The law as it stands on sex, Part 2

So am I Galaxy providing they don't do so to access women's safe spaces, and as far as I'm aware, no one on this or any other trans thread has said differently.

I am very happy for men to wear dresses. I dont think this has any impact on their sex.

they are just trying to love their authenitc selves as who they are on the inside

Someone's swallowed the koolaid.

But rejecting gender norms . . .

What is a gender norm? Who is allowed to decide?

Me? trisher? TW? MPs?
It’s a social construct and if it’s as fluid as I’ve seen mentioned on here, how can there be a norm?

They never claimed to be women Galaxy so why would you think they were?

But that's the whole point! GP and DB may well have "dressed as women" but they never claimed to be, nor dod they ever seek to access women's safe spaces, sports or demand to 've addressed as a woman! I can't decide if you genuinely can't retain what's been said so many times before trisher or whether you just like rehashing the same silly situations ad nauseam in the hope that, one day, they'll stick, but, either way, I'll humour you again: no one, thus far, has said that they have any problems with anyone dressing or calling themselves anything they want; they can be a Wookey for all we care! We DO have a problem with a man (no matter what he calls himself, how he dresses or whether he's got a beard as long as Methuselah) we don't want him in our safe spaces, prisons, refuges, sports or toilets. It really isn't difficult to grasp or retain. Please try.

But rejecting gender norms isn't the same as abolishing them and pretending they are not there and believing that we are not judged every day by the way we dress and the way we behave is just unrealistic.
I am sick of saying that my preferred option would be to widen the parameters of gender norms so that people didn’t feel that in order to conform to ‘female’ norms they have to ‘become’ a woman, but when I have said that I am sneered at as ‘transphobic’.

So perhaps having people who identify as women who don't fit those norms is the only way to really get rid of them.
Or perhaps letting women be women, and detaching ‘gender norms’ from sex would get rid of the ‘need’ to transition?

So take beards, some women have facial hair, society dictates they must remove it. So if they allow it to grow will they be challenged and accused of being a transwoman?
No idea. Does that happen? I don’t know any women with full beards. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but women with the same sorts of beards as men are very rare, surely? Do we need to base policy on something that affects very few people?

Perhaps if the concept of woman is widened and transwomen are accepted as women then the concept of gender norms can become more fluid.
As above. I see that as the tail wagging the dog, though. Why not widen the concept of women and men, blur the edges, so that people can stay in their sex class but follow whichever gender norms they like? That way, there is no need for men in women’s spaces, or competing in women’s sport because they ‘feel like’ women based on socially constructed norms.

As for the patriachy operating on gender norms of course it does and that is why transpeople present such a threat to it.
I see not transwomen, but trans ideology as being all about the patriarchy. Men deciding what women should look like, and the idea that one can be (or indeed is) of the ‘gender’ that most closely conforms to the societal norms aligned (by men) to a birth sex. the patriarchy would cease to exist, or would be substantially weakened, if women could be what they liked, and men didn’t feel bound by the more toxic forms of ‘masculinity’. If neither had to attempt to change sex to opt out of gender normative behaviour, rather than insisting on being ‘accepted as’ the other sex, life would be simpler all round, surely?

(Transwomen incidenty have been condemned on these threads as being too concerned with make up , high heels etc and of being butch, deep voiced and masculine. Which shows I suppose that they come in all sorts of shapes and sizes just like cis women)
Of course they do, and nobody has said otherwise, IIRC. I have seen no condemnation that I remember - can you point any out?

But in everyday life the judgements made about people are largely gender related and nothing to do with the sex they were born

That is interesting to consider trisher. A baby is born with female genitals (I won't bother to list what I mean by female genitals, I think everyone knows in this context). That baby grows up into a woman. Now are judgements made about her as a woman, whatever she wears, however she presents herself? Are all those glass ceilings that women have struggled to break through to do with their gender or to do with the sex they were born as? Are judgements made about children by the sex they were born as or by their gender?
I am sure there are more questions - a lot of questions to consider in relation to judgements, gender and sex at birth, I think.

Galaxy

Nope. Because otherwise I would think grayson perry, david bowie ( in some of his presentations) were women. I dont.

They never claimed to be women Galaxy so why would you think they were? Because they dressed outside the gender norms? But that was accepted then but isn't now? The disparaging remarks made about men in dresses on these threads would put a stop to that wouldn't they?
What about a woman with a beard? Is that allowed or would she be castigated and labelled a trasnwomen?

What do you mean "if that is required"? Female spaces for females are required and the regulation is easy isn't it, those spaces are not for TW because they are not female.

The judgements as you refer to the points being raised here are not "largely gender related" and everything to do with the sex people are born with.

Nope. Because otherwise I would think grayson perry, david bowie ( in some of his presentations) were women. I dont.

