Has anyone divorced their spouse for not understanding gender critical views?

What can I say ? I am sorry for speaking out of place.

I felt a bit triggered when I saw this in the post I was replying to. Quote " It means gay, autistic and troubled children being sterilised. "

It brought out my thoughts on gay conversion therapy, and it is suggestive of the "mental illness" thing I see mentioned a lot on this subject, on this forum.

I don't post on GC stuff, not my place. I am only in this thread because the OP had started a thread on GC and Islam, and I followed it over. That's all. I was originally exploring the OPs position on Islam.

On the subject of GC, would you agree that it is a broad umbrella ? That it does include actual transphobes, anti gay, religious fanatics etc. Not everyone is in it for women's rights ? And hey, I follow a lot of US politics, and over there the religious component is substantial.

I was thinking more of your internet company. The kind of company that teaches to:

• "Stay in your lane!"
• Use emotive arguments.
• See every debate as a battle to be won or lost.
• Assume that no pro-women people can be lib left.

The women here are not like that. We are forceful, but we're not looking to crush you. If you want to discuss, you will find several of us willing to explain where we come from; several have already started to do so in previous posts. You don't have to be defeated, because it doesn't have to be a fight in the first place.

Given that I live in a country where pride events etc are effectively banned, I don't see how any company I keep is indicated by my language. As for trans, they don't exist where I am, I think.

Another patronising poster with no solid argument.

Your language sadly reveals a lot about the kind of company you keep.

I am defeated. You win. You can chalk that up on your board. I strayed out my lane and have been corrected.

As a lib leftie, I have been totally and utterly defeated. You win.

Who are the 'some folk' Alan?
You're going to need to be a bit clearer in 2026.

This comment above makes zero sense in this context.

You were pulled up for this comment: Ah right. So it's rights for everyone except T, who some folk don't like.
Got ya.

...after @Igmum had patiently explained how women's actual rights clash with trans 'rights'.

You were asked to clarify what trans rights are, but you can't. So you flounce.

Checking what I posted. It was this:

"Ah right. So it's rights for everyone except T, who some folk don't like.
Got ya."

Is that not what is being said ?

Nobody told you to "get back into your lane". You're the one using this emotional language to try to make us feel bad.

But by all means, flounce away; we're used to TRAs coming here to scold us, and then disappearing when we confront them with facts they don't like.

Genuinely interested in your answer as to why the trans woman (whose sex is male) should be given the 'right' to be in women's spaces instead of prioritising the women and girls 'right' to exclude him?

Trans women pose the same physical threat as any other man to women and girls. The very large majority of trans-identifying men still have their full male genitals. And the majority are sexually attracted to women and/or teenage girls. By excluding all males, we exclude all male genitals. If no-one has a penis, no-one can flash or rape with one. This logic is inescapable.

Just one trans woman regularly using the women's changing room at the local Pool is likely to shock/frighten hundreds of women/teenage girls over the course of a year. Some of the distressed women/teenage girls may simply say nothing, get (re)dressed quickly, leave and never come back to the Pool. Including men means excluding these women and girls.

So why prioritise these specific men's 'rights', if you're not TQ and won't directly benefit?

Do you have a TQ child? That, I agree, is extraordinarly challenging for parents, and if so, I'm sincerely very sorry. But the principle of protecting single sex spaces still holds. Why not campaign for third (single-room) spaces so trans girls and trans boys (and all the other pupils) can feel safe and comfortable?

Fair enough. I am flouncing. Getting back into my lane.

Well, I am trans, and I can tell you confidently: both in my country and in the UK, trans people don't lack any right that everyone else has. We have every right other people have; we're not missing a single one of them.

When TRAs speak of "trans rights", they mean new rights, rights that nobody else would get to have, only trans people. Don't be fooled.

Well, I aint black ,but that does not mean I am against BLM.

👏 thank you! I’ve had enough of this BULLSHIT ! 2026 needs to be the year of reality.

But you saw fit to leave a sarcastic comment about it anyway.

I am not LGBTQ, so I have no idea.

Yes.
We'll wait.....

I suppose that like every other TRA who's been asked that question, you won't be able to tell us what rights trans people don't have that everyone else has?

No. It’s that T already have rights. They, their identity and their expression are fully protected in this country by the Equality Act 2010. Anyone mistakenly assumed to be T is also protected under the same Act and it doesn’t matter where on the transition journey you are. Those rights hold, as they do for the 8 other legally protected groups. That isn’t an issue for the majority, including the majority of people here.

What is an issue is when T activists attempt to prevent others exercising their rights. We’ve seen the violence, intimidation and threats against anyone who disagrees. The Supreme Court was clear that lesbians and gay men are also protected - two leaders of Stonewall, which started life as an LGB charity - called people who preferred to have sex with same sex partners sexual racists. Give trans activists their way and you don’t have gay rights. Similarly, give trans activists their way and you don’t have women’s rights. Women cannot be accurately labelled or counted, cannot meet in same sex groups. Add to that the fact that no one - protected or not - can disagree with the assertion that TWAW and it is clear that the standard balance of rights we rely on in a democracy can only work if we acknowledge that T people have the same rights as everyone else, no more and no less.

It is the difference between a religious group having freedom to worship in the way they choose and that religious group insisting that the whole country be forced to worship in the way they dictate. One is normal practice in a democracy, the other needs to be checked.

Women's Rights and Trans Rights ARE in direct conflict with regards to women-only spaces.

This is not uncommon. Gay/Women's Rights and Freedom of Religion are also, often, in direct conflict. For example, women and gay men cannot become Catholic priests, bishops or the Pope. In this case, religious 'Rights' were priotised over those of women and gay people.

One trans woman in a women's prison, or women's changing room, or women's refuge, or women's Olympic 100m final, makes it mixed sex. The large majority of women do not want men (even if they identify as women) in these spaces. Include men means excluding these women. Why should men's rights be prioritised over the rights of women's and girls to well-being, fairness and safety in their own spaces?

Trans women aren't being excluded because they are trans, they're being excluded because their sex is male. Trans women were born male, and will always be male. Sex cannot be changed.

Trans women are men. The recent Supreme Court ruling is very clear that women's spaces MUST exclude all trans women. If a public space is advertised as, or has a sign saying 'Women' or 'Female', then the Equality Act 2010 requires this to mean only people whose sex is female.

This Judgement is a very good thing. I would divorce someone who prioritises men's rights to perform their sexual fetish in public, over the rights of women and girls to feel and be safe and comfortable in the public sphere.

That is a nasty picture to see on a feminism site

Ah right. So it's rights for everyone except T, who some folk don't like.

Got ya.

LGB rights have long been an important issue and many here have fought for it.

T ‘rights’ mean men depriving women of rights, voice and legal status. It means gay, autistic and troubled children being sterilised. No surprise that it’s the only protected group which loses support as more people find out about what T ‘rights’ involve. On this issue the Democrats handed the Republicans a gun to shoot them with and the Republicans obliged. A stupid political move, ideologically driven.