Violent trans rights protest in Manchester.

The issue is that it is too late. The demands have been made, organisations and some people have been fully educated that this is not just a belief but reality. That compliance is not optional but it is mandated, those not doing it are bigoted. I don’t believe it is possible to go back.

I certainly can understand that. I'm afraid I can also know and understand the sexual aspects of this, frequently using and abusive of women; it's not honest to paint it as all innocent distress.

That understanding however does not equate to willingness to enable behaviours that harm and control others. And which damage women's equalities and lives as a sex class.

Having a belief that doesn’t reflect material reality doesn’t mean that a person ‘is’ what they believe they are though. Not the way the word ‘transgender’ has been used.

There is a difference between having a belief in something that is not real and believing that you are something that you are not and expect to be treated as if you are.

It’s only possible to be “trans” if you believe it’s a meaningful label.

But that's a different issue from what I was discussing with @akkakk who seemed to believe that being trans is in itself not possible.

Of course it's possible to be trans, and to hold a deeply held belief that one is in one's essence of the opposite sex somehow.

My personal view is that all trans people, like any of us, are free to use any first name they wish, and should be free to request pronouns of friends and colleagues, but not compel them. In return they should acknowledge that they are not an actual woman or man, they are a trans woman or man, and this comes with some limitations in terms of access to spaces etc.

I do think language is often fluid around material reality when we want to try to spare the feelings of members of a particular group. I am not saying this is right or should be subject to legislation.

For example, we have euphemisms around age, around weight, around disability and this is an attempt to minimise people feeling dismissed, othered or rejected by society. We would often tell white lies "does my bum look big in this?", "celebrate your curves" . We refer to "older adults" when we mean the elderly, "differently abled" people. Some feminine gay men have historically referred to each other as "she" as well.

Why should this group’s philosophical beliefs be prioritised the way it has in society though?

And I mean to the point that there is language expectations, with policies around that language, that there is not for any other groups. Or do you think you have a comparative group that society and organisations treat in any way as if that belief reflects material reality when it doesn’t.

Basically, there are millions of people who believe all kinds of weird and wonderful things, and that’s fine until their beliefs are allowed to negatively impact others.

I can understand they might feel that way, but no matter how genuinely they believe it, we should not allow those beliefs to change our laws or our basic reality. It should be given no more weight than people who genuinely believe the earth is flat or that they’re the next messiah or that King Charles is a lizard person.

"so what is a trans identity? How do you define it esp. in light of the science that proves you can’t transition sex and the logic that shows you can’t transition gender (you simply expand societal understanding of your birth gender / sex)"

Of course you can't literally transition sex.

You just don't get it. Most trans people either deeply wish they were the other sex, or genuinely believe that in their brain or heart or soul their identity is that they are the other sex. This might well be misguided or wrong, but it feels real to them. If you can't even try to understand that then there's not really anywhere to start from is there? What do you think trans people are trying to do?

You don't have to agree with this idea, but surely you can perceive the possibility that some people's sense of who they are might not align with their sexed body, and this might cause distress?

I'm afraid I disagree. When I meet my numerous trans friends/relatives to speak to them, they're lovely and considerate, but then I see the misinformation and inflammatory shit they're posting and sharing on Facebook and realise that's only part of the story, to the point that I don't really want to see them anymore because of the amount of petrol-filled grenades they chuck out on social media with the assumption that everyone they know agrees with them.
I have come to realise that friendship with them is conditional on being inside the rightthink.
Maybe there are these mythical quiet trans people out there who are accomplished critical thinkers who can see the problems with TRA ideology but stay silent, but my friends/relatives are fairly quiet and unassuming in person largely due to massive social anxiety issues and autism stopping them saying or doing out loud a lot of what they feel safe to say or do online. That doesn't mean they don't agree with the TRAs, support them, send them money or perpetuate their lies.

Women gaining the vote was an act of providing equal opportunity to female people in a sexist society. You obviously think that this is comparable. I do not. Most feminist action is for the benefit of all female people. However, those changes are not to detriment of another group's actual human rights.

