Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Dating as a TERF

579 replies

TERFisTHEnewTREND · 14/12/2023 19:39

I'm a 34 year old female. I'm currently dating via Tinder.

When the gender issue has come up and I've mentioned that I'm a TERF, a lot of men have disengaged from me. I once went on three dates with a man, we got on great, and then when I mentioned my views on gender ideology, he ghosted me after!

Do you mention your stance up front or do you wait? I don't want to date anyone who thinks humans can change sex, is it worth stating this on my profile?

Any help/ advice/ insights appreciated.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
29
nothingcomestonothing · 16/12/2023 22:07

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 21:48

When I say progressive, I'm referring to the general attitude towards trans people, ie. compassionate, and not the hostility that terfs exude ("bloke in a dress"). Kellie-Jay Keen, she's a bigot plain and simple.

Your question is a good one. I'm against altering the language in referring to women as "birthing people", "people who menstruate", "cervix havers" etc. I would be more inclusive of legitimate transwomen (not the chancers) as also being women though (just not natural women).

Show quote history

LOL, go and post that on twitter or Reddit and see what happens. You're a TERF.

catduckgoose · 16/12/2023 22:03

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 21:48

When I say progressive, I'm referring to the general attitude towards trans people, ie. compassionate, and not the hostility that terfs exude ("bloke in a dress"). Kellie-Jay Keen, she's a bigot plain and simple.

Your question is a good one. I'm against altering the language in referring to women as "birthing people", "people who menstruate", "cervix havers" etc. I would be more inclusive of legitimate transwomen (not the chancers) as also being women though (just not natural women).

Show quote history

Inclusive how and where?

Exactly which female-only spaces are you offering up for eradication?

OceanicBoundlessness · 16/12/2023 21:55

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 21:48

When I say progressive, I'm referring to the general attitude towards trans people, ie. compassionate, and not the hostility that terfs exude ("bloke in a dress"). Kellie-Jay Keen, she's a bigot plain and simple.

Your question is a good one. I'm against altering the language in referring to women as "birthing people", "people who menstruate", "cervix havers" etc. I would be more inclusive of legitimate transwomen (not the chancers) as also being women though (just not natural women).

Show quote history

So what you're saying is trans women are trans women?

Creampies · 16/12/2023 21:55

Could you explain the difference between a chancer TW and a proper TW.
the only people who can be trans women are men
so how do you tell the difference between a bloke in a dress and a man in a dress

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 21:48

Catiette · 16/12/2023 16:01

This whole progressive thing. I’ve asked it before & not got an answer, & having RTFT, have little reason to expect an answer here, but…

The premise is that it’s self-evidently “progressive” to redefine “woman” from 1) only female-bodied to 2) including male-bodied who perceive themselves as such. Right? So what am I missing?

1), above, provides 51% of the global population - female-bodied people - with the language necessary to advocate for their political rights & needs - they have no other single, collective noun to describe themselves. Many of these needs are still, in many respects, unmet (eg. medical research into women’s bodies, PPE for women), & many of these rights are terrifyingly recent (eg. votes for women). Others are at risk (eg. laws & social contracts that have evolved to give this group, including religious minorities & those with PTSD, equal access to public spaces, participation in public life & dignity).

Option 2) removes from female-bodied people the language necessary to advocate for their political rights & needs - they have no other single, collective noun to describe themselves. HOWEVER, Option 2) also assuages the intense distress felt by a minority of male-bodied people & facilitates their access to public spaces, participation in public life & dignity.

@Nt1993 & @DC1888, please - a genuine, utterly bamboozled please - explain how 2) is so self-evidently, unambiguously “progressive” in this context, & option 1), woman retaining its original meanjng, “regressive”. You feel this so strongly, you surely must be able to explain. My summary above is, after all, biased to a GC perspective. What are your counter-arguments?

Edited

When I say progressive, I'm referring to the general attitude towards trans people, ie. compassionate, and not the hostility that terfs exude ("bloke in a dress"). Kellie-Jay Keen, she's a bigot plain and simple.

Your question is a good one. I'm against altering the language in referring to women as "birthing people", "people who menstruate", "cervix havers" etc. I would be more inclusive of legitimate transwomen (not the chancers) as also being women though (just not natural women).

TheMarzipanDildo · 16/12/2023 21:33

“Terf is regressive/backward and very un-UK like...its something you'd expect from the US bible belt (no doubt they are too).”

just spotted this- do you really think the Bible Belt is full of radical feminists Confused

Theeyeballsinthesky · 16/12/2023 21:21

, but to mals the sweeping statement that transwomen are not woman is bloody bigoted/backward/ignorant.

probably grasping at straws here but trying to be fair given that research that showed a significant minority of people through TW were women that wanted to be men - You do know that TW are all biological males don’t you?

fivegoldrings9 · 16/12/2023 21:18

DC1888 · 14/12/2023 20:26

Terf is a bigot though, that would put anyone off.

Was astounded reading Wikipedia yesterday to see that the UK is dubbed "terf island".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERF_(acronym)

The reason I found it astounding is the UK is the birthplace of androgyny becoming mainstream via glam rock/new romantics...the UK was far ahead of anywhere else in uprooting gender norms. When anyone thinks of the UK they think progressive/good sense... the right wing fringe (Farage) excepted.

