Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Are these stupid questions?

64 replies

IdentifiesAsTired · 04/02/2019 18:08

In any negotiation, there's usually some kind of mutual benefits, right?

So, what is transactivism bringing to the table for females? What do natal women get in return for opening up their female-only spaces and the female legal identity to literally any male that says they identify as a woman? How do members of the female sex benefit from transactivism turning everything mixed-sex? How is the category 'woman' being enhanced by denying that female reproductive biology is what defines the group, in order to protect the feelings of some males? How is it valuable and enriching for lesbians to be told they must include a penis in their sex lives?

Should I be considering (in their terms:) AFAB nonbinary folks/transmen as the net beneficiaries from the female sex here? Is it that feminists should be fighting for some female's rights to attempt to modify their bodies, take testosterone and undergo double mastectomies/ hysterectomies because they feel their internal identities don't fit with the rigid and harmful feminine gender role?

I can think of multiple negative effects transactivism has on females as a sex, but I am struggling to see the benefits.

Can anyone help?

OP posts:
merrymouse · 04/02/2019 18:34

Because when I've tried to talk about this with some people, they say it's a debate between two sides and that women need to compromise?

Depends what the compromise is.

It's not possible to compromise on facts. Women exist as a biological sex. There is nothing intrinsically similar about trans women and women.

However, I think it is possible to share services - e.g. both buses and bikes are completely different and both use the bus lane. However, that is because of practical convenience, not because anybody has ever argued that a bike is a bus.

it is certainly possible for a service to meet the needs of two different groups, but the first step is to recognise the needs of the groups and who they are. We haven't got there yet, and we never will while everything depends on agreeing that TWAW.

Original poster
IdentifiesAsTired · 04/02/2019 18:28

That's because there are no benefits for females, only for males.

This is what I strongly suspect. I am just wondering if/how someone can argue the opposite case. Sorry if this question has been done to death already.

OP posts:
NothingOnTellyAgain · 04/02/2019 18:27

well no

because women are not higher in the pecking order than men

in your examples the people with power fight to lose any

in this example the people with power want to remove even more from the people who have less

Weetabixandshreddies · 04/02/2019 18:25

Isn't this the same though when any minority group is given rights?

So what was the benefit to men when women were given rights?

The benefit to white British people when BME people gained rights?

To able bodied people when people with disabilities gained rights?

I don't know that you can view it in a "what's in it for me" way.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 04/02/2019 18:25

oh sorry misread

who are you talking to who says that?

what do they thikn women must compromise on

by comprimise do they mean shut up and capitulate

TowelNumber42 · 04/02/2019 18:25

From some people's perspective it is not a negotiation. They think some women have a penis. No debate.

Some people believe in a flat earth. Others are creationists. We don't much bother negotiating those beliefs. So long as those with the power don't put flat earthers in charge of aircraft navigation systems nor creationists in charge of science education then nobody's much bothered.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 04/02/2019 18:24

no they say

#nodebate

any women who disagree are bigots committing literal violence

they attack trans people who want to debate as well

RedemptiveCrocodile · 04/02/2019 18:24

Debate is the wrong word. Debate implies consession is expected on both sides in order to reach a mutually beneficial agreement.

The reality is that women are expected to concede all in the name of inclusivity and progress - and be happy while doing so.

Original poster
IdentifiesAsTired · 04/02/2019 18:20

why do you think it's a negotiation
Because when I've tried to talk about this with some people, they say it's a debate between two sides and that women need to compromise?
Maybe negotiation isn't the right word, but it just made me wonder is in it for females, if anything.

OP posts:
terryleather · 04/02/2019 18:15

I can think of multiple negative effects transactivism has on females as a sex, but I am struggling to see the benefits.

That's because there are no benefits for females, only for males.

LangCleg · 04/02/2019 18:14

It's not a negotiation because it's a male sexual rights movement.

NothingOnTellyAgain · 04/02/2019 18:10

our job is to do as we're fuckign well told and smile while we do it

why do you think it's a negotiation

NothingOnTellyAgain · 04/02/2019 18:09

the people who benefit are men
whatever their gender id

theres your answer

NothingOnTellyAgain · 04/02/2019 18:09

It's not a negotiation
why do you think it's a negotiation