How would you deal with T in a friendship group?

[FourSevenTwo]

How would you deal with T people around you? In general and in my situation?

The main question:
A male in a friendship group decided to go full TW, starting hormones and so on, changing name to the women's form and coming out with pronouns.

Unfortunately, our language is heavily gendered*. For example, instead of Hi Alex, you would say Hi Alexi for a man and Hi Alexo for a woman. If you want to say anything in past tense, like Where were you yesterday, you have to use men's or women's form for were.
This means it is not really possible to ignore it in direct interaction.

I'm not willing to pretend through language that I see him as a woman. I don't and won't. But I don't insist on calling him him. There are some not great alternatives (it, plural - with it's own verb forms, switching to English), but they are all very noticeable.

I'd like to find a solution for our coexistence in this friendship group. I'm not asking about a language solution here, more about an approach.

I'm considering

1. reaching him with a message, saying I've heard the news, and I can't affirm, but, I'd like to keep things civil, so is there some alternative we can agree on?

2. ingoring the issue and limiting communication on grammatically neutral constructions (which will be limiting and obvious after a time)

3. some other option?

To answer possible questions.

• I'm GC woman - in the adult human female sense, in the gender identity terminology I'd claim agender. I absolutely understand people are unhappy with gendered roles, I just don't believe that trying to become/pretend to be/claiming to be the other one is the solution. And I'm sure one can't change sex.

• It seems that majority of our shared friends are willing to be kind, some believe it, some just don't care, men with no skin in the game.

• *I'm elsewhere in EU, not a self-ID country. I don't ask about legal aspects, just personal approach. Discussing in my country's forums would be hard, as we are a small population.

• The group is about games, meeting at someone's home, so no issue with single sex spaces, and generally gender doesn't play a role in the group's activities.

• Yes, I'd like to try to keep the group if possible. I see it as a political topic and I don't need to discuss politics all the time.

• Edit to add : I've name changed for this one. Sorry it is long. And yay, I've managed to force the formatting to behave!

Yes. The logic cannot be anything but the fact that a male person's presence in a female single sex provision immediately makes that provision mixed sex.

This was made rather clear in the UK Supreme Court clarification about the EA2010.

Therefore logic cannot be anything but that a male person in that female single sex provision will be having a 'female' experience of that female single sex provision.

As a woman who has had numerous issues relating to hormones I find comments about hormones from a male deeply offensive.

The fact these males don't want to acknowledge just how deeply offensive some of the stuff they say and do is to women.

Coming onto a feminist section of mainly female forum and telling all the women there they are wrong and don't understand what sex is, is a particular highlight.

It's as good a display of incelism as a man coming her and quoting Andy Tate verbatim.

And to point out before any further discussion about safeguarding, safeguarding is not restricted to protection from sexual assault. It encompasses any harm that can be potentially caused to a female person from a male person's presence in a female single sex provision.

Plus, a short male person still has male physical advantage which includes skeletal leverage, muscular strength etc. This also includes grip strength and punch power which has been shown to be much higher on average to a female on average. These are unchanged with testosterone suppression.

However, safeguarding is not solely about reducing physical harm risk either.

Women have a right to privacy and dignity and being gender critical is recognised as being acceptable in a democratic UK

This means if they believe a transwoman is male they should not be forced to share facilities because they are no longer single sex.

There is no right to validation in law because it can only be achieved by the suppression of others.

I think we have had a great demonstration of how male people justify their demands and how they defend their personal decisions.

Imagine if we changed all the female language in the relevant posts to reflect the material reality of the situation being described. It would really become very clear how deep the lack of respect for female people's needs is with some male people.

Language is a hugely important tool to convince and emotionally manipulate others into supporting, or even just acting as if they support, a philosophical belief and its manifested subjective reality which does not reflect material reality.

Yep.

I must say a real time demonstration of what we were discussing previously is fabulous.

It shows up how this male didn't read a single word nor respect any of our lived experiences of how language matters and impacts up.

It was a firm trampling and attempt to try and shut down this identifing of how it oppresses us.

Again I thank our friend for their welcome contribution to this thread.

