to think that Ian Huntley is most definitely not a woman?

[ATeardropExplodes]

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/15/call-lian-child-killer-ian-huntley-has-told-inmates-call-feminine/

If anyone has any evidence to convince me otherwise please do enlighten me, thanks in advance.

yes I think there are spaces that should be sex-segregated. Depends on the space and what the reasons for the split are

@JAPAB so you accept that transwomen are biologically male and remain of the male sex?

I ask because there’s some post truth shit on twitter about how transwomen are actually biologically female.

McTufty I believe they have an XY chromosome. but then so do they. Sounds like this twitter stuff is just about labelling.

JAPAB, the minute you accept, on faith, that a man is a woman, you prevent any women-only spaces being kept for biological women.

So any man who self-declares himself to be a woman can access women's spaces (including prisons), work in social care with vulnerable women, demand a space in a women's refuge/rape support group, compete in women's sport.

That is why it is important that we don't accept a man can be a woman ever, no matter what he feels.

I'm sure as a man you wouldn't want to trample on women's rights would you? You know, vulnerable women, women who have no choice but to live "as women" and who are having a bit of a shit time of it at the moment because of men.

I'm also sure that as a man you don't feel qualified to tell women what they should feel, think or call themselves.

Or do you?

Utter idiocy.

No, an individual wanting something and wishing it to be so is NOT the ultimate arbiter of fact and truth. It is tough and you might think it’s unfair, but that is how it is. Stop trying to get all of the world to revolve around you and your wishes. You are not the king of the universe and your wants do not trump those of everyone else and more importantly, your deluded made-up version of ‘reality’ does not actually exist. You will not win, you will not subjugate me and an entire sex with your destructive agenda.

Twitter may be about "labelling" but this labelling is carrying on into real life.

A man can label himself a woman (do nothing else, no legal name change, no physical transition) and become a women's officer, a position that is designated to be for women. A boy can declare himself a girl and win girls' races and access university sports scholarships to women's teams.

Labelling isn't harmless.

@japab thanks for the response, I suppose I’m wondering if you agree with certain things being segregated on the basis of sex, as opposed to gender, means that transwomen would not be able to access those sex segregated spaces because they are of the male sex.

I'm also sure that as a man you don't feel qualified to tell women what they should feel, think or call themselves.

Nope, wouldn't tell anyone what to think or feel or call themselves. Tempted to point out that you are the one more likely to tell someone what they can or can't call themself.

I'm sure as a man you wouldn't want to trample on women's rights would you?

No, which is why, if the situation warrants it, some spaces should be formalised as being for a particular sex, say XX females. And not for the men or women with an XY chromosome.

People on here are often shocked that a man would want to do personal care, there have instances where an OP has questioned men doing childcare including nappy changing etc. But if they turn up in a dress and make up, that is supposed to be less worrying than if they were in trousers and a shirt.

What is it about this that makes it less worrying for some people? When many men specifically wear women's clothes for the sexual thrill?

No, which is why, if the situation warrants it, some spaces should be formalised as being for a particular sex, say XX females. And not for the men or women with an XY chromosome

But not prisons?

Tempted to point out that you are the one more likely to tell someone what they can or can't call themself. No, do point it out! As often as you like.

Then we can repeat why, sometimes, a man wanting to be called a woman seems to have the need to ensure that women, the biological kind, must then be re-labelled - cis or some such crap.

Further we can explain again that we don't want to be redefined. We are women. Let the men who wish to live as women pick a new name for themselves. Woman is already in use.

Your oh so clever point wasn't well enough thought through!

You do realise that post makes you a TERF, JAPAB? It's transphobic to suggest that there is any difference between a woman of the XX type and other women.

I'm certainly not telling anyone what to call themselves. I'm objecting to them insisting I can't call myself a woman (meaning adult human female) as women have done for centuries. I either have to call myself a cis-woman, or a redefined woman - meaning "anyone who thinks they are a woman" (circular I know, but hey-ho that seems to be a non-issue these days ).

