In this newsletter: An exploration of gender in sports and what it would look like if all genders competed together. Plus a look at the paranoia around trans-people and bathrooms.
When I think about my experience growing up learning to play soccer, I wish I would have been on boys teams or co-ed teams when I was younger. Boys are taught to be more aggressive on the field, less scared of pain, etc. Certainly my coaches pushed me, but they also viewed me as a girl, which inherently means I'm weaker, less aggressive, less stamina, etc. so I was treated that way, never pushed to the next level. I got the opportunity to play on a boys team when I was 13. They were far better at that age than I was. It wasn't because I was less athletic, it was because no one pushed me to be better in that specific way. That year on the boys team got me to my best in terms of willingness to accept pain as part of the game, to push myself until my lungs and legs were on fire. It was more of a strategic miss than a physical miss. If my coaches hadn't viewed me as a girl, that would have in turn lead to the strategic advantages that boys were coming by naturally from the way they were VIEWED, TREATED, TRAINED, and COACHED. My body wasn't the problem, the perception of my gender was.
So I disagree with the statement that "it is very clear that males have a physical advantage over females." I think they have the same advantage in sports as they do almost every where else. By being treated as better and more capable than women in this area they have out-performed women a lot of the time.
This is comparable to men being viewed as not as good at parenting. They were viewed through that lens throughout history, which means they weren't treated that they could be good at parenting, which means they didn't get the same training as women did. The cool thing is this is, for the most part, shifting. Men are now being viewed as good, present parents, capable of changing diapers, playing with their kids, etc. Women aren't inherently better, we have been societally pushed in one direction. The fact that it is shifting based on society viewing parenting and gender different just proves that sports can change too with a change in how society views women, men, gender in sports.
curious to know why this comment got its writer banned? The disagreement doesn’t seem hostile or offensive…feels like you could easily rebut her points?
Valid question. I'm still experimenting with Substack's moderation tools. Each platform offers different options. Twitter has a mute option that I really like. Instagram will let you block an account plus any future accounts the person make (so useful and I wish other platforms did this!). On Substack, the main option they offer is to "ban" someone from further commenting for specific amounts of time — 24 hours, a few days, a week, a month, permanently, etc. The "bans" allow the existing comments to remain in place.
The comment from "Kate" had some red flags. It came from an anonymous account that isn't subscribed to my newsletter or to any other substack newsletters. I've only shared this newsletter with subscribers and on Twitter, so I could assume Kate was coming from Twitter. I deal with a lot of harassment on Twitter and I was instantly wary. So I enacted a 24-hour comment ban for Kate just so I could observe the comment section and see if I need to take further action — if Kate's plan was to harass people, this temporary ban would hopefully make them lose interest and head back to Twitter. I haven't tried a 24-hour ban before and I'm not sure if I like it yet. Kate's ban will expire later today.
Other issues with the comment: It is explicitly anti-trans while pretending not to be. And it's the first comment on the post. I've moderated thousands of posts and I know the first comment can often set the tone and drive off other commenters. So I thought a "ban" could function as a warning that anti-trans comments aren't welcome here.
Again, still experimenting with Substack's options. I have mixed feelings about their "ban" tools. They are not what I would choose or design for moderation tools, but it's all they've got at the moment.
UPDATE:
After Kate's ban expired, she came back and left over a dozen comments across both posts attempting to use the comment section to promote her anti-trans views. I should have followed my instincts and banned her outright from the beginning. She is definitely a troll and is now permanently banned, and I've deleted some of her comments. Other comments of hers I'm letting remain because there are responses to them. But I may decide to delete those too.
You can disagree with how I moderate comment sections, but I am very practiced at it and I trust my own experience, so I'm going to keep doing what I know works best.
Hi Design Mom! Protecting the rights of women is not anti-trans. Respecting transgender people shouldn’t mean that women have their rights removed (fair competition, safety, etc.). The Economist offered the idea of three categories for competition that seems promising: women, men, and open. Trans women should be respected and able to participate in life, just like all of us - but not when their participation creates unfair competition. Because of biological differences between the sexes, categories for biological women should always exist. How would feel if you, or your daughter, placed lower in a long jump competition, because a biological male out-jumped you? This may not bother you, and as you said, things happen in sports. It’s not the end of the world, of course, but it is definitely not fair competition.
The assumption that respecting transgender people means women have their rights removed, or makes for unfair competition, is faulty, based in fear and paranoia, and most definitely anti-trans.
Trans people have competed in the Olympics for the last 20 years and nobody was bothered until now. In those two decades not a single trans woman has won a medal.
Hi Design Mom! Thank you for your response! Competition results, when comparing men and women, are different, providing clear evidence that competition that combines the sexes is unfair. One example: Florence Griffith Joyner: 10.49 in 100M; Usain Bolt: 9.58 in 100M. How do you see this data? This data tells me that the sexes need to be separated, so that Florence could have the opportunity to earn a gold medal. How does noticing this data cause my views to be paranoid? I believe that all who want to participate in sports should be able to, and should have fair opportunity, based on their effort, to earn recognition for it. We don’t allow able-bodied people in Paralympic categories, because the competition would then be unfair. What do you think of a third category titled open? It seems that that would preserve fair competition, while allowing transgender people the opportunity to compete as well.
