Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Starmer tw don't have the right to use women only toilets

383 replies

lcakethereforeIam · 02/07/2024 00:58

It's a headline in the Telegraph. Unfortunately when I archive it it goes to an article about that twat Ashworth refusing to answer. So, I've screenshot the headline

Starmer tw don't have the right to use women only toilets
OP posts:
Thread gallery
22
UtopiaPlanitia · 03/07/2024 15:51

theilltemperedclavecinist · 03/07/2024 11:48

I think @Sunshineandchill is on to something with the 'bad actors spoilt it for true trans' trope, except I don't believe it's about individuals' choices, so much as an inexorable historical development that's played out over the last fifty years.

In the 70s, male transsexuals existed, on the strength of surgical techniques evolved during the previous fifty years, but they were rare, had no legal status following Corbett v Corbett, and had no protection from discrimination. So a political movement was born.

Medical practitioners of the time tried conversion therapies such as emesis and electric shock treatment, and discouraged transition if the patient was unlikely to pass, which kept numbers down.

Then it was decided that transition had therapeutic utility even for the non-passing. And a human rights based approach meant no more electric shocks (fair enough) and no more making a change in legal sex contingent on genital surgery.

So, for women, the situation has changed over time, from a rare encounter in the ladies (but not in other segregated spaces) with an almost-passing, virtually guaranteed castrated, individual with no political or social clout (therefore, likely to be frightened of the police, for instance). To frequent encounters, in every sort of space, with blatantly non-passing individuals who are virtually guaranteed to be fully intact. Since the turn of the century, lobbyists have been cheering them on, raising their social and political capital, boosting numbers, bullying women, and making any sort of sensible conversation impossible.

In hindsight, every step follows inevitably from the one before. So, what are the inevitable developments of the next twenty years? I don't think it's going to be good for women or trans people.

👏👏 Excellent summation!!

ScrollingLeaves · 03/07/2024 13:51

theilltemperedclavecinist · 03/07/2024 11:48

I think @Sunshineandchill is on to something with the 'bad actors spoilt it for true trans' trope, except I don't believe it's about individuals' choices, so much as an inexorable historical development that's played out over the last fifty years.

In the 70s, male transsexuals existed, on the strength of surgical techniques evolved during the previous fifty years, but they were rare, had no legal status following Corbett v Corbett, and had no protection from discrimination. So a political movement was born.

Medical practitioners of the time tried conversion therapies such as emesis and electric shock treatment, and discouraged transition if the patient was unlikely to pass, which kept numbers down.

Then it was decided that transition had therapeutic utility even for the non-passing. And a human rights based approach meant no more electric shocks (fair enough) and no more making a change in legal sex contingent on genital surgery.

So, for women, the situation has changed over time, from a rare encounter in the ladies (but not in other segregated spaces) with an almost-passing, virtually guaranteed castrated, individual with no political or social clout (therefore, likely to be frightened of the police, for instance). To frequent encounters, in every sort of space, with blatantly non-passing individuals who are virtually guaranteed to be fully intact. Since the turn of the century, lobbyists have been cheering them on, raising their social and political capital, boosting numbers, bullying women, and making any sort of sensible conversation impossible.

In hindsight, every step follows inevitably from the one before. So, what are the inevitable developments of the next twenty years? I don't think it's going to be good for women or trans people.

Thank you, how well you have explained this.

UpThePankhurst · 03/07/2024 13:51

Thank you for the link: a lot of good points there, well made.

Chersfrozenface · 03/07/2024 13:51

And so comfortable with it they are slightly baffled and hurt that women aren't just accepting the head pats and daddy knows best lines.

Not baffled and hurt - angry. Viz. Starmer's clenched fist on the radio phone-in.

UpThePankhurst · 03/07/2024 13:44

I don't think it's pandering after the past few weeks of piles of evidence. I think Starmer is just a plain garden variety misogynist as is Lammy and several others. And so comfortable with it they are slightly baffled and hurt that women aren't just accepting the head pats and daddy knows best lines.

