Gender Critical and Transphobic Trans Allies

[JamieCannister]

It occurred to me last night that there are actually loads of people who claim to be trans allies who are gender critical and transphobic. And deeply ignorant.

People who will genuinely say "trans women are women" and that everyone should be free to live their lives how they want (eg self-ID into women's spaces, receive hormones and surgeries on demand, with no concern for how this stops women living their lives as they want).

They believe "trans children" exist, but that gender non-conforming kids should be left alone and only transition when they reach adulthood if they still want to. They often don't believe that "trans children" ever receive puberty blockers or wrong sex hormones, and don't think they should, yet don't realize that this puts them completely at odds with the ideology they claim to support.

They believe that hardly any men are in women's sports, so it doesn't matter, besides no man would be allowed in until they have "transitioned" at which point they would no longer have male advantage. Fallon Fox either did not happen, because it could not happen or it was a mistake by the sports organisers and it will never happen again.

They believe that DSDs prove that gender is on a spectrum and trans is real, whilst completely missing that the implication is that we can medically test for transness, when the people they claim to support would argue that all medical gatekeeping is wrong.

I don't know where I'm going with this.

There are the real nutter TRAs at protests. There are trans people who are deep into a cult.

But there is also a massive group of people who genuinely believe they are allies, and genuinely believe they are 100% TQ+ friendly. They are happy to shout abuse at "transphobes". Yet stick them in a room to speak with a protest-attending TRA and they would either be condemned as a disgusting transphobe, or they would be browbeaten into being quickly educated and forgiven so long as they do penance as instructed.

"But there is also a massive group of people who genuinely believe they are allies, and genuinely believe they are 100% TQ+ friendly. They are happy to shout abuse at "transphobes". Yet stick them in a room to speak with a protest-attending TRA and they would either be condemned as a disgusting transphobe, or they would be browbeaten into being quickly educated and forgiven so long as they do penance as instructed."

This has long be recognised.

There are quite a few posters on MN who in their defence of people they support as being transgender, end up being arbitrators of who is and is not transgender. And there are even people who have transgender identities who will declare who is and isn't transgender.

Obviously, this revolves around the concept of there being a 'true' transgender group.

And let's not forget that so many of them forget the rest of the 130+ genders!

But sadly, OP, I suspect that your thread may be lost because you used the words such as cult, and if it is deleted, maybe you should contact MNHQ and ask to restate it with different wording.

You might put me in this catagory, although I wouldn't describe myself as an ally and never shouted abuse at transphobes.

I don't think that people can change sex or that transwomen are actually women.

But I believe that some people are only able to live a life they feel is worth living if they have hormonal and surgical interventions to make them look more like the opposite sex and have no issue with them doing so.

I think transgender children exist, in that some children have gender dysphoria that persists into adulthood. I don't think they should be given puberty blockers / hormones / surgery because we don't know if they will grow out of it. But I don't think this means they don't exist.

Some people say racist things while trying to promote anti-racism to actual racists.

Yeah... I was certainly not claiming that I was providing some deeply insightful new analysis... it just struck me last night how utterly, shamefully ignorant so many trans allies are. They are ignorant as to the reality of what is happening in the real world. And they are so ignorant about the ideology they claim to support, to the point that they are literally arguing against it whilst claiming to be arguing for it.

I don't know why I started this thread really, maybe just to emphasize an aspect of this whole issue that I knew existed but it is only just dawning on me how massive a thing it is.

Denying autogynephilia and transvestic fetishism whilst numerous psychologists state it is true, and numerous men admit to it is another example.

Yes I saw one the other day "transphobes who agree with the SC ruling get off my Facebook" then in the comments when someone brought up women's sports the OP conceded this was a huge issue but claimed she "didn't have the spoons" to think about it. 🙄 IDK how I feel about people like this because on one hand they know that there are problems with e.g. self ID but on the other hand they refuse to think about them or address them.

Oh yeah she said "this is a safe space" too, and I thought 'actual TRAs would eat you for breakfast if they saw you had any issues with them being in women's sports.'

I don't think I would put you in that category, but then again I don't know all your views. Do you support the people in paragraph 3 being in women's sports and toilets?

I regard myself as militantly gender critical, but based on what you have said we pretty much agree. Where we might differ is I am not sure how much l like the term gender dysphoria for discomfort with one's sexed body, nor am I sure that the people "only able to live a life they feel is worth living if they have hormonal and surgical interventions to make them look more like the opposite sex" should be getting medical intervensions. Instead I believe they need much better mental health support, partly to give better outcomes generally (people might feel life is only worth living if they transition, but they are likely wrong - they can be happy with proper support, and not have the medical complications), and partly to ensure that we don't end up with deeply distressed post-op destransitioners. The former group are people who could have been happier, the latter are people who made a tragic mistake. And I'd argue that we should sacrifice - if necessary - a small amount of happiness (compared to if they got MH support) for the people for whom transition is a good thing, in order to ensure we have no massively regretful detransitioners.

Are we allowed to mention trans allies who lose their shit when they are mistaken for trans women?
We've had threads where we've shared our experiences of being called 'sir', most of us just laugh it off and I don't think anyone has tried to get a low paid worker sacked for it.

