Arguing from a place of privilege

[Temporaryusernamefortoday]

I’ve been gender critical for about 10 years. My position is mostly/entirely based on keeping men out of women’s prisons, wards, refuges etc.

I do not hold this position because I ever expect to end up one of those places but because I believe that the most vulnerable members of our society (as many of the women in prison, on long term wards and in refuges are) deserve protection. I also believe that TiM that end up in prisons are incredibly dangerous to these vulnerable women particularly as a disproportionate number are locked up for sexual offences.

I feel that a lot of female TRA do not think of these women and TiMs but instead think of the ‘harmless’ TiM they work with or are friends with which feeds into the ‘be kind’ don’t be a bully.

However, my new angle for these arguments is as follows. ‘You are arguing from a place of privilege as a women who is unlikely to end up in prison due to…….’, occasionally backed up with phrases such as ‘you are attempting to speak for these women and erasing their voices and their choice’ and/or ‘it is important to be kind to these women’.

All of these statements are true and while they are not full proof, it is amazing how difficult a lot of them find to argue against points presented in their own ‘language’ and ‘weaponised phrases’.

I hope this may help others who struggle to articulate their position to captured individuals!

Sorry but 'privilege' is one of the problematic words for me, it's all part of Judith Butlers Queer Theory, which is the postmodern bollocks that's created this post-factual, anti-science identarian claptrap that's robbed women of their place in the world.

I'd rather use my own words, I'm not fluent in drivel. I also don't argue, I'm not interested in hearing their justifications, or self-serving lies. I haven't changed anyone's mind but then you can't change a captured mind so why bother.

@TheywontletmehavethenameIwant A lot of people on these boards used to think that "being kind" to trans people was the right thing to do - until they realised that this meant destroying women's rights. So minds can be changed. I have not changed a TRA's mind, but I have made undecided people very suspicious of gender ideology. I understand your concern about using that type of language, but it can be useful.

The major goofy flaw with saying 'you don't get speak for other women' is that YOU ARE SPEAKING FOR OTHER WOMEN when they might not all agree with your position. Women are not a monolith & you seem to be assuming that they are….just like the Patriarchy did.

The other even more goofy flaw is your 'privilege' 'mic drop' because it assumes only people with personal experience can adjudicate on relevant matters which kind of leaves out a lot of judges, juries, voters, police et etc…The illogical lived experience thingy has long died a deserved death.

The concept of 'privilege' is what has got us into this woke mess in the first place. Talk about sowing unnecessary division across society.
I get that 'be kind' to these women might work with some of the hand maidens but really if they can't see that a man in a dress is not a woman, they are likely beyond help. How else can you explain all the well educated female Labour MPs lining up to worry about the poor trans women, the most marginalised etc etc.

I take OP's point. It's very often beneficial to speak another's language - or vernacular, 'code', etc. Most people do it more or less instinctively.

Quite a lot of current activists seem to use set phrases: they won't instinctively code-switch because the thoughts are formed around the phrases. So deploying their language may improve your chances of getting a dialogue going.

I agree with you and I think privilege is a good word for what people have but don’t realise they have it.

I think I have considered the word for it’s dictionary meaning other than a whole ‘thought system’ and I will reflect a bit more on that now it’s been pointed out to me.

People have short memories/ignorance of what has gone before, and limited understanding of how much things have changed.

Many of us live with more wealth and opportunity, than most people at any time in human history, would ever have hoped or imagined. When it comes to women’s issues, it’s only my grandparents generation where women couldn’t get mortgages on their own and financial independence was very difficult apart from a man. That’s not very long ago.

The OP is right. These women are arguing from a place of privilege. They don’t care about women in prison because they think they’ll never go to prison. They don’t care about women in homeless shelters because they’ll never need to be in one. They don’t care about women in domestic abuse refuges because they’re not in an abusive relationship. Gender ideology’s greatest harms are to the most vulnerable women and girls in our society.

Not only that... also women in jobs where changing clothes is required.

Someone spouting thought-terminating soundbites in their nice office will never be forced by bekind polices to strip down in front of a man like Sandie Peggie and the Darlington nurses. This ideology throws working-class women under the bus.

I think it's also worth asking what male privilege TIM lose, when and how they suddenly become 'brave' and more vulnerable than women.

I would love journalistic push back and a request for evidence each time someone publicly describes TIM as 'the most vulnerable'.

the thing I do is stick to my position. I need this because …. So you’re telling me I can’t have the right to …..

I can see where you’re coming from. But I make it personal.