The trans debate

[CEB]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/20 ... ide-united

Wilson said their perception of gender does not fit into the western standards of man and woman, and that finally making the announcement came as a huge relief to them.

“Every non-binary person experiences this differently,” Wilson told Holly Ransom, Pride Cup board chair. “As a kid, I didn’t see that things were supposed to be for girls or for boys but I was taught that as I grew up.

“You don’t realise how much of a difference it makes. Being referred to as ‘they/them’ for the first time gave me this euphoric feeling. I just wanted to be free.”

Arent they falling into the western standards by identifying as non-binary then?

Commentator's nightmare.

Also, assume the Western standard which enable her represent the women's side internationally are...OK?

The idea that because gender expectations don’t suit her, she isn’t a woman, is a deeply individualistic, identitarian method of attempting to escape sexism on an individual level, while implying that those women who remain women must be comfortable with gendered expectations.

[Proposition Joe]

Not being funny but genuinely can't work out if that's sarcastic or a criticism which I need to reflect on.

[CEB]

Oh - it’s neither, I meant to quote LSN so it wasn’t actually a response to what you said, but was my take on specifically what it means politically for a gender non conforming woman to assert that she is not a woman

[Hoover Attack]

@CEB - I occasionally visit this thread and must admit I find it hard to follow.

This.

[CEB]

I’m interested in what’s difficult to follow.

Obviously I know I can be less than succinct, but are there any specific instances where you think my position doesn’t make sense or is confusing? I’m very happy to try to clarify anything from first principles, even word usage/meaning etc

[Rich Tea Wellin]

You’re happy to put hoover right on a few things he’s unsure of?

[CEB]

Hoover has been more or less instinctively right on most of his contributions here. There’s not much I’d be able to put him right on, aside from in terms of how each individual case fits into a societal context.

You too, to be fair. Your instincts are generally not wrong, your issue is in not understanding that the extremist stuff that you assume is rare is actually the mainstream.

[TheyO]

Do I need to read all 75 pages of this to make comment? Potentially some of what I would offer to the conversation, or interrogate from the last two pages may have been covered by others already.

[Rich Tea Wellin]

Do I need to read all 75 pages of this to make comment? Potentially some of what I would offer to the conversation, or interrogate from the last two pages may have been covered by others already.

Advice, don’t bother

[CEB]

Do I need to read all 75 pages of this to make comment? Potentially some of what I would offer to the conversation, or interrogate from the last two pages may have been covered by others already.

Comment away

[TheyO]

Joined this forum to kick something else off, but when I saw 75 pages debating the existence of humans, sadly feel compelled to respond.

There is no need whatsoever to go beyond the obvious. Men are adult male humans, women are adult female humans.

There's no need if your life doesn't literally depend on it.

If you associate whether someone is a man or a woman with traits, you are reinforcing structural “gender”, where “gender” refers to a cultural concept of expectations of what is appropriate for the sexes.

No two self-definitions are the same, but can still feel to that person as “womanly” or “manly”, or not. Some trans men would consider their kindness to be male, and some trans women would consider their confidence to be female. Both infract gender stereotypes rather than conform to them.

You address that here to a point:

Above where I mentioned “expectations of what is appropriate for the sexes”, this is what I mean: the idea that traits that occur in males are “feminine” is what we mean by the idea that “gender” is a limiting set of ideas that tells men how they should be. Is talking about mental health a feminine trait? Is liking football a masculine trait? What do we mean by that?
It’s almost always the case that when we “gender” traits, we are trying to limit what people can or should do or be like because of their sex.

But I think this confuses traditional societal expectations with what is felt in the Self. Again, a trait in one person that feels male, may be the same trait that another person feels is female. Or, and perhaps predominantly, it may be neither, and inconsequential as to whether that person knows they are either male, female, or neither.

A book that does a great job of exploring this is Trans: A Memoir, by Juliet Jacques. Would recommend you do the reading.

What we see in the trans community often even is a confusion of this, which I agree is largely down to societal expectation.

It’s exhausting debating our right to exist. But I acknowledge that it’s where we are as a society. I do have to say, I find it telling that the people who dedicate 75 pages arguing against the existence of a small minority of people (who absolutely do not have access to, let alone command of, the mainstream), detailing exactly why our Self is bogus, are often men born into male bodies, who would likely (rightly) tell men born into male bodies that they have no right to debate or determine a woman's right to abortion and what they do with their body.

[CEB]

The leaked material from WPATH is quite something.

Just seen the prior post. Sorry TheyO, since you started with a false premise - “debating the existence” - I have nothing to say to you unless you engage without the hyperbole, especially since the most “trans” thing about you is the transparency that your tedious one-joke username is for WUMming purposes

[CEB]

Worth a watch, and the thread is interesting too

[Long slender neck]

Doritos hire 'paedophile' for marketing campaign

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68495705

[CEB]

the NHS’s veil slips

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-12/chi ... s-nhs-says

[Dunners]

[CEB]

Might want to click on the link, it’s not specifically trans related
(Also, while the situation is what it is, it’s probably a good idea to deal with what’s practical)

[Currywurst and Chips]

the NHS’s veil slips

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-12/chi ... s-nhs-says

You don’t support life saving gender affirming care?

[Dunners]

LOL. "Advice"

[CEB]

This exchange, from waaaaaaay before I got involved in this thread, in which LSN’s perfectly rational instinctive concerns got him dismissed and insulted by Mick McQuaid seems quite relevant today.

It’s *almost* as if the toxicity of this debate was baked in from the start by people who didn’t fully understand the issue but jumped in enthusiastically without ever asking questions, then sought to make it taboo to ask them.


Funny how it turned out that the guy who called Pammy a dolt has shut the f*** up on this thread and offers only snark in defence of his obnoxious and discredited early posts

[Long slender neck]

the NHS’s veil slips

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-12/chi ... s-nhs-says

Seems to me like the right thing to do. Counselling more appropriate

[Rich Tea Wellin]

the NHS’s veil slips

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-12/chi ... s-nhs-says

I’m going to shock you…I also like wine. And agree with the NHS decision

[Max B Gold]

the NHS’s veil slips

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-12/chi ... s-nhs-says

I’m going to shock you…I also like wine. And agree with the NHS decision

Probably just trying to save money on the drugs bill. Typical NHS. Save money first, patients last.

[CEB]

the NHS’s veil slips

https://www.itv.com/news/2024-03-12/chi ... s-nhs-says

I’m going to shock you…I also like wine. And agree with the NHS decision

I’m not shocked - like I said, I don’t think you’re an ideologue, I don’t think you have an unreasonable instinctive take on this: your only issue is not knowing that the stuff that TERF’s claim about trans activism that sounds mad is actually true, and you (quite understandably) are wary about sounding mad, or adopting a position that sounds mad before being sure it’s right.

The only thing stopping you from being full TERF is caring enough about the subject to scrutinise both sides of it and work out where the truth is.

Of course you don’t want children to be given puberty blockers that can seriously harm them, you’re a decent person.
But now re-read the first page of the thread and see the strident certainty with which some people assumed that they must be fine, since they are being offered (circular reasoning, which should have been a sign)

[Currywurst and Chips]

I think it’s worth noting that when looking at the early pages it should factor in that it was the second half of 2020.

A time where a lot more people felt more strident in expressing mad (for want of a better term) woke views, especially online. Views that may have tempered in the last four years and the consequences for pushing back on the accepted doctrine (at the time) felt greater than they do today