Once you see it OP, you cannot unsee it.

And a thread often helps you clarify in your head just what it is that you are perceiving. The dissonance is real. And it is great to keep reevaluating what you think.

No space is safe if you're engaging in wrong-think. You cannot be made to suffer enough if you engage in wrong-think.

I agree, but we have a whole host of women who know their sex and are taking similar steps to modify their bodies to great risk.

It's the people who say they are allies but also use "woman" as interchangeable with "female" who don't seem very clear on what it is they're actually supporting.

Lots of trans people have come out with this after the ruling - saying male toilets would only have men in them (surely they'd be mixed gender?)

But I believe that some people are only able to live a life they feel is worth living if they have hormonal and surgical interventions to make them look more like the opposite sex and have no issue with them doing so.

That's sex, not gender. The eternal issue of them either meaning the same thing or entirely separate things depending on who you're talking to!

I do think OP makes an interesting point which I have come across time and again. Lots of people believe they should #bekind, parrot TWAW, and agree that they don’t really understand the trans experience. It makes them really uncomfortable if you ask questions, because it makes them confront the conflict between what they know to be true, and what they’ve been socialised to say.

That discomfort is exactly why it’s been socially unacceptable to ask the questions (not ok to make people feel uncomfortable). It’s also why, if #nodebate can be effectively broken down, and people feel empowered to say what they really think, the whole thing will crumble like a pack of cards - the vast majority of people just don’t agree with the GI premise.

I’d also highlight that we don’t know whether pharma/surgical interventions are actually in anyone’s best interests. Proper medical trials may well show that all this was built on a pile of sand, and some doctors’ conceit about being able to perform ‘treatments’ that nobody actually needed

I think that gender ideology is to incoherent that any kind of middle ground is unstable. Either it's rubbish or it's a "maxxing" thing whether the definition of trans is anyone, including rapists in prison, who claims to have a trans identity, and that their identity should take precedence over sex in all circumstances.

It's very common to see people who think they are trans allies on social media give a very clear definition of gender critical beliefs.

They always get very annoyed when you point this out.

Ultimately, until the trans community decides to get behind the sort of position described by @GCornotGCthatisthequestion they won't be able to progress. Whether you agree with it or not it is coherent and based in reality in a way their current agenda isn't. As we see by the way anyone trying to defend the current position collapses into incoherence as soon as they are properly challenged.

If the trans community's position is "Transwomen are to be considered women in ALL circumstances" then eventually those who oppose that will end up with "Transwomen should not be considered women in ANY circumstances".

I'm not here making any judgements whether on our side we should be absolutists, or moderates or whatever! Just that it's irrelevant as long as the trans community's official position is that there can be no compromise.

There are people who identify as transgender who could be described as transphobic as they don't agree with some aspects (for example DD plays a sport where quite a few if the girls team actually identify as boys, but acknowledge it would be dangerous for them to try to play with the boys and for any transwomen to play on their teams)

Re: making them uncomfortable... how confident are you that this is it? I take things at face value, so I tend to assume that these people are ignorant and (unsurprisingly) unable to rationally explain the incoherent ideology they claim to support, and they hate what they see as bigots on the GC side, so they get angry.

How confident are you that significant numbers are uncomfortable, suffering cognitive dissonance, and that is what drives the anger?

I think that this type of black and white thinking is one of the reasons where are in this mess.

To be fair many I've seen quite a few women here talk about unfriending those who they perceive as defending gender idiology so this goes both ways.

There’s always those who say they fully believe TWAW but then say obviously not prisons or sports. You either believe it in every circumstance or you don’t, these are the people that haven’t thought about it in any great depth. You see it on threads here “urgh mumsnet is disgustingly transphobic, I am not though, I am a lovely kind person not like these others”. Then go on to say third spaces are needed or that “obviously those men committing those crimes aren’t real trans people and obviously no men should be in women’s prisons”. By their own utterances they are transphobic but by normal standards they aren’t. It’s why EVERY discussion comes back to the bloody toilets because they are comfortable discussing those but not ok discussing their bias against women in prisons.

This is my horrible ex boyfriend.
I chuckle to myself about it.

Nicola Sturgeon advocating for self ID but then refusing to accept that the rapist Isla Bryson was transgender is a perfect example of this.

How transphobic of Nicola.

Do you support the people in paragraph 3 being in women's sports and toilets?

I think there should always be a catagory for women to compete with each other and no males / transwomen / anyone who has benefited from testosterone. I would have no objection to a separate catagory for transwomen, either as open or one just for transwomen.

I actually don't care about the odd transwoman using the toilet cubicle next to me as long as they behave themselves but recognise that other womens consent to this isn't mine to give.

Not really.

The only commonality between people with transgender identities is that they have a philosophical belief about their identity. And that belief does not reflect material reality. There are no biological markers nor neurological markers that are in common.

Therefore, the question remains, what is a coherent description and definition of this group considering the demands on our laws and policies that they are making.

Why should gender take priority over sex when sex matters, yet that is what is being demanded? And what other philosophical belief that doesn't reflect material reality get such treatment that it is prioritised over another protected characteristic when that characteristic is the most important for safety, safeguarding, equal opportunity and privacy and dignity?