That women should not be banned from Social Media for asking the question ( Thread 4)

[Langrycleg]

Many women have been suspended from sm for asking the question:

“Do you believe that male sexed people should be allowed access to changing rooms and showers for female sexed people and teenagers?”
Seems like a perfectly reasonable question which we should be allowed to ask.

Let’s vote with our AIBU.

CharlieParley

That's incredibly depressing. And entirely unsurprising. If they can ban Donald Trump, arguably the most powerful man in the world, they can ban anyone.

And they can do whatever suits their agenda. Oppressing women isn't exactly unusual.

I hope that governments grow a pair and start to force a bit of sensible regulation on social media.

I've also been banned from certain sites for stating biological reality, namely that a transwoman was complaining of having period pain, cramping, 'morning sickness' and every period symptom imaginable 'every month'. I simply asked what organ was actually cramping given that transwomen are biological men without a uterus. I was promptly thrown off.
Science and fact have no place in the debate it seems, and any attempt to remind some people of it results in complete shutdown of the conversation.

There is one thing I would hope for in your situation - since you mention there is continuing vulnerability around acceptance and rejection - is that a parent instils in their child the knowledge that while transphobia does exist, the vast majority of people who reject the claim that males can become female and females become male do not do so out of ignorance, bigotry or hate.

I'm afraid I don't think this is true and it's certainly not the impression most trans people get of the gender critical movement.

Firstly elements of the movement have been quite happy to stand alongside and work with open transphobes from the political religious right. These are people who think trans people are an abomination before God and deserve to burn in hell - that is literally what some of them think, that trans people deserve to be tortured for eternity. If you can stand alongside someone like that, if you can promote their organisations or give them feminist cover for their anti-trans activities then don't expect people to be sceptical if you calim not to be transphobic - you might not be but you are happy to tolerate it and propagate.

Secondly whilst it is claimed that many of the genuine concerns are rooted in the threat of male violence - in particular men accessing women's spaces, this seems to be a much more significant concern when it comes to trans people and not male identified males. There is no concern about male prison guards for example despite ample examples of horrifying abuse some of them have carried out. There is no pressure to ban male cleaners and maintenance workers from womens spaces, and yet it would surely be far easier for a man who wanted to abuse women to get a job as a toilet cleaner or caretaker, or pretend to be either, then pretend to be trans - and in fact some of the cases of hidden cameras that have emerged has been men doing exactly that. And whilst there may be those who are not keen on the idea of men becoming rape counsellor or training in women's healthcare, I've never seen anyone insinuate these men have some kind of sexual motive in the way I've seen it said of trans women in similar roles. I'm not denying that there are concerns about men, and with good reason, but it seems to me the concerns are often not just that someone might have been born physicially male but also that they are trans. That trans people, or trans women specifically are actually viewed as a greater threat than men which is why the FWR board spends far more time discussing the threat of the trans than the endemic male violence all women have to deal with everyday.

I think this is understandable and somewhat inevitable. There is a centuries old stigma against people born physically male who expressed any form of perceived femininty at all. For those of us a certain age we grew up in a culture awash with both transphobia and stigmatisation of feminine or effeminate men - and I don't mean just on TV or in films If Boy George had come into some of the pubs I started drinking in as a teenager he'd have been lucky to have made it out alive. That's the message society was giving out, that's what I learned, men who don't conform to the male gender deserve violence and will face violence. This is the legacy we are left with and I know myself I've had to battle the internalised transphobia it created within myself. I've seen very little self-reflection from GC activists on how this culture and social environment may have shaped their views and both conscious and unconscious prejudice - the attitude seems to be that just because some doesn't see themselves as a bigot or prejudiced then they can't possibly be that way - but it doesn't actually work that way.

Finally of course it's worth remembering that one of the foundational texts of gender critical feminism called for transsexuals to be morally mandated out of existence, and there are certainly those in the movement who still share that view. I suspect many GC people would really secretly just rather trans people didn't exist. Imagine how it feels to be told you should be morally mandated out of existence by one section of a political movement and then expected to believe there is no transphobia in that movement at the same time. I'm not a fan of using the phrase gas-lighting to describe situations outside of abusive personal relationships but surely that fits the bill.

