The Trans Mass-Debate
It seems that we can’t go from one day to the next without the issue of sex and gender being front and centre in one form or another, and the debate has just been taken to the next level
It seems that we can’t go from one day to the next without the issue of sex and gender being front and centre in one form or another, and the debate has just been taken to the next level over the Scottish Gender Reform Bill (GRB). Sadly, this article has to be caveated that it includes several generalisations of the differences between the sexes, but in the current climate, that needs to be said.
Yesterday in Westminster, the commons debated the UK Governments use of Section 35 to block this piece of legislation passed by Holyrood, and it certainly showed the true colours of some MPs. We saw passionate and principled speeches from the likes of Miriam Cates and Rosie Duffield, countered by jeers from other members of the house, and possibly one of the most hate-filled and aggressive rants ever made in Parliament from Lloyd Russell-Moyle, who frankly should be ashamed of his toxic mansplaining and faux outrage at women MP’s expressing concern over the safeguarding of women and children!
Playing “Billy Big Bollocks” yesterday Russell-Moyle took the standard position of many activists who are incapable of debate and shouted down his opposition accusing them of Transphobia and Bigotry. Indeed, rather than making articulate arguments to support his position, he resorted to bile spewing, accusations, and a rather large amount of finger pointing! Doubling down on his hate for alternative opinions he posted his rant on twitter, bravely disabling replies, clearly unwilling to engage with anyone that does not agree with him, which one would assume would include the constituents who elected him!
Russel-Moyle thinks that the bill should be allowed to pass, claiming that would give us an opportunity to see the flaws in the legislation. If this were a bill on say planning reform, then perhaps that method would be valid, but this bill has real terms implications for the safety of women and girls, those flaws could have far reaching and serious implications, so a “suck it and see” type approach seems reckless in the extreme!
The reality is that most people are very tolerant of others, and really do not care how others wish to identify or present themselves. Frankly, most people, while finding it strange, would not care if someone decided to identify as a kangaroo and hop around calling themselves Skippy, but would draw the line at that identification actually making someone a Kangaroo! The Trans Gender debate is no different, men can present as women, and vice versa, most people just don’t care until that identification impedes on material reality and real-world consequences. For most people there is a huge difference between a man presenting as a woman, and a person with a penis actually being defined as a woman. The phrase “her penis” is a total contradiction in terms that many will never accept, and why should they?
The problem is that the demonstrably accurate arguments around biology and how it effects things like sports are nearly always hatefully shouted down as bigoted and transphobic by the likes of Russel-Moyle. There is a total lack of recognition of the differences between the sexes simply because those facts inconveniently play against the narrative that they try to project.
Calls for understanding and compassion only go one way, apparently we should not hurt the feelings of Transwomen attempting to access women only spaces. Never mind the feelings of the women who are having their spaces invaded, it seems they don’t count. There is simply no acceptance that women wanting changing rooms, toilets and crisis centres to be penis free zones have a right to feel that way.
While the majority of Transwomen do not pose any threat whatsoever to anyone, there are those that do, and there are male predators who would not think twice about using the GRB to give them easier access to their victims. If the argument is that the majority do not pose a threat, then we can un ban fire arms with exactly the same logic. Most people would not run around on a rampage shooting people, so it’s ok for everyone to own a gun, after all it’s only a few nutters who will actually cause any harm isn’t it?
Miriam Cates gave an example in her speech of an experience where she felt threatened by a man dressed as a woman in a women’s toilet. If feelings matter then whether that man meant her any harm or not is irrelevant, she felt threatened in what should have been a single sex space. Of course if feelings don’t matter, then the argument of the Trans community evaporates because that is all their argument is based on. One side simply CANNOT be allowed to have it both ways.
The biggest problem is that the rights that Trans activists want are not compatible with existing Women’s rights. If we are going to ignore biology then we will see more and more second rate male athletes do what Lia Thomas did and switch to the women’s category where their biology gives them an advantage in order to win. Not very sporting in most people’s opinion, but to some, winning is all that matters. We will undoubtedly also see male predators exploit this bill and use it to gain easier access to their victims.
Further than that though, the very identity of the sexes could be erased, and do we really want to be reduced to a society of chest feeders and people with prostates? Sex Matters, it is hard wired into us through millions of years of evolution. Who we are attracted to is not a social construct, and we cannot choose who we find attractive. It is not transphobic for a heterosexual man to not be attracted to a Transwoman, they just don’t want their partner to have a penis. The suggestion that it would totally dismisses the reality of same sex attraction also. The very idea that we can or should somehow override the subconscious processes of sexual attraction within each of us is frankly for the birds, there are both physical and nonphysical elements to attraction all equally as valid.
That same subconscious process plays out in other ways. While it is a generalisation, it is not sexist to state the biological fact that males are generally physically stronger than females. Most men are aware that there are situations that some women will be wary of them because of this physical difference. Most men therefore do what they can to put women at ease in those situations, and that certainly includes not intruding into their personal spaces. It’s also fair to say that most men would be faster to come to the defence of a woman being threatened physically, especially one who is pregnant, than they would be another physically able man. It’s not a conscious thought process, its instinct. While some might say that it is misogynistic to assume that a woman needs a man to defend them, often when placed in a situation like that, the conscious thought doesn’t take place, and most decent human beings will just on instinct protect someone they perceive to be more vulnerable than themselves, and that might well include a woman protecting a child, or a less physically able man. Ultimately the strength that really counts in this situation is the courage to intervene which is neither a predominantly male of female characteristic, nonetheless biology cannot be denied. When it comes to empathy and compassion, again generally, women are far stronger than men in this regard, and there are plenty of occasions where men need that strength from women to help them through their own vulnerabilities. The point being that Men and Women are different and are therefore vulnerable in different ways, not because one sex is superior to the other, but we all have our strengths and weaknesses, admitting that should not be revolutionary.
Absolutely there is no argument that those in the Trans community have rights, exactly the same as everyone else does. So perhaps one way to solve this debate would be to have Trans toilets, Trans sports categories, and everything else that we currently segregate based on sex. If that is unacceptable to the Trans community, the question really needs to be asked, why they feel it is acceptable to impose themselves on women? What gives one group of biological men the right to demand access into women’s spaces or compete against them in physical sports? What we cannot allow is the rights of one group to override the rights of another as currently seems to be happening, and we certainly cannot allow ANY ideology that puts our children at risk from sexual predators. We men owe it to our wives, daughters and mothers to stand with them and fight for their rights that were hard fought for, because if our rights as men are ever under threat as women’s rights are now, we men are going to be very glad of those women who use their strength to stand up for us, either way, turnabout would certainly be fair play. Trans rights are human rights, but so are women’s rights, and allowing biological men to undo years of work to reach equality between the sexes, which absolutely includes sex based rights, will have far reaching and detrimental effects on our society, we simply cannot allow that to happen.