The trans debate

[CEB]

I do indeed have a pretty strong understanding of the various aspects of the debate, and can summarise the positions of all stakeholders in it, including those I completely disagree with.
Maybe if you wanted to “dip a toe”, you could enter the discussion with a question alongside your scrutiny-free post of a tweet from someone on one side of a polarised debate?

But yes, by all means, if you’re unable and unwilling to understand more because you don’t like that someone’s response conveyed irritation, then maybe best to stay out of it.

[The Mindsweep]

I do indeed have a pretty strong understanding of the various aspects of the debate, and can summarise the positions of all stakeholders in it, including those I completely disagree with.
Maybe if you wanted to “dip a toe”, you could enter the discussion with a question alongside your scrutiny-free post of a tweet from someone on one side of a polarised debate?

But yes, by all means, if you’re unable and unwilling to understand more because you don’t like that someone’s response conveyed irritation, then maybe best to stay out of it.

Thank you for putting me in my place. Night night.

[CEB]

You’re very welcome. Feel free to get back involved when you have the first idea of what you’re talking about

[Max Fowler]

Wow, the second tweet in that thread is terrifying

The first tweet isn't far off it.

[CEB]

The first tweet is mad, but wouldn’t be inherently awful without what comes afterwards. If all that was happening was that for some people “boy” described inner identity and was disconnected from sex (and so didn’t require hormonal and surgical intervention) it’d still be regressive but wouldn’t be much more so than a lot of religious beliefs. It’s the pathway it puts kids on that’s awful.

[Max Fowler]

Maybe don’t post links by child abusing ideologues who are openly talking about making her children a lifelong medical patient with no sexual function and no fertility if you aren’t aware enough of the context and find that describing it as “sexist” just adds to hatred?

Maybe actually read some of the arguments made across the board until you actually understand it?

I’m done with people who find the debate “toxic” but can’t be bothered to read, but will happily post tweets by activists without the slightest bit of scrutiny.

The debate is past the point of “duh… puberty blockers are good when a kid is in the wrong body!”, there’s an incredibly well researched book out next week, reviewed in yesterday’s observer. Read it and actually find out what is happening, rather than sharing sexist, regressive crap.

I posted the tweet to proke debate. It wasn't filled with toxic words and hate so I was able to read it. You obviously feel your knowledge on the subject is sufficient to form an opinion that you are entirely happy with but you are wasting that knowledge. Your whole approach with engagement in this area if from one of superiority and at the very least belittling any view that differs from your own. Your tone and frankly vile words, only add to the debate largely being fought between those who feel that they have the all the answers. In reality we are a long way from knowing the best way forward that tries to provide the best solutions. You are not helping but in fact moving that point further away and adding to the suffering many are going through.

Please take a step back and think about a more measured thoughtful and less confrontational approach. Alow the debate to breathe to provide oxygen for others to feel safe to join the debate.

Have you ever seen CEB debate anything online before? He's just as confrontational whatever the issue. I get why he's so angry on this, when those who agree with him on 99% of other matters disagree or are silent. But he's obviously not going to win people around or get them to reconsider with this approach. (Not that I'm saying any other online debating approach works anyway, I guess).

Where he doesn't do himself any favours is by liking comments from those who have reached the same conclusion as him, but have got there by an entirely different route and are no more informed - almost certainly less - than those who he is preaching down to as being uninformed.

[CEB]

I take your point re: liking comments - though I’ve only liked comments that are themselves fair/valid, I haven’t (as far as I recall) liked comments that are themselves regressive in a different way.
It is indeed frustrating

Re: convincing people - yeah, I’ve tried the patient approach, genuinely. Doesn’t work. People are wilfully uninterested. The scandal is breaking in plain sight now though. Look back at the thread pre-me. The gender clinic mentioned has been ordered to close after the damning interim findings of the cass report, with a well researched book by a bbc journo being released this week. The CEO of mermaids has resigned (to work for a puberty blocker prescribing GP who has been struck off), Mermaids is under investigation, and Labour and SNP MPs are floundering when asked whether a rapist with a penis is a woman.

