Do I have a right to be angry about this? (Trans related)

[Nc109283485]

Nc for obvious reasons. This is a very personal issue to me which I am understandably sensitive about, so this may be why I feel this way. I am perfectly happy to be told I AMBU! I believe trans people deserve love and respect and a happy life just like everyone else. So why did this concern and anger me?

I have a condition called vaginismus which has been very traumatic and caused me lots of grief over my life. In my eyes it is a very personal and female problem. (Look if up if you're not sure what it is).

I have tried to join a support group on a social media platform to really get to the bottom of it and sort it out. I wont say which one as dont want to 'out' either myself or the group involved. My request was pending and a message sent. I assumed this was to confirm I definitely suffer from this condition and to make sure I wasn't some strange pervert, but no! The administrator messaged me to say that before I was accepted I would have to answer a 'test question' as this is a gender inclusive group. Will I be addressing group members as 'ladies, men or everyone'. The tone felt quite aggressive and if I did not pass this test I would not be admitted.

My first thought was are men allowed to enter this group? Do I really have to speak about my vagina in front of 'everyone'? Why not say hello ladies (and the occasional transman who currently has issues with their vagina) no I have to address everyone? Wtf?

I honestly don't know what to think right now but this group clearly isn't for me. But maybe I just need some re-education?

It has been explained to you that neutral language is harmful when it comes to medical issues. You completely ignore that. The only reason you want 'neutral' language is because men are changing all the words and you want to bend for them. Despite how harmful and dangerous that is. You'd rather change to 'neutral language' to appease men, than stick to tried, true and appropriate gender language

Its always the same. Someone says something will never happen. Examples/proof posted that it does and then ots just ignored or theres a gazillion reasons why that particular example doesn't count. Of it doesn't come from one exact source at an exact time and comply with ever changing goal posts jts discounted .

Even mermaids now say that its not being in the wrong body, its not stereotypes types a gender dysphoria or any form of transition are not a requirement of being trans. Its actually transphobic to assume they hate their bodies.

So

We are meant to bend over backwards to appease people who not only hate us but are perfectly happy to live their lives in their own bodies and want to change our language and remove our rights.

Why?

I mean why would anyone do that? I dont believe that someone really is happy losing their very definition of who they are and be considered nothing more than the owner of cervix. Stop pretending that you would be happy to tick a box on am.aplication form that just said bleeder.

I do not believe you.

Especially as men get to keep their words.

Its only one way

Men have oppressed women for centuries. In some counties women aren't even allowed to tell people their names, receive medical treatment without the consent of a man akd are thrown in jail for protesting having to cover up.

So let's not start handing over our words to appease people who wouldn't piss on us if we were on fire and we are volunteering to hide the effects of their actions by hiding who it's happening to witg neutral.languafe . Its not progressive its plain stupid and makes you complicit in your own oppression and dehumanisation

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-asia-53436335

So progressive

@Whatwouldscullydo hear hear!!

It's never penis owners, mxn, ejaculators is it? Men wouldn't stand for it, and they know it. They know who to target.

Organisations who engage in this sort of thing get ratioed to fuck on twitter with complaints and they carry on. Because they know who's complaining. Women. And they couldn't give a shit. Some of them probably can't believe their luck they get to show such outright contempt for women and get applauded for it.

I never said someone should be forced to transition but that if they don't have the operation they are not actually 'trans', self-ID is not the same. If someone truly didn't want to be the gender they were at birth, barring ill-health that would prevent an operation, regardless of the cost of it they would move heaven, earth, solar systems and everything in between to get the operation. If they were truly that unhappy with the body they had been born in, they would. Not having it is like having a bet each way, especially if it is a transwoman who wants to keep the male privilege (and there have been examples given on this site of men saying they wouldn't have the op as for career, lifestyle, status etc they would lose privileges). If they genuinely are traumatised by being born in that body, short of ill health and needing to save up for the operation, they would have it.

Id tell that to the police, the schools , sporting bodies etc because as far as they are concerned as per their stonewall/mermaids training anyone who says they are trans is trabs. Even though there's no definition of whT trans is because its not stereotypes its not the wrong body and they haven't defined what a gender identity is without resorting to the 2 things it apparently isn't yet either.

if everything was a bit more neutral, especially as the world moves to work more remotely, people will be seen on their merits and not based on stereotypical assumptions and be negatively impacted by that.

Hiding an issue in gender neutrality does not fix the issue at all. Anyone who truly believes this is somewhat misguided. It merely brings its own set of issues. It is far better to fix the discrimination at the source and continue to work for women’s and children’s safety and opportunities than to couch it in gender neutral terms that then obfuscate those issues.

