The Trans Rights Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

It’s really not and while you’re right that it’s not literally every man, it is potentially any man so from a woman’s perspective, unless she knows you, then unfortunately you and I need to live with being tarred with that brush until all men sort themselves out.

I have two daughters and two sisters, as well as a wife. Their lives experiences are littered with predatory and unpleasant experiences of men, and that’s everything from being ignored at a garage or a DIY shop (amongst others), to having daily instances of men - strangers - making comments, wolf-whistling from cars or vans, being followed, being pestered on the bus or train, the list is almost endless.

It’s a million miles away from being anywhere near as dangerous as the oratory misogyny the author refers to.

---

Sorry, that is stereotyping. You know that not all women share those views, neither do all feminists. What you said about the experiences of women you know is sad, but it's anecdotal. My anecdotal view is that these behaviours are still present, but nowhere near as pervasive as they once were. I'm not keen on the "potentially any man" stuff either, whether the woman knows you or not.

When you say "oratory misogyny", you are probably referring to the transgender rights activists that, for example, are describing women's right to a single gender safe space ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Sorry, that is stereotyping. You know that not all women share those views, neither do all feminists. What you said about the experiences of women you know is sad, but it's anecdotal. My anecdotal view is that these behaviours are still present, but nowhere near as pervasive as they once were. I'm not keen on the "potentially any man" stuff either, whether the woman knows you or not.

When you say "oratory misogyny", you are probably referring to the transgender rights activists that, for example, are describing women's right to a single gender safe space ?

---

No. “Oratory” was my phone deciding I wanted that word instead of the word i typed, which was “predatory”.

With the greatest of respect, it’s irrelevant whether you’re keen on it or not, from women’s (and not every single woman because that would be a ridiculous statement) perspective, any man is a potential threat.

I was brought up with “never talk to strangers” - the strangers in question where never women. That’s not to say women aren’t capable, but you know, if a bad thing was going to happen to you there’s a massive difference in the chances of that bad thing happening to you at the hands of a man than at the hands of a female.

I doubt any of us would want to be considered a potential threat, but we are.


With regards to being anecdotal, of course they are, however i can extend those anecdotes to female friends, female colleagues, extended family. They’ve all experienced it.

It’s absolutely not stereotyping to say that as men, some women will find you you and I a threat on some level, now that could be completely contextual and it could be on a very small scale, but it’s true.

We teach our daughters to watch out for it from a young age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

No. “Oratory” was my phone deciding I wanted that word instead of the word i typed, which was “predatory”.

With the greatest of respect, it’s irrelevant whether you’re keen on it or not, from women’s (and not every single woman because that would be a ridiculous statement) perspective, any man is a potential threat.

I was brought up with “never talk to strangers” - the strangers in question where never women. That’s not to say women aren’t capable, but you know, if a bad thing was going to happen to you there’s a massive difference in the chances of that bad thing happening to you at the hands of a man than at the hands of a female.

I doubt any of us would want to be considered a potential threat, but we are.


With regards to being anecdotal, of course they are, however i can extend those anecdotes to female friends, female colleagues, extended family. They’ve all experienced it.

It’s absolutely not stereotyping to say that as men, some women will find you you and I a threat on some level, now that could be completely contextual and it could be on a very small scale, but it’s true.

We teach our daughters to watch out for it from a young age.

---

I don't think that an ultra feminist perspective on gender relationships and male abuse of power is the only valid opinion. A women's perspective of the world must be a very narrow and fearful one if they were all to view men (would that include, gay men, disabled men, transgender men ?) as a potential threat.

As a man, a woman can view me anyway they choose, but as a starting point to that perception, viewing me as a potential threat on the basis of my gender is straying into discriminatory cliché and stereotyping (along the lines of all men are potential rapists). It is also very disempowering and would seem to me to undermine all the progress we have made around gender and addressing male abuse of power. There has been an enormous shift in my lifetime. Yes, there are still pockets of male entitled stupidity, but it's being eroded.

It's a mixed up, muddled up, shook up world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

I don't think that an ultra feminist perspective on gender relationships and male abuse of power is the only valid opinion. A women's perspective of the world must be a very narrow and fearful one if they were all to view men (would that include, gay men, disabled men, transgender men ?) as a potential threat.

As a man, a woman can view me anyway they choose, but as a starting point to that perception, viewing me as a potential threat on the basis of my gender is straying into discriminatory cliché and stereotyping (along the lines of all men are potential rapists). It is also very disempowering and would seem to me to undermine all the progress we have made around gender and addressing male abuse of power. There has been an enormous shift in my lifetime. Yes, there are still pockets of male entitled stupidity, but it's being eroded.

