“Heated Rivalry” author Rachel Reid on J. K. Rowling - “the bar is pretty high in how evil you have to be,” “ I’m extremely the opposite of everything she believes”

The whole ‘I am a woman’ is never going to be true for a male person. And if it were true then those ‘women’ would have free access to female sports, and would be placed automatically in female prisons in the UK.

There would be no restrictions usable under Article 8 either.

The very existence of these exceptions are proof that society in general does not believe that these male people are female in any way. And the attempt of leveraging ‘social sex ‘ is flawed in exactly the same way. Social sex is also philosophical … but apparently we are told it is not.

The determined mantra of ‘The UK will see trans people living as fully embodied people once again some day’ is an empty one. It might be comforting to some, but there is no sign that this will ever be unless a group of people are in power that are fully totalitarian and authoritarian and control people to make it happen.

Why? Because it is purely a constructed subjective reality which crumbles with scrutiny and analysis.

It is why the term biological determinism keeps being falsely used to characterise women rejecting that male people can ever be female in any way. Any way to discredit women will be used.

https://x.com/gaynotqueer1/status/2026296936278430099?s=46

Here is a great example of two men discussing ‘girlhood’. Because describing yourself as a ‘girl’ is apparently not about any philosophical belief structure at all. It is just as meaningful as any male person claiming any other female language for themselves when they are male people.

And then comes the shaming tactic of calling people perverted if they then enquire how materially that male person fits the description of female person being a human with a body formed around producing large gametes regardless of whether they do produce those gametes.

It is a script meant to stop discussion of female people’s needs to be recognised as a unique category. We have seen parts of it over this thread from multiple posters.

Make a statement that is not true in any material sense according to science and then comes all the tactics to shame people or try to convince them using theories and belief.

We touched on the concept of solipsism ages ago when I was at school and it's all I can think of when I read oneposts misogynistic ramblings.

For the solipsist, it is not merely the case that he believes that his thoughts, experiences, and emotions are, as a matter of contingent fact, the only thoughts, experiences, and emotions. Rather, the solipsist can attach no meaning to the supposition that there could be thoughts, experiences, and emotions other than his own. In short, the true solipsist understands the word “pain,” for example, to mean “my pain.” He cannot accordingly conceive how this word is to be applied in any sense other than this exclusively egocentric one.

I've noticed that this kind of extreme solipsism, is a feature, not a bug amongst many men who say they're women.

Sad times indeed.

Imagine having to spend so much energy to convince others that your identity makes you something you are not. That is ‘sad’ on so many levels.

it's always an existential crisis isn't it? Or emotional incontinence as I prefer to call it.
Countless posts on a thread all about themselves, their demands and their dislike of women.
Sad times.

Obviously I don't see any need to give up the word 'woman', but I'm happy to acknowledge that I am not a flam, and I have no problem with all the people who identify as cis and trans women having their own word to describe their identity.

Would they in turn accept a new word that refers simply to people whose sex is female and infers nothing about identity?

Could this be the solution?

I think maybe an existential crisis was had last night.

Quite simply though, female people don't have to go through an existential folding of reality to enable them to describe themselves. And that is also what we saw last night.

The effort is huge where a male person has to deny that their language and descriptions of themselves and their life is based purely on philosophical theory and not on being able to use accurate and factual language. You end up with the endless cycle of returning to those male people trying to use accurate statements such as 'women don't need to [insert word here]' in order to justify their statements, their decisions and their behaviour.

Yet ultimately the only way that statement could be considered accurate to describe their personal experience is through philosophical theory. Because using proven and established science will mean show the falsity.

I also think that these male people think that simply repeating the false statement enough times keeps them in their comfort zone, they also have been led to believe that it will prevent others from continuing discussion and that maybe some people will feel that male person feels so strongly about their identity that there must be something to it.

Meanwhile, the reality is seeing male people simply just double down on using female language for themselves strips away remaining emotional support. Particularly when that language is describing a group of male people's intention to continue to act in ways that cause harm to female people.

So then the hyperbole comes where that emotional support must be regained somehow? How? Well, remind everyone that this group of male people are heavily persecuted, that deaths may occur, that no woman or girl has complained up until now, and that decades of experience must be real, how can it not be real while forgetting that the experience itself is not being denied, the description of it is.

