I am embracing virtue signalling pronouns in emails

Absobloodylutely!

And rubbishing women's voices, reasons, feelings, humanity, autonomy, privacy, dignity, trauma, cultures, faiths.....

until it's normalised that female consent is meaningless and she must never say no to a male.

Gosh that's chilling. Pride in bullying people until lack of consent is not accepted as a barrier by mainstream society.

I note the emphasis on "other women" as a source of validation. The final lines and the rhetoric about the need to "first destroy the trap" that is grounded in the standards and boundaries of "regular women" and their right to say, "No" has some chilling echoes in similar claims by PPs here.

Another quiet bit odd loud - showing that validation and destroying the boundaries of women and girls is the aim and has always been.

Think of a Holloway demo with transvestite, transsexual and drag-queen women, gay women and heterosexual women, black, yellow, brown and white women, working women, housewives and career women.

Three of those is not like the others as they say on Sesame Street.

whatever course we take as transvestites, transsexuals and drag queens, we must first destroy the trap wherein regular women set up standards by which they accept or reject us.

Basically: We must destroy female boundaries and refuse them autonomy. It is not the right of females to say no to males.

How plain do you need it?

Quite.

TWAW Until/Unless.....

does not work any better than 'well just the lovely ones like my lovely friend X' or 'the ones who pass'.

It's all or none.

And the rights and equality of females requires that it is none. No males. At all.

Third choice spaces can be provided if wanted, where the females privileged enough to not mind and male people wanting to be with females can be, and those spaces will serve other inclusion needs too.

Sacrificing all females and all female spaces and rights and words? That's not inclusion, that's male supremacism hiding under a damn great rainbow coloured figleaf.

They do when they get pregnant, or strip their clothes off. Just like their sisters.

Can't help speculating how different things would've turned out if only they chose the 'militant and proud' route of developing a 'unique transvestite identity' rather than insisting on TWAW. Is it too late now?

Sidelight from history, with an extract from this.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4281733-The-Trans-Umbrella-Is-Older-Than-You-Think?reply=108674196

Gay Liberation Front journal - Come Together - issue 11: Lesbians Come Together. The GLF Transvestite, Transsexual and Drag Queen group, contributed this to a special issue about lesbians, originally published in 1972.

A more central question is how to relate to other women. When we talk about our hopes and fantasies, it becomes apparent that what we want above all is to be accepted as women, primarily by other women. But will we achieve this by looking for ways in which we share experience with regular women or by developing a unique transvestite consciousness?

Sometimes the second approach seems real militant and proud, at other times it seems a cop-out, accepting the prejudiced view that we're not women…Possibly we can find some light by considering the situation of black women and gay women, who develop black pride and gay pride, but still explore their feelings as women. Think how much more inspiring and beautiful the women's revolution will be when it joyously includes all women. Think of a Holloway demo with transvestite, transsexual and drag-queen women, gay women and heterosexual women, black, yellow, brown and white women, working women, housewives and career women. Certainly, whatever course we take as transvestites, transsexuals and drag queens, we must first destroy the trap wherein regular women set up standards by which they accept or reject us.

I note the emphasis on "other women" as a source of validation. The final lines and the rhetoric about the need to "first destroy the trap" that is grounded in the standards and boundaries of "regular women" and their right to say, "No" has some chilling echoes in similar claims by PPs here.

I agree here with TRAs who say that if you believe TWAW, then it doesnt matter if someone is a rapist - if you are sticking to the TWAW rule then they go into women's prisons if they say they want to, you can't refuse them.

This is (one reason among several) I can't accept that TWAW

Exactly. You can't say TWAW and then add a BUT, either they are or they are not obfuscating with legal and biological as Penny Mordaunt tried to do does not work, it is one of the aspects that is causing this mess.

TW are a subset of men, they are male they have to be to be TW, they are not a subset of women.

