Wanting assurances about Women’s Rights, yet debate is often reframed around trans issues - why?

[DissidentDaughter]

Ask about women’s sex-based rights and, for some reason, many hosts/moderators and contributors automatically head down the ‘trans rights/gender’ avenue… What’s going on?

51% of the population - a distinct class in our own right - and yet most journalists and TV/radio interviewers struggle to be accurate and focused when announcing the topic.

How credible is the ‘toxic debate’ mantra?

How is it ‘bigotry’ for women to talk about their sex-specific realities and the right to safeguard boundaries and single-sex spaces/services?

Why do many people get offended by the concept of ‘consent’?

• AIBU - journalists/TV&Radio hosts shouldn’t have to bother about clarity

• YANBU - journalists/TV&Radio hosts have a duty to understand the distinction between women’s rights and trans issues.

Oh dear, how terrible of her.

What's your point?

Oh dear, how terrible of her

Again 🙄👍
Seems all we're capable of debating at here.

She's allowed to say anything she likes. I agree with her about some things. I disagree with her about other things. She's not a spokeswoman for gender critical feminism and none of us are responsible for anything she says. She's just a woman with opinions. (Which some people seem to have a big problem with.)

Oh. I know she said she wasn't a feminist but I was pretty sure she was a leading GC campaigner
Is she now being disowned? Interesting...

I’m 46, the head boy at my pretty traditional
secondary school (where even the female teachers weren’t allowed to wear trousers) was openly gay.

Trans rights is mentioned every time someone asks about women’s rights because the trans rights movement is essentially a men’s rights movement and we all know that men’s rights are the most important thing ever (see the already noted provision in the GRA that means trans men aren’t men when it comes to inheritance).

The idea that there is any link between young people consenting to take drugs that will likely lead to their sterility and a lifetime of medicalisation and young women taking the pill is so ludicrous that only TRAs could have thought of it.

We don’t let under 18s drink, get tattoos etc, yet still young women are able to get the pill if they are gillick competent. Puberty blockers are like tattoos, no child should be able to consent to them for “gender dysphoria” because they cannot possibly understand the consequences.

No, she's a woman with opinions and a microphone.

"People who don't believe any woman has ever had a penis" isn't an organised political movement with official spokespeople, you know.

It's odd that you seem to think it is.

What next? Hitler was a leading member of the vegetarian community?

She's allowed to say anything she likes

I agree there at least

Disturbingly any progress that was being made has now been undermined as the protected characteristics of ‘sex’ and ‘sexual orientation’ are being distorted.

I find it really concerning that young lesbians, exploring their sexuality, are under pressure to consider they may be ‘born in the wrong body’, ie that they are male, rather than simply being accepted as women who happen to be same-sex attracted.

Women’s rights are concerned about all women

I agree with her about some things. I disagree with her about other things

Ok, would be good to know what it is you agree with her about seeing as it's been established on the thread that she's no feminist.
(By GC posters)

I agree with her that humans can't change sex and that male people don't belong in women's spaces or sports, regardless of how they believe they identify.

I agree with her that women should be allowed to say the above without being cancelled.

I agree with you about puberty blockers. But beach is right that getting rid entirely of the idea of "Gillick competence" had wider implications. As you can see on the KJK video.

There is quite a lot of the debate that's like that. Rewriting the EA for example would provide an opportunity to debate "amendments" and potentially scrap a load of protections women have.

Giving parents the right to have a say on what's taught in RHSE could cause a load of topics to become forbidden and lead to a return of s28.

"Women, don't fight to have a word for yourselves or any single sex spaces because if you open that can of worms you might lose your right to contraception and abortion" is quite the hot take.

Women's rights have been hard won. Achieving recognition that women are not second class citizens has taken 100 years and there's still some way to go.
Now we're going backwards and women are being threatened. What recognition has been granted is now being taken away by men who claim to 'feel like a woman' but actually feel anything but.
That's why right now women's rights are inextricably linked to trans rights, because the demands of the TRAs are all about taking away the rights, security and safety of women.

I think many people underestimate how angry women are - that the rights of 51% of the population are dismissed as a ‘culture war’, a side issue, instead of being about responsible policy-making that recognises the realities of life for female citizens.

Yes, getting rid of gillick competence would have all sorts of negative repercussions. But absolutely no one except TRAs is suggesting that gillick competence might be got rid of.

It is scaremongering, pure and simple, designed to make women think that if we try to maintain our boundaries & rights, and protect vulnerable children, that we might end up losing them altogether. We’re not falling for it.

It is appalling that any child not suffering precocious puberty has had drugs to prevent a natural process from occurring. One day this will be a medical scandal akin to lobotomies.

I often wonder why ‘feeling like a woman’ fails to include the joys of being a menopausal, tired, carer-of-elderly-parents…

Reminds me of the fact that rowing is the only sport in which biological sex is specified - because rowers row in mixed sex teams so otherwise male athletes would be disadvantaged. When it’s the other way around it’s just common sense…

Why do some women boil down their entire existence to these tired old tropes (or at least try to? (
I'm nearly menopausal, that's not all that is for me being a woman.
If you want to or can only see yourself as bleeding every month or boiling yourself down to worth on your breeding/lactating capacity then crack on.
I feel it in myself, if you don't then Ok.

The whole point of this movement is to remove women's rights, and it suits men as a class to go along with that - hence how eager governments are to compel women's obedience.

51 of the population

Like you speak for all of us though.
You don't.

What’s with the “entire existence” malarkey? Perhaps you’re unaware that other women, too, are not defined solely by their commitments or health.

However, dismissing the demanding nature of being a carer as a “tired old trope” is inaccurate. Furthermore, being menopausal isn’t a crime - it’s a reality that all women go through, for better or worse.

Glad to hear it - speaking for yourself is your responsibility, not mine.

@BeachParty Equally you don't get to give away other women's rights because you don't feel the need for them.

👍
Likewise, just if posts would refrain from "speaking for women" like we're some great blob when it comes to thinking.
Let's all speak for ourselves, all grand.

Furthermore, being menopausal isn’t a crime - it’s a reality that all women go through, for better or worse

Hundred percent agree