It feels like maybe you didn't read this newsletter? I specifically talk about sprinters. (Granted, I know the newsletter is long so many you missed it.)
And yes, I do think the view you're putting forth is paranoid. When trans people have been competing in the Olympics for decades and it hasn't been a problem, but then you promote your personal fears that it will now become a problem, I see that as paranoid.
Thank you so much for this. As always you have these mind blowing, creative answers and thoughts, while I am just baffled by how narrow minded a lot of people are. I have a hard time finding the right words in an argument and you do it so well.
My kid is trans and it hurts me how specially progressive people are weirded out by the transgender topic. See, I come frome an atheist family and God and religion has always been a foreign concept to me that I learned to respect, but don't understand. And I find it crazy how much we let churches invade safe spaces, abuse and exploit women and kids and noone is talking about shutting down religion or never letting priests work with kids again. If we are lucky, the church is dealing with the abusers, but not questioning the whole concept. So I always wondered why is it so hard to deal with the very few men who pretend to be transwomen in order to attack women, and not go after every transwomen, who wants to use the women's bathroom?
As to the topic of sports: I always sucked at sport but loved to move my body and I would have benefitted so much from a more creative and less competitive approach. I understand that competition is important for ambitious athlets but when I look at the fact that most professional athlets have a completely wrecked and worn out body by the time they are forty, I wonder if we might carried it a bit too far there, too.
So again: Thank you. This was an especially good read.
I wish your newsletters on Trans harassment were seen by many…many more than will see it. Unfortunately, those who hold views opposing yours wouldn’t be moved to change their minds because their views are based on beliefs that are deeply engrained in their brains. Perhaps some may be moved to think about these issues based on your extremely well expressed explanations, but not many.
Thank you once again…I am constantly reminded of the reasons why I support your newsletter by subscribing.
Gabrielle, this is my first comment to you, but I have read you for years. Saw your House Hunters and have your book. So it's no surprise I agree with these two emails. I have always thought that the bathroom issue was nuts. If all bathrooms had stalls this would not be an issue! Simple privacy manners and common sense could rule.
Your timing is impeccable! I just had a conversation about trans women in sports (as you said, it seems no one cares about trans men in sport) and I brought up the same idea of sport being developed inclusive of all genders. My example was gymnastics- how different would the sport be, and how would the physicality of top athletes change if flexibility and balance events (like the beam) were required for all?
I think the presence of trans and non-binary individuals are such a gift to us all, because their presence helps us all to question and dismantle the rigid stories we have been sold about gender.
Thank you for your usual clarity and wonderful links. I truly appreciate your commentary and writing.
I live in Melbourne, Australia, and I have noticed many parks and recreation areas now have genderless toilets - there is a row of toilet cubicles (all with doors, obviously) and then the taps for hand washing are outside the toilet cubicles, to be used by everyone. It is safe because every toilet cubicle opens not into a huge bathroom, but into the open. Anyone can use any toilet. This setup removes the worry of men attacking women in toilets because the only part of the facilities not visible is inside each individual toilet cubicle.
Another point about gender toilets - I have a severely disabled daughter and when I take her to a public toilet, I need to use a disability-friendly toilet so there is plenty of room in the cubicle for both my daughter and myself. In most places - parks, restaurants, shopping centres - the disabled toilet is separate to the male and female toilets, so is to be used by any disabled person. I feel lucky that we can access a disabled toilet when we are out, nevermind worrying about whether the last person to use it was a male. Perhaps toilets and bathrooms just need to be redesigned as so many have been in public areas where I live. It would certainly make life easier for people who need to toilet a child/disabled person or elderly relative of a different gender.
Side note : one of my brother-in-laws was verbally abused by a woman when he took one of his young children into a parent's room to change the child's nappy. HIS child into a PARENTS room. It upset him greatly and he was thereafter reluctant to use family change rooms with his children unless his wife was present. Some people are just horrid.
I am a boyish female (often mistaken for male) with 5 children and a disability. This disability affects women and men very differently. A lot of women have received bad treatment or the wrong treatment based on the fact that the medical community persists in thinking that women are just small men. There is current studies that are finally discovering that the reason women suffer so many more side effects to medication than men is because they are medicated as small men rather than as someone with a completely different system than the male. This is a problem which persists across a number of work situations also - such as the construction industry or even the army where defence clothing or safety wear is designed for men or small men (women) and therefore doesn’t give them adequate protection. This goes so far as safety for women in cars where crash test dummies are men or smaller men - female bodies (which respond differently in a crash) have not been used in crash tests, or at the very least are not used in the driving seat.
There is a huge missing gap when it comes to serving a large section of society’s needs.
