Source
r/GCdebatesQT•
TwatchWaffle

Why do transmedicalists/transum's dislike GC's?

The transmedicalist community seems to hold near identical concerns as the Gender Critical community does as far as I can see it. While obviously the main 'what is a woman' one will not be agreed on, for all practical purposes it seems GC and transcum want much of the same things.

GC comes from a point of where it's affecting women and children while transcums come from the point of how it's harming dysphoric trans people and children. We have both been ostracized and deplatformed, being accused of the same hate that I think both communities would vehemently disagree with. I was surprised to see a community which shared much of the same concerns but also the same abrupt dislike and dismissal of GC.

If there are any transmedical QTs here, are you able to pinpoint why transmedicalists seem to share the same dislike of the GC concerns as transcute' communities even though it seems to me transmeds and GC are much closer aligned in theory?

Posted Dec 14, 2019, 1:20 PM UTC

39133
BenderRodriguez9Kill All Humans•

I agree that transmed is very similar to GC in a lot of ways, and it's in part because of that similarity that there is a lot of tension between the two groups.

For instance, while QT thinks being a "man"/"woman"/"other" is a matter of self-perception and identity, both transmed and GC see being a man/woman as a matter of one's physical sex. The difference though between transmed and GC here is that transmeds believe that with enough surgeries/hormones/etc you can embody the other sex close enough that you can reasonably be considered that sex, while GC's stance is that sex is fixed regardless of how many modifications you make. So both transmeds and GCs can look at QT and agree that QT is ridiculous for its circular, non-definitions of what a man or woman is, but then argue with each other about what physical characteristics makes a body male or female.

And this plays out with how the various groups handle real-world issues. For example, with sports, you generally see the following distribution of ideas:

QT: Anyone who says they're a woman can play in women's sports because they're a woman and even without hormones or surgery they have a woman's body because they identify as women!

Transmed: Transwomen should be allowed to play in women's sports if they have been on hormones for X amount of time and have lowered their testosterone to be in the female-typical range and perhaps have had their penis removed.

GC: No transwomen in women's sports ever. Only allow female-born people who have not taken testosterone to play.

So while both GC and transmed can rightfully dismiss the QT position as nonsense, they're close enough to each others' positions that specific differences stick out more and are likely to lead to frustration since the other side is "so close" to getting it.

30
TwatchWaffleOP•

So while both GC and transmed can rightfully dismiss the QT position as nonsense, they're close enough to each others' positions that specific differences stick out more and are likely to lead to frustration since the other side is "so close" to getting it.

That's a good point however I have seen several transmeds disagree with transwomen in women's sports. I know you were just using is as an example but it was a good one. I feel both communities agree QT just... can't continue to monopolize the conversation and if we keep bickering between us QT gets to continue it's monopoly.

I think it requires a bit of trust and good faith. For instance could GC trust that if transwomen is sports shows to be or is proven to be completely unfair to natal women, that transmed would stand against it with us? Same for GC.

QT seems to be led entirely by their feelings in spite of facts and sometimes it seems, logic. On transcum and GC you will often see people talking about real facts, figures, things that have actually happened along with their feelings on it all. I'd like to think that if those willing to look at the evidence before forming an opinion, or change their opinion based on new information could join together in their goals balances could be struck that would at least be better for everybody than whats going on now.

10
gayorles57•

For instance could GC trust that if transwomen is sports shows to be or is proven to be completely unfair to natal women, that transmed would stand against it with us?

No, I don't think so, because if we wait for more "proof" that male bodies, even altered, are stronger than female bodies, then a lot of female athletes are going to suffer before we have time to conduct repetitive studies that are pretty much guaranteed to reflect the studies already done on male/female athleticism.

5
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

Transmed / critical of gender here.

Transmeds and GCers are very closely aligned. They are probably closer in beliefs with each other than they are with any other group. I've lurked on r/gc & r/g_c for 5 years and I've started browsing r/truescum this year.

Today you can find comments on r/truescum that were common on r/gc several years ago. Things like, "simply wearing a dress and putting on lipstick doesn't make you a woman!" or "how is <some action> not a fetishtic behavior?!?". So strikingly similar that I sometimes question if I'm on the right subreddit.

The key differences is 1) Belief on whether sex dysphoria is real, and 2) whether transwomen who appear to be female should be treated as women.

Apart from a handful of transmeds who have accepted that they will never pass, most generally desire to be treated as women eventually when we believe that we *pass so that we can just live a normal life and be treated as a person. This is not to say we expect hetero men and women to sleep with us, but we expect not to be chased out of places like women's toilets, or to be stripped frisk searched by a man, or to be outed to everyone by being referred to as 'he/him'.

*yes, I know passing is subjective.

Radical GCers & radfems refuse to accept transwomen as women, largely because once you accept one of the "good" transmeds, it opens the doors to the rest of the creepy "trans" people, and there's no possible way to distinguish who is one of the "good" ones and who is one of the "bad" ones. As such, the only solution is to reject all trans people.

In truth, I think most moderate GCers still believe that they are "good" dysphoric transmedicalists and are are still willing to make some concessions for them as long as they aren't unreasonable, and most moderate transmedicalists have views which sound reasonable to moderate GCers. However it is the radicals that make the most noise and are the representatives of the communities, which is why moderate GCers will not ally with transmedicalist because they dislike QTs, and moderate transmedicalists will not ally with GCers because they dislike radical GCers / radfems.

24
[deleted]•

Mostly agree except for the sharing women’s bathrooms thing. Also “or to be stripped searched by a man” makes me think I don’t want anyone to feel uncomfortable or violated, but women shouldn’t be required to ‘strip search’ a man either.

20
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

Well, fortunately not every woman thinks that transwomen are men!

