Are we extremist and fanatical?

[RogueFemale]

We, as in gender critical/sex realist women.

I saw an old schoolfriend today, to exchange Christmas gifts over tea and biscuits. She's highly educated and intelligent, v. firmly feminist (in the sense of anti-patriarchy, and wanting women to use Ms not Miss or Mrs). Has travelled widely, knows a lot about other cultures etc.

Politics came up and I mentioned Phillipson blocking the ECHR guidance, and how I wasn't happy about it.

Turns out she thinks my gender critical views are extremist and fanatical. Actual words. I knew already she was inclined to the 'be kind' end of the spectrum, and that we disagreed, but this was new - that I'm an extremist.

That I was being unkind and TiM had a right to exist (I said of course they do, but...). That I should keep my views to myself, if I didn't want to be regarded as a nasty person, essentially.

I said, 'you don't understand'. She was having none of it, said she understands very well, and how there's been gender fluidity since time began. (And these poor TiM have nowhere to pee if they can't go in the ladies, as they'll get abused if they go in the mens).

But she really doesn't understand what is happening now.

I tried to tell her about autogynophilia, about how TiM have been attacking women who protest, the pattern these men have of abuse convictions, same as all men, etc. I said I could send her stuff to prove my points, she said, please don't.

Just a bit depressed to be told by an old friend that I'm a fanatical extremist weirdo, really.

Just been catching up on this thread.

Personally, I wouldn't.

Although it's nothing to do with gender identity, I had a situation several years ago where I had come to the reluctant and sad conclusion that a friendship that I had really valued for years (although I had other close friends, I considered my friend to be my best friend amongst them) had run its course. Just prior to this conclusion, I remember talking myself through the pros and cons of remaining friends out loud while decorating the walls on my landing. Once I'd made the decision, I started thinking about how I could do the "breakup" conversation. She was due to stay with me overnight shortly and I knew I couldn't keep going as things were.

When it came time to have the conversation, I didn't start with "I'm breaking up with you" (although effectively, that's exactly what I was doing), I said that I had something on my mind that was fundamental and had impacted our friendship to the point where I was unhappy. I felt she deserved to hear why I was stepping away. To her credit, she listened and asked questions so that she could understand more. It was after dinner out when I was driving us back to my house. Trains were still running and I offered to collect her things from my house and take her to the station if she didn't feel she could stay. I had aired everything I had been feeling (calmly and firmly, but not with any malice or anger) and was aware it probably felt very hurtful.

She said asked if she could stay over because there was lots to think about. The next morning she asked if we could go for a walk and talk more so I said yes. We left things on neutral terms and she thanked me for my honesty. I still didn't know which way it would go at that point.

What happened next, and over the following years, is testament to the strength of our friendship. I was genuinely prepared to end it because I felt it was irreparable, but I'm very glad that I was wrong. That was about 15 years ago and we now have an incredibly strong friendship. Probably/possibly all the more so because it got to this point.

Re your own situation, I don't think giving her information about why you're not "fanatical" or "extremist" is going to help. It's unlikely to persuade her, she's unlikely to read it - and as at least one PP has said, she might just feel that it proves her point. It's an impasse in your friendship because currently the only way to remain friends, after the way she has spoken to you, is to do so on her terms - to accept that you are indeed extreme, fanatical and need to keep your views to yourself. If you can do that because the friendship is worth it for other reasons, great. If not (and it sounds like you can't - I wouldn't be able to either), is it worth talking to her about how being spoken to like that made you feel? If she's a good friend that could break through. If it doesn't break through, is it that the friendship has run its course? If you need to put more energy in to maintain it, and twist yourself into pretzels just to do so, is it worth it?

To add: in my own case, I would actually concede that I am fanatical about this subject.

I meet the dictionary definition of being obsessively concerned about it because of the impact that it has had so far, and the risk that it still poses, to my daughter. I'm going to fanatically keep on with doing everything that I can to keep her safe. If that also makes me "extreme", I'll take that on the chin too. A good friend would take the time to listen to why I was behaving in this way, even if there wasn't a single shared viewpoint about the subject itself.