It is not just the gender critical movement (?) that say changing sex isn't actually possible

Secondly it's pretty hard to say gc people say trans does not exist and simultaneously they want all trans people to die horribly .

I am gender critical,. I can see transgender people exist , I don't want people to die . I believe that if you managed to minimise gender then the vast majority of transgender people would not identify that way. That's not wanting them to disappear . It's just saying I can see a way that makes them happy with themselves without needing any medicalisation. Surely a good thing unless you are a pharmaceutical company ?

So my form of gender critical don't believe that transgender is innate but instead a response of the gendered and homophobic society

I have reached this conclusion based firstly on my own experience, backed up with studies that suggest homosexuality is innate but transgender isn't

Please don't misrepresent a group of people using generalised statements that are probable incorrect

That's terrible**@CharlieParley** and there are lots of ex-twitter users, mainly Women, with similar experiences.

After Linehan was banned there was a lot of talk of a 'cull' of gc posters on twitter and that seems to be being carried out - there is no leeway, if you dare to say TWAM and someone complains it's a ban. Or, a suspension where you are told you can be reinstated if you agree to delete any tweets with such 'offensive' content.

Rosie Duffield MP has been hounded on twitter, and trans activists in the Labour party regularly pop up to denounce her and call for Starmer to suspend the whip from her, because she said that 'only Women have a cervix'.

That wasn't my experience growing up at all.
I haven't read that text or heard that opinion about moral mandates expressed.
The majority of people who work in a field where others might be vulnerable are vetted. Interviews, DBS checks, references, training. That's safeguarding and it may not be infallible but it's there for a reason.

I suspect many GC people would really secretly just rather trans people didn't exist

I would describe myself as 'gender critical' (in the absence of any better description) and I find this ridiculous and (as usual) dishonest. I never had a single problem with the idea of trans people existing until I became aware that trans activists were directly attacking Women's rights and trying to shut down any dissent.

It's also massively hypocritical of a trans activist like jj1968 to talk about ppl trying to erase trans people when, if you mention trans ppl that don't agree with trans ideology, they just write them off as 'truscum' or 'boot licker' or some other disgusting expression.

Given his conviction I don't think Boy George is the most wholesome example either.

Firstly elements of the movement have been quite happy to stand alongside and work with open transphobes from the political religious right.

And perhaps j j you should be very wary because you have already lowered your credibility by posting an opinion piece about Joanne Rowling written by a misogynistic bully who was involved in the sexual harassment of Helen Staniland. I watched it unfold over the week before she was banned.

Your own allegiances are not credible, so why should we listen to you continue to accuse us of being involved with the far right. Yes, SOME opinions coincide with the far right. Strangely, biological facts are shared across the world by people of many different political alignments.

As keeps on being said, what is more believable. That tens of thousands of previously left wing women suddenly became far right supporters? Or that there are some major issues involved and that a group of activists wish to keep trying to discredit the women who are fighting against the impacts on their rights by the conflicts of trans rights.

And again, let's bring up that at least two major political party activist groups which to define transphobia as 'believing that there is any conflict between women's rights and trans rights'.....

As I said. Your credibility is low on this, as with many of your other conspiracy theories that you post across this forum.

I think it is a slur that is always pulled out that we work with the religious right. We work for the interests of women and girls and sometimes we can cross other boundaries..similar to Remainers and Leavers.where there is an import issue that affects us, we will continue to do so. As long as certain political parties refuse to acknowledge what a woman is I don’t see how we can support them, though we might approve of other policies. Sometimes although I am not religious in any way , being a nun in an enclosed order would seem to be a good place to be. No nonsense there except for when the priests arrive!

It's also massively hypocritical of a trans activist like jj1968 to talk about ppl trying to erase trans people when, if you mention trans ppl that don't agree with trans ideology, they just write them off as 'truscum' or 'boot licker' or some other disgusting expression.

j j has repeatedly declared that any trans activist that is attempting to seek discussion around these topics is not someone that any trans person respects. They do indeed write off any other trans person that does not agree fully with their ideas.