OP posts:
ScrapeMyArse · 03/07/2024 13:29

theilltemperedclavecinist

Excellent summary.

theilltemperedclavecinist · 03/07/2024 11:48

I think @Sunshineandchill is on to something with the 'bad actors spoilt it for true trans' trope, except I don't believe it's about individuals' choices, so much as an inexorable historical development that's played out over the last fifty years.

In the 70s, male transsexuals existed, on the strength of surgical techniques evolved during the previous fifty years, but they were rare, had no legal status following Corbett v Corbett, and had no protection from discrimination. So a political movement was born.

Medical practitioners of the time tried conversion therapies such as emesis and electric shock treatment, and discouraged transition if the patient was unlikely to pass, which kept numbers down.

Then it was decided that transition had therapeutic utility even for the non-passing. And a human rights based approach meant no more electric shocks (fair enough) and no more making a change in legal sex contingent on genital surgery.

So, for women, the situation has changed over time, from a rare encounter in the ladies (but not in other segregated spaces) with an almost-passing, virtually guaranteed castrated, individual with no political or social clout (therefore, likely to be frightened of the police, for instance). To frequent encounters, in every sort of space, with blatantly non-passing individuals who are virtually guaranteed to be fully intact. Since the turn of the century, lobbyists have been cheering them on, raising their social and political capital, boosting numbers, bullying women, and making any sort of sensible conversation impossible.

In hindsight, every step follows inevitably from the one before. So, what are the inevitable developments of the next twenty years? I don't think it's going to be good for women or trans people.

UpThePankhurst · 03/07/2024 11:41

I'm afraid I'm a lot more cynical, with this having come from a lot of bitter experience.

Whether you wish to use a woman as a resource and prop in your feeling good about being a woman in a woman's space doing women things, or use her to enjoy her sympathy/disgust/fear, or to use her to enjoy other aspects of experience isn't really relevant. The problem is the using part, and that it involves removing women's equality and excluding women in order for men to do it.

LonginesPrime · 03/07/2024 11:30

UpThePankhurst · 03/07/2024 11:13

It's not about just peeing. It's about all the thrills and pleasures that come from sliding into forbidden territory. Then having a piss on it.

And enjoying the reactions of the women being so dominated and not being able to do a thing about it.

While there is obviously that power/abusive angle to some TWs' motivations, I'm convinced that the motivation of the vast majority of males wanting to access female spaces is simply because they feel good being validated as women, they are on their journey to be accepted as women and their feelings are the only ones that ever occur to them.

As entitled and misogynistic men, it simply doesn't occur to them that women (who they typically regard as NPCs) have any distinct feelings or needs at all.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 03/07/2024 11:26

Glengarrybell · 03/07/2024 11:22

Does anyone else remember a time when Sunak didn’t want to answer the question “what is a woman?” At that stage I think he wasn’t sure how he was going to position himself.
I think Starmers new position is a testimony to how effective the gender critical lobby have been. I imagine politicians mostly hate this issue because it’s so hard to tell where “history” is going to land on it. The reality is if you’re relatively wealthy enough you can largely buy your way out of it ever effecting your or your family (or at least you think you can). Most politicians in the UK probably fall into this category.

I am worried that the last year or so will turn out to have been a brief period during which a light was shone on the absurdity and unfairness of trans activism, and then after Thursday all progress will be lost and women will have no voice again. Doubly so if the Lib Dems end up being the official opposition.

I'm also voting in France on Sunday, and the situation is even more depressing here. The choice is essentially between the far right or the loony left who want to bring in self ID as a matter of priority. Macron made a disparaging remark about the far left who want people to just be able to pop down to the town hall and change their legal gender and has faced accusations of transphobia including from within his own party. I mean, he's not wrong but seriously, how on earth did he think saying that right now would help?

