitted defeat. In fact the more you argued, the more entrenched he became in his position. He is thankfully dead now, but he would love the 'trans' debate - "you women all brought it on yourself" would be his argument.

You're debating life and death for you as a woman, it's just rhetorical entertainment for your brother and your father. They like demonstrating their superior rhetoric and advanced progressive thinking in these fun debates. They don't get it and never will.

I find men and young women who have never been sexualy assaulted/raped, or have ever been made to feel scared and overpowered by someone far bigger and stronger than them, will never understand until it happens to them.

Well, there are a couple of different things.

1. Thanks for accepting that I'm not going to be converted to your religion;
2. It's great that he wants to be kind - why not try being kind to women? Maybe listen to a woman who was in Limerick prison speaking to Paddy O'Gorman. If you think what she describes is fine, you should think a bit about why;
3. You may believe that people can change sex, I personally don't and regard it as a highly controversial theory, see no reason for society to reorganise on the basis that it's correct.

Oh just ignore him. You can't make him agree with you. He'll either come around in his own time and based on his own thinking or he won't - it doesn't have to define your relationship.