can we discuss feminism please

The texts were very wide ranging, and it is a quite a while ago, so I can't reel off a list of names. (Sadly, I had large range of texts which I got rid of when I downsized and moved overseas.) However, many of them were first person accounts. Interestingly (because this was LONG before there was any kind of feminist reaction against trans equality) the vast majority of first person accounts I read were of F2M. Two writers that spring to mind are Leslie Fineberg and Jack Halberstam.

I would say most of the texts were cross disciplinary, covering history / sociology / psychology. Probably not politics back then, because it was before the topic became really politicised. But I do remember having a very clear understanding that transgender was the next logical step on from feminist / queer activism. I carried it with me into my grassroots work with a gay / lesoian support group I was in.

At the time I fully intended to continue my research into a PhD and to try to get the work published, because I knew we were on the edge of it being the next movement, but motherhood and life prevented it.

Edit - by 'Otherwise' above, I meant 'apart from that' they can live as female, rather than 'or else' they can live as female.

Trisher, the word 'realise' is very loaded. 'Agree', or 'believe' might be a more accurate way to describe Rosie51's position, although she can, of course, correct me if I am wrong, but the way you are expressing your views is pitching you as the immovable 'right' position, and Rosie as in the wrong.

You may believe that this is the case, but the assumption that you are right, and that anyone who doesn't agree with you just doesn't understand means that your argument is not built on logic but opinion.

Needing a medical diagnosis is not an abuse of human rights - denying someone such a diagnosis might be, as might refusing to treat them on the NHS, but ensuring that someone is not making a mistake is not denying them their rights, it strengthens them.

Also, no diagnosis is required for someone to live as a member of whatever gender they choose. It is only when they want to transition that they need to seek medical backing. Personally, I think that any male born person who wants to enter all-female spaces, or take places on all-female shortlists etc should need to have some sort of medical diagnosis to to so legally. Otherwise, legally there is nothing stopping them from 'living as female', whatever that means.

Gaga, my postgrad research has not included anything on gender politics, but I did find the theories interesting back in the day. All texts of that nature need to be seen in the context of their subject genre though, and I'm not sure which subject would cover the current situation. Sociology? Psychology, Politics?

I have taught research methods, however, and in all of those cases, I would want to know who had funded the research, and why. I would look on research funded by Mermaids very differently from something funded by Stonewall, to use hypothetical examples, and it is not always clear from reading a general textbook, (or one referring to research outside of its specialism) who is behind the studies to which they refer.

Sorry I missed the first part of your post Rosie51 I suppose because I am surprised anyone doesn't realise the requirement that you need a medical diagnosis or have to present evidence to a panel to live as the gender you feel you are is an abuse of human rights. I have posted about this before and described it as similar to when disabilities were regarded as a medical and not a social problem. I don't think anyone has asked you to present any evidence, or pay, to have your gender recognised.

I am a feminist. Frequently referred to as a rampant feminist. And I don't share the opinion that trans rights take away from womens rights.

I feel that feminist that have that opinion are entitled to their opinion, but not all feminists feel that way.

From what I have seen of teenagers who have trans peers, they don't have issues with the toilet thing either.

Yes, IMO transrights are human rights, and should be protected vigorously in law.

I don’t see parallels between trans issues and gay issues, as gays had to fight for the rights that already exist for transpeople. Neither do I see trans issues as moral issues, as many did about gay rights- I think that everyone should live their best lives and be supported in doing so.

As I have repeatedly said, however, the way in which this is being done is removing rights from women, which is where my objections lie.

trisher Not asking you to get into loos etc, just wondered what human rights I enjoy that a transperon doesn't because I can't think of any. Of course if you can't think of any either it rather suggests there are none missing.

I'm not getting into the loos, women's refuges argument again. Read the thread if you want my opinion. No one is dentying you anything you have at present.

trisher can you explain exactly what human rights I have that are denied to a transperson? The rights that gay people wanted were exactly the same rights that heterosexual people had, marriage for example and I supported them 100% That they finally got equality took nothing away from any other group. The rights that some transgender people want, especially with self ID, will take away from another group. My right to single sex places in certain defined situations is incompatible with someone declaring their gender identity gives them an absolute right to share those spaces.

I agree about the generational divide I see it much the same as that which exsted when gay rights were first established. There was much hype about how society would be ruined, how young people would be unduly influenced, how the family would become irrelevant and none of it happened.Any changes in the status quo worry people. Churchill opposed women having the vote on the grounds that it is contrary to natural law and the practice of civilized states[;] that no necessity is shown[;] that only the most undesirable class of women are eager for the right It was largely considered that having the vote would be a bad thing
None of the steps forward in human rights have ever made society worse, only better. I see no reason why ths should be different.

To be honest, Doodledog, it wasn't the teaching, that was very minimal, with it being a post grad course. Most of it was research. It was the scope of the reading that I did. I did my MA at a uni with a very large library of feminist / gay / gender / queer theory texts and it was an epiphany for me. Although I had worked on a gay and lesbian helpline in the past that had supported trans people, I didn't really engage with it until I started doing my own research.

My teaching is just in English, nothing outside the ordinary. Certainly nothing that has encompassed my MA research. But just about every trans student I have taught has been F2M. There WAS one M2F in my last UK school, but they weren't at the stage of looking for help and obviously, any overture has to come from the student.

What was the teaching on your MA as regards the difference between sex and gender, Gaga?

I studied the theories as part of my undergrad degree (literature) many years ago, and they were mostly about representation and things like the male gaze, and didn't touch on trans politics, as the topic wasn't remotely mainstream back then.

I appreciate that personal experience and anecdotes are not scientific, but in more than 20 years of university teaching I did not see any F-M transpeople. All were/are M-F and even then the numbers were small, given the number of students I got to know in those 20-odd years.

