First time poster - question about GC beliefs

[lovelycosyslippers]

This is my first time posting on this board. I am trying to work out what my position is in the trans/gender debate.

If you hold gender critical beliefs, do you accept that some people firmly believe they are born in the 'wrong' body, and have a right to live as the other sex (up to but not including the point where it would impinge on the rights of that other sex), possibly taking hormones and undergoing surgery? Is this a coherent position to hold?

Or do you believe these people should not ever be supported to live as the opposite sex? That doing so is always wrong?

Hope this question makes sense!

I once asked a trans activist on Twitter why there aren't loads of men identifying as women in Afghanistan.

They said, and I shit you not, "Don't be so stupid, it's far too dangerous to be trans in Afghanistan."

To which my response was, "It's far too dangerous to be a woman in Afghanistan, but unfortunately for women, they can't just wipe their lipstick off, put some trousers on and be treated like a man."

Again the clear separation in the mind of activists between trans and actual women. The two are only ever conflated when to do so benefits the agenda of the male person. And it's a choice or just something that is and is not a choice, depending on which framing at the time benefits the male person's agenda.

No one should identify into anything that the population who actually are cannot identify out of.

And men should not play games with women and their lives for their own agendas.

If you really want to make an activist rage, try explaining how you'd be delighted to accept intimate care from a female nurse who is six foot one, bench presses small buildings, has a crew cut, wears DMs and plays rugby in her spare time, but not a male nurse with swishy hair and lipstick.

That you don't care at all how she presents or what stereotypes she chooses in her life, you just want someone who lives in the same biological body you do, doesn't compute at all.

Again the clear separation in the mind of activists between trans and actual women. The two are only ever conflated when to do so benefits the agenda of the male person.

Excellent point.

They will just tell you that female people can identify as men or non binary if they want because they live in fucking la-la-land.

As noted in the thread however, these conversations are always about male transitioners only. In the same way that the political advantages and demands only ever mention the male transitioners.

Because female transitioners are not a sexual threat to men, and dare not take the same kind of liberties with men that men do with women, because it would be dangerous for them. And they do not want to use men in the way that men wish to use women, because womens' sexuality just does not work in the same way. The limitations and privileges of sex never change, regardless of how words are bandied around.

No one should identify into anything that the population who actually are cannot identify out of

Well said, @Froodwithatowel

Yes, but for many, especially young people, the very possibility ( belief) that 'being trans' is such a thing at all is down to the social force of trend, ideation and contagion. For many these feelings, or framing of their feelings, would not have arisen in this way/form in the first place without these social forces.

Spot On.

And decades of lobbying by the gender identity wing of the men’s sexual entitlement movement, promoting the concept throughout the media, including children’s programmes on the state supported national broadcaster, and across social media.

@LoobiJee and @RebelliousCow agreed.

So yes, fair point on the "social construct" @RebelliousCow I hadn't been looking at it like that but it makes perfect sense summarised in that way now.

It's almost back to the old argument, that if 'trans kids' is such a universal phenomenon as they'd have you believe, where the hell were all the trans kids 40, 50, 100 years ago? Brutally suppressed, like Joan of Arc and Liz I, they'd have us believe? Yeah, right. 🙄

SM, porn, anime, avatars; it's a different universe now for kids (especially girls) than one most of us grew up in.

I'm not sure whether it was in this thread or another one, but yesterday someone posted a link to an interesting blog post about how "trans is something we made up".

It talks about how anxiety is a normal human thing but it manifests itself in different ways across different cultures. So there are cultures where no one is trans but some people are utterly terrified of becoming cannibals, for example.

I think it's a really relevant point, especially when comparing and contrasting the LGB with the T. We know that there have been same sex attracted people in every culture and every era of history, so we can surmise that being same sex attracted is innate and not caused by any kind of social contagion, although there may appear to be fewer same sex attracted people in cultures where this is still illegal or frowned upon and where people are afraid to admit, sometimes even to themselves, that they are not heterosexual. But the concept of being trans, in the form we currently know it, is not actually a universal human truth. Despite what trans activists would have us believe, there are plenty of cultures where being trans is not a thing, and no real evidence to suggest that trans people in those places are just in the closet.

Not all languages and cultures have a concept of gender identity, or specifically the concept of having a gender identity which either matches or conflicts with your biological sex.

I find it entirely plausible that for many people, particularly young people, "being trans" is actually caused by the widespread belief that these clothes/hobbies/interests are woman things and those clothes/hobbies/interests are man things, and if you don't fit in this box it means there is a mismatch between your gender identity and your biological sex.

