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?

Indeed we have quite the opposite.

Lots of older women saying that in their late teens and early twenties they went through a period of hating being female and wishing that they were male for all manner of reasons.

They went through that and now say, they are relieved they were born at another time because they recognise just how vulnerable they would have been to medicalisation and ideology which might have put them at risk from things they were safeguarded against.

But this voice of experience is derided by ageist attitudes that belittle and dismiss these women as 'bigoted' because they don't understand how 'the world has changed'.

The world hasn't changed. It is still sexist, ageist, homophobic and racist. It's just manifesting in a different way because those pushing themselves views have learnt ways to do this whilst deflecting the recognition of them as being unacceptable and anti-equality.

Yes, you’re right. Thanks for making me clarify my thinking!

Why can’t people be rude? We are adults and sometimes people are rude, sometimes they swear and sometimes they are blunt and others mistake this for rudeness?

Surely rudeness can be said to be all too subjective if it is not a personal attack and name calling.

Aah, remember the days when MN was known as a nest of vipers, full of robust, blunt no holds barred, sweary commentary.

I'm not a fan of the term Gender Critical. Because it focuses on what's not important. I don't give a shit about how you perceive your 'gender'. Knock yourself out. But it's not relevant to anyone else really. Sex is what's important.

My new favourite post on the thread! Thank you @Mmmnotsure

Oh my God you've solved it! Let's do this and get the whole thing over and done with. ✔️

It is something I have vowed to do if I ever get into trouble. Even if it doesn't help in the long run I shall enjoy watching all the squirming in the beginning. Yes I am petty

I think you will find the current research shows that Gen X and boomers are more inclusive than the younger generations. There are two sets of data that shows this.

Perhaps you have a biased view on what ‘inclusive’ means. Maybe you believe it only means including specific sets of people and opinions. Whereas, the research shows that Gen X and Boomers are more widely accepting. Particularly of opinions that differ from theirs. Millennials and younger people are fearful of stating their opinions and losing friends and family who would ostracize them.

I have seen far too many people complaining about shit like having to read the work ‘fuck’. I mean, that is fucking crazy that in this day and age people will actually not be able to read a few fucks. I figure those people don’t give enough fucks about the topic.

Inclusivity of people who don't agree with you seems at a low ebb generally. Cancel culture is fairly alarming, especially in universities.

Do you remember the drive by scolder who insisted we were all being ridiculous, hysterical conspiracy theorists when we talked about the monitors and the screen grab dredging and went very quiet when we linked articles of TRA's boasting that that is exactly what they do?

I remember more than one, including a disingenuous interpretation that "The Monitors" was referring to specific pro-trans posters on the thread rather than the TRAs who had literally appointed themselves "monitors" and gave an interview about it.

Indeed.

When you have university staff and students unable to debate opinions they find objectionable, you know we are in trouble as a society.

And when people cannot support their opinions with evidence, or logically consistent reasoning, then, I am not sure why they think others should just accept those opinions without challenge.

And when people cannot support their opinions with evidence, or logically consistent reasoning, then, I am not sure why they think others should just accept those opinions without challenge.

Indeed.

There were three attempts to screen the film Adult Human Female at the University of Edinburgh and the students (and some staff) were so determined to stop women watching a film that an activist spat at attendees at one of the cancelled screenings and students blockaded the entrances at another attempt at a screening. All because they couldn't bear to hear (or have anyone else hear) opposing views.

And that's just one University. There's so many more examples.

I have seen far too many people complaining about shit like having to read the work ‘fuck’. I mean, that is fucking crazy that in this day and age people will actually not be able to read a few fucks. I figure those people don’t give enough fucks about the topic.

Snort, glad you got that off your chest Helle😂

Hearing things you disagree with is healthy.

Theres a study which looks at the brains of known islamic extremists. They realised they had been in an echo chamber of opinions. They exposed them to a plurality of views and found not only did they deradicalise but the scans of their brains changed.

This is important in terms of understanding the impact of social media.

Its is IMPORTANT to be challenged and to look at different views because they help us develop critical thought and good arguments. If you have an opinion you should be able to back it up with substance and valid points.