---

How would a woman, for example, walking alone at night be able to differentiate between a gay man and a straight man who was walking behind or towards her?

Context is important as well, which i mentioned, It’s highly unlikely that if your first encounter with a woman is at a kid’s birthday party where you’re there with your wife and kid, and there are other families around, that she’ll find you a threat at all. Or at a job interview etc.

If her first encounter with you was on a secluded path, then it’s likely she’d be weary, or meeting you for a first date. That’s why a lot of women feel that they need to tell a friend where they’re going and who they’re meeting and agree to phone to let them know they’re ok.

It’s not your fault, it’s not her fault, but her experiences of men (other men) will have informed how she views you in that context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

I don't think that an ultra feminist perspective on gender relationships and male abuse of power is the only valid opinion. A women's perspective of the world must be a very narrow and fearful one if they were all to view men (would that include, gay men, disabled men, transgender men ?) as a potential threat.

As a man, a woman can view me anyway they choose, but as a starting point to that perception, viewing me as a potential threat on the basis of my gender is straying into discriminatory cliché and stereotyping (along the lines of all men are potential rapists). It is also very disempowering and would seem to me to undermine all the progress we have made around gender and addressing male abuse of power. There has been an enormous shift in my lifetime. Yes, there are still pockets of male entitled stupidity, but it's being eroded.

---

Just while it popped into my head, you asked about disabled men as well - without going into names because that’s not appropriate here, there was very recently a lot of focus on a disabled guy who was repeatedly using inappropriate sexually graphic language to girls on something like Tik Tok - it was something where they could pair up and chat to each other.

I’m clearly not saying that’s representative of all disabled people or of all girls’ experiences, but it’s another example of women having to be weary of men’s behaviour. There wasn’t anything to indicate this guy was a threat before the interaction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

How would a woman, for example, walking alone at night be able to differentiate between a gay man and a straight man who was walking behind or towards her?

Context is important as well, which i mentioned, It’s highly unlikely that if your first encounter with a woman is at a kid’s birthday party where you’re there with your wife and kid, and there are other families around, that she’ll find you a threat at all. Or at a job interview etc.

If her first encounter with you was on a secluded path, then it’s likely she’d be weary, or meeting you for a first date. That’s why a lot of women feel that they need to tell a friend where they’re going and who they’re meeting and agree to phone to let them know they’re ok.

It’s not your fault, it’s not her fault, but her experiences of men (other men) will have informed how she views you in that context.

---

Are our Wives, Partners, Mothers, Daughters and female friends really all living " a hellish daily experience" or "fighting and exhausting daily battle to keep themselves safe from men"?

It's not something that I identify with as based in reality for the women I know well. I suspect all women will have experienced casual sexism and misogyny, but is it really like a never ending battle for survival?

Maybe she could qualify the men part by calling them predatory or emotionally damaged men. What % of men have to indulge in sexist, misogynistic or threatening behaviours before we can reasonably just casually apply those descriptions to 50% of the human race?

We know that some people carry out atrocities in the name of religion, but we would never brand all adherents of a particular faith as terrorists just because some lunatic fringes carrying out appalling acts. On that basis is it OK to judge all men against the behaviours of some?

I think my objections to stereotyping still stand, particularly when the context whereby the writer is presenting a wider argument about discrimination and rights.

It's an interesting conversation, though provoking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

What % of men have to indulge in sexist, misogynistic or threatening behaviours before we can reasonably just casually apply those descriptions to 50% of the human race?

---

You're the only who thinks that is what is being said on this thread.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Are our Wives, Partners, Mothers, Daughters and female friends really all living " a hellish daily experience" or "fighting and exhausting daily battle to keep themselves safe from men"?

It's not something that I identify with as based in reality for the women I know well. I suspect all women will have experienced casual sexism and misogyny, but is it really like a never ending battle for survival?

Maybe she could qualify the men part by calling them predatory or emotionally damaged men. What % of men have to indulge in sexist, misogynistic or threatening behaviours before we can reasonably just casually apply those descriptions to 50% of the human race?

We know that some people carry out atrocities in the name of religion, but we would never brand all adherents of a particular faith as terrorists just because some lunatic fringes carrying out appalling acts. On that basis is it OK to judge all men against the behaviours of some?

I think my objections to stereotyping still stand, particularly when the context whereby the writer is presenting a wider argument about discrimination and rights.

It's an interesting conversation, though provoking.

---

Your first paragraph is spot on.

Some utterly ridiculous and quite frankly dangerous views on this thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Since90+2

Your first paragraph is spot on.

Some utterly ridiculous and quite frankly dangerous views on this thread.