Edited to add: I appreciate I've effectively contradicted myself there, after saying I wouldn't accept the accusation. Just because I'm conceding the above, what I'm not accepting is that my views are extreme. They are not. My views align with biology, the law and safeguarding principles. If that's still an impasse, after a conversation such as the one I described above (and being happy that I had explained why I felt the way I did), that's a firm no from me on maintaining that friendship.

Thanks @BonfireLady it's very helpful to hear your experience of something similar. I think, though, that the difference between your friend and mine is that mine is unwilling to discuss it or to listen to my side. The few times I've mentioned it in the past, e.g. isn't it great news about the Supreme Court judgment? she's shut me down. The difference, this time, was the ferocity with which she did it, and the calling me an extremist and fanatic.

It's true that I'm more zealous than everyone I know, but I'm aware of it. I don't constantly talk about it, just an occasional mention, and they're also innately sex realists so they understand, e.g. that the SC judgment was a Good Thing, they're just not all woo-hoo about it, and that's fine. I never proselytise (I'd be no good at it anyway).

I think perhaps the thing with this particular friend, and why I try a bit more, is that, unlike anyone else I know, she claims to be a passionate feminist, - and it's she who made me start to think more about feminism, the patriarchy, said I should call myself Ms not Miss (tho I disagree with her about this) - so, I find it frustrating that she won't talk about it, and also can't/won't see how trans ideology is an attack on women's rights and deeply misogynistic. (To be fair to her, she once admitted that TiM in women's sport might be questionable).

Anyway, I have to agree with you and PPs that it'd be a bad idea to send the book, and could be counter-productive. That is why I asked on here for a reality check. Thanks all.

I think I'm just going to do nothing for now and wait and see what she says/does next, in Jan. It was very awkward after she lashed out at me, and she talked at me about nothing for the next 10 mins before I made my excuses - oh, look at the time! She is mildly Asperger's I suspect, but not that immune to social nuance.

@BonfireLady "Edited to add: I appreciate I've effectively contradicted myself there, after saying I wouldn't accept the accusation. Just because I'm conceding the above, what I'm not accepting is that my views are extreme. They are not. My views align with biology, the law and safeguarding principles. If that's still an impasse, after a conversation such as the one I described above (and being happy that I had explained why I felt the way I did), that's a firm no from me on maintaining that friendship."

I also believe that my views aren't extreme. As you say, aligned with science and law. As I said to my friend that day, if I'm an extremist, then so is the Supreme Court.

As I said to my friend that day, if I'm an extremist, then so is the Supreme Court.

Exactly this.

At some point, it's going to become blindingly obvious to all but the most ardent TRAs that the extremism that's going on here is the enforcement of a belief in gender identity. It's fine for your friend to believe that everyone has a gender identity and that it's possible for someone to have one that differs from their sex. But it's absolutely not fine to go lashing out at others who don't hold this belief. My children's school does it through shaming instead of lashing out e.g. by constantly drip-feeding that the only way to be kind and respectful to anyone with a trans identity is to use their preferred pronouns. Whether it's lashing out or coercion through shaming, it's two sides of the same coin: enforced belief. We're not just expected to hold a belief in gendered souls but to actively demonstrate adherence to it, by shuffling up and letting (transwo)men into women's sports and spaces, by adopting compelled speech with opposite-sex or non-binary pronouns etc.

Thankfully, it feels like we're on a different trajectory in the UK to examples like Germany, where you can be fined or imprisoned for not using the compelled speech e.g. for "misgendering". As long as we don't start moving towards that way of law, it's inevitable that we'll keep edging out of the grip we're in currently.

I think I'm just going to do nothing for now and wait and see what she says/does next, in Jan.

Seems sensible. Unless she's a die-hard TRA (it doesn't sound like she is, but that she's more of a Be Kinder) or she's got a trans-identifying relative for whom she has to keep up outward allegiance, the penny will probably drop at some point that she's been welcoming a mix of different types of TW into women's spaces without any way of differenting between them. By different types I mean the Hayley Cropper type and the fetishists.

Perhaps she'll even notice at some point that her "kindness" isn't that kind if it involves letting vulnerable children and young adults permanently alter their bodies to match their currently held belief that they are trapped in the wrong body.

Until then, she's either worth the energy you'll presumably need to put in to never talk about the subject with her (or, alternatively, to air it all and find a way to talk it through) or not.