Terf is regressive/backward and very un-UK like...its something you'd expect from the US bible belt (no doubt they are too).

A source on that wiki article posits why terf is so strong in the UK: "The U.K. has a long history of powerful feminist movements and feminist activism that has been successful in securing large-scale legal reforms around the notion of 'women's rights,' so TERF groups build on the legacy of this past feminist work when they articulate their politics of 'women's sex-based rights.'"

So Wollstonecraft (founder of feminism), Pankhurst etc. They fought for good causes though. Being a bigot is not a good cause.

You can be against natural born males bejng in natural born women sports (theres a fair argument for that), but to mals the sweeping statement that transwomen are not woman is bloody bigoted/backward/ignorant.

the sweeping statement that transwomen are not woman is bloody bigoted/backward/ignorant

That's not a sweeping statement. It's a very basic biological fact.

TheMarzipanDildo · 16/12/2023 21:16

Catiette · 16/12/2023 19:22

But, but, but...

Didn't you all realise Elizabeth I was trans?!

"I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king" etc.?

Important aside for some readers: this, too, is irony.

And another great example of why we would argue the current ideology is regressive.

I knew I didn’t dream it!

TheMarzipanDildo · 16/12/2023 21:13

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 18:55

The UK has a great tradition of female empowerment (including having female heads of state, Elizabeth I, Victoria, Elizabeth II)....from Mary Wollstonecraft (founder of modern feminism) to Florence Nightingale to Millicent Fawcett to Emmeline (and Sylvia and Christabel) Pankhurst to Virginia Woolf to Germaine Greer (Aussie yes but UK based) to (and dare I say it) Margaret Thatcher (well she was the first female PM)....to...

......Terfs.

*Facepalm emoji

Show quote history

Isn’t Liz I a transman now or did I dream it?

Catiette · 16/12/2023 20:51

Have been checking in, in the hope of a response. It's helping mitigate the tension of the scary fluff I'm watching. 😁 And...

Gone With The Wind Scarlett Ohara GIF
MargotBamborough · 16/12/2023 20:50

I'm pretty sure they saw and chose to pretend they hadn't.

Original poster
TERFisTHEnewTREND · 16/12/2023 20:43

Catiette · 16/12/2023 16:01

This whole progressive thing. I’ve asked it before & not got an answer, & having RTFT, have little reason to expect an answer here, but…

The premise is that it’s self-evidently “progressive” to redefine “woman” from 1) only female-bodied to 2) including male-bodied who perceive themselves as such. Right? So what am I missing?

1), above, provides 51% of the global population - female-bodied people - with the language necessary to advocate for their political rights & needs - they have no other single, collective noun to describe themselves. Many of these needs are still, in many respects, unmet (eg. medical research into women’s bodies, PPE for women), & many of these rights are terrifyingly recent (eg. votes for women). Others are at risk (eg. laws & social contracts that have evolved to give this group, including religious minorities & those with PTSD, equal access to public spaces, participation in public life & dignity).

Option 2) removes from female-bodied people the language necessary to advocate for their political rights & needs - they have no other single, collective noun to describe themselves. HOWEVER, Option 2) also assuages the intense distress felt by a minority of male-bodied people & facilitates their access to public spaces, participation in public life & dignity.

@Nt1993 & @DC1888, please - a genuine, utterly bamboozled please - explain how 2) is so self-evidently, unambiguously “progressive” in this context, & option 1), woman retaining its original meanjng, “regressive”. You feel this so strongly, you surely must be able to explain. My summary above is, after all, biased to a GC perspective. What are your counter-arguments?

Edited

Bumping this as I don't think the posters it was aimed at saw it. Xmas Smile

OP posts:
OceanicBoundlessness · 16/12/2023 19:47

Catiette · 16/12/2023 19:36

1601?

This

and @DC1888

You said "You can be against natural born males bejng in natural born women sports (theres a fair argument for that), but to mals the sweeping statement that transwomen are not woman is bloody bigoted/backward/ignorant."

Can you please explain what you mean here. How is referring to 'natural born males' any different from saying trans women are not women?

What does it mean to say a trans woman is a woman?
Do we have to believe it? Or pretend to believe it? Or what? What definition of a woman are you using here.
Do we try to make ourselves believe it on a case by case basis? Do we pretend we believe it on a case by case basis?

catduckgoose · 16/12/2023 19:39

MargotBamborough · 16/12/2023 19:05

Germaine Greer was proudly TERFing decades before trans issues were on most people's radar.

Show quote history

She's brilliant, I love her wisdom and her fury on everything she writes about.

Catiette · 16/12/2023 19:36

1601?

ArthurbellaScott · 16/12/2023 19:33

That's right, well done! You can do it!

Now try reading over some of the other responses and questions. There's no rush.

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 19:29

ArthurbellaScott · 16/12/2023 15:45

No, mate. The word you are after is 'populace'.

Show quote history

Awww thanks mate.

Populace (same as population)....populous (large/dense population)

Got it!

