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.

@Helleofabore

Helleofabore, I'm going to have to ask you respectfully tone down the aggression in your posts, otherwise it's difficult to reply. I'm not even sure if you actually even read what I post as some of your questions above I've already addressed.

And yet, the male swimmers had a locker room, did they not? Penises with penises? And Thomas would supposedly have had friends in the male locker room considering that Thomas swam previous meets as a male swimmer.

It was a female meet. For whatever reason, the male locker rooms were inaccessible, according to Gaines. It's odd though.

So, Riley Gaines, as one of the first women to publicly complain was initially taking a careful approach and you feel this makes her dishonest?

I never said she was dishonest. I stated her story has changed.
*
Have you considered she carefully worded her statement because she was still at university and felt she would jeopardise her place there if she deviated from that carefully curated position?*

That's an interesting take. She has deferred her dentistry studies to pursue feminist advocacy and Republican public relations, so there's no university studies happening anyway. I have considered this, and no, I don't think so.
*
Do you think that she also needed to process what happened to her and the others and work through it? Don’t women victims of sexual abuse get to do that?*

Possibly, but if that was the case, she wouldn't be where she is now. Are you calling her a sexual abuse victim now?
*
Or is it that she is a conservative that you are reacting to? Would you prefer that she not talk? That she only talk in the way you wish her to talk so that you are comfortable in sharing her words? That she had a differerent political background? Or what? *

It isn't the people themselves that I'm reacting to primarily. It's the fact that the situation was latched onto by Conservatives and amplified far beyond what it should have been.

I have seen how Riley was treated in her early speaking events, she was abused even then for just speaking out. Do you believe that she would have felt safe to express the full truth of her distress that she was exposed to a male penis ?

Do you believe that women who have been sexually abused should then be shamed as that article you posted has attempted to do? Do you believe that a woman’s declaration of being sexually abused should be treated with such derision and suspicion?

I don't think the article shames her. It tells a different story. I'm not sure why that offends you so much? I don't believe women should be automatically believed because they are women. In this case, it seems Thomas came into the locker room, got changed, and Gaines was horrified by this. (I would be, too.) I don't think he walked about waving genitalia or stood naked in front of the other women deliberately. That's extra decoration Gaines added later to keep the story in the media.
*
Have any other female swimmers contradicted her account that Thomas exposed Thomas’s penis and that Thomas watched them ? If anything more women have now come out and confirmed. So of course, those women feel more confident in being honest in how they felt now that they have processed it. Do you think they should have remained silent? Or just spoken the way you feel they should have approached it?*

Not sure. Have they? And if they have spoken, that's great. I wouldn't want anyone to remain silent about something that is troubling them.

Ugh, sorry about the formatting fail!

@Helleofabore

And yet, it wasn’t that ‘you posted thoughts of your own’. You were, even in your own words, patronising. We went one step further and pointed out just how accusatory your posts were. And you then turned abusive.

Do you feel it is appropriate to patronise and scold a group of women the way your first posts did whether they might agreed with you or not? And if you feel it is not appropriate, why did you do it?

That's not quite how it went, but if it makes sleep better, okay. And I wasn't "scolding a group of women". I thought I was having a discussion with like-minded peers on MN - not just a group of women.

I believe her

we are being manipulated to think this is a greater issue than it actually is.

How many women impacted is a big enough number for you to think this is a big issue? Is it ok if only a few women are impacted? If only a couple of women lose jobs or opportunities, are raped, are denied same sex rape support, are silenced or bullied? Because for me, the acceptable number of women damaged is none.

And yet, my post was talking about the post that waterhound referred to. Are they your words that Waterhound referred to?

Would you like to define ‘abuse’ then since you have made those accusations? I mean, I asked multiple times and recommended that you report the posts. Did you?

Shall we go back to your very first posts again censuring and patronising women? And then the name calling when that was pointed out that you were patronising and censuring women for their media consumption while then infantilising mature adults making reasonable decisions about their media and the links they post?

I think the answer @nothingcomestonothing is always N+1.

no matter how many women have been harmed, it always needs ‘oh just one more’ before certain posters will accept there’s a problem

and as always a reminder to the lurkers that redefining woman to mean “adult human female - oh and men with self declared lady feelings” affects all women.

No. It is being portrayed as such though.

You talk about media manipulation. This is manipulation right here.

“I'm going to have to ask you respectfully tone down the aggression in your posts, otherwise it's difficult to reply. I'm not even sure if you actually even read what I post as some of your questions above I've already addressed.”

And here is that hypocrisy again

You may chose to continue with this theme of ignoring your very own posts, however, I can assure you that people reading can follow them.

I have no issue with you thinking differently, @DrBalenciaga

In fact the comment you quoted was specifically about women having different opinions. That’s fine.

My objection to you- and it is quite personal now, so I hope it isn’t seen as an attack- is your twisting of people’s words to match your preconceptions, your determination to find proof of witchcraft in people who don’t agree with you.
It’s an odd strategy, as tying knots in people's sentences and shouting 'Gotcha' doesn't change anyone's minds.
It's something like sealioning. Relentless, detailed dismantling of people's thoughts to find a verbal equivalent of a soundbite you can use to discredit them.

