Gender? Sex? Help me out please.

I agree VS. Sad. And gives the lie to 'progress' and 'civilisation' that this process has to be gone through time after time. Discrimination. Hate. Thousands (or more) of people hurt before some degree of acceptance.

On the plus side, a trans student of mine, from 8 years ago, has returned to social media today after disappearing from view for a prolonged period. Nothing dramatic, but a happy post, with a new partner. Made me smile. I wish them well.

FarNorth

We have no choice but to see it that way GagaJo as you won't answer.

What sort of women are you VioletSky?
What other sorts are there?
Have you explained what is a man and a woman, for those of us who are having difficulty?

All good questions.

I get tired of hearing 'the wrong sort of woman', but again, any attempts to get clarification of what is meant by it are met with refusal.

As regards 'the wrong sort of feminist' - I bow to trisher's expertise. She is very clear about waves of feminism, complete with history and definitions. The rest of us can google, of course, but I think the takeaway is that intersectional feminists are the cool gang, and to become one you have to include men's rights in your definition of feminism.

GagaJo

I agree VS. Sad. And gives the lie to 'progress' and 'civilisation' that this process has to be gone through time after time. Discrimination. Hate. Thousands (or more) of people hurt before some degree of acceptance.

On the plus side, a trans student of mine, from 8 years ago, has returned to social media today after disappearing from view for a prolonged period. Nothing dramatic, but a happy post, with a new partner. Made me smile. I wish them well.

That's lovely news!

Gosh can you imagine what it would have been like if the Internet were around when gay people started being out and proud?

So so much worse.

I have faith though, my circles are all trans friendly, even though they discuss the issues, it's in a trans inclusive way

I'm sure I read and heard 'no debate' often. Can anyone remember which group used that phrase so much? JKR has received so much hate mail, death threats, vile, vile suggestions of what people wish on her, running to thousands and thousands directed at one woman. Anyone remember what group did that?

Kathleen Stock has written an excellent article for Substance called Entering the parallel universe of transactivism. Not a long read but one particular paragraph stood out:

When it comes to people who aren’t trans, the typical motivations for immersion in transactivism’s foundational fictions seem of four main sorts. First, there’s a desire to be kind to trans people, without a lot of further thought about what that might look like. Second, there’s wanting to seem kind because of the social capital it brings you these days. Third, there’s a desire to avoid ostracisation, since you know you will be socially punished if you don’t. And fourth, there’s a desire to undo human sexed categories with the power of words, because you heard from some whackjob academic that this was a coherent and politically desirable thing to aim for.

This is the link to the whole article; it's a great piece of writing done by a very intelligent and brave woman.

kathleenstock.substack.com/p/entering-the-parallel-universe-of?s=r

Not "Substance"..... Substack

According to trisher intersectional feminists have to include men's rights in your definition of feminism.
*Feminists don’t need any qualifying adjectives to prove their existence. They support and care about women.
Whereas ‘intersectional’ means you support the patriarchy.
What makes this support of the patriarchy or mysogyny in intersectional feminists obvious is:
-the non-recognition of cheating by transmen,
-the insistence that men suddenly deciding they are women when faced with prosecution are really transwomen.
A step forward has been made with the mention of separate tw units, but that these separate units should be attached to male prisons because the culprits are males is still not accepted.
-the insistence that men/tw have the right to tell abused women how they should feel about their trauma.
Et al.

When it comes to people who aren’t trans, the typical motivations for immersion in transactivism’s foundational fictions seem of four main sorts. First, there’s a desire to be kind to trans people, without a lot of further thought about what that might look like. Second, there’s wanting to seem kind because of the social capital it brings you these days. Third, there’s a desire to avoid ostracisation, since you know you will be socially punished if you don’t. And fourth, there’s a desire to undo human sexed categories with the power of words, because you heard from some whackjob academic that this was a coherent and politically desirable thing to aim for.

That definition sounds spot on from what I've seen. I work in a university, so am exposed to a higher rate of this than most, but the people I know who have bought into the trans agenda are generally young, naive, but basically kindly. Some are desperate to be liked, and can be quite shocked to discover that not everyone agrees with them, and that the disagree-ers are generally decent people too. They clearly expected to find that 'good' people would be supportive of the trans agenda, and that cynics would be 'unkind', although they struggle to define those terms, too. There is a set of learned responses that they trot out if questioned - it's as though they have all read the same paper, or all attended the same brainwashing sessions:

* Transpeople are the most marginalised group in society.

