If you avoid the feminist section then at least read this article

And I have never seen any TRA or ally up to and including Judith Butler ever produce a convincing "rebuttal" of the basic GC argument, thesis-level or otherwise. But try me.

Expecting an argument better than 'a woman is anyone who identifies as a woman' is not 'expecting thesis-level rebuttal'.

Indeed.

Regarding the quest to find something that refers to prostate-owners aimed at men, I've foun-

No I haven't. This is Teen Vogue, so aimed at girls and it refers to Prostate Owners and Non-Prostate Owners.

That's right! Women and girls are now being referred to by bodyparts they don't even have. We are simply non-men.

www.teenvogue.com/story/anal-sex-what-you-need-to-know

So boggled at reading stuff like this.
Honestly, call everything transphobic, call everyone GC if that's your preferred insult, and this, that you have written, is your problem, Medium writer, if this is where you are with your interaction with the world, really, this is your problem.

link.medium.com/r7JAnfPAXgb

Do people agree that if PHW are #100 in the workplace equality index, then #1-99 are likely to have done at least as much? Does anybody have time to go through some of them and check? (I don't, I really do have a boring report to write now!)

I 100% agree with this. It is perfect, logical sense.

Asking for receipts is of course reasonable.

Dismissing large amounts of evidence, such as the parliamentary debates around the maternity bill, or what happened in Scotland around the Lamont amendment, with 'See, didn't happen!' - that's not reasonable. It ignores the huge amount of work that women did to push back and ensure it didn't happen. It assumes we won't have to do it all over again the next time something is slipped into proposed legislation that would harm us.

Dismissing posters' experiences of what's happening in their workplaces, health services or in various women's, pregnancy, childbirth and breastfeeding groups with, 'You're wrong, I found a screenshot!' - that's not reasonable. It assumes there is no problem until the very last accurate reference to women or mothers has been erased. It assumes posters are just making it up.

To do this again and again and again in quick succession, page after page, over a period of two days - that's really not reasonable.

PP suggested to that poster that they could just browse through threads on FWR and find plenty of examples. That's a good suggestion. Just on the current first page there are the following examples of the mangling of language:

• a teacher telling 9 year olds that boys can be girls

• Home Office replacing sex with gender, and gender reassignment with gender identity, in their Equality Objectives statement

• article in the BMJ advocating that clinicians record gender identity and stop recording sex

• a female student who said 'women have vaginas' is cleared after a two month long investigation into whether her comments were offensive and discriminatory

• Government of Guernsey inviting 'anyone with a cervix' for screening

• a campaign to stop the police in Scotland recording rapists as women if that's what they say they are

• a school equality policy that replaces sex with gender, gender reassignment with gender identity or reassignment, and sexual orientation with sexual identity and orientation

My intention was not at all to engage in emotional blackmail and I am sorry if some posters got that impression. (but thank you everyone for your kind wishes )

I could have made up something less emotive I suppose:

'the only reason I indulged your unreasonable demands is because it served as a useful distraction from ... clearing out the loft? doing my tax return? writing a really dull report for work? removing a dead badger from the shed?'

Nobody on any 'side' should be expected to write a thesis-level argument or rebuttal but there's a lot of middle ground between that and 'didn't happen because random screenshot'.

This is all quite dull though.

What do posters think about what Public Health Wales are doing?

Do people agree that if PHW are #100 in the workplace equality index, then #1-99 are likely to have done at least as much? Does anybody have time to go through some of them and check? (I don't, I really do have a boring report to write now!)

Is this starting to look widespread to anyone else?

In fact, just an answer to questions such as:
What is a woman?
What is a transwoman?
At what objective point does someone born male actually become a woman?

Would be quite nice to be honest.

I understood that loud and clear, Quaggars

I also think there can be a bit of a double standard in that some posters refuse to engage at all with anything which doesn't correlate with their existing views, but expect people who aren't GC to read, assimilate and - at times, it seems like - write a thesis-level rebuttal of any GC material in order to present a challenge... which may not be engaged with by some posters, because it doesn't correlate with their existing views.

I meant the in general bit aimed at asking for 'receipts' or questioning things.

