Is this woman a transphobe?

[AmateurAgitator]

You need to understand hie "proportionate" is interpreted by the courts. Perhaps you cannorovide done by samples from case law on his this deviates from my view. You know, actual cases where people with GRC have been excluded from a female only area.

You are very much a nitwit

 

[Spanner]

You silly plonker

..

 

[A380]

..

Two good points.

 

[A380]

Fuck this thread off to the shit bin.

Yes, in my opinion started in bad faith, seeming to me to try to stir up trouble and has become quite the hang out for ‘dubious types’ . Can’t see any reason to keep it going.

 

[Border Reiver]

You are very much a nitwit

Abuse is not debate. Just childish time wasting illustrating inability to defend a point of view. Once more and you are on ignore.

 

[Border Reiver]

Parliament has not clarified anything. The link you posted is from a report by the Women and Equalities Commisson. Parliament doesn't just get to rewrite acts on the hoof, the act is as it is written and for the courts to interpret unless new legislation is brought before Parliament. As the Government explained in their response to the WEC report


That guidance has not been developed yet and the key words are non-statutory. The act is as it stands, and it does contain guidance in the original explanatory notes about a counselling servce, but not a refuge and even then this would be open to interpretation by the courts - what was the nature of the discrimination, could the service have been delivered differently etc. It is very likely refuges would be covered by the exemption and it would give some protection in court were the EHRC to issue guidance advising this, however they have yet to do so and even when they do the guidance is purely advisory and can be over-ruled by the courts.


Oh the irony.

Important fact is that there is no case law yet on this. Decisions on s duality, race and gender suggests that exceptions will be very very rare.

At some point we will get cases like "gay couple in a B&B" and "gay wedding cake". Nothing is going to stop persons with a GRC accessing women only spaces.

 

[Athos]

Nothing is going to stop persons with a GRC accessing women only spaces.

Whilst there is a lack of case law, I'm not sure how you can assert this; on the face of it, such exclusion is permitted (in principle, albeit in very limited circumstances) by the act itself, and the statutory guidance issued by the EHRC. (And seems to be envisaged in the explanatory notes to the Act, and expert legal opinion on its interpretation.)

Also, you're going off script, because lots of advocates for the proposed changes to the GRA insisted to women that GRCs are irrelevant to the application of the Equality Act!

 

[A380]

Whilst there is a lack of case law, I'm not sure how you can assert this; on the face of it, such exclusion is permitted (in principle, albeit in very limited circumstances) by the act itself, and the statutory guidance issued by the EHRC. (And seems to be envisaged in the explanatory notes to the Act, and expert legal opinion on its interpretation.)

Also, you're going off script, because lots of advocates for the proposed changes to the GRA insisted to women that GRCs are irrelevant to the application of the Equality Act!

3 gets you 5 you get ‘ignored’ next. Done?

 

[Knotted]

I’ve bee thinking about the social basis of gender critical feminism. I don’t necessarily have an answer as to why it is particularly prevalent in the UK, but in my mind it is part of a general fragmentation of the way interests are expressed in the modern world (or at least modern Britain).

I don’t take the view that it is simply a product of second wave radical feminism, although that’s the language it expresses itself in, it simply isn’t radical, it often isn’t gender critical and sometimes is hardly feminism of any form. Besides I don’t feel ideas are best understood as a history of ideas, ideas relate to the material world. So best look at that.

Contemporary Britain is acutely post-industrial, with employment largely focused on social reproduction rather than the production of widgets. Services/care/admin/sales etc. This is a simplistic view perhaps, but the upshot of this broad tendency is that the modern British working class is more socialised but more poorly organised than it used to be. So especially among the young there is a common sense anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-homophobia and an anti-transphobia etc. But it’s often expressed in a fragmented, “me first” way. Even the backlash is in identity terms such as “what about the white working class?”. And I think there is a dark underbelly to this extra socialised existence in terms of the alt right but also in terms of the alt left (think Canary/Squawkbox). That social media encourages people to converse in self enclosed bubbles only aids the fragmentation. So when the new class relations expressed themselves in the Corbyn moment, they came with some unsavoury baggage. Social solidarity comes with a helping of social fear.

