This Is About Division

[Disclaimer: This is being written less than 24 hours since the ruling by the UK Supreme Court that a woman is defined by biological sex, under the 2010 Equalities Act. There will inevitably be elements of this that I have missed, and I am not a legal expert so I don't expect to be able to deconstruct that aspect of this news. Plus there are raw emotions here, because I also happen to be a human. I may therefore revisit this and make some edits in the future].

Are we really still this dumb?

Are we still going about our lives and making judgements on other people based on their physical appearance?

Are we still using physical characteristics as a proxy for a person's personality and character?

-

My understanding here with what some people are celebrating is the notion that "men" can't invade a "woman's" space.

And they are absolutely right here - history is littered with "men" oppressing "women", and we are (or maybe were) approaching a point in time where the oppression of others is generally regarded as 'not cool' (to put it mildly).

I absolutely agree that a person should not feel oppressed or threatened by another person - in any situation - as long as that threat is real, and based upon a person's actions and demeanour; but not solely based on their appearance.

I seem to recall a recent time in history (some would call it 'still the present, unfortunately') where the way somebody looked created a sort of pre-judgement in the perceiver's mind about just exactly who they are as a person; and the person doing the perceiving maybe acted rashly on this judgement, before they took the opportunity to get to know and understand the person; and proceeded to kill a nearby mockingbird.

And if that other person does indeed turn out to act or behave in a distressing way, then the first person should absolutely be entitled to safety and security - or (and here's a radical thought) the person acting in a distressing way should maybe not do so in the first place? [I realise the latter is savagely optimistic, given the current divisive/oppressive climate].

But I'm fairly certain that what should not then happen is if the example of one person's inappropriate or - through the scale - up to criminal behaviour; that behaviour should not then get assumed for everyone in "a similar group". That sounds pretty phobic in whatever flavour you like. IE if you hear of an asylum seeker committing X crime; that doesn't mean all asylum seekers are X-ers. Or if you know a black-market heron dealer with ginger hair; therefore all gingers are black-market heron dealers.

Similarly, if a woman experiences a sexual assault by another woman who (the first woman) would classify as a man purely based on appearance; then that does not mean all other women are rapists, and should be excluded.

If I recall there have been a few examples of footballers who turned out to be rapists, or domestic abusers; but I don't remember when all of football got stopped because of this? Sure there got to be a critical mass of incidents at some point, so much so that it became enough to become a few punchlines on Mock the Week - but I don't think everyone took away the conclusion that 'oh all footballers must be like this'; in fact I'm almost certain they didn't take away that conclusion, as football still seems to be a popular pastime amongst many.

I absolutely support people not being abused or attacked (both physically or mentally), and anyone who does attack people in these ways should face criminal intervention. That's bleeding obvious. To me at least.

-

And there's a discussion about spaces. Naturally. And who should be allowed where.

This feels a bit 'moot', as it also feels self-policing to a point. IE a trans-woman wouldn't be welcome in a TERF meeting; in the same way that I wouldn't be welcome in a PoC STEM meeting - I would feel out of place; and I have the added bonus of self-curiosity and critical-thinking, so I would not even attempt to attend such a space as it is very clearly not me.

The challenge appears to be the overlap.

Some folk seem to think that just because they have their own spaces where only certain people are allowed, this should be replicated throughout society. And gender seems to be the current battleground (though I am acutely aware it is not the only one remaining!).

Just because you don't like how another person's appearance makes you feel - be that the colour of their skin; the shape of their body; whether they are "fat" or "thin", or "too androgenous" - that discomfort is yours and yours alone, without action from the other person to back it up.

I completely understand how people can feel unsafe at times, out in the real world; especially if you believe the simple broad-brush strokes of media that tell you "all of X are bad", "all of Y are liars", "all of Z are financially savvy". But until you interact with another person in any way, you do not know who they are - and they do not know you - and until you both know each other, only then can you make a judgement - indeed make a subjective observation - and make your conclusions.

If you want to live in a world where only people that fit your particular perception of how people should be and behave, then you have a very great deal of shocks coming your way - because the amount of people that are open to the fact that humanity is a crazy jumble of fascinating personalities and ways to go about life - far outnumbers those of your pathetic little group.