That clearly is aimed at LangClegsInSpace specifically, don't be disingenuous

Your demands are not reasonable. Nobody sane or healthy would pander to them as I have done. You have no right to expect this of any woman here. Who do you think you are?
No.
I truly am sorry to hear of your mum
This emotional guilt trip of a poster who asked questions or for links though - why the emotional blackmail?
People on both sides of the "debate" ask for "receipts" or question things.
It shouldn't be a case of "you can't demand I answer!" if it's coming from the GC side but relentless asking the same question over and over and over if it's not.
Not aimed at you specifically but in general

I don't want to sound like a bigot, I try to be 'progressive' and such, I still consider myself a feminist...in the CORRECT sense of the term, defending women's rights. Whoever thought it was a great idea to invite everyone else and turn it into an umbrella term is clearly missing the point. Its a middle-finger to all the women who have worked hard for women to be recognized, to get the same basic freedoms and rights as men. Somewhere in the 90's someone decided that if feminism is the philosophy of standing up for 'the little guys' that means they need to include women of color, then women with different sexuality etc. because you can't be seen as racists. But caring about women's rights and only women is sexist, and should include the entirety of Noah's Ark.
I think, I even hope, that this is going to cycle back where there is a movement that is about women and specific to women's rights. MTF can join, why not, they consider themselves women so it shouldn't be a problem to be chucked in with all the natural women. Otherwise what are they transitioning to? FTM have left the club, why do they need women's rights?
The same will go for democracy, where there will be a movement to say "hey guys fellow Earth-dwellers, democracy is rule by majority, also utilitarianism is a good concept"

In short, if people want to be inclusive and included, then include yourself instead of being special.

I will not be dehumanised and dismissed. I refuse to bow down or pander to those who find it triggering or upsetting that a woman is an adult human female, to use words that have been directed at us by them - get over it.

I've saved the links and Lang's wonderful post.

No way will I stand by and accept being called a 'menstruator', a 'birthing person', a 'cervix haver' or a 'ciswoman'.

I will not be referred to by my body parts, or as a subset of my biological sex. I'm a woman ffs and anyone who is offended by this can grow up- I imagine they really don't have any worries in life if they're troubled by women wanting to be referred to as such.

[quote PurgatoryOfPotholes]This just came up in my facebook feed and I thought of this thread. It's everywhere.

"If You're A Millennial With A Vagina Who Wants Kids In The Future, Here's Why You May Want To Immediately Freeze Your Eggs

Men over age 40 have a higher chance of having a child with autism."

Compare and contrast!

www.buzzfeed.com/kristatorres/ivf-tiktok-microscope[/quote]
What arses!

Men v defined by genitalia

Too right we’re not taking it quietly as some on here want.

And it made me wonder what kind of uproar there would be from the TRAs if we started changing men/boys to "people with penises". Then we could say "not all people with penises rape, but all rapes are committed by people with penises"

Quite. Somehow I don't think they'd like it! Even though it is extremely inclusive.

I am on a thread about the "all men use porn" mentality
And it made me wonder what kind of uproar there would be from the TRAs if we started changing men/boys to "people with penises". Then we could say "not all people with penises rape, but all rapes are committed by people with penises"

Maybe we should call the patriarchy the phallocracy instead

That headline is very eye opening potholes

Who ever thought that was appropriate??

So…. A female goat should get in quite quickly then and freeze their eggs I guess!!

And people question that this language is dehumanising.

Compare and contrast!

Jeez. Just the actual women who have had the words to describe themselves removed. Those who 'benefit' being those who rejected womanhood, and those who aren't women. Ffs.

This just came up in my facebook feed and I thought of this thread. It's everywhere.

"If You're A Millennial With A Vagina Who Wants Kids In The Future, Here's Why You May Want To Immediately Freeze Your Eggs

Men over age 40 have a higher chance of having a child with autism."

Compare and contrast!

www.buzzfeed.com/kristatorres/ivf-tiktok-microscope

[quote Datun]Just in case, and in the unlikely event, the people are still unaware that this is an attack on women, not men, I have copied a post from another current thread.

You don't have to read the links particularly far, just the first sentence in each will suffice.

Horizons83

And to all those who think this attack on language is nothing against women, and it goes both ways...

Medical definition of male:
www.medicinenet.com/male/definition.htm

Medical definition of female:
www.medicinenet.com/female/definition.htm[/quote]
Jesus, wept.

LangClegs I'm so sorry about your mum.

Structural engineer may be able to help, don't despair. There's a lot that can be done for subsidence - pinning, propping, ties, etc.

When medical care in the US is so expensive, how can you make it compulsory on anyone to seek it?

And I’m also very sorry for your loss Lang
It always gets nuclear in families after a death
Still painful though

I’m still reading

I’m still baffled and astounded that such a small minority have managed to bring this about

I’m also baffled as to WHY

Surely the number of FTM that have babies is very very small ?

Who is pushing to change this language ? Is it mainly the MTF trans people ?

I can see why it angers people

That medicine net definition