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?

@334bu

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

It benefits the women who are desperate to stay on side with the penis havers...

Do you really think that anyone anywhere is preventing us from calling ourselves women?

Are you going to claim that JK Rowling wasn't horrifically abused for pointing out that women have periods, rather than being 'menstruators? Just as midwives aren't bullied into talking solely about 'birthing people' - that they are not allowed to publish research in relation to women and. maternity now? And Stonewall didn't grade almost all major public sector employees and almost all major private sector businesses based on their willingness to do this? Seriously?

If you find something so awful that you have to deny it's happened, because you can't defend it, then why aren't you considering your own position?

You must - must - know that this is absolutely true. If this is an issue you've been concerned by, then presumably you did some digging, to ascertain the facts. So why deny it? If it's okay with you, say so. If it isn't - why are you still defending the people who are behind it?

I suppose you think the concerted efforts to remove the single sex exemptions from the Equality Act, so no rape crisis service or women's refuge or communal changing room would ever again be allowed to exclude any male person who uttered the magic words, "I am a woman" regardless of the needs of the women in the equation, is dog whistle, too. Is saying that male rapists are being housed in women's prisons dog whistle? Are any and all facts you don't want us to share with other women dog whistles to you?

I am going to make a wild guess, and say you used to insist that Wi Spa was dog whistle. (Did you say that the women were being hateful to a transwoman, or did you claim they lied and made it up?) And what is your view now a sex offender with a rap sheet going back 20 years has in fact been charged with walking into the women's sauna, and sitting down next to a little girl, naked, with penis erect? Still talking about 'dog whistles' with that one? I suppose you must, given you don't want to give an inch and show any compassion at all when women express anger over the threatened loss of single sex provision. I suppose you think it's dog whistle that women who need peer support after rape now have nowhere to go, if they don't want male people able to listen to their stories - and I suppose pointing out that some men would gain real voyeuristic delight from that access is dog whistle, too. Are any attempts to protect women's rights not 'dog whistle', to you? Are there any rights we are to be permitted, in your world? Where are the limits? Do you even know?

This has nothing to do with trans status. This is not about gender identity. This is about male people and women's rights. If you can't find it in yourself to give one shiny shit about women, then fine, but stop manipulatively insisting that those of us who do are engaging in 'dog whistles' when we point out the extremely well evidenced fact that all male people pose, as a group, the same statistical risk to all female people.

If you had facts to disprove the previous posts, and the facts above, you'd use them. But you don't, do you. There are no facts you can use to render the above okay, or fair, or right. All you have are attempts to manipulate and shame women who protest at the erosion of our rights, and the hijacking of the language we need to protect those rights from such erosion.

If you find your position literally indefensible, then here's a thought: change it. Speak the truth. It's a far easier way to live.

MurielSpriggs

Can you not see the difference between
-being prevented from calling yourself a woman
and
- being called a cervix- haver?

I certainly can. It's the difference between being expected to call myself a cunt, and other people calling me a cunt.

The element of compelled speech to the former requires that I collaborate in my own humiliation. I think the phrase there is "adding insult to injury".

The latter, however, is still an injury, whether or not it is compounded by further insults.

It benefits the women who are desperate to stay on side with the penis havers...

and those women will be ditched so fast it will make their heads spin as soon as they've outlived their usefulness.

Well said wellbehavedwomen and Purgatory

“If you can't find it in yourself to give one shiny shit about women, then fine, but stop manipulatively insisting that those of us who do are engaging in 'dog whistles' when we point out the extremely well evidenced fact that all male people pose, as a group, the same statistical risk to all female people.”

Indeed.
We’re called transphobic for wanting sex segregated spaces to protect us from the well known risk of males killing us…..and then they have the gall to say merely using a term in a way they don’t like is violence and can show no evidence of women being a real risk to trans women

It wasn't very long ago that people said that these things, such as wi spa, what happened to Sarah and is happening in rape crisis centres all over the UK would ever happen.

Now they undeniably are happening we should apparently turn a blind eye or it's just a dog whistle.

No, just no. I am not going to turn a blind eye to women's rights being eroded because of the wants of males. I don't give one jot about gender, it's regressive and harmful. A privileged belief.

Girls in the developing world can't identify out of their sex to avoid trafficking, FGM or to be educated like they are boys.

Women in the UK can't identify into the Masons or to overturn the laws on inheritance so why on earth should we turn a blind eye to men who want to access our safe spaces?

