Has this been mentioned yet? Laverne Cox in the Observer article

Oh ffs. Eva Wiseman has drunk the Kool-Aid, though. How can you be so dim as to not know that women's spaces and sports are threatened by having men in them?

It’s really deep that these feminists find themselves aligned with right-wing ideologies.

Trans ideology is aligned with far right ideology, because it stuffs people into gender boxes and minimises the importance of women's rights.

However, belief in sex in no more right wing ideology than belief in climate change is left wing ideology. The only question is why so many people who claim to be 'led by science' are so easily convinced by gender woo.

How can you be so dim as to not know that women's spaces and sports are threatened by having men in them?

I think because people seem to have a strange brain glitch where 'trans' can refer both to a small number of vulnerable transexuals, (of course these women aren't threatening!) and everyone who might enjoy Pride marches (affirmation for all identities!).

pause. “We have to be able to ask ourselves, ‘Am I feeling uncomfortable or am I feeling unsafe? And is my uncomfortability going to impede on the rights of other people?’”

gaslighting

Laverne is putting that question to women but not to transwomen.

Also Laverne: misgendering is an act of violence.

I've said this already but: gaslighting arsehole.

www.google.com/amp/s/hellogiggles.com/news/laverne-cox-twitter-essay-misgendering-deadnaming-trans-people-violence/%3famp=true

How much does Cox spend on hormones per month, per year? Capitalism much? Until when?

Bet the patches, pills or syringes are real environmentally-friendly too.

Feminists = Right wing my arse.

Talked about this a bit on the Sonia Sodha thread too - so much going unquestioned . And it glosses over so many experiences that might have been interesting to have her perspective on ("we talk about... [long list of things never mentioned again]") in favour of peddling outright mistruths. Cox is completely misguided in what she says and it should have been called out. (Not open for comments as per.) A lot of Americans just seem to think we're a nation of mean and nasty hags.

I liked Eva Wiseman but think she signed the Suzanne Moore letter (remember being surprised at the time).

I was going to quote that bit. The disconnect is huge.
And saying that women are just uncomfortable and by implication are overreacting when they feel unsafe is pure misogyny.
I've had zero support for Cox since Cox made a video supporting Synthia China Blast who raped and murdered a 13 year old girl, and then claimed they'd not known what Blast had done when called out on it.
Who on earth throws their support behind a prisoner serving a life sentence without even asking what their crime was?

Also - uncomfortability?

The word is discomfort, Laverne. It's one women are very familiar with. The discomfort of wondering if the man walking behind you at night is some perfectly nice chap popping to the shop or something more sinister. The discomfort of seeing a muscular male bodied person go into the women's toilets on the station platform ahead of you. We feel discomfort an awful lot, often as a prelude to anxiety and abject fear.

A significant pause. “We have to be able to ask ourselves, ‘Am I feeling uncomfortable or am I feeling unsafe? And is my uncomfortability going to impede on the rights of other people?’”

What the holy fuck?

Plus, isn't it 'discomfort'?

I think I'll give Cox a pass on 'uncomfortability', and I would actually agree with that statement.

I'd just point out that the question goes both ways, and its great that Cox is acknowledging that there is a conflict of rights. However, we don't just need to ask ourselves, we need to be able to discuss this question at a legislative and policy level.

merrymouse - I read it that Laverne was only asking this question of women (?).

I suspect you are right, but it is still the basis of sorting out conflicts of rights, which is the practical purpose of human rights law.

So much of feminism is grounded in Marxist theory, the likes of Cox know this and the placement of trans rights on the left and gender critical feminists on the right is very deliberate.

Laverne does not understand truly.

Bet the patches, pills or syringes are real environmentally-friendly too.

The hormones released into the environment cause all sorts of problems (though contraception and HRT are also issues) www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412016304494

I suspect you are right, but it is still the basis of sorting out conflicts of rights, which is the practical purpose of human rights law

Yes. But I'm still very uncomfortable with the idea that only women's discomfort bears scrutiny - as if we must 'get over it' somehow and 'be kind'.

I'm not convinced that human rights is the right approach. It's liberal to the core and I'm not sure that human rights are women's rights, as opposed to being men's rights in disguise. Witness Amnesty's platform that it's a 'right' that men be granted sexual access to women's bodies.

I think human rights have been conceptualized as men's rights, but I think it's important to push back on that, women are half of humanity and we need to get to a point where we are seen as being as human as men.

Yes - or we could think of an alternative to rights. For example (only), we could consider 'needs'. If we stick with 'rights' then what kind of rights are important to us?

This book might be an interesting read for some.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sexual_Contract

I was wondering about how the scottish hate crime bill breaches human rights. The Scottish Parliament cannot make laws that breach the ECHR. Article 10 1gives us freedom of expression though this can be limited. However Article 14 say Article 10 cannot discriminate on the basis of sex, religion or political opinion (and others). Surely the Hate Crimes bill does just that?

Yes it does, and there seems to be a wave of actions that push at the legal boundaries and its left to us to challenge them. Its a deliberate tactic to waste our resources, as is this article.

Imo, its time to stop assuming these activists don't know what they are doing.