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.

Have you tried Substack?

Its astonishingly rude to call a friend an extremist fanatic to their face; why would you try to change her mind? She thinks she's better than you. Don't go chasing after her with evidence, its a power play from an authoritarian who looks down her nose at you. She's a nasty piece of work and doesn't deserve anything from you.

The full sentence was: "I'd probably say frenzy state, more than hysteria. Sometimes it can be a bit of a braying mob, and it's genuinely uncomfortable to read." Following that, at all times, my points were caveated to be clear that it was not everyone, nor all of the time. Please point out where it wasn't.

Why are you being so defensive? This thread could have been a good opportunity to consider on how to better engage people, and perhaps also consider how some threads may come across to those new to the issues and the site. For example, I don't think bringing AGP into early discussions is particularly helpful, even though I agree it's an issue. From the recent legal decisions and the ongoing EHRC debacle, it's clear that the war is not won. It might be obvious to posters here what the issues are, but it's clearly not yet mainstream.

Please elucidate in what way you would like me to self-reflect?

Exactly, @RapidOnsetGenderCritic , the graph for sex would have gamete size on the axis. And would just have 2 spikes: one for tiny gametes (sperms - male) and another for large gametes (eggs - female). No intermediate sized gametes, no spectrum of sex

Nope, though I should have by now, because I saw a couple of things posted here from there that seemed very interesting. Thank you for reminding me!

Maybe by seeing the contradictions in your own arguments?

There are 50 Sandie Peggie threads. Which means 50,000 posts. In there you picked out one instance of people getting something wrong, which you know is wrong because those same women pointed it out in their own thread/s. And you picked out a joke poem response and yet you called the whole thing a 'frenzied baying mob'. So you yourself reduced the 50,000 posts into a mob.

And then go on to say that FWR is not a hive mind.

Either it is a frenzied baying mob, or made up of individuals who all have different opinions and points of view. Make your mind up.

On the upside, Reddit does seem to be slowly evolving. At least in its UK-centric subs.

The UK Politics sub-Reddit seems much more accepting of a wide range of views on most topics. You can even say (politely) Trans Women are male & biological sex can't be changed and are likely to get away with it now.

Transgender UK (and all other transgender-centric subs) are still full-on TWAW and No Debate. Savagely turning on even their own if they dare suggest that the Supreme Court ruling IS very clear in its meaning, and a TW can't use women's spaces.

With friends I'd avoid starting out by talking about science or high-level principles. Instead, I'd use a concrete example, and ask them for their thoughts and listen respectfully without challenging.

I worked in a very large organisation that employed a middle-aged man ('A') who behaved inappropriately with young women colleagues. Our weaselly HR refused to take any action, mainly because the young women couldn't formally complain for fear of being labelled troublemakers or 'difficult'. But we would warn new female recruits and keep a watchful eye out.

Following a bitter divorce, 'A' decided to 'transition'. (The two events may have been closely connected of course). We all received an email announcing his new female name and his 'she/her' pronouns.

He (wearing a skirt, heels, makeup and wig) started to use our floor's women's toilets, and the women's changing room in the basement gym. Most (not all) women were very, very unhappy about this. The men mainly said nothing. But a few spoke to A, to say he was very welcome in the men's spaces, and some women seemed uncomfortable so perhaps... This was not well-received by A. He IS a woman now.

The Supreme Court ruling is very clear that this person should continue using the Men's or a single-room gender-neutral option. We did have a large gender-neutral toilet available on all floors that could also be used for changing.

On balance, I'm very pleased about this. What do you think?

And then let your friend talk through her own arguments. A few gentle 'That's interesting', 'Good Point', 'It is so sensitive/tricky' and 'Why do you think that is?'

Sometimes you can see them struggling with the conflicting ideas in their own head. 'Women are oppressed on the basis of their sex', 'Sex isn't real, or can be changed' and 'Trans women are not only women, but the most vulnerable and oppressed type of a woman'. Not all of these statements can be true?

Always encourage/let people change their own mind. It's much more likely to stick, and much less damaging to the relationship/friendship.

And I say to you, please, have a think.

What characteristics do you think are more male and what characteristics are more female?

Why do you think we bother to define sex at all in any living thing? Do you not think that gametes might have rather important consequences?

