How people do misunderstand

Well, no, not really:

When feminists fought for rights such as not being sacked for becoming pregnant, or maternity pay, many business owners argued that this was an infringement of their rights. Some believed that a woman asking a small, struggling business owner for maternity pay while she couldn’t work was profoundly selfish.

This was solved by the taxpayers (through the reduction in NI payments collected) coughing up for the maternity pay.

Growing up being perceived by others as a feminine gay boy certainly wasn’t easy, but once I transitioned, in my 20s, things radically changed. The flashes of misogyny I witnessed when I was younger are now, as they are for most women, a daily reality. Some of this is banal – like the men on dating websites who call me a “stuck-up bitch” or a “desperate slag” when I turn them down. Some is more structural: when I get into my 30s, the gender pay gap will widen and I will find myself on the “wrong” side of it.

Well, no. Childless women don’t particularly have a pay gap. In fact, on average, never married childless women in their 40s have a pay premium.

36 thoughts on “How people do misunderstand”

  1. It’s not misogyny to call a given woman anything – just bad manners. We should just ignore this bollocks.

  2. I commented the other day, saying that men, whilst being able to chose perfectly appropriate names for their daughters, manage to pick stripper names for themselves, should they decide they are really women.

    Good to see that law is holding.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    Some of this is banal – like the men on dating websites who call me a “stuck-up bitch” or a “desperate slag” when I turn them down.

    Sure sweetheart. I am sure that happens all the time.

    Although it is nice to see such violent transphobia from the homosexual community.

  4. Do the dating site complementers actually know this character is a pseudo-woman?

    Cos if they actually met him after having been misled they would likely call him a lot worse.

  5. On the plus side being able to legally change your gender without a “pathologising medical report” would put the cat among the pigeons in terms of legal forms of sex discrimination.

  6. The idea seems to be that this is a question of the “competing rights” of trans and cis (non-trans) women. But this rhetoric of competition is a dead end – ultimately it isn’t a discussion or a debate, but an impasse. Its logical conclusion is a crushing ultimatum: trans rights or women’s rights. Only one can win.

    Here’s a tie-breaker – how about we go with the rights of the majority with isn’t bloody trans people. If the majority of women don’t want ‘men’ in their toilets or prisons then it’s hard luck for the minuscule number of trans people.

  7. “If the majority of women don’t want ‘men’ in their toilets or prisons or beds then it’s hard luck for the minuscule number of trans people.”

    An important addendum, I feel…

  8. OK, I accept that there are a small number of genuine gender dysmorphism cases. Fine.

    However the current tendancy to find that there’s something “phobic” about not wanting to sleep with a sex-change case, or about not wanting to have a long-term relationship with one (we are, after all, biologically predisposed to want to have children) is frankly baffling and slightly disturbing.

  9. The irony is that those with considerable experience and history in the field – Thai ladyboys – make damned sure anyone getting remotely close to them knows they are a ladyboy because nasty surprises or deliberate misleading is bad for everyone.

    I’m other words, Thai ladyboys show greater ethics and more common sense than their western counterparts. Now that’s something which should worry us.

  10. OK, I accept that there are a small number of genuine gender dysmorphism cases. Fine.

    If you mean by ‘genuine gender dysmorphism’ people who genuinely believe that they are gender x in body y (or XY as it may be) then sure.

    But it is still a delusion. Just like a fellow who genuinely thinks he is Napoleon. Or that ginger yank who thinks she’s black.

  11. ” like the men on dating websites who call me a “stuck-up bitch” or a “desperate slag” when I turn them down.” – christ who’d be desperate enough to want to date a bloke who was willing to cut off his own dick to fulfil his delusions?

  12. ‘Trans women need access to rape and domestic violence services.’

    Whatever that is.

    ‘Growing up being perceived by others as a feminine gay boy certainly wasn’t easy’

    Whah. Whah. Whah.

    ‘Likewise, we need access to services for women fleeing domestic violence’

    What? It’s got a sociology degree? ‘Services’ for everything?

    ‘When feminists fought for rights such as not being sacked for becoming pregnant, or maternity pay, many business owners argued that this was an infringement of their rights.’