-1†
[deleted]•

I’m just saying that women shouldn’t be forced, pressured, etc to handle male genitalia. The thick end of the wedge is if every woman in the world doesn’t want to perform a male strip search, then what? I guess not do a search at all? But that could be dangerous in some contexts. But like I said I don’t want anyone to feel violated either. But I know the moral solution isn’t forcing women to handle male genitalia

22
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

My bad. I see I used the wrong term 'strip search', which specifically refers to searching private regions. I was thinking more of a 'frisk search', where they pat you down through your clothes. Common at festivals and airports.

I'm not sure how I feel about strip searches and I could see how a woman would be uncomfortable with it. Fortunately that's not a very common occurrence and most of us wouldn't have to go through it.

9
TwatchWaffleOP•

You've made excellent points thank you.

The key difference is that apart from the unfortunate few transmeds who have accepted that they will never pass, most generally desire to be treated as women eventually when we believe that we *pass.

I think there's a difference between 'treating someone as if they were' and 'believing that they really were' I think offline or even in PMs you'd see many GCers attempt to use the pronouns your requested out of respect for you as an individual. I believe part of the fracture was somewhere when it went from 'treat this person how they would like to be treated' to, 'think about this person how they'd like to think about themselves'

Radical GCers & radfems refuse to accept transwomen as women, largely because once you accept one of the "good" transmeds, it opens the doors to the rest of the creepy "trans" people, and there's no possible way to distinguish who is one of the "good" ones and who is one of the "bad" ones. As such, the only solution is to reject all trans people.

This is an excellent point. I don't think they will accept someone 'as a woman' but I think most can accept someone as an individual doing whatever it is they want or need to with their own life and in so be respectful towards them as an individual. With the 'bad ones' seeming to outnumber the 'good' (it seems to us GCers anyway) it just feels natural to assume each trans person you come in contact with online or off is going to be one of the bad ones until they show you they aren't.

If transmedicalists had their way and there was ample vetting, medical intervention, psychological intervention and actual standards behind who is and isn't allowed to declare themselves a 'transgendered woman' before being given access to women's spaces wouldn't in stand to reason that that alone would help with this issue? True transexuals would be less likely treated as a threat or as one of the 'bad' ones and women would be able to feel safer with who, and just how many natal males are given access to their spaces. Then the conversation can move on to which spaces are and might not be appropriate for any natal males IE women's sports, women's domestic abuse centers. Then as a society work to build up those same services for transgendered people.

Or simply, anyone can be a 'transgendered woman' but you cannot be granted any women's sex based protections or access to safe spaces until you are medically and legally declared a 'transexual woman'. I know it wouldn't be fair to demand every transexual woman get bottom surgery to be so considering how personal a choice that is but both communities seem to agree selfID is an absolutely travesty hurting everyone that isn't an entitled straight, middle class white man.

18
FancyRedditAccountActually critical of Gender, Noam Chomsky acolyte.•

I believe part of the fracture was somewhere when it went from 'treat this person how they would like to be treated' to, 'think about this person how they'd like to think about themselves'

just repeating it for the folks in the back, in case some people didn't hear it.

I think an even bigger part is something you missed though. I think it should be

...the fracture was somewhere when it went from 'treat this person how they would like to be treated' to, "publicly affirm that you believe about this person what they believe about themselves,'

14
SqueakyBall•

Or simply, anyone can be a 'transgendered woman' but you cannot be granted any women's sex based protections or access to safe spaces until you are medically and legally declared a 'transexual woman'.

I'm not keen on the OP giving away women's rights, protections and space spaces here. Feeling like this would be too easy to google -- give me a more challenging one, y'all! -- but do you suppose in the modern U.S./Canadian/English history, "authorities" have ever declared a boy/man safe and sane, only to have him rape/torture/murder a girl or woman?

17
LoveSloaneI finally learned how to flair! flairy flair•

“suppose” lol

10
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

I think there's a difference between 'treating someone as if they were' and 'believing that they really were' I think offline or even in PMs you'd see many GCers attempt to use the pronouns your requested out of respect for you as an individual.

This is an excellent point. I don't think they will accept someone 'as a woman' but I think most can accept someone as an individual doing whatever it is they want or need to with their own life and in so be respectful towards them as an individual.

That's good enough for most of us really.

With the 'bad ones' seeming to outnumber the 'good' (it seems to us GCers anyway) it just feels natural to assume each trans person you come in contact with online or off is going to be one of the bad ones until they show you they aren't.

It's the same to us transmeds too. We are surrounded by people taking over our spaces. Telling us that we are awful for saying that dysphoria is required to be trans. Telling us to be ashamed for wanting to look like a normal person of the opposite sex. Shaming us for being stealth and not being out and proud. Our spaces and communities have been taken over by GNC people, and since we only make up a tiny percentage, we don't have the numbers to reclaim it.

Just like GCers, we gave them an inch of space and they took over everything and kicked us out.

Or simply, anyone can be a 'transgendered woman' but you cannot be granted any women's sex based protections or access to safe spaces until you are medically and legally declared a 'transexual woman'.

I'm honestly okay with this. This is how it's done in my country and we don't really have a problem with trans people here. The percentage of people who are truly transsexual are so tiny that most people would claim they've never known a trans person in their whole life.

13
TwatchWaffleOP•

It's the same to us transmeds too. We are surrounded by people taking over our spaces. Telling us that we are awful for saying that dysphoria is required to be trans. Telling us to be ashamed for wanting to look like a normal person of the opposite sex. Shaming us for being stealth and not being out and proud. Our spaces and communities have been taken over by GNC people, and since we only make up a tiny percentage, we don't have the numbers to reclaim it.

Just like GCers, we gave them an inch of space and they took over everything and kicked us out.

