Trans men are women according to Gender Critical Movement

[ThisPinkWyvern]

Under Trump's transgender policy, which echoes the ideology of the Gender Critical Movement, trans women are men and trans men are women. This view denies and rejects as worthless and baseless the lived experience of millions of men and women in the US who identify as trans. As a result of having their lived experience of themself ignored and denied by law, millions of trans men as well as trans women are now experiencing deep psychological trauma and living in abject fear and terror in the US. Many are trying to leave the country because they are so terrified.

The almost total silence of the Gender Critical Movement and it's supporters about the effect that it's ideology has had on those hundreds of thousand of women who self identify as men is deafening.It's whole argument about banning trans women from female public toilets and other ' women only spaces' is based on the argument that denying trans women the right to access these spaces is needed to protect the safety of women and girls. Given the fear, terror and trauma that hundreds of thousands of women( trans men) are now experiencing in the US, as a result of the government putting into practise Gender Critical Movement ideology, the sense of safety and well-being of hundreds of thousands of women has been devastated. This makes the infinitesimally small number of cases where women have been or ever would be assaulted by a trans woman in a women only space pale into insignificance by comparison.

In short, the Gender Critical Movement is directly responsible for harming the well being of hundreds of thousands of WOMEN according to it's own ideology.The damage done by implementing it's ideology makes a sickening mockery of it's claim that it's ideology protects the safety of women and girls.

When the number of men( trans women) in the US who are now living in fear and terror in the US is taken into account as well, the Gender Critical Movement and all those who support it are directly responsible for terrorising millions of people. It is impossible to claim that we are supporting women's rights and protecting the safety of women if we support the Gender Critical Movement.

Transmen seem happy enough to use male toilets,

This poster positively advocates that they should have to. Odd when it's so terribly dangerous for the men who identify as women.

If there is a genuine need that this group of male people are at risk in using male toilets, then support groups and governments need to start campaigning to make male toilets safe for all toilets.

And this plea for safety was never dealt with appropriately, because what other vulnerable groups of male people should be given special access to the female toilets? Surely if that group of male people are in danger in male toilets, there are other groups in danger too?

Or is the danger exaggerated for political gain? Where is the evidence that they are in danger? We know that there are male people with transgender identities using male toilets still. Where are the reports of them being attacked?

This is the point that always got me. If males are at risk from other males, in male spaces, why on earth should that be made a woman's problem?

Exactly. The issue is male violence or the threat of so why is the answer to send men into female spaces.

“then support groups and governments need to start campaigning to make male toilets safe for all toilets.”

for all users.

sorry

Wherever you start to peal back what has been allowed to happen and why, there is so much that lacks any evidence or is so low evidence to not be credible, yet this group has gained many additional privileges that no other groups have.

They are not ‘rights’ when you strip it all back, they are privileges. The ‘right’ is that people have access to toilets. The privilege is that a group of male people get not only access to male spaces, but female single sex spaces too.

Another instance is that not only do a group have the right to their philosophical belief. But society has undue pressure, even coercion in some instances (employment is just one example) to comply with the language of that particular philosophical belief. What other group has that privilege?

Sure, but as I said, she went to the extent of actually linking it.

Yes, here is the central issue, the trans ideology believers want to force us to believe their ideology.
Religious groups aren't permitted to force atheists to believe in a super being/force/God because beliefs are just that - they are the perspective of the believer.
As a non believer I'm not gender critical, I'm simply a non believer of gender.
I hope Sandie wins her case because she was simply following her belief that sex exists and matters when she told a man she was uncomfortable with him changing in women's facilities.

And why just some males? What about gay males? Elderly males? Non-white males? Should we let them all in our Female toilets too? Maybe we should make them some nice sandwiches while we’re at it.

No! Women are not service humans! Our needs count too. If men can’t help teasing or assaulting other males or can’t deal with a man wearing make up or a gay man or whatever, that’s a male problem to solve and nothing to do with women!

