Can we take a moment to appreciate Piers Morgan

I don’t disagree with you on that. I’m not talking necessarily about men only though, I’m talking in a very general sense. Women can’t get anywhere without significant backing from men. Because, you know...

And absolutely, I’m not arguing that women don’t do/aren’t doing a better job of it, just very few people give a shit when it’s feminists/mere women talking. Drives me crazy, but there you go.

We need as many men in the public eye as possible to take this up (because sadly a large proportion of the public won’t actually listen unless a man speaks)

Most of the men who would take anything Piers Morgan says seriously are the kind of men who likely already think the whole trans thing is millennial snowflake bollocks. He's not going to convert anyone because by and large he's a pillock, and most sensible people think he's a knob.

We can do better than him!!!

Here you go Beveren

transcrimeuk.com/

It doesn’t matter how often it’s happened or even if it’s never happened! This is about more than this one issue (although it’s a very important one!). This is about the absolute truth of biological fact, and the right to speak freely what we all know to be true. Everything else is secondary to that (but not less important!).

On PM, I do not need to admire the man, nor like him, nor agree with everything he says or everything he stands for, to appreciate his action on this vitally important issue. That kind of thinking is what has got us into this horrific position in the first place. Some overarching principles are too important to be lost in ideological or abstract argument.

I don’t care if he’s ‘advocating for women’, being entirely self-serving or just arguing for the sake of it. In this case he is absolutely right to take the stance he has, and I applaud him for doing it publicly and decisively. We need as many men in the public eye as possible to take this up (because sadly a large proportion of the public won’t actually listen unless a man speaks).

Thread has got a little derailed here, just popping by to say I am no great Piers Morgan fan, found this thread because my husband made me watch the clip from the other day and I agree with the view that's it's great that he is brave enough to run these issues in the mainstream. He referred to getting abuse, there is a petition out to sack him etc. He might well be doing it for the publicity but he is doing it all over the mainstream media and that's important. A few women I work with were at a diversity session and were like when they uncovered a few of these issues. This stuff is not in the mainstream and we are at risk of some things that are horribly unfair and misogynistic just creeping up on us and becoming what's completely accepted and lawful by stealth. I liked that he had someone who had transitioned from Male to Female as part of the debate who was also level headed on issues like a biological male's advantage in women's sport.

Timeforbedithink123 I think you probably mean David TC Davies who has been the only MP vocal in raising awareness of the gender critical point of view in the Houses of Parliament and has received very little support from MPs. He also arranged the meeting at the House of Lords I think when the meeting has been cancelled by some other Venue because of pressure from trans activists

I can't see any statistics there, Datun?

Here Beveren

www.facebook.com/groups/1722756661380462/?ref=share

Yep he gets the thumbs up from me.

Are there figures available on how often it has been demonstrated that a man has self identified as a woman to get into women's spaces?

What makes you think the Karen White assaults and rapes were ''very rare'', or that supposed rarity makes self ID safe for women?

I'm not sure where you get your ''facts'' from, but men frequently self ID as women to get into women's spaces such as prisons.
You don't want to hear anything about the consequences though.

The reason this is discussed on FWR is because its a feminist chat board. Its not an obsession, its a concern; not least because many of us use those spaces and services ourselves.

But you can't realistically achieve feminist ends by sucking up to men who hate feminism and think it should go away because it "oppresses" men.

Hmm, I don't know. What about women who aren't crazy about feminism, or elements of it, are we allowed to be respectful of them? I would say that realistically, we can't achieve any ends unless you get some kind of buy-in from the public at large, and in any case that's a fairly important element of living in a democratic society. I'm not sure how important it is finally whether anyone calls it feminist.

*29Timeforbedithink123

With you. GC but I have no interest nor gratitude to Morgan or Hopkins.

I've seen Phillip Davies mentioned, but usually in the context of "Isn't Phillip Davies dreadful?"

There have been occasional links to stuff Rod Liddle has written about TRAs. But not many in the scheme of things.

I've never seen Phillip Davies even mentioned on this board. Are you sure you've got the right Davies???

I'm strongly inclined to be gender critical, but I'm also inclined to think "hmm" at the regular promotion on this board of people like:

• Piers Morgan (vocal anti-feminist, bullies women, e.g. his creepy hate thing against MM)
• Phillip Davies MP (vocal anti-feminist and MRA, notorious for trying to block legislation protecting women)
• Rod Liddle (vocal anti-feminist, assaulted a pregnant woman).

That's not tribalism. I'm all in favour of left-right engagement on feminist issues. But you can't realistically achieve feminist ends by sucking up to men who hate feminism and think it should go away because it "oppresses" men. Any more than you can promote racial equality by making common cause with David Duke because he's with you on one issue for his own self-interested ends. At best, it's naive to think you can "use" MRAs and discard them (they seem pretty damn sure they're using the "Feminazis" and enjoying watching feminism tear itself apart). At worst, I think you have some people on this board who are promoting anti-feminism under a thin disguise of being gender critical feminists.

His whole "and then she spurned me!" thing about Markle is so weird.

Since when do prisons base their policies on what the prisoners want?

Funny how it's only the supposed least privileged group in the world where what they want matters.

Yeah, no I won't. He's expressing this opinion because it fits in with his persona, not because he gives two fucks about women.

You only need to read the shite he writes about Meghan Markle to see he's a raging misogynist.

The MOJ are not basing their policy on crime.

The new policy shifted the emphasis away from legal gender and instead decisions about location are now based on the strength of evidence of living in the gender the prisoner identifies with.

So exactly how profound a cross dressing sexual fetish a man might have, will determine whether or not he is moved into a female prison.

Or the depth of his gender dysphoria. So quite how motivated he is by gender stereotypes.

None of this is based on crime, or whether he poses a threat. It's all about how much he really, really wants it.

Possibly because he's not that good an interviewer.

I find a lot of the interviewers on these kinds of shows are very similar. Often there is some obvious question that I'm just trying to send them by ESP, it seems so clearly the right thing to ask, but they just don't.

FWIW, I think what the Ben guy was dancing around was that he thought Pier's "identification" as a two-spirit penguin was dishonest or disingenuous, so not really an example of someone's real self-identity. And as far as it goes that's true. But if they had drilled down into where the different gender identities are, or come from, or how we know they are honest, that would have been pretty revealing I think.

Piers maybe got caught up in trying to make clear what his point was about there being a logical contradiction so didn't see the opening?

Probably should have checked before confidently asserting that everyone knows the thing that's not true, eh?

I said as you know because I thought it had been discussed here before.

The k white situation is rare where a trans prisoner has assaulted other prisoners. If the male trans offenders are mixing with women in the new wing I didn’t know that.

The MOJ has since confirmed that high risk transgender prisoners are allowed to mix with female inmates during communal activities such as fitness sessions, library and chapel visits, while being supervised by a prison officer.

Dear God, I didn't know that. I just paraphrased the BBC News report.

As ProdigalKittens points out, the women prisoners in such situations don't have any say. Unless they opt out of gym sessions, library visits and chapel services, of course, and stay in their cells.

I wonder how many self-exclude. I'd be highly surprised if none did.

How about we as a society just decide not to play Rapist Roulette with women's prisons?