So I was very disappointed when I was told that they were removing the mention of ‘women’ in the important department of ‘women’s health’ in hospitals. Many many more women than men suffer inadequate treatment and if the mention of this is statistically removed I worry. I was also told that I should not describe myself as a mother in case it caused offence - mention of the fact that I was a mother was removed from my medical file - this had major implications on subsequent treatment because it is a big deal to my body that I have given birth to 5 children.
My daughter is struggling with heavy periods and as a 15 year old is struggling with frustration as she is watching her male counterparts and brothers simply grow muscles and get taller and stronger with no real effort while she pushes herself in the gym and struggles to hide her daily pain as her body softens into womanhood. It is important to me that I am able to discuss her differences and accept with her that there are some aspects of her body that feels unfair. Not to just say she is essentially a small man. She is important and her body can do incredible, but very different things from the male body. It is important that I help her to praise the positives to help her to accept the downsides. This is not to reject the sad and difficult situation of someone who feels they were born in the wrong body, but just because I am already fighting to get the needs met of my children and myself. I understand that this shouldn’t mean that trans people should not be treated with kindness and dignity, but that we still have a long way to go in our (society’s) treatment (literally) of women particularly and I don’t want to see this important work abandoned - but I am seeing that this is what is happening for the mistaken belief that it will create a fairer society.
It sounds like you've read Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez. For anyone who hasn't read it, it's so worthwhile and I highly recommend it. Here's the link on Amazon: https://amzn.to/3KuEmPE The book discusses lots of very real examples of how the world was designed by men for men and how that hurts women. I think we've all seen this — my mother in law's knee replacement always comes to mind when I think about this. Her knee replacement never "worked" — even after years and lots of physical therapy she could never walk up or down stairs with the new knee, and was constantly in pain. When I learned that all artificial knees were designed for men's bodies, there was a realization that that's very likely what the problem was with my mother-in-law's knee replacement. The new knee wasn't designed with her in mind. It never fit because it wasn't made for her.
FB, Do you have some links to share about hospitals removing the word "women" and telling patients not to mention they've had babies? I'm sure you know they sound like extremist Fox News talking points, and I'm not sure what to make of them. I'd love to read more about these policies so I can get a better understanding.
Hi! Yes I did read Invisible Women, and also 'The Better half' by Sharon Moalem which is also very good and recommend you read - it concentrates on women's medical care - which is my main concern.
I have reread my post and can see why my comments could be misconstrued as I squashed together a number of facts for speed, they were a number of unrelated personal experiences, rather than one leading on from the other - so I will clarify.
I have an inherited condition which is complicated, in addition I have had an operation where they put plastic mesh in my body which has basically ruined it. I have quite complicated care as a result and am part of a variety of support groups for both the social, campaigning and medical aspects of my condition and the outcome of my operation. These groups are both national (Im in UK) and international and are vital to me and many others in sharing informaton to improve our lives but also in collaberating for better care and campaigning.
Some of these support groups have unfortunately become rather difficult as they have become dominated by a small number of people who don't want anyone to use the term 'woman', or indeed use any female terminology at all!. This makes normal conversation for women who want to discuss their own bodies difficult as there is often a horrific backlash against someone who writes - 'TMI question - can anyone help with a ladies problem?' - they will be massively bullied and shut down. The aggressive people will make a series of unfair and nasty comments and the polite people will ask that we no longer use words such as 'mother', 'woman', etc. I have been asked to describe myself as a. 'menstruater' or a 'uterus haver', they asked me to describe my daughter as a 'menstruating child'. I have not got involved in these rows but it has made me totally wary of saying anything and have withdrawn from multiple groups as I can't find ways to discuss my experience. I have noticed there have been breakaway groups set up which are for women who wish to be able to discuss the medical issues in the context of being a woman. So to be clear these are not institutions with policies, but groups - some with many thousands in them.
I also stated that mention of being a mother was removed from my medical file. As I mentioned I had a disastous operation where they implanted plastic mesh in my body. Shortly after my operation ALL my medical files, both physical and digital disappeared. I have discovered that I am one of many women whose record of this controversial operation was deleted and I suspect it was for rather nefarious reasons, not related to any gender question - the reason I mentioned it was that I hadn't realised that this had happened and so a number of medical decisions were made for me without knowledge that I had had 5 children. It meant I have had a number of years of wrong treatment. You may think this is irrelevant to your point, but it is part of a wider problem where people have been allowed to removed gender from important figures for their own purposed. Women have suffered in far greater numbers in this mesh crisis, however there have been efforts to conceal this - one of the efforts seem to be including male hernia mesh statistics (which has higher levels of success) with female mesh statistics (which has high failure rates with life changing outcomes). This greatly reduces the proportion of 'unsafe' operations by removing the male/female separation. In UK it has helped to prolong this largely female health crisis (I believe this operation is banned in america - I was not told this when I was offered it as a 'new' procedure).Even now with the campaigners they are fighting for clarity as statistics are muddied (You may see now why I condensed my facts).
