Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Always been GC, but now afraid I'm becoming transphobic

674 replies

HouseOfGuineaPigs · 30/09/2025 23:07

I've always been gender critical and 100% in support of safe spaces for natal women only. I'm completely comfortable with being gender critical. But I'm concerned I've crossed a line into becoming a full on bigot, which is something I don't want to be. Due to my own background of mental health and trauma issues I follow pages on this issue on Facebook. I just saw one with a graphic post saying Using Preferred Pronouns Is Suicide Prevention and it made me want to scream and throw things.

I've been suicidal, I've attempted. I've battled see harm and self destructive behaviours since childhood. I should be sympathetic about the struggles people are having . But I feel manipulated seeing posts like that one. I use preferred names when I'm addressing trans persons. I am kind to them, I don't mention their issues. I treat them the same as anyone else. I will call a bloke Sue even if his real name is Bob, it feels odd, but I will do it to be respectful . But calling a he a she is a step too far. I would either use their name or use they.

Why do I feel so strongly that I'm being manipulated ? None of the trans people I know have abused me in any way. They haven't infringed on my boundaries . I have 2 trans friends, another who is non binary and 2 acquaintances. They have all been decent .

I just feel resentful that I'm being made to feel responsible for someone not taking their life because I don't affirm their identity ?

I'm horrible aren't I ? Please sort my head out !

OP posts:
Thread gallery
31
Helleofabore · 01/10/2025 16:25

FlirtsWithRhinos · 01/10/2025 10:35

On topic:

What the "oh just be polite" argument misses (or deliberately ignores) is that there are two people in the interaction and they both have a sex. So it is impossible to "respect" a trans person's belief about their sex and the type of person it implies without implicitly condoning those beliefs apply to us as well.

The focus is always on what is respectful of the trans person, never whether what the trans person expects is considerate or respectful of the other person. It is just taken as read that the only reason to say no is irrational prejudice.

But this is wrong. It ignores the fact that if I accept that "woman", something I am, meams something other than the sex of the trans person's body, I am accepting that definition for myself as well. And that is not how I see myself.

Women (original sex based meaning) grow up with heavy social expectations to be nice and put others first, prioritising their needs, wants and comfort over our own.

Sadly this is far too often exploited against us both on a personal level by abusive or boundary-pushing men, and at a professional, political and social level by men accepting our support but sidelining our interests.

In the case of language compelled as "courtesy", what is being (deliberately) ignored by these neo sexists is that women are being asked not just to lie about who trans people are, but who we are as well.

There's a reason the neo sexist genderist movement has focused its energy on redefining women (who is one, who isn't one) rather than men - because our social context has made women more easily coerced to accomodate things that make them uncomfortable or sidelined than men are if they can be made to believe the people who are making them uncomfortable are somehow more deserving of comfort or attention.

If I don't believe my status as a woman depends on how much I align to neo-sexist beliefs about having the right set of personality characteristics to be a woman, pretending that I accept this is not just demeaning and humiliating, but deeply distressing because of how it is based in the same beliefs that lead to the historic and ongoing oppression of female people, and how it is just one more situation in which as a woman I experience my lack of power/voice in society.

So all those arguments about "juat be nice can't you" should equally well apply to the genderists who are expecting women to accept language we find degrading and dehumanising.

And yet, they don't.

Why not?

Because genderists, being neo-sexist, bring in fact a movement and a belief that cannot exist without sexism, are naturally and blithely following the same old playbook that sexist society gave them.

OP feels discomfort and anger because at some level she recognises that this is just the same old abuse and emotional manipulation that society has used to coerce women to act against our own interests forever.

^^ this

Theeyeballsinthesky · 01/10/2025 16:33

Ah I see this milkshake brought all the usual TRA and their endlessly debunked arguments to the yard 🙄

Helleofabore · 01/10/2025 16:35

Howseitgoin · 01/10/2025 10:41

When we say that people can't change sex, we call that scientific fact. You call it ideological dogma.

