Is Gender Critical the new Pro Life?

Thankyou I wasnt after sympathy so to speak, although I appreciate it, I was trying to say that making assumptions about peoples lives and beliefs (especially on the internet) just doesnt work.

An excellent summation Doodledog. The paucity of actual lived experience shown in some of the contributors to this thread has been breathtakingly shocking. The "none-of-you-are-as-liberal-and-down-wid-da-kidz-as-me" and "ah-but-that's-not-what-I-mean-in-this-context-and-you-shouldn't-be-quoting-me" simply convinces me that this, along with the recommendations to "learn about how gay people suffer from homophobia by Googling it", convinces me that they don't actually have anything to add other than research from Google and an antiquated perception of what was actually happening in general society (let alone on GN) 20 years ago.

Galaxy you have my sympathies. I lost a colleague at around the same time to Aids.

I have just added it up and realised it was nearer 30 years ago doodle, time slips past . I was just feeling guilty about bringing him up in anger so to speak but he would have roared with laughter at my angst.
GN is really glitchy tonight it took me ages to be able to post. Oh and I loved the venn diagram description

Doodledog I didn't get through all that but if you are bringing in something I said on a completely different issue and have already calirified my meaning on... On this thread.....

Then I really don't understand how you expect anyone to be able to have an open honest discussion with you.

What I did read of what you are saying works both ways.

Practice what you preach.

Pull up anyone doing it, it doesn't weaken your arguments unless you need strength in numbers so badly you are willing to let others on your "side" make personal attacks

Oh. That was meant to be a preview that I was going to edit, but it got stuck and posted - it's long even for me?. Sorry about that, but it does 'sum up' my feelings on this thread.

Galaxy, I'm really sorry to hear about your friend - that must have been devastating for you. FWIW, I completely understand your frustration at the assumptions made about Gransnetters. x

Bless you. It shows how your understanding of the GN population isnt very accurate either. 20 years ago I was watching my best friend die of Aids.

I will be called to task for posting a long reply, but this thread covers so much (both in the subject matter and the way it has been handled) that I can't say what I want to say in a shorter one.

The OP of this thread seems to think she has an omniscient perspectives on the opinions of a whole generation, pro-lifers and the position of GCFs on the sex/gender issue. There are sweeping statements which claim to summarise the feelings of these groups, but which are glaringly and offensively inaccurate, as are many of the ‘debating techniques’ used in the course of the thread.

We have had ‘because I said so’, ‘my opinions don’t need facts’ and ‘it doesn’t matter if I have said X before, I am saying Y now, so that’s what matters.’. We’ve had ‘you can’t say that as it’s against the rules of GN’ posing as a counter-argument to opposing points of view.

We’ve had ‘science’ used against pro-lifers, but when the OP was asked to provide some scientific basis for her own argument, she ‘declined’, and used the much-derided FOFO (eff off and find out) approach which is notorious in education circles as being easily translatable as ‘I have no idea’. We were told that Opening Post was intended as the starting point for a debate, but then that the Opening Poster MAY decide to answer difficult questions WHEN she has the time. Not only is shouting like that rude, but so is brushing people who have bothered to respond to an invitation to debate in this condescending manner.

We’ve had insulting remarks made against GCFs thinly disguised as supportive comments to TRAs. Ironically, some of them were self-congratulatory remarks about how only ‘some people’ resort to personal attacks, unlike themselves. Despite the fact that until now I have deliberately stayed away from this thread, and despite the fact that dragging in other threads is ‘against the rules of GN’ when it suits, I was personally singled out for a dig about ‘demanding’ answers, which is something I have never done. Yes, I have directed a question to individuals, and asked why they haven’t answered, but those individuals are vocal proponents of the TRA point of view, and the relevant thread had been very one-sided in support of my OP, and I was genuinely interested in what their view would be. Ironic, really.

As in so many of these threads we hear of how those on the ‘trans’ side of the debate (for want of a better way to put it - I am not saying that the other ’side’ is anti-trans, just for avoidance of doubt) know countless transpeople, have numerous ‘personal contacts in the area’ and that they have access to the thoughts of other people as well as the ability to observe their actions - all of which (they claim) back up their point of view. There is never any explanation of where these credentials come from, and whereas I completely understand a desire to stay anonymous, it seems strange that the rest of us, who also have social and professional lives, also mix with people of all ages, and also have friends have found that people we know have very diverse views on the topic, whatever their age or situation, as has been shown by a number of posters above. This wide range of knowledge and contacts looks a bit, erm, 'thin' when seen in the light of the denial of any knowledge of the Stonewall position on gay rights, (and this echoes a similar denial a while ago on the subject of lesbians being threatened for refusing to have sex with transwomen). These denials were based on ‘I haven’t heard of this so it can’t be happening’, when there is a lot of documented evidence out there, and ‘the gay community’ has been vocal in its opposition to Stonewall and its enforced inclusion of trans rights into what was once a gay rights lobby. OK, none of us (AFAIK) is an expert on any of this (are we?) so can’t be expected to know everything, but arguing so vehemently and claiming to have insider knowledge is incongruous with such an important gap, and suggests that people have only familiarised themselves with the things that suit their viewpoint.

To get to the 'substance' of the OP, IMO no, there is no similarity between Pro-lifers and GCF’s, although there would be a section of a Venn Diagram that included both of them, just as there would be a section that overlapped Pro-lifers and TRAs, and one that included all three.