If this idea did not exist in our culture, would all these people be feeling this way?

I strongly suspect not.

I believe a small proportion of people genuinely want to be the opposite sex from a young age, and many lead happier lives being treated as the opposite sex. This has nothing to do with "having a true gender" and also probably in many cases arises from things like wrong perceptions of what it means to be male or female (or gay or straight).

I don't really have a problem with this as long as where sex genuinely matters, there is no dishonesty. And obviously they need to be old enough and capable of informed consent. And not coerced or influenced by others (this is where it gets hard to differentiate).

I also believe that in a less sexist society these numbers would be very small.

I care more about the redefinition of man/woman as mental states of being, because that affects everyone and is not coherent.

It is heartening to hear that your relative was able to consider the issues more deeply and change their position.

Alas, I do not see this happening for my DC. Too many GNC friends who think (know, experience the wider impacts of) no further than it’s ‘just’ being kind. The thinking stops there. When gently pushed, the heels dig in. Still, I live in faint hope of carrying on the conversation another day.

I believe a small proportion of people genuinely want to be the opposite sex from a young age, and many lead happier lives being treated as the opposite sex.

I believe that no evidence exists that medical transition and trying to live your whole life as a lie leads to better outcomes than the highest quality mental health support would.

I don't really have a problem with this as long as where sex genuinely matters, there is no dishonesty.

Surely the whole point is that in some contexts sex does not matter, and in other contexts sex does not matter? There are precisely zero contexts where sex does not matter but meaningless gender identity claim does.

And obviously they need to be old enough and capable of informed consent.

If they are not capable of understanding that gender identity means nothing to most people, and that changing some characteristics of sex does nothing to change sex, then they are not capable of giving informed consent.

And not coerced or influenced by others (this is where it gets hard to differentiate).

We live in a world where lots of people think it is homophobic if say that homoSEXuality is real and matters. Anyone who supports the TQ+ is coerced and influenced (or worse).

Thanks everyone. I am continuing to read all the replies - I'm a bit overwhelmed by the response!

@duc748 I have been wondering this too. If so many secondary school kids are now identifying as trans then where are the equivalent people from my school year (in the 80s/90s) who are trans? There's one, but only one. Surely more would have "come out"?

There is a lot to think about for sure! But you'll find that there is both a range of opinion on here and lots of us enjoy discussing, questioning, or challenging our own views.

@lovelycosyslippers

If so many secondary school kids are now identifying as trans then where are the equivalent people from my school year (in the 80s/90s) who are trans?

I don't know about the boys, but the girls were anorexic and / or cutting themselves. Unhappiness with ones developing female body (and the ways adult males respond to that development) isn't new, it just manifests itself in different ways. A couple of generations before that, in Ireland and other Catholic countries, many of them became nuns.

“There are precisely zero contexts where sex does not matter but meaningless gender identity claim does.”

Turning it around in this way is a really useful way of thinking about it.

Yep. And the way convents attracted recruits was by targeting girls in their susceptible and idealistic teen years.

“And obviously they need to be old enough and capable of informed consent.

If they are not capable of understanding that gender identity means nothing to most people, and that changing some characteristics of sex does nothing to change sex, then they are not capable of giving informed consent.”

Good point.

Surely the whole point is that in some contexts sex does not matter, and in other contexts sex does not matter? There are precisely zero contexts where sex does not matter but meaningless gender identity claim does.

Not sure I fully understand but I'm talking about where sex matters vs where it's not relevant. I can't think of many situations where GI matters and don't think it "trumps" sex - it's usually irrelevant.

I agree re highest quality mental health care but show me a place where that is accessible to those who need it...

Sorry, I meant - Surely the whole point is that in some contexts sex DOES matter, and in other contexts sex DOES NOT matter? There are precisely zero contexts where sex DOES NOT matter but meaningless gender identity claim DOES.

My point is that where men and women need to be segregated it ALWAYS needs to be done by sex, and never by gender, because sometimes (eg public toilets) sex matters, but there is no context in which separating men from men who present as women is necessary.

A lack of great mental health care in no reason to give non-evidenced surgical and hormonal interventions. And indeed if less money were being wasted on wrong sex hormones etc there'd be a bit more for mental health support.

My point is that where men and women need to be segregated it ALWAYS needs to be done by sex, and never by gender, because sometimes (eg public toilets) sex matters, but there is no context in which separating men from men who present as women is necessary.

Yes, I agree. I thought this was what I had said but obviously not typing properly!