Gina Martin not happy women don’t want trans women in their sex segregated spaces

Very astute points Goosefoot

I get how frustrating it is and I guess some other people following the discussion might see the lack of coherence and pause to think.

If she doesn't have the imagination to have empathy for all the women and girls who don't share her views, she's not going to suddenly develop it. I'm happy with arguments peaking some lurkers.

Does a TRA honestly think the transwoman's pain matters more?

Yes, because narcissism. But other people should engage their brains more.

Is it easier to extend sympathy to a transwoman because to acknowledge the pain of a fellow woman triggers empathy, which can be painful? Honest questions! I really don't understand this response/lack of response.

Its interesting, though depressing, to see the experiences of a transwoman seem to elicit more sympathy than those of a woman. People just presume abuse, violence and rape are such an accepted part of being female, it doesn't even merit a mention? Does a TRA honestly think the transwoman's pain matters more?

Good points, Goosefoot. I wouldn't be able to explain much about black holes if asked, but I believe that the theory is likely to be reliable because people I trust to know have said so.

Academia is absolutely riddled with this nonsensical magical pseudoscience of sex as a spectrum, though. Probably not the science subjects, but the arts are well befuddled. Post modernism and moral relativism has a lot to answer for.

TWAW never has been a logical argument, it's an emotional one, so trying to dismantle it with logic alone is never going to work.

It doesn't make any sense but - and I think this is Goosefoot's point but I'm sure she'll say if not - that argument on its own won't change Gina Ward's mind.

Maybe that's what I mean... that doesn't sound so promising...

This kind of argument won't change her mind, I think. People who aren't in her mind any kind of authorities aren't going to do it by saying it's illogical, or a language trick.

I think if you went up to a large proportion of university educated liberals, and asked them something like, do you believe in black holdes? Do you believe evolution selected for these kinds of traits through this mechanism? Do you think the universe started with the Big Bang, ado you think light is a photon and a wave - a lot of them would say they do think those things were true, and in fact they would think that to some extent they understand them, that they make sense. If someone tried to say, nah, that's just made up, they would argue it and think those people were a little cracked.

But if you pushed their understanding, or the basis of their confidence, or asked them difficult questions, it would become clear pretty quickly that they believe these things because they have been told that they are true, and their understanding is limited, and they don't have a capacity to really deal with difficult questions or problems, real scientific ones or maybe even made up ones.

People are used to thinking that way, and having a lot of confidence in their "scientific" beliefs. They don't know this stuff, it's all a belief system for them personally, but they've been told it's part of a system of true facts or at least a process that reveals true facts pretty well.

The science of gender ideology isn't really any different for many. I think it's why some people who claim to have the most faith in science are also prone to believe the worst scientific garbage.

I don't think that's it. I think she genuinely believes it - that's the problem - and no amount of pointing out the lack of logic is going to change her mind.

It's not just humiliation - just imagine the pile on if she dared to stand up to the trans mob? She must be fucking petrified. They have serious power and influence behind them while women are just beginning to grasp some of our rights back from these men.

It doesn't make any sense but - and I think this is Goosefoot's point but I'm sure she'll say if not - that argument on its own won't change Gina Ward's mind.
I get how frustrating it is and I guess some other people following the discussion might see the lack of coherence and pause to think. But all Gina's going to do now is double down, because even if she does have doubts, to admit them now would be too humiliating.
People don't as a rule back down unless they have room to manoeuvre.

Her responses to sexual assault survivors were really quite shocking. Handwaving it away with "I'm a survivor too" as if what she thinks is the last word on it.

I agree, Michelle

She thinks transwomen are women.

Rather she thinks she thinks transwomen are women.

When you look at the effort of care and prioritisation she is affording to some people born male as opposed to that she is affording to all people born female, no, she does not believe that TW are women at all.

She is specially indulging and nurturing males that she perceives as vulnerable for her own personal reasons.

Nor do I think she's thought about it

A lot of people accept it because they have bought the idea that this is the new, correct, scientific understanding.

I think for a lot of them it will take the medical and scientific establishment coming right out and clarifying things, though trans people making the same point is also probably helpful.

The point is that it doesn't make any sense. It's an article of faith. Not a coherent belief.

She is mistaken then.

Well, yes, I think so.

But there is a reason that's been such a popular sloganeering point. If you accept it, many of the arguments about keeping biological men out of women's spaces etc don't work.

She thinks transwomen are women. It's a category problem.

Except she hasn't bothered to define "transwoman". Nor do I think she's thought about it. Men are men, and transwomen are women. It's really so obvious, she can't understand why anyone can't see it.

I'm tired of people being willfully ignorant. Just once, I'd love someone to say 'oh, yeah, you're right we can't tell who is predatory by looking at them so let's go with the statistics and keep single sex spaces to ensure women's safety.'

YY

She is mistaken then.

She thinks transwomen are women. It's a category problem.

Head Girl complex?

But that's the point. She was passionate about upskirting. To protect girls and women and get a law so the men could be prosecuted. Where before it fell down a gap between voyeurism and sexual assault.

She does care about women and girls. So I want to understand why she believes that opening up all single sex things (prisons, sports, communal changing at swim clubs etc etc to anyone on a basis of self ID.

It just doesn't follow.

*We need to understand WHY she thinks like that rather than just dismissing it and her.

That's all very nice to say, but there's limited point in trying to do the right thing with someone who will never extend you the same courtesy in return*

Indeed- I think the question is WHY she doesn’t think the safety, privacy and dignity of women and girls is important.

Why does she voice concern on Twitter about attacks on TW but not for the women.

"when all men can be a woman, then everyone's a woman"

So the old term "woman," is airbrushed out of existence, and everything that defines or protects those who were defined by this old term, along with it.