Is the LP changing its stance on 'gender'?

The forum topic is "News & politics" and is visible above the title. It isn't any more specific than that, as the hot news topics change so often that GNHQ would have to keep adding new topics - and as it takes them months (years?) to add any to the list, they would always be out of date.

The title includes 'gender'. That should have been enough of a clue.

It's such fun getting involved in these little diversions, tho, when someone from your group pops into a thread.

No need to avoid anything. If you have an opinion, please express it - I don't think you've done so yet, other than to tell others how boring you find us and that people on both 'sides' of the debate are extremists, thus painting yourself as the only one who is able to moderate her views? Self-praise is no recommendation, as my mother used to say. These threads would be more interesting all round if those with other opinions joined in, and said more than 'you are all meanies and are picking on me'.

If they are echo chambers it is only because it is rare for someone from who disagrees to post and engage in a debate - ie answer questions that are put to them and go beyond 'TWAW' in their replies.

People coming onto threads simply to police what others post is tedious though.

FarNorth

DaisyAnne

I did read the thread title FarNorth. No need to try and be clever. What I said is that I must read the full OP as the titles are sometimes misleading - as I found this one. This happens from time to times. I am sure I am not the only one to have found some groups are basically "closed" groups.

We live and learn each time and then avoid such groups as I will next time this group posts. However, it is easy to avoid the "Estrangement" threads as they have a Forum Topic heading. This one doesn't. I have no idea what you would call it but just think - if I could avoid these posts we would both be happy

DaisyAnne I think the advice is avoid any thread with the word gender in the title. There is a group on GN determined to keep posting their views over and over again. Like the child that screams to have its own way, they yell "Agree with me"at the top of their voice and pretend they want to discuss when all they really want is to confirm each others prejudices. Ignore them and don't engage.

DaisyAnne I think the advice is avoid any thread with the word gender in the title. * There is a group on GN determined to keep posting their views over and over again. Like the child that screams to have its own way, they yell "Agree with me"at the top of their voice and pretend they want to discuss when all they really want is to confirm each others prejudices. Ignore them and don't engage.
Do take note DaisyAnne, although the above mentioned TaF group of posters who post their views over and over again refuse to accept that the more reasonable posters support people’s right to choose their gender, merely reiterating that the majority of those being transgender do not wish any harm or upset to women
This reasonable group are unlike the TaF group who constantly post their views, who do not deny trans the right to use actions which could cause such harm or distress to females.
Unless you support the TaF group, and wish to scream and yell to get your own way, the advice not to engage is well given.

What is TaF?
I've not come across that before.

Neither have I. Even Google didn’t help with that one.

If, as the transgender ideology insists there is nothing to definitively pronounce what constitutes a Man or a Woman, then there can be no foundational basis to trans From or To. Not mentally emotionally psychologically or biologically. There is no North Star, no map of meaning. This is the conundrum I can’t get my head around. How can you trans into something that is a chimera. Illumination anyone?

A valid question, Stormystar. It baffles me, too - particularly when those who believe it can happen also claim that they wish to broaden the scope of gender expectations and reduce stereotypes.

This is one of the main problems I have with understanding their point of view. Gender stereotypes have been slowly but surely breaking down for the last few decades, which is, IMO all to the good and liberating for all concerned. There is no reason why someone should have to (or feel that they need to) 'transition' to the opposite sex in order to adopt new gender roles - they can just adopt them.

If trans people are really the most marginalised group in society, there is all the more reason for 'transitioning' to be unnecessary, and if a very high percentage of transwomen are sexually intact males who can't define a woman, then it makes no sense at all - as you say, what are they hoping to achieve by becoming marginalised?

I have asked for explanations, but have met with naked hostility, personal abuse and more. It is, apparently, an extremist view, and asking questions is 'cross-questioning'. I hope you have more success.

Brilliant post @ 18.27 Stormystar.

It would be interesting to know what is the difference between being identified as a transwoman and being the same person, presenting in the same ways, and not choosing to identify as a transwoman.

I don't know if Philip Bunce is helpful to consideration of this, or not.
Clearly he has different body language, depending on which 'identity' he is in. Maybe he has different vocal language too or/and a different voice.
Nevertheless, he is the same person and everyone who knows him is aware of that.

FarNorth are you saying if there is an essential self beyond sexual/gender identity, then Transition is a defunct unnecessary proposition. As Philip inhabits a reality of fluidity it’s mere mood or temperament that determines the daily performance. The essential self being unalterable.

Whilst Phillip is inhabiting his reality of fluidity that determines his daily performance is it possible that he could respect the need for safe spaces for women at all?

Agreed, Stormystar. The same is true of Eddie Izzard and Courtney Act, both of whom 'are' male on some days and female on others.

Whilst I can't see the harm in that on a day to day level, I don't think that relying on what is 'in their heads' on a given day is reason enough for them to be able to come and go in fundamental ways, such as 'competing' in sport or entering enclosed spaces where there are vulnerable women.

Glorianny

DaisyAnne

I did read the thread title FarNorth. No need to try and be clever. What I said is that I must read the full OP as the titles are sometimes misleading - as I found this one. This happens from time to times. I am sure I am not the only one to have found some groups are basically "closed" groups.

