I wonder what the compassionate side of the equation looks like. Creating "all-gender" competitions just pulls resources from sports programs where females are already getting short shrift. And, of course, males would win in those categories as well, so that would be two opportunities for males and one for females. Not a fair option. That's why we should simply go back to male and female sports categories, but not just for the sake of the girls/women. Clear, consistent policies that reflect the reality of sex are necessary so that the damaging gender messaging isn't reinforced. That's the truly kind response, but when supporters of girls'/women's right to fairness, safety, and dignity are up against a community who has supported a male violating female boundaries, they will always be seen as cruel for their compassionate honesty.
* There are all sorts of people who identify as trans.
* They're all people.
* We need not vilify or dehumanize a group of people, some of whom are still kids, based on the intrusive, egregious, bullying actions of a few.
* We need not allow our own anger to become toxic - to us. Which can happen; I speak from experience. I'm a survivor of child sexual abuse and an outspoken feminist, lesbian writer and author who has weathered backlash including death threats. If you analyze male behavior closely, it can rightfully become infuriating. Some use that fury to fuel activism, and I have too. But in my experience, if you "feed that lion" too much, you can miss life's joys, such as today's spring weather. "Behind every jerk there's a sad story," as a friend of mine says. Seeing or imagining those sad stories can help us retain our own humanity.
As for policy: Yes, the kindest, most sensible policies offer two categories for the two sexes, along with age, weight and disability categories sometimes, to be as fair and inclusive as possible.
@DIAGdemocrats This is such a good point from Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender, posted in response to my Gavin Newsom story on X, that I'm reposting it here.
<<As for Newsom’s vague concept of “holding both things” — fairness to females and kindness and care to males who want to be perceived as females, this really has nothing to do with women and girls. Protect their rights to sex-segregated opportunities, honors, and spaces and leave them out of the rest of it. It was never their burden to carry. If you truly want to be kind and caring to this vulnerable group of males, stop telling them they’re heroes for crossing sex-based boundaries and stop telling them that they can change sex for the mere cost of their fertility, sexual function, cardiovascular health, and future mental stability. Start working on the mental health and medical infrastructure that we’ll need to support them when they figure out it was just a massive medical abuse scandal.>>
We have to keep plugging away at this -- even though it's common fcking sense and we shouldn't even have to work at convincing people.
Thank you for all your hard work on this. I've written -- twice now -- to my U. S. Senators and am about to write to my State reps and even city councilwoman.
"ordinary, confused, mentally ill trans-identified 16-year-olds or 26-year-olds. The co-morbidity rate (not just anxiety and depression, but higher-order psychiatric disorders and autism) is very high."
As a mother of a daughter who developed an eating disorder during the pandemic, I am not suggesting that we shouldn't confer great consideration to gender distressed teens. But as the current system in California is set up, it does not confer due consideration to gender distressed teens. My daughter fully recovered from her eating disorder, and did not present with gender dysphoria, but in the course of her treatment, we encountered a healthcare and insurance system that is likely wholly unsuitable to treat the range of illnesses that a gender distressed teen might develop.
Social media is mostly based in California. There is mounting evidence that some of the distress in teens, including gender and eating disorders, is due to social media exposure and smart phone addiction. Hardcore porn is readily available and something that teens are bombarded with as soon as they get a smartphone. Because much of their homework and friend groups are accessed through laptops and smartphones, it is very difficult for teens to not have a smartphone. (For a discourse on how social media is harming the psychological well being of teens, see Jean M. Twenge and Jon Haidt, both on substack).
Have California legislators curbed the excesses of section 230 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230) that frees social media platforms from responsibility for their content? No. We live in a state where politicians at every level have turned a blind eye to smartphone enabled trafficking, grooming, hardcore porn and toxic social media content. Foremost of these is Scott Wiener, my former San Francisco supervisor and close friend of my current supervisor, Rafael Mandelman. Lest you worry that I am going to be rude to Scott or Rafael, I think they are too busy schmoozing with the wealthy to bother with me. And honestly, after being blown off by Rafeal in 2021 when I expressed by concerns about MTF trans athletes competing in women's sports, I can't be bothered to restart the conversation. It's not up to me to try to rescue the Democrats.