As I am in UK, where we have NHS, there is separation into different trusts which can be managed very differently from one another and can have different ethos - so I can't give you an overall 'policy' where they have removed the word woman from women's health as in some areas it has been done, but in other not. Again this was based on my personal experience and what I have been told by staff.
Hello! I think that words matter and we should be inclusive and respectful of trans people with the words we use. I also think this consideration needs to extend to everyone, and I agree with FB that sometimes we try so hard to be inclusive that we don't extend that consideration to women. Two recent examples:
ACLU issued a Tweet last fall that changed a quote from Justice Ginsberg to take out the words 'woman' and 'women' and applicable pronouns and replace it with 'person' and 'people' and 'they/their' (https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1439259891064004610). The quote is a famous one: "The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices." You can see that if you replace 'woman' with 'person' it completely obfuscates what Justice Ginsberg was trying to say. I recently became a mother and while my husband is very involved in caring for our child, the sheer physical impact of pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, the hormones, and so on is intense, not to mention the social and economic impacts which are foisted on women by society--and I think I had a child under some of the best circumstances (first of all, I chose to have a child, and I'm older, financially stable, married, family to help, supportive workplace, etc.) Not having these circumstances would, I'm guessing, make the impact of bearing a child even more immense. I understand that ACLU made that change to not exclude trans men who have children, and trying to be inclusive is good, but to change Justice Ginsberg's quote to 'person' changes the meaning and makes it seems like any parent is going through the same physical, mental, social, and economic challenges as the mother, and this is not the case. So by changing the quote to make it more inclusive to one group (child bearing trans men), the words cut out another group (childbearing women).
The second example: I breastfeed my child and float in various liberal breastfeeding groups. There is a general push to use more inclusive language, like referring to chestfeeding as well as breastfeeding. I think this is fine! And I think in formalized settings (like, hospital policies) the idea is to simply use both terms depending on the patient. But in practice in some of the places I participate in, chestfeeding is seen as the default (as a way to be inclusive) and then one can request to use the term breastfeeding. Nursing your kid is such an incredibly physical process, as is so much of pregnancy and labor and those early postpartum days, that I think for many women hearing a term that does not refer to your body (breasts) when you are so physically involved could be really alienating. I also think hearing the term breastfeeding when you are a trans man who is chestfeeding could also be super alienating!
That's why I think we need to think about being genuinely inclusive with language (for instance, genuinely using multiple terms like chestfeeding and breastfeeding, woman and people with uteri), rather than just switching to new default terms (chestfeeding, or uterus haver) that make some people feel better but alienate other groups. People should be able to use (in reference to themselves) and be referred to (by others) with words they are comfortable with--that's the whole premise of using appropriate pronouns for trans gender people--and this includes women.
I am always in awe and filled with gratitude when I witness how your brain works and then puts words together in the very best order. It's a beautiful thing and inspires me to read more and think more creatively. To add to your discussion about designing competitive sports differently, I played on Intramural, co-ed, highly competitive sports teams during my university years. All teams were required to have an equal mix on the field. The men on my teams admitted to thinking more strategically about positions and the mechanics of the game on co-ed teams vs. their all men teams. It made them better and smarter players on both kinds of teams.
I know you wrote this from a trans athlete point of view (and I 1000% agree with you on that subject so just hear my "YES!" from over here), but your examination of sports made me think of a book I read called The Sports Gene. Not all men are equal, not all women are equal, and in some cases, women will beat men and in others men will beat women. Your family ancestry is probably a better predictor of what sport you'll be good at than what sport your heart loves. This is why I'm good at hockey and a horrible runner even though I had to quit hockey due to logistics (live an hour from a rink/league) and have been running (or at least trying to) for almost 20 years.
Incredible work as always, Gabrielle. Thoughtful, thought provoking, unthreatening - I wish more people out there were putting this kind of thing out into the world, and were the loudest voices around. I try to share your work when I can, and yet I often wonder, are the only people reading this those that already agree with me anyway? This is the kind of thing that should be blasted from the rooftops.
I feel so ambivalent about the sea change on this issue over the last few years. I feel like on the left end, people are quick to condemn anyone who can't get in line with the new terminology and proper new opinions fast enough (like JK Rolling and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie). The vocabulary changes so quickly that I get confused and feel like a dinosaur when I see new terms like cishet or AMAB, and I'm actually trying to keep up and I'm still in my 30s. Meanwhile another huge portion of society is having Gender Reveal parties or otherwise sticking with long-standing norms about appropriate societal roles of men and women (including - prominently- gender-restricted roles in many religious organizations). I feel like the people coming to the table to discuss, trying to understand and grow, are getting shot down as insufficiently progressive or open-minded, while half of society is not even acknowledging that anything worth noticing is going on with our understanding of sex and gender.
Am I the only one who feels like women are being erased when we use terms like "pregnant person" or "menstruating person"? Is there still room in society for female-only spaces, like women's colleges? The new orthodoxy reminds me of the "I don't see color, so I can't be racist."
