Fecking guts? Are you OK? Totally normal levels of anger there.
Anyway, I believe that if you have any critique of gender science or an opinion on the subject that doesn't land squarely within a very narrow groupthink, people start thinking you're a bigot.
It's symptomatic of online discourse in general but more so on this subject perhaps on any other.
The pattern I keep seeing is of a group that, at times, displays the negative gender traits of men; toxic discourse, aggression, speaking over people, shutting down debate, insults etc.
These traits that have been highlighted by feminism to try and educate men to check their behaviour when working with women for example.
Is this entirely true of an entire group of people or a specific gender? Of course not.
But when you bring this up, the conversation starts to resemble the "not all men" trope, i.e. the reaction to a critique of a gender or, a subject to do with gender identity, is taken to mean everyone in that group is being attacked, by people really just being reactionary.
I think my general malaise over this subject, through the lens of social media, is that there is pretty much zero nuance and it is utterly tribal. Insofar as to the fact most people take a point at face value because it was made by a person they agreed with on another subject.
I have had the reaction to this statement be something, like "Nuance?! We are talking about people's lives here and their lived experiences you terf!"
Outside of fringe groups of bigots or trolls or actual Nazi's I don't see people calling for the removal of trans people from that public life, nor their expulsion from society, or their extermination. Yet, when you enter into this discourse or raise a point, usually you are labelled as an agitator or a coward or a terf or a bigot who is enabling those fringe and rare views.
Do I believe transphobia exists? Yes. Unequivocally so.
Do I believe there are glaring inconsistencies with queer theory and the current ideas around gender? Absolutely.
Are women who raise concerns about the side effects of changing legislation which might enable dangerous men to have easier access to vulnerable women bigots? No.
Am I saying some people will use the above statement as cover to justify their existing transphobia? Yeah, I'd say some would.
Does this mean we should ignore the concerns of women, who are, let's not forget, a protected class of people? In my opinion no.
Should we seek to enable trans women to have the ultimate possible protections and civil liberties in society that we all should have? Unequivocally yes.
Should vulnerable transwomen be allowed to use the female restrooms and protected spaces? I believe so.
Should we remove all protections and allow anyone to enter a female only spaces? I think this idea increases risks and should be discussed.
How do we maintain safeguarding of women in their protected spaces while we enable the correct and needed protections and rights for transwomen? This will be a conundrum all the while men continue to be a threat to women.
What if women vote en mass that they don't want this, through fear men, will use this to gain access to women? Do we ignore them? Remove their right to vote? What do we do then?
There are fundamental questions on this subject that need to be discussed. At no point am I wanting to discuss the legitimacy of TW, nor do I want to deny them polite, caring, consistent societies that enable them to flourish and be who they are.
