Gender Discussions #3

[2020two]

What @judgejohndeed said (I always agree witch you ) am a university lecturer and the mark scheme shouldn't say that if it's not necessary! Can't believe any academic would be asking students to out their gender like this anyway. I would be asking why it's on the mark scheme and for an updated version without the pronoun BS so it can't be held against you later!

 

[Aquamarina]

Thanks. I really appreciate it.

But I wasn’t surprised. Hate directed at gender critical women is socially acceptable... encouraged even, isn’t it? Doesn’t matter if the hate comes from other women because they’re ignorant about what we’re facing here - the most important thing is to virtual signal

I actually forgot myself in that thread and said too much. I should have known it was a bad idea to take my opinions outside of a safe space like this thread.

I am a regular poster on the JM thread and I never discuss my GC views, as they all seem very anti any criticism of trans issues there.

Like you say, it’s safest to keep stuff like this here or on the JK Rowling thread. It makes me so sad and angry that women discussing their own rights and spaces are made to feel like this. But thankfully, decisions like the one made in the High Court yesterday convince me even more that we are on the right side of history.
One day (hopefully very soon) people will look back at all of this trans nonsense and wonder why we allowed this very tiny minority to have so much influence and power. It disturbs me that so many women are supportive of what is essentially a men’s rights movement that seeks to shut down and erase actual women.

 

[Vee6]

From The Times

 

[HockyRorror]

From The Times

I would actually feel sorry for SG for basically having to face the fact that she took her own child to be butchered but she has done so damage to others it’s hard to. My only hope is that her child genuinely lives a happy life.

 

[witchofwestbyfleet]

She doesn't see it as butchering her own child, that's exactly it

 

[HockyRorror]

She doesn't see it as butchering her own child, that's exactly it

True, but if she has to face facts one day, especially if her child turns resentful...that is going to be extremely hard to face and something I wouldn’t wish on my worst enemy.

 

[Vee6]

I can’t feel sorry for her. She’s pushed and pushed for affirmation only treatment, she weaponises suicide, starts defensive and never chances her script, showed not a speck of empathy towards Keira on news night, she’s had a hell of a lot of power for a long time!

I can’t imagine that she will get through the rest of her life without having to face up to what she did to her own child and numerous other people’s children. Can’t come soon enough

 

[SqualorVictoria]

From The Times

Do you know who wrote this?

 

[Begborrowsteal]

I am a regular poster on the JM thread and I never discuss my GC views, as they all seem very anti any criticism of trans issues there.

Like you say, it’s safest to keep stuff like this here or on the JK Rowling thread. It makes me so sad and angry that women discussing their own rights and spaces are made to feel like this. But thankfully, decisions like the one made in the High Court yesterday convince me even more that we are on the right side of history.
One day (hopefully very soon) people will look back at all of this trans nonsense and wonder why we allowed this very tiny minority to have so much influence and power. It disturbs me that so many women are supportive of what is essentially a men’s rights movement that seeks to shut down and erase actual women.

I check in here every so often. I cant articulate my opinion on gender issues well enough, but i scroll through and agree and disagree with lots of comments. Ive directed gender stuff from other threads to here purely because it can be so emotive and it can then spiral and take over a thread. I cant speak for anyone else over on JM, but personally its such a big topic, its right that it has a bigger space rather than snippets dropped in every so often iykwim?

 

[mindlessness]

I check in here every so often. I cant articulate my opinion on gender issues well enough, but i scroll through and agree and disagree with lots of comments. Ive directed gender stuff from other threads to here purely because it can be so emotive and it can then spiral and take over a thread. I cant speak for anyone else over on JM, but personally its such a big topic, its right that it has a bigger space rather than snippets dropped in every so often iykwim?

Please do comment if you want to as I am sure you have interesting points to add to the discussion. I know I definitely can't always full articulate my thoughts fully in real life, and find this thread helpful for parsing things out.

I would argue its not helpful to only have discussion on gender and surrounding issues in one thread too. It's relevant to discussion of beauty and fashion influencers for instance and the role they play in selling idealised versions of femininity to the general public etc. I agree its hard when it gets argumentative and spirals into off-topic land.

 

[holliebollie]

I love the JM thread but when you see a blunt “There’s a gender discussions thread for that” type comment it can feel a bit dismissive. Her attitudes to race and disability and how she basically sets up camp in ANY oppressed group is discussed in great detail but any mention of her ‘I’m trans/not trans/NB/duck it I’m a woman’ stance is shot down immediately. It’s probably because most people on there seem to be educated, middle class, left leaning peeps who would hate to feel like they’re being ‘transphobic’ by discussing it... that’s just how things are at the moment.

I’ve felt bad all afternoon thinking about the whole pronouns thing from earlier, wondering if I’m being non-inclusive etc by not saying mine and will that make a person who is trans feel like they can’t talk openly, and worried the person I emailed will discuss it and say, ‘oh she’s being a bit TERF-y’ when that wasn’t my intention at all. But will it get to a point where any interaction needs a pronoun to ensure the 0.01% of NB people (I don’t know the actual figure but assume it’s low) feel okay using they/them? Will medical staff have to say, “Hi, I’m Dr Jones, I use she/her pronouns” with every patient? Or a solicitor who will see a client for a while?

As suggested (thank you) I will ask for the pronouns bit to be moved if it doesn’t have to be on there to get full marks. Or at least an asterisk next to it saying ‘your CHOICE’. Choice, you know, a thing we encourage so that people feel comfortable

 

[SqualorVictoria]

Don't feel bad about pronouns! Came across this earlier

Pronouns are Rohypnol • Fair Play For Women

There’s a lot of chat around about pronouns right now. Specifically, ‘preferred’ pronouns. By which is usually meant, the pronouns a person would prefer.

fairplayforwomen.com

 

[emmer_moans]

.

