A space for respectful dialogue about sex, gender and diversity

[Tandora]

This is a thread for posters who want to talk and share a diverse range of opinions about sex, gender, being gender non-conforming and/or trans, and public policy. It is to learn from each other; to engage in a productive exchange, and to hear different sides of the story.

It is not a space for bullying and insults. Please do not join if your intention is to control the conversation and undermine those who disagree with you.

Nope absolutely fine.

I couldn't believe it was actually happening at the time. It's sounds bloody made up, especially since this bloke had a fucking beard.

I am very well aware it happens but to see it playing out in real time before you, is something else. It makes you feel utterly powerless (which of course is the point). It's a demonstration of dominance.

I was with DH at the time, and told him what was about to happen discreetly on my phone. I think it actively shocked him because he's always been a good few steps behind where I am in terms of understanding the extent of this bullshit. He's always thought I exaggerate or am somehow over sensitive to a degree.

I think seeing it for real rather than it being one of those random stories on the internet has been one of those moments where the penny drops and he's gone 'actually you really aren't are you, they really are that disrespectful and sexist and it's happening everywhere including on MY patch'. I think his actual words included the phrase "God aren't men awful?"

All these little drips are mounting up and more and more people notice them and don't like them because the behaviour is just so tone deaf, inappropriate and disrespectful. This ideology will flounder under the weight of its own bullshit.

I kinda think every time there's one of these outrageous incidents, which they think it some sort of victory, there now more people quietly observing going "Fuck No".

It's not just women who are fairly poor at assessing risk. Men (and I am one) are also poor at assessing risk.

Some sports do have weight categories (boxing, weightlifting) or handicap systems (golf, horse racing). Other sports tend to use promotion and relegation between leagues to allow for differences of ability while still permitting competition. I think it would be a very retrograde step to remove the sex categories though. They still exist in the weight categorised sports, because for example of strength differences between men and women of the same weight.

I agree it cruelly mocks Taztoy and belittles her trauma (and, by extension, the trauma of other abuse survivors who have severe problems with sharing enclosed spaces with transwomen). To me, it is all part of Tandora's belittling and mocking women's trauma and also her refusal to answer our questions about why our trauma doesn't count (or doesn't count nearly as much as transwomen's pain).

I think that Tandora realizes that insisting that transwomen be able to use women's SSS even when it causes us to have traumatic reactions undermines the whole "be kind" mantra. It asks "be kind to whom?" and there really is no good answer for why everyone needs to be kind to transwomen but cruel and heartless to trauma survivors. There is no good answer as to why transwomen's distress is more valid or important than the distress of trauma survivors. So Tandora avoids addressing that issue in many ways, including mocking trauma survivors, minimizing or denying our pain and distress, belittling our distress, answering questions in evasive and misleading ways, and mostly avoiding the topic as much as possible, even though that is all profoundly disrespectful.

I'm curious: regardless of the current wording of the EA, would the existence of such a group bother you on principle?

Or perhaps to make it a more practical question, under what circumstances (if any) do you think it should be allowable to have such a group, vs it MUST be a single-sex group by law? Again, not talking about the current wording of the EA but if you could dictate the laws from on high...

Interesting that it happens. It sounds as if that's pushing at the boundaries of what's permitted, by giving out the signal that it's for ladies (of various flavours) without being formally single-sex. (And thanks for the warning!)

Well I won't help you out there. I absolutely detest makeup – on men and on women!

I wouldn't be thrilled about it but, for freedom of association reasons, I would rather we allowed it than banned it. It must be crystal clear that it applies to 'feminine GI' or similar wording. Not called 'women', with its true nature hidden away in the T&Cs

It would be a different matter for single-sex spaces, which absolutely should be single-sex by law.

Yes, thank you for this clarification

Its so difficult to accurately convey complex thoughts on a chat forum, so apologies if my reply to this sounds a bit like an essay or clumsy (its late and I'm tired) but I will try to get across what I mean.

With the exception of breasts, all of the gender stereotypes in relation to women as not fixed. It is society that has decided which clothes, hair and makeup belong to women and which belong to men. It is used to negatively to control both sexes either through female oppression or toxic masculinity.

