To say that just because someone is opposed to " Trans Acceptance Without Exception" it doesn't mean that they are GC or Feminist.

[TooBigForMyBoots]

And it's important to understand the difference?

Some oppose Trans Rights Activism from a Radical Feminist POV. Gender is abstract. A societal construct that can be accepted, rejected or adapted throughout life. Gender is different to biological sex which is scientifically binary and immutable so Gender is not really important and not a stable basis for law.

Some oppose Trans Rights Activism from a Feminist POV. Gender might have a biological component. Fine with gender ideology long as biological women's rights, security and single sex spaces are safe with no encroachment from males.

Some oppose Trans Activism because it goes against their religious beliefs. It does not make them GC or Feminist.

Some oppose it because they believe in stereotypical gender roles. Men should be men and women should be women. This is not GC or Feminist.

Some oppose it because of misogyny. They hate women. They hate men pretending to be women because it debases men. This is not GC or feminist.

Am i being Unreasonable to say that just because someone is opposed to TRA "acceptance without exception", it doesnt mean they are Gender Critical or feminists. And we need to understand the difference.

And whilst I am thanking brilliant posters who are relentlessly intelligent, patient and well informed I also want to namecheck Wadermellone and Ereshkigalangleg. I have loved reading your posts and the way that you dismantle the crap that is thrown your way for wanting to defend the rights of women and girls. 💪💪

Including DrBalenciaga it seems. Very telling. 🙄

Thank you @DewHopper

No. The DM started to cover it because they saw the gap in the media coverage, saw women talking about it, and are making money out of it.

No one here is naive or under any illusions that a mainstream media service is making money from publishing stories. They even have feminists write articles and I am yet to see one person show us where Julie Bindel’s articles are factually incorrect, pushing misinformation or are ‘right wing’. And still the constant refrain of ‘I am not reading that, you posted a DM arficle. How very right wing of you’.

Yes, that's exactly what I meant, and I'll give the poster the benefit of the doubt that they misrepresented it in error, in this good faith discussion.

Thank you dewhopper.

DrBalenciaga · Yesterday 10:21

We are referencing the social media propaganda the far-right has generated around this issue, not the specific actions of an individual.

So, your position seems to be:
"The many, many crimes of abuse perpetrated by transw are all one-offs and individually tragic, but complaining about the trend has been fostered by the right wing press and you are wrong to make a fuss about it."

OK.

Thank you.

I don’t consider myself an expert on the issue, far from it. But I have been GC a long time. My dd who is a young adult and also happens to be gay has suffered horrendously at the hands of the TRA movement, so I might take more interest than some.

Left wing feminists (and many LW men too) going right wing in their later years is a sad phenomenon, and Julie Bindel appears to be an example of it, as are Julie Burchill and others. In some cases it's purely self-serving opportunism when people get old and fat (financially) and suddenly conservatism makes SO much more sense! Julie Bindel, I suspect (I'm not any kind of authority on her thinking), is one of the 'one issue' radical feminists who cannot see the middle ground on this argument that is necessary for any kind of meaningful progress, so has decided, very unwisely, to side with the DM. But I'm forever grateful for her tireless work over the years for women and girls.

I get my facts usually from original sources where I can. And the DM helpfully provides the background I need to do my own research and it is without a paywall. That you believe that is your own prejudice coming through about where you believe feminists get their information and your own prejudice on a media source that is undoubtedly designed to make money from who ever it can.

Have you provided the moment when Keir Starmer has clarified that no male person will ever be included in Labour’s definition of ‘biological woman’ given the party’s and Starmer insistence that male people with a GRC are to be treated as female?

ubiquity · Today 12:42

Left wing feminists (and many LW men too) going right wing in their later years is a sad phenomenon, and Julie Bindel appears to be an example of it, as are Julie Burchill and others.

I don't think that Julie Bindel has become right wing, just because the Mail and Telegraph publish her articles, it doesn't follow that she's adopted their politics. In my opinion, it's lazy thinking.

Again, your ignorance and prejudice is showing very clearly. If I were you, I would look up Julie Bindel and the work she has done and is doing.

Labour may well have ‘done far more’ for women’s rights, but then they gave all that away AND MORE to anyone who is prepared to say they are a woman.

Literally.

You are not talking to surrendered wives, here you know.

You are talking to lawyers, social workers, care workers, nurses, domestic violence survivors, campaigners,teachers, councillors, parents, university students and lecturers- every kind of woman.

We aren’t a faceless hive mind if credulous mums who forgot how to read when they were breastfeeding through the night. We are the wives, sisters, daughters, mums and aunties of trans men and women, boys and girls.

Where the fuck do you get off with your patronising guff about having fallen for the RW conspiracy!

I'm answering you in the spirit of giving you a fair hearing and trying to be reasonable, but I'm not going to get pushed into a corner answering any questions simply designed to trip people up. Many of you focus on very specific, narrow examples and fixate on potential, hyperbolic scenarios. It's never a good idea to make decisions based on hysterical 'what if' paranoia.

Labour has done far more for women's rights than the Conservatives ever have, and they are trying to walk a tightrope on this issue suddenly made so divisive by toxic right wing rhetoric with nothing but electoral gain in mind.

ALL they have to do is commit to protecting sex specific spaces and clarify that this means biological sex.

Not that hard.

Why won't they do that, do you think?

As I said I'm not an expert on her politics or her thinking, but her writing on (very) right wing (and questionable) publications does say something.

Oh. And by ‘original sources’ I mean from studies, from academic papers and original research and documents. I am certainly not alone, I know many people on this board take the time to read everything they can. They read widely and they read constantly.

Your accusations about us and the Daily Mail are laughably absurd. Demonstrably with the tripe that has been posted on this thread.

Anyone who thinks "what is a woman" started with the release of a documentary in 2022 hasn't been paying much attention to the issue until it went more mainstream

I would urge you to do more of the 'critical thinking' that so many somewhat hard of thinking are so often referencing here.

I'm not going to get pushed into a corner answering any questions simply designed to trip people up.

No of course you aren't. Perhaps you have an inkling of why people ask what a woman is, given that you obviously can't answer it?

And yet you labelled her as right wing.

I think we see the absolute deficit in critical thinking behind your posts and over confident accusations.

If any one of the regular posters here dismantled my post- and they often have-, I’d hold my hand up and take it. I respect them, even when I disagree with them.

They tower above you.

As it is, you are easy to dismiss. Though you are irritating and I could do with saving my breath.

Hi.

As all the threads that talk about this are hived off into one seperate forum, it is likely that the titles in that forum will cover this topic as that's where all the threads are hived off to.

It ain't rocket science.

To focus on your last point, has Keir Starmer said that Labour would give trans women with a GRC access to ALL single sex spaces, because I don't think he has, since Labour's revised pledge on this as itemised here by Anneliese Dodds:

We need to recognise that sex and gender are different – as the Equality Act does. We will make sure that nothing in our modernised gender recognition process would override the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act. Put simply, this means that there will always be places where it is reasonable for biological women only to have access. Labour will defend those spaces, providing legal clarity for the providers of single-sex services.

The devil is in the detail @ubiquity