@midgedude

Secondly it's pretty hard to say gc people say trans does not exist and simultaneously they want all trans people to die horribly .

I am gender critical,. I can see transgender people exist , I don't want people to die . I believe that if you managed to minimise gender then the vast majority of transgender people would not identify that way. That's not wanting them to disappear . It's just saying I can see a way that makes them happy with themselves without needing any medicalisation. Surely a good thing unless you are a pharmaceutical company ?

So my form of gender critical don't believe that transgender is innate but instead a response of the gendered and homophobic society

I have reached this conclusion based firstly on my own experience, backed up with studies that suggest homosexuality is innate but transgender isn't

Please don't misrepresent a group of people using generalised statements that are probable incorrect

I'd be interested to see those studies.

I'm not claiming that people want transgender people to die horribly. Janice Raymond talked about morally mandating trans people out of existence using social and medical means - which Sheila Jeffreys followed up by calling for any form of trans healthcare to be made a crime under human rights law. It's not about murdering trans people but about making life so difficult they either suddenly see the error of their ways and stop being trans or what would actually happen which is that trans people would be pushed back into the margins and once again forced to lead hidden lives. This is a strong element in the GC movement, Sheila Jeffreys is a massive influence to many and she has been at the heart of the UK gender critical scene for many years.

@Winesalot

It's also massively hypocritical of a trans activist like jj1968 to talk about ppl trying to erase trans people when, if you mention trans ppl that don't agree with trans ideology, they just write them off as 'truscum' or 'boot licker' or some other disgusting expression.

j j has repeatedly declared that any trans activist that is attempting to seek discussion around these topics is not someone that any trans person respects. They do indeed write off any other trans person that does not agree fully with their ideas.

I have never declared that. You seem to repeatedly put words in my mouth that I never said. I'm not sure if that's intended as a deliberate smear or that you can't possibly perceive that a trans person has opinions outside of what you have decided is trans ideology and so presume that's what all trans people must think.

JJ I'd have complete sympathy with your position regarding a male person working in female safe spaces if the definition of trans is limited to gender dysphoric.

It isn't - therefore any man can say he is a woman and access our spaces with no further thought, that's not the same as a person going through the process of applying for a job to access spaces and often a DBS is now required if the man is going to be working with children or other vulnerable adults.

It is also deeply offensive that a cross dresser who is dresses as a man some days of a week and dresses as a woman on others and people who make no effort to change appearance can no call themselves women. Full stop. No debate.

We are far more at risk from people who will take advantage of that to get access than we are from people who have gone to the trouble to apply for jobs. And they don't need to under the new regime do they!

The floodgates have literally been opened to anyone.

should say can now call themselves women.

Sheila Jeffreys is a massive influence to many and she has been at the heart of the UK gender critical scene for many years.

Is she? I'm not aware of anyone on MN particularly citing her, except yourself.

@Langrycleg

I think it is a slur that is always pulled out that we work with the religious right. We work for the interests of women and girls and sometimes we can cross other boundaries..similar to Remainers and Leavers.where there is an import issue that affects us, we will continue to do so. As long as certain political parties refuse to acknowledge what a woman is I don’t see how we can support them, though we might approve of other policies. Sometimes although I am not religious in any way , being a nun in an enclosed order would seem to be a good place to be. No nonsense there except for when the priests arrive!

If I was approached by a bunch of religious misogynists who decided that being trans was okay as long as you fully transitioned and wanted to form an allegiance against gender critical feminism to help protect trans rights I would tell them in no uncertain terms to fuck off, as I suspect would any other person you might claim to be a TRA.

If was approached by a bunch of religious misogynists who decided that being trans was okay as long as you fully transitioned and wanted to form an allegiance against gender critical feminism to help protect trans rights I would tell them in no uncertain terms to fuck off

What does 'fully transitioned' mean?

Many trans activists have a lot in common with Creationist religious groups who don't believe in the theory of evolution. Both groups deny biology and claim it's an 'insult' to talk about humans in terms of their biological makeup.