I will not 'be kind' to males to the detriment of women and girls.

sorry should say would 'never' happen.

@wellbehavedwomen

Do you really think that anyone anywhere is preventing us from calling ourselves women?

Are you going to claim that JK Rowling wasn't horrifically abused for pointing out that women have periods, rather than being 'menstruators? Just as midwives aren't bullied into talking solely about 'birthing people' - that they are not allowed to publish research in relation to women and. maternity now? And Stonewall didn't grade almost all major public sector employees and almost all major private sector businesses based on their willingness to do this? Seriously?

If you find something so awful that you have to deny it's happened, because you can't defend it, then why aren't you considering your own position?

You must - must - know that this is absolutely true. If this is an issue you've been concerned by, then presumably you did some digging, to ascertain the facts. So why deny it? If it's okay with you, say so. If it isn't - why are you still defending the people who are behind it?

I suppose you think the concerted efforts to remove the single sex exemptions from the Equality Act, so no rape crisis service or women's refuge or communal changing room would ever again be allowed to exclude any male person who uttered the magic words, "I am a woman" regardless of the needs of the women in the equation, is dog whistle, too. Is saying that male rapists are being housed in women's prisons dog whistle? Are any and all facts you don't want us to share with other women dog whistles to you?

I am going to make a wild guess, and say you used to insist that Wi Spa was dog whistle. (Did you say that the women were being hateful to a transwoman, or did you claim they lied and made it up?) And what is your view now a sex offender with a rap sheet going back 20 years has in fact been charged with walking into the women's sauna, and sitting down next to a little girl, naked, with penis erect? Still talking about 'dog whistles' with that one? I suppose you must, given you don't want to give an inch and show any compassion at all when women express anger over the threatened loss of single sex provision. I suppose you think it's dog whistle that women who need peer support after rape now have nowhere to go, if they don't want male people able to listen to their stories - and I suppose pointing out that some men would gain real voyeuristic delight from that access is dog whistle, too. Are any attempts to protect women's rights not 'dog whistle', to you? Are there any rights we are to be permitted, in your world? Where are the limits? Do you even know?

This has nothing to do with trans status. This is not about gender identity. This is about male people and women's rights. If you can't find it in yourself to give one shiny shit about women, then fine, but stop manipulatively insisting that those of us who do are engaging in 'dog whistles' when we point out the extremely well evidenced fact that all male people pose, as a group, the same statistical risk to all female people.

If you had facts to disprove the previous posts, and the facts above, you'd use them. But you don't, do you. There are no facts you can use to render the above okay, or fair, or right. All you have are attempts to manipulate and shame women who protest at the erosion of our rights, and the hijacking of the language we need to protect those rights from such erosion.

If you find your position literally indefensible, then here's a thought: change it. Speak the truth. It's a far easier way to live.

Many thanks, @wellbehavedwomen, for such a lengthy and impassioned reply.

I'm afraid that I can only reply with the original statement which you addressed: in none of your post do I see any evidence that women are being prevented from calling themselves women. It seems that we both observe the same events but each see something very different.

This might be a good time to add this.

See if the defenders can defend this.

Is it OK to write women ( in this case black women. Who are dying) out of their own sufferring/oppression.

Its just inclusive right?

Just another dig whistle.

Should the black.women to which this refers who are dying in chikd birth just be kind?

I'm afraid that I can only reply with the original statement which you addressed: in none of your post do I see any evidence that women are being prevented from calling themselves women. It seems that we both observe the same events but each see something very different.

Wow, not quite sure what to say.
Obviously, unless you put a gag over someone's mouth, there is nothing to stop a woman referring to herself as a woman. However, you can prevent her from being heard by excluding her from society, in this case from a social media platform, or removing all traces of a woman's existence in, for example, health campaigns.
Removing the right or, in this case, the ability of a disadvantaged group to name themselves, is always the opening gambit of the oppressor group.

I'm afraid that I can only reply with the original statement which you addressed: in none of your post do I see any evidence that women are being prevented from calling themselves women.

The OP got kicked out of a group for calling herself a woman. How is that not the evidence you require?

If that’s true it’s bizarre. I can’t think of any of my trans friends who’d expect me to be called that rather than woman. There is space in the world to use inclusive language when appropriate without rescuing people to body parts. FFS.

I'm afraid that I can only reply with the original statement which you addressed: in none of your post do I see any evidence that women are being prevented from calling themselves women. It seems that we both observe the same events but each see something very different.

What a load of absolute cobblers.

