What do you believe is required for males to identify as trans? Let’s start there.
There is a significant push for self-identification that would allow transgender people to change their legal sex without producing any evidence of psychological need. Self-ID is what JKR is flagging out as a big concern.
Here is a good summary of what is happening around the world with this issue. I posted it earlier but I’m not sure any one read it.
I’m not aware of any males trying to identify as trans (transwomen I assume you mean). It doesn’t seem to happen, nor does there seem to be much benefit to them doing so.
YWTF, do you believe that trans men are women?
The attitude I am talking about is of a person who doesn’t want to be (I am making an analogy) women’s chess champion, she wants to be the chess champion. And competed with, and beat, men (as well as other women) to receive distinguished scholarships and other prestigious opportunities in what was, and still is, a disparate world. Without going beneath the surface and analysing what makes a person so driven — who knows if it does not have something to do with being marginalized? — I do not see it as a rejection of or incompatible with having pride in one’s own identity.
(Meanwhile this isn’t taking place in some utopia; in fact one would have to be willfully blind —many are including some women-- to miss the pervasive sexism, homophobia, and racism all around, including in some rarified academic settings where you’d hope it didn’t belong)
What our kids can teach us about gender and sexuality
The link contains this relevant passage:
3. You should believe people when they tell you who they are.
Sometimes, folks get a little passive-aggressive in their language about people who don’t fit neatly into our cultural gender boxes. There’s no such thing as a “real woman”; anyone who says they are a woman is a woman, regardless of the sex they were assigned at birth. It’s not the “name they go by”; it’s their name. They aren’t “preferred” pronouns; they are that person’s actual pronouns.
At the end of the day, it’s none of our business what’s underneath someone’s underwear or who they want to kiss (unless it’s specifically us). So if someone says they are a boy, treat them like a boy. If someone says their name is Jessica, call them Jessica. If someone says they use the pronoun “they,” use the pronoun “they.” (And before anyone gets all hot about “they” as a singular pronoun, reflect for a minute how often we already use it when we don’t know the gender of the person we’re referring to: “Someone left their jacket” or “We’ll meet the doctor later and they’ll tell us what’s next” or this entire paragraph… So let it go.) If someone says they are a glitterbutch fairy who uses the pronouns ze/zir, you can say, “That’s new for me. Can you explain what a glitterbutch fairy means and show me how to use your pronouns correctly?” But if you want your kids to stop rolling their eyes at you (and to be a decent human being), take people for who they say they are.**
The article conveniently only gives examples of situations where it doesn’t matter what someone’s gender or gender identity is. If someone tells me they are a woman while we’re standing in the line at the grocery store, of course I’d be a jerk if I told them they were wrong.
But if I’m walking up to the locked door of my women’s only dormitory and a dude-looking person tries to step in right after me, am I jerk for reacting with some doubt if this person says, “Don’t worry. I’m a woman!” If I’m unclothed in a locker room all by myself and a dude-looking person strolls up in there, am I jerk if them telling me they are a woman doesn’t make me feel less scared?" The gender ideologues aren’t imagining these kind of scenarios. They only seem to be fixated on the no brainer scenarios that only hateful fanatics would have a problem with.
I have a problem with an article like this. We shouldn’t aspire to have the innocence of children, since children lack critical thinking skills. We should teach children how to have critical thinking skills while still being decent human beings. We can teach kids to be courteous and respectful to everyone by default, no matter how weird or different they are or appear to be, while simultaneously teaching them that it is OK to not believe everything as person says they are. I wish the article had said that it’s OK to think whatever you want about the glitterbutch fairy identity, but we should treat a person with this identity with respect, by using the pronouns they request and not telling them they are wrong. Respect does not obligate you to believe someone is a glitterbutch fairy, though.
Are you familiar with Cathy Brennan? She’s one of the more prominent anti-trans rights activists on our side of the pond, and was responsible for creating a number of websites related to the issue. She had a habit of contacting the employers of people who argued with her online to get them fired, and publishing identifiable information about her critics on her various websites. Some of her targets were high school kids.
Apparently, she’s recently split from the larger gender critical movement in the US, because of what she perceives to be its increasingly right-wing politics and flirtation with broader anti-LGB legislation.
