That is helpful. Thank you!
It is also biased?
So-called 'gender-critical feminists' believe that feminism is about women, and that self-identifying transwomen have different needs from those of people who have been socialised as women, and lived as girls, with all of the relative disadvantage that that can entail. For this reason we do not buy into the notion that TWAW (transwomen are women) but would prefer them to be a separate group with equal rights and protections, but not to be included in things like female sports teams and not to have access to places such as female DV hostels, where they can cause serious distress to the women for whom these spaces were intended.
They also point to the fact that some only self identify when it suits them, such as when they are about to be sentenced for a sex crime and prefer the idea of going to a women's prison where they won't be at the bottom of the pecking order, and that such self-identification can be a voyeur's dream, eg when men access female changing rooms and stand next to women and girls in states of undress.
Many lesbians have suffered abuse for not wanting to have sex with transwomen, despite the fact that they (the TW) have penises, and lesbians do not, on the whole, want to have sex with people with penises. There is a condition called autogynephilia, which causes men to 'get off on' being taken as women, and such men often target lesbians because they are heterosexual males, then get violently offended when they are rejected as sexual partners as it bursts their autogynephile bubble.
All of this is unfortunate for the TW who just want to 'live as' though they are female (whatever that means, as women live lives in diverse ways). They (or many of them) are also critical of TRAs (Trans Rights Activists) who make their lives more difficult, and also of Stonewall, which has infiltrated places such as universities and local councils with its insistence on No Debate and the threat of 'exposure' as transphobic to any institution which does not adhere to its Diversity Champion rules, which include things like putting pronouns on email signatures and Teams/Zoom screens. This can be 'outing' for trans and non-binary people who prefer to be private about these things, and offensive to those who do not accept that there is such a thing as a 'gender pronoun' but see them as markers of sex.
Research into sex-based areas such as equal pay, access to housing/education/pensions and so on can be skewed when people self-identify on the questionnaires. This has obvious ramifications for policies that are intended to equalise life for women (or, more rarely, for men).
If words to describe women and mothers are dropped from the language, and others such as 'female' are corrupted to include 'male', there will be no way for those whom we now call women to discuss their lives in a meaningful way.
Finally (for now!) gender-critical feminists reject the idea that gender is fixed, and point to the fact that there is no need for young people to 'change gender' in order to 'behave like' the other gender. They can just do it. All we need to do is to break down the links between gender and sex, so that people can pick and mix their 'presentation' and behaviour, perhaps in more obvious ways than most of us already do, but without taking hormones or having surgery to reinforce their choices.
This would prevent the high numbers of retransitioners who are now making their voices heard, by make changing their minds much easier.
)
overall I wouldn't say it's confrontational volver, there are a lot of very sensible and well explained points of view being expressed.
