Is anyone on here trans-inclusive?

[plinkyplonk123]

Hi everyone, this is just a quick post to ask if anybody else on here is trans inclusive? I know I’m definitely in the minority here but I just wanted to see.

The OP asked if anyone was trans inclusive. They didn't ask for any narrative as to why. It's a yes/no answer.

I said yes but not interested in elaborating or entering debate about it as there's enough conflict and bad feeling in the world without generating more. I said this, to try and avoid precisely this kind of entirely unproductive back and forth.

And yet, here y'all are, actively seeking it out...

I have as much right to post on the feminist board as you do. You are not the feminist board police, nor the arbiter of what feminism is or isn't. Your brand of feminism may well be trans exclusionary. Mine is not. And as you say, this is the feminism board, not the trans exclusionary board.

I haven't said that women shouldn't have the language to define their rights. I'm not even sure I understand what you mean. Are you suggesting that because I wouldn't engage with Ereshkigalangcleg's snark, I am trying to shut her down and deny her the language to define her rights? Because that's simply not true.

Not wanting to spend my day articulating and defending my own view doesn't make me a 'men's rights activist'. The idea that if you are not trans exclusionary, you're not a feminist/are a meninist/could well be a man is ridiculous.

However, also couldn't be less interested in whether you believe I'm a feminist/meninist/woman or not. Like I said, there's enough bad faith in the world - folk like you trying to pick fights with people that don't agree with you just adds to it.

Very interesting but does that mean female women of colour who believe they are men stand a higher chance of being murdered but other transgender groups don't?

I have noticed a bit of discussion about ‘reality’ on this thread.

The thing is, you cannot change material reality. So if one person wishes to live in their own personally defined reality, no one should be expected to believe that this is material reality. A material reality based on factual truth and scientific evidence.

Why should society act like one person’s reality, if it is not materially real, is materially real? If you, as an individual wish to act as if someone else’s personally defined reality is materially real, that is your choice.

No one else should be shamed in not choosing to act as if someone else’s personally constructed reality that doesn’t reflect material reality, is their material reality.

I didn't know that, not that it matters. So are you saying because my viewpoint is in the minority, I should expect to be misrepresented & disrespected? Because that's what's happened. And I'm supposed to be grateful that people are interacting with me?!? Christ, you lot really do think you are something don't you.

As it stands, I think so. It's an article more about the fallibility of the data than the current known statistics. Recognising flaws in data systems is so important, in every area of life

And you will not understand until you recognise that your "identity" actually depends on imposing identities onto other people.

You are the one who decided there is a line between us and you, between what we are and what you are.

And just as you feel you have the right to be upset and hurt when your identity is dismissed, so others feel the same by what you are doing to us.

The difference is, to be very blunt, you started it.

We didn't redefine ourselves, you did that the day you decided "woman" meant something different to just physically female, something mental, something that you despite your female body are not.

And as long as you continue to insist, by your claim of a non-binary identity, that this definition of women is more accurate for us than the one we would use for ourselves, women will continue to resist.

Trans people started this when they decided their own sexist ideas needed to define everyone else as well. So only trans people can stop this. Do not demonise other people for complaining that you are stamping on our feet.

So what’s the point in posting on a discussion board (clue is in the name), on a thread and topic that you have no intent to discuss or ‘enter into debate’. Then you’re surprised when people try to probe further?
Totally pointless. Funny how it’s always the posters that state TWAW aren’t able or willing to defend their position. It’s almost as if it’s indefensible and they know it.

I'm glad I'm not a person that thinks it's humane to deny someone their reality, that somehow by expressing my truth, that you have no comprehension of, that I am the problem. One day maybe you will see the harm you do. I hope not though, because it isn't going to feel nice.

Biology and the body are indeed more stable realities than our fluctuating psychological ups and downs, traumas and so on. Our bodies and other unchosen conditions of our life are the stuff we have to deal with; they shape our experieneces, and they impact upon our relationships with other people.

Dysphoria is, by definition, a mental health issue. The prefix DYS is suggestive of a maladaptation or some kind pathological thinking or perception. Many people who suffer from dysphoria find their diistress simply focuses or latches onto another body part once they have addressed the initial focus of distress.

Dysphoria is not an indication, however, that you are whatever you imagine yourself to be. Not anywhere other than in your own mind, anyway.

Not wanting to spend my day articulating and defending my own view doesn't make me a 'men's rights activist'. The idea that if you are not trans exclusionary, you're not a feminist/are a meninist/could well be a man is ridiculous.

Really depends what you mean by being 'trans inclusive'.

If it means allowing men to compete in women's sporting competition, which effectively excludes all women from fair competition, regardless of whether they identify as women, men or non-binary, that is definitely a 'men's rights activist' argument.

