To ask why aibu is so anti-trans?

[BinkyBaa]

Just that really. I don't mean to be goady I've just noticed that when it comes up here, people seem more against it than other social circles I'm familiar with. I think I'm a bit out of the loop as to what the issue is.

And so we the men who attack women who question the ‘gender’ vs actual bio sex. And the police who don’t follow it up.

“Agree with you OP, it’s an absolute cesspit at times.”

Could you ignore the “cesspool” element, and discuss some of the valid points? Just ignore or report any awful posts.

Some people just won't compromise at all at any sniff of being treated less equally than others.

Except for women of course, whose sex based rights don't matter a shite apparently.

Agree with you OP, it’s an absolute cesspit at times.

Ah the old 'cesspit'. How original.

And bonus points for plopping that in without a single argument to back it up. Slow hand clap for you.

Nah, twitter is the cesspit/swamp.

"But why can't women just be nice? Why are those so mean to not want transwomen in women's single-sex spaces?"

Last night there was a meeting in Edinburgh to discuss women's based rights:

twitter.com/bindelj/status/1136402563379716096

If you scroll down you can get some more information. At the moment it seems Julie Bindel was physically attacked for the crime of saying "no" to transwomen.

twitter.com/thepotatofarmer/status/1136515647091945472

Oh! I hope ot was filmed and that the police are dealing with it appropriately!

Such a good way to protest violence... with your fists!

Actually, it seems that because there was security there, they were able to step in and prevent Jule Bindel from being physically assaulted.

But many women's single sex spaces won't have security to protect the women if someone like this Brennan person decides to march in.

Typical bloody female response eh?

There is a consistently hostile narrative on the FWR board regarding trans women in general.

That board is also openly hostile to any posters challenging a GC position.

Whether that’s true of AIBU at this time I’m not sure.

Certainly every time there is a sniff of an opportunity to get the hostile narrative out onto the more general boards you will see an influx of FWR GC adherents taking the opportunity to “peak trans” others.

The confirmation bias on FWR is entrenched.

Dissenting views are not tolerated there. It is a bigoted board in that sense. I don’t think that’s true of AIBU.

@WhoopDeFuckingDo - I am desperate for dissenting voices. If I ask questions will you answer them?

whoop most dissenting voices refuse to answer the most basic of questions like "what is a woman?" or "what does it mean to 'feel' like a woman?"

They refuse to answer then flounce off, ired that it's not a lovely lady feels place.

At the moment it seems Julie Bindel was physically attacked for the crime of saying "no" to transwomen

What unladylike behaviour.

what does it mean to 'feel' like a woman?"

This always intrigues me. How could a man know, if he’s not a woman?

I’m not even so bothered about the “feelings” thing any more. It’s the resolving of completely incompatible wants/needs/rights that needs to be addressed.

That board is also openly hostile to any posters challenging a GC position. You mean we asl questions like How do human bengs change sex? Or the really easy on what is a woman?

And we don't change our minds to agree with the wishy washy answers we occasionally get?

We don't 'play nice' and back down when told we are being nasty?

That we use words, not fists, to get our pint acorss?

Yes, that's truly nasty of us.

The confirmation bias on FWR is entrenched. I think you'll find that's just us knowing basic biology!

Nuaticant thanks for that! So he pushed at security guards to get his desired face to face with the evil doer that is Julie Bindle... and was soundly rebuffed. Great! But I do hope there is film of him trying to reach out to her... wonder why he didn't just go into the meeting and ask his questions there?

We can talk about what it feels like to be a woman over bottles of wine for the foreseeable. What we need-and quickly- is some proper discussion about crisis women’s spaces, crime reporting and women’s sport.

Are you suggesting that women’s rights, boundaries and consent are less important than that of the trans community.

In a word, yes. The TRA agenda is doing precisely this. It's also alienating those women among us who are broadly supportive of trans rights. But sometimes rights conflict. Assert your own rights in contravention of the trans-agenda, and you are instantly branded a 'transphobe' and debate is effectively shut down. (Which, incidentally, seems to be the general tone of the original post).