All to support some male people's impossible claim that they are female people.

We get it, trans women think they're women because they think women is a category defined by whatever you say you are.

You get it, gender critical women think you are not women because we think women is a category defined by biological sex. Repeating a zillion times that you are women will not change that fact. It just means you are repeating your miscategorisation a zillion times.

Let us say we changed the names. We'll call people with female bodies flims, and people who identify with femininity flams. Two different categories, two different names. Transwomen are flams, many gender critical women are not. Transwomen are not flims but they are flams.

Now which group is it that we need to differentiate by in sports, in medical studies, in changing rooms?

At the same time deny anyone else has the ability to understand his experience. Even though understanding his experience is just about knowing he's lying when he says he's a women.

You are not missing a thing.

It all comes down to the falsity based on the philosophical theories that if someone describes their personal experiences as 'female' when they are male, they are female.

We have seen it said by experts where they have said 'children know who they are' and that we must treat their description of themselves as being true because they are the only ones who know who they are.

Yet, apparently 'There is no philosophy' and 'I do not identify'.

This is a form of gaslighting. Of denying the philosophical basis that forms the foundation of describing 'experiences' all while also denying that 'experience' is being used to form an 'identity'.

I’m not sure he’s actually claimed that he thinks he can understand the woman experience or that he can be a woman if he wants because he understands the woman experience. (Though this is a long thread, and I could have missed it within the rest of his me-me-me drivel.)

Rather, it seems to me that he claims he can be a woman and appropriate everything to do with women simply because he wants to. And that we are the exemplars of sex-realist evil for not soothing his brow and validating him like good service humans.

Hmm. The statistical size is too small, therefore, we are wrong to state that TW commit sex offences at higher rates than other men; but, at the same time, those too small statistics prove that TW commit sex offences at a lower rate.

I see.

You have no ability to understand my experience. You are very anti-my experience as it is.

Am I missing something, this is coming from a man who thinks he can understand the women experience and therefore he can be a women if he wants because he understands the woman experience.

And more hyperbole with a huge dose of none of you women or girls complained before, why now? It is along the lines of 'why are the support humans complaining'?

The hyperbole was very strong last night after I decided to jump off the ferris wheel of denial.

This post has it all included the age old deflection of shaming women because they are not focused on the political agenda that the shamer wants them to be, eg. general male violence against women and girls.

It predicts deaths because women won’t affirm some male people’s identities that are not based in reality where they demand to be treated as being female people when they are not. The emotional blackmail of that statement is predictable. It is abusive though.

Then there is some lovely inspirational thinking centring male people’s dreams for the future.

All to convince people that male people can be female people
they say so and to justify their demands of accessing female single sex provisions. This hyperbole though is wild.

LOL

What’s the saying? “None so blind as will not see”?

The hypocrisy is strong in this one.

Oh the lengths people go to keep their subjective reality from
crashing into material reality and crumbling.

And then denying that he'd do any such thing.

I don't believe I've ever met a trans woman who demanded to be granted access to anywhere.

Whilst simultaneously pretending he doesn't understand why we need our single sex facilities but he, of course, does.

Personally, I never gave change rooms or toilets any thought. It seems bizarre that they are so suddenly political.

"I've been doing it for years" and "I'm going to keep doing it anyway"

To women, these are some of the most stereotypically masculine sentiments out there.

Speak to transwomen, they said. Listen to transwomen, they said. onepostwonder is more than enough to send even the most neutral person 'terf'. Just more proof that listening to transwomen will send you 'terf'. They are their own worst enemy with their alpha male demands, rather than meek self-sacrifice that is the hallmark of being a woman.

NO! The laugh one was only ever used to bully.

Personally I think we don't need any 'reactions' at all. None.

You're not a woman, you're in a space you as a male don't belong in. So yes, you as a male and man need to ask permission. That you don't see that is CLASSIC alpha male male entitlement.

There always was criminal enforcement prior to 15 years ago. Women could call the police, and the filthy males would be removed and charged with an indecency act.

It has always been the way. Lets return to that.

It would be good to remove the male sex entirely from society. Males like you demonstrate why that might ultimately be necessary.