To be angry and feel the Scottish Gov’s Twitter header is an attack on women?

[Badmoonsarising]

i’d like them to clarify exactly what their definition of “transphobic” is because it seems to have become a slur these days often aimed at anyone but mostly women who are critical of or question in any way the recent upsurge of identity politics. I just feel they’re doing a knee jerk, ignorant, unnecessary huge fuck you to women.

You want it to be too circular to be acceptable.

It isn't acceptable to anyone not mired in pomo batshittery. It's a silly "I use words to mean what I personally want them to, not the commonly understood meaning" gotcha.

And NOBODY is disputing that. Just some of us don't reduce us all to just body parts.

For the avoidance of doubt, what this poster claims is a straw man. Gender critical feminists do not reduce women to body parts. Like it or not, we are our body. But it shouldn't affect our lives any more than is biologically unavoidable.

Thats it. It says nothing at all about you as a person, or your thoughts, feelings or capabilities. It isnt a judgement, acheivement, limitation or constriction.

Exactly. It's strange that this simple progressive concept is proving too difficult to grasp for believers in gender ideology.

Its just biology

That's why I SAID IT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE THREAD COS THERE'S ONLY ONE WAY YOU'RE ALLOWED TO BE A WOMAN AND ONLY ONE WAY TO ANSWER
AND YES I'M SHOUTINGGGGG MAYBE IT MIGHT BE EASIER TO SEE THAT WAY

Rat has it right if she has to bugger off out, it is absolutely fucking batshit on these threads.
As I said, women, you're only ever your biology and there's nothing else.
EVEN THOUGH I SAID THERE IS FOR ME

NOT a straw man, people are LITERALLY saying women are their biology and there''s nothing else to being a woman.
It is THERE.

Bloody hell verbeena you get it!! Yes, whether you are a woman or man is just body parts

Wheeee, look there you go, there's just one of them.
Magic.

I mean seriously, this is basic observable stuff. You don't need a fucking study to open you eyes and SEE.

You are using the same explanation that a religious believer would use.

"We observe the presence of god in our lives"

There's nothing objectively observable that backs up in a compelling way the existence of innate gender identity.

Rat your arguments are all bluster and bombast. There is no substance.

Nah, you just flat out refuse to accept experiences outside of your own tunnel.
You'll never accept transwomen. We get it.
Which is why you can't or won't listen to anyone else.

I don't believe, in common with scientific consensus and most of the world's population, that it's possible to change sex.

I don't accept any males as women for that sole reason.

Got it yet?

We accept transwomen.

We just dont accept they are women.
Because they are not female.

And I will not have your personal unsupported faith based belief, or anyone else's, forced on me. Get that through your head.

You don't want there to maybe be something else, do you?
As that'd mean maybe having to reluctantly accept them.
That's why I get told it's just biology, nothing more. As you're closed off to the idea that FOR OTHERS there is something more as it'd mean validating transpeople.

We accept transwomen

How though? If you're saying they're not women?

As I said upthread, you do you. Nobody's forcing you to believe anything.
YOU though are dismissing other people, belittling, told their experiences are wrong, it is YOU AND OTHERS telling others there is only one way to woman.
Not me.

I do have spiritual beliefs. They are rational for me as an individual actor. I don't expect others to share them even if I muster up all my best anecdotal evidence. Because that's not a rational basis for someone without that experience to believe an empirical claim. My belief is faith based. Just like your belief in gender is.

My how though was a genuine question, btw, wasn't a sarky one. Genuinely curious by what you mean as you accept transwomen but that they are male.

Biological sex categories are only very very simple when you point blank refuse to acknowledge intersex,

Oh Rat...

They have no other argument but sophistry to prop up this flimsy framework, Datun. Either pomo or intersex based.

They should be treated with the same respect and have the same human right as all of us. They should not be subject to abuse, violence, or hate crimes.

I agree, however to return to the OP some clear definitions of what "hate crime" constitutes in this case are needed.

They should not be subject to abuse, violence, or hate crime

They are though, just because of being trans in the first place.

We accept transwomen.

Yes. I accept there are men with gender dysphoria, there are fetishistic transvestites, there are cross dressers and autogynephiles.

This notion that there is another reason to identify as a woman has no backing, anywhere. Including from transwomen themselves.

Debbie Hayton on the Matthew Wright show today, for instance. Knows full well they are male. And is happy to say it out loud.

Debbie wants to present as a woman, to alleviate the symptoms of gender dysphoria.

I have no idea where this peculiar idea has come from thet there is some kind of soul/essence that makes a woman, that a man has. It's laughable.

By saying that they're always male whatever they do you are denying their existence as a transwomen.
That's kind of what it means to not accept them.

We accept transwomen

Yes. I accept there are men with gender dysphoria, there are fetishistic transvestites, there are cross dressers and autogynephiles

How, how is that going from a yes in answer to we accept transwomen into yes I accept there are men with gender dysphoria etc?
That isn't even answering the question, what are you actually even talking about?