---

Which views are dangerous?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

You're the only who thinks that is what is being said on this thread.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

---

Thanks for the insight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Thanks for the insight.

---

Is anyone else claiming this?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

Is anyone else claiming this?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

---

Claiming what? You may not have noticed, but it’s a discussion and people offer a view. I have contributed to this thread since it begun and the conversation has been wide ranging. That said, it’s not one that’s grabbing the same level of attention as , let’s say the Ukraine one. Therefore to say no one else shares my view is odd, when we n fact the only two contributors engaged in the discussion were Matty and I. If you have a view on trans rights or the wider issues of women and male abuse of power, let’s hear them. Otherwise, what’s the point of your posts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Claiming what? You may not have noticed, but it’s a discussion and people offer a view. I have contributed to this thread since it begun and the conversation has been wide ranging. That said, it’s not one that’s grabbing the same level of attention as , let’s say the Ukraine one. Therefore to say no one else shares my view is odd, when we n fact the only two contributors engaged in the discussion were Marty and I. If you have a view on trans rights or the wider issues of women and male abuse of power, let’s hear them. Otherwise, what’s the point of your posts?

---

Fair enough. Matty said..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

With the greatest of respect, it’s irrelevant whether you’re keen on it or not, from women’s (and not every single woman because that would be a ridiculous statement) perspective, any man is a potential threat.

---

I think that is quite right in certain circumstances even more so.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

Fair enough. Matty said..







I think that is quite right in certain circumstances even more so.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

---

“Are our Wives, Partners, Mothers, Daughters and female friends really all living " a hellish daily experience" or "fighting and exhausting daily battle to keep themselves safe from men"?

Do you really believe that describes day to day life for the average Scottish woman. No one is denying there is male abuse of power or that women may rightly perceive threat or feel anxiety with regard to men in certain circumstances.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

“Are our Wives, Partners, Mothers, Daughters and female friends really all living " a hellish daily experience" or "fighting and exhausting daily battle to keep themselves safe from men"?

Do you really believe that describes day to day life for the average Scottish woman. No one is denying there is male abuse of power or that women may rightly perceive threat or feel anxiety with regard to men in certain circumstances.

---

I doubt that's a daily experience for a lot of women but more than probably for some.

Where I think Matty is correct is where he says women should think of any man as a threat in certain circumstances. They aren't "stereotyping" anyone, they are just keeping on their toes in case the man walking towards them, say late at night, is a nutter.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kato

I doubt that's a daily experience for a lot of women but more than probably for some.

Where I think Matty is correct is where he says women should think of any man as a threat in certain circumstances. They aren't "stereotyping" anyone, they are just keeping on their toes in case the man walking towards them, say late at night, is a nutter.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

---

So, after actually reading what was said , it turns out that you share my views then :aok:

Matty introduced the bit about threat and circumstances, not me. No one denied that there are situations where women might feel frightened or intimidated, or that harassment and casual sexism and misogyny happen (perhaps more frequently than some men may care to acknowledge)

My point was that it was a gross exaggeration to say that women live a hellish experience or fight a daily battle to keep safe from men. The context was discussing an article about rights, discrimination and gender. I agreed with just about everything the writer said in respect of the self-assigned gender discussion, but found it bizarre that she introduced a few lines which to me stereotyped men and at the same time disempowered women.

Attitudes have shifted lots in my lifetime. When I was a boy (60's and 70's), a man could beat his wife and the Police weren’t interested, unless it amounted to GBH. Women weren’t paid equally and mainstream culture embraced male chauvinism. Things have moved on a bit since then, albeit there are still issues around equality, male privilege and discrimination.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

So, after actually reading what was said , it turns out that you share my views then :aok:

Matty introduced the bit about threat and circumstances, not me. No one denied that there are situations where women might feel frightened or intimidated, or that harassment and casual sexism and misogyny happen (perhaps more frequently than some men may care to acknowledge)

My point was that it was a gross exaggeration to say that women live a hellish experience or fight a daily battle to keep safe from men. The context was discussing an article about rights, discrimination and gender. I agreed with just about everything the writer said in respect of the self-assigned gender discussion, but found it bizarre that she introduced a few lines which to me stereotyped men and at the same time disempowered women.

Attitudes have shifted lots in my lifetime. When I was a boy (60's and 70's), a man could beat his wife and the Police weren’t interested, unless it amounted to GBH. Women weren’t paid equally and mainstream culture embraced male chauvinism. Things have moved on a bit since then, albeit there are still issues around equality, male privilege and discrimination.

---

FWIW, my point has never been about disempowering women. This is a male issue rather than a female one.