MargotBamborough · 16/12/2023 19:29

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 19:06

Cherry picking one example of an awful situation (I assume it's awful hence you posted it?)...what about all the cases of those who transitioned who now feel completely liberated and no longer suicidal? Any of those testimonies?

I don't see the point in giving one example (good or bad), that can be used for pretty much any topic. "Oh the covid vaccine...after receiving it such and such dropped dead a week later" (so from that anecdote don't get the vaccine then?).

Show quote history

"Cherry picking one example"?

Did you miss the part about who this woman is?

She's not just the random mother of a random trans person who took her minor child abroad for illegal sex reassignment surgery and somehow managed to escape prosecution.

She was the CEO of Mermaids, the UK's main charity for "trans kids".

She's not just an odd bad apple, she has been at the forefront of this movement in the UK. During the time she was heading up Mermaids the number of adolescent girls identifying as boys and wanting to take testosterone and have medically unnecessary mastectomies increased by about 4000%. She personally put families in touch with Gender GP, a private clinic run by a couple of doctors, one of whom has since been struck off for medical malpractice, and under whose "care" hundreds of children were fast tracked onto puberty blockers without undergoing any proper counselling. In the last year numerous safeguarding scandals connected with this charity have been exposed, including the fact that they had been sending breast binders to teen girls without their parents' knowledge or consent, that one of their trustees was a self confessed paedophile, and another member of their staff had posted pictures of his genitals all over Twitter.

Susie Green was probably more influential than any other individual person in shaping UK policy regarding young trans people. She's not a blip, or an anomaly. She's right at the very heart of this.

As for those who feel liberated and no longer suicidal, well, two things.

Firstly there is no actual evidence that people are any less likely to attempt suicide after transitioning.

And secondly, what about them? Is the fact that some people believe they feel better as a result of being able to transition supposed to make it OK that women have seen all their single sex spaces and sports made inclusive of males? What about women who can now no longer access rape crisis support because they're not allowed to have single sex groups anymore, or the women from minority religions who can no longer use the ladies swimming pond at Highgate ponds because it has been made inclusive of trans women despite the fact that there is also a mixed sex pond?

What about the actual women? Can we talk about the actual women who have been negatively affected by this? Is that OK with you? Or are they all just acceptable collateral damage for making a few trans people feel a bit happier?

ApocalipstickNow · 16/12/2023 19:28

I don’t even know what gender dysphoria means since that AMA thread by a transwoman a few months ago.

I always thought it was not being able to live happily in your body the way it is (something many women can understand) but apparently it’s about offensive stereotypes and totally messed up ways of viewing women.

Catiette · 16/12/2023 19:22

But, but, but...

Didn't you all realise Elizabeth I was trans?!

"I know I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king" etc.?

Important aside for some readers: this, too, is irony.

And another great example of why we would argue the current ideology is regressive.

Catiette · 16/12/2023 19:19

And to show willing, in response to your dismissal of Susie Green using the Covid vax analogy, I'd argue you're comparing apples and oranges.

Unproven anecdotes of people dying after having the vax are attributable to spurious correlation & ignorance.

A formal first-person account of "transing the gay away" offers indisputable evidence that this has the potential to happen. As a single personal experience, you're quite right that it doesn't represent a pattern or statistical probability, or offer anything resembling a researched explanation for this phenomenon. But it does offer sound evidence that one GC concern, focussed on safeguarding gay children, at the very least shouldn't be unthinkingly dismissed.

likingthistie · 16/12/2023 19:16

DC1888 · 14/12/2023 22:26

There is likely an inherent genetic advantage being born male, thus would put natural born women at a competitive disadvantage.

On the other issues, it's a case by case basis.

It isn't a simplistic black and white issue ("they're not women so are precluded from X"). That Scottish bloke (yes it was a bloke) who raped women and tried to get in the womens prison, that's a straightforward case.

The numbers are so small, a case by case basis works.

Show quote history

Firstly, you don't think TWAW or you would think they can compete in women's sports.

So, if you don't think TWAW there is no case for them being in any other space that men are excluded from to protect women's safety, dignity or fairness.

Take prisons for example, you clearly don't think rapists, and presumably other male sex offenders, should be in women's prisons. But being as most sex offenders don't get even reported to the police, let alone charged, let alone convicted, the only way we have to keep them out of women's prisons is to not let any men in. And that is exactly why 'case by case' does not keep women safe but full exclusions of all males does.

InvisibleBuffy · 16/12/2023 19:16

DC1888 · 16/12/2023 19:06

Cherry picking one example of an awful situation (I assume it's awful hence you posted it?)...what about all the cases of those who transitioned who now feel completely liberated and no longer suicidal? Any of those testimonies?

I don't see the point in giving one example (good or bad), that can be used for pretty much any topic. "Oh the covid vaccine...after receiving it such and such dropped dead a week later" (so from that anecdote don't get the vaccine then?).

Show quote history

The fact that Susie Green was CEO at Mermaids and is now known to have put substantial pressure on the Tavistock to grant puberty blockers against medical advice means that this isn't cherry picking. It's not an isolated example but shows just how badly let down so many of these children were. It's a feature, not the exception.