When I think about my experience growing up learning to play soccer, I wish I would have been on boys teams or co-ed teams when I was younger. Boys are taught to be more aggressive on the field, less scared of pain, etc. Certainly my coaches pushed me, but they also viewed me as a girl, which inherently means I'm weaker, less aggressive, less stamina, etc. so I was treated that way, never pushed to the next level. I got the opportunity to play on a boys team when I was 13. They were far better at that age than I was. It wasn't because I was less athletic, it was because no one pushed me to be better in that specific way. That year on the boys team got me to my best in terms of willingness to accept pain as part of the game, to push myself until my lungs and legs were on fire. It was more of a strategic miss than a physical miss. If my coaches hadn't viewed me as a girl, that would have in turn lead to the strategic advantages that boys were coming by naturally from the way they were VIEWED, TREATED, TRAINED, and COACHED. My body wasn't the problem, the perception of my gender was.
So I disagree with the statement that "it is very clear that males have a physical advantage over females." I think they have the same advantage in sports as they do almost every where else. By being treated as better and more capable than women in this area they have out-performed women a lot of the time.
This is comparable to men being viewed as not as good at parenting. They were viewed through that lens throughout history, which means they weren't treated that they could be good at parenting, which means they didn't get the same training as women did. The cool thing is this is, for the most part, shifting. Men are now being viewed as good, present parents, capable of changing diapers, playing with their kids, etc. Women aren't inherently better, we have been societally pushed in one direction. The fact that it is shifting based on society viewing parenting and gender different just proves that sports can change too with a change in how society views women, men, gender in sports.
curious to know why this comment got its writer banned? The disagreement doesn’t seem hostile or offensive…feels like you could easily rebut her points?
Valid question. I'm still experimenting with Substack's moderation tools. Each platform offers different options. Twitter has a mute option that I really like. Instagram will let you block an account plus any future accounts the person make (so useful and I wish other platforms did this!). On Substack, the main option they offer is to "ban" someone from further commenting for specific amounts of time — 24 hours, a few days, a week, a month, permanently, etc. The "bans" allow the existing comments to remain in place.
The comment from "Kate" had some red flags. It came from an anonymous account that isn't subscribed to my newsletter or to any other substack newsletters. I've only shared this newsletter with subscribers and on Twitter, so I could assume Kate was coming from Twitter. I deal with a lot of harassment on Twitter and I was instantly wary. So I enacted a 24-hour comment ban for Kate just so I could observe the comment section and see if I need to take further action — if Kate's plan was to harass people, this temporary ban would hopefully make them lose interest and head back to Twitter. I haven't tried a 24-hour ban before and I'm not sure if I like it yet. Kate's ban will expire later today.
Other issues with the comment: It is explicitly anti-trans while pretending not to be. And it's the first comment on the post. I've moderated thousands of posts and I know the first comment can often set the tone and drive off other commenters. So I thought a "ban" could function as a warning that anti-trans comments aren't welcome here.
Again, still experimenting with Substack's options. I have mixed feelings about their "ban" tools. They are not what I would choose or design for moderation tools, but it's all they've got at the moment.
UPDATE:
After Kate's ban expired, she came back and left over a dozen comments across both posts attempting to use the comment section to promote her anti-trans views. I should have followed my instincts and banned her outright from the beginning. She is definitely a troll and is now permanently banned, and I've deleted some of her comments. Other comments of hers I'm letting remain because there are responses to them. But I may decide to delete those too.
You can disagree with how I moderate comment sections, but I am very practiced at it and I trust my own experience, so I'm going to keep doing what I know works best.
Hi Design Mom! Protecting the rights of women is not anti-trans. Respecting transgender people shouldn’t mean that women have their rights removed (fair competition, safety, etc.). The Economist offered the idea of three categories for competition that seems promising: women, men, and open. Trans women should be respected and able to participate in life, just like all of us - but not when their participation creates unfair competition. Because of biological differences between the sexes, categories for biological women should always exist. How would feel if you, or your daughter, placed lower in a long jump competition, because a biological male out-jumped you? This may not bother you, and as you said, things happen in sports. It’s not the end of the world, of course, but it is definitely not fair competition.
The assumption that respecting transgender people means women have their rights removed, or makes for unfair competition, is faulty, based in fear and paranoia, and most definitely anti-trans.
Trans people have competed in the Olympics for the last 20 years and nobody was bothered until now. In those two decades not a single trans woman has won a medal.
Hi Design Mom! Thank you for your response! Competition results, when comparing men and women, are different, providing clear evidence that competition that combines the sexes is unfair. One example: Florence Griffith Joyner: 10.49 in 100M; Usain Bolt: 9.58 in 100M. How do you see this data? This data tells me that the sexes need to be separated, so that Florence could have the opportunity to earn a gold medal. How does noticing this data cause my views to be paranoid? I believe that all who want to participate in sports should be able to, and should have fair opportunity, based on their effort, to earn recognition for it. We don’t allow able-bodied people in Paralympic categories, because the competition would then be unfair. What do you think of a third category titled open? It seems that that would preserve fair competition, while allowing transgender people the opportunity to compete as well.
