Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions
Chersfrozenface · 31/01/2025 09:37

In the end I think there is far more potential for “liberal” sex denialists to be led back to reason than there is for right-wing patriarchs to ever drop their own flawed definition of “woman".

I'm not seeing much, if any, evidence of that yet. All I see is doubling down.

WorthyTraybake · 31/01/2025 10:02

Yes, I struggled a bit with that too, although I desperately want it to be true.

I think there are signs of hope post-Cass, especially with eg Wes Streeting's apology to Rosie Duffield.

Fundamentally though, I think Smith must be right because the "liberal" side must be more aligned with enlightenment values - with science and truth, rather than the Trumpist post-truth.

(Problem is, I fear what I just wrote stems more from hope than from any real evidence...)

OP posts:
Chersfrozenface · 31/01/2025 10:07

Fundamentally though, I think Smith must be right because the "liberal" side must be more aligned with enlightenment values - with science and truth, rather than the Trumpist post-truth.

Well the "liberal" side don't seem to be very aligned with science and truth when it comes to GII. I mean, how much more post-truth can you get than TWAW?

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 10:29

Fundamentally though, I think Smith must be right because the "liberal" side must be more aligned with enlightenment values - with science and truth, rather than the Trumpist post-truth.

This sounds like you desperately want it to be true. However I see zero evidence that it is. Science and truth has been comprehensively by the left over the last few years - and not just on gender.

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 10:50

Chersfrozenface · 31/01/2025 09:37

In the end I think there is far more potential for “liberal” sex denialists to be led back to reason than there is for right-wing patriarchs to ever drop their own flawed definition of “woman".

I'm not seeing much, if any, evidence of that yet. All I see is doubling down.

I think Trump and his cronies are making this even worse. The "left" (or whatever) are becoming entrenched because the other side are filled with fundamentally bad people.

AlbertCamusflage · 31/01/2025 11:01

Brilliant article. Goodness that woman can write with such clarity and incision. Thank you for the link.

Chersfrozenface · 31/01/2025 11:03

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 10:50

I think Trump and his cronies are making this even worse. The "left" (or whatever) are becoming entrenched because the other side are filled with fundamentally bad people.

The "left" or whatever are numpties, then.

Why the hell would you stick with, and in fact double down on, policies that have at least partly encouraged the public to vote for "fundamentally bad people"?

If you don't want "fundamentally bad people" in power, make sure you're not plugging fundamentally bad policies yourself.

WorthyTraybake · 31/01/2025 11:19

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 10:29

Fundamentally though, I think Smith must be right because the "liberal" side must be more aligned with enlightenment values - with science and truth, rather than the Trumpist post-truth.

This sounds like you desperately want it to be true. However I see zero evidence that it is. Science and truth has been comprehensively by the left over the last few years - and not just on gender.

I think you're right, and I'm guilty of denying the evidence before my own eyes that the left are showing very few signs right now of embracing reality on this (and, with support for the third runway, our centre left (?) government is, in effect if not in words, engaging in anti-scienec climate change denial).
I still think that Trump is the bigger enemy though - he's not even pretending to be decent 😟

OP posts:
TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 11:22

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 10:50

I think Trump and his cronies are making this even worse. The "left" (or whatever) are becoming entrenched because the other side are filled with fundamentally bad people.

Trump is playing them all like a violin.

The left are totally paralysed by this idea that they're the 'good guys' and the orange man is evil. It means they can't back down on obviously awful and damaging policies. And their cognitive dissonance in trying to maintain their image of themselves is off the charts.

The voting public simply do not agree with the left's assessment of themselves. And on many issues, Trump is looking like the more sane option. That is a situation entirely of the democrats making.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 31/01/2025 11:23

I agree with almost everything she says - except I have yet to see labour prioritising safeguarding children or (apart from Wes Streeting to whom I'm pathetically grateful) actually taking on the work of ensuring women's basic rights to safety, privacy and dignity from men.

Bridget Phillipson (Sec State for Education) is frighteningly silent about Cass, the draft education guidelines for schools and the porn soaked organisations that were able to access schools under the last government. It may be that's because she feels an obligation to Stonewall's Lord Ali after he paid £14,000 for her birthday party - who knows.