Nobody, IMO can change gender, as there is no gender to change, and sex cannot be changed for biological reasons. Gender norms exist, but are social things - they vary between cultures, across time, age, class and many other things as well as sex. If you can list a few gender norms, the following of which would indicate that someone ‘is a woman’, I would be interested to see it, and simultaneously appalled at the idea that it is adherence to social norms that makes someone a woman as that would be the stuff of nightmares. What are women who don’t adhere to those norms? Are they like IW’s ‘lady on the right’? Less of a woman than transwomen in make-up and heels? Can’t you see how this plays into the hands of the patriarchy?

But rejecting gender norms isn't the same as abolishing them and pretending they are not there and believing that we are not judged every day by the way we dress and the way we behave is just unrealistic. So perhaps having people who identify as women who don't fit those norms is the only way to really get rid of them. So take beards, some women have facial hair, society dictates they must remove it. So if they allow it to grow will they be challenged and accused of being a transwoman? Perhaps if the concept of woman is widened and transwomen are accepted as women then the concept of gender norms can become more fluid. As for the patriachy operating on gender norms of course it does and that is why transpeople present such a threat to it. (Transwomen incidenty have been condemned on these threads as being too concerned with make up , high heels etc and of being butch, deep voiced and masculine. Which shows I suppose that they come in all sorts of shapes and sizes just like cis women)

And before anyone retaliates with posts about female spaces they are just that female spaces. If they can be regulated it is perfectly possible to make them spaces for ciswomen if that is required. But in everyday life the judgements made about people are largely gender related and nothing to do with the sex they were born.

*Thanks for a reasonable answer to my post DiamondLily having had experiences with the police in the past and knowing the level of corruption that existed I have always been careful. So perhaps it is foolish of me to wonder why there isn't more posted or brought up about them. I wonder if it is to do with the demographic on GN and it is mainly younger women who are the recipients of abuse, perhaps on nights out.
It's obviously not a problem that is widely publicised.*
Was there anything unreasonable about the previous replies, or are you simply cherry-picking the bits you wish to address, and trying to shift the conversation to being about the police? Why would they be posted about on threads about trans issues?

DiamondLily

trisher

It's always interesting to read the restrictive and conflicting expectations of the gender critical.
So let's get this straight. You reject gender norms but a man in a dress is an anathema and is obviously up to no good.

Anyone who hasn't had surgery to modify their body, regardless of the reasons why cannot be considered to have changed gender.

You consistently imagine that it is possible to tell a transperson from a cis person in spite of much evidence to the contrary, presumably because if you ever admit it is difficult you are left with a situation it is impossible to regulate.

In order to perpetuate the idea that transpeople cause harm you consistently post every instance of crime or abuse which you can root out many of which are in other countries.

So here's a question there were 800 accusations of assault made against police officers in the last 5 years. One polieman has been convicted of murder. Should we all be frightened of police officers?

Well, speaking for myself, in London, I am much more wary of lone officers than I would have been previously.

At one point some senior officers were advising lone women to call them if approached by a lone officer.

Police officers have caused harm, and have managed a lot because it wasn't expected that a police officer would cause harm.

The same thing could, logically, be applied if a woman thought she was sharing a sensitive/risky space with a woman, (harm not expected), and then that "woman" turns out to be a man..

Both events are, of course, unlikely.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58753857

Thanks for a reasonable answer to my post DiamondLily having had experiences with the police in the past and knowing the level of corruption that existed I have always been careful.
So perhaps it is foolish of me to wonder why there isn't more posted or brought up about them. I wonder if it is to do with the demographic on GN and it is mainly younger women who are the recipients of abuse, perhaps on nights out.
It's obviously not a problem that is widely publicised.

trisher

It's always interesting to read the restrictive and conflicting expectations of the gender critical.
So let's get this straight. You reject gender norms but a man in a dress is an anathema and is obviously up to no good.

Anyone who hasn't had surgery to modify their body, regardless of the reasons why cannot be considered to have changed gender.

You consistently imagine that it is possible to tell a transperson from a cis person in spite of much evidence to the contrary, presumably because if you ever admit it is difficult you are left with a situation it is impossible to regulate.

In order to perpetuate the idea that transpeople cause harm you consistently post every instance of crime or abuse which you can root out many of which are in other countries.

So here's a question there were 800 accusations of assault made against police officers in the last 5 years. One polieman has been convicted of murder. Should we all be frightened of police officers?

Well, speaking for myself, in London, I am much more wary of lone officers than I would have been previously.

At one point some senior officers were advising lone women to call them if approached by a lone officer.

Police officers have caused harm, and have managed a lot because it wasn't expected that a police officer would cause harm.

The same thing could, logically, be applied if a woman thought she was sharing a sensitive/risky space with a woman, (harm not expected), and then that "woman" turns out to be a man..