When it comes to the fraught complexity of definition involved, I don't object to using a transwoman's choice of female names and pronouns. This hurts no one. I don't object to the term 'cis' - said in understanding that a lot of posters here do and I respect their reasons for this - but it's generally used in specific contexts and I don't see it as a disavowal of women's general oppression. By the same token I find the denigration of the definition 'adult human female' hugely offensive: ditto 'chest-feeder' and worse still, 'cervix-haver'. Those terms are derogatory, misogynistic, and calculated to cause the deepest possible offence.

The whole narrative being pursued by the more strident trans-lobby is deeply misogynistic, and is harking back to the rhetoric used about women to keep us in our place all the way back to that temeritous 'hyena in a petticoat' Mary Wollstonecraft. Women are not a minority, but our experience is unique in that we have traditionally been treated as one, despite the fact that we number approximately one half of the human race. In that respect, our experience is already vastly different from that of transwomen.

Consistently parroting 'transwomen are women' is not only inaccurate, but to my mind it misses a point so huge it obscures the entirety of the view. And you can only do that if you're deliberately shutting your eyes to it. Transwomen are TRANSwomen. And there's nothing whatsoever wrong or shameful in that. So why not work toward a social acceptance of that fact - as LGBQ people have successfully done before them - as opposed to stampeding over women's rights or trying to obliterate the category of 'woman' altogether?

That's a given, I think Bertrand.

The problem arises instantly though. We sit down and start to talk and GC feminists mean human adult female, when we talk about the need for crisis women’s spaces, crime reporting and women’s sport.

Trans Activists do not.

So we could come to an accord very, very quickly, in mere seconds - women's spaces for women. But would leave with 2 extremely different ideas of what had actually been agreed.

That's why terminology s important. And why we haven't a hope in hell of any resolution in the near future without mainstream political backing.

And the annoying thing is most people, even the complainers on this thread, would agree that male rapists should not be in female prisons, that men identifying as women should not be in female sport, that a woman in a rape refuge has the right to expect a female counsellor and the right of a transwoman to counsel them does not trump their right to a female. And similar situations.

I suspect the disparity comes because these people don't necessarily say these things out loud.

As soon as you say these things out loud, which, indeed, almost everyone would agree to, you realise that you are a transphobic bigot who deserves everything they get.

It hardens your stance in a heartbeat.

JAPAB: Some people won't compromise on matters of discrimination or inequality. Barring some women from the women's pool is just that.

That is as neat an example of question-begging as I have seen in many a day. Thanks JAPAB.

[It may be obvious, but in case not: by 'question-begging' I mean the logical fallacy sometimes otherwise known as petitio principii, rather than the (unfortunate, to my mind) use of the phrase as a synonym for ' raising a question'.]

Are transwomen women? If not, barring them from the women's pool would not be discriminatory. Would it, JAPAB?

Some of us here on MN think transwomen are men. (Some of us think it obvious, but anyway, lots of us think it true.) So, to make your point, JAPAB you need to argue that transwomen are women. Otherwise your question-begging could seem (as question-begging, sometimes with conscious intent, can be) ... well, it could seem goady.

You seem not to have any arguments to the conclusion that transwomen are women, JAPAB. Am I wrong? Do you?

Well said Mariel . However I hate "cis" and I will never use it.

@marielvanarkelstinks : marvellously put. Thank you.

I too object to 'cis' and think where there is a contextual need to differentiate between transwomen and 'cis' women the terms 'Transwomen' and 'Woman' would do just fine.

But otherwise everything you said, a thousand times over

Dissenting views are not tolerated there. It is a bigoted board in that sense.

Please feel free to explain how a man who puts on a dress/says 'I am a woman', is automatically safer for women and girls than a man who doesn't.

Please we are desperate to know how this works.

Educate us.

mariel have you read this article re pronouns? Can't agree with you on that one.