But weren’t the protests in Scotland led by the Scottish Family Party an organisation led and formed by Richard Lucas formerly of UKIP? The protests last week were fronted by Calvin Robinson and Laurence Fox, the less said about them the better. They looked to me to be very small but loud protests.

Where to start with this? I think both sides of this absurd arguing and mud-slinging need to remember that other people can have opinions and experiences and that they can be as nuanced and non-binary as the subject at the core of the arguments. This really is peak STW.

@stevenmenmuir sounds like you know more than me about these things. My previous comment was very crude — I just watched a youtube video of someone interviewing people at the Scottish protest and it looked reasonably large

as johndoh said – this is not a single issue / yes-no situation, it’s far more nuanced. It’s like one of those infernal management spider map diagrams, and even on each axis of the web they aren’t single yes-no choices, they are 1-10 scores on how strongly you agree or disagree. In many cases even as Dad to a TG son, I have ‘conflicting’ views.

eg: Do I think toilets should be open to TG in general – yes, I’m towards that so they can identify and live in the gender they have chosen.

Do i think that refuges for abused or trafficked women should be open to all? I lean towards nofor that, I don’t think you can escape the need that these very vulnerable people have needs that potentially usurp more ‘day to day’ equality. If there’s a case where TG women are also abused / trafficked maybe that would need re-examination, IDK. But I hope by saying I lean towards protected spaces in these instances, I don’t now get labelled transphobic?

Some people are firmly against everything on this map, and their reasons may be fear, religion, bigotry, ignorance, who knows.

Where I see bigotry i will call it out (and as per other posts, if you align with clearly transphobic actors and don’t challenge that, you’re going to get lumped in by association I’m afraid).

Where I’m not sure I’ll try to clarify – and there have been a couple of posts on here that have failed the sniff test for me, for example, others that have passed.

If it’s ignorance, I’ll try to discuss and hopefully enlighten, despite neither being TG or a woman myself, the two groups that seem to have most at stake here. I hope that’s not mansplaining.

If it’s fear, I try to soothe – the vast vast majority of TG folk are not embarking on this for a glimpse of boob in the changing rooms, it’s a terrifying distressing journey and there are far easier ways to see other people’s privates if you want to.

If it’s confusion – come join the club. I knew being a parent would be challenging, this wasn’t anywhere near the top of the list of ‘things I might need to deal with’ when they handed me a grey screaming mass and said congratulations, it’s a girl. It’s OK to say you don’t know.

But please let’s all be a bit nicer to each other while we try to navigate this, I believe (most of) you are nice people at heart and some of you are letting yourselves down a bit.

But please let’s all be a bit nicer to each other while we try to navigate this

But you do have to be sure that you remain nice too. What you call out as bigotry may well just be an example of nuance based on that individual’s experience and exposure to TG being expressed as an opinion.

I’d like to be able to share my experience of TG challenges and experiences, but I can’t really say anything due to safeguarding reasons around the child in our care.

agreed. As I say to my son, if you press that button you’d better be sure you’re doing it for the right reasons. I probably err too far to the side of caution at times.

And also note – even bigotry is a nuanced issue. None of it is acceptable, but saying someone has expressed bigoted views (label the act, not the person) isn’t the same as calling them a full on paid up Nazi.

johndoh

But you do have to be sure that you remain nice too. What you call out as bigotry may well just be an example of nuance based on that individual’s experience and exposure to TG being expressed as an opinion.

I was about to post similar in reply to Cougar, who said:

Cougar

I do. It’s quite easy really. Stop othering and start being nice to people.

Dismissing people’s concerns as “squawking”, accusing people of “white knighting” for their “ignorant” friends etc is not being nice.

Besides, it does nothing to bring people round to your way of thinking- quite the opposite, it makes people dig their heels in.

Lovely post Jonv and its nice to see someone with real skin in the game accept nuance.

thats been my issue mainly. People presenting what is a highly nuanced and difficult thing as a binary proposition

Dismissing people’s concerns as “squawking”, accusing people of “white knighting” for their “ignorant” friends etc is not being nice.

Besides, it does nothing to bring people round to your way of thinking- quite the opposite, it makes people dig their heels in.

For what it’s worth, TJ and I have been discussing this out of band.