I don’t think it’s the wish of many trans women to encroach on those spaces

Also, I agree. I think many transwomen just want to live their lives and have no interest in accessing women's spaces - many of them understand very well the reasons why women want single sex spaces and respect those wishes. Several transwomen have spoken up (at great personal risk and to their own detriment - I salute their courage) on this issue.

I refer you to Miranda Yardley, Debbie Hayton, Fionne Orlander, Kristina Harrison, Blair White, Seven Hex, and many more, some anonymous.

Women on here have pointed out for a long time that this isn't even really about 'trans' issues - it's about women's ability to say 'no' and have that 'no' respected.

Which leaves the question: What do we do about the males and transwomen who do want to access women's single sex spaces and do not respect those wishes? By definition, the problems will only crop up when women's wishes are not respected.

It's a bit like males who have committed sex offences who then ID as women when in prison. To believe them, we are taking the word of someone whom has proven themselves to be a predator, liar, and who specifically and deliberately breaks women's boundaries and ignores consent. Anyone who is willing to ignore the feelings, requests, wishes, desires and possible harms of having a male in a women's space has already demonstrated their lack of empathy and respect and care, which I would say should bar them from the space.

I agree here with TRAs who say that if you believe TWAW, then it doesnt matter if someone is a rapist - if you are sticking to the TWAW rule then they go into women's prisons if they say they want to, you can't refuse them.

This is (one reason among several) I can't accept that TWAW.

Okay, it doesnt' really matter who is saying yes; what it boils down to is does one woman's 'no' outweight the 'yesses' of those who don't mind. I say it does; that's how consent works - 'no' is given more weight than 'yes'. The numbers involved are immaterial - if one person says 'no' then the answer is 'no' no matter how many say 'yes'.

Exactly. As I pointed out, it doesn't harm women to respect other women's privacy and dignity and wish for a single sex space. I'm not convinced at all that women who want to take single sex spaces away on behalf of males lose anything when they don't get their way.

DidiMum

do we respect her boundary, or do we respect the male's wishes more than her boundary?

First of all just wanted to say I found the first part of your reply very compelling. It’s something I dwell a lot on, for sure. The above however – it isn’t necessarily the male’s wish, but the wish of the other women being asked the question. Over all, however, of course I see your point.

Okay, it doesnt' really matter who is saying yes; what it boils down to is does one woman's 'no' outweight the 'yesses' of those who don't mind. I say it does; that's how consent works - 'no' is given more weight than 'yes'. The numbers involved are immaterial - if one person says 'no' then the answer is 'no' no matter how many say 'yes'.

Rape survivors want and need a.male free space for obvious reasons. These services were set up for the most part by and for women - the history of the movement is stirring.If transwomen need these sevices then this would be a perfect use of some of Stonewalls enormous resources. Instead a woman is told she can't have a single sex space and that she is a bigot for asking.

I don’t think it’s the wish of many trans women to encroach on those spaces. As I said before, I think it’s a line taken by the most extreme, with the loudest voices. I was asked before, ‘well why don’t those with the softer voices speak up?' – but surely we all know how media works, it’s harrowing at the very least, especially in this climate, and can do real damage to someone’s well being to engage in it. You have the extremes of both ends of the spectrum shouting down everyone in the middle – and the middle is where the solutions often lie, or if not solutions, then at least the ability to understand one another.

What about the males who are pretending to be transwomen in order to transgress boundaries? For example, IAmSarah's rape survivor group included a male with a male name, who presented in male clothes, who sat smiling through the session. This may have been a transwoman who chose to present as a male and was there legitimately. Or it may have been a male who wanted to transgress womens' boundaries.

How can we tell the difference? That is a serious question.

When a male entered the women's space at the Wi Spa in Los Angeles the women and girls who objected were told it was a transwomen and they were 'being a dick' for raising it as an issue. The person was indeed a transwoman - who has previous convictions for sexual offences.

I can substantiate this.