I’m angry about it because I worked 20 years with vulnerable children, and barely any progressive lefties who previously enjoyed (or at least endured) my rants when directed at things they agreed with me on, gave my position even so much as a hearing.

[Max Fowler]

I guessed that.

It's pretty much like me and Drinnan.

[Max Fowler]

Look how I lifted the tension with a Roperesque Orient gag.

[Max B Gold]

Most of her posts on Twitter are about writing video games. I smell a rat.

[Max Fowler]

Most of her posts on Twitter are about writing video games. I smell a rat.

So she has fully transitioned?

[greyhound]

ask Angela Rayner what is a woman

[CEB]

Most of her posts on Twitter are about writing video games. I smell a rat.

What rat do you smell? Are you aware of how significantly over/represented trans people are in the gaming industry/surrounding culture?

[Max B Gold]

Maybe don’t post links by child abusing ideologues who are openly talking about making her children a lifelong medical patient with no sexual function and no fertility if you aren’t aware enough of the context and find that describing it as “sexist” just adds to hatred?

Maybe actually read some of the arguments made across the board until you actually understand it?

I’m done with people who find the debate “toxic” but can’t be bothered to read, but will happily post tweets by activists without the slightest bit of scrutiny.

The debate is past the point of “duh… puberty blockers are good when a kid is in the wrong body!”, there’s an incredibly well researched book out next week, reviewed in yesterday’s observer. Read it and actually find out what is happening, rather than sharing sexist, regressive crap.

I posted the tweet to proke debate. It wasn't filled with toxic words and hate so I was able to read it. You obviously feel your knowledge on the subject is sufficient to form an opinion that you are entirely happy with but you are wasting that knowledge. Your whole approach with engagement in this area if from one of superiority and at the very least belittling any view that differs from your own. Your tone and frankly vile words, only add to the debate largely being fought between those who feel that they have the all the answers. In reality we are a long way from knowing the best way forward that tries to provide the best solutions. You are not helping but in fact moving that point further away and adding to the suffering many are going through.

Please take a step back and think about a more measured thoughtful and less confrontational approach. Alow the debate to breathe to provide oxygen for others to feel safe to join the debate.

Have you ever seen CEB debate anything online before? He's just as confrontational whatever the issue. I get why he's so angry on this, when those who agree with him on 99% of other matters disagree or are silent. But he's obviously not going to win people around or get them to reconsider with this approach. (Not that I'm saying any other online debating approach works anyway, I guess).

Where he doesn't do himself any favours is by liking comments from those who have reached the same conclusion as him, but have got there by an entirely different route and are no more informed - almost certainly less - than those who he is preaching down to as being uninformed.

You talking about the nazi types who appear to share his cherished opinions?

[Max B Gold]

Most of her posts on Twitter are about writing video games. I smell a rat.

What rat do you smell? Are you aware of how significantly over/represented trans people are in the gaming industry/surrounding culture?

Nope.

[CEB]

Max’yyyy I know you like to grind my gears on this, but when it comes down to it, from what you’ve said when pressed, you actually agree with my take on it, except that you simply don’t believe that what I’m suggesting is happening is actually happening

[Max B Gold]

Max’yyyy I know you like to grind my gears on this, but when it comes down to it, from what you’ve said when pressed, you actually agree with my take on it, except that you simply don’t believe that what I’m suggesting is happening is actually happening

Incorrect. You are focused on children and have safeguarding concerns. I too have the same concerns.

I just dont think you take enough care when talking about the trans community as a whole. Because it generates irrational hatred, violence and murder. I accept that in the grown up trans sector your target is the extreme activists type who can be a bit nutty. More care required and try and be nicer.

[CEB]

Disagree. Everything I’ve said about trans activism has been a strident critique of said activism - I’ve never used a slur, I’ve actively supported gender non conformity, and I have not seen a single credible link between a progressive critique of trans activism and male violence towards people who identify as trans. (I also think that the faction of “gender criticals” who don’t have red lines about who they share platforms with are misguided and wrong to do so, and are making common cause with people who do not have women’s interests at heart)

Right wing demonisation of gender non-conformity is how violence against trans people is justified, not stridently maintaining a position that nobody has actually been able to discredit.