But until the labour government start prioritising children's safety and women's rights without fear or favour, (remember the recent Women & Equalities committee attempts to undermine Cass?) it seems that currying favour with the powerful trans lobby is the left's priority.

Which is why I'm envious that the USA is getting such a clear steer on all this from the repellent Trump.

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 11:27

I still think that Trump is the bigger enemy though - he's not even pretending to be decent

This is a very telling phrase and similar to one Rory Stewart used the other day. Why would 'pretending' to be decent when you are not be better?

I think this is one of Trump's most powerful qualities for his supporter base. They think that all politicians are fundamentally corrupt and out for their own ends. And the thing they are most sick of is the 'pretending' they are not.

And while there are definitely degrees of this, I don't think they're entirely wrong in their assessment.

IllustratedDictionaryOfTheDoldrums · 31/01/2025 11:33

I think this all had to happen. It's a natural progression of the whole thing.
The right/conservative side was always going to push back to the left/TRA side in a different way to the left/GC side.
The right might have the same biological definition of 'woman' as left/GC but they have the same social definition as left/TRA that is based on stereotyping and regressive gender roles.
This is the time to keep our voices loud - counteract sexism whether it comes from left or right. We are finally getting some sunlight. We need to stand in it, make sure the debate continues to be had.

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 11:37

Chersfrozenface · 31/01/2025 11:03

The "left" or whatever are numpties, then.

Why the hell would you stick with, and in fact double down on, policies that have at least partly encouraged the public to vote for "fundamentally bad people"?

If you don't want "fundamentally bad people" in power, make sure you're not plugging fundamentally bad policies yourself.

At least the "left" have good intentions, even if they are misguided on some issues.

Whereas the "right" are petty and vindictive and only occasionally get things right by accident.

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 11:39

That's the key thing about Trump. He isn't playing the 'game' of civilised politics. And that's proving successful with the voters.

This is inspiring existential panic in those who have made lucrative careers out of their ability to play that game.

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 11:41

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 11:37

At least the "left" have good intentions, even if they are misguided on some issues.

Whereas the "right" are petty and vindictive and only occasionally get things right by accident.

Do they?

Do they have good intentions towards the women locked up with men in prisons? Do they have good intentions towards the children who's health and future are being sacrificed to the gender cult?

And ultimately, outcomes matter more than intentions.

JazzyJelly · 31/01/2025 11:41

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 11:37

At least the "left" have good intentions, even if they are misguided on some issues.

Whereas the "right" are petty and vindictive and only occasionally get things right by accident.

Good intentions butter no parsnips

liveandlearn73628 · 31/01/2025 11:45

Chersfrozenface · 31/01/2025 09:37

In the end I think there is far more potential for “liberal” sex denialists to be led back to reason than there is for right-wing patriarchs to ever drop their own flawed definition of “woman".

I'm not seeing much, if any, evidence of that yet. All I see is doubling down.

Agree. Trump was the shock that needed to happen. But will anything make the left think straight?? Maybe the only thing that will work is reducing the amount of money gender ideology makes... which is what Trump is doing.

Floisme · 31/01/2025 11:52

What Trump knows, is what an open goal looks like.
Sort it out, Democrats. (You too, Labour Party.)

TheCatsTongue · 31/01/2025 11:53

WorthyTraybake · 31/01/2025 11:19

I think you're right, and I'm guilty of denying the evidence before my own eyes that the left are showing very few signs right now of embracing reality on this (and, with support for the third runway, our centre left (?) government is, in effect if not in words, engaging in anti-scienec climate change denial).
I still think that Trump is the bigger enemy though - he's not even pretending to be decent 😟

The third runway is a strange take. It's not being built because of an engagement with anti-science climate change denial, it's being done out of desperation to create economic growth.