My own sex has no influence on how the other wives in my community would feel if I were to start spending a lot of time with their husbands.

Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene
I'm begging of you, please don't take my man
Jolene, Jolene, Jolene, Jolene
Please don't take him just because you can

Ok. Thanks to onepostwonder for demonstration.

1. if you don't understand influence of sex on daily life of people, you are male. Male experience is the default and normal one, the one where sex doesn't have any influence, so it feels that only gender does.

2)I expect the current development is making life harder for you as well. With the rapid influx of trans identifying people in different ages, stages and vocality, the previous status - which was a kind of silent "don't be obtuse and we will look away" can't continue.

3)we are talking about middle aged male here, so your experience is of limited applicability.

Please, decide, whether you want to continue in this thread.
I was happy that it kept civil and on point for a long time.
I can't stop you, but I can assure you, that your points to my question were notified - you don't see importance of sex and you expect that the group will have to expell someone. I take it seriously, because we have majority of males, who might see similarly about sex vs gender question, so I might need to comment on that.

This supposed point is like those videos we see of male people who present in what they believe is stereotypical female ways, that say ‘do you really want me in the male toilet with your husband’?

It relies on those ‘husbands’ not registering that there is another male person in their presence. Which is unlikely. It then supposes those female person’s husbands are bisexual.

There is a lot of fallacious thinking going into points such as that one. It shows male entitlement though too.

My own sex has no influence on how the other wives in my community would feel if I were to start spending a lot of time with their husbands.

My husband doesn't dictate who I spend time with and whom I friends with because he trusts me and my judgement.

It's a thoroughly unhealthy and sexist relationship where a husband starts being bothered about the company his wife keeps.

It's fascinating that the entire premise of this statement comes from the idea that women are owned by the husbands and the husbands are responsible for the protection of their wives.

In this narrative women have no autonomy of their own. They are secondary to the actions of the husband and the transwoman.

Once again language use reveals far more about what the writer thinks of women and reveals how they perceive power dynamics.

Women of course notice this because they are impacted by this and live this on a daily basis. I also note how women are framed as support humans to both groups of males.

I’d just avoid all interactions with him. I find it all massively insulting.

Well, I think this thread will have been very useful for the OP.

It has certainly demonstrated what Keffles let slip: “Being a trans woman isn't about trying to imitate women. It's about trying to be better than women.”

It is very much a male thing.

It was also quite amusing to come back to this thread to find that my comment - which named no one - that some people have an over inflated idea of their own self importance (using a common British phrase that includes the word arse) has been deleted. 😆

Was it the use of arse that offended?

@FourSevenTwo I couldn't lie on a regular basis about something I felt so strongly about. I would be stressed before the meet-ups and angry during them. It is more than just a political topic to me. It is an assault on me as a woman.

I would continue to use male language for him, though only when the alternative of not communicating with him was impossible. I would then see where that led with him personally and with the group as a whole.

However, that is my personality. You need to go with whatever arrangement works best for you.

Yes, it was very interesting thread.

I was surprised how fast the deletions were here. I've only seen this before with some seriously racist stuff.
At the same time, I am thankful to MN, that we were able to discuss so many things here even with the kind surveillance holding us to the highest standards of internet discussion.

Oh dear.

“Therefore logic cannot be anything but that a male person in that female single sex provision will be having a 'female' experience of that female single sex provision.”

should be

Therefore logic cannot be anything but that a male person in that female single sex provision will not be having a 'female' experience of that female single sex provision.

Going back to the OP: I have several women who have chosen trans identities in my social circle - no men, they're all women - one of whom in particular I've known for years since a teenager and am fond of, and proud of for her achievements despite many severe struggles with mental health and neurodiversity. I avoid the pronoun games as much as is possible, and have navigated the few battles as I find two of those women are boundary breakers in general, not maliciously or intentionally but because they don't find it easy to deal with their feelings of 'I want' in the moment and they don't like any rules or limits to that 'I want' in the moment, regardless of how it affects others or the group. However they both are able to repair the anger and tantrums when a boundary doesn't move, to accept reasons once they calm down, and the one I've known longest has done plenty for our group and is very much reciprocal in that way.

