The "I just don't get it thread".

[Bruce Rioja]

But ELO without Jeff Lynne can't ever be ELO!

[Gary the Enfield]

Bloody Expensive ELO too.

[Prufrock]

Yeah, there's some disagreement over that point. I think the problem is if you subscribe to the idea that gender is in the mind than you're presumably subscribing to the idea of male vs female brains, which the Daily Mail might agree with but neuroscientists less so.

I get that with such deeply entrenched ideas of gender roles there's going to be large swathes of people who don't feel as though they fit the stereotype of their gender, but as more and more genders get added it would almost suggest that 'gender' is different for everyone and what in fact is happening is that gender is getting conflated with personality.

Should people suffering from gender dysphoria get the support to transition? I don't see why not, but you're on shaky ground if you think gender is exclusively in the mind. What if I wake up feeling a bit woman-y but want to keep my penis - and I'm not being facetious (Gender Fluid- someone whose gender identity and presentation are not confined to only one gender category. Gender fluid people may have dynamic or fluctuating understandings of their gender, moving between categories as feels right. For example, a gender fluid person might feel more like a man one day and more like a woman on another day, or that neither term is a good fit.), would women feel comfortable if I were to use their changing room at the gym? Should they be called bigots if they aren't? And isn't the idea of male feelings and female feelings promoting ideas of inequality rather than equality?

There is, quite understandably, a tendency to be as right on as possible and think 'yeah, good on the type 1 bipedal androgyqueers' (ok, I did make that one up) but I don't think it's as clear cut as say a position on gay marriage might be.

This is about where I am I think.

I get the argument that gender and sex are distinct but often unfortunately conflated. Sex is arbitrary and decided by whether you you have the XX or XY sex chromosomes which in almost all cases decides what junk you get. Gender is not linked to your junk. There are plenty people who are born with one set of junk but don't feel like they fit in the stereotypical boxes society has for those roles. I'm with it quite happily so far.

Where I get lost is when we get to gender "correction" surgery for people who don't identify with the gender they were "assingned" at birth. Now, "correction" demands a mistake, and an assignation demands an agent. I can't fathom an argument that says X "should" have been born with the chromosomes to get different junk. It's chance. I don't get why the argument is that people who don't identify with the gender they get at birth (the one society assigns them due to their sex, which no-one assigns them) should have surgery to attempt to physically alter their sex, rather the argument be that society needs to stop being a d*ck and start being OK with boys who like ballet or women who don't like make-up! I appreciate that last sentence is glib, but it illustrates the point.

I am hesitant in all of the above though. Like bish I have a wariness in these situations. I've just slagged the left off on another thread, but it absolutely won the social wars of the 20th century and there's always a sneaking suspicion that like with gay rights etc they might be onto something. I've tried to find out though! I've asked as many people of the Corbyn-y sort who are into all this why the answer is surgery not social change and I've yet to get an answer. When Germaine Greer got in trouble a few weeks ago the main "rebuttal argument" to her that went "viral" was this. This is the only attempt in that article to address Greer's actual point,

"If you believe that trans women are women, as you should because they are, then what Germaine Greer is espousing in her campaign against them is misogyny and surely no feminism should include any form of misogyny."

That's not an argument.

TBF, there are lots of other arguments that go with trans issues that I do completely understand, ones around clothing, and language particularly. But yeah, the surgery thing still leaves me baffled.

[thebish]

it could be very simply that people are not patient enough to wait for society to change its attitudes. and if - consequently and not unreasonably - a gender disphoric person believes that isn't going to happen in their lifetime - then can you or i really blame them for not wanting to spend their entire life being vilified/persecuted by said societal change not happening?

I think I am not entirely sure that the NHS can always afford such kinds of surgery - which to me falls on the same kind of not-immediately-obviously-helathcare spectrum as boob jobs, tattoo removal, and (yes) in vitro fertilization... if the NHS needs prioritisation - then those are the kinds of things that would fall of any list I had to construct fairly early on...

also - you admitted your sentence was glib - but transgender and gender disphoria are not the same as transvestite...

[Bruce Rioja]

Bloody Expensive ELO too.

And today's Spotty's Little Known Fact is that Bill Hunt (horns & keyboards in ELO) is the uncle of Miles Hunt, lead singer of The Wonderstuff.