I would argue that very few feminist actions are not about providing equity and equality. These are things that all people should have access to but not necessarily how they demand if those demands negatively impact on a groups rights (and I mean rights here again, not additional privileges).

@Diverze

They do benefit from the organisational policy of it not being ok to scream at them in the street, sack them from a job, or deny them housing on the grounds of them being trans.

I am sure people can feel all sorts of things they are not…

I police nothing - just state what is truth, reality, law…

but you don't get to deny that declaring a trans identity is allowed in UK law

so what is a trans identity? How do you define it esp. in light of the science that proves you can’t transition sex and the logic that shows you can’t transition gender (you simply expand societal understanding of your birth gender / sex)

Of course it's possible to be trans. It's not possible to actually change sex, to literally become or "really be" the opposite sex

This makes no sense to me - you accept that you can’t ‘become’ the opposite sex but then say that you can be trans. - so what does trans. mean? Is it dressing up like small children who try on their mother’s high heels? Is it play-acting like a Shakespearean play with boys playing the girls part? Is it some sort of sexual fantasy like role play? Or is it just men in skirts in which case that is just men being their type of man - which is fine, but that doesn’t need to be called trans. they are just men.

or to enjoy all the rights and privileges of the opposite sex. That part is what has got us all in this mess.

partially - along with violence against women / de-platforming truth esp from women / aggression online / aggression in real life / demand of private spaces including prisons and rape centres / sexual harassment by using the toilets and changing rooms of women / sexual perversions such as men watching little girls change / sexual and physical abuse against the vulnerable and children through promoting positive affirmation, hormones and bodily mutilation / sexual abuse of women by parading themselves sexually in women’s spaces…

a little bit more than just rights…

You want me to base my ideas about trans people on observation of the teans people I know?

I do.

The males are fetishists (3), plus one gay male who is decidedly unpleasant towards women. The one woman (transman) I know is fine.

"despite your attempt to suggest that trans people are threatened"

Where did I say that?

Most of the rest of your post is denying the possibility that people can ever genuinely feel that they are trans and frankly, that is rubbish. There have always been, in many cultures, people who do not identify with their birth sex for a variety of reasons, and who feel more comfortable moving through life as if they are the other sex.

You simply can't police what name people choose to use for themselves or the pronouns they prefer/request people to use. You may disagree and you may refuse to go along with it, that's your prerogative, but you don't get to deny that declaring a trans identity is allowed in UK law . Of course it's possible to be trans. It's not possible to actually change sex, to literally become or "really be" the opposite sex, or to enjoy all the rights and privileges of the opposite sex. That part is what has got us all in this mess.

"They do benefit from the organisational policy of it not being ok to scream at them in the street, sack them from a job, or deny them housing on the grounds of them being trans."

These were already protected though through philosophical belief.

"After all as the recent ruling has clarified, trans people never had other rights except the right not to be discriminated against for being trans."

Sure. But they have claimed additional privileges are 'human rights', when they are not. Additional privileges are not human rights, yet that label 'rights' gets used for privileges all the time.

After all, Trans rights are human rights takes on a very dishonest meaning when those screaming it are referring to accessing female single sex provisions when they are male. And yet... that is exactly what they mean when they say it.

I have to agree. The sheer number of people with body cams or with phones out was shocking. It looked like everyone was spoiling for a fight tbh. I watched part of with the sound off and I couldn't tell for the life of me who was protesting for what.

You don't turn up to a march with a body cam on if you aren't looking for full on drama and to antagonise. It's very different dynamic to going to a march innocently and then getting your phone out because someone starts on you.