Firstly, @WiddlinDiddlin , transwomen are completely safe in the males. They and gay men have said the worst transwomen get in the males is a smirk. There are no records of any transwoman being assaulted in the males. None. The same can't be said of females assaulted by transwomen in the ladies.
Secondly, in any case we are not HUMAN SHIELDS for male on male violence. Its not our problem to solve.

Thirdly, re the typical photoshop test not even the most ardent transactivist uses the photo test anymore. You realise photoshop can do wonders? It's in person, it is in the MOTION: the gait not just the voice, adams apple, lack of hips, square jaw, height, limb size, hand size, philtrum width etc

Lastly, I don't believe trans men should have to use the females. They are free to use the males. I just think that transwomen should use the males, as the males are threats, not females. I don't care what the females use.

Edit: I missed the bit about 'birth gender'. Its birth SEX. Not 'gender'. The spaces are sex based. Not 'gender' based. And newsflash; the solution to make people use the sex based spaces for their birth sex had worked for decades and decades before - until the last 8 to 10 years. So why can't it work again, when it successfully worked for decades?

”I recently came across Alexis Blake on instagram. I totally recommend watching her instagram and you tube as a very balanced viewpoint from a trans woman.”

Going back to this point about this group of males with a transgender identity that appear to make reasonable points, mainly because they admit they are male and also because they say they see female people’s point of view and may even agree with some points. But all the while, they also admit they are never going to stop using the female toilets.

I saw this on Twitter from Amy Sousa about empathy traps and Brianna Wu, and I feel it applies to Blake and this softer approach to activism as well. However, I also thought about this aspect of Blake too.

Blake is a content producer so Blake will be profiting from appearing to be a moderate. Just like Wu is profiting by being on panels etc. There is a social likely financial gain to them appearing to be moderate.

Plus, by appearing moderate, they also get the collaborations and the support from the male social commentators. Those commentators such as Leor Sapir and Ben Ryan who use these male people’s preferred pronouns. They then determinedly reject those comments from people pointing out that discrepancy in stating that no one can change sex and that gender identities should not be a basis to allow male people access into female dingle sex provision while using female pronouns for a male. Or those commentators double down on ‘true trans’ despite no evidence being available. In other words, both groups of those male people benefit from their ‘moderate’ positions.

Anyway, this is what Amy Sousa said about empathy traps that might help people like @Daisymae23 to understand why others rejected their suggestion about Blake because they recognise the issue. I thought it perhaps could help there.

x.com/knownheretic/status/1893705434156105966?s=46

“🚨WARNING about how to safeguard oneself against the "persuasion-predator" who attempts to persuade the target out of trusting their own instincts.

The persuasion-predator gets a target to cooperate and is thus granted more flexibility when it comes to privacy.

Persuasion requires the participation of the target.

Persuasion is an internal process, not an external one, we persuade ourselves.

While predators may manipulate, persuade, compel, and direct, they only succeed in control when the target allows them to be persuaded out of trusting their own instincts.

I could also speak about Wu in terms of DARVO, empathy traps, and other kinds of narcissistic manipulation tactics, but the important part is to spot the tactics and shine a light on them so as not to allow yourself to become a willing participant with predators who attempt to groom the public out of healthy boundaries.”

She later posted this too:

“I think of narcissists as manipulative in order to achieve their own ends, but it's not always an abusive aim, their aim might be money, power, or other kinds of control. In terms of the persuasion-predator, abuse, boundary violation, or access to the preferred victim is the aim.”

https://x.com/knownheretic/status/1893826007351607662?s=46

The Bewilderness also made a good point

”This is the claim predatory men make to absolve themselves of responsibility for their own actions.

The behavior is inborn & not the result of a series of choices they made.

Very like the claims religious leaders make to shift responsibility for their abusive actions on to God.”

Thank you for this. I really appreciate learning more on the topic. As I said before, I would be considered gendered critical but really I feel I am just an advocate of common sense (and therefore feel biology cannot be ignored) I will be reading the links you have sent me with interest and appreciate your responses to me to provide meaningful debate and information x

I think that most of us want some sort of common sense solution. What I have noticed is that there are different pathways at play here.