@Didimum

It's not a straw man argument to draw parallels with race. It's important as a way of highlighting the importance of the dominant group not feeling entitled to the protecrions afforded the less dominant and powerful group. If it's ok for a TW to take a space on a female shortlist then it's ok for a white person to take a scholarship reserved for a person of colour. If it's ok for a man to have q say in whether a prison remains female only or becomes mixed sex, then it's ok for a white person to have a say in whether that scholarship continues. Centring the white person, or the man shows ignorance of privilege. Men do not get to have a say in whether protections from men should continue for women. Not in any civilised society. Just as I don't get to say whether racism is a problem or not.

No one here is trying to change your mind, you do you and if you want to do something for transwomen (I note that you use transwomen every time, never a mention of transmen) you go right ahead. But whatever you do cannot involve single sex spaces, because I said NO.

Yes, these women need to go back to their male friends and say, "I love you, you are valid, but we need to find an alternative together, because other women and girls need their spaces and they matter too ".

A million times this.

Sorry, yes that was a typo. My 90% was supposed to be 99%

But practically, a society which largely asks us to operate in a binary way cannot switch from one thing to another without wading through the chasm between – so what is it to be done in that chasm in between?

It's not that hard, huge advances have already been made - thanks to suffragettes, feminists and their allies. I'd much rather continue as a GC feminist putting my energy into breaking down inequities and stereotypes than waste them on propping up 'gender'.
Sex is inescapable, there's serious work to be done on structural sexism. But a lot of that is around issues relating to pregnancy and childcare, really not anything particularly relevant to trans males 'gender' issues.

No one here is trying to change your mind, you do you and if you want to do something for transwomen (I note that you use transwomen every time, never a mention of transmen) you go right ahead. But whatever you do cannot involve single sex spaces, because I said NO.

"Transmen" barely get a look in - that's because they are women, and unimportant.

No one here is trying to change your mind, you do you and if you want to do something for transwomen (I note that you use transwomen every time, never a mention of transmen) you go right ahead. But whatever you do cannot involve single sex spaces, because I said NO.

Yes, these women need to go back to their male friends and say, "I love you, you are valid, but we need to find an alternative together, because other women and girls need their spaces and they matter too ".

The ‘it’s personality’ argument sounds like something potentially great for the future – it’s potentially a vein of thinking that allows many people to grow up and live comfortably in their own skin, and also perhaps why the identification of being ‘non-binary’ is on the increase. But practically, a society which largely asks us to operate in a binary way cannot switch from one thing to another without wading through the chasm between – so what is it to be done in that chasm in between? How does one get from end to the other in the least combative and divided way
So the short answer is you do not have a sense of womanhood, cannot define it. Because that's what I asked and you copied.
What chasm?

As for the other stuff about race , Rachel Dolezal and Oli london and Xiahn Nishi

So that's three in the news, which means many more not in the news

Transabled is actually a huge number worldwide, but it's not often mentioned. People live with it for a very long time, its actually biid I think. Well documented just not much newsworthy.

And finally, I don’t think it is a woman’s job, but many women want it to be their job. Part of my reasoning, for example, is that I know many trans women also feel deeply under threat from male violence
No one here is trying to change your mind, you do you and if you want to do something for transwomen (I note that you use transwomen every time, never a mention of transmen) you go right ahead. But whatever you do cannot involve single sex spaces, because I said NO.
I say no, not for me, but for all those other women who for reasons cannot say it. For the girls who have no real voice, for DV survivors, for CSA survivors, for rape Survivors for all women who have PTSD and those with the fear response to men in their single sex spaces.

Isn't it often the case that women agitating for men to be admitted into women's spaces are often unlikely to need those spaces themselves? Usually because they're privileged enough to have alternatives and/or be extremely unlikely to be in a position to need them.

Exactly this.

Sorry - I hadn't seen this post when I jumped in. This is the woman I was talking about in my post.

Thank you @ErrolTheDragon

I also think that a lot of these women are extremely naive, sheltered and impractical.