If it means gendering language that refers to sex, so that 'breast' is feminine even though men get breast cancer, I don't understand how that includes anyone.

I'm not saying these are your arguments. I'm just struggling to find an argument for gendered language and policy that isn't fundamentally indistinguishable from sexism.

These policies are often labelled trans inclusive, so what does trans inclusive mean?

You imagine yourself to be a 'better' person than anyone here ?

As I mentioned earlier, not everything is about feelings. Feelings are fluctuating weather systems that come and go - not a stable reality to be identified with.
This awareness is, in fact, at the heart of spiritual systems such as Buddhism.

I don't have issues with transgender. I have issues with people with male genitalia who are in spaces that are supposed to be reserved for biological women. I'd have the same issue with any man who came in there.

Let me put this slowly and simply. Women have rights too.

If I thought I was the Queen of Sheba would you treat me as though I actually was that? Many people with severe mental health issues are not in touch with reality. Are we supposed to agree that what they see/hear or think are real?

That is a very Trumpy argument.

Are you saying biology is more important than psychology?

Sometimes, yes.

For example, when it comes to protecting me from genital cancers, biology (the fact that I have a vagina, a uterus, ovaries and so on) is more important than my gender incongruence.

Similarly, when it comes to safeguarding, or sports, biology is what matters.

Sure I am. As a sportswoman I don’t mind knowing I’ll never win anything, because inclusivity is so much more important than having a level playing field.

You are taking about body dysmorphia, not gender dysphoria. I have both. I stopped wanting to hack pieces out of myself when I heard about the concept of being non-binary & realised it somewhat aligned with how I felt. I also started to find it easier to manage other mental health problems. I completely understand the need to utilise decisive language & structures in such a complicated & harmful debate, you feel to concede in any way will allow, probably realistically so, others to undermine your viewpoint. Stating over & over again that I am female & feeling the need to prove it over & over again is something that I struggle to see as anything other than cruel.

You are being challenged on your posts. This is a discussion board...not a counselling sesssion. Ideas and representations need to be probed, tested, critiqued. If you just rely on feelings you are going to be in for a tough time.

Well there's a new one! Cheers.

Both share the DYS prefix. 'Gender Dysphoria' is a concept that can be critiqued and challenged..it is not a stable reality.

It's a long thread and my "you" was generic not personal. I'm pleased you don't do any unhealthy medical things and that you're OK with being called "she" and a woman (assuming you're female, I do get mixed up in these long threads.)

I'm not belittling you, at least not intentionally. I am only dismissing your argument that biology matters less than psychology.

(edited to correct logic fail!)

"I completely understand the need to utilise decisive language & structures in such a complicated & harmful debate, you feel to concede in any way will allow, probably realistically so, others to undermine your viewpoint."

Using accurate and evidence based language based on material reality should not be 'divisive' though.

And collectively there has already been a great deal of harm done by some people and organisations and governments using inaccurate language demanded by a group of people who have sought to impose their own meanings and definitions to commonly used words. This has caused huge harm to female people in general. Sports, prisons and female single sex services around health and rape and abuse care are just part of it.

Where is the respect of those who demand that society change the language for female people to suit their own, or their group's, personal philosophical belief when that belief is not based on material reality and established science?

I think I can solve this for you. You don't like us. You don't respect us. You simply want us to agree with you. You've clearly realised that we're not going to do that, so how about if you go across to transreddit and hang out with people who do agree with you?

But that sounds to me as though you have a pre-conceived notion of what and who 'she' and 'her' mean and should be. Whereas, in fact, all 'she/her' means is someone born with female body parts. The rest is entirely your call.

And we are all of us better off fiercely defending women's rights to dress and act as we choose and study what we like and participate in all sports and show interest in whatever fascinates us without feeling something as nebulous and obnoxious and constructed as 'gender' or 'gender conformity' dictate what that makes us.

Having to dysregulate or dissociate to approach your body is a problem that deserves serious compassion and attention. It doesn't mean you are not a woman. It means you are a woman with issues of deregulation and dissociation around your own body.

Gender dysmorphia is a form of body dysmorphia / that’s why I wanted to hack bits off myself - because of they body not being what I thought it should be given how i perceived myself ( aka gender )

I now find that only when with people who insist that gender is real that I experience symptoms . With people who think gender is externally imposed I can female

with people who think gender is innate - I can’t accept being female under those conditions and I get distressed with myself

but really in the clear light of day I dont see why I should change myself so that others find it easier to see who I am - because it’s their weakness I would be trying to bypass . Their reductive concept of gender

and given I cant pass as anything other than female without serious surgery and drastic hormonal changes- the changes I would need to make are not superficial but serious and life limiting