Friends suggesting transphobia and misogyny both rooted in policing gender roles

[Pyjamatimenow]

Friend of mine has posted on her social media ( a very long detailed post) that basically trans rights are women’s rights and that what she sees as transphobia is akin to people who ‘punish’ women who don’t fit into gender stereotypes, don’t get married, don’t look ‘feminine’, don’t have children…Says she’s a feminist and defends the rights of trans women to live safely etc …whatever that means. Cis women mentioned several times. I don’t normally comment on these kinds of things on FB but struggling with this particular post! If I were to say something what would you say?

I agree.

If there is a good case to include some men in a particular "women's" resource based on some shared need then change the name to label the need and drop the pretence it's a single sex resource.

Ultimately, accepting some men are meaningfully more like women than other men because of how they present, or think, or feel unavoidably also requires accepting that there are ways to present, think or feel that are right for women but not for men, or vice versa.

Rather than using "women" as a label for something that some men also feel, I would prefer that we just be honest.

She’s just spouting a mantra without thinking about whether it actually makes the slightest bit of sense.

Of course. They have to, otherwise their whole argument fails.

They have nothing but superficiality and snark. Their whole movement is based on "I know myself fully, I was born this way, society exists outside me and separate from me for me to take, not something that shapes me."

The idea that "yes, women, being human, are susceptible to social pressure and form our sense of self not in a vacuum but within and influenced by society's existing norms, and that we can recognise this is true for us today while still believing it's possible to change the future" just blows their tiny minds.

You'd like a society where everyone can trust each other to do the right thing would? Trans women are .25 of the population. Cis Women who are sexually ambiguous in presentation? A helleva lot more who now face heightened anxiety over scrutinisation & harassment all for a non issue.

How's that 'trust' working for UK women now?

I don’t really care if they are 0.0001%. Statistical significance is irrelevant. Everyone in society should do the right thing and go by biology rather than presentation. Then we can all be who we want to be, dress how we want to. Have no stereotypes foisted upon us.

Genes and hormones tell women to shave their legs or wear dresses or smile when they are furious at being belittled yet again? Yeah right.

And slaves are people who are genetically and hormonally programmed to just really love wearing chains.

You have no idea.

Oh the arrogant confidence of men telling women what it is to be us! 😂

Yes, it's such a shame that a tiny minority of men ruined it for everyone. But then men are always the reason we can't have nice things.

The attempt to fold "transphobia" into misogyny is pretty much a textbook example of how the trans movement tries to colonise womanhood. But it also betrays their thinking about what a woman is. Women are oppressed as women because of their sex (regardless of what they look like), but trans thinking suggests it's because of their appearance, hence men who look like women can also be victims of misogyny.
Which is nonsense, but revealing.
There is nothing these men will not try to steal from women, even our sex-based oppression.

Look mate. If you want to separate the bogs into "people with wommany feelings" and "people without womanny feelings" then go for it. Make an honest case.

If you get the vapours at the thought a few women might be incorrectly questioned about bring men, I can't wait to hear how you are going to justify challenging people who you don't think feel womanny enough on the inside!

Genes and hormones tell women to shave their legs or wear dresses or smile when they are furious at being belittled yet again? Yeah right.

Owwwwwww!!! Stop making me buy those $1500 high heels!!!

Oh the arrogant confidence of men telling women what it is to be us!

Oh the arrogance of speaking for all women!

@Baileyonice
The tail ends are irrelevant to the point here of how human categorisations work. When an overwhelming majority of a group adopts certain behaviours they become associated to them. This isn't stereotyping this just a fact of how human categorisation works because in no way does saying that typical behaviours associated with a group exist mean that less typical one's don't exist. Its as silly as say people can't hold two different thoughts in their heads at the same time.
Dismissing an overarching pattern or valid phenomenon simply because a few minority variations don't fit the rule indeed leads to deeply flawed, incompetent evaluations
You imply that behavioural variance is almost binary with a few outliers and that there are obvious behavioural phenomenons that have been proven to be biological and not the result of socialisation. None of this is true and we need to be very wary of such assertions.

