The trans debate

[Proposition Joe]

Does this mean Bowie was trans as well? I wore eyeliner when going out a few times, might have to reconsider whether this meant anything deeper than "I just fancied it (and it looked great)".

[CEB]

It’s one of the examples of what I mean by the internal inconsistency: suggest to a trans activist that their identity is based on identification with stereotypes associated with the opposite sex, and they say “no, it’s not that at all - it is MUCH deeper”, and yet they are quite happy to see transness in historical figures based on that criteria.

You won’t be surprised to know that yes, Bowie has been claimed as trans by many of the generation who think they are the first to subvert gender expectations

[Lost not Found]

"I just fancied it (and it looked great)".

We don't need photo proof that you would have done! Although for the advert revenue and traffic a few photos would do the world of good.

Without reading it thoroughly, so I'm probably wrong. The new guidelines seem sort of sensible. Individual circumstances are different so you can't force things one way or the other. Let schools and professionals who actually know their pupils decide what's best for individuals within their settings.

[CEB]

"I just fancied it (and it looked great)".

We don't need photo proof that you would have done! Although for the advert revenue and traffic a few photos would do the world of good.

Without reading it thoroughly, so I'm probably wrong. The new guidelines seem sort of sensible. Individual circumstances are different so you can't force things one way or the other. Let schools and professionals who actually know their pupils decide what's best for individuals within their settings.

They’re theoretically a sensible development from where we were before. They are still open to exploitation of loopholes by activist teachers/teachers easily led by guidance from ostensibly progressive organisations.

They also fundamentally fail to recognise the simple truth that there is no such thing as a “trans child”; there are children who, for a variety of reasons, experience discomfort with their sexed bodies. While such children are still identified as potentially being on a pathway which ends in medicalisation, surgery and hormonal treatment (all of which will disproportionately impact children who would otherwise grow up to be gay) there is still a big problem

[CEB]

A fundamental issue with the concept of “trans children” is that the vocabulary around it actually, demonstrably *creates* “trans children”

What I mean is that in a context where children are taught that “girl” and “boy” refer to body types, and they are protected from dated ideas like “boys can’t have long hair” or “Star Wars is for boys”, for (say) a male child to identify as a female child, he would need to be literally distressed with his male body, and to independently be able to recognise his penis as a problem. (because there would be no societal/parental pressure on him to be “masculine”

In a context where children are free from having gendered norms imposed on them, the idea of “transness” would be virtually meaningless, and would not open up new possibilities for behaviour or interests, because they’re already open.


However, in a context where children are taught (as Stonewall/Mermaids advocate) that “girl” and “boy” are nothing to do with our bodies, but are instead words that describe how we feel inside, then we are inviting children to measure their “girlness” or “boyness” against societal norms. This, when it takes place as children are learning about concepts and categories for the first time (and where transness is framed as an unambiguous positive by activists) clearly makes it more likely for “feminine” boys to categorise themselves as “girls” and vice versa.

And in a context where that’s a live issue, without consensus, it creates the conditions where children may start to hate their bodies as they begin to view them as a barrier to being the type of person they want to be

[CEB]

This is what I mean when I say that it is the mainstream organisations that are the problem. Underpinning this sort of thing is the crusade that a child’s “trans identity” is sacred, permanent, and that a child who has come to believe that he or she is trans, needs to be put on the pathway that leads to full medical and hormonal transition as early as possible.
This is scandalous

[Rich Tea Wellin]

A good way of thinking about the Kurt Cobain thing…

You’re watching telly in 1992. Your dad comes in the room, sees Kurt in a dress and eyeliner looking brilliant. Says “is that a man or a woman?”

Is the dad showing an uncannily prescient recognition that Kurt may well have an inner female essence? Or is he being a willy because he doesn’t think real men wear make up?

Agree with this and think this is a great example of your main point on this topic.

[CEB]

A good way of thinking about the Kurt Cobain thing…

You’re watching telly in 1992. Your dad comes in the room, sees Kurt in a dress and eyeliner looking brilliant. Says “is that a man or a woman?”

Is the dad showing an uncannily prescient recognition that Kurt may well have an inner female essence? Or is he being a willy because he doesn’t think real men wear make up?

Agree with this and think this is a great example of your main point on this topic.

