A woman is a woman

[EmotionSickness]

For those who have been following the Tory conference and general themes of their speeches…

How do you feel about Sunak’s speech?

I know there has been a lot of discussion on here from those who didn’t want to vote for a party that didn’t know the definition of a woman.

Rishi has stated clearly that “a woman is a woman and a man is a man.” While I’d argue that still isn’t a definition, per se, he is appeasing this way of thinking.

So I’m just wondering. Is this enough for you to vote Tory at the next election?

I don't think anybody is suggesting that violence against women and girls committed by men who do not identify as transgender is fine. It's just that there are no simple solutions to combatting it.

Keeping all male people however they identify out of women's spaces is a blanket rule which is easy to apply and provides women and children with some protection, freeing up more time and energy to focus on more difficult problems.

But because some people want women's spaces opened up to any male person who wishes to access them, we have to waste time and energy opposing that, which takes away time and energy which could be better spent tackling the more difficult stuff.

And as others have pointed out, it's not just about safety, but about women's comfort and dignity too. Why is it so important for trans women to be able to feel that their comfort and dignity and identities are being respected, but when women want exactly the same thing their needs are deemed unimportant and expressing them is considered bigotry?

What is it about trans women that makes them more important than biological women? Because if it's the fact that they were born with a penis, that looks like good old fashioned misogyny to me.

I don't scrutinise people. I just sort of acknowledge their presence. Sometimes I say hello, which is considered polite where I live.

Not once have I ever needed to scrutinise someone in order to figure out what sex they were. Except recently, in a photograph, where I knew that someone in the group was a trans woman but I couldn't work out which out of two people was the trans woman. It turned out both of them were.

That is great. Some women have more complex needs for toilets, and those will make privacy away from male people very important.

Have you dismissed those needs, or do you not have any idea of what those needs are?

No one is "ignoring" any attacks!

The point is that safe, single sex spaces are one of the few measures actually in place that protects women and girls! Losing those safe spaces increases the risk to women and girls. Change that and any man claiming to be a woman will have access. How is that going to reduce the number of attacks?

Like Hippocrates said in relation to doctors "First do no harm".

We are campaigning to stop the harm that losing safe spaces will cause.

I haven't read the full thread, but I'll judge by what they do not what they say. The Tories have made life harder and harder for women in this country, and I'm sure with the direction they're going abortion rights will be up for grabs in the near future. So no, virtue signalling/dog whistling on the trans agenda wouldn't sway my vote.

Yes. It is a really warped logic that suggests that to prevent further attacks to women and children we should have reduced levels of safeguarding for one group of males based on no evidence, just a philosophical belief which seems to be easily demonstrated to be false based on conviction rates.

But that is the logic. That some posters believe that keeping women and children safe involves allowing one group of males into female single sex spaces while also attempting to deal with all male violence and sex crime. So on one hand declaring one group of male people ‘safe‘ based on not one shred of evidence, while insisting that all other male people are to be kept out. Like that this has never happened before with disastrous results.

And the other part is that in dealing with violence against women and children by male people in general, we should ignore a clear loophole that has been opened. Because some people believe it is unkind to close that loophole.

And I need to mention that we are told that many male trans people also support law changes to exclude all male people. So even male trans people support strengthening female single sex spaces that exclude them. This means it is an even smaller group of the small group of male people that some posters are supporting to access female single sex spaces. Because those male trans people who fully respect the needs of female people are not those who are using the female single sex spaces.

But apparently women wanting to discuss strengthening ALL loopholes that mean male people can access single sex spaces are the problem to be shamed and female experiences are to be dismissedIn favour of privileged women who deny there are issues. Not only because female toilets are used for more than just getting in and out for a quick pee, but because some women have very valid reasons for wanting any male excluded. Any male above the age of a child of about 8 that is. All because ‘they are alright Jack’ and cannot see an issue.

It means absolutely nothing. There's lots of ways the government could make a real statement. I.e provide guidance to schools about transitioning children would massively help schools deal with the situation. Make a statement about trans women in sports, or women only hostels. But they don't want to actually get their hands dirty with what is a really complex situation. Legally and morally they would be in hot water totally denying the rights of trans people to exist but they want to dog whistle their homophobia base enough to get more votes without actually doing anything.

Why would they be denying people’s right to exist? have they so far? Has any mainstream UK political party even indicated this?

There is a great deal of hypocrisy in using ‘deny trans people’s right to exist’ and ‘dog whistle’.

To say trans women aren’t women, which is what they are hinting at and what GC people what to hear, does deny trans peoples right to exist.

In what way? It's a statement of fact.

How is it denying their right to exist?

You might think that. Trans people don’t. So the government saying they aren’t the gender they want to be is denying a key part of who they think they are. Surely you understand the effect a statement like that would have on a trans person. Even if you don’t agree with them.

Of course it doesn't,they're men and men exist.

Saying that a trans person is not the opposite sex, as much as they might want to be, is not denying that they exist. This is hyperbole.

Just like saying that God isn't real is not the same as denying that Christians exist.

I'm sorry if saying these things is hurtful to trans people, but not saying these things is harmful to women.

You might think that. Trans people don’t. So the government saying they aren’t the gender they want to be is denying a key part of who they think they are.

Has the government said that trans people "aren't the gender they want to be"? What does that even mean? They're entitled to "identify" how they want. It is a scientific fact that sex is immutable, that's the issue.

The more accurate analogy would be denying people can be Christian’s and saying people can only be Jewish.

That’s what they are hinting at. Without actually doing anything legally or with legislation about it. They haven’t actually said it

If a person with delusions claims to be Napoleon, it is not 'denying their existence' to disagree.

The more accurate analogy would be denying people can be Christian’s and saying people can only be Jewish.

No, it would not.

No. A more accurate analogy would be saying that anyone can call themselves Christian, but that does not mean they are entitled to dress up like a Bishop and try to take over the CoE. Or wear a dog collar and claim a council tax exemption.

To recap:

People are free to believe in the existence of innate "gender identity"

No one else should be required to do so, especially when it affects other people's rights

No, it would not be even remotely similar to that.

For a start, you can follow any religion you want, or none at all.

You can be a committed Christian, or atheist, and convert to Judaism.

But no human has ever changed sex.

I am not arguing that trans women should have access to all the same places and things that other women should have. I think there should be safeguards and equality considerations. But I do think we should figure out a way for them to still be an able to comfortably live as the gender they want. My point is to just say ‘women are women’ doesn’t say anything meaningful about how trans people can live without causing unfairness to other women. They say it because they want votes from GC people without putting the work into solving this complicated problem

OK, let's unpick this a little.

If you don't think trans women should have access to all women's single sex spaces, which spaces do you think they should not have access to, and why not?

If they are, as you seem to believe, women, why should they not have unfettered access to all women's spaces?

And if they do not have unfettered access to all women's spaces, what does "living as the gender they want" actually look like, as far as you are concerned?