Anyroad, summat else I don't get - I was listening to Woman's Hour on R4 on Monday (don't knock it 'til you've tried it ) and the presenter (I think it was Victoria Derbyshire) was banging on about how she's a committed feminist. Now then, if a bloke was on and he claimed to be something of a misogynist he'd have all Hell to pay, so how does that work then?

A while ago I was listening to it and a small gaggle of women were in the studio, same programme, giggling as they discussed sex toys with one of them saying "Soon we'll be able to do without men altogether". Again, if that was blokes discussing blow-up dolls, say, I dare say that it would've been deemed inappropriate.

[thebish]

Anyroad, summat else I don't get - I was listening to Woman's Hour on R4 on Monday (don't knock it 'til you've tried it ) and the presenter (I think it was Victoria Derbyshire) was banging on about how she's a committed feminist. Now then, if a bloke was on and he claimed to be something of a misogynist he'd have all Hell to pay, so how does that work then?

is "misogynist" really the male equivalent of "feminist"??

there is, apparently, such a thing as masculism and an extremist version of masculism called "virism"! masculism has its own wiki page - so it must be a thing!

[Prufrock]

it could be very simply that people are not patient enough to wait for society to change its attitudes. and if - consequently and not unreasonably - a gender disphoric person believes that isn't going to happen in their lifetime - then can you or i really blame them for not wanting to spend their entire life being vilified/persecuted by said societal change not happening?

I think I am not entirely sure that the NHS can always afford such kinds of surgery - which to me falls on the same kind of not-immediately-obviously-helathcare spectrum as boob jobs, tattoo removal, and (yes) in vitro fertilization... if the NHS needs prioritisation - then those are the kinds of things that would fall of any list I had to construct fairly early on...

also - you admitted your sentence was glib - but transgender and gender disphoria are not the same as transvestite...

I get that for those people (though I'm entirely sure having a sex change frees you from vilification/persecution!). I wouldn't have the surgery on the NHS, but I wouldn't want to try to "ban" it either, as with those other types mentioned.

It's not the actions of the trans people themselves, it's the focus of all the pressure groups whose target very much seems to be on encouraging steps for trans people to fit more easily into the box they feel they should be in, rather than getting rid of the boxes all together.

[thebish]

it could be very simply that people are not patient enough to wait for society to change its attitudes. and if - consequently and not unreasonably - a gender disphoric person believes that isn't going to happen in their lifetime - then can you or i really blame them for not wanting to spend their entire life being vilified/persecuted by said societal change not happening?

I think I am not entirely sure that the NHS can always afford such kinds of surgery - which to me falls on the same kind of not-immediately-obviously-helathcare spectrum as boob jobs, tattoo removal, and (yes) in vitro fertilization... if the NHS needs prioritisation - then those are the kinds of things that would fall of any list I had to construct fairly early on...

also - you admitted your sentence was glib - but transgender and gender disphoria are not the same as transvestite...

I get that for those people (though I'm entirely sure having a sex change frees you from vilification/persecution!). I wouldn't have the surgery on the NHS, but I wouldn't want to try to "ban" it either, as with those other types mentioned.

It's not the actions of the trans people themselves, it's the focus of all the pressure groups whose target very much seems to be on encouraging steps for trans people to fit more easily into the box they feel they should be in, rather than getting rid of the boxes all together.

how would you get rid of the boxes altogether?

[Prufrock]

Bloody Expensive ELO too.

And today's Spotty's Little Known Fact is that Bill Hunt (horns & keyboards in ELO) is the uncle of Miles Hunt, lead singer of The Wonderstuff.

Anyroad, summat else I don't get - I was listening to Woman's Hour on R4 on Monday (don't knock it 'til you've tried it ) and the presenter (I think it was Victoria Derbyshire) was banging on about how she's a committed feminist. Now then, if a bloke was on and he claimed to be something of a misogynist he'd have all Hell to pay, so how does that work then?

A while ago I was listening to it and a small gaggle of women were in the studio, same programme, giggling as they discussed sex toys with one of them saying "Soon we'll be able to do without men altogether". Again, if that was blokes discussing blow-up dolls, say, I dare say that it would've been deemed inappropriate.

Feminism isn't the opposite of misogyny! (That would be misandry).

There was a flowchart knocking around Facebook a while back that helped you find out in two easy steps whether you are a feminist. Something like:

Q1 "Do you think all human beings should have equal rights and opportunities?" (Yes - go to Q2; No - You're a nob!)