And generally every decision by a government is due to vested interests from lobbying. Heathrow has been lobbying for years. The trans movement is only the size it is today because Stonewall get massive funding and then lobby. It is definitely the case where the government fund Stonewall to lobby them!

liveandlearn73628 · 31/01/2025 11:55

As an example, I don't know of any Guardian readers who actually understand what the issue is in the first place. It's been 10 years! They think it's about DSDs or LGB. Not about actual men in women's toilets (they think they're fully transitioned and "no threat"), the mutilation of children (they think it's "gender-affirming care"), nor death and rape threats to women (of course they must be Karens). They don't even think this was a big reason why Trump was elected (must have all been bigots voting). The same people will not sully their eyes by reading a right-wing or independent newspaper to get the other side of the story.

They are in their own bubble. Something needs to break them out of it.

So, I, respectfully, disagree with the amazing Victoria Smith on this one. Either way, Trump already in, so the argument is moot.

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 11:58

This article was posted on the other thread and is quite the read for anyone who wants to take a good clear look at how 'well intentioned' the Democrats were on the gender issue.

www.thefp.com/p/abigail-shrier-how-the-gender-fever-broke-trump-executive-order

MrsOvertonsWindow · 31/01/2025 12:02

TheKeatingFive · 31/01/2025 11:58

This article was posted on the other thread and is quite the read for anyone who wants to take a good clear look at how 'well intentioned' the Democrats were on the gender issue.

www.thefp.com/p/abigail-shrier-how-the-gender-fever-broke-trump-executive-order

What a good article from Abigail Shrier - thank you

Greyskybluesky · 31/01/2025 12:02

HardenYourHeart · 31/01/2025 11:37

At least the "left" have good intentions, even if they are misguided on some issues.

Whereas the "right" are petty and vindictive and only occasionally get things right by accident.

So how long do we have to wait until they get around to acting on these "good intentions"?

I think believing men can be women is a bit more than just "misguided".

Catiette · 31/01/2025 12:02

I think I'll make a mess of expressing this - not very well, and really weak on politics generally: it could sound facile. But...

The Left, founded on a belief in social progress and a happy belief in humanity's relentless march towards betterment, has a degree of conviction in its own moral superiority that can frighten me. It seems to come with a built-in blindness to its own fallibility. And with this comes a dangerous confidence that can be used to justify the most egregious wrongs - including reworking language and reframing reality: "this is what we do, after all: we shape a New World For The Good Of The People". Communism. Trans ideology at the expense of women. Its complete denial of - or worse, a failure to see - its flaws is a key feature. It's "progressive", after all. And how can progress, by definition, be problematic?

Rightly or wrongly, I see somewhat less capacity for such dangerous deceit - the outward-facing kind, of voters, and self-deceit - in the Right. Isn't there are kind of additional layer of security in their C/conservative status? They look to preserve what is and what was, and we're in a society now in which there's a clear consensus on left and right that some, at least, of the most extreme examples of what was (voteless women, Section 28 etc.), are now unthinkable. I do worry this doesn't apply so much to racism - the Southport riots showed this bubbling undercurrent of racist fury... but, even then, my point is that this tendency was expressed more overtly than equivalent, fundamental, prejudices are expressed be by the Left. To the Right, political arguments for the removal or degradation of established rights tend to be more explicit: "Feminism has gone too far... We need a return to the values of the past... We'll protect women whether they want it or not!" Hitler's anti-semitism far more blatant than the complex spectrum of feelings, from the liberal to the intolerant - we know it's still out there - jumbled together in, for example, the pro-Palestinian marches.

So (perhaps extremely naively?), I sometimes think we're better protected from the more obvious risks of right-wing prejudice, by our awareness of how far we've come and what these changes mean to us, than we are against the Left's more insidious, and by definition less familiar, forays into "social progress" through experimental social engineering. These efforts can include - to a degree, will be driven by - the exact same prejudices (eg. the misogyny & homophobia of trans rights ideology)... but these prejudices are better hidden under the rainbow flag of progressivism than an open acknowledgement of past values as being in some way "better".

I worry that they're that much more marketable to an increasingly frustrated and disenfranchised voting public.

PS Fell behind on the thread writing that, so not aware of the more recent replies!

Floisme · 31/01/2025 12:03

I normally have a lot of time for Victoria Smith but I found that article pretty patronising. Does she really think we're not aware of all this?
Is she pleased for women currently in federal prisons or not?