It feels like maybe you didn't read this newsletter? I specifically talk about sprinters. (Granted, I know the newsletter is long so many you missed it.)
And yes, I do think the view you're putting forth is paranoid. When trans people have been competing in the Olympics for decades and it hasn't been a problem, but then you promote your personal fears that it will now become a problem, I see that as paranoid.
Thank you so much for this. As always you have these mind blowing, creative answers and thoughts, while I am just baffled by how narrow minded a lot of people are. I have a hard time finding the right words in an argument and you do it so well.
My kid is trans and it hurts me how specially progressive people are weirded out by the transgender topic. See, I come frome an atheist family and God and religion has always been a foreign concept to me that I learned to respect, but don't understand. And I find it crazy how much we let churches invade safe spaces, abuse and exploit women and kids and noone is talking about shutting down religion or never letting priests work with kids again. If we are lucky, the church is dealing with the abusers, but not questioning the whole concept. So I always wondered why is it so hard to deal with the very few men who pretend to be transwomen in order to attack women, and not go after every transwomen, who wants to use the women's bathroom?
As to the topic of sports: I always sucked at sport but loved to move my body and I would have benefitted so much from a more creative and less competitive approach. I understand that competition is important for ambitious athlets but when I look at the fact that most professional athlets have a completely wrecked and worn out body by the time they are forty, I wonder if we might carried it a bit too far there, too.
So again: Thank you. This was an especially good read.
I wish your newsletters on Trans harassment were seen by many…many more than will see it. Unfortunately, those who hold views opposing yours wouldn’t be moved to change their minds because their views are based on beliefs that are deeply engrained in their brains. Perhaps some may be moved to think about these issues based on your extremely well expressed explanations, but not many.
Thank you once again…I am constantly reminded of the reasons why I support your newsletter by subscribing.
Gabrielle, this is my first comment to you, but I have read you for years. Saw your House Hunters and have your book. So it's no surprise I agree with these two emails. I have always thought that the bathroom issue was nuts. If all bathrooms had stalls this would not be an issue! Simple privacy manners and common sense could rule.
Your timing is impeccable! I just had a conversation about trans women in sports (as you said, it seems no one cares about trans men in sport) and I brought up the same idea of sport being developed inclusive of all genders. My example was gymnastics- how different would the sport be, and how would the physicality of top athletes change if flexibility and balance events (like the beam) were required for all?
I think the presence of trans and non-binary individuals are such a gift to us all, because their presence helps us all to question and dismantle the rigid stories we have been sold about gender.
Thank you for your usual clarity and wonderful links. I truly appreciate your commentary and writing.
I live in Melbourne, Australia, and I have noticed many parks and recreation areas now have genderless toilets - there is a row of toilet cubicles (all with doors, obviously) and then the taps for hand washing are outside the toilet cubicles, to be used by everyone. It is safe because every toilet cubicle opens not into a huge bathroom, but into the open. Anyone can use any toilet. This setup removes the worry of men attacking women in toilets because the only part of the facilities not visible is inside each individual toilet cubicle.
Another point about gender toilets - I have a severely disabled daughter and when I take her to a public toilet, I need to use a disability-friendly toilet so there is plenty of room in the cubicle for both my daughter and myself. In most places - parks, restaurants, shopping centres - the disabled toilet is separate to the male and female toilets, so is to be used by any disabled person. I feel lucky that we can access a disabled toilet when we are out, nevermind worrying about whether the last person to use it was a male. Perhaps toilets and bathrooms just need to be redesigned as so many have been in public areas where I live. It would certainly make life easier for people who need to toilet a child/disabled person or elderly relative of a different gender.
Side note : one of my brother-in-laws was verbally abused by a woman when he took one of his young children into a parent's room to change the child's nappy. HIS child into a PARENTS room. It upset him greatly and he was thereafter reluctant to use family change rooms with his children unless his wife was present. Some people are just horrid.
I am a boyish female (often mistaken for male) with 5 children and a disability. This disability affects women and men very differently. A lot of women have received bad treatment or the wrong treatment based on the fact that the medical community persists in thinking that women are just small men. There is current studies that are finally discovering that the reason women suffer so many more side effects to medication than men is because they are medicated as small men rather than as someone with a completely different system than the male. This is a problem which persists across a number of work situations also - such as the construction industry or even the army where defence clothing or safety wear is designed for men or small men (women) and therefore doesn’t give them adequate protection. This goes so far as safety for women in cars where crash test dummies are men or smaller men - female bodies (which respond differently in a crash) have not been used in crash tests, or at the very least are not used in the driving seat.
There is a huge missing gap when it comes to serving a large section of society’s needs.