I kind of feel like this is a trick question, to be honest.
Short answer: Trans men are trans men.
Long answer: Trans men are females, by definition. If they are over the age of 18, they are adult females. Another term for adult female humans is “woman”. If it’s not inaccurate to refer to trans men as female then it’s not inaccurate to refer to them as women. But out of respect for their identities, I don’t refer to them as women.
Can I ask you a question? Of what material consequence is there if I believe trans men to be women? Do you think their rights are deprived if I mentally lump them together with women, based on them having the same reproductive system in common? In my day-to-day walk through life, I interact with men and women the same way. This means I treat trans men the same way I treat women. That’s what we’re supposed to be doing, right? So then why does it matter if I see one group of people as women and another group as men?
Why is your concern framed to involve a male-presenting transwoman? Is that the only kind of transwoman you can imagine? Or is it a case where if you can’t tell she’s a transwoman, you don’t care?
Is this a common scenario anyway? How many “dude-looking persons” try to enter women’s-only spaces by claiming to be women? And to what end?
Powers &8^]
Karen White benefited by identifying as trans and so did this person.
Go look at that article I linked to. Does it say “Anyone presenting as a woman is a woman?” Or does it say “Anyone who says they are a woman is a woman.” If this is the messaging folks are sending out into the universe, then it doesn’t matter how many dude-looking people are trying to enter women’s spaces in this singular moment in time. If you are a woman who is raped or sexually assaulted because of a dude playing the “woman” card, it won’t matter to you that only 1 in a 100,000 dudes are evil enough to do something like this.
How many guys are beating transwomen who use men’s restrooms? I’m guessing it’s some non-zero number but not a huge number. So imagine the same non-zero number of guys deciding they want to beat down some transwomen by gaining access to women’s only spaces. Maybe you’ll find some compassion and sympathy for my position if I make this about the safety of transwomen rather than all women.
It would explain what I see as very clear inconsistencies and inaccuracies in some of the things you write. But this clears it up.
Do you think it’s wrong for someone to deliberately try to avoid rhetorically erasing trans men, and thus say things like “women and trans men who menstruate” or “women and others who menstruate”, in the service of trying to be inclusive of trans men?
How is that tweet in any way trying to “cancel” Boylan? Did she call for her to be fired? Was this in some other tweet you didn’t share?
Yes, this. (Agreed that we still need the “like” button.)
Exactly. If she agreed with the sentiments in the letter, she shouldn’t change her mind because she doesn’t agree about everything with everyone else who signed. For chrissakes, that is metaphysically impossible once David Brooks and Noam Chomsky have both signed! Not to mention the variety of others among the signatories.
…is “calling to be fired” the definition of “cancelling?” Is it impossible to “cancel someone” without explicitly demanding they get fired?
Seems to fit this definition to me. Rowling shamed Boylan in front of millions of her followers. Textbook cancelling.
Why must I assume that any male-presenting person who says they are a woman is a transwomen? Notice I said nothing about “transwoman” in my post. I said a “dude-looking person”. And I’m talking about a dude-looking person who says they are a woman. They don’t have a card that says they are a transwomen. They don’t have a card that says they are genderfluid/nonbinary. They are just a dude who is saying they are a woman in that singular moment of time when I’m wondering if they are a danger to me. If saying “I’m a woman” is the only thing a male has to say to suddenly become transwoman, then “transwoman” becomes meaningless too.
Go look at that article I linked to. Does it say “Anyone presenting as a woman is a woman?” Or does it say “Anyone who says they are a woman is a woman.” If this is the messaging folks are sending out into the universe, then it doesn’t matter how many dude-looking people are trying to enter women’s spaces in this singular moment in time. If you are a woman who is raped or sexually assaulted because of a dude playing the “woman” card, it won’t matter to you that only 1 in a 100,000 dudes are evil enough to do something like this.
How many guys are beating transwomen who use men’s restrooms? I’m guessing it’s some non-zero number but not a huge number. So imagine the same non-zero number of guys deciding they want to beat down some transwomen by gaining access to women’s only spaces. Maybe you’ll find some compassion and sympathy for my position if I make this about the safety of transwomen rather than all women.
