Any recommended genderist writers?

[bonfireoftheverities]

"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that." - John Stuart Mill

This is something I've tried to keep in mind over the last half dozen or so years since I heard TWAW, thought "What?" and fairly quickly found FWR. So I've made sure to read as much as I can take from those who truly believe that men can be women, or if they don't actually believe it (because how can you, deep down?), desperately want it to be true. I say as much as I can take because after a while you've seen and heard it all before, and it never starts being convincing.

The latest pile of nonsense I dove into is this: The End of Trans Rights in the UK Is the Start of Democratic Collapse. Dear god, that almost made my brain melt. The links alone show you that he never strays outside an idiotic bubble (Helen Webberley being the first I clicked into).

Is there anyone you can recommend who makes their case without lying and relying on liars?

If this means you’re acknowledging that women have the right to single sex spaces & transpeople’s rights have to be balanced with that, then we could be getting somewhere.

Gender identification is an identification to the typical behaviours/gender more common to one sex. It's not saying you are that sex rather the gender.

Not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate?

It would be irrelevant if people didn't keep insisting that their beliefs about their own gender give them the right to be classified as the opposite sex.

But as you said so eloquently earlier, gender is a set of stereotypes. How can someone be a gender? How many stereotypes does someone have to adhere to to be considered that gender?

It’s a legitimate question. Are women in Afghanistan oppressed because they adhere to gender stereotypes or because they are female?

Because they are female.

What do you think would happen if they refused to adhere to gender stereotypes and stated they identified with the stereotypes more typical of men?

They would be beaten into submission or killed.

Would they then be allowed the freedoms men have? If not, why not?

Because interchangeabilty threatens The Patriarchy.

If gender stereotypes are related to see, as you claim, why do gender stereotypes differ between cultures. Surely this just confirms they are not related to sex, or they would be universal.

Um, because organic impulses like equality are a threat raging patriarchal theocracies?

Here's a tip, when comparing countries & wondering why human behaviour isn't universal it might come in handy to consider the cultural political & economical limitations between them.

No because its typical behaviours.

You seem to be suggesting that people should be formally categorised by gender and that sex and gender are interchangeable ways of defining identity.

You said

Your values clearly consider sex to be a defining identity characteristic others don't.

But I don't think sex is an 'identity characteristic'. It's no more an identity characteristic than being over 18. It's just a material fact that has consequences.

Why do you think anyone needs to be categorised by gender? Or are you agreeing that it is a completely personal belief that can be ignored by everyone else?

I would say it depends on utility & practicality of the particular space being segregated.

So sex is universal, but gender is a load of made up bollocks. Gotcha. So why are transpeople so determined to prioritise gender, which is malleable, infinite and regressive, rather than sex which is immutable and binary? Surely then, whether someone is “sees themselves as a man or a woman” could change if they moved countries? So someone could see themselves as a woman in nie country according to gender stereotypes, but as a man in another?

So what “typical” behaviours do women perform that would convince a man he’s really a woman? If you could not use any of the sexist bollocks ones that would be great.

You seem to be suggesting that people should be formally categorised by gender and that sex and gender are interchangeable ways of defining identity.

I'm saying its upto the individual to decide if sex or gender defines them & whatever they choose is a valid identity.

But I don't think sex is an 'identity characteristic'. It's no more an identity characteristic than being over 18. It's just a material fact that has consequences.

Just because sex is a* *material fact that has consequences doesn't mean its a more valid identity than gender. Acknowledging gender identity doesn't diminish the societal need to address consequences. These are two separate issues.
Both an adult & a minor deserve rights but it doesn't mean they deserve to be treated the same. Rights depend on utility & practicality.

Why do you think anyone needs to be categorised by gender?

Because its just as valid as an association to man/woman as sex. Categorisations are human constructs that are based on associations to phenomena.

Or are you agreeing that it is a completely personal belief that can be ignored by everyone else?

No. By this logic one could equally ignore the personal belief that sex is a valid identity. Again, both sex & gender possess valid associations to males & females.

So when men are out protesting, threatening violence, breaking windows & peeing in public / pouring bottles of urine over themselves - all this is because they think they share typical behaviours with women & so should be allowed to use our toilets?

Great. Now do it with race.

But sex is a real fact. We’ve all agreed gender is a load of sexist bollocks that is malleable. What valid associations does gender have to males and females? If gender is different for everyone, and self defined, then thst cannot be related to the words man and woman can it? If everyone’s definition of what a woman or a man is, how can anyone now they are a man or a woman?

False equivalence. Race by definition requires a genetic association. Gender only requires psychological & behavioural ones.

Ooh yes. I’m here for that.

But being a woman or a man also requires a genetic association. If some one can self identify into those categories, why not race?

Ethnicity then.

If you need to pretend typical gendered behaviours don't exist in the face of mountains of evidence then I think we are done here.

I’m asking you to name some. You’re the one saying they exist. I assume you have examples?

I mean we could do almost anything if we’re doing ‘typical behaviours’ (which are absolutely not stereotypes. Oh no). Maybe there are typical behaviours of gay men or lesbians? We can all presumably identify as either without the requirement for any same sex shenanigans? Just as long as we like musical theatre or KD Lang. (Again, absolutely not stereotypes)

I do like Liza Minnelli films and sequins.. maybe I’m actually a gay man!!! That’s what I would think if I was a sexist,homophobic bigot who believes stereotypes define people.

Another false equivalence. Ethnicity requires cultural associations by definition. Gender is about inborn psychological associations.

Nooo, you said gender was about social stereotypes that enabled people to identify themselves. Are you now saying it’s inborn?