We need to talk about what transgender means

What I was trying to say was that we need to talk about what it means, but not in the way the OP intended.

Same destination!

I meant, obviously, in terms of the OP, which is trying to persuade us to make a distinction between transgender and transsexual, and dysphoric and non-dysphoric. There's no distinction in terms of women's rights and child protection and never has been.

What I was trying to say was that we need to talk about what it means, but not in the way the OP intended. Someone earlier in the thread seemed to be saying that we shouldn't be talking about what it means full stop, which I understood to mean that they thought it was nothing to do with us. That's what I disagree with.

I agree that there is no real distinction or definite dividing line between the different varieties of trans.

Looking at Dr Pankhurst's thread reminded me of the importance of archives. Last year, it seemed as if one of the odder impacts of Brexist would be that the British Library would no longer have the right to hold the Spare Rib electronic archive.

Spare Rib, the trailblazing women’s magazine that defined generations of feminism, faces the axe from the British Library’s digital archive if there is no Brexit deal, it has emerged.

The magazine ran from 1972 to 1993, and all 11,000 articles, cartoons and photographs were made digitally available in 2015 as part of the joint efforts of the British Library (BL) and the Spare Rib Collective.

But BL has now written to researchers to tell them that if there is no agreement on exiting from the EU, they will have no choice but to suspend access to their digital archives for copyright reasons, although they will still be able to access the archive in person.

www.theguardian.com/media/2019/feb/25/spare-rib-digital-archive-no-deal-brexit-british-library

Does anyone know if there's an update on this?

Here’s the thread reader link for Em’s archive posts, easier to follow for non twitter people. Probably deserves it’s own M/N thread:

threader.app/thread/1211654889228640257

Wow LangCleg, thanks for that link.

It's rather disquieting to see quite how far back this goes. All the exact same arguments, but, it would appear, with more open acknowledgement that this is largely a fetish, for many men - the mags, etc.

And, overriding everything, the total expectation that women are there to be used to support it all.

The, still quite shocking, realisation that women are not seen as anything other than a service.

Bloody hell, Lang! Em has turned up some fascinating stuff there!

I disagree. We need to shout louder that it means men colonising womanhood.

I meant, obviously, in terms of the OP, which is trying to persuade us to make a distinction between transgender and transsexual, and dysphoric and non-dysphoric. There's no distinction in terms of women's rights and child protection and never has been. A movement for transsexuals has not been recently hijacked by "evil fetishists". The movement is exactly the same now as it was when it began. As Dr Em's thread illustrates.

We don't need to talk about what transgender means.

I disagree. We need to shout louder that it means men colonising womanhood. It means children being drugged because they are gender non-conforming. It means the relentless reinforcement of sex role stereotypes. It means men feeling entitled to invade women only spaces. It means women and children losing their rights and their safety due to the action of entitled males.

There are vulnerable people involved, but these are the children and women who are endangered by this juggernaut of a men's rights movement.

Anybody still labouring under the impression that the aims and objectives of this movement have changed in any way over recent years, should read this Twitter thread by Dr Em (awesome research). Complaints about the cotton ceiling in 1978, conflation with intersex in 1971, claiming rights to women's shelters in 1969, "I'm ma'am" assaults in 1980, a letter to the Guardian about editorial policy silencing women's rights in favour of "trans" in 1983.

twitter.com/PankhurstEM/status/1212398421849624577

It's all there.

The male entitlement hasn't changed. The political aim to abolish sex hasn't changed. The only thing that has changed is that pomo-queer theory has dominated the liberal academy and its graduates have gone on to fill institutional and third sector jobs allowing for regulatory capture.

We don't need to talk about what transgender means.

We need to talk about women's rights and child protection.

no one will have worked harder for acceptance or rights than she will have just to be legally accepted as female

I'm old enough to remember marital rape being legal. My mum helped build (literally, she helped refurbish the building) a women's DV shelter. I have fought tooth and nail to be taken seriously in my particular male-dominated field. I have been sexually assaulted. I have spent my whole life fighting for fair treatment, acceptance, and the upholding of the rights I have on paper but not in practice.

No transwoman has worked as hard as OFAB women do to maintain their rights and dignity in the face of a world run by males for male convenience.

No, we don't need to talk about what transgender means on a women's rights forum, any more than we need to talk about what Catholicism means on an abortion rights forum.

A set of people exist. Their beliefs are at odds with our rights. That's all we need to know about them.

The safety of women is paramount - whatever points are raised to try and be inclusive to trans people.

As one of the "type 1s" the OP categorises, despite the fact I've gone through the entire medical process, keep myself to myself and live a happily boring mundane life I still recognise that I am biologically still male.

The trans movement, as it is now, IS a men's right movement based on appropriation of female identities/bodies and some kind of twisted identity validation.

And as much as I find the idea of having to share 3rd spaces with hairy a*sed AGPs in bad wigs and fishnets distasteful, MEN should not be using women's sex segretated spaces AT ALL. No matter how many "magical gender feelz" are hurt in the process, it's miniscule in comparison to the women who are being sexually assaulted, subjected to violence or are in genuine fear of their lives DAILY because of this nonsense.

Yes, transsexuals ARE going to get thrown under the bus as this carries on, but it should be us that's fighting ALONGSIDE you and speaking up to sort out this sad state of affairs. You, as women, shouldn't have to do it for us. It's not your job and not your fight.

Over the last few months, the TRAs are definitely rattled after being dragged into the daylight and exposed for what they are. Hopefully this year will be the year the tide actually turns.

www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/strictly-orthodox-women-to-mobilise-against-opening-hampstead-heath-ladies-pond-to-trans-swimmers-1.484633

Entering women’s only spaces to ‘validate’ self identity is another way of using female bodies for their own purposes. It’s gross.

Re single sex spaces. Safety is a massive issue and it is undeniable that the safety of women and girls will be sacrificed with the dismantling of single sex spaces.

Privacy and dignity is also highly important. Even if you don’t fear you safety is compromised.

• I don’t want my daughters seeing men unzipping their trousers as they enter an enclosed toilet booth even if they can’t see the penis. That’s what now happens.

• I don’t want piss all over the seat.

Where is privacy and dignity for women and girls in such circumstances?

Equally most men - don’t want to see women washing hands with menstrual blood on.

Perhaps instead of making large communal toilets for all we should be considering single cubical bathrooms so that every member of society is safe

Unfortunately it has been demonstrated time and again that the subset of men who are determined to violate women and children will use any available opportunity to do so. Men will and do place hidden cameras in such establishments, knowing women will use them. Public toilets allow women to keep and eye on one another and are Proven safer - as long as women are legally allowed to challenge male people entry.

Besides, third, gender neutral facilities have been tried and were protested by trans activists as being “exclusionary” because they imply that trans women are in any way different from women.

"Well statistics can Never be argued with, obviously that is definitely how things are no questions asked about the percentages of male victims of female assailants that don't come
Forward out of embarrassment or risk of loosing their rights to their children, or simply don't understand that their victims cause women clearly don't assault men right???"

One of the problems with statistics now is that male people who claim they have changed sex/gender (clunky sentence,sorry) are having their crimes recorded as if they are adult human female offenders. This skews statistics significantly.

There are men who suffer domestic violence who do not report. Very few posters on FWR would deny that. No one should be the victim of domestic or other violence.

However the focus tends to be on the abuse of women on this forum as we are talking about the rights of women. Many posters have pointed out that single sex spaces do not remain single sex if men are permitted access.

You are entitled to your opinion and you are freely voicing it here. I support your right to say it, but I also support the right of people to disagree.

Fab post BickerinBrattle Thank you.
Needs repeating again and again and again

ahenderson270: '... stamp unceremoniously on my right to an opinion ...'

What you seem not to realise, ahenderson270, is the difference between denying someone the right to have an opinion, and explaining to someone why their opinion is mistaken.

At least here on FWR, no-one 'stamps unceremoniously' on your right to hold any opinion. On the contrary, it would seem to the lurking reader (such as me), you are encouraged to express your opinions, and your right to hold them is thoroughly upheld.

But your opinions will be are challenged. It will be is pointed out to you where and why you are mistaken in the opinions you hold. Some of the things you believe are false, and people explain why. You seem not to understand this.

I know many people think all opinions are somehow equal. They are not. If my opinion is that x is true and your opinion is that x is not true, one of us must be wrong. People like you, ahenderson270, it seems who talk about being denied the right to hold an opinion when their opinions are simply challenged, are not morons, in your word. (Not a word I would use, but there it is.) However, such people like you, ahenderson270, it seems do lack understanding.

There is no shame in not understanding. But, perhaps, there is something to be pitied in those who wilfully deny themselves the possibility of understanding in the face of clear explanation. This is a particular cap you, ahenderson270, might try on for size.

Excellent post, Bicker.

It’s the same old patriarchy, done up in new clothes.

You know, it's ridiculous how many screenshots one has to make these days. Some posts I want to be sure I can re-read.

well we don't know which trans people are dangerous so let's keep them away

It is not just about danger, but about protecting the natural dignity & comfort of our sex and our intimate female spaces.

Orrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr we spend more time and effort in properly educating children, especially boys around consent, feminism and women's rights

Totally agree about the issue of consent. That is the main issue, in fact.
Consent. Not forceful or unwanted violation of boundaries .

If I'm a moron for thinking we should be embracing each other and each others battles so that the fight may finally end then I'm happy to be a moron .. rather a moron with hope and love at the base of my intentions than what I'm seeing here

Look, I was very idealistic once. I spent two years living at the side of a road on a peace camp, amongst many other idealistic political actions But let me tell you - they were not very peaceful, and anything but flowers and rainbows. In the real world conflicts have to be managed and dealt with - they don't just disappear because we believe in peace and love and 'inclusion'.

If it makes me stupid. If I'm a moron

You've come to the wrong place if you expect or want to be abused. You ought to try meeting with a group of women when they attempt to hold a legitimate meeting or conference to discuss issues which will impact on women and women's services on account of trans ideology. This forum is about as civilised and intelligent as it gets on this issue.

no one will have worked harder for acceptance or rights than she will have just to be legally accepted as female

You are joking? Are you aware of the length and depth of women's struggle for liberation and equal civil rights? For women to have their own spaces and services, unique to them on account of their biology and their role and position as women in ours society.

I'm not sure how old you are...but i'm of an age when I can remember when women could not take out a mortgage in their own right; were expected to give up work upon marriage; expected to 'obey their husbands in their marriage vows; and when women did not have even half of the freedoms and rights they now have today. So much has been fought and struggled for p- and that includes the right to feel a measure of dignity in our sex and some protections on account of it.