Does anyone ever have a "are we the baddies"* moment?

Firstly, OP, I think you're right to question where you stand, and the fact that you're genuinely asking 'am I on the wrong side of this issue' means that there's probably still hope that you haven't sunk too far down the GC Conspiracy Theory rabbit hole.

Like you, I came to this movement some years ago, when I realised that I'd bought in to harmful negative stereotypes about trans people. That moment I call 'Peak transphobe', the point at which I looked who I was keeping political company with. The Christian Right, combining their anti trans activism with axing women's right to reproductive healthcare and curtailing the right to abortion. Actual NeoNazis. MRAs and Incels. And that made me ask myself 'um...what if I'm the baddie here?...oh shite I AM the baddie!'

And then I realised that the vast majority of GC talking points were one-dimensional hateful stereotyping, that the scientific consensus did not agree with my position...that I had been duped and was hurting people with my rhetoric. So I stopped. I educated myself.

When I came out as bisexual, I found the community of LGBTQIA+ there ready to support me. When I desperately needed help with my disabled kid, I was helped by those queer people including a wonderful trans woman who became my best friend and second mother to my kid. And I realised all the hurtful, shameful garbage spoken about people like my friend.

So yes, I think it's fine to ask ourselves if we're the baddies.

The world is complex, but if there's a binary split down a polarising issue?

Look where the Nazis are.

Then, for the love of the Goddess, pick the other side.

@Menstrualcycledisplayteam my apologies, that rant was not directed at you or intended to criticise your OP at all. It was a response to the poster whose sole contribution in response to the ten pages of explained, thoughtful posts was the "you're all baddies, wrong side of history" plop and run.

I may have lost my temper slightly at that point. I am only human and this kind of childish silliness is beyond tedious, particularly when so many women have taken the time to explain.

I am sorry it seemed to criticise you, it was not meant to.

We don't have skulls on our uniform.
Do we even have a uniform? I feel this has been neglected. I'd punt for jeans.

*But it was a load of unscientific tosh, which was not supported by any real scientific findings.

Everytime a TRA says "educate yourself" I think "I am! But the more educated I get, the more sure I become that I already have the right POV on this."*

Yes exactly this.

I don't believe the pp who have said they were supporting women and then "saw a bigger picture."

Due to the "science" and evidence it's not logical.

I think some women in the public's eye have been forced to take the non boat rocking side. For fear of reprisal.

I don't know if any men who, once they've looked into it and agreed, have then moved away from that stance. Some sit on the fence, definitely.

Sorry I mean the social and cultural perspective of how trans women are portrayed and the threats they are percieved to pose towards women.

The threat is not from individuals who are trans, it's that unless we do something to protect Female rights as something distinct from Women's rights, it's impossible to meet the movement's demand to define trans women as women without cancelling the right of females to exist and organise separately from males.

That matters because females are structurally underrepresented and disadvantaged in our society. The current female-specific rights, opportunities, protections and spaces that provide some level of counterbalance were fought for by women and eventually accepted as necessary by (most of) society until such a time as we get rid of the underlying sex-based inequalities. But if we open those up to male people based simply on self-defined gender identity they can't meet that purpose, and to do so is prioritising males' desire to self-identify over females' need for rights and protections.

Plenty of studies have shown that male people are just not very good at recognising when they are taking power and space from women. I'm sure most of us have lived experience of that as well! Female people would be very foolish to just accept TWAW and trust that in return those TW will be sensitive to and self-police their impact on us. Indeed we already have too many examples of that not happening. We need the right to say No, this opportunity is for females, this space is for females, this voice should be female.

Furthermore, the current knee-jerk condemnation of anyone who raises concerns about the impact of TWAW on female rights as a TERF or a bigot is being used to silence discussion about this wholesale dissolution of female rights.

If there was not a pre-existing power imbalance I would be totally fine with TWAW - in fact that's where I started out. Or if the trans movement would accept something more formal and stringent than self-id as the criteria to accept a trans woman as a woman I'm sure we could find a way forward that protected female rights. But as things stand neither is the case.

For me the obvious compromise is to separate gender rights and sex-based rights entirely, but that is not acceptable under current trans ideology which posits that gender is meaningful and sex is not.

Yes, sometimes, when women I respect appear to publicly endorse the TWAW viewpoint I wonder "what have they seen or read that I haven't?"

Take Margaret Atwood for example. I love her writing , her books, her interviews, but she has always shied away from the full-blown feminist stuff and is not GC. Last year she supported her views with some article about fish, so I read it, and I read it again. But it was a load of unscientific tosh, which was not supported by any real scientific findings.