However I wouldn't say she is a friend. She is someone I am fond of, someone I care about, someone I like many things about and am protective of and kind to and take an interest in as I would to a nice youngster who was a friend's child, although she is now in her 30s. My friends are people that I can be myself with, who I can relax with and be freely on equal terms with. Not someone I have to be the grown up for, and provide labour to look after, or pretend with and be responsible for while carefully watching my language and their coping skills. That's work, it's babysitting, not friendship.

Emotional vampires who need constant validation are not great friends regardless of how they identify.

There are limits to how much you can support someone like this and it's healthy to know when it gets to much.

If someone needs constant validation what they need is professional support and help not everyone continuing to bend over backwards to accommodation this.

Very well put.

I wonder if re wording the 'being gender critical' part to be more specific and explicit might help those struggling to understand. It's so often dismissed as those women just being phobic, intolerant, prejudiced, yada yada

It's actually that women have a right to privacy and dignity, and choosing not to subordinate themselves and their own feelings, needs and access to enable the desires of a man to express his perceived inner self is (of course) recognised as being acceptable in a democratic UK.

This would be because women are equal human beings to men, with equal rights, and of course no group of humans should be compelled and forced to submit to and enable/provide labour to another group.

I was talking about the friendship issue - that there is a difference between real friendship and babysitting. You could see this from two sides. One: that I accept and embrace my unpaid, unrewarded job of babysitting and get better at meeting the needs of this vulnerable dependent which involves putting on an even better act. I'm not sure what's in that for me, or why it's healthy, but ok. Or two: that the person needing such care seeks to move past it and be able to engage in equal social relationships, which means listening as much as talking, and being able to tolerate boundaries and reciprocal respect and identity. That would be the path to real friendship.

Take it out of the friendship context to a random stranger requiring this babysitting and input and it's hardly surprising that the answer is going to be a surprised and rather annoyed 'no'. #noteveryonewithavaginaisyourmum. This may be a case of people with boundary issues looking for other people with boundary issues. Not every woman is a rescuer, and it's not necessarily a good or healthy thing when a woman has that urge.

And yes to Red's point about women somehow always being defined solely by their purpose or use to a man. They're not, and that assumption is likely to be perceived as rude. They have whole independent and autonomous inner lives of their own. They even go on existing when men aren't involved in their lives at all.

Fwiw I think men have a much lower tolerance of emotional vampires and I suspect there are implications to this.

Note how GC lesbians have not only come off worst in terms of politics but also they have been most actively targeted as 'the enemy' by TRAs.

The 'cotton ceiling' was something that shocked me when I first read about it.

Good point.

It was a very stark 'I want to use these women for sex, how do I make them get their pants off and submit so I can get off on my fantasy?'

Very red pill. Those women weren't human at all in that concept, with no feelings, no needs, no existence past a warm body to use that had the right label on it. It's seeking free sex work basically. The main thrill and connection in that act would be entirely between the man and the fantasy in his head, she's more or less now just a vibrator with a heartbeat.

Why would a man think a woman would want to engage, unpaid, in an intimate act with someone who saw her like that? And it was only about sex. Not relationships, not about any real connection with another person. Sadly many of the trans widows describe abuse of this type in their sex lives as their husband transitioned.

This.

It's one of the reasons why transgender ideology is so harmful to children, because it encourages a very unhealthy view of how they should interact and expect to interact with others. It will limit their friendships because it demands compliance and does not demonstrate reciprocity. The people of whom pronouns and lying is demanded are never seen as full human beings in their own right.

You can't be friends with people who don't see you as a full human being.

Gametes matter a great deal to a majority of people who wish to find a partner to procreate.

This is a particularly male perspective. The idea that how humans procreate only matters when they actually wish to procreate. Not every single month from puberty, not every single time sexual intercourse, wanted or unwanted, is likely. Not a thought about contraception and the impact of the various options. No consideration of pregnancy and the impact of that, or menopause.

Clearly our homosexual male visitor does not need to consider such matters. Though I fear exploiting vulnerable women to purchase and traffic their baby may fall into ‘find a partner to procreate’.