What can we do?

Tolerate atheists in your genderism, make it intersectional so it accepts that some females need sex based spaces or will suffer as a result, be kind, stop taking things forcibly from females while telling them their protests are stupid/wrong/irrelevant, and you may find a much more relaxed and enthusiastic ear.

Without biology to identify the group in question there wouldn't be the basis on which to stand a whole lot of pontification, academics, noticing gendered stereotypes and social constructs as relevant.

If it was a case of live and let live, no one would care. See woman as a nebulous, complicated amorphous shifting constellation and have a ball, write papers about it.

Just stop telling me you're confiscating my biological reality and my identity, and my language, and the reality of womanhood and the sex based issues it entails for half the human race, because it limits the freedoms and wishes of the other biological sex.

Who incidentally have historically always controlled and limited women on the basis of their biological sex.

And have the power to achieve this over the protests of women, because as this thread and many others shows, there is not unlimited joyful acceptance of how male people would like to change female people's definitions, words, spaces, etc, and there are major issues for some females in this that male people are refusing to acknowledge, never mind work with.

The experience is a very familiar one of sex based oppression. Telling me I'm imagining it/my lived experience as a woman is irrelevant to your new and wonderful male centred definition is not helping convince me otherwise.

jj, that seems insane to me!

woman is not a socially defined term. The term woman is not gendered. I had a discussion with my 10 year old daughter 2 days ago, she has a friend who has told her he is a girl. This has greatly confused DD so we started chatting about what is a boy, what is a girl.

DD astutely said being a girl doesn't mean being girly, you don't have to like lipstick and dresses to be a girl. She likes sports, mud, climbing trees and is still a girl. Her friend who is a boy is only interested in being a feminine girl, nail polish, long hair, dresses. This is a gendered perception of being a girl, this is not being an actual girl. Even DD understands this.

We discussed how everyone has a right to wear what they want, behave how they want, love who they want and that is the freedom our society now affords us. What we don't have the ability to do is magically change sex, we can manipulate our bodies but that will never change our sex. It's not fair to tell people they can change sex, we are setting them up for failure. Being trans should be a worn as a badge of honour, the challenges faced, the hurdles overcome. However being a transwoman isn't being an adult human female and they should have no right to our spaces.

I am quite new to my thinking on this topic however am increasingly scared for our future daughters. (Am 40 so also on the cusp generationally)

Sadly I have had to caution DD about discussing this subject as am certain her peers are already on the TWAW bandwagon. I am determined to raise a confident, questioning GC feminist! And that goes for ds too!

Hi Babybee, a woman is an adult human female, that’s always been the case. No one has ever contradicted it in the past.

They absolutely have. Feminists from Firestone to Dworkin to Wittig to Butler have written widely about how under patriarchy a woman is a socially constructed role as well as a physical reality. A huge amount of feminist literature discusses the nature of what a woman is, even going as far as in Dworkin and Firestone's case calling for the category of woman to be destroyed.

When people say trans women are women it's not because they are stupid and don't understand basic biology, but because they recognise in a highly gendered society then what a woman is has a political and social dimension whether we want it to or not. Trans women are by and large treated as (often a highly sexualised sub class of) women by patriarchy and as such deserve and need that recognition - and feminism is made stronger by that alliance, whilst it is weakened by reducing women's oppression to an inevitable result of possessing female biology.

I know you don't agree with a word of that, but to claim that people can only possibly acknowledge trans people as the gender they say they are because they are stupid, brainwashed or too scared to say what they really believe is both insulting and incorrect. The truth is they just have a more nuanced view of how sex, gender and hierarchy plays out in patriarchal societies and their analysis is one many many feminists agree with.

Is there a hard break between the tail end of Gen X and the Millenials?

I suspect part of it has to do with growing up online. They live in a very constructed reality already. They tend to have poor connections to their body, nature, and other people. They often are more isolated from other people who aren't like them.

Education is also a factor. Lots of younger people have been subject to a type of education that tells us inclusivity is the highest moral good. They have no real historical knowledge but have learned all kinds of ideas about 20th century activism as if they are facts - this is a group of people who will believe almost anything you tell them if it fits a certain kind of narrative about power. They believe they have superior critical thinking skills but meltdown if anyone challenges the slogans they have learned as first principles of though. And they truly believe the goal of those making such challenges is to hurt other people.

These are all things that come from a certain kind of education, that was common by the early 90s, well before trans issues were big. It was encouraged by many leftist groups, and I'm sorry to say we are now seeing the results of that kind of encouragement.