There has been a rise in the numbers of non-binary/gender-neutral students in the past few years, but they are mainly 1st year undergrads who may well be trying on new identities without commitment.

I agree about the female to male % Trisher. Almost all of the trans children I have come across in my teaching career have been female to male.

*When I did... (WHY don't I preview?!)

I haven't been following the Hate Crime bill, and maybe I'm mis-remembering but I thought I'd read they weren't going to include misogyny as a category. I wonder if that would be because you'd then have to define what a woman is. The dictionary definition adult female human being considered hateful makes it difficult, I'd imagine.

The writing has been on the wall for where we are now with the gender/sex/trans situation for many years. When I need my MA, I did some of it in Feminist / Gender / Queer theory. The movements flow into each other and each one moves forward a bit more.

The reason it feels so alien to us is because we have lived most of our lives in a different era. For many of the younger generation, gender difference is not as firmly entrenched. It is still there though, and it will be many years still before culture and society adjust. But they will.

Although I am old, I see it as onward movement. We can no more stop it than the tide and there is no point in fighting it. There is a reason it is a youth movement, and that is because we are no longer as relevant. Speaking personally, I don't want to fight it. I have had many students who were gay / queer/ trans and I am happy that their lives are easier now.

For the trans boy in one of my previous schools, to see him begin to get support in his journey and to be accepted by quite traditional parents, staff AND peers was lovely to watch. So different from a few years before with the trans boy who daren't even tell his parents, even though all of his friends knew.

VAMPIRE QUEEN I do so agree with you.

I couldn't agree more, petunia, and am shocked and worried by how few people seem to be at all concerned.

There does seem (in my experience only) to be a generation divide. A lot of young people I know are 100% behind the idea that 'transwomen are women', whether or not they are transitioned.

It is older feminists who spent years fighting for the rights that younger people take for granted who can see the dangers, but as usual, older women are invisible and our views disregarded. If we are heard, we are assumed to be out of touch, discriminatory and transphobic.

Sometimes it feels as though we have stepped into a parallel universe over gender identity. We can no more change sex than turn into a unicorn. It is impossible. Every cell in our bodies are male or female. It is a biological reality that we can not change, even if we would desperately like too do so. Gender is something else entirely. And while respecting a persons desire to take on particular aspects of the opposite sex, clothing, behaviour etc., that person can not change sex.

I agree doodledog, this is more than terminology, but that's where it starts. If we cant even be sure exactly what a woman is, we will live in a society where there are men and non men. I'm sorry if you cant see that Trisher but you will be gradually drawn into a non man category. But that wont matter unless you want a specific job, a place of protection, privacy and dignity, protection from the violent non man prison inmate, sporting achievement or even to wish to be referred to as mother or grandmother.

Looking to our politicians for help seems a waste of time. Most political parties have fully embraced the gender identity ideology and those that are gender critical are reluctant to speak up. And now it seems that modern feminists have included “non women” into their ranks.

MBHP1 the rainbow has only recently been adopted by the NHS it has been a symbol of Gay rights since 1978 www.britannica.com/story/how-did-the-rainbow-flag-become-a-symbol-of-lgbt-pride

Doodledog In fact the number of people transitioning from female to male is increasing. It used to be about the same but is now more. So in effect the problem is not what you thnk slate.com/human-interest/2017/09/trans-youth-clinics-are-seeing-more-trans-boys-than-before-why.html

The rainbow is now used as a symbol for supporting the NHS, is it not?
As a longtime supporter of Gay rights I pointed out to my trade Union what the rainbow meant to me and was informed that was ‘old hat’. Is it not the trans symbol the ping, blue and white rainbow that is being referred to?
Please don’t confuse my support for Gay rights with my other views as many gay people are on same page as me.

We all are, if legislation like this goes through. Men stay men, and 'women' includes anyone who self-defines as such. I know that women can transition to men, but that happens very rarely, and in any case, natal women are far less of a threat to men in pretty much any situation than natal men are to women.

If anyone can self-id as female, then female shortlists, and all the things in my earlier post that I'm not typing out again will be impossible. There will be men, and 'those who identify as female', even though those not born female need not have transitioned and will not have had a background that has been the same as the actual women for whom an all-female shortlist was deemed necessary.

I struggled a bit with using 'they' for a while, but as it is becoming more commonplace, I am getting used to it and learning not to see it as plural or ungrammatical. It's not the terminology that worries me, though - it is the implications of sex and gender being conflated with all that this entails.

How exactly am I "being consumed into a non-male sex" Doodledog?
I see no danger in the person standing next to me being either a natal women or a trans woman? Or for that matter the man standing beside me being trans or natal. Or for them to be non-binary.
The biggest problem for me is non-binary people using the pronoun "they" I read a story recently with a non-binary person as main character and had trouble at one point becase I thought there were two of them.

I'm not condemning anyone to anything. I recognise the change of gender, but not the change of sex, which is my point, and in any case, your pointing out that I didn't include non-binary people in my post does not weaken my argument, which still stands.

It is feminism because women are threatened with being subsumed into a 'non-male' class. I find this a very worrying trend, and had hoped it would die along with Trump and his Gileadian policies, but Biden has bought in to it too.

If feminists don't stand up for the rights of their sex, who will?

Bridgeit, was that directed at me?

It's not sophistry. It's demonstrating the weakness of the argument.
If you refuse to recognise a change of sex, or the right of the person to believe they have changed gender then you condemn women who do not want to be women to remain in a tortured situation and deny them the pronoun and gender they want. How is that feminism? You deny women who want to be non-binary the right to legally exist at all, some of them you would define as women. How is that feminism?