Reflections on trans presence at a Dykes Who Hike event

But there was support. TRA phoned the venues and threatened the venues. So again, why are some groups allowed to determine who they want in the group and some are not? In Australia a TIM took the founder of an app for females only to court because he was banned for being male. So no, women are nit allowed their own spaces so why should LGBTQ people be allowed their own spaces?

But if the OP identifies as a lesbian surely the group is for her?? You seem very gatekeepy

Why are you acting surprised to hear that? You know full well that is the case. This faux outrage is bizarre. This part of MN literally exists because some people essentally believe this.

If I was vocally GC and part of the "movement", as it were, I'd be very public about criticising anyone who did this kind of thing in the name of "women's rights" or whatever. It just seems like antagonistic anx quite creepy behaviour, speculating on people's motiviations and desires for attending a hiking group of all things and then "assessing" how they behave when you sre the new person to that environment.

For all OP knew, the trans people are regulars who everyone knows like to keep to themselves but enjoy the presence of others. People walk for different reasons and in different ways.

It didn't use that sort of terminology though, did it. It used the word 'dyke' which is a word which originates in radical feminist circles and is strongly suggestive of lesbian only spaces and activities.

Perhaps it should have been named 'Queer hike' for all those that 'identify as' 'queer' or as LGBTQ+?

We’re not just talking about this group. Do try to keep up dear.

Well in this case, the group make it clear that TW are more welcome than GC women, so it would be the OP turning up somewhere she knew wasn't for people like her.

Well in this case, the group make it clear that TW are more welcome than GC women, so it would be the OP turning up somewhere she knew wasn't for people like her.

I am not comfortable with this. After I was assaulted my therapist suggested joining an all women's social group to help me get out more without getting constantly triggered.

A women's walking group would be ideal, but just don't exist as far as I know.

When those who are visibly men join women's groups that's gone.

It's also extremely self centred of them. They could join an LGBT or mixed group of which there are plenty.

I don't claim I always know who is a trans woman. If it was someone not obvious I wouldn't necessarily care especially if they were there with someone else. It's those thinking they have the right to be there who are the issue.

Oh like when TIM use women’s spaces inappropriately? Gotcha.

So you’d be ok if people who did not have a trans identity joined groups specifically set up for transpeople? If not, why not?

Youre telling me some knobheads believewomen who have been raped by men don’t need and deserve single sex spaces away from men? Surely only the nastiest, most woman hating misogynists would believe that. If all the other RcCC are inclusive of men, why does it matter if this one exists? Why do the TRA attack it on a daily basis and abuse the staff? What possible benefit would they get out of it closing?

Straight women are known for using queer spaces inappropriately. I'd not assume they were all definitely attracted to other women.

Because a lot of people disagree with the need for such spaces to be separated by biological sex. That's obvious.

Well you’d hopefully believe that all the women were L or B, otherwise wouldn’t it be straight people inserting themselves in groups not for them….

It’s not just the hiking group is it? It seems to be any group where women want single sex groups. Look at Bieras place, the only single sex rape crisis centre in Edinburgh. It gets hate on a daily basis as it won’t let TIM in. Even though nearly every other RCC in Edinburgh will let them in. Why is that do you think?

It's a group that uses Dyke in its title, but is openly inclusive of trans and NB people. The OP attaneded and then speculated on the interactions between the 5-6 trans women they identified and the other attendees that they identified as "lesbians" and presumably biological women.

I’m not sure that I follow all this.

Were these men saying that they were lesbians?

I’m a biological female but I’m straight, so there’s no way I’d impose myself on a lesbian group.

They do. That's why the hiking group for bio women is nearly dead and this inclusive one is so popular. Nobody wants to be at the GC one.

But how do you know those women are what you call biological women? I mean, if biology doesn’t determine what a woman is then…

So if they’re not very popular, why are TIM so determined to get in? Why don’t they just pop off to the inclusive places and leave the spaces that done want them alone?

Because so many biological women are more interested in including trans women in their spaces becauae they believe they are women. That's why events that exclude trans women are not very popular. Especially, it seems, events that are aimed at gay or bi women but exclude trans women. I'm sure you could get one going which was for heterosexual married women who don't want to share space with trans women but then "dyke" definitely wouldn't be fitting.

It sounds like they have a great turn out of mostly biological women with their inclusive policy. Why would they change that?
.

Well youre the one saying you’d never date a TIF because you don’t see them as men. If you saw them as men, you wouldnt automatically discount them would you? Seems pretty TERF like behaviour. Tut tut.
we have TRA saying lesbians are transphobic for not dating TIM so you saying you’d never date a TIF because you’re. Heterosexual woman… well… I don’t make the rules….