WIBU to ask MNers who think Trans Women are 'Chicks With Dicks' to ...

[KKCupCakes]

Take a look at this article about supporting families of Transgender people by the Gires.org.uk Website to see why that view is so utterly incorrect and harmful?
www.gires.org.uk/assets/supporting-families.pdf

:)

Woodheaven -- I suspect they do not fully transition via surgery because what they actually want to do is escape from current gender norms for men. They don't really 'feel like a woman'. I suspect they just don't want to look or act like what the people they perceive as men do, going about their lives, dressed and acting like men.

I do think the issue of women who look like men is part of the same argument. We have become prisoners of our appearances. Over the last century, women have defied the reliance on appearance as a means of self presentation, but men have not. The solution is not for transwomen to insist they are women and insist that there are 'cis' women and trans women, in order to broaden the category to include themselves. The solution is to be able to look like a woman or dress like a woman and still identify as a man. Or look like a man, dress like a man, etc. and still be a woman.

....
Itsbetterthanabox --
Whose confusion does the term cis help with? The majority of people are not one bit confused and are perfectly happy to call themselves 'men' or 'women'. The term cis is used as a means of redefining everybody to suit the interests of a very small group of people who are intent on redefining themselves.

The fact that this thread even exists bothers me. Haven't we got enough issues to talk about that actually concern the majority of women?

And yes, people can fuck right off with this 'cis' business. I'm a woman. Call yourself whatever you like, I don't care.

Your post is the first mention of "Chicks With Dicks" on mn I am aware of. I won't read and dissect 9 pages of a pdf on a topic not particularly high on my agenda.

I see this transgender stuff all over the place, and have watched documentaries on it and did quite avidly follow all the media coverage when Bruce made his transition to Caitlin... And I'm very much of the belief that whatever makes someone comfortable, I am happy to go along with. It's none of the general publics business what is really in your underwear, it's only our job to remain respectful of whoever a person is when interacting with them.
BUT I've not read anyone use that term here, and I doubt that it's been used on this forum... That sounds more like something found off pornhub! Which is a derogatory industry regardless of sexual identity.
I don't see the point in posting like you did, unless there was a post up where people were out to be rude about transgender people.

Whenever I see these trans threads I feel the same as someone above.
What I would like is statistics. We know 50% of the UK is female and most of us suffer awful every day sexism almost every day and all the other disadvantage of our sex so that's about 30m people suffering.

How many trans people are there in the UK?
That does not mean I would ever want to stifle debate and I always think it's particularly interesting to hear from people who are different from we are and learn and learn what words are acceptable and which ones upset people so the threads can be useful but it would be great if we had a computer programme which would monitor those threads and see if non trans women are drowned out - there does seem to be a bit of a male feel about how some of the debates go - it feels like you are in the usual place on line where men post and are so vociferous they stop you posting because you can hardly get a word in edgeways. It feels a bit like I felt in defence of Proudman on many a thread dominated by men.

I had a thought. In the world of six million different types of "privilege", some people may say that there is already a word for the privilege of your inner thoughts matching your outer 'expression', or your brain matching your body, or however else you want to describe it.
It comes under mental health privilege, and i will gladly share my place in that category.

I just wonder if people realise twitter isn't real life.

All this cis, trans, feminazi, they're blocking our voices, they're being platformingitis or whatever the buggery seems to occur there.

Wandering along in the actual real where I can touch people world there appears to be none of it. There's Bob and Sue snd quite frankly I'm not sure what is in either of their pants and don't care as long as they in themselves aren't a prat.

silver I am not sure what you are on about, the gender recognition act is very real and men being put in women's prisons is real.

Going back to the thread title, and the OP's request - which makes it look as though all MNers think that transwomen are "chicks with dicks". This is a misreading - or emotional response maybe? - to another thread (so this whole thread is a TAAT?) In that thread, I've done a search - I believe in research & data. On the thread in qusrtion, ther is ONE use of that awful phrase "C with D" by a poster who is actually very supportive of transwomen. S/he writes:

Many of the examples on that male priviledge thread will be utterly denied to Tara and co. Getting to be CEO , getting good treatment from mechanics etc - Tara and team ain't getting that just a level of abuse and prejudice reserved for those people view as 'chicks with dicks ' or other such abhorrent terms

So the poster on the other thread is making an assumption about other posters which is rhetorical (and inaccurate, but let that go). That post is the ONLY post with the objectionable phrase, and it's used in support of transwomen and transactivists.