[Max B Gold]

Disagree. Everything I’ve said about trans activism has been a strident critique of said activism - I’ve never used a slur, I’ve actively supported gender non conformity, and I have not seen a single credible link between a progressive critique of trans activism and male violence towards people who identify as trans. (I also think that the faction of “gender criticals” who don’t have red lines about who they share platforms with are misguided and wrong to do so, and are making common cause with people who do not have women’s interests at heart)

Right wing demonisation of gender non-conformity is how violence against trans people is justified, not stridently maintaining a position that nobody has actually been able to discredit.

Disagree. Your "Left Wing" critique just adds fuel to the pile on to suppress a vulnerable minority and intensify the culture war.

[CEB]

Putting “left wing” in inverted commas isn’t a convincing rebuttal to my assertion that my position comes from a demonstrably progressive position.

But I see you’ve gone back from engagement to vague accusations of bad faith. That’s a pity.

[Max B Gold]

Putting “left wing” in inverted commas isn’t a convincing rebuttal to my assertion that my position comes from a demonstrably progressive position.

But I see you’ve gone back from engagement to vague accusations of bad faith. That’s a pity.

So vague that a young trans girl was stabbed to death last week. OKs.

[CEB]

I accused you of vagueness. I did not claim that there is anything “vague” about the abhorrent murder of a gender non conforming child.

[Max B Gold]

I accused you of vagueness. I did not claim that there is anything “vague” about the abhorrent murder of a gender non conforming child.

Interesting language. So not a girl then?

[CEB]

What’s interesting about my language? I saw you attempt this gotcha the other day, too.

I use “child” because that’s neutral language that’s not in dispute.
I won’t use “boy” here because I’m not in this debate for the right to needlessly use an upsetting term to describe a dead child, and the child’s sex would be relevant only in terms of discussing the medical pathway that organisations would put the child onto.
I won’t use “girl” because due to my existing, carefully articulated position, it’s sexist and regressive to affirm male children as girls, and currently supports the idea that male children who don’t conform to stereotypes should be on a pathway to hormonal and surgical intervention.

It’s astounding that you think that me choosing a neutral term rather than being needlessly inflammatory, or totally at odds with my expressed position, is somehow bad.

Tell you what mate, you choose. You can either have me
1: refer to this child neutrally, as a “child”
2: bullishly refer to this child according to my pre-existing rationale as a “boy”, despite not feeling that I need to do so
3: you can explain to me why my underpinning rationale as to why I won’t affirm male children as girls is wrong.

I’m not sure that “you self-moderated your language to avoid insensitivity about disputed terms in relation to a tragedy and I wanna pin you down on it” is quite the gotcha you think it is.

[Max B Gold]

What’s interesting about my language? I saw you attempt this gotcha the other day, too.

I use “child” because that’s neutral language that’s not in dispute.
I won’t use “boy” here because I’m not in this debate for the right to needlessly use an upsetting term to describe a dead child, and the child’s sex would be relevant only in terms of discussing the medical pathway that organisations would put the child onto.
I won’t use “girl” because due to my existing, carefully articulated position, it’s sexist and regressive to affirm male children as girls, and currently supports the idea that male children who don’t conform to stereotypes should be on a pathway to hormonal and surgical intervention.

It’s astounding that you think that me choosing a neutral term rather than being needlessly inflammatory, or totally at odds with my expressed position, is somehow bad.

Tell you what mate, you choose. You can either have me
1: refer to this child neutrally, as a “child”
2: bullishly refer to this child according to my pre-existing rationale as a “boy”, despite not feeling that I need to do so
3: you can explain to me why my underpinning rationale as to why I won’t affirm male children as girls is wrong.

I’m not sure that “you self-moderated your language to avoid insensitivity about disputed terms in relation to a tragedy and I wanna pin you down on it” is quite the gotcha you think it is.

I have no preference regarding naming the murder victim. It was her express wish to be a girl and be identified as such.

I see no reason to needlessly upset people who make that personal choice. Whereas you wish to deny them a common courtesy. It's no more complicated than that and it's not a matter of adopting "neutral" nomenclature. It isn't neutral nor is it in accordance with the trans person's wishes.