BabyBee, what are your thoughts about all the lesbians under pressure from men who say they are women (and who are fully physically male) looking for sex?

If people can change sex at will, how about race? Where would you stand on white people saying they are black? Would you support the right of a white person who identifies as black to apply for a bursary intended for people of colour? Do you believe that black people could identify out of oppression merely by identifying as white? Could we end racism this way? If not, why not?

it's easy to assume that "woman" means "vagina"

Babybee, if you’re being serious, I have to say I’ve never heard of anyone, female or male, saying that woman = vagina. Our sex is decided at the moment of conception. Our genital organs are just a small part of the differences between the two sexes.

Adding basic human rights to one demographic of people cannot remove the basic human rights of another

Absolutely correct. What basic human rights are men lacking? Privacy among members of one’s own sex, for certain functions, is a right that most cultures don’t question. Deciding to be a member of the other sex has never been a basic human right.

In terms of where the “generational break” appears then early education and schooling where you grew up might well have a part to play.

Since the 1990’s in some parts of the UK there have been programmes from Primary Schools upwards introducing children to “queer sexuality”, fetish, kink, BDSM, transgenderism, etc.

Depending where you lived in the UK, if you were at Primary and Junior School from the mid to late 90’s onwards then you would have been subjected to indoctrination that included such delights as role playing a transvestite visiting The Ladies toilets.

These programmes, the Local Authorities and some of the content are recorded in Hansard, raised by Baroness Blatch during the 2003 debate on the repeal of Section 28:

”Some local authorities are pushing unsuitable sex education materials into our schools and they are praying in aid government's guidance. I shall give an example of what is happening in one area; namely, Brighton. Brighton and Hove Council and East Sussex County Council have a joint personal, social and health education advisory team. These PSHE advisors—eight part-timers in total—are using their powers to influence sex education to the full.

In the year 2000 the council's advisory team published its own handbook for teachers. The council claims that the handbook is in accordance with government guidance. So what does the handbook say? It "strongly recommends" that schools buy a particular "essential" resource pack entitled, Taking Sex Seriously. A more unsuitable resource it is difficult to imagine. One lesson suggests that pupils are asked to buy condoms for homework. Another lesson has the aim of getting pupils to think about the full range of sexual activities. Teachers are told to, “give a few examples to get the group thinking along the right lines".” The suggested examples include dressing up, tying up, sadism and/or masochism, partner swapping, anal intercourse or multiple partner at one time. Those are just the milder examples. Decency prevents me from reading out the rest.

api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/2003/apr/03/local-government-bill#column_1538

None of them seemed to know what I was talking about. And when I tried to explain it, they didn't care because TW are so few.

How can we fight this?

In a number of ways, BrandineDelRoy. Something that I've found useful and time-saving is to establish who you are both talking about and what you both understand the slogan TWAW to mean. Very often you'll not be talking about the same people and also have a different interpretation of that slogan. Sometimes as soon as you have explored that and reached a common understanding of the terms, you'll find agreement is not far behind that those who identify as trans should not be discriminated against for doing so and at the same time that any protection you put in place for such individuals should not abolish protections we have put in place for other vulnerable groups.

It's not necessary to undermine women's sex-based rights to afford those who identify as trans protection against discrimination. So, it maybe worth asking the person you're talking to what they know about women's needs, including the needs of various subgroups of women. I've had lengthy conversations with libfems that made it clear to me that they knew very little (or nothing at all) of the reality of these needs, where they come from, how they can be met and why we want to do so.

And I found out that their personal experience with very vulnerable males who identify as trans meant that they honestly perceived them to need more protection than women. I might not have changed their minds, but I did clear up a number of misconceptions they had about our position, and about the needs of women. Eventually, for some of them, this contributed to the penny dropping at a later point. (There was a great thread on the old gender critical reddit board where you could read countless stories of women talking about their journey from thinking TWAW to thinking that women need to keep their sex-based rights which showed how they reached that conclusion. Inevitably, along that journey were conversations like the ones I had with those libfems.)

But most of the time I don't talk about males who identify as trans at all. I focus only on women and girls, our needs and what legal protections we have and why they are necessary to meet our needs. The US is obviously different to the UK in regard to the law, but Title IX gives you one good example to focus on. Why was this specific protection necessary, how does it work, what did it achieve, why is it still necessary etc.

I'm in my 30s and feel distressed at the number of women around my age who are more concerned with 'being woke & nice' than the threat to their rights. I only speak about these issues with friends I know agree with me and it definitely feels like we are in the minority. Can't speak out publicly for fear of being jumped on these days and called a TERF.

