Thoughts on this tweet?

No, trans women do not belong in professional sports. But it’s hateful to call them men.

Then they shouldn't have done the constant "if black women can participate in sports than so can trans women" gotcha, nor the disingenuous "it's an adjectiiiiive!" We were ready to be polite but you leveraged that politeness into a justification to bulldoze down every last boundary. I for one am done being kind.

Kinder to who?

If you condone the belief that there is "something" in these men that makes a name containing the word "woman" more appropriate than one containing the word "man" or even than a totally non-sex-related name, you are unavoidably condoning the belief that some parts of what makes a person a woman are appearance and/or mentality rather then simply body sex.

And that unavoidably means that the sum total of appearances and mentalities that come under the umbrella of "woman" is reduced from anything the female half of humanity may think, feel or do to some subset we have decided is suitable for "women".

And I do not consider that kind to women at all. In fact I consider it going back to some sexist ideas that we were supposed to have left behind us decades ago.

This is just the latest iteration of Reasonable Trans™ that we've been periodically treated to since about 2012. I like it when a few of them get together and form a Reasonable Trans Society and then all fall out spectacularly over which of them are trutrans enough. I'm quite disappointed that this is just BW again.

No children are 'true trans'.

It is not hateful to call men men, even men who say they are women.

People almost never perceive men as women, regardless of hard work or surgery. They may pretend they do out of misplaced politeness or fear.

If you are male there is no way of using the ladies without it being disruptive, so don't.

If you are male, you are mentally still a man regardless of whether you can understand why women do not want to see cock in the locker room, or not. You are also physically still a man.

'Transsexual healthcare' is medical malpractice.

Womanhood is not a reward for hard work, it's a simple biological state of being a female person and surviving to adulthood. Also see above, 'People almost never perceive men as women ...'

to me they seem like a moderate take on what can sometimes be two extremes in viewpoints. I wouldn’t say I wholly agree with it (I.e. the idea that a trans person needs to try really hard to be valid seems unfair) but I think there is a medium ground to be had.

The 'medium ground' is what we now have - single sex means single sex, third spaces are encouraged and people with the PC of gender reassignment are protected from discrimination. It has been an exhausting battle of over a decade to get here. Women have lost jobs and careers, been socially ostracised, slandered and doxxed, dragged through endless punishing and expensive court proceedings, threatened and intimidated, and some women have been physically attacked, simply for standing up for our rights.

So now we finally have the Supreme Court judgment, which many of us here helped fund, and which confirmed that women's rights were not upheld for 15 years, I don't think you'll find many here who are willing to reopen negotiations about which of our rights we should now cede to men.

#NoThankYou

Oh "'Brianna" can get plenty rude and irate. Just listen to the second half of his interview on the Heterodorx podcast where he truly drops his mask after getting pushback. Very much the "call a transwoman a man and he'll prove to you right away he is one" meme.

@PencilsInSpace Exactly. All of that.

And the "medium ground" is where women started so many years ago, and look what we got for our troubles. They spit in the face of the "medium ground" and now that's all they're going to have, if not less than that. Tough. They should have considered this before it was too late. Many women have no goodwill left. This is what you get when you step on other people to get where you want to be, especially when you know you're in the wrong.

Only one thing I disagree about: #NoThankYou

Thank you for replying.

I hope you won't take this the wrong way, but that is kind of a non-answer.

You say "live as the opposite gender", but what does that actually mean? Dress a certain way? Enjoy certain hobbies? Is that not a bit .... sexist,?

Women (actual female people I mean) have been working so hard to get society to accept we don't have to look a certain way or enjoy certain hobbies.

So when you say "it's ok as long as it doesn't impact on others", to me, I think the whole concept does impact on others, even your "reasonable" position, because it's basically agreeing that a whole bunch of sexist ideas about what women think, look like or enjoy are actually real enough to make a man into a woman in some ways.

To me the idea that some men are actually, not just in their own eyes, but actually, in the real world, more like women than other men seems extreme to me wherever you draw that line. So you feel you are taking "a moderate position between two extremes", but to me that is like someone trying to find a moderate position between a flat earther and someone who says the world is round by saying "can we not agree it's a sort of smartie-shape?" 😂

I really do recommend you try and answer the questions in my previous post. They are good ones to clarify what you really think on a topic that sometimes people don't want to think about properly because they don't want to be unsupportive.

Half way between two extremes is often a good place to compromise. But halfway between the truth and a lie, or between a theft and the original owner, are not compromises, they are injustices. And manipulatative people and movements are very good at exploting that.

Thank you for epitomising my name here, Flirts.

By total chance, I just read a Guardian book review, nothing to do with Genderism, that includes this paragraph - bold mine....

"Brazen lying in public life is a tactic Lobaczewski recognised – he called it the “reversive blockade”. Koehli describes it as: “When you tell a lie convincingly and it’s such an absurd lie, most people’s automatic reaction is that they can’t comprehend a lie told on that scale, so they try to find the ‘golden mean’ between the statement and the reality. But that, Lobaczewski says, is the intention of the big lie. They know it will sow confusion.” The impact on the population over which a dark personality presides is huge: some will try and find that golden mean; others will remain steadfast in calling it a lie and fall out with the first lot; others will try to adjust their own reality to make the lie true; while others will become inured to the new normal – that we just all lie now."

www.theguardian.com/science/2026/aug/27/how-to-spot-a-psychopath-its-like-the-difference-between-a-domestic-cat-and-a-wild-cat

There is obvious and clear middle ground, the only possible middle ground, and it's in the Equality Act, and in the guidance just signed off and brought into practice.

