Women have the right to state that trans women are actually trans-identifying men

Your chosen gender identity doesn’t alter your biological sex.

People don't 'choose' their gender identity, anymore than they choose their sexual orientation.

Damn right. I will not be gaslighted into saying things that we all know to be untrue.

Why would anyone say it’s transphobic to say the transgender people who identify as women are actually biologically male?

Your chosen gender identity doesn’t alter your biological sex. That’s not transphobic it’s reality.

Yes I agree that some of the female allies believe they're actually women. As do some trans identified males. Male allies, not so much. They would treat them with the obvious contempt most of them have for women if they really believed that.

Tinkle

At the end of the day, does it even matter what the motivation was in saying that? Whether you genuinely believe or just want to score "woke" points, the claim is nonsense. And its effect doesn't change depending on motivation. Erasure of sex, biology, and women is the result.

Fwiw I have no doubt they said it because they believe it. I think mostly only men, beardybros, say stuff that they know is nonsense, but they want to be seen as woke (and often also shit on women). But young girls especially, I have no doubt they actually believe that. You see it on twitter all the time. And with believe I don't necessarily mean believe they can get pregnant (although for sure with the tons of misinformation out there, far too many also do think this), but rather "they identify as women, women have maternity leave, i.e. they need maternity leave".

MrG I blinked at that one. I wonder if it was an over the top virtue signalling 'look how totally much I validate you and believe you're a woman' gesture to others. Which basically translates as 'validate me for how very cool and good I am' rather than a genuine interest or concern for the person you're using.

Having said all that, it has always been perfectly possible for any nut case with a suitable physique to disguise themselves as a woman and get past a door . Nearly 20 years ago someone did it at female open plan changing room at a sports centre in south Birmingham, UK. The police were called, there was a fuss, and the idiot was ejected. That would still be possible even after the change; behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace is gloriously flexible!

If you did this now, you would be the one being cautioned for a hate crime. Good luck with that gloriously flexible law.

Stating biological fact is not transphobic.

Gynophobia, which most mtf and tra have, has been proven to be much more harmful and violent.

How is stating a biological fact transphobic? Transwomen are trans identifying men. So they're men.

Why is it dangerous to state that a woman is an adult human female and has the right to spaces away from men?

Funny, I've never seen anyone say that stating that a man is an adult human male is transphobic. The definition of man on Wikipedia remains adult human male. No-one calls men transphobic for talking about their penises. No-one screams for male-only spaces to be shut down.

This is a war on women and women alone.

I agree with the op.

A younger employee replied: “Shouldn’t trans women qualify for maternity leave though?”

I give up with humanity. My generation is a bunch of entitled morons.

In fact, everything that is happening now with the male invasion of women's sports, jails etc is all predicated on the logic inherent in 'transwoman', which linguistically groups males as a subgroup of women, who then become women's problem and duty to accommodate.

This is spot on. (My bold)

Someone on Reddit mentioned 'women and cis women'. So that's the next step.

Certain TRAs really like using this phrasing. Supposedly as a joke, but it's clear to see how they regard women as subordinate to them.

Internationally that seem to have been the experience

What you're missing is that underpinning equality law giving access doesn't always work the same. "Gender" isn't always completely conflated with sex as is happening here. So in Ireland I understand they don't put any MTF trans in the female prison estate. There is also a much smaller number of trans people.

Also I challenge the idea that in Canada and the US there haven't been problems. There have.

And fundamentally, if we can no longer use the word woman to mean adult human female, we no longer have the language to describe sex-based oppression. And we cannot fight sex-based oppression if we don't have the words to articulate it.

Laws are being made which conflate sex and gender, starting with the Gender Recognition Act:
Where a full gender recognition certificate is issued to a person, the person’s gender becomes for all purposes the acquired gender (so that, if the acquired gender is the male gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a man and, if it is the female gender, the person’s sex becomes that of a woman).

This has been interpreted to mean:
As the Gender Recognition Act states that one’s acquired gender becomes one’s legal sex then there is little difference between sex and gender. Indeed sex is preceded and exceeded by gender by the terms of the Gender Recognition Act. Sex in this sense is determined by gender identity – the social role that one chooses to take.
www.socresonline.org.uk/12/1/whittle.html

So the law, according to some people, is saying that 'sex' doesn't exist but 'gender' is real. These are the people who are shaping the law. Stephen Whittle, who wrote the paragraph above, was one of the authors of the Yogyakarta Principles, elements of which were included in Resolution 2048 of the Council of Europe. These are the documents being used by the government to decide the way forward on changes to the GRA. They were mentioned in the Scottish GRA consultation, and also by Maria Miller.

