How the erosion of LGBT rights effects female sex based rights.

[needatalk]

I've been reading various discussions and articles on this topic for some time and the conclusion that keeps popping up in my mind is the worry that my female rights will be as much eroded as LGBT rights in law.

I've seen a push in America especially Florida from activists and lawmakers, combining female and LGBT rights in the same grouping. In the UK, politicians are taking American policies. They are calling for diversity and equality to be dismantled in law. It's like time is going backwards in just on LGBT rights but on female sex based rights. Where less rights will exist for us females in the future to do subjects such as STEM or be Astronaut because of the stereotyping happening from suppose feminists who's concepts are the old typical stay at home leave the male to do the dangerous or go to work mentally.

My daughter is 8 years old and and I worry for her, to not able to have the right to do express herself as bisexual or lesbian because of erosion of LGBT rights. We all know homosexuality a long time ago was illegal and that can happen again for all LGBT rights. I worry that my daughter who loves space won't able to follow Rosemary Coogan become an astronaut which is something she dreams of because in the future people will say the radiation of space is too dangerous for females as they will get deformities in that area to prevent them for having babies or healthy babies. Science has disprove this but people are dismissing science now.

As much as I care and support about sex based rights, I can't forget the thought in my mind that my and my daughter's female rights are in as much danger of being taken away not by activists but by lawmakers who enforce sex based past stereotyping and us females lose equality which has been hard to fight for in the first place.

I'm so worried for the future for us females.

Yes, just more from the Ladybird Book of TRA Twaddle.

How many tweets did that get?

Who cares how many tweets it got? She's not a virtue signaller.

It's funny that you didn't have a clue about it though, it just shows the level of your knowledge @Lampy123678

I'd say her obsessive amount of tweets about trans people guised as concern for women is the definition of virtue signalling.

Not really. She's not signalling to people. It reflects her concerns and feelings. But nice try.

Virtue signalling would be for eg boasting about how much you do for charity. She is challenging people, not signalling. There's no "guising" involved. Women's rights matter as much as "trans rights".

I think you need to look up virtue signalling perhaps.
I agree with you. I said it's a shame that attacks on women's rights don't get much platforming by big GC campaigners since they matter just as much.

I did actually (not sure why you think I didn't) and it's a great example of how she can use her wealth and privilege where she wants to.

Need research so that more males can act out their fetishes on un-consenting infants who would be perfectly adequately nourished on formula milk?

And it's a shame the RSPCA don't focus more on disability rights, the RNIB hardly tweet about refugees, Rosa Parks barely made a dent in the Norwegian arson rate, and David Attenborough never made a single documentary about the sub prime mortgage market.

Perhaps different people have different priorities?

I think you need to look up virtue signalling perhaps.

That's because you don't understand what it is. It's essentially the same concept as "slacktivism". That doesn't really apply here.

Lol - It means expressing a moral viewpoint disingenuously so yes I believe it's virtue signalling coming from her. Unless you're going to tell me I'm not entitled to think that, is there anything else you want?

She's not expressing anything disingenuously, it's what she believes, and I share that belief. You subscribe to an ideology which sees it differently.

You were the one who told me to look up "virtue signalling" when it's you who is using it as a buzzword you don't really understand.

And I think she's disingenuous because her claims to care about women being assaulted doesn't reflect her actions. You seem determined to change what I think without providing any defense for her numerous abusive friends.

That's fine, we're all allowed an opinion.

And I think she's disingenuous because her claims to care about women being assaulted doesn't reflect her actions.

Using her own money to set up a rape crisis centre solely for women (the ones with vaginas btw). What an uncaring bitch! She should really care more about women being assaulted and do something about it.

Yeah but she also schmoozes with men who have decades of SA and rape allegations. Both can be true. I just don't consider her some sort of feminist icon as you do, sorry.

Yeah but she also schmoozes with men who have decades of SA and rape allegations. Both can be true. I just don't consider her some sort of feminist icon as you do, sorry.

If you say so.

Mybe I am being a bit dim but I don't really understand why homosexuality being legal and not believing people can change sex means your daughter can't be an astronaut

Who would you consider a Feminist icon out of interest?

a lot of GCs views have more support from ring wingers than not.

Have you got any receipts for that, or is it just your opinion?

Yeah she made that comment a while ago.

So JKR said transpeople don't exist. A while ago. Presumably it'd be easy to find evidence for that assertion, since you're stating it as fact you must have evidence right?

Well it was you who has stated throughout the thread that a person should be judged by the actions and beliefs of other people who believe one thing that they also believe. You clearly believe that transpeople should be treated as if they have become the sex they identify as. So do all of these people.

https://terfisaslur.com/

Therefore, by your logic, you should be judged by the views and actions of these people. That's fair.

I'm judging her by what feminist issues she thinks are deserving of her time which by the looks of it is very little bar women's bathrooms.

Did you miss the part where she funds a whole rape crisis service for women?

No no please go back and read my posts I have stated several times you and another person believing X doesn't mean anything. Literally verbatim. When you and person both believe X and that person also is a danger to women and their rights and you welcome the support of that person that's where I take issue.