I don't for one minute think this is a 'modern medical view'. It's just old fashioned sexism. Reproduction is a woman's problem, so not to be discussed in polite society, and certainly not in a way that might offend men.

I don't see a contradiction. Maybe I'm thick.

I pointed out one recent example of a number of posters (not all), jumping onto a rage-wagon when the thing they were angry/annoyed/frustrated at was actually a joke. That's one example, there are others, where one person gets something wrong, and rather than engage with the material presented, others simply jump in to continue the outrage. When reading along, especially when reading after the fact, it's can range from cringe-inducing to uncomfortable.

I'm not asking anyone to change how they post, or the language they use in their posts. I'm not casting value judgements on anyone or calling them 'bad people'.

Aside from the countless examples of the Scottish Government shutting down debate and telling women that their views 'aren't valid', here's examples from Bristol, within the last three months -

https://www.bristol247.com/lgbtq/news-lgbtq/calls-for-respect-at-council-meetings-after-trans-rights-walkout/

Women are still being told to wheesht, whether that through being told that there are more important issues (wheesht for Indy etc), through being told that we might have a point but our voices are too strident and should thus be ignored or by our elected representatives simply walking out if they don't want to hear something.

'No debate' is far, far from an abandoned idea.

So, what is your persepctive? And why, if you do, do you think women saying " No" is extreme?

others simply jump in to continue the outrage.

To be fair, emotions also run high on threads about parking and weddings.

This is a topic where people are actively engaged so it’s not surprising that people have strong opinions.

That's not the point.

You can't force someone to listen.

I had a "discussion" with someone very similar a few years back, who started out asking why I, who was so obviously a leftwing women's rights type person, and another friend who's on the same page as I am on this, both had this "blind spot" about trans issues (ie why were we taking what she thought was a regressive RW position on them)?

Well since she'd asked, I sent her some stuff - and THEN she got a bit overwhelmed by it and asked why I was trying to convince her!!

I said "Emm, you asked: I was trying to explain" and left it at that.

About a year or so later she actually apologised and said she now understood far better where we had been coming from. She's now fairly GC, though still "wants" to be on the progressive side and thinks it's a matter of a few abusers, rather than a bunch of porn sick AGP men. But that's ok by me. I still think that given enough time she'll come fully round but in any case she's FAR more sympathetic to our view of things than she was. So that's a win.

No, it's not.

Oh no we don't!

Sorry.

Panto season, innit.

in this situation? OP just needs to "talk to the hand" and take it from there.

I haven’t read the full thread yet, so maybe others have said it, but the reason she called you names was to silence you. If pushed to defend her position, she would be unable to do so and somewhere inside, she knows it.

Those struggling with this kind of cognitive dissonance end up living in a permanent state of anger, where they lash out at others because otherwise they’d have to deal with their internal turmoil.

Canny transactivists have weaponised this and handed those who support them the perfect accusation which will silence those who disagree.

You grew up, as we all did, in a world where the words men and women meant something specific and where segregation by sex existed without any noticeable problems. All we are asking for is a return to that.

Your friend wants to embrace a massive social change, where we no longer segregate by sex (concrete, observable) and instead segregate by so-called “gender-identity” an unproven and unprovable concept, based entirely on feelings (subjective, easily falsified).

Your friend wants this change to occur without ever having to clearly debate why we should do so and what effects this might have on society. This argument is entirely based on “well it’s already happened, so we can’t go back”.

Who exactly is the extremist here? Whose views are substantiated and fact based?

It astonishes me how many people suddenly believe that the understanding of sex has changed radically and become impossible to define or delineate, coincidentally at exactly the same time that men started claiming to be female and demanding access to women’s spaces.

That said, it is thoroughly depressing how irrational human society is. I’m not sure any more that we will win this argument, even though I am completely certain we are correct.

Erm, yeah I know people without arms, that doesn’t mean the world needs to accept that human beings are not two armed beings.

And if sex is fluid, then why does a man need to ‘transition’ to being a woman. And pleaseeeeee tell me…how many trans people are intersex? Because this is such a gross argument that trans extremists use - intersex people shouldn’t be used to try to prove their point.