* People who criticise TRAs would have been homophobic if they'd been around in the past (or if they are older, they must have been homophobic as younger people).

* Nothing is being taken from so-called 'cis' people if transpeople get the things they want.

* There should be no debate, as debating suggests that there is another side to the argument.

All of these things are clearly nonsense, and they have no comeback when pressed to defend them beyond a simple 'trotting out' of the cliches. They can never, ever, define the terms 'woman' or 'man', and insist that transpeople 'just know' that they are one or the other, and that saying it makes it so - TWAW, and that's all there is to it. It's like a cult.

Thanks for that Chewbacca a very interesting read. Of course Kathleen Stock is another victim of 'no debate' bullies.

People who criticise TRAs would have been homophobic if they'd been around in the past (or if they are older, they must have been homophobic as younger people).

What they don’t seem to grasp is that whilst gay men and lesbians did not deserve the treatment they received and in some places are still receiving, they truly didn’t want to take anything from men or women. They wanted the right to be men who preferred men and women who preferred women.
If trans didn’t (and most of them don’t)
-want to rename women
- claim women’s safe places instead of setting up their own
- take women’s hard fought for rights in employment
-cheat in sport
etc. etc, do you think there would be the problems that have arisen?

This paragraph seems particularly appropriate:

In the social sciences, meanwhile, things don’t seem much better. Here the aim of research often seems to be to rationalise certain background beliefs. These beliefs are designed to make immersion in the original fictions appear beneficial or at least cost-free; or else to make refusal look costly in moral and social terms. (Effectively, failure to immerse is often equated with “transphobia”.) ^For instance: “there is an extremely low prevalence of regret in transgender patients after surgery” (i.e. medically-assisted immersion is harmless;) “administering
cross-sex hormones to gender dysphoric adolescence lowers suicidal ideation” (i.e. medically assisted immersion is beneficial;) “questioning the ‘ontological reality’ of transgender identities leads to transphobic harassment” (i.e. as a non-trans person, refusing to immerse yourself in the fictions of trans people causes trans people to be harassed;) “non-suicidal self injury is common in trans youth and emphasises the need for interventions that reduce transphobia” (i.e. as a non-trans person, refusing to immerse yourself in the fictions of trans people causes trans youth to self-harm;) and so on

I think that many of the people I'm talking about haven't thought about it all deeply enough to have separated sexuality from trans issues. Probably the term 'transexual' has confused the matter, but I suspect that this is why they accept the link with gay people from The Past. I know it's spurious, and that one form of discrimination/intolerance/prejudice is never going to be the same as another, but it persists. Maybe it's the notion (again spurious, of course) that many gay men are effeminate, and they make the link with drag and trans. I don't know, but the link has been made, and it's one of the tropes they trot out.

Do I think there would have been problems if the trans agenda had been less detrimental to women? I don't know that either, as it would have been a very different movement. I don't think that the misogynist end of the trans spectrum has anything to do with people 'knowing they are in the wrong body'. I think it is more sinister than that, and is bound up with a real hatred of women. This is why some of the crimes that so-called 'transwomen' (the violent ones who pose as such) commit are so brutal to women, and why the threats against critics are so violent.

I think that if not for Stonewall and the Diversity Champions scheme there would not have been so many people claiming to be trans, there would not have been so many demands placed on women in general and on the workplace in particular, and consequently there would not have been so many problems, no.

The situation with so many children and young people is, if anything, even more troubling. My heart goes out to them. It must be so difficult to pick a way through all the 'well-meaning' advice and vested interests, without the people who define as 'allies' but can walk away and live their lives when the kids have to come to terms with the changes made to theirs - some of them permanent.

Sorry - that post was in response to Molly's one above.

'Trans Britain - Our Journey from the Shadows' ed. Christine Burns, explains a lot of the background campaigning that went on.
It's worth a read.

Thanks FarNorth, there's a huge amount of really insightful reading material out there now which I'm taking as a good sign that, those capable of any critical thinking, are having their voices heard.

