Men who affirm TW

Not if that 'safety' for the trans community came at a cost to women. If this brave new world also showed a reduction in violence against women maybe but we all know it would actually show the opposite so no
Women are not a resource for unhappy men.

No I wouldn't support it, because it would come at the expense of women. Why's that so hard to understand? Unless you only think about men's needs not women's. Is that really your position?

Women have the right to their own single sex spaces. If trans identifying men need their own separate spaces then go right ahead and campaign for them.

I'm curious, if there were studies that showed that socially accepting trans people as their chosen gender stopped all the violence, mental health, suicide etc in their community, would you support it then?

I'm just wondering if you position is driven by principle of single sex spaces or by the lack of evidence in social transition. I'm gender critical but I'm not ideologically captured so am opened to what new evidence shows,

Why would anyone have a 'right' to be treated as the opposite sex.

That's not a right. This is not a rights issue.

No we don't have to weigh up anything. Any measures taken to accommodate trans identifying males should not be coming at the expense of women. They can be accommodated while leaving women well alone.

We have rules and laws which govern such matters

Rules and laws work best if people follow them. They are not that effective if the majority of the public is pro-trans and believes TWAW so acts/votes that way. Winning over public opinion is crucial.

No, we don't have to do that. We don't have to weigh up anything. We just have to insist that women's rights and protections already exist. They do.

I used the word 'we.' I meant it more like society have to balance rights. Again, the other side chooses the former and we choose the latter.

No, we don't have to do that. We don't have to weigh up anything. We just have to insist that women's rights and protections already exist. They do.

It doesn't matter what " they" think. We've had years of having to deal with the consequences of what " they" think. We have rules and laws which govern such matters

You have to weight up preventing harm to trans people vs protecting womens spaces. Some choose the former, some choose the latter.

If we prove that suicide rates stays the same or go up after transition, doesnt that indicate that women need to do more to support their journey

Its not just suicide, its also higher rates of unemployment, assault, homelessness etc. It falls under a wide umbrella of "harm"

Not everyone will be swayed by the argument (a lot of people jsut don't care about the issue at all) but for those who are motivated by reducing harm to the trans community, then this argument would be force them to re-think their position.

When men talk about their trans journey, they do talk about suicide and being happier when women accept them as women.

But, if we believe that most men are indifferent to trans, how would disproving the suicide rates help?

If we prove that suicide rates stays the same or go up after transition, doesnt that indicate that women need to do more to support their journey?

If it goes down, doesnt it indicate that transition works?

If you are working on that premise, thats good. But I'm not convinced it will have effect you think.

Most people don't buy into the concept of trans identity and they recognise that people cannot change sex.

The concept of 'treating someone as a woman' makes no sense. What does it mean, apart from letting some men into women's protected categories?

Came to say I think a lot of those men are attracted to the perverseness of it - but don't want to admit it outwardly, so instead affirm it

I suggest that is a confused reading of the situation. It doesn't matter if a man is violent or not, or whether he feels suicidal - he remains male and women have a right to the dignity of their sex when in protected services or spaces.

and more than that I would say that men are not being swayed by numbers. As the saying goes you can't reason people out of a place they didn't reason themselves.

I'm not talking about trying to reason with people who are ideologically captured. I'm talking about reasoning with the large percentage of people who are undecided or uncertain about the issue. The vast majority of people mistakingly believe treating TW as women helps reduce harm, showing them evidence that it doesn't would change their opinion.

And yes we have seen a change in public opinion with new evidence coming to light (Cass report).

If we said OK woman is about a feeling, it's a 'gender word' but we now want the word 'adhufem' as a 'sex word' and is only to be applied to as such and female toilets (oh hold, on according to the PP this is already a 'sex word' - this isn't going to work is it?) are now 'adhufem' toilets and set up the 'Adhufem Institute' the TRA aren't going to say 'great you finally got it, we never wanted to be female sex, just woman gender you can have as much 'adhufem' stuff as you like and we will stay away from it as long as there is 'woman' stuff for us.'

