The two questions they all need to be asked

You’d think, wouldn’t you?

Complications, yes. But surely the fact the surgery is irreversible shouldn't matter, since they have always known they are trans, and will never want to detransition.

Because they cut your dick off and for most men, it's a fetish. Hard to get your kicks with no dicks.

Complications from the surgery are frequent and unpleasant and the surgery is irreversible.

I've always wondered why so few have 'bottom' surgery?

And you can say, "What does it feel like, to be a woman?" I don't know. I only know what it feels like to be myself. I don't know what goes on in other women's heads, and I don't know what it feels like them, any more than I know what it feels like for men.

What I do know is that we women share a body type, and that determines certain aspects of our lives - whether we might be able to bear children, whether we are likely to grow breasts and menstruate, whether we are more likely to be beaten by our partners, whether we are more likely to be patronised at work, and many other such things.

I usually ask why they think prisons, changing rooms etc were sex-segregated in the first place. Also highlight how few transwomen have surgery, and most people find the idea of women being expected to strip in front of a man-who-says-he’s-a-woman ridiculous

This is particularly effective with bekind friends who haven’t really thought about what that would mean. It wouldn’t work on anyone who really didn’t care about women…..or worse

Why do so many of these men behave exactly like men then?

It's established in law: there is a large group who have the characteristic of being born unambiguously biologically female in common.

They are half the bloody population. Called women, in law.

Should women and gay people be allowed to have rights to privacy and dignity that men with gender identities find inconvenient?

I don't want blether: yes or no.

Should women and gay people not able or willing to conform to this sex-based hierarchy of submission to male interests above their own, be punished for this? And have no access to resources or spaces? Or equality?

No blether. I don't want to hear how it's complicated, which is a cowardly excuse at best and wholly irrelevant to the terrified woman about to be strip searched by a man with a certificate at home. Yes or no?

This group will include very large numbers of women from minority religions, minority cultures, working class women, women with disabilities, women with trauma from MVAWG.

If the answers to above are yes, is the speaker aware that these exclusionary and sexist/religiously intolerant/xenophobic/homophobic/classist/colonialist /superior and affluent values are in fact very heavily right wing?

You'd have to go further back than Thatcher to actually find a sufficiently right wing leader who was that heavily punitive to the lesser beings. Disraeli possibly?

Right. 'Feel'. It's the only difference.

But this is the point of this particular question. If you boil the difference down to feelings you can then rapidly move on to.

Why do their feelings trump ours?
How do they know what 'feeling' like a woman is like?
And most importantly.. if it's a feeling. How to we tell the difference between 'genuine' trans and bad faith actors?

My main motivation for the question is the reverse the burden of evidence. Make it about how men are men, commit male crimes, feel like men, are the SAME as men. Making it less about women's 'feelings' which don't matter obvs.

They'll say, men Feel like men. Transwomen Feel like women because they were always meant to be one and they are very brave

That he wasn’t calling himself a woman or “non binary” - entirely self ID.

But on what grounds would one assert that a man is 'cis'?

Because they can maintain the pretence that the group called “cis men” are the only reason to segregate by “gender”.

It’s the same as the Greens’ notorious “non men” category label.

Why would anyone do this?

If there are no grounds for excluding anyone from being described as 'FLINTA', why bother with any kind of segregation? Much cheaper just to have mixed sex toilets.

I agree with you OP, and I don't think your wording is too complicated.

That would be awesome.

I know it's not an original observation, but at times like this I really miss the laugh emoji. It's just occurred to me, however, that what we need even more is one for the most extreme eyeroll ever..

They talked about how they behaved and that they dont want trans only spaces because they dont want to be alone with them.

Wow, that's quite the eye-opener.

There was debate sub on reddit for a while, and some TW did acknowledge the danger from a section of TW. They talked about how they behaved and that they dont want trans only spaces because they dont want to be alone with them.

I think its allies who are the ones promote the idea that all TW are lovely because they are trans.

None of the posts I read were confused about the 'bigoted' logic, though. Everyone understood that TW are somehow different from women. Women are now dismissed because of the perception of risk, not the fact that TWareliterallyW. That wouldn't have been the case 6 or 7 years ago.

It may be how TRA have moved on from TWAW to TW are marginalised and womens spaces are now safe spaces?

There were a couple of transwomen in that group who said they felt some sympathy for women who felt threatened by biological men in their spaces. And others who said that it was irrelevant whether women were genuinely afraid or were just pretending that they were afraid (while having an agenda against transwomen). As in - transwomen's wishes to be treated as women have precedence over women's feelings, even if those women are genuinely afraid due to having been attacked by men in the past.

Reddit muppets.

We are women. Not 'cis' women.

We are not a subset of our own sex class.

Women
Transwomen

Reality bites. And I make no apologies for it.