Gender? Sex? Help me out please.

Is saying that something is true when it isn’t really true but it’s what I think acceptable on GN now?

(I may have had to ignore biology and change the established meaning of words to make my claim true.)

Just asking.

Well then it's obvious that even GC feminists don't agree on everything isn't it.

The only thing that really makes my voice different is that I agree trans women are women...

That and the fact I believe we can make this work for trans people because otherwise we will create a group of people who have no place at all.

Yet given that my views don't allow for women to lose safe spaces, don't allow for women to lose out in sports and don't allow for women to lose their terms...

TWAW...

That's the only thing that makes me different really other than another voice with individual perspectives on how to make everyone feel more comfortable..

So why have I been treated so badly in discussion and been accused of so many things I could not do, let alone would not do. Why have I never received an apology for awful things said about my character?

Why have I been left in a position where I feel I can't safely engage without being misrepresented? I speak the same language, I try to be respectful.

That's a question that has never been answered to my satisfaction other than assertions that I mean things I absolutely do not.

But I've been trying to point this out for a long time and I really don't expect to be heard now...

I'll keep an open mind though.

Doodledog

You all type so much faster than I do ??

I dictate my responses then add **. Sometimes it makes more work.

You all type so much faster than I do ??

Galaxy

What middle would you suggest VS. If your 'middle' removes single sex spaces its not really a middle is it.

There can't really be middle, can there, Galaxy?

We either have male and female spaces, open both to all comers (in other words get rid of them altogether), or have separate male, female and trans spaces. I doubt there are enough transpeople to make the second one a viable option, and in any case it would be likely to offend the AGF transwomen who think that they 'pass' as female.

So long as we allow male bodied people into what used to be female spaces there is a problem, like it or not. In most cases there will be no ill-effects, but when there are (such as in the case of the prisoner upthread) they are catastrophic for the women affected, or in a non-violent, but equally impactful example, the Lia Thomas case, or the statistical anomalies that happen when rapes are recorded as female crimes.

It is not that so-called GC people are not willing to compromise, so much as the fact that any 'compromise' suggested involves us giving away safety, dignity and/or achievement.

Who hasn’t tried to meet in the middle?

I have agreed that all transwomen are not to blame for the evils and falsehoods perpetrated by a small % of transwomen and we sympathise with the majority of trans who are damaged by this small %.

I have agreed that transmen and transwomen should have separate prison sections, but unless totally separate, feel they should linked to the sex assigned at birth, of the prisoners, rather than their often suddenly assumed transwomen claims.

I have agreed that some natal women can be violent, whilst refusing to accept this as an excuse for the violence perpetrated by transwomen.

I have not refused people the option to ‘change gender’ whilst reiterating the truth that sex is immutable, except when the change is for nefarious purposes.

I have however refused to accept that
ill-intentioned males should have access to places that should be safe for women. E.g. refuges, women’s hospital wards. Personal experience has shown me how wrong this is.

I have also, refused to accept the skewing of crime figures where crimes committed by by people ‘who were assigned male at birth’ (stupid phrase, but it could be usefully used to assign males to the correct prison!) Changing the meaning of ‘rape’ is one really sick attempt to skew abuse figures.

I have refused to condone the cheating in female sport by those who were assigned male at birth.

What concessions have the so called intersectional feminists made? What have they done to make things any better for the females they purport to be?

I think its perfectly possible to have both mixed sex and single sex provision alongside each other. It will cost of course.

I dont think its shouting down I think its disagreeing with. But for many women a refuge that includes men just isnt a safe space. And their needs are who the refuges were created for and who are protected by law.

Galaxy

What middle would you suggest VS. If your 'middle' removes single sex spaces its not really a middle is it.

This is a example of what I mean

I've never advocated for this. Not once.

I've suggested means of making spaces that trans people can use because they do need to use the bathroom and try on clothes and have shelter from abuse too but I have never advocated that women are left without safe spaces. Not once.

But sperate secure toilets have been shouted down

Facilities like prisons or refuges with separate wings/areas/floors for trans people have been shouted down

Single cubicle changing spaces have been shouted down

Using more language to include trans people in top of what already existed has been shouted down

Even though there are many women just like me who need and want more privacy to use the bathroom and try on clothes or get ready to swim and our needs matter too.

What middle would you suggest VS. If your 'middle' removes single sex spaces its not really a middle is it.

grannysyb

Chewbacca spoke for me. I have been following the Maya Forstater employment tribunal on Mumsnet, fascinating, most mumsnetters seem to agreed with Chebacca and me!