You're unable to recognise your dogma because you don't understand what social constructions are. You falsely believe the concept of 'woman' is some sort of never changing set in stone 'fact' when all it is is a socially constructed word based on cultural associations.

Words come in to being by social associations not by a particular phenomena. Phenomena might be related to the concept via cultural association but they are not what determine it. It's cultural associations or agreed cultural meaning. That's why word meaning evolves over time because culture does. Hence 'chair' once only meant a 'seat' but has now evolved to mean a 'position' in a meeting. That they are both phenomena that exist in the world isn't what determines the word its agreed social associative meaning that does.

'Woman', theoretically for most people has biological associations however in practice socially we usually don't know the reproductive traits of a person but determine whether they are a woman or man based on stereotypical associations hence a 'woman' factually can be a person with either biological or stereotypical associations. Now you might say as I'm sure you will 'but stereotypes are wrong' but that's irrelevant to the fact that stereotypes are overwhelmingly used to determine gender.

"Does this apply to everyone, however they want to be referred to? Should I respect Rachel Dolezal's identity as a black woman? Should I respect Stephonknee Wolscht's identity as a 6-year-old girl? What about that bloke who stands in the shopping centre declaring that he's Jesus?

The context here is pronouns & its not as if preferred pronouns don't have any basis in facts as in cultural associations because they do as I just mentioned.

"What about criminals like Isla Bryson and Sarah Jane Baker?
If a male person assaults me and it ends up in court, can he still decide that I should refer to him as he chooses? Whose rights should be more important here? The criminal or his victim?"

If you've ever been in court you might notice alleged criminals are still afforded basic civilities. That they might of committed a crime does not mean they forfeit their rights to be treated humanely.

"But once again, you seem to have forgotten that respect should go both ways. How is it showing respect to me to expect me to lie? That's not respect, it's coercion."

This is silly. You aren't lying. Respecting someones wishes isn't the same as endorsing them.

"It's not about preferences. If I demanded that it was my preference to be referred to as Her Supreme Majesty the Wonderful and Amazing Old Crone, you might (quite reasonably) say no. Would it change your mind if I said I'd kill myself if you didn't (and it would be your fault)? Is it discrimination to say no to my declared preference?"

Firstly, preferred pronouns are based in reality as discussed unlike your examples. Secondly I'm not suggesting suicidality is a justification rather consistency in maintaining social conventions.

If gender identification is a fact, perhaps you could give a definition. Your second sentence seems to be anti-feminist bollocks.

It's interesting that those who claim to be aligned with reality are often those who can't accept it. Something about ideological dogma? Gendered identification with gendered social roles are adhering to societal expectations dictating how individuals should act, feel, and behave based on their gender. That society has certain gendered expectations right or wrong is a fact.

Show quote history

Blimey Old Crone! After all these years, you don't know what is social construction and what is not.

And words have no established meaning that is based on a materially real and well understood concept.

Oh.. and that stereotypes are wrong... yet vitally important to describe womanhood!

Oh.. and apparently this poster has missed the court cases where male people are being described as being male and where media has started to avoid using pronouns and will accurately describe someone as a 'male' who identifies as a 'female'. Because they still believe that male criminals are not accurately described these days. Maybe it is just the very narrow media selection they read.

You cannot make this up. It is truly remarkable to see it on the feminism board.

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:37

Hoardasurass · 01/10/2025 10:59

Yes as 9nly women and girls can get pregnant, give birth or breastfeed anything else is ideological dogma that has no place in medicine
Glad to be of help ☺️

Show quote history

Makes it clear. No midwives wont be isolating trans men from maternity services any time soon as we will continue to use pregnant women and people.

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:41

Namelessnelly · 01/10/2025 13:29

So you can’t show me the article then? Ok. So people being called by the correct sex pronouns are not losing any human rights then?

Show quote history

What article?

