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?

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

For me these DARVO reversals, even when they make fuck all sense in the context, have always been a signature of this movement, since I first encountered online transactivists about a decade ago.

Darvo, lies, emotive appeals, shouting & screaming and punching old ladies in the face are their tactics. It's because their claims simply don't face up to the slightest scrutiny.

Then I think the explanation here is Canadian, immaturity, and being in a cult.

Sorry Canadians. 🙂

being in a cult.

I totally misread that but I think on this occasion, both options apply.

Ha! At around 11.50 last night, I typed out “fascinating: a low activity thread for two days, then as midnight on a Friday approaches, it suddenly gets active”, but then thought, ‘nah, I just can’t be bothered engaging’, and deleted it.

I’m just checking back in now to see if events unfolded as predicted overnight. No surprise to see that they did.

😂 That would be about 7pm in Tranada, wouldn't it? I mean, I spend every night Friday nights on the interwebs, but I'm not supposed to be a foxy female at the forefront of an exciting social movement.

Bless ... 🦊

Awww bless… they really don’t know how to deal with intelligent women.

Damn pic didn’t show

Well, I am glad that we didn’t get the furry persona as that was a possibility. Maybe there is some self awareness left.

I am laughing though that they honestly seem to believe that some male individuals ‘pass’ as per the ‘lol. No you can’t [tell]. On another thread.

And all of the predicatbles hobbies: anime, furries.......

ANYway, this was an interesting thread, with a very good question posed by the OP and their follow-up posts, which I dont' think have actually had much of an attempt at an answer? I did see that fieldsofgreycorn actually seemed to be contributing, so I hope they come back as I'm genuinely interested on their views in my two questions.

Although it's entertaining it is frustrating when threads get targeted by community disruptors.

Do we think things would be more straightforward if we had a term for 'people who, for whatever reason, wish to be seen and treated as the opposite sex' and a different term for 'has something they believe is a gender identity, which both is and isn't related to sex depending on what actions they are trying to take/claims they are making'?

@Transparent2, I keep quotes, too - the most convincingly expressed arguments, useful explanations, things I want to look into more closely.

I‘ve found this thread fascinating in many ways.

What I find distressing is the damage the attitudes reflected here (NB. I do think there was some rudeness on both sides, & share @FlirtsWithRhinos’s concern re. PP’s vulnerability - of a sort - BUT the FWR-ers’ snippy, witty & satirical challenges were absolutely nothing on the intimidating, patronising attack from the other side - it was eye-opening… or would have been, if I wasn’t already impossibly wide-eyed in horror at the attitudes to females now emerging!) are doing to the „cause“ of trans - & gay - rights more generally.

I’m out & about right now, & a bearded man in the most gorgeous smoky, glittery skirt just strode past.

My first thought: How fab that society’s reached the point where he can do this.

Immediately on its tail, though, instinctively, with a spark of anxiety: But I hope he’s not using the Ladies, I hope I don’t meet a man in there myself, do just remember to be a bit more alert than you used to be about that, Catiette…

In other words, to quote an earlier poster, it’s really simple:

I WANT to encourage diverse gender expression, freedom, respect etc. Deeply, viscerally, I truly do!

But I want to feel safe & retain my own rights, freedom of movement &, above all, sense of safety & identity, too.

Without the militancy & aggression, with parallel respect for me inherent in its expression & aims, I’d be 100% behind this movement. But tell me, as PP does, that I must bend my own perception of reality & dissolve my own boundaries to match a male stranger’s internal sense of self? That I must be complicit in recasting known biological facts, & give up my own preferred language? That I must compromise my own sense of safety & self?! That’s misogyny.

I exist, too.

I exist, too.

I used to be puzzled by the genderist mantra "trans people exist" and accusations of "denying our existence". It's been blindingly obvious that they exist, wtf were they on about??

I should have realised this was an early DARVO projection. The mission was always to deny the existence of the female sex, to render us nameless and inconsequential.

Always, always a hair trigger which goes from I am happy to answer questions to anger, abuse and threats within a second when asked to do just that and provide the evidence of their assertions.

It is certainly enlightening for lurkers to see, to realise that only complete capitulation and unquestioning adherence to the mantra is permitted. A better demonstration of authoritarian, totalitarian power, control and dictatorship would be hard to find.

That’s how it feels.

Complaints about not feeling “safe” in a metaphorical sense (meaning discomfort or distress) are being used to justify compromising females’ actual physical safety.

Complaints about “erasure” in a metaphorical sense (meaning not being universally described according to subjective self-perception) are being used to destroy the actual concept of an adult human female as a biological reality, & to remove this group’s capacity to name & advocate for itself.

Complaints about “violence” in a metaphorical sense (meaning language & words, often not even being used derogatively) are being used to incite & justify actual physical violence towards females.

Complaints about “human rights” in a very vague sense (often - not always - referring to what may be better described as exceptions or privileges, such as mandating a third party’s language) are being used to jeopardise actual rights - to safety, freedom of assembly, political self-advocacy, equal pay, consideration in medical research etc. - that females have only had for a few, short decades.

I could go on.

What disturbs me most isn’t the paradoxes themselves, but that so many people not only don’t see them, but actively embrace them.

This is what peaked me. I never realised how vulnerable we were, how fragile our gains. It’s been bloody terrifying.

This.

The absolute brass fucking neck of people saying that if we don't accept members of the opposite sex in our spaces and sports we are denying their right to exist, when they literally refuse to accept that we should be allowed to have a word to describe ourselves, as a sex based category of people which does not include any members of the opposite sex, however they may identify.

😂

The small duck energy. Fantastic.

😁

It was a typo Helle but I liked it. 😁

The Bond villain scriptwriters are not what they were.

🤔

What disturbs me most isn’t the paradoxes themselves, but that so many people not only don’t see them, but actively embrace them.

Same - this has absolutely gobsmacked me. Being generous, people are so soaked in sexist, misogynistic bullshit that it doesn't even occur to educated, socially conscious people that they are contradicting themselves in every way. They can't disentangle gender stereotypes from being physically female (or male).

Sorry. I'm a bit late to this conversation. But can you say more about what you mean when you say it's possible to entirely change a person's body composition to that of the opposite sex? You can't change chromosomes, sex organs or a large number of physical characteristics (e.g. males still have stronger skeletons, thicker jaws). So what are you referring to when you say it's routine to convert a human's entire body?

I'm amazed you don't see the resemblance of your own behaviour to this (I hope) fictional abuser, but I suppose I shouldn't be, should I? You abusers always think you have the right to harm people as you see fit and of course you just love to insist that anyone setting a boundary you don't like is the real abuser.

If you don't want people setting boundaries don't make it necessary. Don't level grotesque slanders at people and they wont have to tell you "That's not appropriate! stop saying that!" I'm sure you wont get it though, abusers never do...

Honestly, @ancuruadh, ordering people to believe what you believe to be true, without objectively compelling evidence, isn't setting boundaries. It's attempted totalitariansm.

Boundaries are what women are setting, and also what trans people set when they make an event or venue transgender only.