This would mean that 'woman' is someone who feels like a woman, not someone with female biology, since 'gender' is reality, and 'sex' means nothing. I'm not sure that the politicians really understand this, but the people behind it certainly do.

Ceinwen2 I'm reading.

Having said all that, it has always been perfectly possible for any nut case with a suitable physique to disguise themselves as a woman and get past a door . Nearly 20 years ago someone did it at female open plan changing room at a sports centre in south Birmingham, UK. The police were called, there was a fuss, and the idiot was ejected. That would still be possible even after the change; behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace is gloriously flexible!

Its a wonder why we have sex segregation at all, given how easy it is to stop abuse.

Also, if calling the police is so easy, why can't TIM call them when problems arise in the male spaces?

And we cannot fight sex-based oppression if we don't have the words to articulate it.

And so become complicit in our own oppression.

Pressed send too soon.

And fundamentally, if we can no longer use the word woman to mean adult human female, we no longer have the language to describe sex-based oppression. And we cannot fight sex-based oppression if we don't have the words to articulate it.

Placemarking

I used to take a very similar position Ceinwen. I used to think it was okay to say transwoman and woman. It was kind and I recognised that the majority of transgender individuals want to live their lives with their dysphoria quietly and respectfully of the gender they identify as.

But I'm afraid that has shifted over the last few years because I've seen the boundary pushing that's gone on and I know - not because I'm paranoid or bigoted - but because they've said it - that TIMs want to co-opt the word woman for themselves.

Or maybe they thought trans woman meant a female person who is trans, and therefore genuinely could get pregnant?

From reading a few of the comments, it seems that a lot of people there think the same. People seem to think transwoman means a female person who is trans, which is a transman. Part of the issue with all this language changing tbh. Of course it seems reasonable that a transman who was pregnant got maternity leave (so people think feminists are transphobic for saying they shouldn't...). It makes no sense at all to give a male person maternity leave. For what exactly?!

I wasn't surprised by the responses to my earlier post, to be honest. To anyone reading this with an open mind about this matter, and not sure what the "facts" are, please be assured that I am broadly aware of the issues on both sides, including recent and current issues around a young man ( and yes I will say that) who after humane and sensitive assessment and at the Tavistock is now well on the way through his treatment at the main UK Gender Identity Clinic. Since he now has a beard, and a deep voice, it would be rude in the extreme to refer to him as "her". The same applies to people going the other way. The writer Jan Morris, then, should be referred to as " him"?

It is all horribly complicated, though both sides don't see it that way, and there is room even for informed people to have different views. It seems to depend on their " core beliefs" about society, as much as on objective facts. Which are in short supply. Or quoted out of context, etc.

Please be clear; I am personally concerned by the prospect of it being " too easy" to "register" an official "changed gender/ done and dusted" identity. What I have seen over many years is that the " change in the head" takes many years.

Having said all that, it has always been perfectly possible for any nut case with a suitable physique to disguise themselves as a woman and get past a door . Nearly 20 years ago someone did it at female open plan changing room at a sports centre in south Birmingham, UK. The police were called, there was a fuss, and the idiot was ejected. That would still be possible even after the change; behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace is gloriously flexible!

Things will work out as they will. I stand quite firmly with those who want the GRA to be much as it is now, and against ( too rapid?) self diagnosis. But I also think that much of the current hoo haa will prove to have been over reaction. Internationally that seem to have been the experience. Though it may be that we have a bigger, bolder group of particularly idiotic trans activists here. I do concede that.

But what can anyone say, without being vilified by someone. This post would enrage the most committed on both sides, and can only influence people in the middle somewhere. Who, lets face it, may not be reading this thread anyway! Ah me.

On the plus side, I rarely get "trans women are women" chanted at me by transactivists and allies because it kind of takes the wind out of their sails when you don't indulge it at all.

The phrase 'trans women are women' is dependent on the term 'transwoman'. The manta could not exist without the neologism. In fact, everything that is happening now with the male invasion of women's sports, jails etc is all predicated on the logic inherent in 'transwoman', which linguistically groups males as a subgroup of women, who then become women's problem and duty to accommodate.

By making it one word, it is a separate entity, and not 'a type of woman'.

Yes, 'transwoman' absolutely implies that men are a type of woman. The clue is in the 'woman' bit.

However I use it with the caveat that I absolutely believe that transwomen are men.

If feminists understand how important it is point out that male people are men, I don't understand why they would refer to them as '(adjective)woman'. It's totally counterproductive to the point we wish to make. I really don't get why feminists who understand how harmful the male appropriation of womanhood is are also happy to refer to those males linguistically as 'women' (with or without a space), simply because men invented this word for themselves, with the express purpose of colonising womanhood.