We live and learn each time and then avoid such groups as I will next time this group posts. However, it is easy to avoid the "Estrangement" threads as they have a Forum Topic heading. This one doesn't. I have no idea what you would call it but just think - if I could avoid these posts we would both be happy

DaisyAnne I think the advice is avoid any thread with the word gender in the title. There is a group on GN determined to keep posting their views over and over again. Like the child that screams to have its own way, they yell "Agree with me"at the top of their voice and pretend they want to discuss when all they really want is to confirm each others prejudices. Ignore them and don't engage.

I think you're right Glorianny. I shall watch out for it as a no-no.

???

Chewbacca I suggest certainly a possibility but not necessarily probable.

Of course Safety and fairness writ large Must be the prime political and legal considerations. Glorrianny I had hoped for a discussion on my request for illumination Id like clarity of thought logic to engender within me greater awareness and understanding - not adversarially.

Stormystar

FarNorth are you saying if there is an essential self beyond sexual/gender identity, then Transition is a defunct unnecessary proposition. As Philip inhabits a reality of fluidity it’s mere mood or temperament that determines the daily performance. The essential self being unalterable.

I was saying that the person is the same regardless of the mood or temperament - in PB's case still a heterosexual male, as he happily says.
I mentioned PB as being a clear illustration of what I believe applies to all trans identified males - they remain males no matter what changes they make, or don't make, to how they look and behave.

Just as those who identify as animals still remain human no matter what changes......etc.

So transition should be a defunct unnecessary proposition and society should get used to people presenting in ways that suit them, instead of contorting itself to pretend that people can change sex.

Mollygo

???

I know. And it's 'the gender critical' who supposedly shut down debate ?.

I apologise to anyone reading this who doesn't post on these threads - this sort of thing is unedifying, I know. But I am sick to the back teeth of being portrayed as someone who doesn't want debate, and who shouts people down. If anyone has stuck with this thread they will see that this is not the case, and that it is not 'the gender critical' who came along to snipe and refuse to take part other than to make accusations, or to attempt to isolate the threads and make them into echo chambers by encouraging others to avoid the them. Quite the reverse.

This is a topic that I find important, and it's depressing when 'discussions' go this way. I am still genuinely interested in people's thoughts about the LP and their position on gender politics (or other related thoughts) if there is anyone still out there?

So, indeed, what is the difference between being identified as a transwoman and being the same person, presenting in the same trans type of ways, and not choosing to identify as a transwoman?

Here is a video (18 mins) of Blaire White (transwoman) interviewing Shapeshifter (detransitioned transwoman).
Shapeshifter is a man who no longer identifies as a transwoman and still presents in a glamorous 'feminine' way that he likes.
He understands, now, that he is still the same person whatever happens.

youtu.be/mRh80xSI8QQ

Again, I'll have to watch it tomorrow, or when Mr Dog goes to bed - we are in a lodge with one living room, and he's watching the TV.

But without seeing it, it's difficult to be sure, but I don't think that my 'gender' is an important part of me at all. As I've said on this thread, there are aspects of my behaviour and 'presentation' that are recognisably female, and others that aren't. I am wearing a shapeless linen dress today because it's hot. If I lopped the bottom off it, and wore it as a top it would be unisex I think. Yesterday I wore jeans and a shirt, as it was cooler. My hair isn't styled, although it has been on and off over the years. Mr D and I share housework and cooking, and although there are some things that I do and others that he does that just suits us. If I had a female partner or he a male one they wouldn't be seen as divided on gender lines.

Things like getting paid less and the disparity in medical care, having given birth to my children, or having had a much more restricted childhood than he did (my parents weren't progressive!) are not things that transwomen experience, so won't make up their personality as they may have influenced mine.

I don't consciously play the role of a woman, and don't think that Mr D role-plays either - we are just us. I realise that if anyone wanted to score points they could say that this is because we are 'cis'; but whilst it may be true that we behave according to our socialisation I think that so do at least some transpeople. I have known a few transwomen in one area of my life (a fairly niche social/interest thing), and without exception they communicate like men - talking over women, explaining what we already know and taking the lead in conversations. It would be comical if it wasn't so annoying. I can't claim that they are necessarily representative of all transwomen in all situations, but it is true. We know each other well enough now to make a joke of it, and they are starting to catch themselves on and rein it in a bit, but it's clearly what comes naturally (but whether because of nature or nurture, or because of the nature of the reason we meet is a whole other discussion!).

I don't know if that answers your question though.

I'm afraid I communicate like men I have quite a deep voice which I am very good at projecting. If men try to interrupt whilst I'm speaking I talk over them. Stopping speaking is learned behaviour which women can challenge.
As for the surgery discussion. It is really little to do with trans issues there are all sorts of people who undergo plastic surgery time after time and are never happy with the results. It is the result of a culture which regards medical care as a commodity to be bought and sold.

That's not the point, though. My point was that the transwomen all behave like many men do - not whether they get away with it.

In fact I pointed out that they don't - but only because we gel as a group well enough to deal with it. It's the attempted behaviour that relates to FN's post about how people behave when 'presenting' as male or female.