While I agree that there’s more than a touch of hyperbole being used by the author, I don’t think it’s in any way unreasonable to suggest that women have to consider the behaviour of men in every day life- irrespective of whether or not that behaviour materialises on any given day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

FWIW, my point has never been about disempowering women. This is a male issue rather than a female one.

While I agree that there’s more than a touch of hyperbole being used by the author, I don’t think it’s in any way unreasonable to suggest that women have to consider the behaviour of men in every day life- irrespective of whether or not that behaviour materialises on any given day.

---

No, I'm talking disempowerment and the authors views. Disempowering and divisive, in terms of recognising the progress of women's movement. Not just disempowering for women There are many men who support the women's rights and without their input and support, it would surely be a lost cause.

Without wishing to deflect too much from the Trans Rights discussion, ultra feminist views are not necessarily representative of the whole feminist movement. Many recognise the importance of inclusivity and recognition of how men also suffer under the Patriarchy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

No, I'm talking disempowerment and the authors views. Disempowering and divisive, in terms of recognising the progress of women's movement. Not just disempowering for women There are many men who support the women's rights and without their input and support, it would surely be a lost cause.

Without wishing to deflect too much from the Trans Rights discussion, ultra feminist views are not necessarily representative of the whole feminist movement. Many recognise the importance of inclusivity and recognition of how men also suffer under the Patriarchy.

---

The points aren’t mutually exclusive though.

I’m not sure that the author is talking down the progress of the women’s movement by highlighting that women still have to deal with a load of unnecessary crap from men but the trans issue itself potential undermines that progress.

I’m not even sure I’d agree that acknowledging women have to make regular adjustments or considerations to allow for men’s behaviours is a particularly feminist view.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

I’m not even sure I’d agree that acknowledging women have to make regular adjustments or considerations to allow for men’s behaviours is a particularly feminist view.

---

It’s a truism. Obvious to anyone that cares to look.

Women constantly have to review their choices to account for their safety.

It’s oppressive……and that’s without even getting to the issue about their voices being shut down when they raise such issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by matty_f

The points aren’t mutually exclusive though.

I’m not sure that the author is talking down the progress of the women’s movement by highlighting that women still have to deal with a load of unnecessary crap from men but the trans issue itself potential undermines that progress.

I’m not even sure I’d agree that acknowledging women have to make regular adjustments or considerations to allow for men’s behaviours is a particularly feminist view.

---

Yes, women deal with lots of unnecessary crap, but it’s still not equating to a daily battle to keep safe or hellish experience, which was my point to begin with. TBF, you did, eventually, acknowledge that that statement was unhelpful hyperbole.

Earlier, I made the point that it’s not only women who have a stake in voicing an opinion on the trans rights- gender self identification question. Men are invested in this too, yet the main voices in the debate seem very polarised and to come mostly from women or men that self identify as women. Why is that that?

I also said that ultra feminist dogma ( is it really necessary to launch a hand grenade castigating and scapegoating all men when discussing the erosion of women’s rights through the proposed legislation?) is divisive. My belief is that these kind of views aren’t necessarily representative of women in general ( or even feminists in general).

So, now that we all agree that women can still be subject to male harassment, casual misogyny, discrimination in the work place, bullying in the home, can we move on to why we are having a legislative based approach to promoting gender self-identification from the Scottish government? I would also be interested to hear people’s views on why there are so few male voices being heard in the debate?

The Bill is being tabled in Parliament today.

It seems that only the Tories, as a party, are against reforms.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-60589578

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

The Bill is being tabled in Parliament today.

It seems that only the Tories, as a party, are against reforms.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-60589578

---

Seems like that on here as well. [emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainm...cid=entnewsntp

This is where we are heading.

"Kate Grimes, who has a history of transforming troubled hospitals, was told not to waste her time applying for the Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust as her belief in biological sex was “not a viewpoint” they want.
The Tavistock has now been accused of breaking equality law by discriminating against those with gender-critical beliefs, just months after the appeal court ruled it was protected under the Equality Act".

In a letter to the Health Secretary, Ms Grimes said that the trust was “exacerbating its governance failures – and breaking the law – by refusing to interview anyone who believes biological sex cannot be changed”.

Excluding those with gender-critical beliefs created “a very significant danger of skewed thinking” and if it was applied across the trust then it would be “indoctrination at an organisational level”, she said. Ms Grimes told the Telegraph that patient safety was at risk if “clinicians are working from a belief system rather than evidence-based care”.

She said that it was “perfectly possible to support and care for children with gender dysphoria without believing it is literally possible to change biological sex”.