You are quite...astonishing. Several people have responded, very thoroughly, to your claim that kicking a woman out of a group for wanting to use the word "woman" isn't preventing her from calling herself a woman. As for seeing different things, I'm amazed that you could have read wellbehavedwoman's post and still insist on missing her point so spectacularly. While patronising her into the bargain. And, again, not responding to a single thing she's said.

You asked a question, several people responded, and your answer is literally "Nah." You have no case, like the other person who's got nothing but "haha". And I think on some level, you do know this or you would be able to come up with something better. He'll, I could come up with something better and I see this cobblers for exactly what it is.

I suppose the real question is: why is this particular branch of performative pseudo-liberalism so absolutely blind to women's rights and women's voices?

[quote Waitwhat23]@musicalfrog couple of links that you might find useful -
www.sexmatters.org
safeschoolsallianceuk.net[/quote]
Thank you @Waitwhat23 I already follow them on twitter but are there no official government organisations looking into safeguarding in schools/ hospitals etc because if there isn't then there bloody well should be!

@MurielSpriggs , I also think that we need to be kind and inclusive. And some of the posts here are quite long and doesn’t really relate to the thread (yes, yes, I will try to read them later).

But do you really think it was right that the OP was thrown out of her FB group for protesting against being called a uterus owner?

If I join a menopause group, should I not talk about my symptoms in case a transwoman has joined?

Am I transphobic for even asking this?

I think we need to define " inclusive" tbh

When was the last time anything focused on being more accessible to those with disabilities, or who had English as an additional language. Wheres the focus on ensuring diversity and that people are aware of how things affect people from.ethnic minorities or learning difficulties.

Instead it seems to be about erasing any language that indicates who it's actually for.

I'd be excluded from a prostate cancer group. Rightly so as that would he fir men who probably needed to discuss intimate details . If I wanted to be involved I'd look for a group that was fir families or hell set my own up aimed at supporting friends and families.

The whole point of many of these groups is EXCLUSION. So that the advice, support etc was not diluted or wasted on people who were physically unaffected by something.

And language isn't inclusive. Or communication would be impossible. The word lorry excludes anything that's not a lorry. If lorry suddenly meant bike or tree when people talked about being a lorry driver you'd not know what it meant.

Woman is the word that tells you that someone is an adult female human. It's a word inclusive of anyone wishing adult human and female regardless of identity because that's individual to the person I'm question..the word also excluded children under 18 and men/males. They have their own words we don't need to included them.

Well, I agree that it sounds absolutely bonkers with this exclusion of OP. I am hoping Muriel can explain her thinking here.

But yes, I also think that inclusion of disabled people and minorities is extremely important as well. And I think that in order to achieve that, you need integration. You cannot divide people up into little groups and not talk to each other. But then obviously there needs to be respect. And in some cases that may mean to stay away from certain places.

I wouldn’t just pop into the local mosque and try to sit in the men’s section. I wouldn’t go the the mosque at all actually as I am Christian. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be kind and inclusive in school.

That's not the kind of inclusion that seems to be happening though is it.

Real inclusion would be expecting everyone to be respectful of beliefs and boundaries. The inclusion that appears to be expected us is to pretend we don't even exist. To be redefined in someone elses believe system and emotionally blackmailed and manipulated into doing so. To ignore reality and play along.

wellbehavedwomen

Bravo

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.

You don't know the answer, this is a very naive view, so you can drop the condescending tone. The reason that people don't use "women and trans men" more often and go for just "people with a cervix" is that extremist TRAs wish to separate "woman" from "biologically female" altogether. It benefits male people more than female people, who often aren't keen on being called "menstruators" etc even when they don't identify as women.

I don't feel the need to question

Says it all.

I can't help but think that all men societies like the Garrick club or some Golf Clubs don't buy into the idea that transmen are men. Or that Eton would accept a 16 year old girl who said she'd like to be considered a man, despite not having bollocks and a willie. When that does happen then maybe we could go along with the transwomen are women nonsense.

Peregrina

The Masons will accept transwomen but not transmen, I wonder why?

I'm afraid that I can only reply with the original statement which you addressed: in none of your post do I see any evidence that women are being prevented from calling themselves women. It seems that we both observe the same events but each see something very different

None so blind as those desperate not to see, I suppose!

As I said, that's some extremely fine hairs you are splitting @MurielSpriggs.

The Masons will accept transwomen but not transmen, I wonder why?
And where are the TRAs shouting about this transphobia?