If anyone could wear whatever clothing or makeup they wanted without fear of ridicule, regardless of their sex, it would reduce the power of people who were doing it with negative intention.

I think there are a lot of men who like to wear womens clothes and makeup etc, who identify as trans because it is the only way that they can do so and be accepted (I'm not talking about the fetishists here who take stereotypes to extremes or trans men that demand to be let into single sex spaces - they can go jump!).

Although race, like gender, is a social construct, blackface is wholey different because skin colour is fixed.

We may share life experiences because of our femaleness, but the only experiences which we all share are uniquely biologically female experiences.

That doesn't track though - not every woman shares the same uniquely biological female experiences in the same way they don't share the same life experiences. That's why I said its a complex combination of everything all three elements - body, genetics and experience - because none of those things in isolation are common to every female.

Re: Semenya and Khalif. They were born with what appeared to be vaginas and raised as females.

I agree there may be some doubt in Semenya's case as to whether her parents and neighbours perceived her to be a boy even though they continued to nominally raise her as a girl and I am open to reconsider my position on her over time - but I'm not aware the same doubt round upbringing exists for Khalif?

Do you really think that a poor family in rural Sahara, where Khalif grew up, would have access to expensive genetic testing or medical scans, especially if there was no illness aside from a lack of periods?

Many people with 5-ARD who are diagnosed in their teens go on to live as males, but I see it as a perfectly valid life choice to continue to live as female for those that choose to.

You can't argue that XY alone makes someone male because you pull in people with DSDs like Swyers where they have a female phenotype, are generally raised female and don't have the benefit of testosterone at puberty that those with 5-ARD get.

As I've previously stated, I don't think that people with 5-ARD should be allowed to compete in women's sports - but if they have a largely female phenotype, have lived as girls / women since childhood and always believed themselves to be girls, then I am going to respect that as it is a completely different situation to men who don't have a DSD and absolutely no formative experience of being female deciding that they 'feel like a woman'.

Anyway - hopefully that makes some sense 🫤

@BloominNora if IK was raised female, he would never have been allowed to to bios or play football with boys (his origin story). His coach would never have carried him on his shoulders. He is a man. He knows this. Why do you think he never followed through with the lawsuits? Why do you think he has raged against sex testing? If he truly thought he was female, he would have no problem doing the tests and putting all the controversy to rest would he? No one believes he is female.

Please can you tell me what a 'self' is and how a man can 'know' that they're actually a woman? What defines a woman absolutely apart from their genes?

If I could understand that, I could engage with this argument so much better. Otherwise, it seems to come down to 'I know because I know' and that isn't a proper argument. I believe in anyone's right to believe something about themselves. I just don't think something that cannot be shown to exist should be used to deny other people their legal rights and make them feel uncomfortable for excellent reasons. One in three women will experience sexual violence in their lives. That, to me, is an excellent reason not to have to share toilets or changing rooms with men and no further explanations should be necessary.

Adding to this, I wonder if you would be kind enough to educate me about something else. Recent tribunals have shown that a woman who wants to exercise her legal right to single sex facitilites will be interrogated on every aspect of her life. Should it not therefore be the case that a MTF transgender person who wishes to use the women's facilities should be interviewed by a panel of women to make sure that they are genuine and what their reasons for changing how they identify themselves are? If they want to be equal to women then surely they won't mind? It would surely be kind for them to put women's valid fears at rest.

Edited to include an apology to rapid because I meant to ask Tandora this.

@BloominNora

I am not sure that I follow. You see ‘race’ is not a social construct - it is a biological reality that is visibly observable because of skin colour. And whilst notions of ‘gender’ [as I understand it, which is social expectations attributed to persons according to their sexed body] is also a social construct, it is also predicated on the physical reality of the observable features of the sexed body. The history of drag is rooted in minstrel history - it shares it. It wasn’t just black males that were ridiculed, demonised, belittled by minstrels it was also women. The big, fat black momma, with her waddling gait, enormous breasts and accentuated behind was the first example of woman face - it was both as inherently and unapologetically racist as it was rooted in a malignant form of misogyny that was prevalent in the US in the 1820s when it began.