We know by the age of 2.5 for example that girls show a strong preference for pink things choosing pink objects over blue objects 80% of the time. We also know that five year old boys show an aversion to pink and will only select the pink object 20% of the time. So the 'typical' behaviours at these ages would suggest that choosing the pink object is a fundamentally female trait. Except we know that girls below these ages showed no preference for pink and that girls that grew up in different cultures that didn't associate pink with females didn't have a preference for pink. It seems that socialisation as opposed to biology plays a much larger role but according to your logic boys that have a strong preference for pink would be expressing feminine characteristics and this could be seen as a sign that they were somehow born into the wrong body or sex. Don't you see how dangerous this is?

Building on this further, we know that adults treat babies dressed in blue and pink differently and shock horror, the way we treat the babies aligns perfectly with gender stereotypes. Is it any wonder then that babies who have been conditioned a certain way are more likely to develop certain traits? How can we prove that these traits are biological or a result of this different treatment? Your assertion that social conditioning is secondary in all of this is incompetent and deeply flawed.

An is is not an ought. Recognising some groups have a commonality with others doesn't mean they require the same treatment. Both minors & adults being an example. It's as if you would like people to pretend there are no parallels between groups when there clearly are. And in any case self determination encompasses the right to individual values. In other words its up to the butch natal female what defines them more when it comes to gender: Their reproductive or behavioural traits
What on earth are you talking about? Of course there is a huge amount of commonality between the sexes and all other groups in society. That's what I mean by variance and within that normal level of variance there will be all kinds of overlaps. This doesn't mean though that biological men can pretend to be women anymore than it means that white people can pretend to be black or that adults can pretend to be minors.

Self determination should not be allowed in some areas for obvious reasons. I used my learning disabled relative as an example. There are huge overlaps with his behaviours and children's behaviours but he is not a child. It would be wholly inappropriate and unsafe to allow him into safe spaces designed exclusively for the use of children. I would absolutely stand against any attempt to allow him to identify as a child because he shares some commonalities. This would be damaging for everyone involved.

Not trying to convince anyone of anything. Simply expressing my opinion. Maybe you should all try stop trying to convince people all the time.

Being trans identified is to literally re-inforce gender stereotypes, not challenge them.It is to suggest that if you feel one way or other, or if you have a preference for certain sorts of things then this is what makes you male or female.

I think this confusion arose/developed out of certain strands of feminism - those which stated that there was no difference between the sexes at all, and that any differences ( at population level) that did exist were purely socially constructed and used to oppress women (and gay men - who were associated with women).

Transgender ideology is a weird hybrid borne of a particular time in western social and cultural history...largely rooted in western Individualism ( and american civil rights) with its aspirations towards transhumanism and being free of the body and its confines and limitations.

Can anyone think of any legal cases where employers have insisted that males must wear high heels for work? Or is it only woman who have been required to wear high heels to be employed?

I don't need to speak for all women. One exception to your sexist ideas is enough to break your sexist "theory".

And mate, there are so many more than one of us.

Read some Feminism. The role of society in forming gendered personalities is well understood.

"Owwwwwww!!! Stop making me buy those $1500 high heels!!!"

I'm sorry, are you suggesting that women evolved to wear stupid shoes rather than were socialised into it?

Ironically you actually picked a great example to demonstrate how society makes it rational for women to act against our own long term interests. There is a whole new thread to start about why the shoes and handbags thing has emerged so strongly in the last 30 years or so.

But it would require you to ne clear-eyed, engage honestly and listen to women instead of looking for ways to score cheap points, so sadly it goes into the graveyard of things it's not worth talking to Genderists about because their blinkers preclude them understanding the core points.

