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

[HouseOfGuineaPigs]

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 !

Again social convention is not about 'facts'. Its about preferences. You are entitled to your preferences of how you wish to be treated as are others. And if you deny those preferences to some but not to others, that is text book discrimination.

I look forward to the evidence that throughout history women who wished to be referred to as "sir" were respected, and peasants who wanted the Lord of the Manor to refer to them as "Your highness" also got full respect.

One definition - A phobia is an anxiety disorder, defined by an irrational, unrealistic, persistent and excessive fear of an object or situation.

Anger with a particular situation where you are being manipulated in a disgusting way that goes against what suicide prevention strategies say is not irrational or excessive.

Another thing.... for it to be "transphobia" a belief or behaviour would have to be directed at all who claim to be trans. OP - like all of us, I am sure - likely has very different beliefs about and reactions to a convicted rapist who has prison onset gender dysphoria, a man who has just left his wife of 20 years to dress up as the biggest slut in his law firm and a 15 year old autistic lesbian in a badly funded local authority care home.

So can you quote any posts showing people wish trans people not to have human rights? Using the opposite sex facilities and demanding language be changed are not human rights so you can discount those. What posts can you quote showing people want transpeople to lose any rights?

Yes they made it clear that instead of providing maternity care for example, doctors and midwives and other staff should focus on their pronoun use and how they identify and refuse to call them by the terms they would like us to. That would be a breach of human rights.

I asked several times if people expect me to do this in the capacity of a midwife to service users, and they either said yes or repeated what actions I should take.

Those people would definitely use any power they had to abuse trans people and punish them.

No pregnant person is ever using the "opposite sex facilities" in maternity care.

People’s beliefs and views are multifaceted and complex and are formed by many different factors. Distilling them into ‘racists’/ ‘non racists’ or ‘transphobic’/ ‘trans accepting’ is highly problematic for society, for the person who believes they can read people’s minds, and for the individuals whose minds they think they know more about than the individual themselves.

Haven't we had a lot of new posters posting along these lines?

"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."

Sniff test...

I’ve pondered this too OP. GC women are accused of “hating trans people” and I honestly do not think that is my motivation at all - I’m GC because I care about women and children and I think gender ideology is harming them. I don’t think trans people should be persecuted or harmed for being trans.

But, I do feel distaste and annoyance with the concept of someone announcing they’re trans, and I’ve tried to ask myself why.

I think what it is that it is actually human nature to distrust and even stigmatise someone who pretends to be something they are not. Deceit and dishonesty are not good for social cohesion and we have an instinctive “alarm bell” reaction. In any other context I think that’s normal and widely agreed on - eg someone pretending to have a professional ability or qualification they don’t have, lying that they have cancer, impersonating a security guard and so on. Likewise we don’t condone people saying they have a disability when they don’t, an ethnicity or age they don’t have, etc.

It’s then even worse that this ideology not only requires everyone else to accept that people “are” something they are not, but demands they overtly agree and affirm it. It’s a deep insult to our instinctive reaction to falsehoods. I think allies and supporters of the ideology feel this too, which is why they are so vocal and vehement - they are trying to suppress this feeling on the assumption it’s just their privilege and innate bigotry making them feel that and they must do better.

Then because of this whole situation being as it is, ID-ing as trans does appeal to a lot of narcissistic and controlling people and predatory men. I can’t understand why anyone would deny that - it’s so obvious that if we condone demanding other people agree you are what you say you are, and taking another group’s rights and access to their spaces on that basis, a whole bunch of people with other motives are going to run with that. So we get used to seeing a glut of cases where trans is clearly linked to fetish, grifting or plain old criminality and that association can lead to a scepticism.

And lastly, to me, anyone who IDs as trans is by definition sexist AF. They can only possibly think someone has a “gender identity” that doesn’t “match their sex at birth” if they they think there is such a thing as a gender identity that DOES match your sex. That’s sexist and I am not on board with sexism and don’t like sexists.

That is not to say real dysphoria about the sexed body doesn’t exist - and I sympathise with and care about people who are suffering with that - but the answer is support and help to accept yourself as you are.

Do I hate trans people or want them genocided - no. Does “coming out as trans” make me think you’re a roaring sexist and more likely than average to be untrustworthy, controlling or predatory, especially if you’re male - yes and with good, statistical reason.

Have you considered that as the site moves towards a more and more radicalised and extreme version of GC, there will be people questioning the "progress" and whether it is actually progressive?

I know that's how many people felt about Reform and NF. At first, he seemed to have some good points but then it became clear that he is just racist

Exactly.

Why should people expressing a different opinion be banned from this site? If someone is abusive, report their posts. No one should be abusing people as a group or individually. However, this board is quite well moderated if you report posts. The moderators are trained and will look to make reasonable decisions. So, if you report something and it is not considered abuse by the mods, it is just as likely that you are too sensitive to what has been posted versus a poor moderation decision.

People don’t get banned from MN for expressing an alternative opinion. They will for continuing to fail to post within the talk guidelines after many of their posts have been deleted already. That usually includes group or individual personal attacks, name calling or abuse. I have seen many people declare that their opinion has been deleted, when it is not the opinion that was deleted, it was the abuse or name calling that was deleted. Had the poster posted without labelling everyone in hateful language, the post would not have been an issue.

So, no, I don’t believe that this site is a hub for extremists.

Do you think these things equally about trans women and trans men? So if you were a midwife and a trans man came in pregnant, would you assume they were narcissistic and controlling because they are trans?

I agree that if people find themselves feeling emotionally or cognitively overwhelmed by any forum or material, it’s a good idea to step away.