Q2 "Do you think women are human beings?" (Yes - You're a feminist; No - you're weird).

[thebish]

further to what bruce wrote...

I think there is a mens hour equivalent to woman's hour now - or there was recently!

what would be the topics of masculist protest?

not too difficult to imagine... (except we don't bang on about mens issues as much as women bang on about women's issues! maybe they have more time on their hands? )

masculinist issues..

1) the idea that the education suits girls better - not well suited to boys - girls get better grades (saying it's cos they are cleverererer is sexist!)
2) cancers that affect men - nothing LIKE the massive national screening programmes for cancers that affect women...
3) more men commit suicide
4) custody issues
5) adverts that think it is very funny if men are depicted as stupid (like blondes)
6) hugely greater percentage of men killed in the workplace - cos men to more dangerous jobs
7) we make men do most of the dangerous fighting in wars! unfair!
men always have to put the bins out
9) the utter pain of having to shave every day

man the barricades!!! burn your... errrr..... jockstraps???

[Prufrock]

it could be very simply that people are not patient enough to wait for society to change its attitudes. and if - consequently and not unreasonably - a gender disphoric person believes that isn't going to happen in their lifetime - then can you or i really blame them for not wanting to spend their entire life being vilified/persecuted by said societal change not happening?

I think I am not entirely sure that the NHS can always afford such kinds of surgery - which to me falls on the same kind of not-immediately-obviously-helathcare spectrum as boob jobs, tattoo removal, and (yes) in vitro fertilization... if the NHS needs prioritisation - then those are the kinds of things that would fall of any list I had to construct fairly early on...

also - you admitted your sentence was glib - but transgender and gender disphoria are not the same as transvestite...

I get that for those people (though I'm entirely sure having a sex change frees you from vilification/persecution!). I wouldn't have the surgery on the NHS, but I wouldn't want to try to "ban" it either, as with those other types mentioned.

It's not the actions of the trans people themselves, it's the focus of all the pressure groups whose target very much seems to be on encouraging steps for trans people to fit more easily into the box they feel they should be in, rather than getting rid of the boxes all together.

how would you get rid of the boxes altogether?

I'm not sure I can write a fag-packet manifesto on how. But generally. Stop basing our expectations of people on the combination of their sex chromosomes. As an example of the interesting linguistic elements I was talking about, I quite like the arguments put forward about pronouns. On the one hand "Mx." does look and sound quite wanky, but I can't actually think of an argument against it. The distinctions we have seem pretty useless. Why on earth, for example, is my sex on my passport. There's an actual photograph on me, and with the new ones an iris thing and whatever (you may guess that I don't have one yet. Civil liberties and that.). What does that "M" acheive.

So yeah, get rid of the male/female option on passports. That's my plan.

I'm sure it'll be tough and take time, but encouraging half of gay men to have sex change so that society would be cool wasn't the answer to homophobia.

[thebish]

^ your final analogy is very odd indeed! how would it help a gay man to have a sex change?

as for the passport idea - yep - that should do it!

[bobo the clown]

^ your final analogy is very odd indeed! how would it help a gay man to have a sex change?

Well it'd just be STUPID to have them ALL have a sex change, now wouldn't it !?

[thebish]

^ your final analogy is very odd indeed! how would it help a gay man to have a sex change?

Well it'd just be STUPID to have them ALL have a sex change, now wouldn't it !?

any percentage would be stupid. Pru appears to be imagining that gay men want to be women and/or to marry/have sex with a woman...

[thebish]

I'm sure it'll be tough and take time, but encouraging half of gay men to have sex change so that society would be cool wasn't the answer to homophobia.

nor was not writing "gay" on the passport!

[bobo the clown]

^ your final analogy is very odd indeed! how would it help a gay man to have a sex change?

Well it'd just be STUPID to have them ALL have a sex change, now wouldn't it !?

any percentage would be stupid. Pru appears to be imagining that gay men want to be women and/or to marry/have sex with a woman...

... if gay men had a sex change and THEN wanted to have sex with women then I think they'd just be being awkward tbh.

... & I'd jolly well tell them so !

[thebish]

^ your final analogy is very odd indeed! how would it help a gay man to have a sex change?

Well it'd just be STUPID to have them ALL have a sex change, now wouldn't it !?

any percentage would be stupid. Pru appears to be imagining that gay men want to be women and/or to marry/have sex with a woman...