If that was what they wanted Brighton would have a single sex 'adhufem' rape service along side single gender 'women's' service but the refusal to have such a group despite agreeing to and the determination to bring down Sisters Heal shows that none of this about making sure transwomen have a service, it all about making sure women, sorry adhufems don't.

If we relinquished 'woman' from any biological meaning and made it a 'gender word' today and set up a parallel 'sex word' the TRAs would have Adhufem on their X biographies before the ink was dry on the agreement.

So you are saying women need to prove that suicide isnt improved by social acceptance, when most men aren't bothered about this argument?

I think debunking that would help sway a lot of people to our side (not just men, but women as well).

There's no evidence in the UK that this is the case

and more than that I would say that men are not being swayed by numbers. As the saying goes you can't reason people out of a place they didn't reason themselves.

that just don't think women matter and they approach everything from that point. Women are support humans and men are the proper humans

it's not that complicated

A) that's not true, the stats do not bear out that out at all in the UK.

B) there's absolutely no need to play one group off the other. They could accommodate trans identifying men without troubling women's spaces.

So no, that doesn't justify anything.

I'm not following the argument.

We need to prove that trans surgery and social acceptance don't lead to reduced suicide rates, because its the suicide rates that enforces TWAW.

Yet men aren't generally bothered about trans and suicide rates. Its only activist who are.

So you are saying women need to prove that suicide isnt improved by social acceptance, when most men aren't bothered about this argument?

The thread is about men in general supporting TWAW, but you seem to think that working to prove a premise wrong that they arent thinking about is useful?

I havent seen any indication that activists argument would fall apart if suicide rates were disproved either. They say TWAW and its not treating them as women thats the problem. Suicide rates are irrelevant.

So they're prepared to put women at additional risk, without their consent, to protect men from tother men.

They are going with the numbers. They are choosing the side that experiences higher rates of violence, suicide, mental health, homelessness etc. If women experienced higher rates of all those things, they would have probably sided with us.

They also side with transmen over men. That's why I don't think it is driven by misogyny. Not right, but that is how they justify it.

It is misogyny though as they conveniently ignore the incredibly high rate of violence committed against women by men and all the effect of that on women's lives

So they're prepared to put women at additional risk, without their consent, to protect men from tother men.

Explain to me how that isnt deeply and profoundly misogynistic.

What you're describing here is just deep rooted, thoughtless misogyny.

I don't think it is misogyny at all. I think they would do the same if the issue was transmen in men's spaces (they would support the trans side).

They see a major problem (high violence/suicide of of trans people) and thinķ it can be solved through treating them as their preferred sex. To them women are at risķ of violence but as trans people experience more violence than women it is more important to safegaurd them. That is their argument. Would be the same if it is transmen in men's spaces

despite this, lots of men men fundamentally just don't care about the affect on women because it isn't affecting them directly

Honestly this is an pretty niche issue even amongst women. We on here are pretty unusual in how much we talk about think about this issue.

As I said above we do understand their arguments, we've heard them a gazillion times.

they're all nonsense and have been evidenced as nonsense repeatedly

despite this, lots of men men fundamentally just don't care about the affect on women because it isn't affecting them directly. In addition, some men are actively enjoying how upset and distressed this is making women.

(edited for grammar)

”They see transwomen as a separate category to men, one which is persecuted by society. They think they can lower the rates of violence and suicide by transwomen by accepting them socially. Women are oppressed but not nearly as oppressed as trans people according to them.”

Yes. Some men who support the mantra TWAW do think this.

However, they also seem to lack any knowledge or understanding of safeguarding principles. Perhaps if there were greater understanding of these principles (not just policies), they would understand what Keating is pointing out.

Because Keating is correct. It doesn’t matter about showing that transitioning doesn’t improve suicide rates and violence. Female people have specific needs, as you know, and these are in direct conflict with that sub group of male people that some people wish to wedge into female single sex provisions.