I know it may be an unpopular opinion but I think if our two groups could find a way to have some of it's members work together we could all get much closer to shining light on both of our issues. When it's just transmedicalists talking about it it's 'right wing self hate' when it's just radfems talking about it it's 'hysterical man hating transphobia' when it's parents of children talking about it it's 'child abuse for not letting them transition'. When all these groups of vastly different people share a lot of the same concerns they can't keep using the same scapegoating excuses to dismiss us all and will need to address our actual talking points.

13
DivingRightIntoWorkShe-elzebub•

Have you seen r/genderdifficult and it's sister subs?

7
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

I do hope we can. Most of us have very similar beliefs and want the same things. But we have to convince our sides that it's worth speaking to the other side.

1
raheemthecat•

I really appreciate how you make an effort to see the situation through a GC lens (understanding- if not agreeing) with why many of us take such a hardline due to the whole "give em an inch they'll take a mile".

It's absurd to me that transmed seems to be the minority - when in my 100 percent anecdotal experience in the past - it was the pov of most trans people I knew (nyc early 00s.. Acquaintances so our convos rarely got that deep on these topics - we talked about regular human stuff as people do lol).

Do you think trans med thought is still actually the majority of trans people - (ok that question is flawed because it's an assumption) and many trans meds are just doing their thing without getting all activist and on Twitter - or do you think this new defintion of trans (everyone and anyone who says so, no questions asked!) Is the most widely held belief?

I guess do you think the POV that trans is anything and all things - is the loudest belief due to social media/media period - or it's truly the dominant belief?

2
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

I guess do you think the POV that trans is anything and all things - is the loudest belief due to social media/media period - or it's truly the dominant belief?

Inside liberal leftist "woke" circles, the QT belief is the dominant one. Transmedicalists are absolutely vile in their eyes. I can only share my true feelings about transmedicalisim with my leftist friends who already know that I'm trans, because they will give me the benefit of the doubt and listen before speaking over me. However with libfem friends of my libfem friends who don't know I'm trans, I have to tone done my thoughts or they'll probably think I'm transphobic as shit.

Outside of these "woke" circles, the transmed belief is the dominant one. People still believe that trans people are born that way, have always known that they weren't the right sex since they were a very young age, experience distress and desire to transition to be seen as the other sex. When venturing outside liberal subreddits, I sometimes see some comment about "horrible awful truscum", and someone will ask "what's a truscum". I'll reply "a truscum is just someone who believes that you need dysphoria to be trans", and the comments are generally "oh yeah that sounds right. Isn't that what being trans is about?!?"

It's a double whammy I feel...over the last few decades I feel the trans movement has started to gain acceptance that we are really just people who want to live our lives and be treated normally...but now you have all these articles popping out all over the place that talk about trans people participating in women's sports, or people showing off their dick in public, or people with beards claiming to be women, or transtrenders thinking that they are boys because they're not like other girls. The average person still thinks that trans people are dysphoric people, so when they read all these articles, their impression of dysphoric people are going to be tainted....

Maybe in about 5 - 10 years, the trend of being trans will die down. Transtrenders will grow out of their phase. Many will have transition regrets. So many AGPs and creeps will have infiltrated their way in and made the headlines. They can all go their own way and just lead their normal lives again since they aren't really trans...but real transsexuals will have to face a world where people are even less accepting, believing that sex dysphoria isn't real, and less likely to be given hormone therapy and surgery that will help them.

2
SqueakyBall•

once you accept one of the "good" transmeds, it opens the doors to the rest of the creepy "trans" people, and there's no possible way to distinguish who is one of the "good" ones and who is one of the "bad" ones.

Fyi, I like a lot of your comments overall, and I like the main point behind this one. But I want to take a moment to object to this language.

The problem for me and many gc feminists is not that transwomen are good or bad or creepy (although this may come up when we talk intimate spaces), it's that transwomen are bio males. That is the issue first and foremost with all transwomen, trenders and transmeds both. Transmeds obviously try to minimize the difference as much as possible, which is helpful for them, and can be helpful for bio women. It's not nothing, at least not to all women.

But the issue of good/bad/creepy, that's entirely secondary to male. It feels important to emphasize that for a lot of reasons. Transwomen may hear insult in the emphasis. But I mean the opposite. "Male" is fact. Good, bad and creepy are value judgments and moralistic. This isn't a test of their character, or how they dress or even -- though I sometimes wish -- their feminism and their work in ridding themselves of misogyny. If they were female they woudn't have to jump through any hoops proving their moral worth. But they're not female. And that is the problem.

17
trutranstranssexual | critical of gender•

I guess I personally don't believe the issue is as simple as XY (male) or XX (female). After all I just don't think it can be boiled down to a simple matter of chromosomes and nothing more. We don't have magic chromosome detectors. We infer people's sexes from their physical attributes and make assumptions and inferences from that.

I feel the issue ultimately boils down to how "safe" you feel around the person, which depends on a myriad of factors. Are they male or female? Males are more likely to find a woman attractive. More likely to stare. What is their sexuality? Is a gay man less likely to look at a naked woman than a straight man? Maybe. What is their socialization like? Women are more likely to know how uncomfortable it is to being stared at, or know how it's disrespectful and inappropriate and may not do it. Are they very young? Might be less likely. Teenage or middle aged; hornier raging hormones. Could they overpower me if it comes down to it? How well do I identify with the person I'm talking with? How understanding have they been to me?

It is tiring to do the mental calculations of who I feel "safe enough" with and who I don't. So generally statistically speaking, if I only had someone's sex to go by and nothing more, then obviously I'd feel safer with a female.

But does that mean I'd feel equally safe with every single female? No. Does it mean I'd feel equally unsafe with all males? Also no. Could there be some males I feel safer with than females? Very possibly, yes.