... if gay men had a sex change and THEN wanted to have sex with women then I think they'd just be being awkward tbh.

... & I'd jolly well tell them so !

indeed - which is why the analogy is VERY odd, as I said!

[Prufrock]

^ your final analogy is very odd indeed! how would it help a gay man to have a sex change?

as for the passport idea - yep - that should do it!

it could be very simply that people are not patient enough to wait for society to change its attitudes. and if - consequently and not unreasonably - a gender disphoric person believes that isn't going to happen in their lifetime - then can you or i really blame them for not wanting to spend their entire life being vilified/persecuted by said societal change not happening?

Unless I've misunderstood (I'm not ruling it out!) the argument above is that, for example, a man who identifies as a a woman might have re-assignment surgery in order to avoid persecution as society would be OK with them if they physically resembled what our social norms expect them to. We're not OK with men who think and behave in that way, but we are with women, so if this male just has a huge amount of surgery, hormones and lord knows what accompanying stress, we'll all be cool with the fact he didn't fit in the "man" box.

Well no-one would make the argument for half of gay couples to have sex change so that they then resembled a straight couple (as social norms would expect them to) and so hope to avoid persecution. We're not OK with man-man relationships, so you just have this huge amount of surgery, hormones and lord knows what accompanying stress, we'll all be cool with it because we can deal with man-woman relationships.

I'm not saying they're the same argument, but that they are wrong for the same reason: neither actually adresses the social root of the problem.

What I don't get about the "if you accept that trans women are women, which you should because they are" is that it too doesn't seem to know if it's talking about sex or gender.

If it's sex they mean by "women", then no, trans women are not women, they don't have the chromosomes. That seems an indisputable, but also minor point. Sex should be irrelevant.

On the other hand, if it's gender, then fine, they are women (though "women" seems an unhelpful label given its close ties with the above-mentioned-but-irrelevant sex) but then surgery to "correct" their sexual organs is therefore irrelevant too (albeit, you the reasons you've mentioned I can see why it might look like an answer). I'm not criticising the emotional reactions of people who feel they don't "fit in". I'm criticising the logic of the social movement that goes with.

[thebish]

I don't think people with gender disphoria generally want a sex change in order to make them more acceptable to society... the accounts I have heard are more about people feeling like aliens inside a body they cannot "own" - whatever that means... they are wanting/doing it for their own peace... even if your passport ruse worked and nobody had an issue with transgender people - many of them would STILL (I think) want to inhabit a body they felt comfortable with - and for many of them that involves surgery.

I don't think your homosexuality analogy or comparison is helpful at all! if I had to reach for an analogy - and i don't see why we have to - it is simpler just to talk about the thing itself, surely? - then the closest thing i can think of is the phenomenon of people who feel they have a limb they need to remove - Apotemnophilia - or sometimes, Body integrity identity disorder (BIID).

[Prufrock]

I don't think people with gender disphoria generally want a sex change in order to make them more acceptable to society... the accounts I have heard are more about people feeling like aliens inside a body they cannot "own" - whatever that means... they are wanting/doing it for their own peace... even if your passport ruse worked and nobody had an issue with transgender people - many of them would STILL (I think) want to inhabit a body they felt comfortable with - and for many of them that involves surgery.

I don't think your homosexuality analogy or comparison is helpful at all! if I had to reach for an analogy - and i don't see why we have to - it is simpler just to talk about the thing itself, surely? - then the closest thing i can think of is the phenomenon of people who feel they have a limb they need to remove - Apotemnophilia - or sometimes, Body integrity identity disorder (BIID).

Well it was you who first suggested it!

it could be very simply that people are not patient enough to wait for society to change its attitudes. and if - consequently and not unreasonably - a gender disphoric person believes that isn't going to happen in their lifetime - then can you or i really blame them for not wanting to spend their entire life being vilified/persecuted by said societal change not happening?

I think *some* people feel uncomfortable with that body because of societal reasons to do with expectations of men and women. As I've explained, I don't think think gender reassignment surgery is the answer to that.

I can accept that there may be people who even in my utopia would feel uncomfortable with their body (as you describe above) but in that case, as you allude to, I think we're in the realms of psychiatric disorder/being unhappy with your lot. That's not to say that we should be dicks to those people or not provide as much support as possible, but for then I don't think it's a social justice problem anymore.