I had to smile earlier when I saw that a poster had made reference to "young people being so much more accepting and open to trans" whilst older people are stuck in the past and dragging their feet about "progress". It was only last night that another poster had had a conversation with their GS who instantly rejected that idea. I can only assume that any allie on GN hasn't acquainted themselves with the sheer fury and outrage of MN posters on their Feminism: Sex & Gender Discussion forum; most of whom could be grouped into that same group "young people". But it might not be a pleasant read for them; it probably won't be what they think "young women" are thinking and feeling.

The Observer had a very good opinion piece about young people and gender identity. www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/mar/20/observer-view-cass-review-gender-identity-services-young-people?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

I think that young people should be allowed to dress as they wish and be as they wish. But I do not think that puberty blockers should be given - does that make me transphobic? - who knows?

I think that a person's gender identity is entirely their choice, but do not want people with penises in women-only spaces or sport - does that make me transphobic? - who knows?

I think that if we all just let people be who they want to be and pursue what are regarded as gender-specific behaviours, dress etc. then we would all be much happier; but I do not think that individuals who choose the behaviours or dress of opposite to their biological sex should have special provisions made for them - they should just be what they want to be and we all just get on with life together - does that make me transphobic? - who knows?

My biggest concern is to protect the young from pressure to be someone other than who they feel they are. I want freedom about how they want to be as regards gender not to become an either/or choice, but to give them the space to explore what is right for them without criticism or discomfort. But I want them to be protected from taking irrevocable steps that they could potentially later regret. Does that make me transphobic? - who knows?

I'm with you on all that Luckygirl3.

Luckygirl worrying about that doesn't make you transphobic

It depends who you ask on here Luckygirl, but no I don’t think what you want makes you transphobic.

It's only when you won't make any space for trans people that you are transphobic.

Or if you ignore the increasing attacks on trans people because of the way that these issues are discussed.

Or if you aren't open to finding solutions so that we can all feel safe and included.

Or if you refuse to use peoples preferred pronouns.

Or if you point at trans people and say they look too much like the gender they were assigned for birth.

Or if you think bring trans is not valid or they are mentally ill.

Or if you think the existence of trans people is somehow an attack on women..

Etc

SueDomin, thanks for the link to the Cass report. It’s been summarised or referred to a number of times on the trans threads. It’s an interim report but is clear that the GIDS clinic at the Tavistock clinic isn’t fit for purpose. It confirms the concerns raised by professionals and those of us dismissed as gender critical, that the starting point of accepting a child wants to change gender is dangerous.
Many of these young children have complex mental health problems, are neuro-diverse. The focus on gender has been omitting a more through assessment of attachment, family relationships, trauma etc.
I’ve seen no response to the report from the posters who support early medical / hormone and other treatments for children

I really do worry about children be given hormones before they are fully independent.

I spent most of my childhood wanting to be a boy, i even knew what name I would go by. I was described as tomboy, I preferred playing with boys to girls and was happiest in their company.

In the 1950s the concept of saying 'I am a boy' was beyond any belief.

However as I grew through adolescence, it was clear that my body was very comfortable being female, even if my mind was less convinced. As it happened both my choice of university degree and the industries I worked in were predominantly male and I was very comfortable working in a predominantly male environent and rarely had any problems.

It frightens me to think that if I was a teenager now, this ambivaelnce in me could be taken over by those who might see my dichotomy and encourage me to see myself as a boy and take drugs that irrevocably would change my body for ever. What adults do is diffeent.

As I have said, gender is a social construct, all I needed as a child was for my behaviour and preferences to be entirely acceptable and not defined by my sex.

SueDonim thanks for the link to the report. It is quite horrifying, the damage that has been done in the name of being ‘woke’ or ‘forward thinking’ or ‘kind’.
Reading M0nicas post above is a good way of looking at it. Wanting to be the opposite sex as a child has been around for years-even George in Enid Blyton’s books expressed that feeling.
Using chemical or physical medical treatment to make that a reality before children and teenagers really understand the possibly irrevocable consequences is dangerous.
Some people, refusing the Covid Vaccine because they don’t know the potential future effects, will happily endorse the chemical or physical transgender treatment of children.

M0nica I wonder did you ever consider self harm when you were a "tomboy" because that is the recourse of some who are uncomfortable with their body and their assigned gender. That's one of the reasons puberty blockers are given Luckygirl3 because if the alternative is a child who attempts to change his or her body by doing potentially damaging things which leaves scars it is much better to delay the development which bothers them and allow them a space to explore. The effects of puberty blockers are for the most part reversible