Trans people

[Mog65]

Firstly, I'm a trans ally

Everyone is up in arms about trans women. What seems to be forgotten these people are human beings. Where is humanity. You have probably been sharing toilets and coming into contact with trans women every day and have no idea. You only hear about the few bad ones. In a public toilet, you go into a cubical and pee. Its not like you're sat there in full public view with your knickers at your ankles.

What has been forgotten also, as many females are changing to. So trans men. So you're in hospital in a ward. The woman in the next bed, identifys as George, clit is now a penis fully working and you're in the next bed! Same person can wander around female only spaces as the law has changed. George can now only be searched by a female. By the way George a transgender man is a pervert! All hypothetical but nobody has brought this up.

Just a thought.

Why?

This ruling is extremely useful for them however, as it clarifies that they are entitled to female only benefits around pregnancy/mat leave.

And also ensure that they have access to screening for women’s cancers etc presumably

@Helleofabore you’re really hellbent in reaching for the stars to find some outrage

English isn’t even my first language so maybe that would calm in your nerves to understand why I don’t have a full compendium of similar expressions that I can just pluck a different one from

If she's white and identifies as being black that's pretty offensive to black people. Surely you can see that?

I also know some transmen, and I think that is highly unlikely, however much they might like it to be true.

This is rather ridiculous. Why be "very devastated" when the only thing that's happened is that the definition of "woman" has been clarified to be "biological woman"? That's all it is. To consider anyone who agrees with this as an "inhumane monster" is rather silly.

They wouldn’t because they’re women.

That post is basically pure virtue signalling. I doubt the poster themselves even thought it through.

Someone said the same to me a few pages back and wasnt called a misogynist? I guess because my beliefs differ from yours

Because the context is different. @Bingbopboomboomboombopbam has dated women are “pearl clutching” over wanting to protect their same sex spaces - essentially saying we’re should STFU and not make a fuss, because the menz are so much more important

You were pearl clutching because the “most hateful things you’d read” were people stating the fact that people can’t change sex

No. I am pointing out the issues with using a word that is meaningless.

If English isn't your first language, perhaps instead to telling women that they need to accept being categorised by the word 'cis', you could take on board what I said .

The term 'cis' is meaningless because the term includes any male person who has a DSD yet has a body that is **formed around the production of small gametes that has any degree of sensitivity to any of the testosterone that body produces.

There is no word left for female people.

Because even male people are now saying they are also ‘female’ . When ^^ female means only a person of the sex category where that person's body has been formed around the production of large gametes, regardless of whether the body does, has or ever will produce those large gametes. ie that requires the presence of ovaries or ovarian tissue - never testes.

In fact, we now have examples of many male people declaring that they are female people. So even the word for female has become meaningless in that sense.

But 'cis' is a* *word that was repurposed from its original usage and is meaningless for the purpose of discussing female people in its current usage. It has been used in academic papers as well in an attempt at using inclusive language which then renders the papers meaningless because the term is not describing a unique grouping of human bodies, even when it claims to be doing just that.

To see how this works, we have been told that 'girl' and 'woman' both now include:

1 Male person who has been incorrectly registered as a female at birth, but has a male body **.
2 Any male person has now claimed a transgender identity using those labels.
3 And any person who has a female body ^^.

Under the label of 'girl' and 'woman', extreme transgender activists have been telling us for years that those labels break down into two types of girls or women:

Cis and Transwomen/transgirls.

These terms mean:
Cis
= (1) Male person who has been incorrectly registered as a female at birth, but has a male body **
and
= (3) Any person who has a female body^^
Trans
= (2) Any male person has now claimed a transgender identity using those labels.

Therefore there is no unique word to mean female people who have a body ^^ formed around the production of large gametes.

Cis is meaningless as a unique description for female people and it always was. It is also misogynistic because it leaves female people with no unique word for their needs.

I find that man repulsive and attention seeking. Unfortunately people like that undermine the cause and ruin it for genuine people who deeply struggle with how they feel.

The absurdity of it.

It just feels attention seeking to me,he should get himself a cute dog.

Especially as they're "very" devastated. 😂

The other significant issue with ‘cis’ is that its very usage forcibly categorises someone into having a philosophical belief that they may or may not have. It is very problematic for those who do not have a ‘gender identity’.

In fact, to extrapolate it out : if ‘cis’ excludes those who do not ‘identify as having a gender aligned with the sex they were born’ then the trans gender community would be fucking huge. Because it would include everyone who doesn’t believe in gender identities at all. Not through deliberately self-categorisation as ‘agender’ but simply through rejection of anything to do with that philosophical belief that is the foundation for gender identity and the theories that shape those identities.

Because, the only commonality with all those claiming a transgender identity is philosophical belief. Not a medical 'problem' according to transgender people and academics and medical professionals who are transgender and shaping public awareness. No scientific and robustly established material facts.

So only philosophical belief.

And I would be pleased to know just what other philosophical belief should be given the power to shape a whole populations language to the extent that we are seeing these language changes being demanded?

If someone who was religious called me a non-believer, I cannot dispute that. Because it reflects my reality. I don’t believe in their religion so in their religion centred language that is what I am. It could be considered neutral in that respect. It doesn’t change my belief.

However, calling me ‘cis’ is not neutral. It falsely categorises my beliefs and is not a neutral act at all. Calling me ‘cis’ coercively forces me to believe in gender identity and the theories that are foundational to them.

Look here are the ultra manly transmen getting wheeled out again. They won't know themselves, they've been shoved to the back (if they've been noticed at all) for over a decade and now they're suddenly massively important.

Characterising women as shrieking is also telling on yourself, fyi.

I'm surprised you've managed to return to such a traumatising thread, Hazel. Here are some more images from terfisaslur for you to compare with this appalling thread.

Why teach your children inaccurate “facts”. Will you also teach them the moon landings were fake, that the earth is flat, that unicorns and dinosaurs exist? You owe your kids honesty, tell them you sympathise with transpeople, but don’t tell them lies. After all, your children are human beings, and they have rights too!

I would say that any person who uses the term 'pearl clutching' is misogynistic. Do you want me to go back and quote the person who said it to you and say the same?

Ive never had anyone this obsessed with me

And the violence and vitriol from those websites is horrific

Gosh TRAs really do have delusions of grandeur.

I agree. And ive never said otherwise. Nor have i said this thread is 'just as bad' so im really not sure where other posters have got that idea from

Can ANYONE - just one person - who says TWAW explain how they are women? Surely it can’t be that hard? Bonus points go to anyone who explains it without using depressing sexist stereotypes

I know, people not forgetting inconvenient things you've said must be annoying for you.

I think women (if you really are a woman), who have zero regard for the rights or safety of other women should be challenged. Unlike you, I prefer to be honest about it rather than add private little emojis to people's comments.