The Mental gymnastics of genz thought process

[ThrowawayMay]

NC for this. Can’t sleep so thought I’d ask about this evenings youthful interaction.

My niece (23) who lives with me, attends a design college and yesterday a male student installed artwork threatening surveillance in the female toilets (and all the other toilets too so there were no alternatives). My niece and her classmates wouldn’t use the toilets because they didn’t know if it was just a concept artwork or if he had actually installed cameras. A older female student challenged the man taking photos in the toilets and ordered him out then complained to staff via email but apparently nobody was in so nothing was done about it.

When I was speaking to my niece and her classmate in the evening, I was astounded by the mental gymnastics involved in how it would be ok if the person had identified as a trans woman but because he didn’t this was a problem. The friend went so far as to point out unironically that the women’s toilet should be a safe space for women. I asked how they knew he didn’t identify as trans (they said because they knew him as a man so knew he wasn’t) and I asked how him wearing women’s clothes could have changed the outcome of the threat of surveillance cameras, and they said because a trans woman wouldn’t do that (!). I asked what if they didn’t know this hypothetical trans person personally and they said then it wouldn’t matter because they wouldn’t see them again. My niece even went so far as to say it’s not how a person presents, it’s how they identify but couldn’t answer how they would know how someone identifies in a situation like this without asking them outright which is as we know problematic.

I just don’t understand the mental gymnastics involved in justifying albeit in this instance, hypothetical behaviours. Because this person dresses like a man and identifies as a man he’s a threat but if he happened to say he identified as a woman then he wouldn’t be a threat regardless of how he dressed, and they’d just accept this on his say so?

I tried to explain to my niece and friend that this is the gender critical dilemma. How do we know who is safe? and doesn’t allowing a male bodied person who identifies as not male into places where women are in a state of undress or vulnerability, open up the spaces to men like this guy who doesn’t care for the boundary being crossed and thinks it’s acceptable in the name of art (or any other reason he can think of)

Of course I’m called an old t*rf for my logic but they just cannot see that their response is illogical. The level of trust required for their viewpoint is astounding based on how someone identifies internally which we can never truly know about or if they make it known, be sure that they are genuine

Can anyone explain to me how this works in the mind of genZ because my geriatric millennial brain is not catching up?

Interestingly (and depressingly) not long ago I was asked to take part in 'diversity' training (which was all about TQIA+ with a passing reference to LGB but nothing about race, sex, age, disability etc). One slide was headed 'Get comfortable with being uncomfortable'

There's a phrase that could do with some unpacking. In the context of sexuality, its a humdinger. 'Lie back and think of England' is what comes to mind.

The most damaging thing about TWAW is not that it has emboldened predators to transgress boundaries, although it has.

The most damaging thing is how it has eroded women and girls' own boundaries, taught them that they should replace their own privacy, dignity, and safety with 'be kind', doubt their own instincts, stay silent for fear of being accidentally 'transphobic'.

It has wholesale taught women and girls that their wants and needs and rights are less important than those of males.

Basically it has taught women that to be afraid, or cautious, or curious, is forbidden. We are to comply, support, and affirm. That's our duty as support humans.

I also think that logical arguments are never going to work with someone who truly believes in gender ideology, because it's not based on logic.

I think that you have to accept and respect that someone believes whatever they believe, but that where you draw a great big line is when other people are expected to behave as if they believe it too.

With a bit of luck the male student will respond to pushback by identifying as female.

Why would it be okay for anyone to surveil any toilets?

I can’t understand it because when I was their age, about 20 years ago I first encountered transwomen in the gay bars in town and I remember thinking how ridiculous the idea was and how I would be more wary of a man dressed in women’s clothes, not less.

I honestly do think Haley on Coronation Street has a lot to answer for l, giving the impression transwomen are all tiny, wouldn’t hurt a fly and indistinguishable for actual women.

I bet if they were actually faced with an unknown 6ft 15st man in a dress in the ladies they’d shit themselves.

I think another part of it is also that they haven’t had the life experience to understand that there are people who will do things just because they can, they assume that it would be too humiliating for a man to wear women’s clothes and enter the ladies unless he genuinely believed he was a transwoman, but it’s only once you go out into the world as an adult you find there are arseholes who will go against social norms just because “I’m entitled” or “no one can stop me” or they enjoy the discomfort they cause others.

That’s what I’m thinking. Why not address her actual concerns and encourage her to report to teachers, police. Instead of using it as an opportunity to shoe horn your own beliefs into the mix. This conversation wasn’t the place. Odd.

Call me a fusty old boomer but what is meant by "artwork threatening surveillance " does it mean this person may or may not have hidden cameras? I am confused.
What are the college authorities doing about it?

I honestly just despair for that generation. The worst of it is they are so superior in thinking they can grasp and perceive things the rest of us can’t. It’s like watching a car crash.

Thankfully my dcs generation seem to take a “ but the Emperor has no clothes “ approach and I think that’s our only hope for humanity- that the younger children coming through are not intimated into the nonsense because they will see the purveyors of this clap-trap as “ old and stupid” ( and in this generational instance they would have a point …)

I think we are trained to believe that men with gender are particularly vulnerable. That not only are they deserving to be in womens spaces, but because they are vulnerable they can't be perpetrators.

Even if they cause women to be distress, women need to cope with a little uncomfort for the greater good of the men's inclusion.

Men without gender arent vulnerable therefore can be perpetrators. And wouldnt demean themselves or need to dress 'as women' to be in the space because of male privilege and abuse culture.

Therefore your neice can be upset that this man without gender did this, whereas couldnt be if a man with gender did the same thing.

Its hierarchies of vulnerability allowing different groups to get away with different behaviours.

The mind boggles.

Im guessing he thinks he can get away with it because he isnt actually doing any surveillance, only Schrödinger's cat-ing it.

I came across similar views from my art student daughter. It was in danger of causing a real rift at one point. Now in her late twenties, she's showing signs of getting it, though I think you're right that there is immense social pressure to be kind.

pressurr to be kind to men. Not to women.

This is a absolutely it, we need to elevate the value of being female. Celebrate the contribution that most females make to society, the thing that no man can do, providing and raising the next generation.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

I honestly think it has more to do with challenging established orthodoxy than being kind - because a lot of the impact isn’t kind.

Call me cynical, but I think that this is the actual point behind the whole trans movement. Women were getting too uppity with “the future is female” mantra and this was a way to curtail that and put us back in the place that patriarchy has designed for us. It’s the real backlash against feminism itself.

This! It’s outrageous that any woman was cast to play a trans woman, but maybe it was a deliberate ploy to make them seem less threatening, it might all have been orchestrated. I don’t think that people realise just how long this has been in the making, nudge units may have existed long before they became apparent.

👏 👏 👏
Excellent post. Thanks.

I cannot believe so many people cannot join the dots in this

Go on then mate. Your opportunity to explain why transwomen are women and not male with stereotypically male patterns of offending and how we are wrong to 'shoe horn' this seemingly 100% relevant 'belief' into the conversation. We await your wisdom.

I suspect the artwork was intended to be an illustration of the oft-trotted out TRA claim that single sex toilets means toilets will require surveillance and policing.

In a poorly informed push to make toilets "dignified" and "safe" by excluding trans women, TERFs are ironically stripping away their own privacy.

The artist probably felt very very clever.

Firstly don't call me your mate, you don't know me and I'm not your mate . Also, while we're at it can you show me where I have stated that trans women are women? I haven't expressed any of my own beliefs, simply because they're not relevant to the topic raised by the op's niece.
If there's any mental gymnastics going here, it's the people desperate to turn everything into fucking a trans debate.