The kind of canceling that concerns me is when it gets people fired, gets their book or movie project withdrawn, etc. If it’s just “shaming”, that’s simply free speech and I endorse it fully.
Not a real helpful contribution, this little bit here. You have a chance to educate me on all these inconsistencies and inaccuracies.
I don’t think that’s wrong at all. But that’s not the relevant question to ask.
Women are being hounded, harassed, maligned, and muzzled for the crime of referring to women’s health issues as women’s health issues. The issue has moved a thousand miles past mere PCness; the intense policing of language is now creating hostile environments for women trying to discuss female-exclusive issues. So the relevant question is do I think it’s wrong that this happening? The answer is hell yes I think that’s wrong.
The latest victim of this madness is r/PCOS, a subreddit for sufferers of polycystic ovarian syndrome. The entire board was taken down last week after it was branded transphobic. Why? Because a woman posted a rant about the masculinizing symptoms of PCOS, and to combat this, she proposed taking the feminizing hormones that trans women take. For this “offense”, she was shut down and called transphobic. When others came to her defense, the subreddit was brigaded by gender ideologists who labeled them TERFs, accused them of being insufficiently inclusive, and demanded that they stop using the word “woman” even in reference to themselves as individuals.
The board is now back up, but the women who spoke up for free speech are banned for “[denigrating others for their gender]”, according to the administrators](Reddit - Dive into anything). But that didn’t happen. You can piece the real story together from these screenshots.
At this point, I don’t care if what I’m saying convinces you. There is bound to be someone lurking in this thread who is reading this stuff and having their eyes opened.
I admit, I really dislike the line in monstro’s quote - "There’s no such thing as a “real woman” ". I am offended at the notion. It does feel to me like they are trying to erase women. And I don’t like it and I don’t like the people who are doing it. Who are they to tell me - a biological woman from the genetic material out - that I’m not a real woman? That my experience (which while different than many women’s) is completely out of touch with a transwoman’s experience. And that is just truth. The studies they quote on the male/female brain differences (studies of maybe 50 people - don’t forgot we’re still struggling to get some sort of parity in “real women” participating in medical studies) reminds of the study of phrenology where scientists of the day had studies to back up their usually bigoted beliefs as well. It reminds me of pet “parents” who insist that their relationship with their pets is exactly the same as parent’s relationship with their children. Transpeople are entitled to rights and responsibilities and obligations and freedoms just like everyone else; they are entitled to some extra help to overcome difficulties and problems; they and their allies are not entitled to say they can take over women’s spaces and if women object, well, those evil TERFs or whatever just need to sit down and shut up or roll over and die. I’ve been reading everything on here and all the links (I can’t believe I even looked at a Washington Times link) and I and most of the women I know fall in between monstro and YWTF. Transwomen are transwomen. I do believe there is a continuum between male and female and transpeople fall appropriately along that continuum but there is a space in it labeled “women” and transwomen don’t fall into it.
I am old enough to be the first “women” in some roles a couple of times in my life. And a lot of those people some are calling “fake feminists” made that possible. And a lot of the people fighting against us said we weren’t “real women” either.
They’re not inconsistencies or inaccuracies if you believe trans men are women. Based on my conversations with trans men, they would find that to be a highly offensive and denigrating sentiment, but you probably are already aware of that.
It is wrt a part of my criticism of what JKR said, but we’ve already been through that.
Convinced me of what? That trans men are women? That nothing JKR said should be criticized? That trans women are not women? No, I’m not convinced of those things.
I’m already convinced that death threats are wrong, and that not every trans activist (and cis woman trans ally) is always right. I’m already convinced that women are largely treated like shit by society (and so are trans people, which you hopefully already accept). I’m already convinced that there are special unique challenges and obstacles faced by cis women, and faced by others raised as girls. I’m already convinced that there are hordes of assholes on the internet who spend their time hounding women they disagree with, including those who advocate for and against trans rights.
It seems to me that, “There’s no such thing as a real woman,” is a pretty solid response to being told, “Real women don’t do that sort of thing.” I’m not really getting how you view those as complimentary sentiments - they seem diametrically opposed to me.