Anyone in the middle?

[piesforever]

All I see on here is GC rants. I am in the middle, I support trans people but do agree they shouldn't take part in gender specific sport, and there needs to be more caution in "changing gender" for sure, especially hormones and surgery for young people. I do agree some are troubled or young people, who are hating puberty or have had some trauma. Let's support them overall though, it must be horrible whatever the outcome. Anyone else feel a bit of sympathy to both "sides"? In fact, why are there sides, we need to find common ground and help each other!! Instead of being furious all the time. It's not healthy.

The problem is that they kind of....do have the right to do that.

I don't think they should have the right to do that, but they currently do, and politicians of all political persuasions support that.

Yeah, and that's why I am now politically homeless.

Same.

I don't think this is true. There is also a person left there, whose humanity should be seen.

No one is denying that they are human. It's no more relevant to the point than my humanity is.

I think the trouble is fahbeep is coming at this from a position many of us were in some years ago, we’ve all argued for compromise and middle ground and we are repeatedly told “no”.

So whilst I agree in principle with what you are saying right now we can’t even get “the other side” to the table. Look how many debating opps have been cancelled or refused because “we won’t share unsafe spaces with people who wish us harm” which is utter bollocks, but that’s the argument.

Like you I don’t know the answer but I know my urge to compromise has withered as every compromise from women/feminists/GC people has been met with refusal.

i also find it frustrating that our resident TRAs are not all over this thread giving their thoughts on this middle ground. No debate or I have no reasonable debate?

Of course. But what is it about that humanity that makes that human person specifically a trans woman, once we take away both the sexism that should not be accomdated and the physical differences that cannot be accomdated?

It's not trans people's humanity, or even their sincerity, I dispute. It's that accomodating their beliefs about themselves requires society to endorse damaging and sexist beliefs about women (and indeed men) as a whole.

@ApocalipstickNow

i also find it frustrating that our resident TRAs are not all over this thread giving their thoughts on this middle ground. No debate or I have no reasonable debate?

Sorry, can't contribute now but will share my thoughts later if I can.

(TRA)

So it was a plopper.

One side believes in reality, the other in fantasy.

Where is the middle ground?

@AlphaTransWoman

I have a specific question for you.

Let's take prisons out of the equation for one moment. I get that there is a safety argument about prisons, although that could be easily resolved by having separate accommodation for transgender prisoners.

What exactly is it that trans women are afraid might happen to them in, say, the men's toilets at work?

I would like to think I'm in the middle ground.

I'm happy for trans people to wear what they want, call themselves what personal names they want. I am against discrimination in employment etc., and I am against abuse, whether verbal or physical.

I'm not happy for transwomen to claim they are actually, really women, to use women-only spaces, take women-only jobs or places on committees, get awards aimed at women, take part in women-only sports. (And vice-versa for transmen, though this seems to be less of an issue for numerous reasons).

(I'm in two minds about pronouns, mainly because pronouns seem to get used to support the TWAW and TMAM stance.)

But what I've said doesn't seem to be taken as middle ground - it is supposedly hateful and bigoted, and deserves threats and abuse.

I agree , you don't need to worry about being called a bigot on this thread as the usual suspects ( TRAs ) are not interested as this thread is about compromise .

To be fair, whilst I’m interested in what you have to say @AlphaTransWoman im also curious about the absence of posters like stephanee, Mishy and all the others who’s prime motivation doesn’t seem like supporting trans rights at all.

But it’s a derail, if I’m being honest.

Open to your debate, of course.

I really want to see this answered 😉

For those who haven't seen it Alpha has an interesting AMA going right now. Even though I disagree, Alpha has at least engaged in the discussions and has not resorted to name calling.

There is a logic to this, but I think what it leaves out is things that are "gendered" or what you are calling stereotypes, aren't actually just random attachments.

They are usually either generalizations that may be true at a group level, or they are how we culturally express the reality that we are a sexually dimorphic species, and that's really important to our lives. So even, say, Woman-pink, boy-blue, which is very abitrary and could be totally different, is mainly about recognizing that we have two sexes. Which is a real thing, not just a stereotype.

