3 questions for GC women

[ChirpyFinch]

As the title says, three questions for the women in this chat.

1. Do you think the majority of people are gender critical, and why/why not?

2. Globally, the right wing is more vocally gender critical than the left. They are also far more likely to be regressive on a range of women’s issues like abortion and anti-gay. Why do you think they agree with GCs on this one issue but disagree on so much else (if you think they do?)

3. How many trans people do you estimate there are globally?

Ah, yes, of course.

views can differ

Indeed they can but when certain views are being used to completely upend and fundamentally alter Laws and functions within a democratic society those views have to have a substance behind them and be able to withstand debate, discussion, scrutiny and questioning.

Sacrilege!!! Off with your head!

When people refuse to back up their ideological viewpoint but still insist that I should give it primacy over my reality-based one, I'm always going to be drawing conclusions about them and their views. It's not personal.

It's not possible to make a convincing claim that your (general your) view is the superior one when you haven't explained it.

This.

Another thing. Right leaning people are often more religious.

Trans ideology seems to deliver to some of the same basic human needs that religion does. For those on the left without religious faith, it fulfils some of these human instincts that aren't currently being met by a religious world view.

Sex (back to evolution again!) is a reproductive strategy common to all mammals. What does it mean to identify as egg-haver when you are sperm-jizzer?

I also struggle to understand this!

@ElleWoods15 I would really appreciate your thoughts on this.

This is a great point.

However, instead of worshipping a deity of whatever flavour, the individual BECOMES THE DEITY.

Its a narcissists dream, really.

Trans ideology seems to deliver to some of the same basic human needs that religion does. For those on the left without religious faith, it fulfils some of these human instincts that aren't currently being met by a religious world view.

Yes, I think this is a good point. I think that's why the "Humanists" love it so much.

Absolutely

But you can see how it's a little, odd, to tell other people their views are regressive and so on, without explaining why or being prepared to explain why your alternative opinion is more valid and well reasoned

Yes, you're questioning my intelligence in response to my views but you're not prepared to share your views.

Makes you wonder just how many new wee Gods and Goddesses it'll take for the Big Man to start the smiting.

As I’ve said repeatedly, I believe our opinions can differ. I’m not asking you to change your view. I’m asking you to be respectful of those who hold differing views.

I’m not questioning your intelligence.

The only questioning of intelligence has been from GC posters about those supporting trans rights.

I’m not asking you to change your views. Just don’t be offensive about those who hold alternative views.

Can you see why people don't have to respect a view that isn't explained or even allowed to be questioned? I respect your right to hold that view, but I'm not going to give any credence or weight to it either.

Perhaps you could respond to those people who you feel haven't insulted you or your intelligence and ignore those that you feel have.

You're being asked respectfully to explain how you come by those other views, that's all. Nobody's holding your feet in a fire. You're also being respectfully told that if you can't explain these views then they'll be dismissed.

Just how much kowtowing do you want?

I’m asking you to be respectful of those who hold differing views.

Being respectful of people doesn't mean people have to respect the view itself. I also don't have to be respectful of those trans rights activists or their supporters who threaten, abuse and bully women.

Chesterton's “When men choose not to believe in God, they do not thereafter believe in nothing, they then become capable of believing in anything.” (And I say that as an athiest)

I don’t really buy the argument of Gen Z and inclusiveness. Why is this inclusive? What is the value of collapsing male and female as meaningful biological categories?

I think that trans and non binary identifications right now are mostly driven by powerful social forces and social contagion. That wouldn’t matter so much if the impact of gender dysphoria was confined to superficial elements, like makeup and clothing, but it is leading young people to seek hormones and surgery that damage bodies. And it’s sincerely done, by many.

So I guess I feel that belief in trans identity is similar to belief in religion. It’s hard to argue people out of religious beliefs; you can’t argue me out of my scepticism. But I come back to the physical consequences of these beliefs- often profoundly harmful- and I don’t see what is positive or inclusive.

By calling an apparently opposing view "regressive" and expressing opinions that it is an intolerant and non-inclusive view that only old people hold, and by expressing the view that you hope younger people won't hold this view... you are criticising that view and judging it to be harmful. Surely you can see that? You're not just politely respecting other people's right to hold that view. You engaged in criticism of it, but won't explain why or answer questions about your own view which you clearly judge to be superior.

Yes. 'Gender' being an innate and mystical property only works if it has a function akin to a soul.

Of course many people believe in souls. And gender. That's fine; it's not fine to try to impose those views on the rest of the population.

Yes. 'Gender' being an innate and mystical property only works if it has a function akin to a soul.

Of course many people believe in souls. And gender. That's fine; it's not fine to try to impose those views on the rest of the population.

This. I don't believe in god. I don't believe in Allah. I don't believe in "being born in the wrong body".

Can’t you see that repeatedly commenting that either they can’t be intelligent or that they must be blinded by ideology is rude.

So is ignoring polite, respectfully asked questions but hey, we have to make exceptions for special people.....

I didn't comment that anyone wasn't intelligent, let alone "repeatedly", so not sure where you've got that from.