I'm not sure if that's intended as a deliberate smear or that you can't possibly perceive that a trans person has opinions outside of what you have decided is trans ideology and so presume that's what all trans people must think.

Haven't you told us time and time again that you don't consider Buck Angel, Debbie Hayton and others as having opinions that should be listened to. I am pretty sure you have minimised their opinions a few times and not relevant to discussions.

If I have you confused with another poster, I do apologise.

@Impatiens

If was approached by a bunch of religious misogynists who decided that being trans was okay as long as you fully transitioned and wanted to form an allegiance against gender critical feminism to help protect trans rights I would tell them in no uncertain terms to fuck off

What does 'fully transitioned' mean?

Many trans activists have a lot in common with Creationist religious groups who don't believe in the theory of evolution. Both groups deny biology and claim it's an 'insult' to talk about humans in terms of their biological makeup.

Actually I meant to take that out. I was thinking of the regime in Iran where trans people are required to fully medically transition including surgery or they face prosecution for cross dressing. But then I'd obviously tell them to fuck off, but I'd equally tell a misogynist religious organisation to fuck off even if they thought all trans people were valid and supported Self ID.

Secondly whilst it is claimed that many of the genuine concerns are rooted in the threat of male violence - in particular men accessing women's spaces, this seems to be a much more significant concern when it comes to trans people and not male identified males. There is no concern about male prison guards for example despite ample examples of horrifying abuse some of them have carried out. There is no pressure to ban male cleaners and maintenance workers from womens spaces, and yet it would surely be far easier for a man who wanted to abuse women to get a job as a toilet cleaner or caretaker, or pretend to be either, then pretend to be trans - and in fact some of the cases of hidden cameras that have emerged has been men doing exactly that. And whilst there may be those who are not keen on the idea of men becoming rape counsellor or training in women's healthcare, I've never seen anyone insinuate these men have some kind of sexual motive in the way I've seen it said of trans women in similar roles. I'm not denying that there are concerns about men, and with good reason, but it seems to me the concerns are often not just that someone might have been born physicially male but also that they are trans. That trans people, or Secondly whilst it is claimed that many of the genuine concerns are rooted in the threat of male violence - in particular men accessing women's spaces, this seems to be a much more significant concern when it comes to trans people and not male identified males. There is no concern about male prison guards for example despite ample examples of horrifying abuse some of them have carried out. There is no pressure to ban male cleaners and maintenance workers from womens spaces, and yet it would surely be far easier for a man who wanted to abuse women to get a job as a toilet cleaner or caretaker, or pretend to be either, then pretend to be trans - and in fact some of the cases of hidden cameras that have emerged has been men doing exactly that. And whilst there may be those who are not keen on the idea of men becoming rape counsellor or training in women's healthcare, I've never seen anyone insinuate these men have some kind of sexual motive in the way I've seen it said of trans women in similar roles. I'm not denying that there are concerns about men, and with good reason, but it seems to me the concerns are often not just that someone might have been born physicially male but also that they are trans. That trans people, or trans women specifically are actually viewed as a greater threat than men which is why the FWR board spends far more time discussing the threat of the trans than the endemic male violence all women have to deal with everyday. women specifically are actually viewed as a greater threat than men which is why the FWR board spends far more time discussing the threat of the trans than the endemic male violence all women have to deal with everyday.

I am glad you recognise the appalling male violence that women have to deal with. So why do you want to allow males free rein in female only spaces?
Abuse of female prisoners by males, be they guards or transwomen prisoners ,is appalling and should be dealt with. The use of male cleaners etc does have some protection for females as signs are always put up and this gives women the choice to enter or not but the same is not true if the male in the changing room is a transwomen.
The fact that the male person in the changing room, shower is trans is not the problem. The problem is that they are male.
Any changes which may allow a subset of males to access female spaces , can only result in any male accessing these spaces.

Women fear male violence ; violence perpetrated by males of all gender identities, as all evidence shows that,when it comes to being violent , there is absolutely no difference between transwomen, non binary AMAB, gender fluid persons AMAB, agender males and other men

I don’t ‘stand with’ right wingers.