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:43

Hoardasurass · 01/10/2025 13:24

There's no such act however the women's and girls act is the common name for the criminal law ammendment act 1885. I think @LoftyRobin good mixed up, its easy enough to do I mean she's only 110 years out 🤭

Show quote history

I was being bloody sarcastic, did you lot really go searching for the womens and girls act 1995

😂

You guys need to go outside or something

Hoardasurass · 01/10/2025 16:44

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:37

Makes it clear. No midwives wont be isolating trans men from maternity services any time soon as we will continue to use pregnant women and people.

Show quote history

And yet earlier you claimed that you would only use pregnant person.
Have you ever wondered why a women doing the most feminine thing possible ie getting pregnant isn't to dysphoric to do so yet calling her a pregnant woman or mother is the worst possible thing ever due to her dysphoria?

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:44

"Women and girls are also people believe it or not. It was the woman and girls act 1995 that stated we also count as people or persons."

You really went to search out an act from the 90s that stated that women and girls are people?

😂😂😂😂

You guys need help.

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:46

Hoardasurass · 01/10/2025 16:44

And yet earlier you claimed that you would only use pregnant person.
Have you ever wondered why a women doing the most feminine thing possible ie getting pregnant isn't to dysphoric to do so yet calling her a pregnant woman or mother is the worst possible thing ever due to her dysphoria?

Show quote history

No i didnt at all. Ive consistently said on all threads that our literature contains pregnant women and people (I think before I said women and pregnant people but I actually rechecked). Ive never had to use these words out loud as a practitioner because i am speaking to individuals. I rarely say "this is applicable to you but also anyone else who might be pregnant". It's just not necessary.

Greyskybluesky · 01/10/2025 16:48

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:43

I was being bloody sarcastic, did you lot really go searching for the womens and girls act 1995

😂

You guys need to go outside or something

Show quote history

I think @Hoardasurass was giving you the benefit of the doubt that you'd got mixed up or something.

Glad it's all so hilarious to you.

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 01/10/2025 16:49

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:44

"Women and girls are also people believe it or not. It was the woman and girls act 1995 that stated we also count as people or persons."

You really went to search out an act from the 90s that stated that women and girls are people?

😂😂😂😂

You guys need help.

Try saying "thank you" to whoever corrected your typo and explained what you most likely meant? I expect she took the trouble to google the exact name and date of the Act so as to get them right.

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:50

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 01/10/2025 16:49

Try saying "thank you" to whoever corrected your typo and explained what you most likely meant? I expect she took the trouble to google the exact name and date of the Act so as to get them right.

Show quote history

More fool her. You really need to find an actual that states that females count as people like, too?

Jesus wept.

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 01/10/2025 16:54

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:50

More fool her. You really need to find an actual that states that females count as people like, too?

Jesus wept.

Show quote history

Funnily enough yes, we did.... because history. But OK then, we wont take you seriously in future.

Instructions · 01/10/2025 16:54

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:44

"Women and girls are also people believe it or not. It was the woman and girls act 1995 that stated we also count as people or persons."

You really went to search out an act from the 90s that stated that women and girls are people?

😂😂😂😂

You guys need help.

I am actually starting to feel a bit sorry for you at this point

Helleofabore · 01/10/2025 16:56

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:50

More fool her. You really need to find an actual that states that females count as people like, too?

Jesus wept.

Show quote history

"You really need to find an actual that states that females count as people like, too?"

yes. That is why the Supreme Court judgement was so important. What is remarkable is that you didn't understand the significance of that judgement.

Helleofabore · 01/10/2025 17:00

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 10:03

No they really don't and actually many women fully support sharing all single sex provisions with trans people. I can tell you that if we were to announce that we are going to exclude trans users from maternity care in any way, the first and loudest protestors would be women.

Show quote history

Sure 'many' women may be supportive of including male people in single sex provisions. However, the 'majority' are not supportive of inclusive of this.

They are supportive of including female people with transgender identities in female single sex spaces. Is that what you meant?

Greyskybluesky · 01/10/2025 17:04

I can tell you that if we were to announce that we are going to exclude trans users from maternity care in any way, the first and loudest protestors would be women.

