M&S changing room policy

But welcoming her and her theorys into feminism will help feminists with a different perspective on misogyny and trans misogyny for the benefit of all women.

Sounds a lot like mansplaining. Transplaining?

Women behold, this is how you are doing feminism wrong.

Something that is irrefutable, is the distinction between genuine transsexuals, who have gender dysphoria and men who have autogynephilia.

You really are having a laugh aren't you. AGP is junk science, ask yourself why every respectable psychiatric society has dumped it as a theory of transsexualism. Why it is systematically being removed from all the diagnostic manuals (its not completely gone yet unfortunately) Fundamentally the test for AGP cant be failed. its a witch test. Float and you burn in the fire of AGP, sink and you drown as a liar. Apply the AGP test to natal women and a high proportion of them meet the criteria.

Ask yourself why AGP transsexuals loose their AGP traits once on HRT and sex drive falls of a cliff, yet they still continue with transition, the two things are not compatible.

Stop reading TERF propaganda and go and read the counter arguments. Julia Sorano is a good start particularly on AGP but one you will dismiss as a TIM. But welcoming her and her theorys into feminism will help feminists with a different perspective on misogyny and trans misogyny for the benefit of all women.

Once again Datun, I salute you!

How you respond, again and again, with logical, measured accuracy is a joy to behold.

Much to you

I'm a scientist. I like data,

I do too.

And I can totally understand how surveys and studies can be manipulated for either side. I really do.

The problem with this specific issue is the lack of data. Stats aren't being compiled as a matter of course.

Women having to do the leg work for themselves.

There is an overwhelming body of evidence across newspaper articles, social media, transactivist assertions, personal experience, notable incidents. Daily.

It's incredibly frustrating to not have officials collating data.

Crimes by men being recorded as crimes by women. People talking about ' women who do this' when it's men.

James Caspian, who wanted to collate data from female detransitioners. But was told by his ethics committee that it was not politically correct.

Women are thwarted at every turn. Venues targeted, women intimidated to stop them talking.

The lack of oxygen running through this issue is appalling.

My conviction is profound.

I have absolutely zero hesitation in calling for official statistics, evidence, surveys, studies.

I want them to happen.

Desperately.

Something that is irrefutable, is the distinction between genuine transsexuals, who have gender dysphoria and men who have autogynephilia.

There is ample, meta analysis about the two types of transwomen.

Scientifically studied with many sources to choose from.

I'm not a scientist. But the connection between fetishising women, which is rife in the trans ideology, and access to women's spaces, cannot be ignored.

From what I can tell, many of the studies, did not take into account the two types. The Swedish study only took into account men who had undergone SRS, for example. Something which is statistically more likely for men who do not have AGP.

A brain study, for instance, which I read a couple of years ago, I should imagine only took into account AGP individuals. Because it disregarded sexual orientation.

Identifying as transgender is a massively broad church.

You could have gender dysphoria, you could be a fetishist, you could be a chancer. Frankly, you could be a normal woman. I, personally fit the definition of transgender.

Define transgender, and you might be able to nail down its impact.

Who today have been shown to misrepresent the figures and studies.

No they haven't.

Anyone who reads the article can see that. They were perfectly upfront about how they collated the information, and why they drew their conclusions.

They deliberately, went out of their way to not misrepresent.

And, you still haven't answered my question.

How does self identification benefit women?

Because, Debbie6666, we can debate all the day long day about how a survey represents either side of an argument.

But, your tactic is to cherry pick parts of the argument that you feel you can refute. Which, is a tactic, but I am challenging the underlying motive here.

So instead of that, why don't you give me the argument that self identification is beneficial to women.

My motive is the protection and advocacy of women and girls.

How does self identification demonstrate that?

I'll look them up if they cite their original sources.

I'm a scientist. I like data, and I like it to mean something (hence the irritation at the NOMS paper above).

I'm going on the fair play for women stats.

Who today have been shown to misrepresent the figures and studies. Because I took the time to go and find the studies and read them, not just post link after link of biased unchecked junk journalism with an agenda.

LangCleg Feel free to spell and grammar check if that is where you think the debate will benefit.

I can't remember last time I saw a segregated room in a shop. And what would the point be anyway, there's cubicles.

DodoPatrol

I'm going on the fair play for women stats.

It's a long read, specifically about prisons. But it's worth it.

Or rather , 3 didn't say. (My 4 is identifying as a 3 today.)

Having said that about the numbers: Datun, where are yours from? I'm getting from the National Offender Management Service that of the 125 reported cases of transgender prisoners (rather weirdly defined as 'those who have had a case review and don't have a GRC'), 99 reported themselves to be male, 23 as female and 4 didn't say.

