Trying to understand everyday views on sex and gender discussions

[Schallern]

Hi,

I hope this is the right place for this post.

I am a bisexual female and have been friends for years with a very liberal, LGBT crowd. Past “trans women are women”, I never questioned anything.

I’m in my mid to late 20s now and I’ve recently expanded my social circle. As a result of this and moving away from purely LGBT spaces, I’ve had a lot more exposure to a wider range of political and social opinions.

A big one of these is the realisation that my previously, narrower social circle was very much an echo chamber. We just accepted everyone. That is lovely in some senses, but I also understand the world isn’t that simple.

Thing is, I’m struggling to even work out my feelings.

I’ve been taught that anything less than fully accepting trans people as the gender they want to present as is transphobic.

I suppose in my mind the two sides are a) complete acceptance and b) complete denial and erasure of trans-people and outright transphobia.

I’m interested in what exists in the middle. What do normal, everyday, people believe? What is the most “common” view on trans issues? Outside of my own echo chamber, where does the line lie?

I understand this forum leans very heavily in one direction. However, that’s why I’m asking here. Do you discuss trans issues with your friends and own social circles? Does it even come up? What kind of conversations do you have?

I suppose I’m trying to get a gist for what “acceptable” opinions are outside of my own social scene. Like I said, it’s just “trans women are women.” Anything less is considered erasure and denial and would have an individual cast out!

Happy to answer any questions. I’m trying to think more critically and actually work out what my own opinions are. And please note that whilst I have obviously described myself as coming from a very liberal background, I’m very open to hearing views as I no longer know what mine are. It’s amazing how quickly things change once you’re in the “real world.”

Thanks, so it's binary, not bimodal.

... or by using specialist terms without clarification.

Gender critical feminists are rigid about gender as they believe it to be purely a social construct which is anti science. Modern science shows that sex does play a significant role in shaping human behaviour ,cognitive traits, and development.
If I'm reading correctly, you're conflating sex and gender here. Could you reword so that it's clearer what you mean?

@BrickBiscuit That is an excellent point. Being able to define terms simply, clearly and without the definition being circular is essential.

i would love to know what cognitive traits are inherent in women ( and transwomen) and not in men

Quick question?

What is thrawn?

I only know it as Grand Admiral Thrawn - he of the blue face and red eyes, aiming to protect the Chiss Ascendancy and establish absolute order.

On the other hand, that might actually explain it... 😂

we are actually talking about here is the personal perceptions of an individual based... We aren't talking about outsiders perceptions & how they might conflict

Wrong. We are talking about how some individuals' internal perception is their business, but the external material reality is what matters when organising for society at large.

My internal self perception means bugger all to anyone but me. As do my religion beliefs or lack thereof, my likes and dislikes, and my beliefs about my abilities. I can believe I'm 5'8", 21 and a Czech tennis star all I want, but it won't get my older, short, disabled arse into Wimbledon.

I also noticed the paltry tactic that when confronted with the fact some trans identifying men (Willoughby, Upton etc al) claim they actually have changed sex, Bailey says "oh of course, they mean some spurious definition of sex I made up, so if course that's what they claim."

We see you, you disingenuous huckster.

I don't know, but I only know one group obsessed with spinny skirts and I sure as shite ain't actual women.

https://www.scotslanguage.com/articles/view/id/562

I discuss it with anybody and don’t dilute my opinions to please. I find it alarming how many women in particular have been brain washed into accepting the lie that a trans woman is a woman, when they are clearly a controlling man with ghastly dress sense.

Sadly the ‘be kind, you are transphobic’ brigade tend to steer clear of any critical thinking preferring to roost in an echo chamber whilst female spaces burn to the ground.

Yup. And even when they transition, the difference remains. I still very clearly remember, back when I was in the community, how we transmen organised an outing. Most of the transwomen declined to come, but one did join us at first. The minute she left, the atmosphere changed completely! We became so much more relaxed and open, instantly. We showed to each other a face that the transwomen simply never saw - something they wouldn't even be aware of.

Its pointless taking about presentation and behaviours because non of it is defined or used to determine if someone is trans or not.

Trans is an identity anyone can adopt. A man might persistently believe he is a TW, or only think as such occasionally. And even so, it isnt apparent to anyone else.

When sex matter, an identity is irrelevant. A man cannot be more female than a woman, whatever their identities.