Its like a catechism

"what about the intersex people"
"transwomen have been passing for years"
"trans people have always existed"
"biology is changing, sex is not binary"
"JK is a bigot"

and if every you hear "Helen Joyce is a failed academic"
I can 100% confirm that the source is TransReddit

They cannot let you state your views carefully
because that will shake their belief

I see we had the 'Be kind' plea from the conductor at this year's Vienna New Year Concert 🙄

Really? What did he say? I stopped listening on Radio 3 after 5 min because all those waltzes and stuff isn't my kind of classical music.

He mentioned the importance of kindness especially with regard to difference and we are all on this planet together etc. Look him up. I knew what he was angling at.

I'm fine with kindness but not when it erases boundaries

I'm fine with kindness but not when it erases boundaries

This.

In fact I'm going to paraphrase as follows in my next communication on this subject with the school:

Kindness and respect are great values to instill across the school, but not at the expense of boundaries [... then add examples of what I have seen and experienced, where boundaries have indeed been erased and make it beyond obvious that without these boundaries, safeguarding is impossible - for it to be achievable, all boundaries need to be clear and unambiguous].

@BonfireLady
"At some point, it's going to become blindingly obvious to all but the most ardent TRAs that the extremism that's going on here is the enforcement of a belief in gender identity."

Yes indeed, and it’s already obvious to the majority of the public, if you look at the YouGov annual polls which show support for trans ideology has been falling away in every demographic, year by year. As and when the government is forced to approve the EHRC guidance, - for it will happen in the end - the light will dawn even in the most captured areas of the political sphere and the NHS (even if reluctantly).

And happily we live on Terf Island :)

"Unless she's a die-hard TRA (it doesn't sound like she is, but that she's more of a Be Kinder) or she's got a trans-identifying relative for whom she has to keep up outward allegiance”

She’s a Be Kinder, no TI friend or family, just convinced of her righteousness, her progressiveness, I suppose. Her superior understanding compared to me, (me being a former Tory voter to boot).

I’m pretty sure I'll have to say, eventually, that I can’t accept being silenced and being told to shut up, accused of being an extremist. That isn’t my idea of a good friend.

I often think this about ‘No Outsiders’ etc. it is muddling for children.
Some people need to be vehemently rejected, with violence if necessary . When I myself was a child, feeling free to do this protected me on several occasions.

When is the inborn instinct to be against the weird and different acceptable and when is is not? The baby should not be thrown out with the bathwater.

Ugh.

@RogueFemale , the merit beliefs/crony beliefs distinction might be useful for thinking about your friend's reaction.

'Merit beliefs' are beliefs that we hold because they help us to navigate the material world, whereas 'crony beliefs' are beliefs we hold because they enhance our standing amongst other people. Your friend's belief in gender ideology isn't a merit belief because it doesn't help her to navigate the world in any practical way. If she wanted to have a child using a sperm donor, would she choose a transman to be her sperm donor? Of course she wouldn't, because she knows perfectly well that transmen aren't men in any material practical way. Her belief that transmen are men is a crony belief that she holds because people she admires say they believe it. Sophisticated intellectuals, like philosophy academics. Her kind of people!

When you said you didn't share her belief, she reacted furiously because she was experiencing cognitive dissonance. Ultimately she believes in gender ideology because at a subconscious level she wants people to like and admire her. And yet her friend (a person she wants to like and admire her) is critical of gender ideology. She felt uncomfortable because she couldn't reconcile these two things so she lashed out at you. Because she felt you were undermining her understanding of herself as an intelligent and kind person

I didn't watch the concert so I didn't hear what he said, and does he have 'form' for being a TRA?

Isn't it possible that he was referring to shooting people or blowing them up or threatening to burn down hotels they are staying in, etc?
There's a lot of that going on on the planet.

I think most listeners' minds would go to wars and that kind of thing as the most obvious examples of absence of 'kindness' on the planet.

Another thing to hold against TRAs: they have made the word 'kind' a suspect one😠

Well I suppose it could be more general kindness from stop all wars to save the polar bears. He doesn't scream TRA but given his background (LGBTQ+, Canada), I'm guessing it's not be kind to polar bears even when they're mauling you

I think it could be read either way which I'd hazard a guess was the intention.