I take it then peopel are absolutely fine with, for transwomen to take up positions and roles allocated to females as an attempt to ensure females have some say on their plight. Plus equal participation after millennia of discrimination. That’s ok then?

It is far better to fix the discrimination at the source and continue to work for women’s and children’s safety and opportunities than to couch it in gender neutral terms that then obfuscate those issues

Exactly.

I don't understand how someone could be happy to have the fact they are paid less than their male colleagues for the same job hidden by the fact that words now have different meanings amd the salaries of males can be entered in a different column and the problems completely hidden from view.

It is actually bizarre to think that merely adopting neutral names and terms fix any systemic discrimination. It is called denial, I think.

We will however get diverted back to the group and a greeting in the discussion as no one will admit that neutral language and changing the meaning of words actually can be damaging and dangerous.

The dishonesty is breathtaking.

I haven't got the time, or, quite frankly, the inclination to go into this today.

People complain that nobody comes onto this site and answers the questions you ask, I spent a huge part of yesterday doing so. I answered everything, bar the one question I didn't feel able to speak about with any certainty.

I was then accused of being threatening, and racist and misogynistic.

You people are behaving the exact way that you say you hate so much.

I come in to have a reasonable discussion, you don't agree with what I have to say, and try and shut me down with accusations.

You don't have to agree with what I'm saying just as I don't agree with a lot of what you're saying, but you don't have to resort to lies about me.

We can all give instances of one person doing this, that or the next thing, there is bad in all walks of life, those people will do bad things regardless. I could give millions of links of women giving false accusations,, women murdering people, women abusing their husbands etc, it doesn't mean its anything like all women at all, it means there are some who are awful human beings and should be dealt with accordingly. It doesn't mean that the fact they are criminals needs to have an impact on the rest of the population.

I'll leave you to pick apart what I have said now and accuse me of goodness knows what else. Have fun.

That one question was the very topic of the thread.

Is neutral language polite and kind or does it have the potential to be dangerous ajd offensive.

You voted for one and made up an excuse to not have to acknowledge the other.

We can all give instances of one person doing this, that or the next thing, there is bad in all walks of life, those people will do bad things regardless. I could give millions of links of women giving false accusations,, women murdering people, women abusing their husbands etc, it doesn't mean its anything like all women at all, it means there are some who are awful human beings and should be dealt with accordingly. It doesn't mean that the fact they are criminals needs to have an impact on the rest of the population

Completely irrelevant whataboutery.

@DifficultPifcultLemonDifficult Again, we make rules based on risk assessment and common sense. Most men are not paedophiles, that does not mean we ignore the possible "impact on the rest of the population." and allow men in children's change rooms. This has been pointed out to you before, yet like most other points, you ignored it, side-stepped it and then changed the topic. Your whataboutery is not only desperate flailing about, but in a paradoxical way it actually backs up our argument.

I answered everything, bar the one question I didn't feel able to speak about with any certainty.

But you never addressed the fundamental questions, did you? And even when several people pointed out to you that your proposal for neutral language literally made no sense, you didn't counteract that with any reasons, your argument is just "my opinion is valid, everyone's opinion is valid". Your opinion is totally divorced from reality though. I can only guess that you must be very young if you have not been forced, in real life, to see how everyone (and especially women) sooner or later have to deal with material reality, including harm perpetrated against them. Unfortunately, just changing words without changing structural inequality doesn't help anyone. If only!

Its not even just one person is it.

Lush told customers they would be asked to leave if they wore a t shirt with the dictionary definition of woman on.

Ocado removed the board witg the same

Many well known brands of pads and tampons refuse to use the word woman and refer to cervix havers or menstruators

News articles are written In.ways that make the numbers impossible to follow

Planned parent hood refer to "people who have/need abortions"

Body shop were at it to.

How many vompanies/organisations have to start calling women and girls cervix havers, menstruaters, people who bleed, bleeders, people who menstruate ,.people with a cervix, black.birthing bodies, pregnant people etc befire we are allowed to admit there might be a problem.with writing women out of their own suffering ?

One person indeed

And here they are once again with the vexatious reporting and silencing, @Ereshkigalangcleg . And right on time. It's very predictable isn't it? You can even time it. If anything, it only re-enforces our point that they are attempting to silence women. On this site, I've had to take to copying and saving my posts and rephrasing if I have to.

Yes, it's extremely predictable.

I guess within the oppsing view a suggestion could be that boundries within the neutral language are set. Fir instance when discussing healthcare, crime, discrimination etc that clear and precise language matters. And no reducing to body parts/functions.

I mean personally I'm not sure how that would work in the sense that once you hand over the ability to alter/direct conversation and facts, you then have no control over what happenes next and how far it goes. We have seen first hand many a time how confusing it can get when no one is sure what is being spoken about.