I’m used to sparring with him but I seemingly genuinely offended him here, and for that I publicly apologise. Terms like “ignorant” are often used as an insult but don’t have to be, I’m ignorant of many things.

Ta cougar

Terms like “ignorant” are often used as an insult but don’t have to be

They will always be read as such, on the internet and probably always in real.life too. Every word has a context, or meta information if you like.

But please let’s all be a bit nicer to each other while we try to navigate this

But you do have to be sure that you remain nice too. What you call out as bigotry may well just be an example of nuance based on that individual’s experience and exposure to TG being expressed as an opinion.

I’d like to be able to share my experience of TG challenges and experiences, but I can’t really say anything due to safeguarding reasons around the child in our care.

@johndoh I agree with you, but I do wonder why you wrote that to theotherjonv’s understanding, non-judgemental and deeply empathetic post — bearing in mind that all theotherjonv’s posts that I’ve read have been similar?

I don’t want to now misunderstand you, but from what you’ve said I wonder when, if at all, you think someone can rightfully be called a bigot, transphobic, or similar? Bearing in mind that very often, people’s views on something like trans issues are shaped by media, not direct experience.

I frequent a lot of leftist spaces online — less so in the real world nowadays — and I will be the first to admit that accusations of terf, fascist, racist, etc., often get thrown around prematurely and counterproductively. But this of course doesn’t mean they aren’t accurate well over half of the time. And the dangers of not confronting discriminatory behaviour and views through fear of making false accusations are also considerable.

May I suggest a group hug?

but I do wonder why you wrote that to theotherjonv’s understanding, non-judgemental and deeply empathetic post

Good question – but I wrote it in response to what he said (‘Where I see bigotry i will call it out’) – all I was trying to do was explain that we are all in different places at different times with different experiences and we all need to back off on name-calling, no matter what we think we are hearing. Some people tried to get across points of view from where they are and were called out and it wasn’t really helping. As a bunch of (mainly) older people on here we are all on different points of the path. Gawd knows if any of this makes sense.

May I suggest a group hug?

Can I be the littlest spoon? Assuming that’s what you had in mind

Bearing in mind that very often, people’s views on something like trans issues are shaped by media, not direct experience.

It’s a shame in a way that the lengthy conversation TJ and I just had was behind closed doors, as it were. We hit a lot of points raised here.

There is a degree of “all lives matter” going on, because as soon as you speak out in favour of one group the obvious inference is that you’re opposed to another. The notion that anyone in favour of trans rights must automatically against cis women’s rights is an easy conclusions to reach, but it’s a nonsense.

We’ve got people like Piers Morgan flogging the notion that he can simply self-identify as a helicopter, and it’s just pouring petrol on the whole conversation. This is not how self-identification works. It is a deeply fundamental misconception.

If the concern is that a bloke may be able access a women’s refuge simply because he’s claimed to be a woman then someone has screwed up. Which of course is possible, mistakes happen (and create tabloid headlines). But that’s not a trans rights issue, or a women’s rights issue, it’s a lack of due diligence. Refuges have a screening process, someone explained it on a previous thread.

May I suggest a group hug?

No you may not.

Of course he may. He may suggest anything he likes. He can suggest stripping you naked, rolling you in gravy and chucking you into the lion enclosure at Whipsnade if he wants to. Equally you may ignore his suggestions.

😁

Thanks for once again insinuating I am a bigot poly. Nice

I didn’t, I carefully chose my words to help you understand how your post sounded.  I didn’t make any judgement about the substance of the content, or the person who posted them.  I was hoping you’d go back and read your post again and apply your obvious intellect to the words you used.

Calling trans people “obviously very troubled” was rather offensive.

What I think you were trying to say, I agree with.  I think you could have picked your language better, and then perhaps nobody would have implied you were a bigot.  Sometimes we might be being prejudiced without realising.  Sometimes we just come across that way be stumbling across our words.  I’d hope that if you know this is a controversial topic where you tend to upset people that you’d pick your words especially carefully.

OK

I’ll reflect that back tho.  Thats how your post seemed to me

Once again I think we hit the difficulties of text based discussion.

Hi Cougar.

I’m interested in how you think “self-ID” works.