Adults are entirely capable of holding the same opinion on one matter-biological sex can’t be changed- and entirely different ones on other issues. The reality of voting means we need to prioritise which issue matters most when it comes to who represents us, and then we can argue to high hell every other issue we disagree with said representatives on.

I grew up as a huge Lou Reed fan, I think Coney Island baby is one of the most beautiful songs ever written, I think Nicky Wire and Kurt Cobain were fucking excellent in women’s clothes (come under the current trans umbrella, although they’ve always been clear they were men) and think Yardley is fabulous. Have met plenty tm irl who I hold in high esteem also. I’m good with trans people, as I am with all people, until they try to take my rights away.

I don’t much care about what other gc women think about trans people. The same way I don’t care about what they think about any other group either. Women are allowed to prioritise women’s rights and not punctuate every ‘I’m pro women’s rights’ with the ‘but I want to fight for trans people (or any other group) also’. Falling for appeals to sex role stereotype socialisation that means women must step up for every other marginalised group is a big part of why we keep giving away our legal right protections as it is.

Feminism is allowed to just prioritise females and not compromising isn’t actual violence.

If a capitalist turns up at a Marxist meeting claiming that capitalists are communists too they’d be shown the door. Women are allowed to discriminate against non females, in fact our very lives often depends on it.

These are people who think trans people are an abomination before God and deserve to burn in hell - that is literally what some of them think, that trans people deserve to be tortured for eternity.

Now that is transphobia. It’s ugly. It’s unpleasant. It’s harmful. And there are two key problems implied in this statement. This first is the disingenuous, lazy alignment of GC feminists with the alt right. I don’t know a GC feminist who opposed gay rights, gay marriage and the simple demands of gay people to have the same rights and legal considerations as everyone else. Rights that didn’t involve a whole group of people redefining their sex-based status and even their own anatomy to accommodate someone else's preferences. You’re also neglecting the point that a good many of these people are also lesbian. Turkeys voting for Christmas to align themselves with the ‘Alt Right’ wouldn’t you say?

Secondly, real transphobia is unconscionable. The only trouble is if you go around screaming people are ‘transphobic’ when they’ve merely asserted they are adult human females and talked about their sex-based rights, is that people are less likely to take you seriously when you do experience transphobia. The accusation ‘transphobe!’ is already losing its shock value. People probably more likely to roll their eyes than otherwise (the Twitterverse really isn’t an adequate representational sample). I believe the analogy is known as ‘the boy [no offence intended] who cried wolf’.

That trans people, or trans women specifically are actually viewed as a greater threat than men which is why the FWR board spends far more time discussing the threat of the trans than the endemic male violence all women have to deal with everyday.

This isn’t true. What IS true is that trans women offend at a comparable rate to men. This is why women need protected spaces.

‘Imagine how it feels to be told you should be morally mandated out of existence by one section of a political movement and then expected to believe there is no transphobia in that movement at the same time. I'm not a fan of using the phrase gas-lighting to describe situations outside of abusive personal relationships but surely that fits the bill*.’

If I wear a ‘trans women are women! Get over it!’ tee-shirt (a demonstrable lie) I’ll be lauded as a good little ally. If I wear one stating ‘adult human female’ (irrefutable fact) Costa coffee will refuse to serve me. Skewed logic or what? Women (and gender-critical feminists) have not attempted to impose their own definition on another group, yet we are now the ones playing games of linguistic contortionism in order to apply the definitions we see fit to ourselves. Or we are 'transphobic'. Who’s ‘erasing’ who? And you have the nerve to talk about gaslighting?

I don’t much care about what other gc women think about trans people. The same way I don’t care about what they think about any other group either. Women are allowed to prioritise women’s rights and not punctuate every ‘I’m pro women’s rights’ with the ‘but I want to fight for trans people (or any other group) also’. Falling for appeals to sex role stereotype socialisation that means women must step up for every other marginalised group is a big part of why we keep giving away our legal right protections as it is.

Feminism is allowed to just prioritise females and not compromising isn’t actual violence.

Yes, it's strange that it is the only rights movement where people within it are painted as selfish by other "feminists" for wanting to uphold those rights.