Help me argue that What it Feels Like For a Girl doesn't prove terfs are wrong

[Pluvia]

I'm in a women's discussion group with a woman who is an expert in her field of medicine. She's worked for some years with the WHO and other major agencies and has only recently returned to the UK after about a decade working in Geneva, with stints in Ethiopia and elsewhere in the developing world. Her specialist field is a particular area of women's health. She knows what a woman is.

Sex realism/ the GC pov seems to have completely passed her by. She has no idea of the complexity or reality of the situation and thinks trans people are vulnerable souls who probably have some genetic or neurological predisposition that leaves them feeling that they are in the wrong bodies. She thinks Cass is unduly harsh. Although her life appears to be focussed around women's health, she seems blind to the feminist or women's rights issues inherent in GI.

She has no idea about sexual fetishes, AGP, attacks on women, the misogyny and homophobia that lies behind so much GI. She can't understand how someone like me, who appears to be so reasonable on so many other topics, can be so cruel when it comes to transpeople. I asked her to read Helen Joyce's Trans and she said she tried but couldn't bear the hatred that she experienced in the first few chapters. She has now sent me a link to What It Feels Like For a Girl. which, she says, will show me what I've misunderstood and why my attitude is so harsh.

I'm not going to watch WIFLFAG and give a misogynistic, homophobic gay man any oxygen. Any thoughts on what I can say that might get through to her? At what point with people like her does one just give up?

I think you should watch some of it as she made the effort to read a few chapters of the book. At least then you might get an idea of why she thinks like she does.

She has no idea of the complexity or reality of the situation and thinks trans people are vulnerable souls who probably have some genetic or neurological predisposition that leaves them feeling that they are in the wrong bodies.

That's fine for her to think that, no arguments there. But they ARE in the wrong bodies and therefore cannot use the single sex spaces provided for the sex they want to be rather than the one they are.

It's tough but it's just one of life's difficulties that they are going to have to manage. The same way that people born with disabilities have to manage their condition in their everyday lives. It's not fair but it is what it is.

I would watch it with an open mind and give her your honest opinion. (I did try reading the book but it is bloody awful, almost unreadable, so I'm afraid I didn't get far, but I understand the author had a troubled youth and for that he has my sympathy).

I find people like your acquaintance fascinating and she is not alone, being on the surface reasonably intelligent but then on this issue, very much wrong end of the stick as to what sex realists actually think. The fact she think HJ's book is full of hatred shows she is not keeping an open mind. Will she agree to read the book if you agree to watch the series?

You will need to find some common ground, eg sympathy for those who feel they don't fit in (we can all agree there hopefully), men in womens sports, or sharing cells in prisons, or the lack of positive evidence for medical treatments for GQ children, and take things from there. (Whatever you do, don't start with toilets.)

Perhaps I should add that I am a long-time terf, a lesbian and an activist of some years' standing. This isn't my first rodeo. And no, I'm not going to watch the series.

What do YOU got that proves her wrong?

My long held position of why terfs are so militant in their views is that on the opposite of them is start realisation that they harassed, tortured, marginalized, dehumanized, bullied and tormented people who are going through A LOT, and did all of it for absolutely no tangible gain; simply driven by unrealistic and unreasonable fears (and they have no basis in reality, yes singular incidents CAN happen, but that's no basis for policy making). No better than any other type of bigotry like racism.

To give a practiced example is the often thrown around criminality pattern. The whole thing originated from 1 page written by non-scientist as "summary" of a study. Since then author of the actual study that was surmised came out and debunked the summary, and stated clearly that the summary is not backed up by the study and that it's misrepresenting the work.

And having to face up to this reality is just too much to handle, which is why trying to argue away from this mentality is so problematic and will not be done with facts as you are dealing with deeply rooted feelings. Same as was successfully done in cases of other bigotries.

And now cue in tons of people quoting it and airing out their fears based on nothing resembling reality and in the process completely doing the things I said to trans people at large, because... Yeah, it's a hard thing to accept that you may be the baddie.

I doubt you’ll be able to give her lots of facts and figures to convince her. Remember if she’s a bit behind she’s at the BeKind beginning which is where most people start. Worth saying that you started where she is now but as you’ve seen what self ID has done to women you became less sympathetic - which isn’t the same as hatred.

So asking questions might work? Like - so you think it was OK for Sandie Peggie to be disciplined and sacked for saying “but you’re a man”? What did you think of 16 year old Cerys getting a 12 month football ban for asking a 26 year old bearded player on the women’s team “are you a man”? If you were the woman who was raped on a Kent NHS ward would you expect them to say “there was no man on the ward” because her attacker was a TW? If Cass is harsh get her to watch the Ritchie 5mins Battle of Ideas YouTube clip?

Obvs not all these things at once but more of a drip drip over quite a long time. Maybe start with Ritchie’s film because kids and sports are the things which overcome resistance to changing POV most. And it’s a horrificly graphic illustration about why Cass was not at all harsh if you’re a teen caught up in all this?