I don’t subscribe to the view that ‘extreme’ views should be censored, unless they are unlawful. I also don’t think it is helpful to dismiss them simply by giving them a label (e.g. bigoted). Engaging in reflective dialogue is productive for both sides. Having a better understanding of our fellow humans, even when we disagree or are offended/offend, is a good thing in my book.

If that rule was applied consistently, then most of the sweeping statements about men generally, particular men, trans people and Muslims would warrant a ban. There is a difference between a difference of opinion and sharing bigoted views on large groups of people.

I have compared this to anorexia before - a dislike of the body combined with a wish to have a particular appearance, and a desire to be the centre of attention, possibly a response to being neurodiverse, possibly a reaction to past abuse, and a way to be very very very manipulative.

'I'll die and then you'll be sorry'

Attention feeds it. Admiration feeds it more. Indulgence is abuse.

The only person who is displaying ideological dogma is you.
You are attempting to manipulate people into acts of religious observance as a societal norm its not. A Christian cannot expect a Muslim to say god bless you nor can a Muslim expect a Christian to praise Allah and its not discrimination nor harassment to refuse to do so. Using wrong sexed pronouns IS an act of religious observance and as such cannot be expected from a non believer and again refusal to do so is not discriminatory nor harassment. Demanding that someone uses wrong sexed pronouns IS, so is using threats of harassment, bullying and/or transphobia to compell religious observance is in itself discrimination, bullying, harassment and religious bigotry.
I hope that helps you understand why noone should ever be required or expected to refer to a man as she or her and why its abusive and discriminatory to do so

Yes. But people have definitely been saying a lot of clearly racist things recently who then get upset at being called racist.

I have been on this site since 2009. I’ve been supporting the likes of Alison, JKR, Glinner, Julie etc for over a decade. I’ve started conversations with my kids’ schools about their PSE lessons - wity the aim of trying to ensure they are not confusing kids about biological sex / gender.

But this recent racist political movement in our country has really made me think deeply about being called transphobic and how, when we find ourselves at an extreme end of a discussion, we need to be careful - to reflect.

(Having said all that, which is about how I feel, I do not support laughing at, mocking or sneering at trans-IDing people. This does happen on social media and it makes me uncomfortable because I do know that trans identity is correlated with poor MH, past trauma especially sexual abuse, being ND, etc as well, and I also think it’s important to remember that many trans people are confused and looking for a way out of self-loathing, and are on a journey that will end with detransition - especially the younger and female ones.)

Iv'e commented on various forums for years & only encountered misunderstandings here with a particular few which I suspect as wilful given the severity of ideological dogma they exhibit.

Perhaps we're just speaking a different language.

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

What's convention is respecting peoples wishes to how they wish to be referred to. What's not convention is deciding it for them.

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?

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?

Again, the convention being violated is the personal choice of another's wishes on how they wish to be referred to. IE Its not always about how you. Social convention is about respecting other people.

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.

Again social convention is not about 'facts'. Its about preferences. You are entitled to your preferences of how you wish to be treated as are others. And if you deny those preferences to some but not to others, that is text book discrimination.

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?

BTW gender identification is a fact. Right or wrong, societal standards of gendered roles are a fact.

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

As I said I support your right to your own opinions & freedom to do so. What I don't support is your imposing those on others. Big difference.

I also support your right to your own opinions. And I don't support you imposing your anti-woman genderist crap on the rest of us. Including pronoun nonsense.

Nobody deserves to be deprived of their rights & dignity because of their beliefs.

So you are now agreeing that women shouldn't be stripped of their rights and their dignity simply because they refuse to comply with genderist demands? Good.

That would be alright if people with other opinions didnt attack those they disagree with. So when I tried to point out that as a midwife, it would be unprofessional to argue with a trans person about their identity and disruptive to their maternity care, I was told I was a shit midwife then.

That's not debate and discussion that if someone disagrees, you say they are bad at their job, or a bad parent, or what have you. And the thing is, while that wouldn't stand on many threads because the users would call it out, it does stand on threads on those issues. If someone doesn't agree that all trans people are mad, many of them are bad (especially the MTF) and that they shouldn't have a place in our society where we dont constantly remind them that we disagree with their personal identity, then we are anti-feminist, probably a man and definitely predatory to women.

The fact the site allows this to stand shows that it wants to be a place for actual bigots. Not just people who don't agree that changing sex is a possibility.

They want trans people to suffer rejection and misery in every area of their life by everyone..only then will they be happy.

I would definitely think they were sexist. I would be on my guard for controlling behaviour but also be aware that they were likely to be vulnerable. A young or youngish female trans-IDing person unusually likely to be autistic, a sexual abuse survivor and/or have other ACEs.

Fair point - it’s the listening to each other and being reflective that many seem to take issue with.

Why would you be "on your guard for controlling behaviour" as their HCP? Are you worried they will try and control their pregnancy and birth?

@LoftyRobin They want trans people to suffer rejection and misery in every area of their life by everyone..only then will they be happy.

I want demonstrably mentally unwell people to recover, and be happy.

I do not want a society where demonstrably mentally unwell people are praised for their symptoms and encouraged to destroy their communities and societies.

This site has always had a wide range of views though. I don’t believe that it has become more ‘radicalised’ or ‘extreme’.

I also find the constant comparisons with right wing politics to be lazy. If anyone ever looked very closely at Nigel Farage’s political points and drilled down, I don’t think they will find he has changed.

I don’t believe that MN FWR has changed to be more extreme either.

Has definitely changed. At first, he was all about "British" but after several interviews, he admitted he also meant "white". He would remove laws that stop people from.discrimnating against others based on the colour of their skin as well as their nationality. So if a business only wanted to employ white, British men, they could and be open about it. That's when it clear that it wasnt about the UK, it was about removing laws around sexism, racism and disability.