So whereas attitudes are more liberal than they used to be, they’ve also grown more conspiratorial and the old Daily Mail style fear mongering is back with a vengeance in new left wing clothes.

 

[Knotted]

As smokeout has pointed out the gender critical feminists take largely hypothetical problems and imagine a conspiracy to implement the worst possible case scenarios no matter how absurd. Eg. the idea that if a therapist questions a young person’s desire to transition there is a danger of being accused of “conversion therapy” and banned. Or eg. a transgender person expressing themselves in “gender essentialist” (see here for a succinct definition h/t hitmouse) terms is not to be carefully criticised but is to be held to be an enforcer of gender roles and stereotypes. [Besides what if it turns out that gender is a real thing and there are eg. male and female brains? Whereas I don’t think this is at all likely to happen, I don’t think feminism would collapse if it did. Structural/social theories can survive biological nuance.] Transgender people become transgender activists who then become transgenderists who then become “self-identity theorists” or “essentialists” or some other dangerous ideologue. In this scheme transgender people’s very existence is explained in terms of their supposed ideology and is thus open to questioning and even attack.

And there is the disingenuity of the gender critical feminists. Who exactly isn’t gender critical? Even transgender gender essentialists aren’t usually interested in shielding traditional/patriarchal concepts of gender from criticism. To mix a metaphor, this is what I might call hiding behind an open door. What is presented first and foremost is agreeable, even uncontroversial (“I believe in biological reality”!) in the pretence that the supposed opposition are against these reasonable ideas, all the while concealing the fear, the conspiracies and the obsessions. Butter-wouldn’t-melt-in-my-mouth provocation.

There is also a parental/moral panic aspect to gender critical feminism. Burdened with the lonely task of child rearing and trying to respond to various often conservative pressures to raise your child “properly”, talk of the trans agenda trying to convert gender nonconforming children is classic Daily Mail fear mongering. Many parents may fall for this, and some mums might find a quasi-feminist expressing of these concerns more palatable. Not that dad is likely to be any better.

 

[Knotted]

The real opposition to gender criticism comes from the conservative right. And yet there is a fixation on the trans right movement. I believe this is a modern phenomenon. An old trans exclusionary radical feminist like Germaine Greer, rarely talks about the subject. But now for many it is an obsession. Referring back to the concept of fragmented solidarity I introduced above, I think this is to do with opinion bubbles on eg. social media which then become the form of expression for political interests. It may or may not be driven by visceral fear and hatred of trans people, but here political interest is expressed in terms of total neglect of other competing/parallel interests and going for the easiest target reaps the biggest psychological rewards. Why take on the whole patriarchy, when you can take on trans teenagers on tumblr? Fuck them, they aren’t real women.

But as smokedout has repeatedly pointed out, this movement is far more harmful than some shit posting on Twitter. That some ally themselves with the conservative right who in turn are successful in rolling back trans gains, shows that it’s something that needs to be taken very seriously. There are other problems on the left with respect to anti-semitism and anti-grt sentiment for example, but this may be the worst one in terms of real world consequences. This concrete political reality, that smokeout draws our attention to again and again is something that keeps getting ignored on here. I find myself guilty of not focusing on it. This is not just clean up operation for the left as with the anti-semitism issue, it’s part of an immediate struggle over policy. This is where the rhetoric about the “tra’s” being just as bad or worse falls flat. There is a real insight into pointing out that transwomen were socialised as boys/men and may well retain sexist attitudes. It’s also perfectly correct to say that many trans gendered people (activists or not) are likely to find themselves trapped in their own ideological bubbles. Some may be fixated on terfs where the more prominent threat is from the conservative right. Some might be badly behaved on Twitter. But non of them are in it to roll back women’s gains.

Look at treefrog’s last words to urban.

“You’ve embraced an ideology that places me in actual danger.” That’s not a, “I find what you are saying offensive”, or a “I don’t want to hear about women’s changing rooms.” Treefrog recognised the (often coded) ideological language of a movement pushing for real immediate harm. Don’t blame the thread or the heated arguments. Blame the transphobia.

“You’ve embraced an ideology that places me in actual danger.”