This, @piesforever , is a great summary. Trans people aren't an enemy and women have every right to safe spaces and fairness in sports.
To my mind this is an entirely male problem, if transwomen feel unsafe in changing rooms and toilet that match their genitals then men need to change to make them safe. Not 'I don't feel safe here: oh look there's a safe space there: budge over women'. As someone posted on here a long time ago: I will not set myself on fire to keep you warm.

No royalties necessary. I'm glad that people find it a useful analogy.

What it doesn't have, that Christianity does, is a history of it being accommodated in laws and culture as a truth.

What do you mean by this? A belief in reincarnation is a part of some major religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. So it's as much a 'truth' as Christian beliefs are - which are also not truths, but beliefs. I don't know how a belief in reincarnation is accommodated in the laws and culture of countries where the majority of people follow these religions - presumably in the same way as all other religious beliefs are accommodated.

But I don't see why this is important if we are just looking at claims by some people that they are reincarnated as being similar to a claim to have an opposite sex gender identity.

The reason I think it's a good analogy is that there's a difference between how we are expected to react to someone with a claimed gender identity and someone with a claimed reincarnated identity. When someone claims to be the reincarnation of some famous person from history, or claims to remember a past life, we are not all expected to believe in this reincarnated identity without question.

@Rudderneck

So even, say, Woman-pink, boy-blue, which is very abitrary and could be totally different, is mainly about recognizing that we have two sexes. Which is a real thing, not just a stereotype.

Sure, that's how the stereotypes and generalisations got started. My point is just because they exist today doesn't mean we have to keep them. And it certainly doesn't mean we have to make them inherent to our concept of men and women.

The point isn't that pink and blue are arbitrary choices which could just as well have been the other way round, or green and black, it's that there's no need to have a different colour for each sex at all.

I think it's a real medical issue so yes there should be sympathy on that level.

I don't have sympathy for bully political tactics, or "no debate", or harassment, or violence.

As for why there are different "sides" here, well if people are making different and conflicting claims about fundamental rights, you can't really avoid that.

People could probably mostly ignore the "TWAW" stuff, if it wasn't tied up with demands and claims about their supposed "rights". To me, it looks like a bully tactic to try to cheat democracy and force your agenda. It's then combined with calling people transphobic or whatever if they don't go along with it.

If people use those kind of political tactics you will have division.

There is no common ground when sides want diametrically opposed outcomes. This is a zero sum game.

They were the other way round in victorian times I believe. Pink was for boys and blue for girls.

I agree with you, but I also have to ask the question “Is a woman demanding to be called he committing an act of female aggression?" and "Is a woman demanding that a man be called she committing an act of female aggression?”

… and, for balance, "Is a man demanding that a woman be called he committing an act of male aggression?”

All these demands have been made on me (a man, as it happens).

I don't think you would find that there are many people who believe they are inherent. Some of the GI people seem to, but even there probably not the majority.

What I am saying is that it is inevitable that there will be cultural reflections of our sexual dimorphism. It might be clothing colours, or something else, but we will never have no cultural reflections of our awareness of our sexed bodies being different.

That's really why certain people are invested in the stereotypes. Apart from children, it's not about the specific trappings, it's about what those things represent.

The idea that we could get rid of all such cultural products is a pipe dream, it won't happen as long as people have sexed bodies.

A woman demanding to be called a man is identifying up not down so it is different though I think might well be offensive to men. A man demanding a woman be called he is similarly committing an act of make aggression because that doesn't occur outside of also demanding a man be called she.

First of all, if the sign on the door just says "men" or "women", without specifying biological sex, then I should use the women's. Because that's what the sign says I should do, since I identify as a woman.

Having said this, I avoid gendered toilets whenever possible, because I feel like an unwanted intruder in either.

To address the specific question, I agree that a male toilet at work is unlikely to be physically dangerous for me unlike, say, a male toilet in a pub. But it would still be demeaning and embarrassing for me and any men I encountered there.

The big issue is urinals. Unlike in a women's toilet, you've got people standing there with their genitalia exposed. I think it's not appropriate for me to be in that situation while presenting as female. Cubicles aren't ideal but are a lot more private.

For avoidance of doubt, I simply can't use gendered changing rooms full stop. So I would need there to be a unisex alternative in order to be able to use, say, a gym or swimming pool.