For those who believe in Gender Identity over sex: why do you still need to believe in Men and Women at all?

[FlirtsWithRhinos]

One thing I do not get about Genderism is that they reject the belief that it's the physical body that makes a human a man or a woman, yet still believe some humans are men and some humans are women.

But if we hadn't had the example of two physical sexes, why would we have come up with the idea of Man-people and Woman-people in the first place?

I find it very weird that they can't or won't tell us what definition they use for Man, Woman etc ("it's a gotcha" , "blah blah blah" etc) yet demand such very specific provisions for Men and Women. How can they be so certain "trans women must use women's spaces/compete in women's sports" when without a definition of woman it's impossible to even explain why women need women only spaces or women only sports?

I could agree that it may be right for some people to transition. They may be happier that way.

I'm not sure that some people "don't have an alternative". That suggests that they couldn't learn to live with dysphoria, and have a relatively good outcome, and how much research had really been done to know that?

Also, as this is basically a fiction and an accommodation for people with a medical condition, how far do you take that legally?

Maybe you think it's only a small number of people and it's not going to create a big problem to have them using women's facilities. But what we have seen is that it has become any man that claims to be "non binary" and "feels more comfortable" can use women’s facilities. Do you want that kind of thing supported?

Couldn't you just normally protect single sex spaces? And create third spaces for trans people? Isn't that a reasonable balance?

Womens' discomfort (or increased risk) is only minimal if they lose their single sex spaces? Or their discomfort doesn't matter at all because they are being unreasonable?

But there are some people who due to a mixture of biological, psychological and cultural factors, develop a gender identity that conflicts with their physical sex.

Can you expand on this? What is a gender identity, and how might it conflict with physical sex? Can you give some examples of the sort of conflict you're referring to?

The exact image. Carlton in a fit.

Love it.

I find that the penis is just a “dangling thing” to be sad though. That says a great deal about this poster. And how little they know about male bodies.

Thanks for the tip eresh that was indeed informative.

And very much confirms the reason for the rage being the-acronym-that-must-not-be-named.

Still, I’m disappointed no forthcoming evidence for the assertions. I would genuinely have liked to read a paper or 2 on the subject.

Of course one of the things that has been studied is whether pregnant women given certain drugs, predominantly one called Diethylstilbestrol were more like to have children who grew up to be gay or lesbian and whether in utero hormone exposure could account for why some people are homosexual. From memory there was no statistically significant correlation. Reminds me though that once again TRAs co-opting from same sex attracted people.

Thank you.

I can see how my referring to growing up could be upsetting for someone whose own childhood and adolescence included sexual abuse, so I am cutting ancuruadh a little slack for their extreme overreaction. I'm sure they are not feeling in a good place right now.

For avoidance of doubt, I also absolutely did not say "actually you're the real perv". That was ancuruadh's misreading. My post is still up, and shows that my actual point was that male people encrouch on female in our daily lives, one of which was "they perve on us".

Surely ancuruadh's posts are a nasty, transphobic spoof trying to fool us into thinking that trans people are misogynistic, mansplaining morons riven with male entitlement and with less understanding of biology than the average 7 year old?

“For avoidance of doubt, I also absolutely did not say "actually you're the real perv". That was ancuruadh's misreading.”

It was the wee hours and I checked back before I asked for clarification. And yes, it was a gross misrepresentation. I suspect it was deliberately so thinking others wouldn’t check or that by that stage this poster simply didn’t care what was true or what was not in any attempt to claim some kind of higher moral position.

“My post is still up, and shows that my actual point was that male people encrouch on female in our daily lives, one of which was "they perve on us".”

And what you said is correct. And it is laughable, fucking ludicrous really, to deny this. As it would be for any male to deny that a % of males with trans indentities will sexually harass or abuse or assault girls and women and it will be at least the same % of all the male population. Just because a male attempts to falsely leverage access to female single sex spaces based on some pseudoscience beliefs doesn’t make them any more or any less a risk as per general safeguarding assessments as any other adult male.

For any reading along who honestly believed that male people should access female single sex spaces, why do you think an abusive male such as you have seen on this thread in the past 14 hours or so, should be allowed to share space with women and girls?

I thought this, but it was consistent across different threads. And it wasn’t clever enough either to be a spoof.

And then you read other content with the same name on other sites.

I mean, it could be. But it is so consistent with what we see on Twitter and have seen previously that it would serve no purpose to be a spoof. Maybe it would have worked even a couple of years ago. But not now.

I think the poster had access to a lot of pre-written text that could be dumped into their posts very quickly hence the lack of coherent reasoning. Statements that made no sense being followed, after challenges and queries, by large chunks of vaguely related stuff that did not actually answer the questions.

The whole dangling inert penis nonsense made it hard to believe that any adult or adolescent could have written it, yet it clearly was not the work of a child.

OK, ancuruadh

Well this is a lot... So, first of all, a sex change is not cosmetic, it changes everything right down to the DNA, that's how powerful hormones are...

