Just been kicked out of a group for objecting to being referred to as my reproductive organs

[Gerlais]

Group on Facebook. I was referred to as a “uterus owner”. I objected to this. I’m now banned from the group for being transphobic. Everyone piled on me and if I wasn’t kicked out I would have been leaving anyway. I don’t care what other people want to be called but I will not be referred to as my reproductive organs!! It’s not transphobic to want to be referred to as a woman if you were in fact born female and wish to remain a woman? surely?? Or AIBU?

Sarah Silverman did this in her unwatchable rant of shite against, of all things, a transwoman who opposed transwomen athletes competing against women. I'm not kidding: her justification was "You're a girl! So why are you opposed to girls competing against girls? What about tall girls?"

She's literally taken "girl" to include "adult male body" and then moved to the next step of saying that of course girls can compete against girls. Which is logical, if "girl" doesn't actually mean "female"!

Should we be calling people who had a pennis at birth and transitioned to be a "woman" inside out penis owners?? 😁

@RaisedByPangolins

Get yourself over the feminism threads and to see even more of this batshittery on a daily basis. The world has gone nuts. Oh sorry shouldn’t say that as it’s probably offensive to people with nut allergies.

Can't say batshittery, it's offensive to bats.

Yep - its mad. But more than that its a high powered, effective attack on women only spaces. Every woman who feels this way ought to be writing to MP's, government officials etc. Lots of good groups popping up with template letters to use.

I was banned from instagram for 48 hours after I objected to being called a bleeder by a organic tampon company (don't remember the name, but they have a pink logo). All I said was that they were using the same sexist language the boys in my school used to use when bullying and harassing the girls, and I got banned

I don't feel the need to question, because I'm confident I know the answer. It's to make transmen feel more comfortable in groups discussing menstruation, menopause and other issues which are a consequence of female biology.

And trans identified males?

But seriously, erasing the societally undertsood word for one cohort to make a sub group of the same cohort feel more comfortable?

OK. Then, yet again, what about the women who have no idea that tehyare cervix havers etc - the 46% of women surveyed by/for the NHS, if I remember rightly.

(And as far as I can see from @Gerlais's posts, she was not prevented from calling herself a woman or identifying as a woman.)

So you missed the bit about having been thrown out of the group and not having been able to defend her viewpoint? No allowing her agency, to ask to be called whatever she prefers (which is what the TRA perspective as all about). No! Just a peremptory TERFing out!

You are splitting some very fine hairs there!!

@334bu Thank you that was EXACTLY the point I was trying to make. Of course someone was going to call me transphobic because of this belief.

@MothExterminator

I don’t understand why we all can’t just get along and be kind to each other?

But I don’t want to be called a uterus haver.
I was hoping to join a menopause group as I am having terrible symptoms. But I really don’t want to be dealing with this at the moment . I have no idea of what I can and can’t say.

Women have been perfectly prepared to make reasonable compromises. You won't find any feminist on here who opposes third spaces for example, and most will tolerate "women and others with a uterus". So who isn't willing to compromise? Who is it who want nothing less than total capitulation?

To be honest, I'm not keen for 'women and others with a uterus' to become common.

Learning difficulties and low level literacy are barriers in this country. I don't think adding extra, often multisyllabic or non phonetic words into literature aimed at the public helps people overcome those barriers.

I think the best solution would be to put all the possible identities as terms and conditions in a glossary.

@DrSbaitso

Sarah Silverman did this in her unwatchable rant of shite against, of all things, a transwoman who opposed transwomen athletes competing against women. I'm not kidding: her justification was "You're a girl! So why are you opposed to girls competing against girls? What about tall girls?"

She's literally taken "girl" to include "adult male body" and then moved to the next step of saying that of course girls can compete against girls. Which is logical, if "girl" doesn't actually mean "female"!