Moving onto khelif and semenya - I think you are buying the PR that they were raised as girls. Whilst it is totally likely that when they were born, given the poverty and lack of of medical expertise available in rural African or Algerian villages, they were misidentified at birth it is unlikely that this persisted into adulthood. Babies are often born at home, delivered by a local midwife with nothing like the training westernised midwifes have, and thus babies with ambiguous [malformed] genitalia is mistaken for female. In the US/Europe in the last 20-25 years, babies like these two men would be referred immediately for assessment and identified as male babies within days of birth and their correct birth recorded… and a treatment pathway determined.

So, yes, within the social context of their early childhoods they would likely have begun their lives being raised as girls. However male/female phsycal development differentiates even before puberty. 7 year old boys are taller, stronger, their body ratios change, and their behaviour is completely different. It is quite evident from pictures taken and stories shared on social media that these boys - and I use the word boys deliberately - had been identified as such long before puberty but also as a result of their different pubertal pathways confirming that they were not girls. In Algeria, being trans or homosexual is criminalised yet it is quite clear Khelif has lived according to expectations of male society members, from how he dresses, his physical interactions within his community, etc. Pictures of Khelif in suits, etc very much evidence that he was understood by those in his community and his training team to be male, not female. The same for Semenya, if you read biography about him and his autobiography.

There is a whole industry across parts of Africa to identify boys with DSD and to engage them in sports training - this is evidenced by the dozens or so of DSD males in athletics over the decades since sex testing was removed. There is money involved - money that the Olympic Ctee and other sporting bodies make available to these athletes and their trainers that can lift them out of poverty or even in some cases make them relatively rich. It is not a cynical con on their part, but a lifeline out of poverty for these athletes and their families, so naturally that take it. But, nonetheless, it is a con. They, their families and communities, their trainers KNOW they are males but the incentives to persist, to win the medals, earn money from the notoriety, is too enticing.

I feel for them. In the western world they would have access to free medical care from birth, access to operations and hormone treatment that etc and live (superficially at least) relatively normal lives [I assume, I have no idea what the implications are for those people growing up as I’m not a clinician], but the empathy I feel for them does not override the concern for the women whose opportunities they steal when they win their prizes, take their scholarships, undermine their historical records of achievements/their sporting records, or punch them in the face in the boxing ring. And when they KNOWINGLY participate in that con - and by 15/16 there is absolutely no doubt that they now KNOW they are not natal females - they lose all right to empathy and compassion because by then they are complicit in the con.

Sorry that was rambling.. up early as spaniel being sick…

I agree with cautiousL. The discovery story of Khelif by a boxing coach says a lot. A 15-17 year old girl playing football in an area which is supposedly so determined to ensure Khelif would have only been socialised as a girl doesn’t ring true. That sounds instead like a large enough town to have a boxing coach to start with.

Which will likely then have access to doctors who would be capable of accessing enough testing equipment, such as an ultrasound, to assess why Khelif had started puberty that was obviously male. Plus likely to have bus runs to cities with those facilities. Puberty is not just about periods though. There would be no breast development either, no widening of the hips.

It is also quite likely that people in these areas knew about these specific DSDs. It was said that in the place where Semenya came from, it is not as rare as it is in other parts of the world.

Yet we are also supposed to believe the Khelif family was very conservative. Would a conservative family allow their teenaged girl to be hanging out with boys? There are things that don’t add up at all with what people have said or assumed.

It is doubtful we will ever know.

However, even now, what female boxer has been given such prestigious access to the fashion and film industry? Not one that I remember. There really is something asymmetrical happening with some of these male athletes with DSDs in their access to investment after they win compared to female athletes in their events / countries.

It's convenient that in the west we read some of these signals as...

"How progressive and empowering - a lesbian couple including a gender-nonconforming woman who doesn't conform to stereotypes - Africa truly is an inspiring and progressive place" (or "how inspiring, a girl who played football / went running with the boys, in her impoverished village, proving that in some ways their people are more enlightened than ours...", repeat ad nauseum for whatever origin story)

And it's like no, they just consider "her" a man

@OneAmberFinch not sure what your point is? A man with a DSD is still a man. Not a gender non conforming woman.