OP posts:
Glengarrybell · 03/07/2024 11:22

Does anyone else remember a time when Sunak didn’t want to answer the question “what is a woman?” At that stage I think he wasn’t sure how he was going to position himself.
I think Starmers new position is a testimony to how effective the gender critical lobby have been. I imagine politicians mostly hate this issue because it’s so hard to tell where “history” is going to land on it. The reality is if you’re relatively wealthy enough you can largely buy your way out of it ever effecting your or your family (or at least you think you can). Most politicians in the UK probably fall into this category.

UpThePankhurst · 03/07/2024 11:13

It's not about just peeing. It's about all the thrills and pleasures that come from sliding into forbidden territory. Then having a piss on it.

And enjoying the reactions of the women being so dominated and not being able to do a thing about it.

BustyCrustacean · 03/07/2024 10:43

TheABC · 02/07/2024 22:19

I want the right to challenge a male who walks into the ladies toilets after my eight year old daughter.

I don't know if he's got a GRC (they don't tattoo it on the forehead) and I don't care.
90% of transwomen keep their male equipment. No surgery, no hormones; a few don't even bother to shave.

We don't have a reliable way of telling the good men from the bad, but we know that men as a sex class pose a danger to women. That's why its a blanket exclusion. Being trans does not change that.

I agree and would add that any man who follows your 8yr old into the female toilet is not a good man, regardless of GRC/hormone treatment/penis amputation or not.

CocoapuffPuff · 03/07/2024 10:36

Third spaces have been rejected so many times now that it's a joke.

The sporting world saw that very clearly when one event put on 3 races - men's, women's and open, third gender neurltral race. I think it was swimming?

Not one entrant. Not a single blasted tw.

Yet tw whined about being banned and excluded because they were not allowed to enter the women's race.

They were offered a solution, they threw it back at the organisers. They didn't want to race. They wanted to race against women, change with women, shove a woman out of her own category.

It's not about just peeing. It's about all the thrills and pleasures that come from sliding into forbidden territory. Then having a piss on it.

AlisonDonut · 03/07/2024 09:30

Sunshineandchill · 03/07/2024 02:36

Spaces then whatever it takes. 👋

What you and so many others fail to recognise, that it isn't their own spaces they want.

Like when they opened a 'third' category in sports. Nobody entered.

It is domination and infiltration of women's spaces they want. Not their own. They already have that. Because they are men.

UpThePankhurst · 03/07/2024 09:30

I always find it interesting that when women explain in very plain terms the reality of deciding to be kind to men who have tried hard enough, who don't personally bother or affect the speaker, they graciously withdraw the hem of their robe and leave the conversation.

By which demonstrating that yes, they do believe that (other) women should be sacrificed to men's interests and that this is right and in order. But they do not actually have the courage to say that and defend their position.

MrsWhattery · 03/07/2024 09:16

genuine people, men and women who genuinely want to be another sex.

Lots of people genuinely want things they can’t have. What if you genuinely want to be another ethnicity, or twice the height you are, or you genuinely want to be 25 when you’re 60? Why is sex different and everyone is expected to not be “weird” about it and go out of their way to help people pretend to be the opposite sex even if it puts them in danger?

There is far more of an argument that you should be able to “identify” as a different ethnicity- it actually is a spectrum and I have far more in common physiologically with every other woman of whatever heritage, than I do with any male. Yet we don’t enable that, because it’s bloody insulting to pretend you can have someone else’s lived experience that you will never actually understand, and even worse help yourself to roles, awards etc set aside for a group of people to redress imbalances. With ethnicity, we get that. Why can’t you see that with sex it’s even worse and obviously dangerous?

one thing that definitely brings home the reality of sex that is when you abandon sex-based categories, one sex pretty much exclusively suffers more and it’s the females. Put a male TW in a female prison - the woman are at risk. Put a female TM in a male prison - the TM is at risk. Same in toilets, changing rooms, hospital wards and sport. Women lose out who ever pretends to be the opposite sex. That’s why there are sex categories in the first place. To protect women and girls.

Flowers4me · 03/07/2024 08:35

UpThePankhurst · 02/07/2024 19:15

Is this a man you want on the world stage having to have serious conversations with world leaders with red buttons at their fingertips??