Some people flat out cannot be convinced that any male people should be considered female when sex matters including language. From the start. That is me, because I came at it from protecting female people from negative sex discrimination. I still believe everyone should be not illegitimately discriminated against and that if a male wants to present how he wants, if it causes no harm, so be it.

Some people take a while to reach their own conclusions. Whatever those conclusions are.

But, I really do believe we should be reading and watching anything we find interesting. I don’t believe it is ever a waste of time. So, I will watch Blake on occasion, but I do so very much aware of what Blake’s motivation is.

And read original source material too, often I find that opinion pieces about the original is not accurate.

Good luck. But I have found that once you start to see that pattern, you rarely miss it.

I don't see how there can ever be a way to let some men into female SSS without letting any male who wants to enter in.

We can't know what surgery/hormones someone has had, we can't know how sincere their feelings are or how good their intentions are. If we let one male in we let them all in.

If you let the toothless vegan fox into the henhouse you make it a house for hens and foxes and less reconstructed foxes will enter and carnage ensue.

Whether or not a man has had surgery or hormones is entirely irrelevant. He is still a man and no less of a potential threat than any other man.

Men with mutilated genitals are still stronger than women and can still commit sexual assault and other violent crimes.

Also, genital mutilation is a fetish for some of these men. I certainly don't want to be in a place where I am vulnerable with them.

I totally agree.

I also have said in the past that it is a case of negative discrimination to allow some male people access to single sex provisions (ie any provision for a female people, including board positions, sports, awards as well as spaces) over all other male people based only on their philosophical belief. There was never a solid foundation of evidence that the group could and should be allowed over all other male people.

I totally agree.

And even if a man were completely harmless etc etc the presence of a person that 'reads' male in a female space is distressing to some women the fact that some women are happy to share SSS if the male in question is surgically altered/ chemically castrated doesn't remove the gut reaction of fear in a previously abused woman

Even a male with everything removed is male. Female facilities are for females only.
Males can be re educated to accept that some males look feminine.

There is no evidence that transwomen are at risk in the male toilets or changing rooms, absolutely none, zero, nada. You can be damn sure we'd never hear the end of it if there was even ONE incident, but there haven't been any.

There was the infamous stunt pulled by a couple of high profile transwomen in the UK where they went into the male toilets to film the horrors of what they would encounter in there. Said stunt fell flat on it's arse as not one male using the toilets during the stunt so much as looked sideways at the transwomen.

It is just another emotionally laden deception to manipulate and garner sympathy used by the GI adherents. It is false.

If transwomen feel uncomfortable using the facilities for their sex I don't actually care that is their problem to solve and the solution is NOT to force themselves into the facilities for women and girls.

Fionne Orlander has written about never getting any hassle in the men's toilets, despite being a very pretty transwoman. Fionne and Miranda Yardley campaigned for third spaces, and not one of the many large, loud and profitable organisations involved in pushing transwomen into women's spaces supported them. If this was about transpeople being safe/ just wanting to pee, why weren't those organisations all over that campaign? Why didn't it get any traction?

Because this was never about safety for transpeople. If it had been, third spaces could have been fought for and won by now.

https://www.change.org/p/boris-johnson-a-plea-for-third-spaces-for-transgender-men-and-women

100% Nameychangington.

I think it is quite clear that it was not about safety so much as control and access to spaces they demanded.

I have only read the last couple of pages, however, I think it can all be boiled down into the following:

This is not about needs, it is about wants.

Can I just say I congratulate your bravery. Those of us who are gender critical don't want to kill trans people or cause people pain or upset (despite what the tra's say) I work with a trans woman- she is very nice. We call her she, we call her by her chosen name and she came over before a work night out and we helped her do her make up. She is though not a biological woman and never will be. That is the difference. She isn't a woman she is a trans woman and there is no issue with that.

Until you find yourself naked in a changing room next to this gorgeous lady