Both events are, of course, unlikely.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58753857

trisher

It's always interesting to read the restrictive expectations of the female critical or transsectional feminists.

So let's get this straight.
You reject female needs and consider that a man in a dress, where a male is not supposed to be cannot possibly be up to no good.

Anyone who hasn't had surgery to modify their body, regardless of the reasons why cannot be considered to have changed gender.

You said that trisher, not me, nor AFAIK anyone on here. I would say they can’t change sex!
Are you saying they can?

If NO TW made attempts to misrepresent themselves in places or situations where they shouldn’t be, there would be no need to regulate anything. The fact that a small number, even from different countries do exactly that is what causes the problems.

Although I know you don’t consider a small number of transwomen harming AHF women to be a problem.

So here’s the answer to your diversion. Cute, but still a diversion. (Another of your other groups are doing bad things so why pick on TW? cries.)

In case you haven’t noticed, all the reports of police attacks, or murders, has damaged the image of the police force, and has made people much more wary of trusting the police in any situation where they would be alone with them.

The image perpetuated by the tw who are as you put it up to no good has had exactly the same effect, in making women wary of being in situations with tw where the tw should not be.

What makes the situation with TW worse, is the refusal by a group of people to admit that the TW who are *up to no good are harming not only females, but also the rest of the trans community.*

trisher, yet again you are twisting what people say. At least we try to grapple with the more difficult questions, rather than ignoring them until something comes along with which we can find fault - usually with a term that can be misconstrued, or some sort of ‘gotcha’.

I used the word ‘anathema’ - not to describe a man in a dress, but to reject the idea of a ‘true gender’ (a term used by VS) -the idea that simply wearing that dress makes him a woman. There is a massive difference, as any English speaker will know.

Nobody, IMO can change gender, as there is no gender to change, and sex cannot be changed for biological reasons. Gender norms exist, but are social things - they vary between cultures, across time, age, class and many other things as well as sex. If you can list a few gender norms, the following of which would indicate that someone ‘is a woman’, I would be interested to see it, and simultaneously appalled at the idea that it is adherence to social norms that makes someone a woman as that would be the stuff of nightmares. What are women who don’t adhere to those norms? Are they like IW’s ‘lady on the right’? Less of a woman than transwomen in make-up and heels? Can’t you see how this plays into the hands of the patriarchy?

Whether it is possible to spot all transpeople is neither here nor there, is it? As I keep saying, laws have to be clear, applicable to all, and not open to interpretation, ‘feelings’ and norms of beauty or ‘femininity’.

What you describe as ‘rooting out’ of crimes simply refutes your own claims that woman are never harmed by changes in the rules that have protected them for centuries, and were put in place because of the understanding that there are some men (trans or otherwise) who will harm women if put in a position of power over them when those women are alone and vulnerable. NAMALT, yada yada - we know! But not all passers by will rob a house with an open door - I still lock mine when I go away.

Finally (although I do wish you would answer our questions as you are so fond of asking them of us), speaking for myself, I have lost faith in the police because of the behaviour of some of the ‘bad apples’, yes. It’s not that I think they are all bad - of course they aren’t - but the fact that there are not effective rules to prevent the ones who are bad from doing bad things. It’s not that I have no faith in the police at all - of course I do - but that it is not as strong as it could be, because of the bad apples.

It's always interesting to read the restrictive and conflicting expectations of the gender critical.
So let's get this straight. You reject gender norms but a man in a dress is an anathema and is obviously up to no good.

Anyone who hasn't had surgery to modify their body, regardless of the reasons why cannot be considered to have changed gender.

You consistently imagine that it is possible to tell a transperson from a cis person in spite of much evidence to the contrary, presumably because if you ever admit it is difficult you are left with a situation it is impossible to regulate.

In order to perpetuate the idea that transpeople cause harm you consistently post every instance of crime or abuse which you can root out many of which are in other countries.

So here's a question there were 800 accusations of assault made against police officers in the last 5 years. One polieman has been convicted of murder. Should we all be frightened of police officers?

Nobody on here (AFAIK) is trying to restrict the lives of transpeople unless and until they impinge on the safety, dignity or agency of the lives of women.

AFAIK your statement is correct, and I’m sure if there were examples of restriction without the qualifications you mention, they would have been cited endlessly.

BUT despite all the examples of those impingements, those who worship at the altar of males, TW or not will never accept that truth.

I’m still trying to puzzle out how gender dysphoria could mean a man is desperate to keep his penis.

VioletSky

So all trans people are the same and experience the same? Isnt that a bit narrow minded?

It isn't possible that for some, living as their true gender is enough?

It isn't possible that for some hormones are enough?

Or that some are stuck on waiting lists unable to access either hormones or surgery so in the meantime they are just trying to love their authenitc selves as who they are on the inside?