As a liberal Canadian/American gen-Xer, who grew up in Vancouver, British Columbia in the 70s, my demeanor is to be polite to all people.
But what of the well meaning San Franciscan/Californian who tells women not to talk about the trans issue? What of the clueless or activist person who tells women that it is not a problem when biological MTF trans athletes compete in women's sports? What of the MTF trans person who pontificates on the great injustice of not being able to use the women's restroom, not realizing that most women can't use public restrooms due to the fact that most public restrooms in California cities are filty and unmaintained? What of the nun mocking Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence? What of the coworker who suddenly one day announces on social media that they are female (but that they are keeping their penis) and thereby becomes the darling techworker token female who co-opts all dialogue about what women confront in the technology workplace?
As I said, while it is not my demeanor to be rude, if confronted by such persons, I would be calm but forthright in stating that they are infringing my rights, and the rights of women and girls. For that, chances are, they would dismiss my concerns and likely attack me as a radical and a nut. They might even try to get me fired and isolate me from my family. Such is the reality of the trans lobby.
Mariah, I appreciate what you are doing. Yes, there are gender distressed teens who deserve consideration. But the problem is so much more complicated than simply defending women's sports and otherwise being polite to trans people.
Hi Marnie, Thanks for taking the time to spell out this context, nuance, perspective.
One limitation of my weekly Substack column is that in order to keep it manageable for me and easily accessible to readers, I keep it short.
I'm glad to have readers like you who expand on my work.
BTW I fully support you to "be calm but forthright in stating that they are infringing my rights, and the rights of women and girls."
Or do that without being calm. Losing one's temper is not always a bad thing either, and we need not control our emotions "perfectly." Men surely don't. Though yes, the consequences of public female rage are much different.
I was trying to say something else, but I'm not sure I said it very well. I had an individual trans friend in mind. We've been engaged in an important conversation, and it's expanding my worldview and my heart. Maybe I should have just said that, and left Newsom out of it. Maybe I'll say more about that conversation in the future.
In any case, appreciate your input, and that of many others. How fabulous to be teaching and reaching each other this way! Sincerely, M.
I think about the anger issue a lot. I guess it’s a question of what is effective communication and who are we talking to? I think usually those who remain calm - whether men or women - are more effective communicators in the sense that they tend to be more in control of what comes out of their mouth and therefore more eloquent. Also, many people will just shut off anyone who is angry and yelling. I know I will. And I regret the few times I let my anger out at people and therefore failed to get my point across. Some people have accused me of “tone policing” when I’ve given this advice. Sure you have the right to yell and scream. And people have the right to ignore you and write you off when you do. My 2-cents anyway.
My experience as well is that it is easier to hear out the arguments of a well reasoned calm person. But it is not always possible. Also, it is hard to have nuanced conversations on platforms like X/Twitter. If on X/Twitter, many of these attempted nuanced conversations get hijacked. As you both (Donna and Mariah) point out, a different standard for acceptance of aggression is applied to women. Not fair, but reality. So I try to be calm. If I sense that I won't be calm, I generally say nothing.
Alternative view (from Jennifer Bilek's substack):
The Dark Money Behind the Trans Movement
Jennifer Bilek with Jonathon Van Maren
Trans activism is highly orchestrated and the incursions into women's sports (and other spaces) cannot be stopped without concerted effort. I am not a fan of being rude or disrespectful to trans people. At the same time, politeness alone is not going to reverse the trans lobby. They are not interested in politeness or kindness. They are interested in libeling, smearing, de-platforming and terrifying women when women try to defend women's sports, women's healthcare, women's professional shortlists and women's safe spaces.
Newsom mentions that some trans people are vulnerable. Does he mention the trafficked, degraded, harassed, and objectified women and girls in his own state? No.
I'm not advocating that trans people should be spoken of badly. But when they act out with disrespect toward women, it should be called out.
I'm fed up with the call outs obligating women to be kind to people who are not kind to them.
Hi Marnie, I hear ya. We're all sick of the "just be kind" message and suicide manipulation.