Surely there are some women out there who perceive some transwomen to be female, and feel safe around them. And surely, there are people such as you, who don't feel the same way. And I think your view is valid and I respect it. But I don't think yours is the universal view and I don't think you speak for every single GC woman.

2
raheemthecat•

Before the media and everything everywhere started parroting "transwomen are women" and telling me I'm a bigot for believing that transwomen are transwomen (yes, biological males)- but if you've gone through surgery and hormones - and especially if you're homosexual - as in born male and gay, become transwoman and into men- I'm really much more accepting and willing to make ideological concessions. My mind just can't with permanent pre ops who still present as full males and argue they should be able to strut around naked in front of little kids with their dicks out in the lockerroom.

A biolgocal male who has gone through what I imagine is a traumatic experience of deciding to allow....how do I phrase this...surgery changing a penis into a neovagina is a pretty massive commitment. That person has definitely gone through hell and back and I'd say with 99 percent certainly just wants to live his life in peace and be accepted. Truly. And that transwoman is probably also the type to consider how women feel. I will make every effort in real life to use the preferred pronouns (which honestly won't be much because after living in nyc for close to 15 years and having so many trans acquaintances...its no effort. I actually do make a category in my mind for "transwomen" as separate from women but not men. I'd even say "honorary woman" assuming all mutual respect is there and I'm not bludgeoned with ideology)

I've peeked into a few online forums where immediately pre op and post op transwomen discuss these issues amongst themselves with the utmost consideration for balancing where they are with understanding the position women are in (especially in regards to lockerrooms with kids present).

Many said they change in bathroom stalls, don't linger about in the nude (and who the fuck does! I'm born female and still a stealth "prude" in the locker room lol. I don't even want to see bio females bending over butt holes out in the buff!) And generally wait til after surgery.

I definitely align most with gender critical (rad fem ally probably, but a "real" rad fem wouldn't call me one) - but have a hard time calling myself anything really. Woman and mother are the only identities I commit too - becuase those are things I just am indisputably!

I really wish both groups could swallow hard and at least call a ceasefire to at least consider allying on some issues.

11
LoveSloaneI finally learned how to flair! flairy flair•

I agree with you in theory. I agreed completely before.

Except- the other day, someone mentioned that including trans women or accepting them as women, even “social women”, is only for their benefit.

It takes from women, even in small ways, but we get nothing out of it. Trans women contribute nothing to womanhood.

It’s sharing womanhood with males for no reason other than they want it.

Idk why that stuck with me, or even what it is about it that resonates with me, but every time I start to think “why not just compromise, just a little” I think about that and it leaves a weird (not necessarily bad) taste in my mouth, so to speak.

I’m still trying to figure out what it is about that statement that got to me.

ETA- I kind of want to ask this question, but I don’t think it would go well lol

17
Bad_Girl_LalaVagina Person- notalltrans•

You feel unsettled bc the feeling feels very familiar. It's the same feeling you get from other males when they make unreasonable demands and violate your boundaries. It's the same, I don't care how you feel bc I want what I want. What makes this situation different is that these males are hiding that they're males by calling themselves some kind of women. Take away the entire thought that they're women and that they're "not men". Think of how you would feel if this was just regular old men. We're conditioned not to even imagine it this way bc it make us evil, horrible people to even think it. But when you do, the situation becomes very clear and straight forward then. It's just the same old shit women have always had to deal with, just a new name.

12
Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord•

I’m still trying to figure out what it is about that statement that got to me.

Women have been treated as nice commodities since the beginning of civilization, physically, legally and emotionally. And lots of the times we let that happen because we were convinced that compromising ourselves was the right thing to do for the greater good (aka, men).

Except that after that happens and they get what they want, you feel or you are outright told that "LOL, I can' t believe you dumb bitches fell for it again!".

It is that "again" that gets to you. You know you are being tricked because it' s what always happens, so when it does happen, you cannot blame anyone but yourself because you knew and you went along with it.

In this specific case,you are even more sure that it is going to happen because it has happened already to you specifically. It' s not something that women have gone through a couple of centuries ago, this happened in your lifetime, you saw it happening, you probably lived it on your skin already, it is one of the biggest reason why we are in the situation we are in right now. So what you have in mind is simply that fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. And you are tired of feeling like the idiot who is always fucked over even though you know it is going to happen.

10
gayorles57•

It is that "again" that gets to you. You know you are being tricked because it' s what always happens, so when it does happen, you cannot blame anyone but yourself because you knew and you went along with it.

Yes!

3
raheemthecat•

Gah! My massive comment didn't post. I agree with you. Since I gotta get off my reddit bender and work on bill paying shit before my family starves lol - by compromise I meant politically and policy wise - not compromise emotionally.

Also coming from a place of hoping we could theoretically get trans meds closer to our side as they are ostracized and forgotten by the QT ideologues.

3
CallaAETHIOPICASailBoule’s #1 fan•

You know I used to feel similar if not the same as you when it comes to TW except I realized how many of the ones you’ve described don’t listen to women, nor care. I’ve seen TW that claim to have real dysphoria say really disturbing things about women. A lot of them don’t care about the misogyny they perpetuate and continue to participate in, they don’t care about women like myself that still would be uncomfortable with them in all female spaces, they don’t care about keeping female shelters or prisons intact and separating all TW from them, they don’t care that they appropriate female reproductive conditions, they don’t care that a lot of them are being blatantly homophobic and bullying lesbians into intimacy. A lot of them simply don’t care about women that do not 100% agree with them or include them. I already know not all TW but I see more and more TW being blatantly anti female and it’s gross. I respect where you’re coming from but I honestly cannot say that I would or will ever be inclusive to TW when it comes to womanhood because they have no idea, whatsoever. Not a single one gets where a lot of GC/radfem women are coming from (except Yardley, possibly and a few TW here from their replies) and their words/actions show it.