Can you explain how hormones cause a Y chromosome to develop an extra arm, thus becoming a X chromosome? Perhaps you could get together with India Willoughby, who is also under the impression that taking oestrogen for 7 years has cause every cell in their body to become female.

You've asked about how hormones work and some do, indeed, affect gene expression, but this doesn't alter the sex of the body they are applied to.

Adrenalin is a hormone, it raises the blood pressure, increases blood flow to the muscles and brain, increases heart rate and can close blood vessels at the site of a wound.

Insulin works to regulate the level of glucose in the blood; it can stimulate the uptake of the glucose by cells, or to have the liver convert it into glycogen, to be stored in the body. It can also modify the binding of transcription factors, on insulin-responsive elements of genes.

Is that what you meant?

It really isn't a biological condition. It is a psychological condition. And it is not even'materialistic' in the way that same sex attraction is ( some people just fancy people of their own sex - though this says nothing else about them).

Most younger transitioners are same sex attracted people ( as well as autistic) and they continue to be same sex attracted after transition. Most older male transitioners are heterosexuual autogynephiles who have been cross dressing for a long time; often since childhood).

Many people are absolutely certain that they are trans - but later detransition when they realise that they are not really the opposite sex at all. This includes some transsexuals who transitioned decades ago - and have come to regret their surgery ( there is an excellent documnetary on Netflix called 'Regretters' which features two now fairly elderly men who are in the process of detransitioning - eve going as far as having a penis reconstruction.

The penis is not just a bit of dangly flesh, and both of these regretters recall how utterly trauamtised they actually were on awakening after surgery - and how that shock never left them -even through all of the years 'living as the oposite sex', and even through the initial flushes of gender euphoria.

But euphoria, as with dysphoria, is a mental condition/state.

I honestly don't care what causes it. I don't care if there's biological reasons why or it's a mental health need, I'm really not bothered. TQ+ people are welcome to crack on and do them.

They are not welcome to destroy women's equality of access and inclusion by removing women's single sex spaces, or attempt to destroy women as a sex class, or to subvert safeguarding.

It's not as if there's any possibility I'm suddenly going to see the light and go 'gosh, it's really a biological thing! Destroy all women's rights and exclude them from public spaces!".

The issue is that you are coming across like you are the arbiter of the truth and are somehow in possesssion of facts that are unavailable to everyone else. This is a discussion board, where issues are discussed, dissected and inspected; tested for veracity.

I actually did a module in my degree programme on 'Women's studies'; this was before it morphed into 'Gender studies' in the early 1990's, and I'm sure many other women here did too. I'm not sure we need lectures or explanations on Queer Theory or Gender Identity theory. Many have been around the block quite a few times and know our stuff. We just happen to disagree with some of the tenets of those theories. We don't take them as fact. We like to test them out.

To be fair, @ancuruadh is used to a more admiring audience on Reddit, on a forum where critical examination of the issues is simply not allowed.

eurochick · Today 04:53

I'm back.

Genuine LOL when I saw this, then kept LOLing every time someone else quoted you!

EDIT: It was the timing as much as anything.

Also: Great tip to google usernames, explains a lot.

They seem to think we just need someone to EXPLAIN it all to us, then we’ll become full-blown TREs.

Goodness me - and you were talking about arrogance earlier on.

You do realise that people here are educated, some very highly, and some are actually medical professionals and scientists.

It is impossible to change one's sex.

I wonder if he’ll come back to the thread? Our learnin’ isn’t yet complete, after all.

And why is it always just one over-confident Redditer on each thread? You’d expect their friends to join in, offer support, spout the cliches and slogans that haven’t yet been posited, but it’s always just one at a time, bravely battling the mob.

Maybe that’s it, maybe being scolded by women is the attraction, I’ve heard that’s a thing.

There were certain words and phrases used-
Misogynist
Handmaiden
Biology is not a belief
gaslighting
I think deluded was used as well

these are all terms that crop up with regularity from GC posters about TRAs. Yet none made any sense in this context. How can you write biology is not a belief then explain sex changes can happen.

it’s not the first time GC slogans etc have been thrown back.

Also it was clear from post one how it was going to go. Rhinos was the “good girl” singled out for special praise. This was clearly not sufficiently appreciated by her so the rage came down. And if that is how bullying and threatening someone can be on an anonymous internet forum, where you have the time to step away, compose, edit and not press post how on earth are they in real life?

Also, I assume as others have suggested that’s where the misunderstanding about the “perv” accusation came from but didn’t the post read “I’ve had a message” which implies there was private communication? I’ll be honest, I CBA to go back and check but if anyone else wants to feel free.

What an exceptionally rude, and deluded, person. The 'high school' comments suggest American.

Canadian, according to his prolific Mastodon posts.

Yes, you are completely correct. And thank you for your clear thinking and clear expression of your thinking. Though, unsurprisingly, I don't see absolutely everything as you do, I keep a file of quotes from MNers who have expressed GC thinking clearly and succinctly. Quotes from you feature several times, though I might not be able to spot which ones are yours as I don't keep a record of who posted them - the quotes are for me to remind myself of my dawning understanding.