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.

If she is left wing why is she writing for the Daily Mail and the Telegraph, who are not exactly champions of feminism and women's rights? If she wants a platform, at any cost, then she has lost her credibility IMO.

If she is left wing why is she writing for the Daily Mail and the Telegraph, who are not exactly champions of feminism and women's rights? If she wants a platform, at any cost, then she has lost her credibility IMO.

The same reason Julie Bindel sometimes does. Women have been utterly betrayed by the left.

The Mail and the Telegraph are mainstream media. You sound ridiculous.

The Guardian isn't a champion of women's rights, the Independent isn't a champion of women's rights. The New Statesman isn't a champion of women's rights.

They have prioritised a male supremacist worldview when it comes to this issue.

Is it genuinely news to you Ubiquity that the guardian allowed its staff to bully out GC writers like Suzanne Moore and Hadley freeman??

Because both are mainstream media sources consumed by a very wide range of readers of all political persuasions. You are here continuing this doubling down on 'DM' is a 'far right propaganda' media. And yet, mainstream media has historically carried a wide range of journalists with varied opinions.

It really is not that fucking hard to understand.

Particularly when you look at how feminists have been treated by the Guardian.

You say she has lost her credibility based on your own very prejudiced perspective. When has feminism been only on 'left wing' media? I fucking remember listening to Germaine Greer and Shiela Jeffreys on mainstream media as a teenager.

That Owen Jones is frequently gibbering with rage at the temerity of women who campaign for our sex-based rights?

Written by Jo Bartosch, another Daily Mail/Telegraph journalist so forgive me for not taking her credentials as a women's rights champion terribly seriously

Speechless at your ignorance tbh.

Can you honestly tell us that this 'shitshow' would not have also happened under a Labour government? Really? You think that you can say that and be taken seriously?

Then you don’t believe trans women are women.

Look at the sentence. Trans women are women. Full stop. That’s it. No caveats. No if or buts. Which is how biological males end up in women’s spaces.

It’s not trans women are women, except in a biological sense. and this isn’t labours redefined stance. Because Kier Starmer follows it up with an agreement that trans women are women.

I have no intention of voting for the Tories.

And Labour could gain alot of favour by saying ‘Trans women deserve to be treat with respect and allowed to live their lives freely without fear and free to present how they wish, but are not women in a biological sense even with a GRC. Biological women are free to have their own spaces, that don’t include biological men.’

If that’s what they mean, they could just say that.

I have a Labour MP. As I said before I emailed them 4 weeks ago asking a question about another issue that mainly impacts women. The fact that single parents lose CB when earning over 50k. But 2 parent households can earn up to 99.9k and get it. They are still formulating a response. The trans issue is the only issue that they are failing women on.

Are the Tories any better? No I don’t think so. But that doesn’t mean I can vote for Labour.

Labour need to start looking at why people don’t want to vote for them. Not why people vote for someone else.

There is indeed a lot of it going on. Take a look at the Guardian and the BBC.

The entire point here OP, is that only some posters are telling women 'to be warned' despite the fucking fact that we are completely aware of the issue and have been discussing it for fucking YEARS on this board.

Do you really think that the media manipulation has by passed us? Or do you only believe that it is happening with those bad far right media outlets?

And Labour could gain alot of favour by saying ‘Trans women deserve to be treat with respect and allowed to live their lives freely without fear and free to present how they wish, but are not women in a biological sense even with a GRC. Biological women are free to have their own spaces, that don’t include biological men.’

If that’s what they mean, they could just say that.

Yes, they are going to need to be that clear to get my vote.

Women have been utterly betrayed by the left. Not true. Repeating this ad infinitum doesn't make it any more true. To borrow a leaf from your book, can you explain, with examples, how women have been utterly betrayed by the left?

You sound ridiculous. I thought we weren't throwing insults anymore?

How?

Women have been utterly betrayed by the left. Not true. Repeating this ad infinitum doesn't make it any more true.

You (particularly when you know fuck all about any of what's been going on) saying it isn't true doesn't change my view and it's not going to stop me repeating it as many times as necessary.

We have single sex spaces.

The vast majority of Gc women would be happy for another space for Trans people.

Womens rights are at the forefront of GC views. GRC views are not anti trans. Women’s rights won’t be at the forefront of an anti trans movement. Because women’s rights are not anti trans.

I have never seen anyone suggest all trans women are sexual deviants. However, women are at risk from men’s. Not all men of course. But the risk is enough, we have our own spaces. That risk doesn’t reduce because the biological man says he is a woman.

I have never seen anyone who is GC say they object to men dressing to appear like a woman or changing their name or using spaces that are mixed sex. Simply that they are not women, they are still biological males and shouldn’t be in women only spaces.

GC women want rid of men wear this and women wear that. Or that’s a man’s haircut or that’s a women’s haircut. Thats man’s hobby, that’s a woman’s hobby and so on. For the sake of both men and women.

Its all women’s issues.

Ask Rosie Duffield.

We will make sure that nothing in our modernised gender recognition process would override the single-sex exemptions in the Equality Act

Why couldn't Anneliese Dodds say that in her conference speech in October?

we will modernise the gender recognition law to a new process, while continuing to support the implementation of the Equality Act that protects everyone.

Go and do some research on FWR, going back years. I'm not going to spoon feed ignorant people. Women have been massively let down across the world by left wing parties on this issue.

If by 'mainstream' you mean read by a lot of people, that doesn't change the fact that the Daily Mail is certainly not a champion of women's rights. I'm really interested that you're so defensive of the Daily Mail. I'm afraid that really does explain a lot of the tone and quality of the debate here (by some posters).

Is that you way of apologising for insulting me less than an hour ago?

So you’re still avoiding answering whether or not you know that the guardian allowed GC writers Suzanne Moore & Hadley freeman to be bullied out Ubiquity

I'm really interested that you're so defensive of the Daily Mail. I'm afraid that really does explain a lot of the tone and quality of the debate here (by some posters)

FGS. Getting desperate now.

October 2023

Labour Leader Sir Keir Starmer says he is happy to continue to write and work for The Sun newspaper - as he prepares for his party conference in Liverpool.

During his 2020 leadership campaign, Mr Starmer claimed he would not to speak to The Sun newspaper during a hustings in Liverpool.

When asked why he has since decided to write for the tabloid, Mr Starmer said: "I have to make sure that what we have to say is communicated to as many people as possible in the time that we've got available and that is why I am very happy to work with The Sun, to write for The Sun, to do interviews with The Sun."

Extremely effective way of silencing women's concerns, isn't it? The left leaning media refuse to platform these women and they 'lose credibility' if they are featured in a more right wing outlet.

Real 'win win' for the TRA side there.

And people fall for it time after time.