Just to be clear - I'm not advocating for "politeness alone." I lobbied hard for the Protection of Girls and Women in Sports Act and have met weekly with the Women's Sports Policy Working Group for three years to take a variety of actions toward preserving female-only sports.
I think there's a difference between trans activists who terrorize women and ordinary, confused, mentally ill trans-identified 16-year-olds or 26-year-olds. The co-morbidity rate (not just anxiety and depression, but higher-order psychiatric disorders and autism) is very high.
Think anorexics: others with extremely dysfunctional relationships with their own bodies. Yes, I know anorexics don't insist on rights that are not theirs, etc. But they're people with an illness: a distorted sense of their bodies and how to resolve that problem.
Just on a human level - and, in my case, to maintain my own sense of compassion for ppl who are obviously suffering - I'm choosing to consider the pain behind the identities.
In many cases these are children/people who are deeply unhappy, depressed, abused or autistic who are told that transition is the miracle solution. It is upsetting that this is now considered a social justice problem and not a mental health issue
“Next time you hear, “But there aren’t that many,” consider the collateral damage.”
One girl being displaced by a boy on her team or from winning a medal or scholarship is one too many. The fact that people say that shows they still consider girls must be quiet and accept losing opportunities, because boys are once again considered more important.
I find it fine that Newsome has made a clear statement, most politicians, democrats and republicans alike haven’t.
Complaining that he made the statement is a mystifying position. Would one prefer he hadn’t? Saying one prefers that he had made it a decade ago is meaningless because it only affects this point forward, you couldn’t have felt that way now if he had. There are no time machines.
Take the inches forward towards a better position, consolidate and leverage further.
Consolidating support of women for Democrats the next 2 years and finding firm standing with all lower income families and men in particular moves the democrats to better ground.
Whoever says that men and boys are unwelcome in women and girls sports needs our support. Gov Newsome included. Maybe even more than others because he WAS the lead on welcoming same-sex marriage. He does have political influence. With support, he might just maybe go on to do something about it. When people who want boys out of girls sports (most of the country) are infighting about who is the right messanger, we are stomping all over the message. Sure I’d like to have Sen. Amy Klobucher find her voice. I’d like every single Dem Senator who voted against protecting girls sports (that’s every single one of them) come to their senses. But we must take who we can get. In this polarized and punishing party loyalty environment, it’s easier to go along or let someone else take the fire. So thank you Gov. You are a start.
Yes, good point, let's not shoot the messenger. And a lot of people listen to Newsom. Californians seem to be going nuts in response - because they're surprised. If he can challenge them to open their minds... a good thing.
Mariah, in yours and the whole Working Group's honor and with endless thanks, ROAR Women NYC has put out this call to action today: https://substack.com/@susanscheid/note/c-99460615? Thank you for all you and all at the Working Group do. Let's hope our Democratic electeds wise up and listen to you.
I don't care that 'male' is painful to trans identified males. That is something they will have to deal with. I know now with 100% certainty that if we concede the words 'woman' and 'female' they will use that to take the rest of our rights with it. So there can be no compromise anymore. No politeness. No "just be kind."
Exactly right! Allowing such men to get a foot in the door to “womanhood” and the “be kind” strategy is what got us to this place to in the first place!
Ok. Is it possible to be angry and set boundaries and tell the truth -- in a respectful way? I think so. Fine to disagree. Just want to clarify that my message is not "just be kind."
Sorry if I was unclear. I didn't think that was your message. I'm just explaining how I have changed since I first started looking at this and was happy to call TiMs "she" out of politeness.
I love this write up so much! Please see my substacks and my 90+ minute youtube video on women cancelled,
Banned, ostracized, fired and sued for speaking out against and holding gender critical beliefs. https://youtu.be/0t1kb7o294c?si=uQdChoocPDzZEoEg
I wonder what the compassionate side of the equation looks like. Creating "all-gender" competitions just pulls resources from sports programs where females are already getting short shrift. And, of course, males would win in those categories as well, so that would be two opportunities for males and one for females. Not a fair option. That's why we should simply go back to male and female sports categories, but not just for the sake of the girls/women. Clear, consistent policies that reflect the reality of sex are necessary so that the damaging gender messaging isn't reinforced. That's the truly kind response, but when supporters of girls'/women's right to fairness, safety, and dignity are up against a community who has supported a male violating female boundaries, they will always be seen as cruel for their compassionate honesty.