My mother uses the same strategy. in person, it’s abusive. It’s a relentless scolding analysis of all the ways you are a disappointment and have wandered from the path of correct think.

You contribute nothing valuable, just undermine everyone else. Sorry and all.

I think this is turning into bullying and ganging up against one poster, and I think the above post is accusing a poster of exactly the sort of tactics many of the GC group use here: twisting words, determined to find evidence of some TRA conspiracy among posters here, the 'gotcha' jeering etc.

Lay off bullying individual posters and stick to debating the issue.

You seem to want to give Riley the least flattering interpretation of her actions whilst seeking the most flattering one for Thomas - a man who started this by lying his way into the female swim team and locker room.

Why is this? Why are you so keen to think the worst of Riley whilst minimising his behaviour?

Riley started to speak out more regularly after she left the university. Whether she still has study to do, she was still physically doing her course work when she started to discuss this.

That may have directly influenced just how she spoke about this initially while processing all that happened .

So, you don’t think the accusation of ‘changing her story’ was an accusation of dishonest directly or indirectly?

I believe that being exposed to a male penis without consent constitutes sexual abuse, yes. Hence why we prevent that by having male changing rooms.

If the male toilets were locked, someone would have a key and be able to open them so that Thomas would have had their very own space. However, Thomas chose to use the female change rooms from the start of their competing in the female category, did they not? We have reports that at other meets women also complained. This was not a one off incident.

“It isn't the people themselves that I'm reacting to primarily. It's the fact that the situation was latched onto by Conservatives and amplified far beyond what it should have been.”

So women shouldn’t speak out because a certain group you don’t like might ‘latch’ onto it. Is that what you are saying?

And can you describe the boundaries of where women’s voices are to be amplified to so that they stay within the appropriate groups who can discuss this?

Why can’t she voice her issues at Conservative events? Would you like to tell us what she says that means her words should be censured by you? What specific things?

“I don't think the article shames her. It tells a different story. I'm not sure why that offends you so much? I don't believe women should be automatically believed because they are women. In this case, it seems Thomas came into the locker room, got changed, and Gaines was horrified by this. (I would be, too.) I don't think he walked about waving genitalia or stood naked in front of the other women deliberately. That's extra decoration Gaines added later to keep the story in the media.”

It doesn’t have to be this hard to understand why this article was offensive?

Were Riley and other women exposed to Thomas’s penis without their express consent ? Yes or no?

Does the article throw doubt on this? Yes or no?

Or was this article using someone’s account of their sexual abuse, because that is what it was, to score political points? And are you continuing to do this?

This is troubling me too.

It is clear who the liar is and it is not Riley.

It is the context of the entire situation which led Riley to be cautious in exposing the impact on female swimmers. That context being that they had been told they would lose their scholarships and places if they complained.

Even with all that background and the fact that Riley should never have been put in the position (by Thomas being allowed to compete in the first place), there are posters on here seeking to discredit Riley seemingly because she holds conservative views.

Women can't win, we are disbelieved or told we are exaggerating even when we are faced with harmful situations caused by these males.

Disgraceful.

You think that article written by a trans activist is a balanced piece?

They have deliberately set out to discredit a woman harmed by a trans person and you are putting that on here to manipulate us in to believing that Riley Gaines should be discredited.

Wow.

Don't even pretend to be on the side of balance or of women.

I've not heard one person say that Thomas didn't get his erect penis out in front of the girls in the locker room. And several who say he did.

They had no idea who 'Lia' was at the point of entering the competition by the way.

No female swimmers have denied that Thomas’ penis was exposed and that Thomas was watching women get changed.

And if you have not read the other women’s accounts, perhaps you are judging Riley because of her activism and truly not the veracity of her account. Yes. Other women have spoken out. And each of them have been abused in doing so.

You seem to have missed the amount of abuse these young women have received. Even Selina Soule, the runner from Connecticut had received a huge amount of abuse.

Riley had to held in a room with a team of security guards until the San Francisco police came and cleared the people, mostly male, who were louding intimidating her, and trying to kick the door open. She was also assaulted that night.

That is what waits women speaking out. It takes a very brave woman to speak out.

Apparently it is not victim shaming a woman at all.

Rape crisis seems to think that flashing is a form of sexual assault, from my albeit limited (thank god) experience of friends and relatives who have experienced sexual assault yes their story changes depending on who they speak to and how they process it

so one of my friends who was flashed at in a changing village which was multi sex told it as a really funny story to start with, its only months later she felt she could tell the truth about how it affected her

Apologies. I am on my phone and it keeps dropping sentences and autocorrecting things when it shouldn’t.

Riley first started talking about the incident when she was still doing coursework. She was still at university during her initial interviews, I believe.

Yes. It is almost like MeToo has been forgotten.

Just when you think people couldn’t be more callous.

And sorry for the broken up posts. I remember DrBalencia that you don’t read ‘essays’ . So I made accommodations for that.