Is it safe to be openly gender critical in university

When you talk about good examples of integration, presumably you are thinking of how the British retirees have integrated into Spanish society, adopting Spanish customs and traditions, speaking the language fluently and being a fully integrated part of Spanish society?

These days people seem more interested in winning arguments at all costs including tricks and gotchas, rather than having a debate in good faith.

By a democratic vote in parliament it would seem that covid passes have become law. Time to get your jabs!

Why would you think that they meant you any harm though? I don't think that's a reasonable conclusion to draw at all. As the poster above said, imagine a situation where you are a devout Christian that says prayers before each meal and that I am a firm atheist. If you invite me to lunch I'll probably be polite and offer to stay silent while you do your prayer, but I'm not going to take part in it myself and contradict my own beliefs just to please you. I don't think it would be fair of you to expect me to recite scripture or give thanks to a deity that I don't believe in just because you do. Would you "reasonably conclude" that I mean you harm because of that?

It feels like you're basically saying we all need to agree with your views on gender and pronouns otherwise we're bad people who hate you. But I can assure you I don't hate you or intend any harm at all. I grew up being taught that there are just two genders, man and woman. So for me the correct pronouns are "he" for a man and "she" for a woman. By asking me to refer to you in a different way, you're effectively asking me to go against my beliefs just to keep you happy. Like the religion example above, I don't think that's fair of you. It's like you want me to accept your views while not accepting mine.

I think most people would correctly consider that the "views"/"beliefs" this hypothetical person espouses here to simply be racism, however calmly or politely expressed. But all I've changed from what you said is switching out gender identity for national identity and pronouns for names. You might well argue that this is different from what you're saying for some reason. But even that would be accepting that not all beliefs and views are necessarily worthy of respect; that yes, in such cases it might well be reasonable to insist they go against their beliefs to keep someone else happy, you're merely disputing what falls into that category.

Basically I am disappointed about the vaccine passports coming in. Being excluded from nightclubs and large venues will be difficult for me but nowhere near as miserable as I would feel with that vaccine flowing around inside of me. I would be living in constant terror of a heart attack after every gym session. So you can do what you like but I'll never take it unless they actually address my concerns and I can be certain that it's safe.

I actually agree with you on the vaccine passport. They do seem a bit draconian.

I am really worried now. I have had three injections and didn't get a heart attack. Have I done something wrong?

I'm worried that we actually agreed on something!

vaccination has become more a more personal and selfish act e.g. taking a vaccine reduces your individual risk of going to hospital or worse.

Then shouldn't refusing the vaccine also be seen as more a pure personal choice and not something that is harming society as a whole? I've already said I'd refuse any covid-related treatment from the NHS after seeing some of their nurses say that the unvaccinated don't deserve it.

And since hospitals are a shared resource and non-vaccinated people are taking more of that resource unnecessarily

I don't think I need the vaccine, but if I'm wrong then I'll accept the consequences of that rather than take up hospital resources because of my decision to refuse the jab.

Good luck with that one. I also hope santa visits and the angels shine on you. And if you are really lucky you might see a unicorn. But you have to believe.

Having had covid, you really don't want covid. I have never felt so ill.

All false.

Biology does not show us a sex binary, the sex binary is socially constructed in that it attempts to reduce a number of characteristics which do not always line up with each other into a single binary, and we see that with how the goalposts laid out by anti-trans activists move from chromosomes to gametes to "how your body is organised" as previous definitions are shown to exclude people who, for instance are intersex or are infertile.

Gender Critical "feminists" (they're not feminists, they're extreme misogynists who define women by reproductive capacity above all and treat women as mothers before people) do not define womanhood through not having an active SRY gene, nor do they favour gender abolition. They want to firmly and aggressively enforce gender but call it sex, and you can see that with the way they harass and abuse GNC cis women and men in addition to trans people, how they refer to men wearing makeup as "womanface" (because again, they're massive racists) and how their biggest victims in terms of numbers are butch lesbians.

Your final paragraph is ridiculously racist and colonial in mindset, third genders in indigenous societies weren't concessions to homophobes, the claim that they were is founded on the belief that colonialism was liberatory towards the colonised (it wasn't). Far more regularly they were treated as being of religious significance but for the most part they were a part of societies which had constructed gender and sex differently to how the west had.

Defining a woman by her biology does not exclude females who are unable to reproduce. Have you ever seen a gc feminist deny that prepubescent or menopausal females are female? I sincerely doubt it, but equally I’d be happy to be proven wrong. Only women can carry a child but certainly not all women can carry children.

A relatively basic understanding of genetics would tell you that genes organise developmental pathways, so of course that is a more accurate way of understanding things.

It isn’t misogynistic to exclude men from the definition of women, I don’t think I’ve ever read something so ridiculous. We desperately need research to be done on women’s bodies, because women’s bodies tend to react differently to drugs than men’s bodies, for example. https://pharmaceutical-journal.com/article/feature/why-we-need-to-talk-about-sex-and-clinical-trials Muddying the water for ideological reasons hurts us.

I find your assertion that gc feminist routinely harass gnc women odd as many gcs are gnc. Again the accusation of racism is a bit odd- I am sure that some TRAs are racist, does that then immediately apply to all.

Defining women by their capacity to reproduce is hella ****ing misogynistic. When you make womanhood about having a uterus and try to force what actual radical feminists have long acknowledged are first and foremost political categories into the natural world, you reinforce those political categories and so reinforce patriarchal worldviews.

Creating political categories and social structures around genes however is not dependant on an understanding of genetics, and frankly if you want to get into serious biological discussion then you're on incredibly shaky ground given we see a lot in neuropsychology and genetics which is in support of trans identities (long and the short of it is that identical twins are more likely to both be trans than fraternal twins which is indicative of a genetic element, and while men and women demonstrate some aggregate differences in brain structure on average, these are in regions that demonstrate a high degree of neuroplasticity - in other words it is not innate differences but socially driven, and trans individuals show structures more akin to their actual gender than to their assigned one, which would suggest that, in a practical sense, trans people are socialised as their genders, not as their assigned one).

Medical research being based around men and then assumed for women is a problem, but suggesting this is an issue that is women vs trans people is completely absurd. We similarly know **** all about trans bodies, we've barely recovered to the point we were at 100 years ago after the destruction of the institut fur sexualwissenschaft by the Nazis (first uterus transplant into a trans woman happened in 1929, we've not reached that stage again), and further to that, differences in medical responses are going to be far more directed by things like endocrinology than a gene which bares little relevance after foetal development, so counting trans women as men or trans men as women when those people have been on hormone therapy is similarly not going to give good data medically.

GCs aggressively police womanhood through the policing of femininity, in terms of sheer numbers this primarily affects butch women, and there are countless reports of butch cis women being harassed in public for appearing too trans - and prominent GCs like Kathleen Stock have described this harassment of butch women as acceptable collateral damage. As for racism, again their entire belief system is founded off a western-centric world view. It is inherently racist to insist that a gender binary is immutable and consistent because that denies the culture of so many indigenous peoples around the world (because again, man and woman are not biological categories first and foremost, they are political categories). To appropriate language of black activists and deploy them against marginalised people (taking the concept of blackface and then coining "womanface") is again, racist.

That's not the reason. I would be happy to call him Joe but not because I was suppressing a belief just to keep him happy. I genuinely do believe you can change your name, whether that's someone picking an entirely new name or a foreigner just picking a more Anglicized version of their name.

You say "But all I've changed..." as though you've simply changed minor, irrelevant details. But you've made it a fundamentally different situation as we've moved from discussing gender and pronouns (which you can't change) to names (which you can). At least, that is how I see it.