12
raheemthecat•

I've definitely seen and experienced all you've said too. For those who blatantly disregard women, who think it's transphobic not to fuck them, for literally everything you said- I don't even have words for the anger. I've tried to stop peeking into a lot of the subs where that behavior is most prevalent because it so negatively affects me. Sometimes I try avoid reddit - then a news article talking about trans women or girls dominating sports pops up - and the coverage makes me physically sick. My bf won't even listen anymore. I'm right there with you in many ways - but fighting against the "all" mentality.

My mind splinters a lot over this. Because obviously with the rise in trans identified people - and this whole non binary thing (I'm sorry...i just don't get it and probably never will on NB) the reality is that the scenario above probably won't ever happen.

We'll never go back to a handful of respectful trans women peeing in the bathroom - because of the surge in numbers of people self id-ing as trans and the total indoctrination that begins in preschool - "twaw and if you believe anything else, you're a bigot TERF and deserve the worst and it's a thought crime to question the new biology, etc etc"

All that said - I also think it's the woke allies and media fueling this more than actual trans people- sheer numbers. This kind of advancement doesn't come from a small minority so quickly without seriously powerful allies. Look how long gay people fought just to marry - and gay/lesbian represents far more of the population than trans people.

I think in the way that some democratic politicians say that the "Twitter left" aren't the majority of or the "real" democrats - that the really hardcore trans rhetoric we see online doesn't represent the majority either. And maybe older demographics aren't even all that active online .

I've encountered the spectrum in this sub,and definitely have dropped out of arguments because I know the QT on the other end won't even try to see things from my perspective as a woman. I've also met quite a few trans people on here who restore my faith not just in this - but in humanity.

There are more Miranda Yardley's out there. I guess I'm on here to remind myself constantly how none of us are a monolith (though lots of us do have group think tendencies...). I really believe that over time the centrist GC and centrist transmed can find enough common group to positively affect legislation.

Maybe it's over hormone blockers and kids. Maybe it's just a single issue...but I'm gonna try my best to believe understanding is possible.

I think it's this - in the long run this fight isn't going away. Any kind of solution is going to require compromise if women aren't going to completely be erased and lose all protections. I have the GC sub for when i feel completely hopeless and to vent and to stay on top of issues- and this sub to simultaneously gain/lose/gain/lose hope lol.

3
Bad_Girl_LalaVagina Person- notalltrans•

Any kind of solution is going to require compromise if women aren't going to completely be erased and lose all protections.

You keep saying compromise. That's not a compromise. In a compromise both sides get something they want. The "compromise" presented is that they'll be nicer about what they take and how they take it? I dont understand what exactly women are getting out of any of this so called compromise. They still want out words and our spaces. You know they think they belong in womens prisons and rape shelters, right? You know they still want to police our language, right? You know they want our words and want to obscure the fact that sex based oppression against women is based on our sex? They'll just be nicer about it when they take all this. So what exactly are women getting out of a compromise?

Either way trans meds are still going to fight or be against TRAs bc it's in their best interest. TRAs are hurting them too. I'm not naive enough to believe people who tell me that they're going to take what they want, care at all about my interests. Trans meds are looking out for their best interests. Tucutes are looking out for their best interests. Men are looking out for their best interests. I think its time women did the same.

Eta: I also feel this should be added. This is not about being nice or mean. What they are asking for is out of line and it does hurt us. It is not mean to say no. Only males seem to think that when a woman says no, its a negotiation. And then if she is adamant about her no, that its hateful and mean. No is a completely reasonable response to what they are asking for. Dont let the emotional manipulation and gaslighting make you think otherwise. Would you ever go to another minority group and make the demands that TW are making of us?

11
just_lesbian_thingshorrible human being•

seems to hold near identical concerns as the Gender Critical community does as far as I can see it

No we don't.

14
RadFemRFNo-Fun Hardcore Feminist•

[Edit: Obligatory not-QT, just transmed]

I don't dislike GC-ers as a whole. I dislike GC-ers who are Blanchardian; who engage in genital shaming or who outright lie about post-operative genitalia; who infantilize trans men; who rudely insult transsexual women or intentionally put us in lose-lose situations; etc. If someone is debating in good faith, open to scientific evidence, doesn't lie, and doesn't use hateful language, slurs, or dehumanizing language toward the bodies and/or genitalia of trans people, it doesn't matter to me what their political positions are.

That being said, there are some major differences between hardcore GC posters and transmeds. Most transmeds support access for significantly-transitioned trans women in female spaces on case-by-case bases due to the female support for said access, the fact it's worked for decades without issue or increased risk to natal women, and the significant danger it would put trans women in not to do so (not to mention the fact this danger is usually because we're seen as women, not because we're trans). Most hardcore GC posters use the "no males in female spaces" motto, because they believe it's impossible to open the door to any AMAB person without opening it to every male person. Transmeds mostly support allowing teenagers to medically transition under strict guidelines, since we know how horrid the alternative is of natal puberty and don't want teenagers forcibly injected with the hormones of their birth sex. Hardcore GCers believe that trans teenagers are likely to desist and don't want anyone transitioning before the age of 18.

Yes, there are a lot of similarities, mainly a focus on accurate science, similar positions on women's athletics, the cotton ceiling, and shortlists, etc. But we are not arguing from the same position by any means. That being said, moderate GC members and transmeds who don't believe in behavioural brain sex usually see eye-to-eye enough to work together to bring society back to circa-2011 in Western countries. This is another reason a lot of people think we're the "same group" (and why tucutes believe transmeds are full-on "T*RFs").