I've just caught up with that thread, grannysyb. Fascinating, and yes, good to see that the tide is on the turn, and that those who try to get others' points of view cancelled, deleted or otherwise silenced are learning that it isn't going to happen.

The thing is I think it's important to engage with and have empathy for the women outside your own circles and realms of opinion. Because in this debate the voices of all women do matter.

There was a point where I was reading all opinions and links and understanding people's fears which is still true.

There was a point where I stopped reading comments that assigned me with beliefs or feelings that were not there.

Then there was a point where I stopped reading comments insulting me for things I am not.

There was a point where I stopped engaging directly so that I couldn't have my words twisted into something unrecognisable.

Now I just have this general feeling of being "the wrong sort of woman".

Jokes aside: This actually only damages the GC viewpoints because people sitting i
On the fence will eventually be pushed off and make the divide greater..

What we really need, in my opinion, to affect positive change is a place to meet in the middle...

It's a shame

We feminists don’t need an adjective to qualify us. As feminists care for women and their rights.
Which leaves us free to support other members of society, male, or trans, but not to support those male &co who mean women (AHF) harm which the feminists who say intersectional but are really patriarchal feel it’s OK to do.

Excellent post Chewbacca.

Chewbacca spoke for me. I have been following the Maya Forstater employment tribunal on Mumsnet, fascinating, most mumsnetters seem to agreed with Chebacca and me!

Chewbacca I agree with your post 100% ?????

We intersectional feminists tend to stand up for ourselves and don't need cheerleaders or yea-sayers.
???????? or as some prefer lol

Can't answer a question with a modicum of intelligence? Claim you have no interest. Can't define the words you use? Just ignore.

It's a lovely sunny day, out I go.

I'm only quoting and agreeing as I get a very short lunch break, before going back into the classroom with 5 year old. You would think I would give myself mpr of a break from those with immature discussion techniques lol

trisher

Isn't it funny how all the allegations of gaslighting DARVOing and every other kind of persecution you can imagine comes from the gender critical. It might be considered part of a pattern of perceived persecution. but actually it's probably just a way of trying to counter perfectly reasonable posts. If you can't question the content claim you are being persecuted. They'll probably say I'm doing something similar now. It's very hard to discuss anything under these terms. Of course some are free to throw abuse about whenever they like.

I agree with you. It's very interesting to watch

Mollygo

DD your belief system seems to be anything that GGJ etc don’t approve of.
Did I say any lesbians or gays are Good Christians? Nothing you say above GGJ disproves my points, but I’m sure you enjoyed trying.

Don't flatter yourself. I'm not interested in trying.

I'm not expressing my real opinion why, because I'm not prepared to resort to being rude to someone I don't know.

If "gender critical" means that I don't blindly accept that human scientific biological and physiological facts are wrong and humans can change sex whenever they want to; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I protest at the erosion of my hard fought for identity, rights and safety; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I won't shut up, move over, make space and be kind towards those who seek to silence and minimise me; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I raise my concerns and doubts that having anyone with a penis and balls, in the same spaces that vulnerable women are occupying; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I raise my concerns that some men are using their right to claim that they're a trans woman in order to harm women and children; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I object to being attacked, assaulted and verbally abused by some trans activists because I dared to walk down a street and say that I am a woman; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I object and protest at having the language used to describe me as nothing more than the sum of my body parts; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I object and protest that my identity has been reduced to such a level that I'm identified as a "cis woman" or a "natal woman", and if I object to that I'm a terf or transphobic; I'm gender critical.
If gender critical means that I have the intellect, intelligence and insight to be able to recognise and acknowledge that not everyone who is in the trans journey mean women harm; I'm gender critical.

And proud to be so.

If being ’gender critical’ means that I criticise the notion that gender (which I define as a socially constructed set of norms) can or should take precedence over sex, then yes, I am GC. I don’t see myself as belonging to a community of GC people though, and I’m still struggling to understand what constitutes my‘belief system’ or the standards to which I apparently hold transpeople.

GagaJo Please define what you mean by GC. We're told by some TRAs that homosexuality is no longer it's literal meaning ie same sex attraction and is now some weird same gender (stereotype?) attraction. How dare you place a label on other people on here? You lectured me on that very subject just a few days ago, told me I can only label myself. Is it one rule for IFs and another for anybody else?

DD your belief system seems to be anything that GGJ etc don’t approve of.
Did I say any lesbians or gays are Good Christians? Nothing you say above GGJ disproves my points, but I’m sure you enjoyed trying.

Well, clearly, on GN there is a GC community. The most prolific commenters on here form it.