Follow up question then (because I really think that thinking these things through to the end is how we work out the tricky issues)

we both, seemingly recognise the inherent ludicrousness of an outsider believing Cobain to be a woman, based on his apparent affinity for some ways of presenting and behaving that society has coded as “feminine”.

Do you believe that Cobain himself, if he were alive today, would have both the right and the capacity to identify himself as a woman, and would members of the female sex have any legitimate right to say “you’re not a woman, because womanhood isn’t a feeling in a man’s head, it’s a neutral descriptor of sex”?

[Rich Tea Wellin]

A good way of thinking about the Kurt Cobain thing…

You’re watching telly in 1992. Your dad comes in the room, sees Kurt in a dress and eyeliner looking brilliant. Says “is that a man or a woman?”

Is the dad showing an uncannily prescient recognition that Kurt may well have an inner female essence? Or is he being a willy because he doesn’t think real men wear make up?

Agree with this and think this is a great example of your main point on this topic.

Follow up question then (because I really think that thinking these things through to the end is how we work out the tricky issues)

we both, seemingly recognise the inherent ludicrousness of an outsider believing Cobain to be a woman, based on his apparent affinity for some ways of presenting and behaving that society has coded as “feminine”.

Do you believe that Cobain himself, if he were alive today, would have both the right and the capacity to identify himself as a woman, and would members of the female sex have any legitimate right to say “you’re not a woman, because womanhood isn’t a feeling in a man’s head, it’s a neutral descriptor of sex”?

I’d say he would have a right and so would the members of the female sex. I don’t think they are mutually exclusive.

I personally think Cobain is a legitimate ‘role model’ if you like of someone who rejected stereotypes of masculinity and raged against macho ideals whilst also supporting women and equality.

Obviously, considering what happened he wasn’t exactly mentally stable and had major daddy issues growing up which perhaps added to his reaction of make stereotypes.

[CEB]

The two rights there are mutually exclusive: the right to categorise oneself as a member of the opposite sex, and the right of the members of that sex to refuse to accommodate him as a member of their sex are in direct opposition to each other, and since the purpose of a “right” is to enshrine a protection of a specific thing, opposing rights must be resolved.

How would you resolve it?

If your answer is “he has the right to think of himself how he wants, but female people have the right to organise themselves as female people and are not obliged to include him in female only spaces”, then that is a rejection of the rights demanded by trans activism, and is support for the rights asserted by opponents of trans activism.

This is what I mean about thinking thoughts through. A conflict of rights requires, as the very least, thinking about what happens at the point those rights clash.

So, let’s say that I (who has also worn a dress on stage, worn eye liner, and thought myself an ally of feminists) decided that yep, I’m going to exercise my right to identify as a woman.
Should my decision to exercise that right mean
1: I get to access single sex spaces where female people might be in a state of undress

2: I should be accepted as a lesbian by other lesbians, on the basis that as a woman attracted to women, I am a lesbian

3: I should be able to work at a rape crisis centre, on the basis that as a woman there is nothing inappropriate about me being present in a space where men’s presence might be traumatic

These are some of the areas where the conflict of rights arises as a flashpoint. How do you resolve them?

[Rich Tea Wellin]

The two rights there are mutually exclusive: the right to categorise oneself as a member of the opposite sex, and the right of the members of that sex to refuse to accommodate him as a member of their sex are in direct opposition to each other, and since the purpose of a “right” is to enshrine a protection of a specific thing, opposing rights must be resolved.

How would you resolve it?

If your answer is “he has the right to think of himself how he wants, but female people have the right to organise themselves as female people and are not obliged to include him in female only spaces”, then that is a rejection of the rights demanded by trans activism, and is support for the rights asserted by opponents of trans activism.

This is what I mean about thinking thoughts through. A conflict of rights requires, as the very least, thinking about what happens at the point those rights clash.

So, let’s say that I (who has also worn a dress on stage, worn eye liner, and thought myself an ally of feminists) decided that yep, I’m going to exercise my right to identify as a woman.
Should my decision to exercise that right mean
1: I get to access single sex spaces where female people might be in a state of undress

2: I should be accepted as a lesbian by other lesbians, on the basis that as a woman attracted to women, I am a lesbian

3: I should be able to work at a rape crisis centre, on the basis that as a woman there is nothing inappropriate about me being present in a space where men’s presence might be traumatic

These are some of the areas where the conflict of rights arises as a flashpoint. How do you resolve them?