    The business owners were correct. Governments have instituted legal requirements on employers, but that doesn’t make them ‘rights.’ Governments can change the requirements today.

  13. “‘When feminists fought for rights such as not being sacked for becoming pregnant, or maternity pay,” – as if this “thing” can become pregnant – or is it now demanding that it has a baby?

  14. “never married childless women in their 40s have a pay premium”: a lesbian conspiracy, obviously. Or maybe the Cat Protection League?

  15. One useful bit of understanding that arises from this article. You can see how trans-exclusionary feminism came about anyway.

  16. @moqifen:

    Stan: I want to be a woman. From now on I want you all to call me Loretta.
    Reg: What!?
    Stan: It’s my right as a man.
    Judith: Why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
    Stan: I want to have babies.
    Reg: You want to have babies?!?!?!
    Stan: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.
    Reg: But you can’t have babies.
    Stan: Don’t you oppress me.
    Reg: I’m not oppressing you, Stan — you haven’t got a womb. Where’s the
    fetus going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?
    (Stan starts crying.)

  17. “Some believed that a woman asking a small, struggling business owner for maternity pay while she couldn’t work was profoundly selfish.”
    Excuse me – who didn’t? If the business goes bankrupt then *all* the workers get no pay.

  18. “If the majority of women don’t want ‘men’ in their toilets or prisons then it’s hard luck for the minuscule number of trans people.”

    Given that I’ve so recently told you the percentage of women who do/don’t have a problem with TGs in their toilets, you’ve got no excuse.

    So tell me, what’s the percentage?

    “Steady, people, we don’t want a riled up Widow Twankey taking over the thread and demanding evidence.”

    Hah!

    “But it is still a delusion. Just like a fellow who genuinely thinks he is Napoleon. Or that ginger yank who thinks she’s black.”

    So how do they manage to change their brain anatomy?

    “However the current tendancy to find that there’s something “phobic” about not wanting to sleep with a sex-change case, or about not wanting to have a long-term relationship with one (we are, after all, biologically predisposed to want to have children) is frankly baffling and slightly disturbing.”

    There’s nothing “phobic” about that. Any more than there’s something phobic about not wanting to sleep or have a relationship with trainspotters.

    Which is not to say that I think someone should get beaten up or killed if you go out with them and only subsequently discover they’re a trainspotter. Breaking off the relationship is generally sufficient.

  19. These rights were eventually won by looking at the bigger picture: women being able to remain in professional life is good not only for individual mothers but our culture as a whole.

    Care to provide a citation, Shon?
    I encountered this argument from a group of (female) lawyers who asserted that maternity leave, plus a requirement to keep lawyer-mothers ‘on the partnership track’ when they return to work was a boon to the profession, since it retained their valuable talents. My response, that if their talents were so much in demand they wouldn’t have had to approach their Bar Association (Upper Canada, IIRC) to establish such rules, because their firms would already be making those arrangements without coercion was discounted. Apparently an argument from economics is unreliable; I suppose there are no such things as revealed preferences…

  20. “Some believed that a woman asking a small, struggling business owner for maternity pay while she couldn’t work was profoundly selfish.”

    What reasonable man – sorry, person – doesn’t think it is entirely reasonable for a struggling small business to have to pay for their loony staff to have their genitalia inverted?

  21. @NiV

    +1

    I notice Josephine (?) isn’t posting here anymore.

    Not really surprised, most of you are behaving like neanderthals trying to prove each is more manly, less gay than previous poster.

    I don’t agree with the extreme TS rights agenda. Equally, I don’t agree with classing TSs as deranged and mentally ill.

    It’s OK to mock recent absurdities, but avoid being cruel and classing all TS as lefty SJWs – many are Right, but based on comments here, may feel excluded and rebel or not vote.

    Remember, it’s the Left who are intolerant, not Libertarian/Right.

  22. Widow T: Given that I’ve so recently told you the percentage of women who do/don’t have a problem with TGs in their toilets, you’ve got no excuse.

    I didn’t spot the figures because I don’t read your posts all the way through but clearly you have some data which says that a proportion of women don’t mind.

    My twofold question, in response, would be to ask you how one should respond to the proportion of women who do mind and who may have grown up used to the idea that the female loo was exclusively female and to what degree the proportion of women who do not object would decrease if the transgendered “woman” in question still had a willy with standard accoutrements?