So, men who are pushing boundaries in clothing and helping to show that we don’t need gender stereotypes… awesome - no-one has any issue with that…

however, as has been shown on here so many times, if they are also:

• calling themselves transwomen (no such thing)
• calling themselves women (men can’t be women)
• claiming that they have changed sex (not possible)
• have changed their name to suggest any of the above (deception)
• have changed their pronouns to suggest any of the above (deception)
• have ever encouraged others esp. the vulnerable or children, to believe that they are in the wrong body etc. (deception and potentially abuse / safeguarding issue)
• have stood by while others in their name have aggressively attacked women / single sex spaces etc (passive participation)
• etc

no-one cares about men wearing skirts - the Scottish do it as do other cultures around the world… but that is not the pattern we are seeing in the UK

the minute anyone calls themselves trans then they are a part of the deception and the current pattern of threat against women - there is no such thing biologically or socially as transitioning - however you behave, whatever you say, whatever you believe - a man always remains a man both in sex and gender. So to claim to be trans has to include an element of deceit somewhere whether it is the individual fooling themselves or attempting to deceive others…

and despite your attempt to suggest that trans people are threatened, the evidence shows a massive opposite reality with women being fired and abused and threatened because they simply state biological reality and truth…

sure, anyone is allowed to play out their delusions or fantasies, but they are not allowed to affect others and that is always a consequence of anyone who claims to be what is not possible - trans.

If trans people agree with the results of these activists, then they're complicit.

These men aren't marching in order to be allowed to wear women's clothes. They're marching to decimate women's rights. And will use violence and aggression to do so.

And trans people 'just getting on with their lives' covers a multitude of different reasons. From a cross-dresser wearing knickers to work, to a troubled child being told they're not gay, they're trans.

The very concept of transgenderism relies on sexism and is deeply homophobic. It's certainly little wonder to me that there aren't lots of trans people standing up and condemning these activists.

Why would they?

The right to vote is not the same as the right to decimate women's dignity privacy and safety.

From Mr Menno's interview this is Steve James aka "Edge of the Matrix" not Billboard Chris who is in Australia doing something similar. Steve has been going round the country with his signs so infuriating TRAs by being calm & reasonable that he has been assaulted on several occasions. His assailants will be appearing in court in due course.

https://www.youtube.com/@edgeofthematrix

The trans people in my life don't use women's spaces, awards or sports. They do wear women's clothes, if there is such a thing. They do benefit from the organisational policy of it not being ok to scream at them in the street, sack them from a job, or deny them housing on the grounds of them being trans.

When suffragettes first gained the vote for women and all women were allowed to vote, would you argue that all those women who then did vote were in fact retrospectively actively involved in the prioritisation of these "privileges" (that I would call rights)? They benefitted, sure, but that's different from being actively involved.

After all as the recent ruling has clarified, trans people never had other rights except the right not to be discriminated against for being trans.

They are not standing up and saying "not in my name" and we have given them ample support and opportunity to do so.

They either don't care, because it benefits them, or they let women take the rap and all the consequences of doing so. So, frankly, i am now at the "fuck them" stage.

As we saw with Rachel Reeves yesterday, when a man is a twat, it's just him. But when a woman shows a bit of emotion "all women are too emotional for the big jobs"

That is the lot of women. We are all witches and awful and need to be subdued and talked over all the time.

"But it seems like all trans people are branded TRA's. It's so ridiculous when you think about your trans friends and relatives. Multiply all those quiet friends and relatives and it's the vast majority."

How many are using single sex provisions, or benefitting from the organisational policies that those extremists have, for the moment, gained for them? I consider anyone who uses those provisions and derives benefit from the policies to be actively involved in the prioritisation of these additional privileges that they have gained over other group's needs.

Can you logically argue how they are not actively involved if they are utilising these gains, just because they were not part of the aggressive extreme activism that gained them?

As I said: I have several trans friends. They would none of them engage themselves in mob antisocial behaviour.

They are however actively approving of it, and cheer it on on social media. They feel it is absolutely justified and enjoy benefitting as pps have described.

Where are the voices of this 'silent majority' who apparently disagree when all this happens in their name? What responsibilities do they have here? Where is the evidence of disagreement?

Otherwise women are again being asked to modify their behaviour 'in case' and take on the responsibility that excuses and lifts it off others. While suffering the effects.

We should never have closed down the mental asylums.