So I was very disappointed when I was told that they were removing the mention of ‘women’ in the important department of ‘women’s health’ in hospitals. Many many more women than men suffer inadequate treatment and if the mention of this is statistically removed I worry. I was also told that I should not describe myself as a mother in case it caused offence - mention of the fact that I was a mother was removed from my medical file - this had major implications on subsequent treatment because it is a big deal to my body that I have given birth to 5 children.
My daughter is struggling with heavy periods and as a 15 year old is struggling with frustration as she is watching her male counterparts and brothers simply grow muscles and get taller and stronger with no real effort while she pushes herself in the gym and struggles to hide her daily pain as her body softens into womanhood. It is important to me that I am able to discuss her differences and accept with her that there are some aspects of her body that feels unfair. Not to just say she is essentially a small man. She is important and her body can do incredible, but very different things from the male body. It is important that I help her to praise the positives to help her to accept the downsides. This is not to reject the sad and difficult situation of someone who feels they were born in the wrong body, but just because I am already fighting to get the needs met of my children and myself. I understand that this shouldn’t mean that trans people should not be treated with kindness and dignity, but that we still have a long way to go in our (society’s) treatment (literally) of women particularly and I don’t want to see this important work abandoned - but I am seeing that this is what is happening for the mistaken belief that it will create a fairer society.
It sounds like you've read Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez. For anyone who hasn't read it, it's so worthwhile and I highly recommend it. Here's the link on Amazon: https://amzn.to/3KuEmPE The book discusses lots of very real examples of how the world was designed by men for men and how that hurts women. I think we've all seen this — my mother in law's knee replacement always comes to mind when I think about this. Her knee replacement never "worked" — even after years and lots of physical therapy she could never walk up or down stairs with the new knee, and was constantly in pain. When I learned that all artificial knees were designed for men's bodies, there was a realization that that's very likely what the problem was with my mother-in-law's knee replacement. The new knee wasn't designed with her in mind. It never fit because it wasn't made for her.
FB, Do you have some links to share about hospitals removing the word "women" and telling patients not to mention they've had babies? I'm sure you know they sound like extremist Fox News talking points, and I'm not sure what to make of them. I'd love to read more about these policies so I can get a better understanding.
Hi! Yes I did read Invisible Women, and also 'The Better half' by Sharon Moalem which is also very good and recommend you read - it concentrates on women's medical care - which is my main concern.
I have reread my post and can see why my comments could be misconstrued as I squashed together a number of facts for speed, they were a number of unrelated personal experiences, rather than one leading on from the other - so I will clarify.
I have an inherited condition which is complicated, in addition I have had an operation where they put plastic mesh in my body which has basically ruined it. I have quite complicated care as a result and am part of a variety of support groups for both the social, campaigning and medical aspects of my condition and the outcome of my operation. These groups are both national (Im in UK) and international and are vital to me and many others in sharing informaton to improve our lives but also in collaberating for better care and campaigning.
Some of these support groups have unfortunately become rather difficult as they have become dominated by a small number of people who don't want anyone to use the term 'woman', or indeed use any female terminology at all!. This makes normal conversation for women who want to discuss their own bodies difficult as there is often a horrific backlash against someone who writes - 'TMI question - can anyone help with a ladies problem?' - they will be massively bullied and shut down. The aggressive people will make a series of unfair and nasty comments and the polite people will ask that we no longer use words such as 'mother', 'woman', etc. I have been asked to describe myself as a. 'menstruater' or a 'uterus haver', they asked me to describe my daughter as a 'menstruating child'. I have not got involved in these rows but it has made me totally wary of saying anything and have withdrawn from multiple groups as I can't find ways to discuss my experience. I have noticed there have been breakaway groups set up which are for women who wish to be able to discuss the medical issues in the context of being a woman. So to be clear these are not institutions with policies, but groups - some with many thousands in them.
I also stated that mention of being a mother was removed from my medical file. As I mentioned I had a disastous operation where they implanted plastic mesh in my body. Shortly after my operation ALL my medical files, both physical and digital disappeared. I have discovered that I am one of many women whose record of this controversial operation was deleted and I suspect it was for rather nefarious reasons, not related to any gender question - the reason I mentioned it was that I hadn't realised that this had happened and so a number of medical decisions were made for me without knowledge that I had had 5 children. It meant I have had a number of years of wrong treatment. You may think this is irrelevant to your point, but it is part of a wider problem where people have been allowed to removed gender from important figures for their own purposed. Women have suffered in far greater numbers in this mesh crisis, however there have been efforts to conceal this - one of the efforts seem to be including male hernia mesh statistics (which has higher levels of success) with female mesh statistics (which has high failure rates with life changing outcomes). This greatly reduces the proportion of 'unsafe' operations by removing the male/female separation. In UK it has helped to prolong this largely female health crisis (I believe this operation is banned in america - I was not told this when I was offered it as a 'new' procedure).Even now with the campaigners they are fighting for clarity as statistics are muddied (You may see now why I condensed my facts).
As I am in UK, where we have NHS, there is separation into different trusts which can be managed very differently from one another and can have different ethos - so I can't give you an overall 'policy' where they have removed the word woman from women's health as in some areas it has been done, but in other not. Again this was based on my personal experience and what I have been told by staff.