I’m sure you are, Simon.

What specifically would you like to know?

I would be interested in learning more about your understanding of “self-ID” and how it works.

At the risk of speaking for Cougar, I would imagine he thinks it works much the same way as it does in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Switzerland and all the other countries where gender recognition procedures are based on self determination.

Thanks Bruce for your contribution.

Would be good to find out Cougars understanding of the subject.

You still around Cougar?

Ooh, this is exciting. I can’t help but feel there is a cunning ploy afoot!

Alright.

Anyone can self-identify because at the end of the day there is precisely one person who knows how that person thinks and feels. And it is no-one else’s place to tell them that they are wrong.

However. This concept has been weaponised by shitbags like Piers Morgan who trot out moronic arguments like “well, I’ll just self-identify as an attack helicopter then.” But the point this utter melt is (probably deliberately) missing is that it is really difficult to get that identification recognised or accepted. If you (say) wish to gain access to a women’s refuge then there is a screening process; you cannot just slap a bit of lipstick on and proclaim “I’m a lady.” It just doesn’t work like that, there are safeguards in place.

Yes of course, mistakes happen, and they’re generally headline news when they do. And of course, some people will try and abuse the system because criminals will criminal. TJ said something to me via DM about “fake trans” and that’s probably as good a way as any of explaining it, I don’t doubt that some people may flat-out lie but such occurrences are surely vanishingly rare. Because ultimately if you wanted to be a bit of a sex pest in women’s toilets then there’s the square root of jeff all stopping you from just walking on in there to start with, it doesn’t require an elaborate charade. I almost did it by accident at the hospital a couple of days ago.

Same question back at you, what’s your understanding?

Ooh, this is exciting. I can’t help but feel there is a cunning ploy afoot!

I mean,

You know that joke about how my dad was stealing roadworks?

Cougar. Thanks for the reply. Might take me a bit to digest all of that.

Thanks again.

It’s amazing to me that so much of society wants to see men’s feelings prioritized over women’s rights, that allowing women to have their own spaces is so controversial. I guess it shouldn’t be, sexism being a well known thing, but still…

How would you propose we classify those “who do or did or will or would… produce small mobile gametes, sperm” but were surgically assigned as female at birth by a well-meaning doctor?

Male. Whatever their sex was observed (surgically assigned? Wtf?!) as at birth, they are male.

Why can’t people just be allowed to be who they want to be and love who they want to love in life?

Why is so bloody difficult to let people just “be”?

Because a hairy builder from Bradford might put on a frock and hang around in women’s toilets. Obvs.

Because when transwomen be accepted as women, women lose out. Every women’s space becomes a mixed sex space. Not just in toilets, but men in women’s refuges, prisons, organisations and clubs, men in their sporting events.

But do you accept that people can change gender, which is the social construct rather than a scientific ‘fact’? Because if you do then why can a man not become a woman and v/v? You are conflating sex (m/f) with gender (man/woman) and I reject your definitions of a woman as an adult female on that basis.

Give me your definition of ‘gender’ and ‘woman’ and I’ll let you know where I stand.

One can act in a way that conforms (in as much as possible) to opposite sex stereotypes but that doesn’t change one’s sex. However they act, dress or modify their bodies, men remain men.

is also a scientific fact that you can “feel” more like woman than a man, whatever body you might have, and vice versa. In the same way as it is a scientific fact that someone can be depressed, or happy. As a person you are more than just your physical body.

So if someone wants to base their gender on how they feel emotionally, or whatever, rather than the body they happen to have, then that’s good enough for me. And it cannot be dismissed because it allegedly doesn’t comply with scientific requirements, a person’s mind is also part of the science imo

Whatever it might mean for someone to say they base their gender on how they feel or identify, it’s irrelevant in terms of their sex. They remain either male or female. To say a man feels like a woman is only to say that this man feels like he believes a woman would feel – he can’t actually feel like a woman because he is not one.

And what is ‘man’ or ‘woman’ anyway? They are simply words in English, with no real definition other than the customary one. In the same way that there’s no such thing as a fish. So why can’t we expand those definitions a bit? Really, why not?

As above, a woman is an adult human female. The term relates to the sex of the individual.
To expand the definition to include men (whatever they feel or believe themselves to be) as women is to say that women as a sex based class do not exist and that women should have no sex based rights.

