Reflections on trans presence at a Dykes Who Hike event

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….

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?

No that's not how it works. You don't have to agree to have sex with someone to accept who they are. It's very sad that you think that.

I agree men with a body type I find unattractive are still men. I don't have to marry one and fuck him to prove that. So if I did believe trans men are men, why would I have to agree to have sex with one or partner with one to "prove" I see them as men?

It's a very infantile argument in all honesty.

Is this a case of GC people picking a trans inclusive group and joining just to attack it from within? Why else would someone GC join a group that says: "Walking group based in LDN for queer, bi, wlw girlies, trans and non-binary folk."?

You mean you wild never date a TIF? Why? If TIF are men then as a good trans ally surely you should include them in your dating pool? If not why not? I mean the fact you are clear you are heterosexual gives a clue, but isn’t that really a bit transphobic? Are you “ally in the streets, TERF in the sheets” as the saying goes?

Likely because the public do not support them so much that they want them cancelled and/or when they do go ahead, not enough people in that category are interested in attending an event they feel is not inclusive.

So basically, a lack of public support. Similar to why a white woman's group might not take off.

I think because said lesbians whp organise the event believe anyone who identifies as a woman or femme with primary attraction to women and femmes can self identify as a dyke if they so wish.

So it is because these lesbians believe TWAW, whether they'd date a TW or not. There are many people who I accept are men and I would never date despite being a heterosexual woman.

This is how the group has structured itself, find groups exclusive to biological women if you do not like it.

So LGBTQ groups get to determine who they want in their groups, but women are not? How does that work then? Weren’t lesbian groups in Brighton and London cancelled because they would not allow males in?

So why are they using “Dyke”? That is a term for a lesbian or a drainage ditch. I don’t think they’re campaigning for drainage ditches so why use dyke if the group is not just for female homosexuals? Is this another word the trans activists have co-opted to mean what they want it to mean?

This is totally irrelevant. The group is explicit about being inclusive of everyone LGBTQ. Someone who turns up knowing they have a problem with that is the issue here. I don't know why anyone who isn't a troublemaker would do that.

But this group was set up to include trans women so I'm really not sure how that's a fair comparison at all.

So basically open to all. I mean, there is no one definition of queer, so anyone can go. How can someone prove they are queer? Is there like a certificate or a badge? Why don’t they just say open to everybody?

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?

What group was set up for non-trans people? This hiking group is explicit that it is for everyone LGBTQ. It isn't just for homosexual biological women.

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?

They're quite explicitly inclusive so I'm not sure why you'd attend if you were bothered about it. I can't say I could get particularly worked up about trans women joining a hike and not doing anything wrong. Imagine keeping to themselves!

If 130 people went, it doesn’t appear too many are drifting away.

The question of social groups for women or lesbians is always going to be complicated.

Much easier to argue that men should be excluded when women are undressing or otherwise vulnerable.

It’s frustrating though, that so many men have been encouraged to join these groups as women who only want other women there no longer have that option, which is a step back, in social terms, for women.

An acquaintance (friend of a friend) described to a group of us her reaction on finding a man at her women’s guild meeting. She said it was immediately obvious there was a man there when she walked in (she heard him before she saw him). She said she was still trying to work out whether to use he or she.

She obviously assumed that she would be expected to just get on with it, and probably wouldn’t leave, but it obviously made her uncomfortable enough to mention it among friends several days afterwards.

There would be other women there who would react differently. I suspect there would be fawning from some and flight from others. It’s never neutral when there is a man among women because we all react differently to the opposite sex than we do to our own.

It’s very destructive for women and women’s spaces, despite the fact that many women tolerate it or even overcompensate. Eventually, those who don’t want men there will either drift away or the group will more actively split. We’ve seen this with WI groups that simply disbanded rather than exclude their pet men. And those who try to form women only groups will find themselves continually under attack, as part of the campaign is to wipe out women’s groups that don’t let men in.

Ultimately, women are losing out on women only groups and spaces. Whether they willingly accept that loss (like the organisers of this hike) or otherwise, it’s always women who have to give way.

They're quite explicitly inclusive so I'm not sure why you'd attend if you were bothered about it. I can't say I could get particularly worked up about trans women joining a hike and not doing anything wrong. Imagine keeping to themselves!

I'm a bit confused my this as the blurb for it says queer, wlw, trans and non binary. DWH seems to be open to all.

There's another group called Hiking Dykes which refers to being for biological females only.