That.

The manifesto is deeply misogynistic, dismisses women's rights and equalities as a 'toxic culture war', and actively promises to destroy them in law. It is in hock to alternative realities which it wants to enforce by 'hate crime' punishments to stop people mentioning unwanted facts, which would protect men from women resisting being mugged for their rights. He has no care for women's dignity, and every damned time anyone has said 'women' he's immediately reminded us all about how sad and vulnerable and much more important men are, making it clear that the main issue for him about women's rights is ensuring that they make men happy.

That he's now making a few vague noises means absolutely sod all. The man does not have integrity, he says whatever works in the moment without conscience and changes it on a dime. It's too bloody late, and words mean nothing.

And while Willoughby's had a helpful little kick off, there's still absolute silence from the big orgs who have had all those cosy cups of tea and ministers' ears and been to all the meetings and planning that women's groups were excluded from.

Here's a few panicky last minute crumbs that from Friday morning will mean fuck all. Now vote for Kier like a good girl.

100% this

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 03/07/2024 07:04

Sunshineandchill · 03/07/2024 02:36

Spaces then whatever it takes. 👋

Yeah this is the point. Some of them say that if third spaces existed they wouldn't use them and would continue to use women's spaces regardless.

Sunshineandchill · 03/07/2024 02:36

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 03/07/2024 01:39

The trouble with that is that many of them don't want separate toilets. Being in women's spaces is the point. (Not all. Some of them would love their own spaces.)

Spaces then whatever it takes. 👋

Sunshineandchill · 03/07/2024 02:31

Wheyofgoat · 02/07/2024 23:33

@Sunshineandchill sadly there is a lot to worry about even with men who seek surgery and hormones.

This study has come up on Mumsnet a few times and it’s alarming because it revealed paedophilia among males seeking gender reassignment.

The study found that over a period of 5 years at an Oxford clinic, 2 out of 38 males were

“seeking gender reassignment to facilitate or normalise paedophilia. This latter small group described gender reassignment as a means by which to increase their intimate contact with children, which they viewed to be more socially acceptable in a female role.”

Gender reassignment: 5 years of referrals in Oxfordshire
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 January 2018 Volume 35 Issue 9 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-psychiatrist/article/gender-reassignment-5-years-of-referrals-in-oxfordshire/6B5F217162ABD9B3189F2EB82787034E

This proves what lengths men will go to. It doesn’t say that they did or did not also have or claim to have gender dysphoria. And who could prove whether they genuinely did or didn’t. You can only go on what people say. Personality disorder was a common co-morbidity though. (Also autism) Maybe others who went through the service hid their motivations better.

These 2 men actually exist in real life not just on paper. Assuming they haven’t offended and been caught, they are out there and are enabled to use women’s spaces by the be kind and don’t ask questions ideology.

I always wonder where these men are now.

Well obviously I had not seen that. Exiting this now 👋

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 03/07/2024 01:39

Sunshineandchill · 02/07/2024 22:21

Or you just provide totally separate toilets for them, I get that I really do. There is no inbetween, that’s the whole problem.

The trouble with that is that many of them don't want separate toilets. Being in women's spaces is the point. (Not all. Some of them would love their own spaces.)

Helleofabore · 02/07/2024 23:55

Sunshineandchill · 02/07/2024 22:14

You don’t that is the problem. And maybe psychiatric test sounded judgemental, I did not mean it too, I was just under the impression that councilling was given to make sure that the person was really sure before going through the whole process.

Can I ask why you think going through any process makes any difference?

A male declaring that they are a woman can only ever do this because they have either a stereotyped view of what a woman or girl is . OR they have rejected what they, personally, believe a man or boy is.

These male people cannot possibly understand the truth about growing up as a female person. Therefore, it is their own personal belief of what being a girl or woman is.

There are no tests at all for measuring ‘womanliness. it is misogynistic to suggest otherwise. So no psychological testing will change this misogynistic view.