    In passing, you appear to accept that TGs are not women since you admit the distinction and once that fundamental point is agreed there isn’t much left to argue about.

  23. No more services for women until we get some services for men.

    When my co-worker kept staring at my crotch, I had no one to report her to.

    I think it high time men call the police and file charges of sexual assault when a women touches them. The can’t just touch us anytime they want to anymore.

  24. “I didn’t spot the figures because I don’t read your posts all the way through but clearly you have some data which says that a proportion of women don’t mind.”

    My point was that you’d clearly assumed that most women would object, but had based that view on no data.

    “My twofold question, in response, would be to ask you…”

    Do you intend to pay attention to my answer this time? 🙂

    “…would be to ask you how one should respond to the proportion of women who do mind and who may have grown up used to the idea that the female loo was exclusively female…”

    Same thing that happens with people who grew up thinking the front of the bus was exclusively for whites. You don’t get to tell other people what they can do, or where they can go, except to prevent harm to others. (Or, on a pure libertarian basis, because you own the joint. But if you go that way, prepare to be excluded from public spaces yourself.)

    “… and to what degree the proportion of women who do not object would decrease if the transgendered “woman” in question still had a willy with standard accoutrements?”

    No distinction is made in the surveys I’ve seen – the definition includes both. Just because you make a distinction doesn’t mean most other people do.

    But judge for yourself.
    http://www.bsa.natcen.ac.uk/media/39147/bsa34_moral_issues_final.pdf

    “In passing, you appear to accept that TGs are not women since you admit the distinction and once that fundamental point is agreed there isn’t much left to argue about.”

    They are for some purposes and not for others. Is a bearded lady a woman? For the purposes of selling shaving products, for example, possibly not. I’m not proposing any denial of objective reality. The point is that they have the genitals of a man but the brain of a woman – the question of ‘which they are’ taken as an absolute makes no sense. Both. Neither. What definition are you using?

    From a legal point of view, they’re women. From a social point of view, they’re women – for most purposes apart from reproduction or medical. From a ‘majority vote’ point of view they’re to be treated as women. But there are many definitions for which they’d be classified men. Or both. Or neither. Or in between. The same, of course, could be applied to anyone. We could define a “man” to be someone capable of crushing a beer can with one hand (as someone did with me, once). But so what? Why should anyone else use your definition?

    You have the right to your own opinion, and that includes the right to define the moon as ‘green cheese’, but you don’t get the right to impose that view on anyone else. You don’t get to impose any harm on others if they fail to agree with or act in accordance with your definitions.

    Most TGs, I think, would settle for not being continually harassed just for walking down the street, or going into a shop and buying stuff, or trying to get a job, or going to the toilet. They don’t give a toss about pronouns – it’s mildly annoying if people persistently and *deliberately* use the wrong one, but people doing that are just shitheads and so what? Like most people, they’re mainly interested in what affects their safety, their wealth, or their health. They don’t want to take over the world, or punish people for being ignorant about it. They just want to mind their own business and live their own lives. Some of them even vote conservative! They’re just people, like everyone else.

  25. @NiV

    From your linked report:

    Over 8 in 10 (82%) describe themselves as “not prejudiced at all”, while 15% say they are “a little prejudiced”, and just 2% say they are “very prejudiced” (Table 3). Of course, this question does have the possibility of a social desirability bias affecting the responses.

    You’ll tell me the report addresses this by asking the same question in a different way with these results:

    only 53% condemn transphobia completely, saying that prejudice against people who are transgender is “always wrong”, however a further 19% say that prejudice against transgender people is “mostly wrong”, meaning a total of 72% have a largely negative view of prejudice against transgender people.

    But we also get this:

    However, less than half of people say suitably qualified transgender people should definitely be employed as police officers or primary school teachers (43% and 41% respectively).

    The classic expressed vs revealed argument – if asked people want to put the correct answer despite their actual feelings on the matter.

    If they are unlikely to be confronted by a tranny in the toilet (and let’s face it with so few gender confused people about they probably won’t) then they say it’s okay.

    Once they know they’ll encounter them (teacher or police) then they are a lot less accommodating.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *