Piers Morgan with Lisa Nandy on Good Morning Britain

Oooh that was long

It's fairly obvious that there are an extraordinary number of people, not just men, who find it almost impossible to centre women

goose

The above isnt an insult or a way of shutting anyone up

Its a statement of fact

I agree with just about all of your recent posts (maybe all ....can’t be arsed to check again)

And I’m not taking datuns comments as an attack on my thoughts

Left to my own devices i would , without question, be ‘true trans’ focused

Ive said many times that there are some arguments on here i am uncomfortable with

HOWEVER, i am well aware that if i stuck to that view i would NOT be centering women (that doesn’t look like ive spelt it right)

Now a number of people are taking the piss on this issue i am much more likely to take one womans NO as the end of the discussion, no matter how uncomfortable I might feel

(And I understand that my comfort level is affected by my female socialisation)

We know women have different views, from no males in places that are women only for safety/ privacy etc to everyone should be treated according to preferred gender including prison, stats etc

Asking me what that does for women or what it would look like - why even ask me that, the whole point is that it would have to be explored in some kind of public discourse.
This is public discourse. I've stated the pros and cons of treating post operative transsexuals as women above. What are your thoughts on it?

But you seem to want to make some women's things open to some male trans people, but only the right sort of male trans people.

Oh for goodness sake, I haven't said anything about what I want.

I think that many women feel differently about different groups of transwomen. I don't know how they would want to differentiate them, I suggested one way, but it is really pretty irrelevent to what I was saying.

I also said that I believe they would have a variety of views about what sorts of things might be open to whom, and again, without going out and doing some detailed polling, I can't tell you what each of them would think.

People here sometimes talk as if the most hard line GC position is the one that the vast majority of women would want to see instantiated, in terms of political solutions, and my point was I am not convinced that is true.

Asking me what that does for women or what it would look like - why even ask me that, the whole point is that it would have to be explored in some kind of public discourse.

But this sort of aggression when someone even mentions that maybe many women would have different views, and snide comments about them (or me, weirdly) not being woman centred? If a woman gives her considered view on an issue about women, and she's told sorry, you aren't a woman-centered woman - well, who is - the women that dismiss the views of other women when they don't like what they say?

Superb work by PM.

If this interview is representative, why Suzanne Moore deems LN bright (see Spectator article) is a mystery.

andyoldlabour
Apparently Piers Morgan does.
Presumably India Willoughby would be one of the male TS who are considered by some men to have had sufficient counselling & surgery that they should be regarded as 'deserving' access to some female only spaces/services?

That’s the real acid test, andy.

R0wantrees

India can shout that from the highest tower, but it still is not true, and 99.9999% of blokes would not consider India to be a woman - just saying.

Yes, I couldn't quite work that comment out, tbh.

India Willoughby, Celebrity Big Brother2018
"I am a real woman... Im going to say that one more time so it really penetrates, I am a real woman"

Im also confident that she doesn't assess their opinions on the basis of 'womanly nature'

Yes, I couldn't quite work that comment out, tbh.

FlyingOink

We know the vast majority of MtF transgender people never have surgery, this is what it makes such a concern to women.
Many of the TRA's demand full access to women's safe places, and that to me as a man rings alarm bells, as it does to virtually all women.
This is a real and very serious situation.
As a guy, this is a case of empathy towards the opposite sex, a little thought and consideration, something which many people have abandoned.
Just because men, such as I, are not going to be afffected by all this, is doesn't mean it doesn't care to us, it does, but the vast majority of us have no voice.
We live in a virtual world, commanded by "celebs" who rule the roost on MSM, they must be challenged.
I am tired and going to bed, because I cannot get my mind around this mess.
However, tomorrow is another day.

As a very famous actress once said.

If you decide that some women aren't properly womanly in their opinions, that comes to the same thing. Maybe worse really.

Im very confident that Datun thinks women are only adult human females.
Im also confident that she doesn't assess their opinions on the basis of 'womanly nature'

If you decide that some women aren't properly womanly in their opinions, that comes to the same thing. Maybe worse really.

Again, I haven't told anyone to shut up goose.

Men's motivation for transitioning will mean bugger all to most women specifically occupying spaces 'designated for women'.

What benefit is it to women to speculate why men transition and 'grade' their access on that basis?

I forgot the obvious on my negatives list : we have no way of knowing who has had surgery so the 95% can easily lie and say they have.