 

[Knotted]

co-op has fallen down this rabbit hole. (I think it's more complex with other posters.) But this thread was all about trying to get urban to accept gender critical ideology.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Both 'sides' in this have gone wrong imo. Where you end up sharing a platform with conservative Christians like Tory MP David Davies, you've gone wrong somewhere. When you end up labelling Keira Bell a bigot or supporting those who want to force the Vancouver Rape Shelter to either accept trans women into its ranks or close down, you've gone wrong somewhere.

Ultimately, this battle of ideologies can only be resolved when both sides accept that others do not think like them, agree to disagree and agree to try to find a way to coexist where the ideologies come into conflict. When accepting disagreement, you actually reach a form of agreement within the larger totality, because you are recognising the position of the other side and recognising a plurality of points of view. That's the only way I see out of this mess.

Like bimble, these threads aren't much good for me. I'll dob out there.

 

[Funky_monks]

There's a scientific, philosophical and mathematical debate about natural sets. I don't understand it, but that's not really what's being talked about here, which is the idea that there's a natural order to things and when we choose to put them into groups it isn't just a whim, it's their proper place in "nature."

The problem is that nature isn't just black and white, there are shades of grey and exceptions.

To recap, you were taught there are two distinct and immutable sexes determined by chromosomes. Yes?

And yet there exist men with XX chromosomes and women with XY. Then there are intersex people. There are also animals that can switch between male and female. Clearly, the world is more complex than you were taught. Maybe time for a readjustment.

No.

I'm a biologist, therefore I deal with sex. Gender is for the sociologists.
there exist X, Y, Z and W chromosomes.
Birds tend to have Z and W, but I did read about one that has Y, Z and W and males could either be ZY or ZW.
Other species exist in a "sex complex" where chromosomes are polymorphic but do not differentiate as much as x and Y or Z and W.

Also, there are many species that can change sex either naturally or who readily respond to hormonal changes in the environment to undergo this change - fish are good examples of this.

Hormones are incredibly powerful chemicals that can cause physical and psychological changes, therefore it is entirely possible that perfectly naturally occuring differences in hormonal production can cause someone to feel, perfectly validly that they are not of the sex that they were born, especially if upping the levels of those hormones artificially cause their body to physically morph into that sex.

 

[19force8]

No.

No, there's no debate about natural sets?
No, nature is black and white with no shades of grey?
No, there are no men with XX chromosomes or women with XY?
No, the world isn't more complex than bmd was taught?

 

[Funky_monks]

No, there's no debate about natural sets?
No, nature is black and white with no shades of grey?
No, there are no men with XX chromosomes or women with XY?
No, the world isn't more complex than bmd was taught?

No, there isn't a natural order to things and we can't always put things into arbitary categories. I'm agreeing with you.

 

[smokedout]

When you end up labelling Keira Bell a bigot

Do you think Posies Parker is a transphobe? And if so what about those who wholeheartedly support her?

 

[smokedout]

If the balance you, or anyone, wants in this debate is that we should just accept Posie Parker whipping up armed MAGA types against trans women, and that it is outrageous to call anyone who leapt to her defence after that, as Keira did, a bigot, then fuck that. One man who was sharing Posie's stuff on facebook has already been convicted of trying to burn down a trans women'a home. If you think there is room for reasonable compromise with the more extreme ends of the GC movement, of which Keira is part, then either you are ignorant of what is actually going on or you're a fucking transphobe yourself.

 

[Orang Utan]

Fucking hell, she's turned. Loved her in Best In Show

 

[Edie]

Who the fuck is Posie Parker. Does anyone actually know? All these names keep getting mentioned but they are mythical people in the twittersphere. No one outside that has ever fucking heard of them

 

[Orang Utan]

Who the fuck is Posie Parker. Does anyone actually know? All these names keep getting mentioned but they are mythical people in the twittersphere. No one outside that has ever fucking heard of them

An actor

 

[Edie]

An actor

Oh. Never heard of her. And she’s said some anti trans stuff on Twitter I take it. My point is that no one outside of that weird Twitter single issue compression zone has ever fucking heard of her. Why is she even mentioned repeatedly on this thread? Who cares?