I don’t think that many large groups of disparate people usually think as one, as is suggested by the OP, but speaking as someone whose friendship group contains many GRFs I can say for sure that none of them are critical of other cultures that accept alternative gender expressions beyond the binary, and none want to shut off support for anyone. The preference would be to give impartial support to those who ask for it, not to leap to any conclusions made by unqualified busybodies.

Again, I know no GCF who refuses to accept any other than 100% transitioned individuals, or deny them surgery, hormones or treatment. I can’t think of a single friend who is anything other than supportive of transpeople - the issue we have is that as things stand, anyone can say they are a woman and enter single-sex spaces with no requirement to prove anything. This, and the fact that the language is being mangled to the point that women are ceasing to exist as a sex-class, and that our rights are further at risk from skewed research figures based on responses from people saying they are female but who have make bodies, hormones and socialisation are our concerns, but these things have been said over and over on these threads, as has the fact that TRAs are unable to define what a woman actually is, despite their vocal support for anyone who ‘just knows they are one’, or who ‘just knows they are not’.

Finally, I can’t speak for Pro-lifers, but as far as I am aware they are united in one thing only - their belief that abortion should not be allowed in law. I don’t share that belief, but I think it is fairly straightforward, and is based on the belief (usually religious) that life begins at conception. I understand their point of view, and their right to hold it, but I don’t think that it has anything in common with the more complex issues surrounding sex/biology and gender/socialisation.

I never saw hostility towards Manchester Pride, or between the various and diverse contributors. GmP always took part, their float got lots of positive support from crowds. We were there over 25 years ago with our children aged 14 and 13. They’d been encouraged to go by three lesbian teachers from their school, who were on the NUT float.

I don't need to Google it Gagajo! I attended the Pride marches with my nexand experienced it first-hand! Perhapsnyoud have a better grasp of the reality of the oppression and fear thatnyou people live with if, instead of relying on Google for your information, you actually went out into their world and experienced it for yourself.

I never saw hostility towards Manchester Pride, or between the various and diverse contributors. GmP always took part, their float got lots of positive support from crowds. We were there over 25 years ago with our children aged 14 and 13. They’d been encouraged to go by three lesbian teachers from their school, who were on the NUT float.

I don't need to Google it Gagajo! I attended the Pride marches and experienced it first-hand! Perhapsnyoud have a better grasp of the reality of the oppression and fear thatnyou people live with if, instead of relying on Google for your information, you actually went out into their world and experienced it for yourself.

I haven’t said there is no hostility between L and G people, but the additional hostility at the Women won’t wheesht meeting and the Manchester Pride was aimed at women, lesbian or not or in the case of Gay Pride at homosexual men by . . . Now let me think!

That shows such ignorance Chewbacca. You only have to scrape the very surface of gay rights to see the horrific violence gay people have suffered in the past.

Google it. You will find millions of links.

They have always attracted hostility.

Absolute tosh! Until I moved out of the area, I used to attend Manchester Pride every year and apart from a few drunks, it was always a happy, peaceful and welcoming weekend of fun for families (yes, I took mine). I cannot recall anyone ever having to be escorted from the march by police officers, just to ensure that a gay man got to safety from a group of violently aggressive trans activists. Until this summer.

But if you have lived with or had contact with gay or lesbian communities you would know that their views are as disparate as any other group of people. There are gay people who call heterosexuals names and don't want to mix with them, gay men who hate lesbians and lesbians who feel the same. That there is a long history of hatred for trans people and many trans people think they are just retaliating. Blaming transpeople for the bad feeling between them is scapegoating . Pretending to support gay people and blaming transpeople is just prejudice.

Apologies for the duplicate!

This is the least diverse environment I'm in Chewbacca. GN's demographic is white, middle-class, elderly women. Not 100% of course. But in the main.

This is the least diverse environment I inhabit actually Chewbacca Mostly older, white, middle-class women. Not 100%, but that is this sites demographic in the main.

if this discussion were taking place on Gransnet 20 years ago, all those who are now gender critical would have been gay critical

Maybe amongst the company you keep Gagajo but certainly not in mine. As long as 35 years ago I had both colleagues, and friends, of both gay men and women and still do to this day. Maybe you could try to widen your friendship group to be more diverse?

I was surprised by your comment that of course abuse will be thrown on protest marches. Why of course?

Because Pride marches are held to refute the established order of heterosexuality as the default norm. They have always attracted hostility. Definitely less so now, but still... plenty of homophobes around.

GagaJo those people who abuse and threaten - others in the parade who were mentioned in my previous sentence.

Around 30 years ago, a friend asked me if I would be concerned if any of my children were gay. She would have no concerns if her children were gay, she said.
I replied that I would be concerned for them because it could mean their lives would be more difficult, and for no other reason.

Gagajo, you say women laughed at you in 1993 because you said you were a feminist. That isn’t new or unusual. Feminists have been dismissed and we still are. On gransnet some of us have been accused of being Terfs, or 70’s third wave irrelevant not real feminists.

I was surprised by your comment that of course abuse will be thrown on protest marches. Why of course?

Where is the evidence to support your statement “ if this discussion were taking place on Gransnet 20 years ago, all those who are now gender critical would have been gay critical”. I find that to be both offensive and ridiculous. Where were you 20 years ago? Certainly not living amongst the diverse groups and communities I was.

Mollygo, I don't know how much involvement you've had with the gay community. Gay men have often discriminated against lesbians. Gay men and lesbian women can demonstrate bigotry towards bisexual people. It isn't the gay utopia you seen to think it is.

'those people' FarNorth? Are you referring to trans people? Bigots? Breeders?

If this discussion were taking place on GN 20 years ago, all those who are now gender critical would have been gay critical.

That is absolute rubbish but why do you think it?