11
MrFahrenheit46gc truscum transboy•

Agreed (although I have come across a few GCers who think 25 should be the minimum age for medical transition)

2
[deleted]•

[deleted]

10
CallaAETHIOPICASailBoule’s #1 fan•

I usually try not to comment on posts that are for the pro trans/trans side but I agree. A lot of dysphoric individuals feel as though they should be treated exactly as the sex they wish they were and deserve the same resources, spaces, no distinction between a TW/female or TM/male can be made, essentially they want a free pass. I can’t speak for anyone else but myself but that shit doesn’t fly. While the transmeds/truscums whatever they wish to be called definitely aren’t as bad as the tucutes, there’s still toxicity. I still see the bs about it being phobic and bigoted to not date trans people post op, they want to gatekeep being trans but won’t allow women to gatekeep womanhood/the words we have for ourselves, etc, they appropriate medical conditions (intersex and female reproductive issues) but get mad when tucutes are apparently appropriating being trans, there’s still misogyny, there’s still blatant racism and homophobia, etc, also a lot of them seem to believe in being neurotically female/male, which also is in disagreement with GC.

Also, I’ve seen transmeds discount detrans individuals and that’s just gross. If transitioning worked out for you, cool. Don’t discount everyone else’s experience because you believe they weren’t truly trans. Believe it or not there are individuals that still experience dysphoria but found that transitioning since it’s mainly cosmetic does nothing for them, and it wasn’t for them. Doesn’t mean they were faking it.

29
[deleted]•

[deleted]

6
Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord•

I don' t think they necessarily support the idea that TWs and women are the same, but they do support the "integration" and adding trans womanhood to womanhood. They would probably be ok with being considered a sub-section of women. But that is still something we are against, because 1) according to our ideas they aren' t and 2) because that' s how this entire mess started in the first place and this led to the insanity we have now.

You can' t make an argument about womanhood being about biology if you make exceptions for some males.

10
[deleted]•

[deleted]

3
adungititever thinked how mens feel ?•

If it was no distinction, transcends wouldn't accept the idea of protections based on transsexual status. That is a distinction, in law.

It's almost like the support distinctions but only as long as they get special treatment from them.

Hypocrisy in the trans ideology? Never!

6
TwatchWaffleOP•

I hadn't seen anything from them about 'cotton ceiling' stuff. I wasn't aware that was one of their stances. Admittedly it isn't as bad as 'transbian girl dick' since they are talking post surgery but that's still pretty bad. I was under the impression that as a community they wanted to live as stealth as possible but that doesn't include romantic partners.

Though I did phrase my question towards the transmedicalists I was looking more to understand why the communities seem to dislike each other when it seems they want quite a lot of the same things so your post was insightful, thank you.

2
10000cockroaches•

How is "trans women are transwomen" vilifying???

20
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1†
SqueakyBall•

Factual, biological reality is not an ideological position. Pointing out that transexual women remain bio males is neither ideological nor vilification.

Your manipulation of the language is Orwelliian.

20
adungititever thinked how mens feel ?•

GC doesn't make exceptions for the truly dysphoric

The mistake you're making here is in thinking that dysphoria magically changes your sex and as such gives "true" trans the right to women's spaces. It doesn't. It only compells you to pretend you're the opposite sex. Just because a man believes he is a woman does not mean he is in any way immune to his male socialisation, as evidenced by transwomen again and again.

11
10000cockroaches•

So you are ok with "vilifying" the "bad" trans people, but have a problem with vilification of the "good" ones? And why should anybody else carry your "good-bad" distinction anyway?

10
[deleted]•

[deleted]

3
TwatchWaffleOP•

No distinction is made that parallels transmed style distinctions between dysphoric transsexuals and hangers on.

That is true. In all fairness though it seems like the transmed population (or even dysphoric trans who do not confer with the transmeds positions) are a very small percentage of the transgender population and the overwhelming majority we see and that people interact with are the hangers on giving transmed dysphorics a bad rap and are the ones putting women in danger.

I'm not saying it's fair to dysphorics to lump them in and assume but given the sheer numbers it seems someone could meet 100 of them before they ever met one of you and it's only going to get worse unless something is done. This is bad for both our communities.

I wouldn't be surprised if most GC people didn't even know transmedicalists existed. You all have been silenced and deplatformed as well. Not that many people are going to read about the dysphoric transexual people fighting against the TRAs and trucute types unless they go looking for it. Just like no one is going to read about any of the issues natal women have encountered because of this movement unless they go looking for it because the TRAs want it that way.

6
[deleted]•

[deleted]

3
RepresentativeNose7•

Well? Trans women who transition due to dysphoria are indeed trans women... should they be treated the way they present, sure. But their whole experience is different from ours from start to finish. Male socialization - and then approaching misogyny as an adult (if they pass and really are treated the way we are) with a mind and expectations informed by male socialization - surgeries, issues with passing, reproductive rights not being an issue- it is just completely a unique experience and separate from what we deal with.

14
[deleted]•

[deleted]

2
RepresentativeNose7•

No it’s why I think it’s correct to talk about trans women as trans when we discuss things, and when we make laws and policies, particularly when trans needs are at odds with natal women’s needs.

Interpersonally I don’t have a problem with treating “as if”

7
FancyRedditAccountActually critical of Gender, Noam Chomsky acolyte.•

I don't even go that far with GC.

"Transwoman" is this imaginary thing that doesn't exist. I prefer to categorize it, "men receiving hormone therapy are men receiving hormone therapy."

7
TwatchWaffleOP•

Yes I did mention above they are not going to agree on the trans as woman part.

I'm talking more about what ideally, both groups would like to see happen being very similar. I can't speak for every GC person but I do believe from the majority of things I've seen there most do believe that there is a small amount of dysphoric people (I don't know if it would be considered rude to say legitimate transgender people because I don't mean to imply any one here isn't) who will get some of their symptoms alleviated by living as the opposite gender. I think the general census on both GC and TS is those legitimate causes have been bastardized and abused to a degree it's having a profound affect on women, children and true trans people.

