For the Attention of Posters in the "bloody terf" thread

Neither does accepting transgender people

Accepting them where, though?

It's really sad people are so desperate to get people to believe.

It's a bit undignified. What ever happened to dignity?

This ismore of a Friday night thread. It's confusing me, I feel like a glass of wine and a sleep in.

@Ereshkigalangcleg
"It doesn't require me to believe an absurd premise about my own reality."
Neither does accepting transgender people.

If you redefine the word to mean anything other than adult human female than I, and most women, don't believe it describes us. This point is not going to go away not matter how much you try and invalidate it.

I don't think this person understands that.

"The definition of marriage is a union between a man and a woman! You're changing definitions to suit your agenda!"

As I was saying

The definition of marriage was changed not by people just suddenly insisting it meant something different, but by campaigning to change the law. That change was accompanied by proper assessment of everything else that would have to change alongside it to make it work. Pensions, insurance, adoption, next of kin, literally everything that depended on the old definition was reviewed and adjusted to make the new one work. Because that is what real, progressive social change does.

That’s exactly not what is happening when Genderists redefine Woman. On the contrary, they insist that we do not look at how that changes everything that was hanging off the original definition, in particular the single sex provisions that support female people, to see whether they need to change, or whether any female people actually can identify as cis, but instead expect that everyone else has to keep exactly as they were so that the new male women can appropriate the female world exactly as they want it.

I would genuinely have no problem with society choosing to redefine Woman in they way you want if it went alongside protection of all the existing single sex provisions. It’s the way it seems to involve the social, political and legal undefinition of female people I cannot accept.

"There's nothing you have for me to be envious of."

Critical thinking comes to mind.

Yeah, yeah, just like how homophobes reject the words "homophobic straight people" because "they're not afraid of gays" and "it's called being normal".

Nope, nothing whatsoever like that. Being gay isn't a belief system with truth claims about reality that I disagree with. People's sexuality isn't any of my business but even if I thought it was, it doesn't require me to believe an absurd premise about my own reality.

You know what, sure. If trans women being recognized as women means you don't want to call yourselves women anymore, go for it.

Make up a new word for yourselves if you want. I'm actually curious what you'd come up with.

Okay. I think it might be against forum rules if I were to indicate that I don’t believe you, so I won’t. Can you explain why you think the four-billion member club of human females is “exclusive?”

Transphobic cis people being all coy with "uhh, technically I reject gender" after hours and hours of saying gender labels must strictly be used in a way that aligns with one's sex isn't the revolutionary idea you people think it is.

Ah, I see your confusion. We have not been insisting that 'gender labels' be used in a way that aligns with your sex. We are saying that the idea that gender is an identity is a problem - i.e. your identity never ever needs to align with your sex and any suggestion that it needs to is a problematic statement that needs to be broken down. We are just suggesting that statements about your biological sex need to relate to reality - they do not need to relate to your identity. Also you have got confused - you have not been talking to any cis people. I'm not sure there are any on this thread.

You know what, the other user was right, this does sound just like a whiny "my special exclusive club is not special and exclusive enough anymore".

Pretty big club including 51% of the population. Exclusive, hardly as anyone born female gets to join.

We are. Literally the entire point of my post is that unisex spaces would be a godsend for trans people who aren't confident enough in their progress with transition.

Great , so what's the problem, get organisations like Stonewall to campaign for third spaces. Everyone can be safe.

A “special exclusive club” that includes four billion people. Once again, the resentment and envy is palpable.

Do you think it's going to catch on?

Nope, that's just you being transphobic. There's nothing homophobic about trans women being lesbians.

There most certainly is!. Lesbians are same sex attracted females and to appropriate the language they use to describe their sexuality and say it also includes heterosexual males is the very epitome of homophobia. You are implying that their sexuality is not valid.

Then I can't help you further.

Obviously transwomen are male. That's the entry requirement.

I started with a lot more goodwill than I've got left.

I tire of shouty males attempting to bully women, & I've seen it & heard it far too often to be impressed by it.

*No one is saying you have to identify with anything except the word itself. For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman.

No "stereotypes" required.*

If you redefine the word to mean anything other than adult human female than I, and most women, don't believe it describes us. This point is not going to go away not matter how much you try and invalidate it.

It is probably one of the most trivial youth movements ever, the only characteristic it seems to have is a desire for a certificate

Brutal summary. I laughed. The really militant activists also demand gold stars and pride of place on the fridge.

They do, actually. Most trans women are nervous wrecks when they're at the point where they don't pass enough to use women's bathrooms, but are too far in their transition to use men's.

So why are they not campaigning for third spaces?

The difference is that, again, this whole thing is about you trying to police other people's lives.