TRA want us to have an identity by default and be able to opt in and out of it, and organise society around these identities.

But how is it possible to determine the needs of such a group when their is no commonality? What do I have in common with a TW, that i dont with by husband? Being comfortable being referred to as a women doesn't lead to common needs.

Perhaps your problem is that you have misunderstood the issue and are confusing two different things?

People will have different opinions about when services should be mixed or single sex. I have no problem with people wishing to have a debate about mixed sex/single sex provision, and to be honest, I have felt inconvenienced by single sex provision when parenting an opposite sex child. However, you cannot have single sex provision that includes people of both sexes. That is logically impossible. if you are genuinely interested look up a poster called keepingtoiletssafe. They have done huge amounts of research on the problem of managing a public/private space safely.

But leaving aside the world of toilets, women's rights cannot be defended if women cannot be defined. Women will continue to exist, but they will be pushed back to the legal position of 50 to 100 years ago. If, for instance, a right wing government decides to reduce funding for contraceptive services, there is no way to frame that as discrimination against women as a sex class (with a range of feelings about their identity) if they no longer have rights in legislation.

There is no way to analyse violence against women if we cannot objectively define women.

There is no way to analyse the impact of healthcare on women if we cannot define women.

This year the Scottish government briefly tried to prevent analysis of the sex of MSPs, making it impossible to understand whether women were represented.

But isn't this obvious?

Me too.

Nothing.

And why would people who share this cognitive trait need specific rights?

I would love for the op to come back once they've read some of the responses that we have put careful thought, time and effort into.

I was party to a conversation a few weeks ago about a women's sports group in which someone involved in running the group said 'Obviously I believe transwomen are women, but I think it's really important that the group is for (you can guess what term she used here) women only because of the different physiology.'

So while she said she believes transwomen are women she very much doesn't really think this does she? If she did believe it there would be no reason to exclude a group of women from a women's group.

I think this is pretty typical- people claim to believe but they don't really, they are just scared of being cancelled, hated or called a bigot.

Oh I think I've asked you this before on other threads and not had an answer. Were all upper class men in the 18th century Britain/ Western Europe actually transwomen? Or do you think they wore lace, wigs, make up, heeled shoes, highly embroidered (often with flowers), colourful clothing because those things are not actually 'female' things they are are just currently regarded as female, because gender isn't some inate love/hate of pink frilly things but a group of social expectations that vary over time and place and therefore liking them has nothing to do with your sex or your gender.

'Gender criticals are rigid about gender'

In what way???

Its like they don't even read the words they're typing.

I think the vast majority have not thought deeply about it. If you ask them in terms they can understand should a person who's gone through male puberty be in a women's sports team, they say no. If you ask them whether a person who is and looks male should be in the women's loos even if they wear a dress, they say no. If you ask them if there should be penises in girls changing rooms or sleeping accommodation on school trips they say "what? they wouldn't allow that would they?"

But they will also say "oh yes TWAW" because they've been told that's what kind people say.

Often people will actively avoid discussing the subject. I suspect it causes them cognitive dissonance.

In terms of who is actually in the middle, I say gender critical views are!

On the one extreme you have "you decide your gender based on what set of stereotypes feel most comfortable to you, declared gender identity is the only thing that matters not sex, and you may want to disguise or medically alter your body to match your gender identity".

On the other extreme you have gender enforced on the basis of sex "you must comply with the stereotypes associated with the sex of your body".

We are in the middle, wear what you like, have any personality you like, declare a gender identity if you like, but that makes you a transwoman, it can't make you a woman. Sex still exists and is often the relevant criterion.

What are the common women inherent behaviours that I
ignoring ?

please someone educate me @Baileyonice

If we hear something enough, we take it in without question. Thats why TWAW has been so effective.

Its why TRA dont like adult human female, because it gets to the point that whatever similarities they think they have with women, it isnt being female.

I think the list according to helpful visitors to this forum includes:

-really high heels
-crying at sad films
-size 8 shoes
-consumer behaviours

These can be statistically mapped onto a constellation of data points, and then someone's mum confirms she would share a changing room with her son.

You'll have to ask Bailey about the consumer behaviours; I assume it's something to do with Tesco Clubcard points, but as I don't sign up to any loyalty schemes I can't confirm.

Yep. They have created a mantra that is a clear and obvious untruth. It's required to chant the mantra, but very few people actually believe it. It's a demonstration of obedience.