GC views not valid because the majority are "bad actors"

Since it is a self-defined label and I don't believe in the reality of anyone being "really trans", it could even be said that a "trans person" is anyone who says they're a trans person.

In fact, I can't define it at all, because I don't believe in "trans" as something real.

100%

Yes, that just about sums up how I feel about it.

Cos sex matters still.

Yes. I can't conceive of any circumstance where "treating someone like a woman" should mean anything other than "doing something female-specific, which then logically can't/shouldn't apply to a male".

People should be treated equally, unless some consideration is needed for their sex. If you're not that sex, you don't need that consideration.

In some other society where there were arbitrary rules for sexes that made no sense, then you could plausibly demand to be treated by the arbitrary rules of the other sex. But we should not be such a society - any such arbitrary rules should be removed rather than granting dispensations.

Favorite Magdalen video on that:

But protection from discrimination for what? Why does a fantasy deserve protection more than other un-evidenced beliefs?

That's such a great sentence, I'd definitely going to use it!

Apart from the fact that it's accurate, I can see it acting as a welcome circuit-breaker in one of those 'conversations' with clever-clever winder-uppers who know they have the verbal dexterity to keep finding ways to misinterpret or circumnavigate what you are trying to say.

Of course no poster on FWR has ever done that, ever🙄

Thank you for this link, Eresh, this is a very useful site, personally and politically - the similarities between TRA tactics and emotional abuse by narcissists is striking:
www.narcissisticabuserehab.com/types-of-flying-monkeys/

I'm sorry, but I didn't see anywhere where you answered the question. I assume from what you've just said that you think it should be legal to sack a trans person specifically because they are trans.

If that's your opinion, then OK. I can't agree with it though, because I think they deserve some basic protections from discrimination.

This nails it.

One is sexist and promoting regressive gender stereotypes.
The other is promoting equal treatment.

Also there are situations where health / biology matters which should also be taken into consideration.

A transwomen with prostate cancer shouldn't be treated like a woman. As wild as this might seem. But they should not be given dispensation for 'menopause' or 'periods' etc either. Cos sex matters still.

I don't think trans people exist.

I wonder if maybe the problem here is actually capitalisation, or lack of.

Religions are generally capitalised. They're treated like proper nouns, because they are basically just names - groupings without a formal definition.

A proper noun is a designator we accept without necessarily agreeing on the belief.

I think it would be better to say that Trans people exist. But their reasons for becoming Trans are many and varied.

The capitalisation denotes that this is just a somewhat arbitrary grouping - a social construct without a solid underlying physical reality. Just like nationalities, countries, etc.

(Conversely I really don't like Black being capitalised, because it isn't a belief or religion - doing that seems to miss the point of the normal English rule).

I don't think trans people exist. I think people with dysphoria exist, and confused gay people exist, and people with paraphilias exist. A lot of young, vulnerable people, many with autism, who are taught on TikTok that they're struggling because they're 'trans' also exist. But you can't actually change sex and no one is born in the wrong body.

Exactly @NecessaryScene

It doesn't mean that I think people who believe in god don't exist, or that they shouldn't exist.

I may believe "people who are going to heaven" don't exist. That doesn't mean I don't think Christians exist.

I don't really care what the man in the OP thinks. You can't argue with stupid, Cassie.

I don't believe in god. I understand that others do, and to the extent that it doesn't affect me, I respect that belief. We can agree to differ. But I don't believe what they do, and if asked directly I will tell them that. If their belief in god is used to oppress me I will argue why that is wrong because god doesn't exist in any objective sense.

It doesn't mean that I think people who believe in god don't exist, or that they shouldn't exist.

It's not about me eresh. Its about people like the man in the OP and trying to show why they would say "GC people say trans people shouldn't exist".

So maybe you got there in the end?

If there is no such thing as trans, how can trans people exist? They are just people.

Yes, you got there in the end. Well done!

I'm GC

I don't think anyone says the wish trans people are dead.

I think the logical conclusion of saying trans is a delusion/lie, humans can't change sex and people shouldn't be forced to go along with the lie, is that there is no such thing as trans.

If there is no such thing as trans, how can trans people exist? They are just people.

It's semantics but when GC people say "noone thinks trans people should not exist" at the same time as outlining reasons why trans isn't real they are in fact sounding like they think trans doesn't exist

www.narcissisticabuserehab.com/types-of-flying-monkeys/

Exactly, so it's bizarre that this line is pushed by people who consider themselves trans "allies".

It's being pushed by people who are highly manipulative, by them and their flying monkeys, both gullible naive people who want to be "inclusive" and people who know what they are doing.

This feeds in to the narrative that the world is against them.
Exactly, so its bizarre that this line is pushed by people who consider themselves trans "allies".

It's a thought terminating cliche.

The shouldn't exist/wish we were dead point is one made repeatedly by TRAs. I've never heard it, or anything that could be remotely construed as it from the GC side. I assume it's a continuation of the argument that 'if you don't believe I am the sex I say I am you want to kill me' argument. Yes, I think this is nonsense too. It also isn't helpful. Most of the children who say they are trans have mental health difficulties. This feeds in to the narrative that the world is against them.

How would you define a trans person in a way that complies with what you have said above?

As pp said I don't think people should be sacked unfairly in any circumstances, for me "trans" comes under religion/belief or disability if they are diagnosed as genuinely psychologically dysphoric, and can be protected as such.

Excellent post.