If you’re intersex, you don’t need to be trans do you? No. Because we are what we are. Can an intersex person miraculously stop being intersex just because they want to not be? Can a one armed person miraculously be a two armed person just because they believe they ‘should have been born with two’?

And Love how you say there’s a ‘percentage’ of the population who are M/F, as if it’s the minority. Do you really think the human race are all just total idiots who at some point a few hundred years ago started following this male female thing? You think somewhere along the line someone went I know! Let’s create a random distinction between people for absolutely no reason at all and call one man and one woman. And ever since we’ve all been blinded to the fact we are individual, spectrum beings some who are male some who are female and a whole load “in the middle”. And actually penises and vaginas have nothing to do with anything. And we women have just been letting ourselves be enslaved, abused and murdered, (and give birth?) to follow this new societal standard or male female?

if only we had known that lots of us are actually way more male than some of the males we’ve been raped by…then we could’ve avoided all that pain by pointing out to them that they have no biological ability to use their self perceived maleness against us! More fool us ‘women who have been tricked into thinking we are women but are probably not women’.

I agree. It's the difference between assertive and abusive. Occasionally people (not just the gc regulars here) go a bit far. If someone reports the post, the moderators make a judgement and either leave it or delete it. Compare this forum with TwiX, or Reddit, or Bluesky; this forum is assertive but rarely abusive, and the moderation is effective and mostly sensible, especially more recently. Those other platforms are poorly moderated and permit, certainly in the case of TwiX, threats and appalling misogyny.

If by bullied, you mean you can’t deny any of the logical arguments, and failed to persuade anyone to agree with you, then bullied is what you are.

The fact that transactivist sites simply ban women like us from the debate shows which side has the most robust debating points.

The fact that you flee when you have roundly lost the argument doesn’t make this an echo chamber. It makes it a place to try out your arguments. When you present the women here with factual information that supports what you are saying, many will change their minds.

Present us with facts and you will win us over. I’d love to believe that “trans” is real and not just a made up, poorly defined concept. My life would be massively easier if I could believe that men who claim they are women really are and that there’s really no harm in giving them what they want. And that there’s no harm in giving children drugs and mutilating their bodies to resolve a difference that exists, but isn’t a mental health problem, or indeed a health problem, but still requires extensive medical treatment.

We’re frankly a bit bored of waiting for these persuasive arguments, but we remain open-minded and open to facts.

In the end it doesnt matter how nicely or how rudely the arguments are made; the facts remain true.

If anyone thinks its 'extreme' to say there are two sexes and its not possible to change sex, they have got themselves into an absurd position.

Those facts are simply true.

Part of the problem with genderism has been using ad homs, smears, and slurs both to intimidate, threaten, and malign women stating simple fact.

The 'gender' arguments rely on this coercion and deflection to preserve an absurd fiction: that people can change sex, that sex is affected by emotions.

Thats why we saw such vicious attacks on women - to avoid exposure of this brittle nonsense.

Most people hold what are called 'gc' views. People with aĺlllllll sorts of beliefs, characters, and affiliations. Lots of disagreement, and all human foibles represented among people who know and understand there are two immutable sexes.

Doesn't really matter.

Two immutable sexes. That's all.

I guess if you start your posts denigrating the regular posters here the way you have then you will be challenged on anything you say.

Have you tried engaging with topics with a well articulated and evidenced position? Or just start with denigration and then mischaracterise the reaction as being about you position on this topic rather than your attempt at denigration? We have seen this happen all to often.

I am on the GC side. I already said that.

I don’t flee when I have lost an argument. I leave when I am called thick and told to give my head a wobble for asking questions. I already said I am on the GC side, but I am seeking more moderate voices.

'more moderate'.

Can you expand on this?

I think there's a lot of women who were 'willing to compromise' in terms of supporting third spaces etc etc until it became apparent that it was never about using women's toilets it's about using women and seeking validation whilst oppressing women.

In this sense more moderate simply means more willing to be walked all over until you realise youve been completely steam rollers and there was no intention of there being a compromise in the first place.

Ultimately how can you compromise on a binary reality?

How many women is acceptable to fuck over in order to be perceived and applauded as being 'moderate'. Is it even moderate to screw over women to appease men? Or is that just more emotional blackmail to force females into compliance?

The answer is still no. No you can't change sex. Sex is not a thing you can somehow negotiate.