Is this likely to happen in reality?
Or is this you twisting other posters' words again?

worksineducation · 01/10/2025 17:06

HouseOfGuineaPigs · 30/09/2025 23:07

I've always been gender critical and 100% in support of safe spaces for natal women only. I'm completely comfortable with being gender critical. But I'm concerned I've crossed a line into becoming a full on bigot, which is something I don't want to be. Due to my own background of mental health and trauma issues I follow pages on this issue on Facebook. I just saw one with a graphic post saying Using Preferred Pronouns Is Suicide Prevention and it made me want to scream and throw things.

I've been suicidal, I've attempted. I've battled see harm and self destructive behaviours since childhood. I should be sympathetic about the struggles people are having . But I feel manipulated seeing posts like that one. I use preferred names when I'm addressing trans persons. I am kind to them, I don't mention their issues. I treat them the same as anyone else. I will call a bloke Sue even if his real name is Bob, it feels odd, but I will do it to be respectful . But calling a he a she is a step too far. I would either use their name or use they.

Why do I feel so strongly that I'm being manipulated ? None of the trans people I know have abused me in any way. They haven't infringed on my boundaries . I have 2 trans friends, another who is non binary and 2 acquaintances. They have all been decent .

I just feel resentful that I'm being made to feel responsible for someone not taking their life because I don't affirm their identity ?

I'm horrible aren't I ? Please sort my head out !

It's an attempt at coercive control.

Calling Barbie Kardashian 'she' is kind only to Barbie Kardashian but it's not kind - quite the opposite - to all the women he's attacked.

More broadly calling men 'she' undermines sex based protections and rights and thereby harms and is unkind to all women and girls. It is lying and obfuscating.

Anyone who uses wrong sex pronouns about men are being unkind to half the population for the sake of a few men. They're undermining child safeguarding.

Not kind.

worksineducation · 01/10/2025 17:09

I mean the whole point of 'preferred pronouns' is to erase women and girls as actual people with their own human rights, feelings, needs, and turn them into something that exists solely in a man's head.

worksineducation · 01/10/2025 17:10

Also - the decent transsexuals who actually see women as equal humans don't ask for preferred pronouns and are happy with sex-based. E.g. Miranda Yardley.

Hoardasurass · 01/10/2025 17:16

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:50

More fool her. You really need to find an actual that states that females count as people like, too?

Jesus wept.

Show quote history

It took 30 seconds to type women and girls act 1995 into Google and hit search which lead me to the 1885 act took a screen shot and clicked the link to the 1885 act and screen shot that too. All in all it took less time than typing this out.
Not sad or foolish however it is something that autistic me did because I'm interested in this

DeanElderberry · 01/10/2025 17:23

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:50

More fool her. You really need to find an actual that states that females count as people like, too?

Jesus wept.

Show quote history

Absolutely, it's hilarious that anyone could possibly have imagined you might write things because they were true rather than just babbling pious word-salad for the sake of babble.

DrBlackbird · 01/10/2025 17:37

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 08:54

There was another compassion shown. Just users insisting that I challenge maternity service users and call them crazy and deluded and things. Report them and try and get their kids taken away. Call them she and woman so they get used to it. Things like that.

Show quote history

On this board you had posters telling you to report mothers and have their children taken away? I’m really shocked that anyone would do that. Sounds perhaps like Twitter but MN? I find that incredible.

DustyWindowsills · 01/10/2025 17:57

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 16:44

"Women and girls are also people believe it or not. It was the woman and girls act 1995 that stated we also count as people or persons."

You really went to search out an act from the 90s that stated that women and girls are people?

😂😂😂😂

You guys need help.

What a sweetheart you are. I bet you have a lovely bedside manner too.

OldCrone · 01/10/2025 18:10

LoftyRobin · 01/10/2025 10:14

Even if they would (no idea who that is btw), most would want trans men to be welcomed at breastfeeding and antenatal classes. And that's the point.

Show quote history

Are you really saying that you have no idea who Isla Bryson is? Or is this another of your ever so funny jokes?