“I believe that there are only two sexes and that sex is immutable. While I fully respect trans people’s right to live their lives free from discrimination, I do not believe that they can literally change sex”, she wrote.

In the reply, seen by this newspaper and sent to Mr Javid, she was told not to waste time applying as “your views on sex being immutable is not a viewpoint that the trust would wish any of their non-executives to hold”.

The senior consultant added that it would be “one of the questions I will be asking candidates at first stage interview”.

Peter Daly, an employment lawyer at Doyle Clayton who acted in the recent appeal in which it was clarified that gender-critical beliefs are a protected, said: “The belief that sex is immutable is a central aspect of those beliefs.

“An employer which refuses to employ somebody because they hold gender critical beliefs is acting unlawfully in precisely the same way as it would be unlawful to refuse to employ someone because of their age, race, sex, disability or gender reassignment status.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertainm...cid=entnewsntp

This is where we are heading.

---

Well done to the trust!

You can't employ someone who doesn't believe in the work that you do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Well done to the trust!

You can't employ someone who doesn't believe in the work that you do.

---

I don't think you read the article. It has nothing to do with the work she would be carrying out there. It's based on an over-arching and potentially discriminatory trust policy. So, if you don't think "correctly", we won't employ you.
Do we really need questionnaires pre -employment to establish your beliefs, particularly when your work isn't actually relevant to gender self identity issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

I don't think you read the article. It has nothing to do with the work she would be carrying out there. It's based on an over-arching and potentially discriminatory trust policy. So, if you don't think "correctly", we won't employ you.
Do we really need questionnaires pre -employment to establish your beliefs, particularly when your work isn't actually relevant to gender self identity issues.

---

Firstly, I replied before you posted the full article, as it was behind a paywall and could only read the first couple of paragraphs.


Second, I stand by what I said. If you want to head up a hospital trust which is helping the traumatic transition for transgender people then you surely have to believe in what they do.

FWIW, I know someone in Fife who moved to Scotland from the south of England for an easier transition from female to male. Something that has been forgotten about in the thread is transgender transition works both ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

Firstly, I replied before you posted the full article, as it was behind a paywall and could only read the first couple of paragraphs.
Second, I stand by what I said. If you want to head up a hospital trust which is helping the traumatic transition for transgender people then you surely have to believe in what they do.

FWIW, I know someone in Fife who moved to Scotland from the south of England for an easier transition from female to male. Something that has been forgotten about in the thread is transgender transition works both ways.

---

Yes, the NHS trust in question has a national gender identity clinic, amongst the many other things it offers.

For a Chairperson and non executive directors posts, and extending that rationale, would beliefs need questioned on a whole range of other social issues too, or is only views on gender and biological determinism that matter (she has never said she opposes transitioning, just that she believes there are only two genders)?

Would we extend the questionnaire to, let's say someone's beliefs on termination if trust offered abortions from one of their clinics? (which they will do). IF she was applying to run the gender identity clinic, I can understand that her beliefs might be seen as being in conflict, that could never happen though........

Interestingly, the thing that piqued my interest in the whole issue was the appointment of a man, who self identifies as a woman, to the role as CEO of the Rape Crisis Centre in Edinburgh. He has since gone onto to publicly criticise people who publicly oppose his appointment (women-not just her from The Brodies Trust) using some very inflammatory language.

That's the crux of this whole discussion. Whose rights prevail and why some rights seem to be more righteous than others.

FWIW, I also have a family member who has successfully transitioned, through surgery and medication. I'm all for adults having the right to be considered for this kind of treatment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Yes, the NHS trust in question has a national gender identity clinic, amongst the many other things it offers.

For a Chairperson and non executive directors posts, and extending that rationale, would beliefs need questioned on a whole range of other social issues too, or is only views on gender and biological determinism that matter (she has never said she opposes transitioning, just that she believes there are only two genders)?

Would we extend the questionnaire to, let's say someone's beliefs on termination if trust offered abortions from one of their clinics? (which they will do). IF she was applying to run the gender identity clinic, I can understand that her beliefs might be seen as being in conflict, that could never happen though........

Interestingly, the thing that piqued my interest in the whole issue was the appointment of a man, who self identifies as a woman, to the role as CEO of the Rape Crisis Centre in Edinburgh. He has since gone onto to publicly criticise people who publicly oppose his appointment (women-not just her from The Brodies Trust) using some very inflammatory language.

That's the crux of this whole discussion. Whose rights prevail and why some rights seem to be more righteous than others.

FWIW, I also have a family member who has successfully transitioned, through surgery and medication. I'm all for adults having the right to be considered for this kind of treatment.

---

A CEO wouldn’t really be working with victims so it shouldn’t really matter, no?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk