Yeah it makes little sense. The second article is written by a trans woman though, I'm not quite sure the thinking there, why would you want to push for more exclusion with separate locker rooms for trans people and possibly end up being completely shut out in the many scenarios where there are no such rooms available?
I don't understand what their solution is, can't just be critical without thinking of the consequences. Where are trans people going to go if the general public aren't welcoming them? Another country? Being openly critical about people is always dangerous no matter if it's about sexual orientation, gender identity, skin color, religion etc etc since it can quickly make it okay to be hateful against other people. And the world really don't need more of that, the biggest problems the world has gone and are going through originates from mindless hatered.
Honestly their solution is for us to either live miserable lives without transitioning, or die. The goal is to make it so difficult for us to exist publically — forcing trans women to use men's facilities and thus exposing us to staggering and everpresent violence, for example — that we have no choice but to never leave our homes or simply never transition if we want to survive. Hell, trans women have UTIs at a much greater rate than the general populaltion because we already have to be extremely careful about what public facilities we use, and often it's simply safer to hold it in until we get home or to work or to another "safe" bathroom.
Oh god that last part really hurt to read :(
It's Sunday so guessing not to expect anythng – if anything comes at all – until tomorrow on. You can contact RPS directly through the email on this page, if you want to let them know directly of concerns around having a staff member deem Gender Critical talking points deserved of respect.
fluffy pillow covered it well in her response but to really underscore that there is no real 'solution' here, in the traditional sense. They just want trans people to be forced into the shadows; to have everyone seen and understood as their biological sex. Until that point they will prod, poke and push against anything that's 'scary' enough to galvanise support around that goal. Many of which, like I linked earlier, are just recycled arguments that were thrown against gay people in years past. There's no concern for fact here, just anything that could sound legitimate enough on a surface read for people to adopt and throw at us. From fearmongering around predators in bathrooms to bone density and 'pummeling' cis women in sports, their aim is to poison the well of discourse and perception around us to help facilitate a hard line between trans people and them. To make others fearful of us or believe that we, in our existence, are a threat to others so that – as fluffy pillow said – we are further forced to stay hidden in the closet.
Obviously they think that yelling at transpeople loudly enough will make them reconsider their transness and turn cis.
It's such a dangerous mindset to display openly, especially when it comes from public figures who people could actually listen to. And honestly, it really says a lot about their thought process, or lack of it, when these ideas in general seems to come from women, like JKR, who should know well enough what it's like to be excluded and treated with inequality. Guess they forgot about that part while being busy with illogical hatred.
Here's some quick quotes I have to hand from discussing Fallon Fox with a TERF here earlier:
bleacherreport.com
Nice one, thanks friend. Appreciate what you do to keep these things in the general consciousness.
It unequivocally is. You need only look to Rowling and her spread of such views as believing transition to be akin to gay conversion therapy, to as wide an audience as she does, and the affect it has on trans children:
mermaidsuk.org.uk
if I recollect correctly, it boils down to "there are no differences between the sexes beyond the obvious ones, it's all social constructs", and so they oppose gender expression, identity and whatnot.
Furthermore whenever it does happen to be about us, it's often based in whether we should be feeling upset or whether it's even a valid frustration to have. Whether something is actually transphobic or not and if so, how it was really meant. Then whether any frustration we do display is "helpful" to us. It's rarely centred around the problem itself, only our reaction to it. Whether that's boiled down to be about a mob, cancelling someone or dismissed as a 'boycott', when it's more just not wanting to interface with things that perpetuate harmful sentiment about us. Which shouldn't be too surprising I guess, when we're seen as political tokens instead of people, and our ability to live as we are is deemed an "understandable concern" worthy of debate.
Given the ever increasing divide in the community and those whose activity feel T should be split off from the LBG I've slowly begun to wonder how long before it splinters and less of if.
Time to start keeping a scoreboard with two columns: one for when the news is about something a trans person has done or has had done to them, and one for when the news is about things people pretend to be scared we might do. Ratio of 1:10 at least.
Even that ratio is frankly very generous of us to assume we account for a tenth of the stories.
I'm sure the sports argument is a hot potato for those interested, if we talk about having equal chances in certain sports where it's important to build muscle mass etc then a trans woman during transition would very likely have an advantage in women sports.
I know it's unintentional but even that first sentence – giving some lenience to the GC concern around matters like sports – is a tad frustrating. There are mandatory periods of time post-transitioning before trans women can compete. As has been mentioned trans women have been allowed to compete in the olympics for over 15 years and have never won a medal. I'll repeat again the quotes from medical professionals in the case of Fallon Fox; an MMA fighter that drew controversy when she won (it was fine when she lost) since it's in relation to the type of sport you reference:
bleacherreport.com
Yeah I don't understand their stance at all tbh, isn't it a bit strange that people who has spent their whole life fighting for women rights are so fast to exclude trans women of their rights? 🤔
Ah didn't know this, thanks for the summary! I'm not into sports tbh, it just annoys me when hatred starts being normalized enough so people can speak openly about it or when it's conveniently tucked away into some other thing people care about to not have to show what they really think.I know it's unintentional but even that first sentence – giving some lenience to the concern around matters like sports – is a tad frustrating. There are mandatory periods of time post-transitioning before trans women can compete. As has been mentioned trans women have been allowed to compete in the olympics for over 15 years and have never won a medal. I'll repeat again the quotes from medical professionals in the case of Fallon Fox; an MMA fighter that drew controversy when she won (it was fine when she lost) since it's in relation to the type of sport you reference:
Fallon Fox and the Culture of Ignorance Within MMA
If you have even a passing interest in the day-to-day happenings in mixed martial arts, you have no doubt heard about Fallon Fox , MMA ’s first transgender athlete. The story has been discussed ad nauseam over the past ten days or so...This isn't some topic that's not being broached for convenience around trans athletes, it's one that's been considered. Like bathroom access and all the other points the framing from Gender Critical adherents is around positioning this as some newfound issue that has to be discussed before things occur. Instead of them having been discussed and them having occured without issue up until now.Bloody Elbow - UFC, MMA and Boxing News
Bloody Elbow has been a leading voice in combat sports since formation in 2007 and has earned a global reputation for expert analysis, opinion and news.www.bloodyelbow.com
Worth noting as well that guidelines are also not ones that solely affect trans women. There are cisgender women who have also been barred from competing unless they take drugs to suppress their own testosterone levels, because they count as being too high to compete in female sports.
For sure and I appreciate that a large part of how effective the GC rhetoric is, is in putting things out that there can 'make sense' at a glance. It's just – as with a lot relating to the body and people – it's seldom the case that something like us, our bodies and identities can be boiled down into simple statements. So when you look into the science behind these cases you begin to appreciate the affect that hormone therapy has on the body, and how it does allow for the diminishing of physical advantages commonly thrown out as being the reason why we shouldn't compete.
Glad to see former RPS talent fighting the good fight.
Thanks for highlighting these, went and read them and put them below for ease of reference for others:
This is such an important part of these "trans women in sports" arguments that needs more attention: nobody gives a shit when trans women do not win. It's not an issue that sports are often dominated by cis women with testosterone levels far higher than trans women on HRT. It's not an issue that cis men and women are exposing themselves to all kinds of health risks and problems through hormone and drug cheating (every major sport has steroid and drug cheating). But as soon as a trans woman wins something, it's time to have a talk about having a level playing field!
If he was here, he would be rightfully banned for transphobic concern trolling from the get go. Are there no moderators for their comment section or are they not seeing the issue?A refreshing response to read indeed. Appreciate him and other former writers pushing back on this.
Thanks for highlighting these, went and read them and put them below for ease of reference for others:
------