The positive about treating post operative men as if they were women is that there are hardly any of them.
The negatives about treating post operative men as if they are women include:
Having to adopt a position that surgery is necessary
Having to adopt a position that surgery is desirable
Having to adopt a position that the outcomes are positive
Ignoring the terrible failure rate of the actual surgery and the failure rate psychologically
Accepting men as women if they try hard enough
Ignoring socialisation
Assuming a penisless man is harmless
Accepting that the adoption of "feminine mannerisms" and removal of a penis makes a man a woman, and all the unpacking that comes with that
What about men who can't have surgery?

I've missed some out, and yeah I agree most people think we owe some respect to those people dysphoric enough to have surgery. So focussing on getting the message out that post operative men are about 5% of the total and the rest are what the public would call transvestites, is important.

I think it would effectively look like a third class, not easy to get included in, who could access some things designated for women but perhaps not others.

How does this benefit women?

All I have suggested is that I think a fair number of real women, even when they are aware of the issues, would consider that not all supposedly trans people are equivalent, and that they might e amenable to thinking about what things really should be female only, and which things need to be less strict, or not strict at all.

Well, obviously there are some things which can be mixed sex, and are already. But you seem to want to make some women's things open to some male trans people, but only the right sort of male trans people. How do you go about that? How do you separate the 'good' trans or 'true' trans from the fakers and self-id types? It can't be done. So it comes back to women-only and mixed sex.

Ive read very carefully Goose & sought clarifications on your propsals:

As I said, I expect people would have different ideas about that. But I think it would effectively look like a third class, not easy to get included in, who could access some things designated for women but perhaps not others.

Such as what 'things designated for women'?

Who is doing the designating?

Both because they think those things would lessen risk, and also keep the numbers quite low.

If a female single-sex space or service admits some males, it is no longer a single sex space or service.

How many women whose safety dignity and/or privacy being compromised is low enough to be acceptable?

And I have no intention on telling anyone to shut up.

If you decide that some women aren't properly womanly in their opinions, that comes to the same thing. Maybe worse really.

Ive asked you for clarification about your assertions & proposals.
Im typing so using my fingers to communicate.

I don't have assertions and proposals, you are not reading what I am saying.

I have said I think that quite a few women, who have no sympathy with the idea of self-id or "trans" people who have made no significant medical changes, think differently about people who have been vetted through significant psychoanalysis, and who have had sex reassignment surgery.

I also said that I think they would not all agree on how to manage that or just what lines to draw.

Why do you think that has anything to do with what I think?

Telling women who have even slightly different opinions than you that they are not being properly woman-centered is one of the things that has turned a lot of women off from listening to feminist voices, and it has not helped in making them heard in this discussion where there is something important to be said. There is really very little as maddening as having a bunch of people tell you to shut up and them appropriate your perspective as a woman. There are times when I think TRAs learned that shit from watching women.

All I have suggested is that I think a fair number of real women, even when they are aware of the issues, would consider that not all supposedly trans people are equivalent, and that they might e amenable to thinking about what things really should be female only, and which things need to be less strict, or not strict at all.

Equivalent to what ??

I can't vouch for anyone else, but I'm not grading men on anything. Focusing on the women means exactly that.

And I have no intention on telling anyone to shut up. 😄

Look, you can't claim you are centering women and then ignore when some of them disagree with you about how to do that. It's just talking out of your ass.

Ive asked you for clarification about your assertions & proposals.
Im typing so using my fingers to communicate.

Look, you can't claim you are centering women and then ignore when some of them disagree with you about how to do that. It's just talking out of your ass. Women are as likely as anyone else to have opinions about which things are important for women to maintain as woman only, and which are not, and also it is totally legitimate for women to think that there are other issues where it is important to be fair to people who are not women.

Telling women who have even slightly different opinions than you that they are not being properly woman-centered is one of the things that has turned a lot of women off from listening to feminist voices, and it has not helped in making them heard in this discussion where there is something important to be said. There is really very little as maddening as having a bunch of people tell you to shut up and them appropriate your perspective as a woman. There are times when I think TRAs learned that shit from watching women.

All I have suggested is that I think a fair number of real women, even when they are aware of the issues, would consider that not all supposedly trans people are equivalent, and that they might e amenable to thinking about what things really should be female only, and which things need to be less strict, or not strict at all.

I may be wrong, but if I'm not, they are allowed to take that view, and you can take yours. If your view isn't in the majority though it doesn't make you better at womaning.