Hi Babybee, a woman is an adult human female, that’s always been the case. No one has ever contradicted it in the past. So if someone wants to replace that with a different definition, it’s up to them to explain why the definition should be changed.

The only explanation trans people give is that they feel like women. But no one has ever explained what being a woman feels like. And no one has explained why a man’s feeling that he’s a woman should be considered differently from, say, a slim person with anorexia believing that s/he is obese.

How would you explain these things?

Yup, BabyBee3, what is your definition of 'woman'?

Is there a hard break between the tail end of Gen X and the Millenials?

Looks like it. Could be in part age-related; gen x statistically more likely to a) have kids and b) have experienced the resulting ramping up of sexism that disabuses us of the lie that women have achieved equality now.

The millennials I know tend to be in favour of kindness&inclusion etc because we grew up with male-born trans people around. That position became normal and entrenched long before the reality of sexism is made apparent. The exceptions have had either children or gynaecological issues or both.

Yawn. Back to the OP. I think that what 'we can do" is first the link between LBG and T needs to be severed.
There is no link between your sex/gender and who you fancy so the two groups shouldnt be merged.
Second the focus needs to be on safeguarding rather than seen as a womens rights v trans rights thing.

Would you argue that the BLM movement infringes on the rights of white people?

Not inherently. It would depend what the specific demands are. Name some.

Adding basic human rights to one demographic of people cannot remove the basic human rights of another? Would you argue that the BLM movement infringes on the rights of white people?

So if we give Rachel Dolezal (and anyone else who wants to) the right to declare herself black, and call any actually black people "transphobic" if they complain that their allegedly "black" organisations/campaigns are being run by white people, that doesn't infringe on their rights at all? I guess it doesn't - because trans blacks...are black.

If we let able-bodied people participate in the Paralympics, and call any disabled people who complain "transphobic", that doesn't infringe on the disabled's rights at all? Nope - trans disabled people...are disabled.

Trans people can have as many actual rights as everybody else, just as gay people got, and black people got, and women got. What they can't have (and what all the other groups didn't get) was the right to declare themselves members of a group they are not part of, thereby depriving that group of any targetted mechanisms to address group-specific needs.

What is the difference between a man and a transwoman?

I have a teenage son and if he said he identified as a girl I would ask him why he thought that? I imagine the answer would be something along the lines of body hatred (normal in teenagers) or rejection of masculinity (fine, still male though!) or possibly a liking for things that are stereotypically associated with female children.

Well I'm a bit baffled at your describing yourself as 'neutral' while referring to us as 'anti trans'.

You also seem to have spent a grand total of 8 minutes on the thread that Kit took the trouble to link for you and which would answer a number of your questions. So I'm off.

[quote BabyBee93]@Kit19 thanks for the link, just flicked through and some very interesting opinions on there

Can I just add as still something I'm not sure I understand...HOW is the existence of trans women a threat to women? They're both women? What part of a transwoman makes her not a woman aside from her vagina?

@Apollo440 can you address some of my points though? I'd like some perspective[/quote]
We are not saying that the existence of males who identify as trans threatens women.

We are saying that the doctrine of gender ideology and its connected politics threaten women's sex-based rights.

This doctrine denies that sex exists as a material reality; it posits that there is no material difference between male humans and female humans (animals are, by and large, allowed to keep their sex under this doctrine); it denies that sex is why women and girls across the globe are disadvantaged, discriminated against and oppressed and it demands that sex is eliminated from all laws, policies and regulations worldwide.

As all laws, policies and regulations that protect and safeguard women and girls are of necessity based on our sex, this results in our existing legal rights that we rely on for protection against discrimination and oppression being undermined, superseded, sabotaged and, increasingly abolished.

Probably because they either think that 1 all trans women have male genitalia removed and or 2 trans women are women because they are women identifying as men adopting steoptypically male dress etc

Ask them if they would strip off naked room in a changing room in front of a stranger with male genitalia ( perhaps their boss in a workplace gym ...!) or if they would be happy for a teenage girl to be put in that position.

Totally baffled by these responses! I think it's shocking to think womanhood is so easily threatened by transwomen. It's not "men putting their rights before women" because transwomen are...women?

Adding basic human rights to one demographic of people cannot remove the basic human rights of another? Would you argue that the BLM movement infringes on the rights of white people?

Question - for those who have sons, what would your genuine response be if they sat you down and told you that they identified as a girl?

It's misogynistic because the people pushing for it are putting men and their wants before women and their needs.