Interesting. I don’t know but I will think about it and come back.

[Dunners]

I think I can hear the sound of lawyers revving up.

[CEB]

India really is thick. So utterly thick that I sort of hope he doesn’t face too many consequences for lashing out; I don’t think he even understands the cause he’s devoted his life to

[CEB]

This is interesting.
A woman who was investigated and suspended for her gender critical beliefs has won her case against her employers.
This, from the judgement, would seem to back up everything I’ve said on here (that is - articulating a mainstream opinion that goes against what Stonewall advocates does not constitute “transphobia”)

[CEB]

The stuff around the Edinburgh rape crisis centre is beyond belief.
Would highly recommend that anyone with a passing interest in this subject to look into it and let me know what they think.

Also, to consider that the fact that it’s getting next to zero coverage in the guardian (and being ignored completely by the columnists who usually write about gender stuff

[Currywurst and Chips]

The stuff around the Edinburgh rape crisis centre is beyond belief.
Would highly recommend that anyone with a passing interest in this subject to look into it and let me know what they think.

Also, to consider that the fact that it’s getting next to zero coverage in the guardian (and being ignored completely by the columnists who usually write about gender stuff

Reality is parody Daily Mail stories from 2008 now

[Currywurst and Chips]

THE Scottish Greens have defended the head of a rape crisis centre who said “bigoted” survivors should have their “unacceptable beliefs” challenged as part of their recovery.

Mridul Wadhwa, chief executive of Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre, said people would not truly recover from trauma unless they addressed any prejudices as “therapy is political”.

It implied rape survivors could be treated differently according to their political views.

Wadhwa, 43, a trans woman without a gender recognition certificate who took on the job in May, faced calls to resign after making the comments on The Guilty Feminist Podcast.

One sexual violence expert said “pushing a political view onto a woman at a time of profound trauma and crisis” would be “inappropriate, unethical and unprofessional”.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/politics ... ivors-row/

[CEB]

Without a gender recognition certificate, and with a penis

[Long slender neck]

Cant find a decent source for this- is the jist of it that they wouldnt tell a victim if their counsellor was a man or a woman?

[Long slender neck]

Biggest trans story I've read this week must be clinicians quitting the replacement for the Tavistock, because they cant agree on anything.

[CEB]

The stuff around the Edinburgh rape crisis centre is beyond belief.
Would highly recommend that anyone with a passing interest in this subject to look into it and let me know what they think.

Also, to consider that the fact that it’s getting next to zero coverage in the guardian (and being ignored completely by the columnists who usually write about gender stuff

Reality is parody Daily Mail stories from 2008 now

That’s the problem really - and I think it’s palpable, seeing how this thread has developed.
The stuff that’s going on with trans rights has been iffy as f*** for years now, but it’s impossible to state whats they’re doing without it sounding like a Richard Littlejohn column making up ludicrous extrapolations.

I would genuinely love for one of the people I engaged with early, who were at the time confident of their position, to jump back in and give us an update. I genuinely don’t know how anyone could even begin to defend this

[CEB]

Cant find a decent source for this- is the jist of it that they wouldnt tell a victim if their counsellor was a man or a woman?

No

[CEB]

This covers all of yesterdays events in court. Fascinating reading

[Long slender neck]

Well thats all i found on a search, must have been testimony from Adams.

[Currywurst and Chips]

The stuff around the Edinburgh rape crisis centre is beyond belief.
Would highly recommend that anyone with a passing interest in this subject to look into it and let me know what they think.

Also, to consider that the fact that it’s getting next to zero coverage in the guardian (and being ignored completely by the columnists who usually write about gender stuff

Reality is parody Daily Mail stories from 2008 now

That’s the problem really - and I think it’s palpable, seeing how this thread has developed.
The stuff that’s going on with trans rights has been iffy as f*** for years now, but it’s impossible to state whats they’re doing without it sounding like a Richard Littlejohn column making up ludicrous extrapolations.

I would genuinely love for one of the people I engaged with early, who were at the time confident of their position, to jump back in and give us an update. I genuinely don’t know how anyone could even begin to defend this

You underestimate their need to remain part of the tribe by keeping on message