Thanks @GCScot (fellow Scot here) for another take on this situation. Really good example, of a woman seeking a sperm donor, because it's so painfully obvious and we all know who has testicles and who doesn't.

I am definitely in the unsophisticated team as she sees it.

I often think this about ‘No Outsiders’ etc. it is muddling for children.
Some people need to be vehemently rejected, with violence if necessary .

The key thing here is to know where the boundaries are so that it's easy to recognise when someone is deliberately overstepping them, easier to know that this feels uncomfortable for a reason and that you can then follow a plan that you have been taught to keep you safe. If clear, objective boundaries between male/female (or any other categories) are eroded, because it's apparently kinder not to have them, this becomes impossible for a child to understand.

Similar to Glinner's now infamous "if a trans-identified male is in a female-only space, he is committing a violent, abusive act"..."Make a scene, call the cops and if all else fails, punch him in the balls", I told my children that if they were on their own (e.g. we used to let them go to our local village park from about 8 without us) and someone tried to get them to go somewhere with them, say no. If they won't take that for an answer and they try to force you to go with them, scream loudly and kick them hard, bite etc.

If you're taught that it's kind to show TW that you believe they are women because otherwise they might get upset, that's remarkably similar to telling children that the stranger in the park might feel sad if you say you don't want to go with them. The boundaries are gone because we've gaslit our children and/or ourselves into eroding them on the basis of kindness.

The Pop N Olly version of Little Red Riding Hood achieves this spectacularly well. In this version, the wolf is just misunderstood. We're told that he's judged unfairly for his clothing choice (a dress) and that all he really wants is a friend. I think it's great to teach children that clothes can be worn by anyone, but the sleight of hand in this story is hiding in plain sight: "clothes are just clothes and a good place to start... <yep, agreed.... but here it comes> .... to help show who you are and what's in your heart". So the moral of the story appears to be that children shouldn't judge others based on what they are wearing (OK.....), and for strangers, of any age (Mr Wolf clearly isn't a child wolf), they should go off with them to play because their clothes will tell you who they are. Effectively, if the wolf is in a dress and tells you he's your grandma, he really is! That's not how the story goes, but it may as well be. This is the version and it's also available as one of their books for schools.

If we're teaching children that these boundaries no longer exist, no wonder it's a struggle to enforce them in a grown-up world. Women's sports, women's changing rooms etc etc are all without a boundary because anyone who says they are a woman is welcome in.

Some TRAs think the SC decision was ordered by Starmer as a sop to Trump, they’re not people you can reason with 😂

Holy fuck, talk about saying the quiet part out loud.

Red Riding Hood is the archetypal story warning girls about predatory men.

Brazen, isn't it? I sent it to my children's school as an example of how this coercion can hide in plain sight.

Red Riding Hood is the archetypal story warning girls about predatory men.

To anyone who has navigated this subject for a while on these boards, this ⬆️ is as obvious as the nose on your face. To others it might perhaps be seen as conspiracy theory on a non-issue at best.

Unfortunately, I'm now at a stage with the school where I'm simply battening down the hatches to keep my own children safe. I'm still being as polite and measured as I've always been - I've not accused them of anything but it's becoming increasingly important to have a paper trail which demonstrates their approach to safeguarding whilst also mitigating it as best I can. Particularly for my older, autistic daughter.

My other daughter can thankfully already see through the majority of the coercion. Not all of it though - currently. Given her high level of emotional intelligence for her age (year 10), it helps to demonstrate, to me as her mum, just how deeply the school has embedded gender identity belief into its core values.

(For multiple reasons, it's not as simple as moving my children. But on a plus note, I can now see where the greater risks are*, so can take steps to mitigate them, thankfully not just on my own).

*by far, these are to my oldest, autistic daughter. Thankfully, she seems to be on her way out of confusing a belief in gender identity with experiencing puberty as an autistic girl. In many ways, it's easier to manage the largest remaining risk - that she'll see people like me, who don't believe in gender identity, as "extreme" and "fanatical" - from within the current situation.

I agree with all you say.

Thank you for posting the video story as an example of the sleight of hand in lowering children’s boundaries.

That trans activist grooming story for children was not only dangerous for them to listen to but also endless, boring and in poor English. Just stop it!