If I argue transwomen are men is this an extremist position?

Everyone knows that TW are men. We need to absolutely stop using female pronouns for them (unless we wish to as a courtesy) Where did this notion that someone can demand to be called certain pronouns come from? It is so childish. Grown ups can treat trans people with respect by using using 'they' rather than 'she.' This pandering to a minorities unreasonable demands are causing more confusion. I'm happy to accept a chap is trans, but they will never be a woman.

I don't know how I am supposed to tell the difference between a male with bad intentions or a transexual who just wants to pee in peace. I can't inspect genitals. I can't ask to see a GRC.

To be honest if you accept you can't inspect anybody's genitals who you might be sharing a loo with, I'd be interested to know how you'd expect to know how anyone was trans at all, let alone which were the "good" and the "bad" ones.

And even if trans women are more readily identified, do you think you'd know the difference between a trans man and an actual man? One would be using the same loos as you. What about a mid-transition trans man and a mid transition trans woman? Totally sure you'd nail the difference as you pass each other in the corridor?

I think this idea that anyone would be put upon to correctly identify "good" and "bad" trans is totally taking for granted the fact that a lot of people aren't especially good at, or even remotely invested in spotting the difference between trans and not trans at all.

Because most toilets in the UK are perfectly safe and, in the grand scheme of things, no more somewhere you need to be on high alert than if you're walking down a reasonably quiet street in the middle of the day. Whilst you can't be completely safe anywhere, no matter what sex you are, 99% of public toilets are not far from the safest anyone can expect to be when going about their business in this country. Yes, even women.

And the situation where one might be even a little invested in spotting good and bad (secluded petrol station, unmanned, toilets out the back of the building, middle of the night, no cameras...) you're likely going to consider absolutely anyone else around with extreme suspicion, be them man, woman or anything else!

(Note: I'm talking specifically about toilets because you write about peeing in your OP)

He just ripped little Owen Jones a new one

He did! And the conversation between Janice Turner and the Morph that inspired it is also a sight to behold.

Ooh I know its the wrong thread but can I take Tom Farr to the feminist utopia? To go in one of the nice cages?

The truth is the truth. Speaking the truth may be considered extreme in times when people prefer to hear lies. So be it.

Yes. I've come to realise almost every adult does know what the truth is. Children, maybe not so much, depending on whether their school has been allowing unscientific training /indoctrination to take place.

So what are people's reasons for refusing to speak the truth? I can only speculate really. For me it's plain fear of never being able to work again (I don't lie mind you, I am tactically silent).

Interesting to think of the outcomes of all this as they currently are. Many women now unable to vote for lib dem /Labour /greens. Many women less hospitable to genuine transsexuals who were previously welcomed in their spaces. Many women shrinking back from taking part in some aspects of public life. Environment becoming more hostile to gay people, especially lesbians.

twitter.com/uracontra_/status/1042517625211891713?s=21

Have a look at this guys twitter. Tom Farr. He just ripped little Owen Jones a new one

Doesn’t hold back one bit
Oh and told shon that shon was so thick that light bent round shon

It's not an extremist position, Lippy - it's a truthful position.

This, however, can never be acknowledged by men, the oppressor class, because they would have to a) budge up and b) address their violent ways, to safely include their non-conforming brethren. Hence the wokeazaoid beardy bros all over the internet affirming TWAW. Affirming the actual truth terrifies the life out of them.

Thanks, speaking.

It’s Gelding

Comes to courtesy (not court). Darn autocorrect!

When did we switch from transvestites (absolutely birth sex) and transsexuals (grey area when it comes to court still birth sex in a XX/XY level)?

It seems the wording has changed to muddy the waters and confuse the issues. If the stats that 80% of trans women are physically men the surely this is something else than someone who genuinely feels that they are 'in the wrong body'. It's a kink along with the nappy wearers and puppy botherers.

a stallion with its penis removed is a colt

Wouldn't that be gelding rather than colt?

(I agree with what you are saying, btw, I just want to make sure that my understanding of terminology is correct.)

A male with his penis removed is a eunuch, not a woman.

All TW are men but not all TW are the same as other TW.

There are some TW who pass convincingly, and some who don't even seem to be trying. There are some TW who essentially work as prostitutes for gay men, and there are some TW who are in 'lesbian' relationships with women.

So whereas 'TW' might have a fairly clear meaning in, say Thailand, Stonewall & chums have made it meaningless in the West. Everyone can be trans.

Being female is an embodied experience - it is not a feeling, or clothing, or voice pitch. Being female does not mean lesser rights, but having particular needs.
This is beautifully expressed and exposes the nonsense of “living as a woman” for 2 years to get a GRC. All the “evidence” that shows men are living as women is window dressing (clothes/makeup/hair) and is meaningless because women don’t have to perform any of that window dressing to still be clearly and obviously women. You can only be a woman if you are born female. I am so angry that our legislative system is endorsing a lie and supporting delusions at the expense of women.

No it isn't.

Can we not just do away with the idea of gender altogether?

So there are male people and female people and they can present how they like and be their natural selves without their clothes or characteristics being coercively assigned as masculine or feminine?

There are some things that only female bodied people can do -menstruate, give birth and so on. They are women, regardless of how they present and whether they actually menstruate or give birth.

How is it extreme to state that?

The move to self-ID seems to come from a view that the need to live as a woman for two years is restrictive; and the same point you make in the OP that the need to take hormones and surgery is barbaric (and medicalises being trans). Hence, this means that any male person can say they identify with being female (how that is possible, I have no idea, as being female is an embodied experience) and that should be accepted. This view erases sex as a marker of difference (and need for different facilities).

Why on earth would a man want to erase sex as a marker of difference and erase the need for different facilities - particularly when the option exists to just present how you like (ditch the sex stereotypes aka gender)?

And why is it not okay to question this?

Being female is an embodied experience - it is not a feeling, or clothing, or voice pitch. Being female does not mean lesser rights, but having particular needs.

I cannot say what being trans is, as it is not my experience. But I do not believe it is being the opposite sex; it is being trans, so why is it not possible to work out the particular needs of trans people as a distinct group. It is not ‘othering’ to do this.

I know it’s not the point but isn’t a male horse a gelding after being castrated?

I actually think the demand to remove your genitals to gain entry into the club male/female club is barbaric.

Except there is no such demand - look at the thread on here which tells us that in 2009 a transwoman who had not had surgery was sent by a judge to the female prison estate because he had a GRC.

It is not compulsory to have male genitals removed to get a GRC.

My advice is that your energy is precious, and using it attempting to prove gravity exists or the earth is round is a waste of your energies.

Very sound advice.

Removal of the penis is emasculation, meaning un-manning. It's meant figuratively but obviously some people are now taking it literally.

Well even taking emasculation=unmanning literally, still doesn’t make an emasculated male a woman. It makes them an emasculated male.

Aspie

Yes. They love misapplying the the term 'literally' don't they?
First they came for our words...

I think there's a generation that has lost the distinction between literal and figurative meaning entirely. Literally.

3. A male with his penis removed is a eunuch, not a woman; just like a stallion with its penis removed is a colt, not a mare.

Balls. That is to say, a eunuch generally has their testicles removed. Removal of the penis is emasculation, meaning un-manning. It's meant figuratively but obviously some people are now taking it literally.

1. Only men can be transwomen therefore transwomen are men

1. A female born woman can't be a transwoman therefore transwomen aren't women

1. A male with his penis removed is a eunuch, not a woman; just like a stallion with its penis removed is a colt, not a mare.