People can identify however the hell they want. No one is stopping them.
They have legal protection from discrimination in their relationship with the state, their choices of identity cannot be used to deny them their civil rights.
They have the right to fictionalise their legal documents to reflect their chosen identity.
There is in the guidance and the SCJ even more accommodations than necessary in law by providing, for those who do not wish for their own identity based reasons to use spaces of their sex, third spaces and gender neutral spaces so that they can access society and resources and facilities within their identity choice.
There is an expectation that no one - including on the basis of their identity choices - should be without facilities or resources or services.

It's all there. That is the middle ground. The only possible middle ground. Many would say the fictionalisation of documentation was a highly silly idea with lasting consequences and issues. Many would say that the going over and above the law is expensive and generous and indulgent, and right there is the 'respect' women haven't had in the years men have been breaking the law. No one was worried about whether those women had alternative provision. Come and see the sexism inherent in the system. A man remains more valuable than a large number of women, whatever his pronouns are.

So all, in fact, that is being bickered and whinged about is NOT oh go on let's have middle ground, it's plainly 'how many rights can we get off women (and gay people) so their legal protections and equality are reduced, in order to provide greater convenience in a small number of men with very varied and questionable agendas in using them against their consent'. That's an exceptionally grim agenda to have.

The law has confirmed: women and gay people have rights too. And that some find this really inconvenient demonstrates precisely why they are needed.

And NO-ONE ever considered women important enough to ASK us if we consented to having our spaces, services and language used for men who claim they are women.

Not one single solitary thought for women at all, it was all about the men and their wishes and wants as per fucking usual, women weren't even an afterthought women weren't thought of full stop.

Absolute NO to any men in any space, service, sports, etc., for women and absolute NO to using the language for women or description women for men.

Still a man who thinks 'female' is a performance, not a biological class.

A man who doesn't have understand or care about the effects of permitting men - whoever they are, however they behave - in women's spaces.

They have to be women to understand why we don’t want them in our spaces. Because they’re men, they will NEVER understand!

I agree with you on each point.

Just to add further to the one but last point, regarding non binary identities, I can't help but feel some girls are wanting to opt out of being female, because of the way men and boys behave towards them, the way society is, and porn related stuff, and so they choose a non binary identity. Of course this changes nothing and they remain female.

I must admit, back in the long ago day, when I was a young girl, if I thought I could opt out of being female and become non binary to escape what I saw lying ahead in wait for me, I'd have naively done the same.

A male person who chooses to have extreme body modification is still a male person, just one with extreme body modifications. They are never female and never either a girl or a woman.

It is not the majority view that some male people should access female single sex provisions. And removing body parts does not remove the risk of either physical harm that that male person may inflict on a female person, nor are female single sex provisions only there to protect from physical attack.

A ‘moderate’ person who advocates for a solution that still allows higher risk for female people is not advocating for the best options for female people. No matter how they like to argue that they are moderate.

Why the fuck should society accept a solution that has a higher risk to female people? What is moderate about advocating for a situation that allows that higher risk?

What is moderate about ignoring female people’s lack of consent?

And for this ‘both sides are extreme’ to work, there needs to be symmetry. There is a world of assymetry between the threats and intimidation male people with transgender identities deliver in person and via social media and the things feminists might say.

There is no symmetry between male people protesting and demanding cancellation of feminist events compared to the reaction of feminists to their events.

There is no symmetry between the demand for total compliance of society to act as if some male people become female people and the solutions suggested by feminists.

This argument that there are these ‘extremes’ completely misrepresents the arguments and the actions. And yet it seems to provide comfort to people who advocate for allowing female people to not be as protected from potential harm as possible.

If I remember correctly, Wu has said some very fucked up stuff about female people who refuse to comply with his demand to be treated as if his constructed subjective reality is the material reality.

He is a misogynist and is one who proudly ignores female people’s needs.

Being a woman is not some male person’s reward for ‘hard work’, nor a safety zone for some male person’s personal discomfort in their own perception of himself.

It is also fucked up to encourage, through reward of access to female single sex provisions and female language, male people to undergo extreme body modifications.

Unfortunately, Wu is not reasonable. Wu pretends to be reasonable by offering up for sacrifice the 'rights' of trans people who are not him.

For example, he is happy to see natal females denied medicalisation, but not natal males like him. He is happy to see more overt AGPs banned from women's toilets, but not more successfully feminised males like him. He is happy to mock and insult the inadequate results provided by phalloplasty but not to tolerate any perceived insult to his vaginoplasty.

Wu is intensely misogynistic, aggressive and entitled. When asked why he couldn't use a gender neutral toilet he said something along the lines of, why should I be forced to do that because of some bigots.

Wu expects to make no sacrifice - his 'right' to oestrogen, experimental surgeries, female only facilities etc. are never up for discussion. He is always more than happy to throw 'trans men' (women) under the bus though.

He blames all of the issues faced by trans people on trans-identified women and girls, saying they are responsible for him losing rights. He never focuses such ire on the sex pests that overwhelmingly make up trans-identified men.

I remember him saying how beautiful women are nice to him because they aren't threatened by him, whereas all the women who disagree with him are homely and ugly. Paraphrasing as I can't remember the exact tweet.

There is no reasonable transactivist. It's a contradiction in terms.