My point is that people who say the stuff I quoted are naive and are projecting western values onto situations where they don't apply. I agree with you.

E.g. Caster S - they see a person dressed in masculine clothes with their partner dressed in feminine clothes and think this is an empowering lesbian couple instead of a man and a woman

Ah, I see. Sorry I didn’t get it.

ETA been up since 5 but dog stopped being sick now! Going to give up and get some coffee now so that my brain starts working again…

I haven't RTFT but @Tandora I disagree with your premise that we always need nuance and to move away from binaries. E.g. sex with children is evil, full stop. Hoping your cat will live longer than 30 years is absurd, full stop. Someone who produces sperm is male, full stop.

No, but I shall in future. Thanks for the tip.

@Helleofabore I think you are likely right. I find it hard to see that IK at least has not had access to diagnostics and treatment in the town where their training has taken place. Those leaked comments from that former trainer indicated that they all knew he was male even before the two formal tests. I’d be surprised if the local GP hadn’t simply run some hormone screens when periods hadn’t started and there were no visible signs of female puberty. It’s why I have increasingly less compassion as I do feel he and CS have been complicit. I do appreciate the allure of wealth - or even just financial security - when the alternative is relative poverty but the same justification is often offered by anyone committing any sort of crime. And fraud is a crime. And what about the opportunity the female competitors they have beaten have lost to potentially rise above poverty, too?

As @Taztoy has continually highlighted here and on other threads - there is no hierarchy of trauma, poverty, or social deprivation where the fact of being a male with issues (medical or psychological) should trump a woman’s experiences of those same things.

Thank you.

For both rebutting the "best of the best" question and for getting my attempt.

I used sport as an analogy for life, not because I actually care about sports (each to their own) but because its a simple concept that has published rules and defined divisions.

There couldn't be such an association, because there is no such thing as "gender identity". So a formal association for people with a 'feminine gender identity' could have no members. (It'd be like an association for people who have a guardian angel, or for people who are both male and female ... or for people with three heads ... .)

Perhaps you mean "a formal association for people who think they have a 'feminine gender identity'"?

[Sorry if this seems pedantic. I notice you say you don't have a gender identity; I think it important to point out (respectfully!) that no-one does.]

@CanSeeClearlyNowTheRainHasGone
I would have hoped that the reasons "we do it this way" were blatantly obvious, especially to a woman and a feminist, as would be the fact that those reasons persist and will continue to do so while the human race exists.

Also, in a time when most women on earth do not have equal rights in law or in practice, it's infuriating when thought experiments which remove the little progress that we have made towards the goal of equality are popularised and then concretised without any concern for their real world impacts.
Bit cheeky to call women's rights and protections "privilege", too.

Perhaps you are working on a post now, but if not, I'd be grateful if you could respond to any of the points in my earlier post to you, especially the question of which rights males surrendered to enable women to have rights?

A ‘dominant discourse’ refers to the socially accepted narrative or framework through which a topic is understood. FWR has a dominant discourse of sex being binary and immutable and women and girls being entitled to female only provision.

Within this context, ‘nuance’ (subtle differences and complexity) relates to aspects like different attributions being given to why males with trans identities want to be included in female only provision. There is nothing nuanced about including transwomen in female only provision, when a starting point is the desire for single sex provision.

As an open forum, people are free to post what they like, where they like, within the talk guidelines. If/ where people have genuine intent to influence the discourse on FWR, the best starting point the point at which their views diverge from the dominant discourse and start there. Otherwise, it’s like seeking to write the script for the next episode of Eastenders, using the characters and current storyline of Coronation Street.

For posters who want to see FWR posters welcoming transwomen into female only provision, you need to start at the founding principles of the dominant discourse. You need to know the characters (Den and Angie are the 2 I recall) and the story so far (their relationship is on the rocks). You need to build on these characters and the other supporting roles and the current storyline and sub plots.

The story so far……it is entirely reasonable that where sex matters, females should be able to access female only provision. There are some natal males who are deeply distressed by their exclusion, for a variety of reasons, but the solution to this should not be to deny females single sex provision. The sub plot is that over 99% of people have the capacity to reproduce at some point in their lives and they will know which reproductive role they would play.