If TS had their way there would be much more safeguards, therapy and steps a person must take to be diagnosed a 'true trans'. That alone would have the affect of helping women.

While yes I don't think GC people are going to suddenly be okay with feeling as though their lives as women are being coopted and many will still view MTF transgenders probably akin to how black people feel about black face, those feelings aren't as important as the reality of how this issue affects their lives.

I'm sure every post on TS isn't a complete picture but from what I understand they disagree with MTF people in female sports. They do not seem to want to invade any women's spaces more than they absolutely have to to function in society. They don't 'bimbo'fy themselves and try to keep low profiles to blend in instead of not bothering to try to pass, making sure their 'trans oppression' card can be seen from a mile away.

I just find it odd that I see a lot of the same points posted to post subs, GC with an eye on the feminist side and TS from the transgender side. Point for point I think we both have the same take on most things happening and are experiencing the same level of blow back.

3
[deleted]•

[deleted]

3
SqueakyBall•

But GC doesn't accept that there are good and bad trans people,

What is with you transpeople and this creepy, moralistic language? There are male transpeople and there are female transpeople. The problem is with male transpeople, or transwomen, who don't belong in women's intimate spaces, on women's sports teams, taking scholarships aimed at helping women, and so on.

14
Omina_SentenziosaSarcastic Ovalord•

But GC doesn't accept that there are good and bad trans people, to match the transmed dysphoric/non-dysphoric distinction.

That is not exactly how it is. We do recognize the difference between the trans people with dysphoria and the trans people who do it for trend/fetish/social issues/attention/to hurt women or children/whatever. The problem, however, is that 1) dysphoria is still not provable objectively and 2) even if it were provable, dysphoria doesn' t change anyone' s sex.

I have much more sympathy for the dysphoric trans people than the Yanivs, and I even admire and consider part of the "good trans" some of the trans people I have recently read about. But they are not their target sex, they are people of their biological sex with dysphoria and/or who have chosen to transition because they were convinced that doing it would make their life better. If it works for them, great, but humans can' t change sex and as I already said, you can' t make exceptions if your main argument is that womanhood is about biology. Not only because it completely undermines the argument, but also because you can' t really make objective exceptions, it' s all about feelings here. And the last time we thought "Well, it' s no biggie if a bunch of guys want to call themselves ladies, let' s humour them!" we ended up with a World in which Madigan was nominated women' s representative, in which White raped women in a prison, in which Yaniv managed to make it" reasonable" to sue women for refusing to touch his dick, in which several trans natal males are allowed to compete in female leagues, in which it is considered the wholesome thing to do to tell a lesbian that she should give lady dicks a chance because they have a different mouth feel than "cis" dicks.

8
adungititever thinked how mens feel ?•

But GC doesn't accept that there are good and bad trans people,

Question: if women should endanger themselves in order to validate transwomen and prove they are not terf transphobes who think all transwomen are violent and dangerous, why is it still taken for granted that men cannot ever enter women's spaces? Is it because you think all men are violent and dangerous? Why do transwomen deserve exceptions just because there are some good ones while men don't? Because good men don't exist?

7
SqueakyBall•

Good question.

This whole "good" and "bad" transwomen idea is weird and moralistic and misses the point of GC's issues entirely.

9
FentanyaTrans woman - HRT since Dec 2018•

Because transmeds believe you must have dysphoria to be a "true" transsexual, whereas GC believes "There ain't no such thang as a """"true"""" transsexual!"

10
adungititever thinked how mens feel ?•

GC does not claim that dysphoria doesn't exist, but that it makes one a woman as much as someone's mental-illness-induced delusions make someone the new Jesus Christ.

15
TwatchWaffleOP•

Not all of us. I can only speak for myself but I do think there is a small amount of the population suffering from dysphoria who experience an alleviation of symptoms by living life as though they were the opposite gender. As a society we need to make sure those people are not unfairly marginalized because of their condition. I think where my beliefs and that of TS agree is that small portion of the population has been seized upon by people with either nefarious purposes or simply selfish ones, even if they aren't aware. I believe it is because of that later group, not the former we are experiencing most of the issues we are today. Believing there are some true trans people seems to be a common belief from what I've seen on GC subs.

I think possibly you might be meaning transmeds believes you must have dysphoria to be a true transexual and there for a true woman (assuming MTF) and GC believes no person not born a female will or ever could do anything to be a true woman. This is a point we obviously just won't agree on and I see most topics here devolve into that exact argument. However I think if we could table that point of contention we could find common goals to work towards.

11
RepresentativeNose7•

Yeah I mean transsexualism , understood and treated as a psychiatric disorder, has been around for decades and there hasn’t been a problem. Some radfems had no issue with them.

Self-ID, streamlining treatment without addressing other mental health issues... that is what we see as a problem

11
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1
[deleted]•

[deleted]

0†
branks4nothing•

-snip-

16
gayorles57•

Lol seriously, it's obvious here that "compromise" is code for "total capitulation by the female sex class."

3
TwatchWaffleOP•

In a diffrent reply to me you talked about transmed / true transsexuals "wanting to invade womens spaces only as much as nessicary".

That has a negative connotation and an implication that these people don't or shouldn't belong and by showing up are doing something bad.

I can understand how it gives off a negative connotation, I didn't mean to use offensive words but rather descriptive to how a woman feels in those places. Considering many of the female only spaces were designed for safety for people who were female birthed from those who were male birthed I think it is difficult without discussing specifics. Also, I think many of us would feel different about most of them if we were talking about fully transexual people. When it comes to bathrooms I knew transexual people used Womens bathrooms since I was old enough to know transexual people existed and I couldn't care less. However when it became advertised that natalmales could go to the women's and no one should stop them no matter how they present, it became an actual safety issue. Now we have cross dressing 'genderfluid' males who decided to put on a dress that day and wack off in the ladies next to kids and no one is allowed to say anything. These two things are vassssstly different.

