Men who affirm TW

All true, and I totally agree; but I disagree about the average woman in the street. I have generally found that even those with no personal experience, if you explain it to them once, they get it and agree - not all of course but most. And, most encouraging of all, YOUNGER woman are starting to get it now. Perhaps, in their cases because they HAVE faced it, at school or university.

Who cares? You know that's not it. Being ND doesn't give him a right to bully you.

He sounds absolutely horrible. An utter selfish wanker and a complete idiot too. I guess he must have SOME good points but I wouldn't be able to stay with such a man.

If there were studies that showed imposing an evening curfew on men stopped all instances of attacks on women on the streets at night, would you support it? Because most people would point out a whole lot of human rights issues and practical matters and collateral damage that meant, while it would undoubtedly achieve a legitimate aim, its not a proportionate means of doing so. Allowing some men to be treated as though they are women is the same. Though with few less likelihood it would actually achieve the aim you intend.

"They don't necessarily despise women but they really don't see us."

They don't 'see' us at all. Yet they fully believe that their description of female people is 'us' and that they fit that description. The dissonance is like a huge bell tolling away.

That is why we end up with posters declaring that they are not 'male' because they have never penetrated anyone and nor do they want to. If that is not a fucking huge misogynistic red flag, then I don't know what is.

It is my opinion that many of theses men have, in their minds, failed at masculinity and therefore being a man. They appear to be mostly non competitive in nature (which would be a struggle for them within a Capitalist society) and envy the way women are treated so begin idolising femininity and womanhood to the point they want to become 'women'..

I think there is a cohort that this is definitely true for. They don't necessarily despise women but they really don't see us.

The basic battles ( around public consciousness etc) have already been won, now we just have to insist that the law is applied as it should be. There will always be some who cling on to trans ideology - we're never going to change their persepctive.

I'm sure, but they don't represent mainstream opinion.

Some of the big battles have already been won, and the public is no longer quite so naive or blindly trusting.

This only for 'some' instances really does completely highlight the falsity of that person's identity claims. The activists are correct on that. That if a group of people use pronouns and language because they feel it is 'kind' even if they don't believe it, allow a male person to join a female group etc, it is cruel to exclude them from anything else that is female only. Male people with transgender identities have been telling us this for a decade, yet some people are not listening.

It seems that some people feel that they can pick and choose what male people should and shouldn't have access to based on what they, personally, feel is appropriate. And it seems those people feel that is them being kind and reasonable.

Yet, that cherry picking of when is appropriate to support an identity based on subjective reality and philosophical belief and when it is not appropriate is the opposite of kind and reasonable. As trans people themselves have been saying for a very long time now.

And this is where all the logic crumbles away.

If a male person is 'female' to join a female only group, how do they then have to accept that they are not female enough to access a female changing room, a female rape crisis centre, a female sport or a female prison?

Every single time they are excluded from a female single sex provision, they really are being told that they are not female at all and that everyone is just acting as if they support them for 'some' instances to keep them happy. How does this supposedly improve someone's mental health if they say that the only way they can live happily is if they are accepted as being a 'woman'?

Giving with one hand and then taking away with another is completely undermining that person's belief. Unless that person is fully aware that they are not a 'woman' and therefore why are they then claiming to be a woman?

Well, according to some recent posters, it is absolutely true that their husbands were never gay or bisexual, only heterosexual. And accepting of a male person as their sexual partner. This is not the first time we have seen this claim either.

It feeds into that subjective reality that they construct to support their identity.

"I'm just wondering if you position is driven by principle of single sex spaces or by the lack of evidence in social transition."

This doesn't make sense.

There is a lack of evidence to support social transition that would give any sub group of male people access to female single sex provisions. Nothing should do this because it is very weak safeguarding.

Even if there was strong evidence that socially transitioning improved mental health and prevented suicides, that is no reason to lower the safeguarding standards in policies protecting female people's need for single sex provisions. Sure, it could support alternative provisions but it does not mean that any male person should ever be welcomed into any female single sex provision.

And if a male person declares that this is the only way that they will have better mental health and lower risk of suicide, then that is emotionally manipulative on a societal level. How is that acceptable?

I think there are a big chunk of men who are TWAW but 'not for relationship purposes' who think man = macho so TW are less than men and so are women so it's OK to chuck us all in the same category because we are both lesser beings.

To them women are at risķ of violence but as trans people experience more violence than women it is more important to safegaurd them.

Could we please see the data for this claim? For the UK, not South America.

@Holdmeclosertinydancer2018 Are there heterosexual men who want to have sex with trans identifying men?
I'm thinking that logically there cannot be any, since they would by definition be gay or bisexual if they wanted to have sex with other men (be they trans identified or not).

Leave time to have a scalding hot shower in dettol after as well.

Yes, this. I think women exist in our own right, not just a collection of projections about womanhood by men.

Validating a man playacting his beliefs about "being" a woman might be good for said man but is not a good message for society to send to about who we are and how much our self knowledge matters.

@PeachyDaisy to your question, I'm sure you can think of plenty of examples where one group's life/happiness/mental health would be greatly improved by access to the resources and protections of another group, but we recognise that to do so is unfair so we don't do it even though the first group would have measurable better outcomes if we did.

So if it were shown that transition does what you suggest it could, I would look for society/researchers to say "right, but men can't actually become women so it can't be being a woman that solved things, so what's really making the difference here? Is it less macho pressures? Is it feeling safer away from agressive men? Is it enjoying clothes ones own sexism prevents one wearing? Let's find the real factor(s) and look for ways to provide those supports in society in ways that don't involve reducing women's own lives and identies and reality into support resources for struggling men".

Firstly its the trans community that won't let us say book group fine, showers not OK.

Secondly think about that book group for a moment. Why is it a woman only group? Are there mixed sex book groupd that the trans women could join? If so why join a women's only group. Will they dominate conversation, push their opinion or will they let women take the lead? Where do women who want or need female only groups for religious, cultural or trauma reasons go instead. What happens if the book is about a uniquely female experience will a woman feel happy to suggest it as a read or would they not suggest it incase it causes upset or embarrassment to the TW? It isn't as black and white as no violence equals OK to give away female spaces.

No, the best way is to ask the very simple question "why does it have to be either/or?"

Why can't we recognise and support the-thing-that-is-not-sex and the-thing-that-is-sex separately?

Stop allowing TRAs to base the argument in the assumption that TW are somehow meaningfully more like the opposite sex than other men and the only question is how far along the man/woman line they should be allowed to go (ie how big a lie about the nature of womanhood we are expected to smile along with), and challenge that assumption.

It's this initial false framing from which everything else springs. It sets the terms of a false question. If we accept the false framing, we can never make our case because our reality is precluded from the picture before we start.

I’d be glad for these men that ‘transition’ had worked to make their lives better.

But I would not accept them in place of women, as being women.

If this brave new world also showed a reduction in violence against women maybe

I'm the same. if it showed a reduction in of the violence to the trans community and no increase in violence to women then I would probably support it. I personally don't object to a transwoman joining a womans bookclub as I dont think them being there leads to an increase in violence. But I would object to them in changing rooms, prisons and etc.