What about those that have differences in sexual development?  its not clear black and white.  a significant number of people have this differences in sexual development.  androgen insensitivity and so on.

To me this is all on a spectrum. I have no issue with people identifying a they wish.  I have no issue with trans folk having rights including the right to be who they want to be.  Basically its none of my buisness

My reservations are around when these rights clash with others rights potentially and actually and seeking solutions around that issue.

Oh – and the whole toilets thing is utter humbug.  who the flip cares?  Just use a cubicle and get on with your business if it bothers you

too many folk use ridiculous ideas to attempt to discredit trans.  Do what ever the flip yo want so long as it does not adversely affect others – and thats in all spheres of life not just sexuality

edit – fiddlesticks sucked back in.  dagnamitt

(surgically assigned? Wtf?!) as at birth

Read some things. Google is that way. ➡

Because when transwomen be accepted as women, women lose out. Every women’s space becomes a mixed sex space.

So you’d be happy with trans men being in “women’s space” because you haven’t accepted them as men?

Re – sex and gender.

Whether you agree or not, if in the UK then there is a defined difference…

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

So that’s the current frame of reference this discussion sits in currently.

Personally (and I admit that at the moment it’s a bit of a pipe dream) I think long term we need to abandon all of these definitions and look for new ones, as they’re actively being used to hinder progress in this area by all sides of the arguments IMO. Language and meaning constantly change, we just maybe need to force the issue on this one.

Its also generational. I work with teenagers and for most of them, gender identity just doesn’t feature on their list of things to make a fuss about. Of course there are always those who struggle to empathise for personal or cultural reasons, but the vast majority IME will not deadname or misgender.

Closest I’ve come to a solution in my own mind without creating a totally new paradigm is to see gender as a continuum. At one end would be someone who exhibits only the social and behavioural characteristics seen as traditionally masculine, and at the other those displaying only the corresponding traditionally female characteristics. Sharing the space in the middle would be those balanced between the two, or who feel neither direction applies to them.

I think that’s where we’ll end up eventually, but it’s going to take a long time sadly.

the whole toilets thing is utter humbug.  who the flip cares?  Just use a cubicle and get on with your business if it bothers you

This strikes me as a question where we (men) should zip our privileged and defer to women. The whole question of being vulnerable (semi-dressed and/or alone) in a confined space just impacts women differently from men.

(I am not in any way suggesting any malice on your part).

Whether you agree or not, if in the UK then there is a defined difference…

…for the particular purpose of reporting on the UK’s progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals. Different words get used by different parts of government for different reasons all the time – and it doesn’t mean we as citizens need to follow them.

What is a “person”? The NHS and HMRC have completely different answers…

This strikes me as a question where we (men) should zip our privileged and defer to women. The whole question of being vulnerable (semi-dressed and/or alone) in a confined space just impacts women differently from men.

Whilst you’re not wrong, that all has sod all to do with sex or gender identity. If someone is going to get a bit rapey then how they identify or claim to identify is way beyond irrelevant. If a door says “women only” then a potential sex pest isn’t going to look at that and think “well, I can’t possibly imagine how I might get into there then, best pretend to be a transsexual.” They’re just going to walk in.

Not wearing a skirt didn’t slow down Jimmy Savile now, did it.

Non of my TERF friends have any issue with loos.  its just not on the radar.  My ;local swimming pool that is 30+ years old has a unisex changing room – just rows and rows of cubicles.  Never been in a nightclub when there is a queue for the ladies loo?  the gents will usually be invaded IME.

this one is a non issue

Isn’t the simplest solution, just remove gender altogether?

It solves all notions of which box to tick on a form.

Or to turn the question on its head, why do we need gender?

that all has sod all to do with sex or gender identity. 

And yet, it seems like a not insignificant number of women seem to feel quite strongly about the subject. 🤔

Never been in a nightclub when there is a queue for the ladies loo?  the gents will usually be invaded IME.

Not your most compelling argument.

However, I should obey my own suggestion and keep my trap shut.

Or to turn the question on its head, why do we need gender?

IMO we don’t. But. We have it and it’s going to take a while to get rid of it.