Thanks for the tip! Gonna love watching that. It’ll be just the tonic after this 🤣

Thanks for the tip! Gonna love watching that. It’ll be just the tonic after this

Unfortunately, it's funny for all the wrong reasons. Odd coming from someone who, a few years ago, did a film called Funny Women in which she interviewed, well, funny women, and didn't seem to have trouble differentiating between the men and the women. Well, she did include Miss Piggy. At the time I thought "oh, I get it, it's a joke because she's pretending Miss Piggy is a real female when everyone knows she's a puppet who's voiced by a man, ha ha!" but maybe Sarah really was confused.

Gonna love watching that.
Those of us whose daughters are athletes don't find it so funny. My daughter trains really hard, as do the other girls on her team - a team which now accepts transwomen too. Except the transwoman on the team recently retired from the male team and now competes with the females despite being on average 20 years older. Do you think that's fair @wobblyhousehunt ?

I know you’re being a bit flippant @Wobblyhousehunt but do you honestly believe that trans women should be allowed to participate in women’s sports?

I’m genuinely interested in the answer to your question.

@Zerogravity

Gonna love watching that. Those of us whose daughters are athletes don't find it so funny. My daughter trains really hard, as do the other girls on her team - a team which now accepts transwomen too. Except the transwoman on the team recently retired from the male team and now competes with the females despite being on average 20 years older. Do you think that's fair *@wobblyhousehunt* ?

Ah, yes - women's sports are now seen as the retirement option for mediocre males. For anyone wordering why there are separate, sex based groups for sports, check out www.boysvswomen.com. Athletic teenage boy can easily beat Olympian women's World records.

It didn't occur to me that Wobblyhousehunt was serious. Silverman is literally just taking the word "girl" to include men, and using that as "proof" that they should compete against actual girls. Oh, and suggesting that tall women are men.

I suppose anyone who takes that seriously is beyond any reason but it's some weapon level delusion. Even those who do argue for males to compete as females don't make the case that obviously stupid and dishonest. They at least claim that a woman is just a modified man (you know, no difference except less testosterone, although that can still remain at a level that would get a natal woman disqualified).

Honestly, even in the grand level gaslighting that's going on, nobody is that thick.

The IOC are now claiming that transwomen have no advantage over 'natal' women and should not have to reduce testosterone - amp.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/16/trans-women-should-not-have-to-reduce-testosterone-say-new-ioc-guidelines

Thanks for the tip! Gonna love watching that. It’ll be just the tonic after this

I suggest you watch the Olympic 2020 mixed relay in swimming. Those elite female swimmers obviously didn't train hard enough. Sarah Silverman should really have a word with them, lazy so and sos.

[quote Waitwhat23]The IOC are now claiming that transwomen have no advantage over 'natal' women and should not have to reduce testosterone - amp.theguardian.com/sport/2021/nov/16/trans-women-should-not-have-to-reduce-testosterone-say-new-ioc-guidelines[/quote]
That's what happens when you don't consult any women's sporting bodies.

That's what happens when you ignore all the overwhelming evidence, because you want to dodge a difficult political decision. The IOC know full well that women can't compete against men but they are too cowardly to say so.

@334bu

That's what happens when you ignore all the overwhelming evidence, because you want to dodge a difficult political decision. The IOC know full well that women can't compete against men but they are too cowardly to say so.

This is what happens when penis holders are in charge.

What’s wrong w:
Woman
Man
Trans woman
Trans man
Non-binary person

It’s all gone cray cray

The last couple of lines of that article are particularly telling -

'The IOC is also likely to face criticism from women’s campaign groups, who had hoped it would follow the lead of the five UK sports councils. In September those councils said there was no magic solution which balances the inclusion of trans women in female sport while guaranteeing competitive fairness and safety – and, for the first time, told sports across Britain that they will have to choose which to prioritise. (my bolds)

I know someone earlier said they didn't want to question (!!) but it really does help, at times like this, to ask who benefits, at whose cost, and what that cost is.

Well we all know one thing, it certainly doesn't benefit one single woman.

The agenda of silencing people that is developing is really frightening. It is the opposite of inclusive.

I saw this woman talk a conference recently about the dangers of cancel culture - she was excellent clairefox.org.uk/about-claire