The compassionate side is that we remember:
* There are all sorts of people who identify as trans.
* They're all people.
* We need not vilify or dehumanize a group of people, some of whom are still kids, based on the intrusive, egregious, bullying actions of a few.
* We need not allow our own anger to become toxic - to us. Which can happen; I speak from experience. I'm a survivor of child sexual abuse and an outspoken feminist, lesbian writer and author who has weathered backlash including death threats. If you analyze male behavior closely, it can rightfully become infuriating. Some use that fury to fuel activism, and I have too. But in my experience, if you "feed that lion" too much, you can miss life's joys, such as today's spring weather. "Behind every jerk there's a sad story," as a friend of mine says. Seeing or imagining those sad stories can help us retain our own humanity.
As for policy: Yes, the kindest, most sensible policies offer two categories for the two sexes, along with age, weight and disability categories sometimes, to be as fair and inclusive as possible.
x
@DIAGdemocrats This is such a good point from Democrats for an Informed Approach to Gender, posted in response to my Gavin Newsom story on X, that I'm reposting it here.
<<As for Newsom’s vague concept of “holding both things” — fairness to females and kindness and care to males who want to be perceived as females, this really has nothing to do with women and girls. Protect their rights to sex-segregated opportunities, honors, and spaces and leave them out of the rest of it. It was never their burden to carry. If you truly want to be kind and caring to this vulnerable group of males, stop telling them they’re heroes for crossing sex-based boundaries and stop telling them that they can change sex for the mere cost of their fertility, sexual function, cardiovascular health, and future mental stability. Start working on the mental health and medical infrastructure that we’ll need to support them when they figure out it was just a massive medical abuse scandal.>>
BRAVA, Mariah!!
We have to keep plugging away at this -- even though it's common fcking sense and we shouldn't even have to work at convincing people.
Thank you for all your hard work on this. I've written -- twice now -- to my U. S. Senators and am about to write to my State reps and even city councilwoman.
And thank you, Lisa, for teaming up to add your voice on numerous fronts. We're getting there.
"ordinary, confused, mentally ill trans-identified 16-year-olds or 26-year-olds. The co-morbidity rate (not just anxiety and depression, but higher-order psychiatric disorders and autism) is very high."
As a mother of a daughter who developed an eating disorder during the pandemic, I am not suggesting that we shouldn't confer great consideration to gender distressed teens. But as the current system in California is set up, it does not confer due consideration to gender distressed teens. My daughter fully recovered from her eating disorder, and did not present with gender dysphoria, but in the course of her treatment, we encountered a healthcare and insurance system that is likely wholly unsuitable to treat the range of illnesses that a gender distressed teen might develop.
Social media is mostly based in California. There is mounting evidence that some of the distress in teens, including gender and eating disorders, is due to social media exposure and smart phone addiction. Hardcore porn is readily available and something that teens are bombarded with as soon as they get a smartphone. Because much of their homework and friend groups are accessed through laptops and smartphones, it is very difficult for teens to not have a smartphone. (For a discourse on how social media is harming the psychological well being of teens, see Jean M. Twenge and Jon Haidt, both on substack).
Have California legislators curbed the excesses of section 230 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230) that frees social media platforms from responsibility for their content? No. We live in a state where politicians at every level have turned a blind eye to smartphone enabled trafficking, grooming, hardcore porn and toxic social media content. Foremost of these is Scott Wiener, my former San Francisco supervisor and close friend of my current supervisor, Rafael Mandelman. Lest you worry that I am going to be rude to Scott or Rafael, I think they are too busy schmoozing with the wealthy to bother with me. And honestly, after being blown off by Rafeal in 2021 when I expressed by concerns about MTF trans athletes competing in women's sports, I can't be bothered to restart the conversation. It's not up to me to try to rescue the Democrats.