I disagree with your starting point. The guiding principle of feminism is not self determination but that female people should be able to particpate in society on equal terms, with their needs and realities fully taken into account. Feminism centers around the fact society doesn't take into account the differences biological sex leads to and that that should change.

Women's rights are undermined by anti-trans activism. It promotes gender conformity, disparages female accomplishment in sport, and encourages the idea of limiting what young women should be able to do with their bodies

That's absolute nonsense. GC women embrace gender non-conformity; many of us are gender non-conforming ourselves. Wear what you like, just don't mistake your clothing choices for being a member of the opposite sex.

Disparages women's sport? The fact that makes puberty means men are faster, stronger and punch harder doesn't mean women's sport is less valid.
Usain Bolt can't outrun a racehorse, that doesn't mean he's not incredibly fast.
Protecting the female sports categories from men with trans identities or DSDs is recognising and valuing the achievements of female athletes. Otherwise you get the travesty of three male athletes on a podium in Rio claiming medals that belong to women.

If by 'limiting what young women should be able to do with their bodies' you are referring to cross sex hormones, binders and mastectomies - YES. I will give that one, we do want to prevent young women from making irreversible alterations to healthy bodies that are dangerous, damaging and can shorten their lives, put them at risk of heart attacks and strokes, experience menopause in their 20s, vaginal atrophy, loss of fertility, etc etc.

We are also against gastric bypasses for anorexia.

If you aren't against these, you might want to have a good long think.

This retrograde position you describe arose out of, and because of, the confusion caused by transgender ideology/gender identity theory. There have always been people who presented, either behaviourally or in dress, androgynously - but it took gender identity theory and the suggestion that sex itself was socially constructed - to suggest that to present in a cross sex manner literally made you into the other sex.

It seems as though you're the one trying to convince people - in which case you may want to work on your arguments!

You imply that behavioural variance is almost binary with a few outliers and that there are obvious behavioural phenomenons that have been proven to be biological and not the result of socialisation. None of this is true and we need to be very wary of such assertions.

For god's sake.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6677266/

This doesn't mean though that biological men can pretend to be women anymore than it means that white people can pretend to be black or that adults can pretend to be minors.

This is what's commonly referred to as a 'false equivalence'. Trans people have an association in that they share behavioural characteristics & inclinations typical to the opposite sex. There's no association between black & white people or adults to minors. All these categories are defined differently so you can't compare them. How race is defined depends on physical attributes. Age depends on chronological years. Gender depends on gendered associations with sex.

Self determination should not be allowed in some areas for obvious reasons. I used my learning disabled relative as an example. There are huge overlaps with his behaviours and children's behaviours but he is not a child. It would be wholly inappropriate and unsafe to allow him into safe spaces designed exclusively for the use of children. I would absolutely stand against any attempt to allow him to identify as a child because he shares some commonalities. This would be damaging for everyone involved.

As I explained earlier ,commonalities don't necessarily justify policy. Social utility does as in the details matter.

What has gender got to do with sex though? You can dress and act as you please in society. If you want to be a feminine man go for it and vice versa.

what does that have to do with your underlying biological sex? They are different.

We all instinctively assess each other all of the time. Being able to tell the difference between the sexes and recognise these features is hard wired in. Even birds and animals can tell the difference. A lot of men seem to think they pass, and some are probably encouraged to feel this way by well meaning friends, but they really don't. You don't even have to be close up to recognise someone's sex, you can pick it up from quite a distance; from the gait, movement etc

A camp gay man with exaggerated 'feminine' movements is still recognised as male.

There is no unique category of person that is 'trans'. People who assume this identity remain male or female like everyone else.

People who detransition have not transformed from one type of human into another and then back again....they are still the same sex category of person they always were....but have simply desisted from overt cross sex performance and/or identification.

Exactly.

Trans women are .25 of the population.

25% of the population? You must be joking, mate! I think you'd better find some accurate "facts" to back up your assertions. (or start from the beginning again with your arithmetic, because that was a whopper!"