Thank you for sharing and standing up for women!
Hello! I think that words matter and we should be inclusive and respectful of trans people with the words we use. I also think this consideration needs to extend to everyone, and I agree with FB that sometimes we try so hard to be inclusive that we don't extend that consideration to women. Two recent examples:
ACLU issued a Tweet last fall that changed a quote from Justice Ginsberg to take out the words 'woman' and 'women' and applicable pronouns and replace it with 'person' and 'people' and 'they/their' (https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1439259891064004610). The quote is a famous one: "The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. It is a decision she must make for herself. When Government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices." You can see that if you replace 'woman' with 'person' it completely obfuscates what Justice Ginsberg was trying to say. I recently became a mother and while my husband is very involved in caring for our child, the sheer physical impact of pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, the hormones, and so on is intense, not to mention the social and economic impacts which are foisted on women by society--and I think I had a child under some of the best circumstances (first of all, I chose to have a child, and I'm older, financially stable, married, family to help, supportive workplace, etc.) Not having these circumstances would, I'm guessing, make the impact of bearing a child even more immense. I understand that ACLU made that change to not exclude trans men who have children, and trying to be inclusive is good, but to change Justice Ginsberg's quote to 'person' changes the meaning and makes it seems like any parent is going through the same physical, mental, social, and economic challenges as the mother, and this is not the case. So by changing the quote to make it more inclusive to one group (child bearing trans men), the words cut out another group (childbearing women).
The second example: I breastfeed my child and float in various liberal breastfeeding groups. There is a general push to use more inclusive language, like referring to chestfeeding as well as breastfeeding. I think this is fine! And I think in formalized settings (like, hospital policies) the idea is to simply use both terms depending on the patient. But in practice in some of the places I participate in, chestfeeding is seen as the default (as a way to be inclusive) and then one can request to use the term breastfeeding. Nursing your kid is such an incredibly physical process, as is so much of pregnancy and labor and those early postpartum days, that I think for many women hearing a term that does not refer to your body (breasts) when you are so physically involved could be really alienating. I also think hearing the term breastfeeding when you are a trans man who is chestfeeding could also be super alienating!
That's why I think we need to think about being genuinely inclusive with language (for instance, genuinely using multiple terms like chestfeeding and breastfeeding, woman and people with uteri), rather than just switching to new default terms (chestfeeding, or uterus haver) that make some people feel better but alienate other groups. People should be able to use (in reference to themselves) and be referred to (by others) with words they are comfortable with--that's the whole premise of using appropriate pronouns for trans gender people--and this includes women.
I am always in awe and filled with gratitude when I witness how your brain works and then puts words together in the very best order. It's a beautiful thing and inspires me to read more and think more creatively. To add to your discussion about designing competitive sports differently, I played on Intramural, co-ed, highly competitive sports teams during my university years. All teams were required to have an equal mix on the field. The men on my teams admitted to thinking more strategically about positions and the mechanics of the game on co-ed teams vs. their all men teams. It made them better and smarter players on both kinds of teams.
I know you wrote this from a trans athlete point of view (and I 1000% agree with you on that subject so just hear my "YES!" from over here), but your examination of sports made me think of a book I read called The Sports Gene. Not all men are equal, not all women are equal, and in some cases, women will beat men and in others men will beat women. Your family ancestry is probably a better predictor of what sport you'll be good at than what sport your heart loves. This is why I'm good at hockey and a horrible runner even though I had to quit hockey due to logistics (live an hour from a rink/league) and have been running (or at least trying to) for almost 20 years.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16171221-the-sports-gene
Incredible work as always, Gabrielle. Thoughtful, thought provoking, unthreatening - I wish more people out there were putting this kind of thing out into the world, and were the loudest voices around. I try to share your work when I can, and yet I often wonder, are the only people reading this those that already agree with me anyway? This is the kind of thing that should be blasted from the rooftops.
I feel so ambivalent about the sea change on this issue over the last few years. I feel like on the left end, people are quick to condemn anyone who can't get in line with the new terminology and proper new opinions fast enough (like JK Rolling and Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie). The vocabulary changes so quickly that I get confused and feel like a dinosaur when I see new terms like cishet or AMAB, and I'm actually trying to keep up and I'm still in my 30s. Meanwhile another huge portion of society is having Gender Reveal parties or otherwise sticking with long-standing norms about appropriate societal roles of men and women (including - prominently- gender-restricted roles in many religious organizations). I feel like the people coming to the table to discuss, trying to understand and grow, are getting shot down as insufficiently progressive or open-minded, while half of society is not even acknowledging that anything worth noticing is going on with our understanding of sex and gender.
Am I the only one who feels like women are being erased when we use terms like "pregnant person" or "menstruating person"? Is there still room in society for female-only spaces, like women's colleges? The new orthodoxy reminds me of the "I don't see color, so I can't be racist."