Trying to understand the hate trans people get on here.

I don’t know if any Transmen have tried to get into the Freemasons. Transwomen are allowed to be members and are referred to as “Brother”.

I don’t know if any Transboys have tried to get into the all boys Eton College. But they appear to allow pupils who joined as a boy to remain after becoming a transgirl.

I also don’t know if any Transmen have tried to claim inheritance intended for eldest sons. But that is specifically prevented in English law.

I don’t believe Transmen are permitted into the Catholic priesthood.

Recently, a team led by Lisa Fazio of Vanderbilt University set out to test how the illusion of truth effect interacts with our prior knowledge. Would it affect our existing knowledge? They used paired true and un-true statements, but also split their items according to how likely participants were to know the truth (so "The Pacific Ocean is the largest ocean on Earth" is an example of a "known" items, which also happens to be true, and "The Atlantic Ocean is the largest ocean on Earth" is an un-true item, for which people are likely to know the actual truth).

Their results show that the illusion of truth effect worked just as strongly for known as for unknown items, suggesting that prior knowledge won’t prevent repetition from swaying our judgements of plausibility.

To cover all bases, the researchers performed one study in which the participants were asked to rate how true each statement seemed on a six-point scale, and one where they just categorised each fact as "true" or "false". Repetition pushed the average item up the six-point scale, and increased the odds that a statement would be categorised as true. For statements that were actually fact or fiction, known or unknown, repetition made them all seem more believable.

At first this looks like bad news for human rationality, but – and I can't emphasise this strongly enough – when interpreting psychological science, you have to look at the actual numbers.

What Fazio and colleagues actually found, is that the biggest influence on whether a statement was judged to be true was... whether it actually was true. The repetition effect couldn’t mask the truth. With or without repetition, people were still more likely to believe the actual facts as opposed to the lies.

This shows something fundamental about how we update our beliefs – repetition has a power to make things sound more true, even when we know differently, but it doesn't over-ride that knowledge

'Trans women are women' as a mantra is a psychological experiment.

Transmen usually make the news for having babies, while transwomen make the news for various accomplishments.

I should also have mentioned Freddie the Seahorse. Got a GRC saying Freddie was legally male, then immediately got pregnant. Now campaigning to be named as 'father' on the child's birth certificate, so that the child would have no mother.

What some of these transmen are doing behind the scenes is dangerous in a less obvious way than what transwomen are doing with all their shouting about women's spaces. They are actually trying to redefine what sex means for all of us.

I always forget about Whittle after the way they showed their ass here.

Part of the reason for all the pressure on colleagues, strangers and friends to comply with preferred pronoun usage is because it is used as evidence that the person is perceived as living as the opposite sex.

^*She said something like post rape trauma is something that is dictated by the sufferer. And that is shaped by societal expectations of a woman raped. That we be ashamed, feel dirty, despoiled. Women are socialised into believing that and it deepens their trauma. We should choose not to internalise the stereotypical version of a woman raped.

I know I didn't. I didn't weep, hide myself away pretend it had not happened. I was angry, told people who he was, where he worked. I have no idea why but I refused to be traumatised by it... well, after the shock, the bruises and the immediate feelings of collapse, numbness. Maybe my age (a young Greenham Common era), we were an angry lot of young women!*^

I'm sorry you experienced this, and I respect your opinion but I do think it's not valid for a lot of victims of rape.

My DD was raped and sexually abused repeatedly in the home of their bio mum. When they disclosed they were too young to fully understand what had happened to them. But their over arching feeling was that they were dirty and they were deeply ashamed of it.

I'm happy for you that you didn't feel traumatised, but so so many women and children do. I think it's very unfair to say they choose to feel like that. She's never been given the message that she should feel like that, but she absolutely did and does, it was one of the big barriers to disclosure. I can't help but think the very nature of rape and sexual assault, the fact that they loose control of their body, that sometimes their abuser can even make them feel pleasure when they really dint want to, can make the feelings so much more complicated than other forms of assault.

Your opinion of course is completely valid, it applies you and is based on tire experience. I just wanted to express an alternative one.

I think to ‚live as a woman‘ boils down to being perceived as a woman by society. Which is only a thing because society treats men and women so differently, still.

Calling the opinion held by Jo Rowling and 90% of the public controversial is a standard reversal tactic deployed by propagandists.

That made me look up the Barbara Cartland Etiquette Manual. Second hand copies are available online. It looks like an ideal gift!

It is

I struggle with the concept. The question has been asked by others on many threads but I haven’t seen an explanation.

It’s worth reading and then you can decide if she’s a ‘transphobe’ or simply pro women’s safety and dignity.

Twitter would be horribly non U, I suspect.

I think the Barbara Cartland book of Etiquette should be essential reading for all Twitter users.

It does that sometimes, OP, try hitting refresh when it happens to see if your comment is there!

I very rarely comment on these threads because they are so political but my view (from the non political sidelines is this)
If you want to live 'as though you at a woman' then fine I have NO PROBLEM with that' no problem at all.

Live and let live.

However if you do not have ovaries . Do not / or ever have given birth to a child because you do not have a womb because you were born Male .. then you are NOT female. It is a biological FACT.. sorry but it is the truth and nothing can change that.

Doesn't mean you can't live as a female but you can't claim that you are .

That's my opinion do with it what you will. I know this is the pinion of most women I know. (White middle class working female) if that helps !

Did you read the letter from JKR, OP?