We are talking about identity here
Hmmm.
WATCH: Is biological sex binary?@JoanMcAlpine MSP says women are discriminated against because of their biological sex. @MaggieChapman argues that the issue of reforming the Gender Recognition Act, is about identity not sex. See the full #scotnight debate at 10.40pm tonight. pic.twitter.com/NEgOU0mHhh
— ScotlandTonight (@ScotlandTonight) May 23, 2019
JM: Women are discriminated against because of their biological sex, and we can’t erase that because if we erase that we’re erasing women.
MC: But we know that biological sex is not binary…Biological sex is not binary. We are talking about identity here Joan…
What is identity then? What are people using it to mean? It’s become a magic word that means whatever you need it to mean in the moment and then its opposite a few seconds later. An “identity” that flatly contradicts the identity-haver’s biology is…what? I don’t know what to call it. An item of magical thinking; a fantasy dressed up as something more respectable and adult. We can, I suppose, decide that our “identity” is that we are ten feet tall and slender as an aspen, but can we, reasonably, try to impose that “identity” on other people? Can we demand, with menaces, that the rest of the world believe in our “identity”? We can in the sense that it’s physically possible, but can we in the sense that it’s a reasonable, workable, justifiable thing to do? Not that I can see.
I wonder if, and if so, for how many in the TRA camp, this assertion of power and demand for acquiescence is part of the attraction of the movement? The ability to force one’s will open others, the power to bend others to accede to your imposition, despite its conflict with reality, is something that all too many men find attractive and desirable. Is this part of the range of behaviours one gets with run-of-the-mill narcissists, or is this something more? It certainly plays against trans claims of oppression and powerlessness in the face of “cis” privilege.
Sorry to be dense, but does “Biological sex is not a binary” just mean that intersex people exist?
Not when it’s immediately followed by “We are talking about identity here Joan” it doesn’t.
YNnB – ohhhhhhhhhh no question. The way the whole thing has kept ratcheting up and up and ever up gives that away. This assertion of power and demand for acquiescence is MASSIVELY attractive and that’s an enormous factor in the popularity of the movement.
“What was that? What am I eating? A beefburger with bacon and cheese. Bloody delicious. Yes, I am aware that this is a meeting of the Vegan Society. What? No, it’s fine. I’m a transvegan. Of course it’s the same thing. It means that I can eat meat and dairy because being transvegan means it isn’t meat and dairy. No, you can’t ask me how that bloody-well happens. Shut up, you transphobic TERV, I want to hear this recipe for mung bean curry. I’ve got some lamb that’d go nice in that.”
Is that how it all works?
How people cannot see that this is a male-supremacist idea/movement is beyond me, I’m afraid.
If it was really about Identitay, and everyone being able to force others to see them as they see themselves, women & girls would be able to make everyone see us (and therefore treat us) as Real People. This would mean much less sexual violence committed by males against us, the obvious fact that bodily autonomy trumps anyone else’s wants regarding using us as brood mares, the pay gaps/work gaps would vanish (the Second Shift would be a thing of the past), and so on.
What we get instead is this deliberate conflation between biological sex, and sex role stereotypes. It should be obvious, but apparently it isn’t.
What it comes down to is: Doodz get to do whatever they want, as usual. Whatever ridiculous pronouncement a dood makes is to be taken as word from On High. If dood puts on a frock, it MUST make him a Laydee, because he says so.
Women & girls apparently only exist as accessories to the Very Important Journey of these doodz. We can’t possibly be an actual group of people with specific characteristics that differ from those of males, because that would spoil all the fun. Women are what men say we are, and any actual differences must be ignored.
Again, it seems to come down to the fact that we are the ones who make Life. Males cannot have babies, and they hate the idea of us doing something they can’t. Something that is outside their direct control, and punctures their fantasy of being in charge of everything.
The bit I really don’t get is, how can these women arguing in favour of male supremacy not see how much men hate us? They really do. That “breath play” thing that’s mentioned (in another of Ophelia’s posts) – choking someone is not an action performed towards someone one loves. Women don’t need to be told that it’s unsafe and cruel. It would never occur to someone who isn’t obsessed with having power over others.
I can see why so many girls & young women are deperately trying to be Anything But Female. They see the hatred and degradation being heaped upon us, and are rightly terrified – “If that’s what Female means, I want none of it!”. What I don’t understand is the women who are happy to beat down any of her “sisters” who notice the problem. The problem being MALES, and their fixation on death, humitialtion, cruelty, torture and destruction.
[…] a comment by cluecat on We are talking about identity […]
Is that how it all works?
Not really. You see it’s a mystery and you need to consult a Catholic priest. They’v being doing this trans stuff for two millennia so they must be pretty good at it by now.