As a liberal Canadian/American gen-Xer, who grew up in Vancouver, British Columbia in the 70s, my demeanor is to be polite to all people.
But what of the well meaning San Franciscan/Californian who tells women not to talk about the trans issue? What of the clueless or activist person who tells women that it is not a problem when biological MTF trans athletes compete in women's sports? What of the MTF trans person who pontificates on the great injustice of not being able to use the women's restroom, not realizing that most women can't use public restrooms due to the fact that most public restrooms in California cities are filty and unmaintained? What of the nun mocking Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence? What of the coworker who suddenly one day announces on social media that they are female (but that they are keeping their penis) and thereby becomes the darling techworker token female who co-opts all dialogue about what women confront in the technology workplace?
As I said, while it is not my demeanor to be rude, if confronted by such persons, I would be calm but forthright in stating that they are infringing my rights, and the rights of women and girls. For that, chances are, they would dismiss my concerns and likely attack me as a radical and a nut. They might even try to get me fired and isolate me from my family. Such is the reality of the trans lobby.
Mariah, I appreciate what you are doing. Yes, there are gender distressed teens who deserve consideration. But the problem is so much more complicated than simply defending women's sports and otherwise being polite to trans people.
Hi Marnie, Thanks for taking the time to spell out this context, nuance, perspective.
One limitation of my weekly Substack column is that in order to keep it manageable for me and easily accessible to readers, I keep it short.
I'm glad to have readers like you who expand on my work.
BTW I fully support you to "be calm but forthright in stating that they are infringing my rights, and the rights of women and girls."
Or do that without being calm. Losing one's temper is not always a bad thing either, and we need not control our emotions "perfectly." Men surely don't. Though yes, the consequences of public female rage are much different.
I was trying to say something else, but I'm not sure I said it very well. I had an individual trans friend in mind. We've been engaged in an important conversation, and it's expanding my worldview and my heart. Maybe I should have just said that, and left Newsom out of it. Maybe I'll say more about that conversation in the future.
In any case, appreciate your input, and that of many others. How fabulous to be teaching and reaching each other this way! Sincerely, M.
I think about the anger issue a lot. I guess it’s a question of what is effective communication and who are we talking to? I think usually those who remain calm - whether men or women - are more effective communicators in the sense that they tend to be more in control of what comes out of their mouth and therefore more eloquent. Also, many people will just shut off anyone who is angry and yelling. I know I will. And I regret the few times I let my anger out at people and therefore failed to get my point across. Some people have accused me of “tone policing” when I’ve given this advice. Sure you have the right to yell and scream. And people have the right to ignore you and write you off when you do. My 2-cents anyway.
My experience as well is that it is easier to hear out the arguments of a well reasoned calm person. But it is not always possible. Also, it is hard to have nuanced conversations on platforms like X/Twitter. If on X/Twitter, many of these attempted nuanced conversations get hijacked. As you both (Donna and Mariah) point out, a different standard for acceptance of aggression is applied to women. Not fair, but reality. So I try to be calm. If I sense that I won't be calm, I generally say nothing.
Good. A lot to be said for self-control. And yes, consequences for women who "get hysterical."
Personally I’m afraid of men who are not calm and just annoyed at women who aren’t. 😫
TRUTH SPOKEN !! 👏🏻👏🏻
:-) Thanks, Brad!
Alternative view (from Jennifer Bilek's substack):
The Dark Money Behind the Trans Movement
Jennifer Bilek with Jonathon Van Maren
Trans activism is highly orchestrated and the incursions into women's sports (and other spaces) cannot be stopped without concerted effort. I am not a fan of being rude or disrespectful to trans people. At the same time, politeness alone is not going to reverse the trans lobby. They are not interested in politeness or kindness. They are interested in libeling, smearing, de-platforming and terrifying women when women try to defend women's sports, women's healthcare, women's professional shortlists and women's safe spaces.
Newsom mentions that some trans people are vulnerable. Does he mention the trafficked, degraded, harassed, and objectified women and girls in his own state? No.
I'm not advocating that trans people should be spoken of badly. But when they act out with disrespect toward women, it should be called out.