That is really interesting Red and this really is important, in fact I'd say imperative, history is littered with examples of how things can go very badly wrong if this doesn't happen:

Its is IMPORTANT to be challenged and to look at different views because they help us develop critical thought and good arguments. If you have an opinion you should be able to back it up with substance and valid points.

Nearly the witching hour for OP's return!

In the meantime, I'm another one who is interested in what Elle makes of Rachel Dolezal and how comfortable white people should feel about identifying as black?

Too fucking right, Gail! 😇

That's very interesting. Makes a lot of sense.

Thank you, it is really helpful to get this insight into your thinking.

So for you, the difference between men and women is indeed that they have different types of mind rather than different types of body, because for you it is possible to that two people with identical bodies could stand in front of you and one be a man and the other a woman.

So for me this raises some further questions:

I understand "female" to be a fact of the body. Female (or woman) to me is simply the name for people who have that body type. There is no other component to it. So to me, if you take away the body from the definition of "woman" (or man) there isn't any further thing left in the term that a person could be. The concept of being "innately female" without a female body is as meaningless to me as the idea that a blue square might be "innately red".

Clearly for you this is different. In your understanding of these things what does "innately female" describe, and how does that innate female quality give rise to to the need for female-only sports, protections, opportunities etc?

And finally, why does this innate feeling need to have the name "man" or "woman" when those words already referred to body types? If Man or Woman is not a fact of the body, what's the connection between their original meaning as a fact of the body and the new meaning as a fact of the mind? And given that male and female bodies obviously do also exist and being one or the other does have material physical and social consequences, why are there not also words for the different sexes?

I don't think that the right wing are more GC than the left. I'd say a lot of people here on MN (not representing the universe obviously) are both GC and pretty vocally left wing. I don't really know anyone openly right wing in real life, quite the opposite. But plenty are GC.
I don't take the fact that Tommy Robinson and his ilk despise absolutely everyone bar working class racist white men as an indication that they are inherently GC, any more than they care about the plight of Jewish people, or that children are victimised by paedos.

There were three attempts to screen the film Adult Human Female at the University of Edinburgh and the students (and some staff) were so determined to stop women watching a film that an activist spat at attendees at one of the cancelled screenings and students blockaded the entrances at another attempt at a screening. All because they couldn't bear to hear (or have anyone else hear) opposing views.

And that is the actions of those who consider themselves righteous and kind - where is the condemnation of this? Who would want to ally themselves with those that do this and worse? Why are their actions excused?

The trans rights extremists and their allies refer to people like my transwomen friends as Truscum, yes that's right they use a term that incorporates the word scum to refer to another human being. Dehumanise and vilify another human being - so progressive, so kind, so tolerant.

Yet posters on this board are being called rude and aggressive - remove the beam from your own eye seems appropriate here (a Biblical quote btw).

Answer to 1:
Talk to the general public about transwomen and transmen and ask if they're gender critical and most won't have the foggiest idea what you're talking about still. That's because the language is so difficult to get your head around.

But the huge majority (90%+) of ordinary people on the street are GC when asked questions such as 'Should men who identify as women be allowed to complete in women's sport?', 'Should men who identify as women be allowed to use women's toilets?' 'Would be happy if a man who identifies as a woman wanted to use the same changing rooms as your daughter/ sister/ mother/ grandmother?' I've been out in various High Streets asking these questions of passersby for eight or nine years now. To start with people thought we were crazy — surely no man would want to play women's sport or use the women's toilets? Now I'd say almost 100% say no, absolutely not — and they're getting more and more certain and angry about it.

Just back from a few hours drinking with an old friend and not sure whether to laugh or cry at this thread now. Her DD, 11 days younger than my own, with similar psychiatric profile to my own (incl EuPD, tho’ not ASD/ADHD) but with 18m as an inpatient aged 14-16, is now 19, on T and had her breasts removed by the NHS on 1st July. Just how FUCKING TRAGIC is that? And just what the FUCK is wrong with the NHS? Am I GC, yes I fucking am.