Don't feel bad about pronouns! Came across this earlier

Pronouns are Rohypnol • Fair Play For Women

There’s a lot of chat around about pronouns right now. Specifically, ‘preferred’ pronouns. By which is usually meant, the pronouns a person would prefer.

fairplayforwomen.com

Interesting on the linguistic and cognitive side of things. I mean, I will still try to use pronouns for people if asked, but definitely not for myself.

 

[HockyRorror]

.

Interesting on the linguistic and cognitive side of things. I mean, I will still try to use pronouns for people if asked, but definitely not for myself.

I think of pronouns like nicknames. If someone tells me their name but tells me they prefer to go by their nickname, I’ll use it if that’s what they prefer. I don’t have a nickname and am not fond of my name being shortened but if it happens, it happens I would NOT expect to be screamed at and called hateful and bigoted if I called someone by their name rather than nickname so a little “two way street” should (but isn’t) be applied with pronouns really, even more so, as if you meet someone and they give you a nickname, it’s stored into your memory whereas pronouns can mean disregarding a lifetimes worth of social reaction where our brains have been wired to differentiate between man and woman, his and hers

 

[mcfeez]

Well it didn’t matter really. And I didn’t say it was unbelievable that a transwoman could be a secretary. I guess it’s simply indicative of women losing out on acting roles because a series will score points for casting a trans woman.

In my opinion no one should get "points" for casting such a minor part. But how is a woman missing out on an acting role when they cast a trans actress instead - the gender of the person doesn't sound remotely relevant to the part.

 

[Vee6]

Do you know who wrote this?

Janice Turner I believe

Please do comment if you want to as I am sure you have interesting points to add to the discussion. I know I definitely can't always full articulate my thoughts fully in real life, and find this thread helpful for parsing things out.

I would argue its not helpful to only have discussion on gender and surrounding issues in one thread too. It's relevant to discussion of beauty and fashion influencers for instance and the role they play in selling idealised versions of femininity to the general public etc. I agree its hard when it gets argumentative and spirals into off-topic land.

I don’t think it ever gets argumentative here. It used to but not for the last few months

 

[Zenchick101]

In my opinion no one should get "points" for casting such a minor part. But how is a woman missing out on an acting role when they cast a trans actress instead - the gender of the person doesn't sound remotely relevant to the part.

It did distract me for a bit because having a trans woman in a woman's role in the 60's is unrealistic, like casting a POC as european royalty in a historical movie, or portraying a happy go lucky gay couple in the 50's where no one bats an eye.

As for women loosing out on roles? well the casting breakdown would be something like - woman, age range, plays x character, no specific ethnicity = having trans women applying for that role creates twice as much applicants, so the demand increases but the supply doesn't. Also in the mind of the casting director? "it's a small part so we can take this opportunity to show we're inclusive while not putting off a majority of the population"

 

[Icing _on_ the_cake]

I'm from the JM thread and have been browsing since the Keira Bell announcement a few days ago.

For me, I think there are genuine trans people for whom transitioning is the best option for them to lead a happy life. I want these people to have equal rights and to be supported. However, what we don't want is people who are merely non-conforming to gender stereotypes to end up going through this difficult medical journey if it's ultimately not the right thing. I also don't think it's helpful for people for whom transition is right to have the waiting lists blocked up by people for whom it's not right. I don't think it's helpful either for trans people, if in 5-10 years there's a spate of detransitions. That's just a gift to the right-wing and the anti-LGBT+ lobby.

Similarly, it's not good for trans people when people like JM jump on the 'I'm trans' bandwagon for 6 months.

I find the Susie Green story interesting. I wonder how their child would have grown up if the parents hadn't freaked out about the toys. It feels like to me that by the age of 2/3 their child learned from them that that they couldn't be a boy and be themselves. I wonder what would have happened if the parents had just been normal about it.

I know Mermaids now say that toy choices are not indicative of gender, but then Susie's entire story is founded on toy choices.

 

[judgejohndeed]

It feels like to me that by the age of 2/3 their child learned from them that that they couldn't be a boy and be themselves. I wonder what would have happened if the parents had just been normal about it.

There was discussion along this line in the Bell case. It was commented at one point that giving kids PBs it just to ‘delay the decision’ and if they want to go full medical transition later it’s easier because they haven’t gone through puberty.
But the judge responded that in that case the child also has no experience at all of living in their body having gone through puberty so how can they know they want to reject it? If we are told all the time ‘not all these people will transition’ how can it be informed at all by experience of what their body would be like without PBs?
I would say giving PBs surely is a huge affirmative action because let’s be real - if you’re a teenager who hasn’t gone through puberty, you’re going to probably be desperate for some normality. And if that means staying on the medical pathway to transition, so be it.
In the same vein as what you’ve just said it worries me a lot that a lot of this trans treatment and stuff seems ‘preventative’ e.g. we must stop puberty here because they might be trans later when actually...they might not. Children go through phases all the time. How many would not be trans later on we don’t know if they keep getting PBs. A lot of this action is just too early and preventative where possibly not needed IMO.

 

[mcfeez]

It did distract me for a bit because having a trans woman in a woman's role in the 60's is unrealistic, like casting a POC as european royalty in a historical movie, or portraying a happy go lucky gay couple in the 50's where no one bats an eye.

As for women loosing out on roles? well the casting breakdown would be something like - woman, age range, plays x character, no specific ethnicity = having trans women applying for that role creates twice as much applicants, so the demand increases but the supply doesn't. Also in the mind of the casting director? "it's a small part so we can take this opportunity to show we're inclusive while not putting off a majority of the population"

Oh sorry I was referring to the Jessica Jones assistant role. Not the Queens Gambit one.