I'm fed up with the call outs obligating women to be kind to people who are not kind to them.
Hi Marnie, I hear ya. We're all sick of the "just be kind" message and suicide manipulation.
Just to be clear - I'm not advocating for "politeness alone." I lobbied hard for the Protection of Girls and Women in Sports Act and have met weekly with the Women's Sports Policy Working Group for three years to take a variety of actions toward preserving female-only sports.
I've written about the subject here on Substack dozens of times. See: https://strongerwomen.substack.com/s/save-womens-sports
I think there's a difference between trans activists who terrorize women and ordinary, confused, mentally ill trans-identified 16-year-olds or 26-year-olds. The co-morbidity rate (not just anxiety and depression, but higher-order psychiatric disorders and autism) is very high.
Think anorexics: others with extremely dysfunctional relationships with their own bodies. Yes, I know anorexics don't insist on rights that are not theirs, etc. But they're people with an illness: a distorted sense of their bodies and how to resolve that problem.
Just on a human level - and, in my case, to maintain my own sense of compassion for ppl who are obviously suffering - I'm choosing to consider the pain behind the identities.
In many cases these are children/people who are deeply unhappy, depressed, abused or autistic who are told that transition is the miracle solution. It is upsetting that this is now considered a social justice problem and not a mental health issue
Yes. Thanks.
“Next time you hear, “But there aren’t that many,” consider the collateral damage.”
One girl being displaced by a boy on her team or from winning a medal or scholarship is one too many. The fact that people say that shows they still consider girls must be quiet and accept losing opportunities, because boys are once again considered more important.
💯
I agree.
I find it fine that Newsome has made a clear statement, most politicians, democrats and republicans alike haven’t.
Complaining that he made the statement is a mystifying position. Would one prefer he hadn’t? Saying one prefers that he had made it a decade ago is meaningless because it only affects this point forward, you couldn’t have felt that way now if he had. There are no time machines.
Take the inches forward towards a better position, consolidate and leverage further.
Consolidating support of women for Democrats the next 2 years and finding firm standing with all lower income families and men in particular moves the democrats to better ground.
Male is painful to transwomen? Too bad! They have to face reality.
Whoever says that men and boys are unwelcome in women and girls sports needs our support. Gov Newsome included. Maybe even more than others because he WAS the lead on welcoming same-sex marriage. He does have political influence. With support, he might just maybe go on to do something about it. When people who want boys out of girls sports (most of the country) are infighting about who is the right messanger, we are stomping all over the message. Sure I’d like to have Sen. Amy Klobucher find her voice. I’d like every single Dem Senator who voted against protecting girls sports (that’s every single one of them) come to their senses. But we must take who we can get. In this polarized and punishing party loyalty environment, it’s easier to go along or let someone else take the fire. So thank you Gov. You are a start.
Yes, good point, let's not shoot the messenger. And a lot of people listen to Newsom. Californians seem to be going nuts in response - because they're surprised. If he can challenge them to open their minds... a good thing.
My response to Gavin Nuisance is that I don't believe a word he says about anything. It's only interesting as a barometer for the winds of change.
Agree!
Mariah, in yours and the whole Working Group's honor and with endless thanks, ROAR Women NYC has put out this call to action today: https://substack.com/@susanscheid/note/c-99460615? Thank you for all you and all at the Working Group do. Let's hope our Democratic electeds wise up and listen to you.
I don't care that 'male' is painful to trans identified males. That is something they will have to deal with. I know now with 100% certainty that if we concede the words 'woman' and 'female' they will use that to take the rest of our rights with it. So there can be no compromise anymore. No politeness. No "just be kind."
Exactly right! Allowing such men to get a foot in the door to “womanhood” and the “be kind” strategy is what got us to this place to in the first place!
Ok. Is it possible to be angry and set boundaries and tell the truth -- in a respectful way? I think so. Fine to disagree. Just want to clarify that my message is not "just be kind."
Sorry if I was unclear. I didn't think that was your message. I'm just explaining how I have changed since I first started looking at this and was happy to call TiMs "she" out of politeness.
Blunt but factual!
:-) Thanks, Suzette. I specialize in blunt.