I find that insulting.

Exactly Curious, well put.

I've only just discovered MN and I love it (it's ace!). But I've noticed a lot of transphobia while lurking about various sections and it's putting me off a wee bit. Why all the transphobic comments?

(I have no opinion on the Huntley thing - I don't know enough about the circumstances)

Where are the transphobic comments, Fabala?

Feel free to report them. They will be deleted.

fyi, saying a man is not a woman is not transphobic.

It's not remotely transphobic to point out that men in dresses are not women.

Sorry I asked!

steps away slowly

Fab what’s wrong with the reply’s you’ve had?

You asked a question, 2 people answered it. What’s the issue?

But I've noticed a lot of transphobia while lurking about various sections and it's putting me off a wee bit. Why all the transphobic comments? As others have said, use the report button and if they are transphobic they will be deleted.

But can I suggest you go back and read the comments on this thread again? Like myself many posters have clearly explained their position regarding trans men and women. No one has said anything phobic though a couple have made that accusation, one at even have snipped a few words out of context to make their point. But there is no trans phobia.

What there most definitely is is a very robust rebuttal of the assumption that biological women will acquiesce in the reframing of what it is to be female. Given that that reframing revolves around a complete 'othering' of the biological status of being female I am not sure there can be any lucid argument against women making that point plainly, repetitively.

Except that when they do they get told, by 'not women' to get back in their cis or TERF boxes and to shut up - sometimes with violence and increasingly with legal backing.

If being scared that your natural, biological female state is being written out of existence is trans phobic then I suspect EVERY SINGLE WOMAN in the world is trans phobic!

But, if you think that having your core identity being redefined to exclude you is a normal reaction to such a weird behaviour then I am sure you will begin to see that there is very little real trans phobia here. Just the same old objection to rampant misogyny!

The issue is whether the "men in dresses" comment is aimed at transwomen (if so, that's fairly shocking)

Don’t be sorry you asked. But maybe think about why you felt the need to label it transphobia. It is not by any stretch phobic (a grossly overused term nowadays, in all manner of situations) to be clear and direct about the very real facts of biology, nor is it phobic to vehemently oppose an ideology that poses a very real and concrete threat to women’s rights and protections. It is a topic that needs more and more discussion and one which demands an urgent and decisive campaign to push back against it. We are sleepwalking into a very dangerous situation for women and girls.

The issue is whether the "men in dresses" comment is aimed at transwomen (if so, that's fairly shocking) Who said that, in what context?

I'll have a read back...

Why all the transphobic comments?

Where and what are the transphobic comments?

If by saying a person with a penis is not a woman is transphobic then I think we need to question the meaning of the word transphobic.
I am not afraid of transpeople, I have transpeople in my friends and family. I will call someone the name and pronoun of their choosing.

What I will not say though is that someone with a penis is a woman, sorry but the word woman is already taken. Us people with vaginas are using it.

Are you talking about labelling women as cis, Curious?

I understand your arguments, but in my daily life I prefer not to discriminate against women and men who are trans (I imagine they've had to deal with a lot of shit in life as it is). I've got mates who are trans and I don't think they're pretending to be women to bullshit their way into having some kind of dubious privilege which doesn't exist (and the whole bathroom prurience thing just ugh)

The issue is whether the "men in dresses" comment is aimed at transwomen (if so, that's fairly shocking)

Comments about 'men in dresses' tend to be about people like IH and the worry that a man can put on a dress, announce that they are called Susan and access everything that women have fought for, including the right to be kept safe from certain men.

I read the thread on Twitter today about a woman who was grabbed in the crotch in public. The police weren't interested and even when they questioned the two men one just said that it didn't happen.
I suspect that had this happened to a trans woman the response would be very different as it would be seen as a hate crime rather than just the ordinary sexual assault that women just brush off every single fucking day.