Then the OP on this thread uses the objectionable phrase to set up a rhetorical position AS IF any MNer who is questioning the attack on hard-won women's rights by transactivists is calling transwomen "C with D" I really hate typing the full phrase it's awful on so many counts

This is the way inaccurate and emotional reading gets turned into so-called "fact."

So I just thought I'd inject some actual data into the discussion.

And also - we should all report ourselves: this is a TAAT.

It was an emotional response - kkcc posted in anger on the tara thread, saying that her partner is a transwoman, then about ten mins later started this thread, then disappeared.

This thread is ace. A much needed oasis of sanity and balance. Thank you, bright women of MN.

Ps it's the quick chick block stack that gets me every time.

Wtf is a quick chick block stack?! Do i want to know?

Well at the risk of being deplatformed, misgendered or indeed deadnamed...

It's a tongue twister from the marvellous Dr Seuss :)

The PDF link in the OP, is just WRONG

Ive only read the first 2 paragraphs. It states that male and female sex people have different brains. They dont.

It says that being male or female depends on sex, gender identity and gender role. No, male and female are a label of bilogical sex

It says that for most people gender identity and gender role align. That it a crock of shit. And also isn't even what most TG people argue. The argument is generally that, gender identity doesnt align with sex

You have to at least start with a logical and consistent case. Its so tedious

Here is an article about the lack of difference between male and female brains. As you say Shortcut it does somewhat negate the link posted by the OP.

MN is indeed an oasis of sanity in what seems to be a world gone mad. The comments under any Guardian article on the issue mostly seem to state that transwomen simply are women, and always have been, just in the wrong body, and to question that in any way makes you hateful and a bigot.

Which, as someone who believes gender is a social construct that women don't fare well out of, leaves me with nowhere to go really.

I think the problem lies with defining masculinity and perhaps those ultra-masculine men who dislike anyone other than themselves. Thankfully, they are the minority.

If you tackle this kind of thinking it would:

1. Allow women freedom from male aggression (be them straight/gay or in the process of a gender change)
2. Allow men who wish to to live a more female lifestyle/any lifestyle other than that of the male aggressor
3. Allow men who chose to reduce their penis size/have an operation and/or have hormonal treatment freedom from male aggression
4. Allow children freedom from male aggression.

Why not concentrate on the aggressors who make everyone else's lives a misery? They are the sexual aggressors, the ones who are violent to men and women alike. They are the problem. And I would put Tara Hudson in the category of a male aggressor because she still has a penis and is aggressive (long list of violent crimes). If she doesn't want to go to a male prison then she should stop behaving like an aggressive male.

They are important issues to debate. I like mnoey, control power and beating others and getting to the top. I am female. Those are human values for many of us and yet if women are like that some people call us male. So certainly plenty of women have much to gain from debates about these topics just as "working fathers" have much to gain from being recognised as people with responsibilities tio children who may need to go home on time to collect children from nursery etc. The gender stereotypes are what many of us are keen to challenge.

"just in the wrong body"

What does that mean, though?

Has anyone proven the existence of souls? And are we now believing that God sometimes makes a mistake and puts a male soul into a female body and vice versa?

Are we also to believe that a schizophrenic who believes he is from Planet Zorg is just an alien born into the wrong (human) body?

Is a man with species dysphoria just a lion born into the wrong (human) body?

If not, why not?

And to believe that people are 'born in the wrong body', you need to believe that people have souls independent of their physical body...at which point of gestation do the souls get deposited in the bodies?

Its all so illogical and irrational

Didn't realise it was TAAT....

The majority of people regardless of sex want to get on and live a happy life. It's the aggressive people that want to control/demean people be they man woman child whatever. This is what needs to change. Then we'll be free to be what we want to be, so long as we are considerate and kind to eachother.

Just to add in - "chick with a dick" - never heard any reference on MN but it's the title of a song in The Jerry Springer Opera".

I've read the whole thread and agree with Cote and NoodleEatingPoodle and others. I'm not "cis", but a "woman"; and I don't get the whole "identity" thing - I identify as me, not as an example of womankind or anything related to my gender specifically. I happen to be a woman but my identity is not fixated around the hub of being one (although aspects of it are - childbearing and rearing, in particular).