I can't be sure whether this means that 99 of them were biological females who identified as male, and only 23-ish males who identified as female, or whether some of those correctly reported their sex, having misinterpreted the question.

There were NO figures for those who have already got a GRC, as they are already legally of the opposite sex. The NOMS report was specific about that.

So, overall, not a clue what to make of those stats!

What i found though was not a study that made this point although it did find slightly elevated levels of sex crimes,

Which is the entire point in terms of women.

If you want to campaign for protecting tranwomen in prisons, go right ahead.

I'll be right behind you. Violence in male prisons is horrific.

The answer is not to transfer male prisoners to the female estate.

Who could even think that?!

Women are not everyone's mummy. They're not. They're real people.

They deserve as much dignity and respect as men.

It doesn't mean they should be subjected to male people in their presence. From the male gaze to sexual assault.

84% of women are imprisoned for non-violent crimes. Almost half the women in prison have been victims of domestic violence and over half suffered childhood trauma, including sexual abuse. Where are their rights? Where is their voice that says they don't want men there because it's triggering.

Women are real people.

Ffs.

I would say its not slightly underestimated, its completely estimated

The subsequent confirmation of figures from MoJ weren't, dear. This was the point I made.

You needed a semi colon there and not a comma. You also needed an apostrophe to indicate the contraction. Twice. HTH.

Debbie, SOME trans-identifying males are sex offenders.

Plus, PLENTY of ordinary garden-variety males are sex offenders.

MANY women are on the receiving end.

Argue the figures all you like, but I want a way of retaining the legal right to shout 'Bog off out of the ladies', you pervy little creep!' at any pervy little creeps in there, without them having that oh-so-convenient comeback that they were just identifying as a woman that day, you bigot, and getting me arrested for a hate crime.

(Mind you, I do rather hate pervy little creeps. I'm pervy little creep phobic, not transphobic.)

I can quite see that you'd rather argue the percentages than say that sex offending is wrong and making it easier is bonkers. Hey ho.

Sorry for my bad spelling.

But I would say its not slightly underestimated, its completely estimated

Debbie, dear, it's in lieu of. It's French. HTH.

Are you aware that official statistics followed the Fair Play For Women analysis and they showed that it had slightly underestimated the proportion of TIMs currently in prison who are sex offenders?

Of course you are.

@Debbie6666 perhaps I've missed it on this long thread but could you point out where people are suggesting that transwomen are all violent sex offenders? I thought the point being made was that transwomen retain a male level of offending, as a group.

So I found the California study referenced by Datun and again used by her to propagate the notion of trans people as violent sex offenders. What i found though was not a study that made this point although it did find slightly elevated levels of sex crimes, but rather what the study said all to loudly was that trans people in the California prison system are hugely and disproportionately the victims of violence and sex crimes both in and out of prison, that prostitution was significant in a large proportion of the inmates (oh and prostitution is also a sex crime btw) and that they were extremely disadvantaged, abused and marginalised group.

It's the classic Milo Y tactic, whereby he stated trans people were disproportionately involved in sex crime, conveniently forgetting to mention. AS THE VICTIMS.

So the claim about crime is supported by half a reputable study which found the latter cohort did not show elevated levels of criminal behaviour.

A California study which found that trans women were disproportionately victims of violence and sex crime and socially disadvantaged and sex workers

A half baked UK anti trans organisations study which in leau of HMPS data made assumptions about 2% of inmates in facilities which house sex offenders and conveniently assumed the trans inmates were the sex offenders without finding out what that 2% were convicted for and if they were the trans inmates.

So all in all a pretty false claim.

Don't be lazy, Jon. Explain.

Read the Act.

Jon, do you understand that intersex and trans are not the same thing?

Ahh. Ok. That explains it.

Jon we are talking about transgender, not intersex.

I completely agree that intersex babies should not be operated on until they are old enough to decide.

Jon, do you understand that intersex and trans are not the same thing? Do you have a dictionary, and if not can you type words into Google?

Jon

What mutilation? Seriously. Can you describe what you mean?

And by medical intervention, do you mean a diagnosis of gender dysphoria?

Do you not agree that gender dysphoria should be the sole reason to transition?

Because if you haven't got gender dysphoria, what other reason is there?

Medical intervention or mutiliation I should have said. Apologies.

deadringer

Also, if you're new to this, it can get very confusing with all the acronyms. Plus the layer upon layer of different strands to transactivism and transgenderism.

Lots of women are wondering what on earth this is all about, as it starts to blip at the edge of their radar.

There was a thread recently started by a woman who wanted it explained. There are some great links and straightforward explanations.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me