Keeping single-sex spaces single-sex is a tangible gain. Prisons, for example. Do you want another Karen White case?

What do YOU got that proves her wrong?

Everything: facts, evidence, data, science. All the evidence in Helen Joyce's book, Hannah Barnes's book and all the other books on the subject. All the high-quality studies, the Cass review and the Supreme Court. All the thousands of photos and posts and videos all over Twix and other social media sites of trans people and their supporters threatening women who speak out, dressed in their fetish gear, transgressing women's boundaries and openly displaying their misogyny. MoJ stats showing that TWs display a higher rate of sexual offending than other men. I could go on but I shouldn't need to.

I'm trying to work out how homophobic bullying, sexual abuse and prostitution leading a nascently gay young man into female identification proves 'TERFS' wrong?

What is it i'm missing?

Wow, @AidaP, where did that come from? What filter have you put between yourself and the world that you can see it like that?

Then I guess if you don't want to meet her halfway by watching at least some of it then there's no conversation to be had. The end. Refusing to try and see where she's coming from so you can talk things through won't get you anywhere

“harassed, tortured, marginalized, dehumanized, bullied and tormented” that’s quite the claim! Is that literal harassment, torture, marginalisation, dehumanisation, bullying and tormenting or of the hurty feelz variety?

@AidaP

Obviously I would feel horrendous if I had harassed, tortured, marginalised, dehumanised, bullied and tormented anyone.

Part of the problem seems to come from me having different definitions of those words and also having lived through quite a sexist period where I was harassed, bullied & marginalised due to being a woman forging a path in a male dominated industry.

In the present day UK I don’t see trans people suffering huge detriments. Could you give me some examples of the sorts of problems you mean?

Or are you somewhere else in the world where trans people have no legal protections? Your intro and spelling suggest that your from abroad?

It's a bit pompous of you to think that she should think the way you do anyway, she sounds like a very intelligent woman, I'm sure she's thought about it all. There's no need to try and change her mind

You didn't see a transgender barrister being followed and harassed at parliament bathroom by 2 transphobic activists two week ago?

No one is as blind as the one who refuses to see... Or warped their views to the point where behaving like that is perfectly fine and acceptable because the victim is in minority you do not like.

Theyre in a discussion group together. If debating ideas is pompous the OP and the other person have both signed up to that! 🤣

You can’t reason with the misogynistic men who think male rights trump all, and the bootlicking women who agree with them.

Oh you mean that bloke who broke the law by using women’s toilets and got called out on it? Are you endorsing criminal behaviour? Tut tut

Well I read about that in the paper. In the UK that transwoman barrister is not permitted to use a female toilet. In fact by using that facility they would potentially be harassing women. We have the Equality Act in the UK which protects women on the basis of biological sex. It came after the 1975 Sex Discrimination Act and about 150 years worth of campaigning on women’s rights - even though women are 51% of the UK population. Majority/minority is relevant but not always the primary driver. For sure trans people should not be left without services but they don’t have automatic rights to those hard won by others.

Do you have any other better examples?

Incorrect, house of parliament made it clear that transgender people in there can continue to use bathrooms as they see fit, explaining that so far law on use of toilets is not as clear as some try to make it. You can read it as it was public through MP interpolation.

But again, if you don't want to see, you won't. This is the difference between seeking validation - find what you like and move on - and actual research where you double and triple check everything, including bits you like.

And even if the law was as you dream of, which so far it isn't, this is civil law, not criminal. That means you cannot then decide to take matters into your own hands and harass another person, that actually makes you a criminal, and yep, MET was notified of the incident and is investigating.

That man should not have been in the female facilities - not by law, not by reason, and not by anny sense of integrity or ethics.
If feminine presenting males are concerned about how other men will react to them in private spaces, that is an issue they need to raise the profile of and fight to make better. Imposing on females is not the answer for them. And suggesting it is women’s problem is patriarchal and misogynistic.

The steward at the HOP steered the barrister away from the female lavs and apologised to the women. There’s a lot of confusion and many people have sought to add to that. But the law is now very clear - slowly all services will fall into line.

Fair enough but OP needs to do her bit by watching some of the programme so she knows more about where her friend is coming from. Refusing to engage isn't going to lead to a worthwhile discussion. Better not to bother if OP only wants to see her side of it

Umm… the Houses of Parliament so apologised and not to the criminal. He definitely deserves to be reported. Arent barristers supposed to uphold the law. Not break it by invading spaces they don’t belong in.

See how you just ignored a very clear position just because it disagrees with you? Reality does not matter, just what you want it to be. And this is what happens when you refuse to even acknowledge the fact that, as far as HoP goes, the law is not with you.

And you use that to justify straight harassment, which it would not even if the law was as you dream it to be. But well, guess if you see some people as less, it becomes easy.

You lot have fun reassuring each other and in not engaging in even shred of doubt.