People have spoken in GC about natal males inviting themselves into PCOS forums, miscarriage support groups, women's infertility groups, these to me are places natal males would only go if they are trying to be invasive and no natal woman should need to feel they need to accept this incursion in the name of inclusion.

For some of the actual physical spaces to me it would depend on the space and it would depend on how many requirements were involved before a true transexual got their 'woman spaces' card for lack of a better term. I don't believe people with male anatomy or male sexed functioning genitalia should be in places where natal women don't have a choice to be in extremely close contact with them. Think prison, women's shelters, over night hospital rooms. That isn't to say I don't feel transexuals do not deserve medical attention or help but I don't think risking natal women is acceptable and there needs to be some separate services available. For the same reasons transexuals need separation and protection from natal males so do natal females. There's also the added issue it seems so many people coopting the trans label have some form of fetishized sexual compulsion the trans label has given them carte blanche to act on in public. It isn't just that as natal women we have natal males in these vulnerable places, it seems we have some of the most dangerous and disturbed natal males with us in these vulnerable places. That wasn't meant as a personal dig to any transgendered person on this sub.

I'm curious from a transmedicalist opinion on which women's spaces specifically you would feel is either off limits to them or they just believe both camps would be suited if there were separate services available.

6
Bad_Girl_LalaVagina Person- notalltrans•

They still feel entitled to our spaces. They're just nicer about it and promise to behave.

For some of the actual physical spaces to me it would depend on the space and it would depend on how many requirements were involved before a true transexual got their 'woman spaces' card for lack of a better term.

What spaces do you feel they should have access to? What requirements do you think should be in place for their woman spaces card?

9
Bad_Girl_LalaVagina Person- notalltrans•

Lol, basically this. The only thing we agree on is that TRAs are insane and messing things up for everyone.

10
LoveSloaneI finally learned how to flair! flairy flair•

How are we supposed to know who the “true” transsexuals are in real life? In our spaces?

10
FancyRedditAccountActually critical of Gender, Noam Chomsky acolyte.•

So transmeds don't regard autogynephiles who get surgery and hormone treatment to be true transexual/transgender?

7
Chronoset1•

That about sums it up

4†
meliss4091•

because they are fundementally at odds about what transwomen are and how they should be treated socially as well as what the treatment for gender dysphoria should be.

10
ComfortableStressPro-Trans•

(I'm not a party member of either group.)

I don't think theres enough agreement within each group to generalize the differences between them. If we try to compare and contrast the most extreme differences in claims then the far-GC claims that all males are indistinguishable and all females are indistinguishable. Far-GC claims that medically transitioning has no impact on how males should be grouped and females should be grouped.

Far-transmedicalists claim medically transitioning may result in a socially significant metaphysical transition between genders.

We can find claims held by moderate individuals from each group that are in strong agreement and claims held by extreme individuals from each group that are in strong disagreement.

9
snarky-The maggotiest of coconuts•

Transmeds typically call themselves their transitioned sex (e.g. an ftm will call themselves a man and male), support the transition of minors, support legal and social change of sex, consider transition to have a real impact on biological sex, support the brain sex theory of dysphoria, etc.

The differences are pretty wide.

7
villanelle23eve•

I agree with the question. There's obviously a pivotal difference in beliefs, but more working together could happen.

6
snowfloeckchen•

Doesn't every trans person dislike gc?

2
Maskbehindmasks•

I would have little issue with gcs if they would stop arguing for programs and policies that put our safety and ability to support ourselves in danger.

Just look at the wolf brief in Harris for the perfect example.

1†
SqueakyBall•

I would have little issue with transwomen and to a less extent transmen if they would stop arguing for laws, programs and policies that put girls' and women's safety, privacy and dignity at risk; that directly threaten our right to organize and protect ourselves, not to mention study issues (criminal, medical, etc.) directly affecting us and our oppressors.

24
adungititever thinked how mens feel ?•

You mean when we argue against your programs and policies that endanger and stereotype us, which you then try to twist to mean that we are attacking you.

18
LoveSloaneI finally learned how to flair! flairy flair•

This. Why would we support programs and policies that are harmful to us? The problem is that the needs of transwomen will probably always conflict with the needs of women, and I don’t see how to fix that.

And yet, somehow we are supposed to support our own demise? Nah.

13
Maskbehindmasks•

I already provided an exact example. Wolf argued that it should be legal to fire trans people for being trans. That doesn’t help natal women. It just shits on trans people.

Hell I like separate spaces so a GC person arguning for trans women to be in separate spaces from men or natal women is fine but a lot of them are arguing we should be stuck with men and that is arguing for us to not have access to bathrooms and to be sextoys for men in prisons.

1†
LoveSloaneI finally learned how to flair! flairy flair•

I did look at it and maybe the article I read was not telling the whole story, but I didn’t see anyone saying it’s okay to fire someone because they are trans. What I read said that nobody has a right to force people (I’m assuming they mean in the work space) to pretend that they think a man is a woman or vice versa. And that if it goes against someone’s religion, they don’t have to go along with it?

I’m not saying that’s accurate and that’s the extent of the situation, I’m just saying that that’s what I’ve read, if there’s more to it, I’d love a link that goes into more detail.

Also- I don’t understand: why is not wanting WOMEN to be sextoys to males in female prisons wrong?

And you do have access to bathrooms, just not the ones you want.

Both of those examples you gave prove my point.

Transwomen want women to sacrifice the safety of females for them. And then get angry with us when we refuse?

10
[deleted]•

[deleted]

1