Or does only the outside matter?

Ill read through your comment again properly later doodledog its late and I have a full day tomorrow

Nobody is saying all transpeople are the same. Where have you got that idea?

As you must surely be aware, the point for many of us is that the idea of a 'true gender' that can be 'lived by' is anathema. Gender is a social construct, so yes, you can 'live by' a construct if you wish, but that really has little to do with your biological sex.

It is possible that hormones are enough for what?

Does the inside/outside matter to whom? For the umpteenth time - people can live as they wish, as far as I am concerned. It is when male people want to enter specific female spaces, or compete against women in sport, or remove agency from women - all the things we say over and over - that it matters. How many times do we need to say it?

Nobody on here (AFAIK) is trying to restrict the lives of transpeople unless and until they impinge on the safety, dignity or agency of the lives of women.

I don't understand your second post about transitioning and acceptance. I can accept people as they are, but that is not the same thing as accepting them as women if they are male. I don't know if that's what you meant, or of that answers a question if there is one.

Chewbacca

Excellent post there Doodledo; you've neatly, and comprehensively addressed each point raised; particularly the complete volte face on Why should anyone do that when they can love their bodies the way they are? when we've so frequently and vehemently been informed that dysphoria is because they hate their bodies. Odd that.

Ditto Chewbacca.
Thanks Doodledog, particularly for the point emphasised by Chewbacca.

Also two statements that donvt work together

1, you must fully transition before acceptance

2, people may want to detransition so people shouldnt fully transition too fast

Accepting people as they are works well enough and is proven to help them accept themselves

So all trans people are the same and experience the same? Isnt that a bit narrow minded?

It isn't possible that for some, living as their true gender is enough?

It isn't possible that for some hormones are enough?

Or that some are stuck on waiting lists unable to access either hormones or surgery so in the meantime they are just trying to love their authenitc selves as who they are on the inside?

Or does only the outside matter?

Ill read through your comment again properly later doodledog its late and I have a full day tomorrow

Excellent post there Doodledo; you've neatly, and comprehensively addressed each point raised; particularly the complete volte face on Why should anyone do that when they can love their bodies the way they are? when we've so frequently and vehemently been informed that dysphoria is because they hate their bodies. Odd that.

So you are asking people to undergo risky surgery in order to accept them as men and women? Perhaps sacrifice their ability for sexual pleasure, live with scars from skin grafts, risk the procedure failing or even their lives simply to attain acceptance?
I am not asking anyone to do anything.

Isn’t that that kinda similar to expecting any women to "look more feminine" by makeup, dress or even surgery to be socially acceptable? Isnt that kinda similar to all the things we hate about pressures put on women to look a certain way?
No. for one thing I don’t think that the only way to be a woman is to look in a particular way. I think that the only way to be a woman is the be an adult human female, and the notion of ‘gender identity’ is what is enforcing stereotypes. I realise that India Willoughby doesn’t speak for transpeople, but her comment that she is more of a woman than a butch lesbian says it all, really. There are many ways to ‘present as’ a woman, but only one way to be a woman, which is to be born female.

I don’t think it’s unreasonable, in return for ‘acceptance’ for transpeople to respect that, and respect the right of women to have spaces and groups of our own. Not many of them - most people would easily avoid ever being refused entry, simply be understanding that there are times when women don’t want male people around, and not forcing themselves in ‘to make a point’.

Why should anyone do that in order for acceptance when there are plenty of people who accept them for who they already are on the inside anyway?
As I say, for me, the only way to gain acceptance is to behave in a respectful way. That’s the only thing I would ask in return for respect to be given back. IME, respect is always a two-way street.

Why should anyone do that when they can love their bodies the way they are?
No idea. I’m no expert, but I thought that dysphoria, which you recently gave as the difference between transwomen and men in dresses, wasn’t about loving bodies as they are, though.

Why should those who date according to their sexuality, have plenty of willing partners and are able to use the genitalia they already have to engage in that loving relationship change that for some sort of acceptance when, they likely wont get that acceptance anyway?
No idea. I couldn’t care less who ‘dates according to their sexuality’ so long as they are not pressurising people from a different sexuality to accommodate them, eg autogynephiles pressuring lesbians into having sex with them to validate their misconception that they are women with heterosexual male desires.

No one actually knows what is in other peoples pants and it is no ones business.
Nine times out of ten it doesn’t matter in the least. There are times, however - eg when a woman wants a female doctor to examine her in a rape suite, or to undress in a curtained-off area with no males able to see her, or if she is locked in a prison cell and asks for a female cell mate - in circumstances like that (all rare in most lives), then what is in someone’s pants does matter, and it is pointless to pretend otherwise.

Madgran77

*You cant change sex whatever you do or dont do to your body.*

No you can't.

No you can’t x2.