Everytime a TRA says "educate yourself" I think "I am! But the more educated I get, the more sure I become that I already have the right POV on this."

I think the whole movement got off on the wrong foot. It was too militant and aggressive. I am surprised at Stonewall really as they started it all.

This is what they gave us.

Transwomen are Women
Acceptance without exception
#nodebate

Now how can anyone make those statements and expect them not to be challenged in any way? TWAW is particularly problematic because they actually aren't. They are transwomen which is different.

Attempting to prevent and shut down any discussion of these facts is what is causing the problem.

any future where women have lost sex based rights is one with a large women's movement in it fighting every day

Yes this is such an important point. Whatever trans ideology tells us, there will still be real women and girls, they'll still be oppressed (even more so, of course, if trans dogma gets its way), and if they don't realise what's happening now, they'll sure as hell realise it then - and they will organise and fight, like they have before. You actually cannot erase female biology and all that comes with it.

People who advocated for lobotomies thought they were progressive and on the right side of history.

Because it’s all about ‘winning’, right?

Quite.

A future where everyone has all the provisions they need and everyones needs are equally met regardless of any characteristic or belief they may have is a good one.

A future that is basically about sacrificing women's sex based rights on a plate to a male led movement who have no problem at all at seeing those women without provision, without resource, unhappy, frightened, excluded, alienated, oppressed and disenfranchised?

How is that going anywhere good? Seriously. Tell me. How is this kind, or inclusive or diverse, or intersectional? How is this even basically moral?

Fgs can we ditch the liberal handwringing and the silly playground politics 'baddies' for petes sake, are you five? And think .

Of course, as a previous poster has so eloquently suggested, it is very important to listen to the ‘other side’. There are numerous accounts by transgender people, for example Andrea Long Chu’s recent book Females, which defines the “barest essentials” of “femaleness” as “an open mouth, an expectant asshole, blank, blank eyes”. (Direct quote) I couldn’t put it much better myself, really.

So yes, keep an open mind, listen to all voices and then history, in its inevitable forward march towards universal justice, will show us who has won the argument. Because it’s all about ‘winning’, right?

"I know this will not be well received here but OP yes I also realised this take was the bad take when i realised who the sort of people who also held this view were.."

So you're admitting to a logical fallacy as being a key part of what motivated you!?

OK, it's nice that you are honest about it, but it doesn't help your case. If you're that irrational... should anyone trust that you properly looked at the issues?

And lots of people would have doubts about aspects of transgender activism. The far-right sure; but also plenty of mainstream conservatives, and some on the political left. Remember that what goes on at the party political level, or activist groups, or Twitter, doesn't necessarily accurately reflect the general population.

'The wrong side of history'

Oh for goodness sake, what does that even mean?

Germany, 1938. Most Germans believed they were on the right side of history (or at least were very careful to say so loudly and convincingly). For about five years, yes, flags and marches and camps were all the rage. Were they still on the right side of history in 1945? Should the allies have rushed to join them on the grounds that in that moment they were on the 'right side of history'?

At one point in history, wearing flares and singing Agadoo was quite fashionable. At one point, forcing children to go up chimneys or shipping children off to be abused in Canada was terribly modern and all the rage.

You've got a brain. Engage it. Stop using silly marketing slogans you haven't even thought through because you really might as well be chanting you're worth it, or you can't get better than a quickfit fitter, and think .

Fashionable isn't the same as 'right'. And any future where women have lost sex based rights is one with a large women's movement in it fighting every day because it will be ethically, morally wrong. Regardless of childish slogans.

So one group of people thinks , talks, presents a reasoned argument

And the response is "you're all baddies "

My position is not a belief, it's accepting the reality that sex is real, it matters and it can't be changed.
Well put

Yes! When people I really respect, especially those in my peer group I've known forever spout TWAW I do get a moment when I think AM I just a middle aged Karen scared of change. Then I look at all the shit going on and KNOW it's them not me who's in the wrong. Hard to block people you've known your whole life though.

Rest!!!!!

Why are one group of males ok but the test not?

Sorry I mean the social and cultural perspective of how trans women are portrayed and the threats they are percieved to pose towards women.

Statistically Males pose a threat to women and all evidence shows that Males who identify as women share the same patterns of violence and sexual offending against women as other males so perception doesn't apply, this is just a fact. Not all transwomen are like this but then again neither are all males like this. So why are we be group of males ok but not the test?

Definitely time for a Bunbury flag.