 

[kabbes]

Oh. Never heard of her. And she’s said some anti trans stuff on Twitter I take it. My point is that no one outside of that weird Twitter single issue compression zone has ever fucking heard of her. Why is she even mentioned repeatedly on this thread? Who cares?

I think it’s because people who use Twitter think that what people say on Twitter matters. Meanwhile, the 95% of people on Earth that are not regular users of Twitter don’t have the first clue what the 1% who care about this topic out of the 5% who use Twitter are talking about.

 

[Edie]

I think it’s because people who use Twitter think that what people say on Twitter matters. Meanwhile, the 95% of people on Earth that are not regular users of Twitter don’t have the first clue what the 1% who care about this topic out of the 5% who use Twitter are talking about.

That must be it. On the outside though it appears insane.

 

[Orang Utan]

hang on, just googled her and she's not who I thought she was. Parker Posey is the actor.
This is Posie Parker:

‘Gender critical feminist’ Posie Parker wants men with guns to start using women’s toilets

Posie Parker, a so-called 'gender critical feminist', has suggested armed men use women's public bathrooms to 'protect' them.

www.pinknews.co.uk

 

[Edie]

hang on, just googled her and she's not who I thought she was. Parker Posey is the actor.
This is Posie Parker:

‘Gender critical feminist’ Posie Parker wants men with guns to start using women’s toilets

Posie Parker, a so-called 'gender critical feminist', has suggested armed men use women's public bathrooms to 'protect' them.

www.pinknews.co.uk

Ok. Well just from that headline, she sounds like a radical nut job. I mean I’ve not even read the article, but I’m pretty confident in saying that littlebabyjesus is very unlikely to support her or those that do. This debate would be much better if the nut job fringes were just ignored. Of course armed men should not protect women in public toilets that’s FUCKING NUTS. Can we discuss something real please.

 

[Funky_monks]

Ok. Well just from that headline, she sounds like a radical nut job. I mean I’ve not even read the article, but I’m pretty confident in saying that littlebabyjesus is very unlikely to support her or those that do. This debate would be much better if the nut job fringes were just ignored. Of course armed men should not protect women in public toilets that’s FUCKING NUTS. Can we discuss something real please.

If she's British, she's a fucking fantasist as well, I mean, who the fuck is going around with random firearms (I say this as someone who has had a FAC)?

 

[smokedout]

Oh. Never heard of her. And she’s said some anti trans stuff on Twitter I take it. My point is that no one outside of that weird Twitter single issue compression zone has ever fucking heard of her. Why is she even mentioned repeatedly on this thread? Who cares?

She's done a bit more than just say some anti-trans stuff on twitter, but really it's what she represents which is important.

You might not care though, it's not your healthcare under threat, there aren't thousands of people on twitter claiming you're a groomer or part of some vast paedophile plot. There aren't 'respectable' people working alongside the far right in some cases to stir up hatred against you. You probably aren't on the end of daily smears and slurs from the right wing press or the subject of an incessant national debate. Posie Parker is emblematic of the extremes of that debate, and yet it is apparantly outrageous that some trans people think those who support her might be a bigot - which is why I've laboured the point. I'm interested what the beardstrokers on this thread think is a reasonable position for trans people to hold in the face of this.

 

[smokedout]

If she's British, she's a fucking fantasist as well, I mean, who the fuck is going around with random firearms (I say this as someone who has had a FAC)?

Her following is largely MAGA types and she's working with WOLF and the ADF in the US on the various bills being introduced to ban trans healthcare or end trans inclusive policies.

 

[smokedout]

Ok. Well just from that headline, she sounds like a radical nut job. I mean I’ve not even read the article, but I’m pretty confident in saying that littlebabyjesus is very unlikely to support her or those that do. This debate would be much better if the nut job fringes were just ignored. Of course armed men should not protect women in public toilets that’s FUCKING NUTS. Can we discuss something real please.

I agree, she's pretty out there, and it would be great if we could just ignore her. But after making those comments and being criticised for it Keira Bell, who has said Posie was her biggest influence, leapt to her defence. And anyone who suggests Bell might be a bigot because of that is outrageous according to littlebabyjesus

Do you see how this stuff filters down? And why it might be a concern when it starts to draw people in like that?