To be bored of the trans hate?

[DaisyUpsy]

Ok, there are extremists (like the punch people in the face person), extremists can be found in many areas of life but is anyone else fed up of the trans stuff constantly being dragged up?

I've seen some ridiculous statements on here recently. Everything gets something added related to trans when it's totally irrelevant. It's getting boring. Trans extremists are not the norm so can we stop pretending they are?

If you think women being raped is wrong, you campaign against social and proposed legal changes that increase opportunities for women and girls to be raped, sexually assaulted and subject to sexual voyeurism. You campaign against men who get off on women having been raped access to women only groups for survivors of sexual assault.

That’s why we are speaking out on gender ideology.

Exactly.

If cis means 'the same', what does cis woman mean? 'same woman' makes no sense.

When everyone routinely refers to men as ejectulaors, I'll start believing that cervix havers is a genuine, non trans ideological description of women.

How many trans men or non binary females really like to call themselves cervix havers? Its driven by men who dont want the word woman and female biology to be linked, because everytime it is, its a reminder to then that they are neither.

You have a cervix so cervix haver is accurate.

But it excludes women who have had surgery.

And when it comes to health messaging about cervical cancer, for example, it's confusing. Most women with some degree of English as a second or third language would understand women in health promotion about cervival screenings. Cervix haver screening might pass them by, with devastating results.

What do you say to women who have limited English, trying to access an English-language health system?

Feel free to give a sensible answer. I'll wait.

Its driven by men who dont want the word woman and female biology to be linked, because everytime it is, its a reminder to then that they are neither.

It is. "Trans men" don't hold the power in the trans movement. Men aren't having to give up their words, when you would think FTM trans people would object to people saying that men have penises, prostates, testicles. But look at men's health organisations. They mostly are left alone.

If you had read the conversation I'm having you would know that I'm not advocating that these terms are used. I'm in fact advocating for not referring to people in ways that they've asked you not to. This means not using the term cis and cervix haver for people who don't like it.

Trans extremists are not the norm so can we stop pretending they are?

Except that they are having a disproportionate influence on a lot of areas of public policy, particularly those areas which affect 51 % of the population ie actual women.

Take hospital policy, for example. It is policy in a scarily wide range of NHS Trusts to take transwomen at their word, and place them on female wards.

Consequences: a woman was raped by a supposedly "female" ward mate. The police & the hospital gaslit her and told her that it couldn't possibly have happened.

Education: educators at schools and universities are being disciplined and sacked (eg Professor Kathleen Stock) if they dare to question Stonewall views, or question the "there are more than 2 sexes" idiocy.

Dissolution of the family: children are being "socially transitioned" without parental knowledge or consent.

And in the state of Victoria, in Australia, if a parent dares to question this, the law requires that Social Services are immediately called in. Children have been removed from otherwise happy homes. These children are not being abused - by their parents, at any rate.

not had time to read the whole thread, but from what I have read, it’s striking that the GC women are able to be specific about their concerns and about the tactics they endure from TRAs , whereas those agreeing with OP are only making vague statements about ‘extremism on both sides’ without specifics of extremism from GC women. I find this is usually the case from ‘both sides’ advocates.

Most rapes are by cis men, no one is on here ranting about that.

Is that right @Peony654 ?

What is it that makes men distinguishable from trans men when discussing this?

And why isn’t that distinction made when talking about women and trans women?

And marketing for male products

There’s no way we see the same

Woman gets dropped in a way man does not

That's right, they don't. It has a reputation for being transphobic, apparently.

I don't disagree with many of the problems brought up and debated here, and it's complex. It's the derailing, by a minority of the same people, on threads with nothing whatsoever to do with the trans debate. People here are sick of it.

I’m bored of week after week a “peaceful” protest derailed by aggressive misogynists
I’m bored of the constant drip drip drip of queer theory into our children’s lives
I’m bored of the NHS erasing specific language for female parts but not mens
I’m bored of worrying my parents won’t receive care if they register and object that the carergiver presenting as a different gender and confusing them
I’m bored of worrying that my very switched on Gen Z kids are going to say “the wrong thing” in front of the wrong person and end up being reprimanded by teachers and spat at by other pupils
I’m bored of seeing countless WokeBros, previously made uncomfortable by #metoo now falling over themselves to dive straight back into the licenced misogyny of being an “ally”.
I’m bored of celebrities having to apologise for liking a tweet
l’m bored of hobby groups on facebook getting taken over by puritans who demand loyalty
I’m bored of autistic kids being offered magical trans identities rather than anyone actually bothering to help them
I’m bored of seeing mass produced t shirts with slogans inciting violence against women

I’m just so fucking bored of it all.

I think that as often in these debates, what is considered extreme is the issue.

I think it is extreme to say or believe that a man can become a women, or a woman a man.
I think it is extreme to have surgery or take drugs, which will cause some issues or harm and are likely not to be reversible.
I think it is extreme and regressive to categorise men and women by their compatibility with outdated sexual stereotypes.
I think it is extreme to say that that because a few people in a group want to be treated a certain way (accepting legislation) that it is acceptable to expect others (especially those adversely affected) to comply.

I do think there are trans people who need protection (which they have in law) and rightly so. But the comparator must be with their own sex, as it is the only way the female sex can also retain their protection.

I would be much happier if it were more the norm for women and men to display a spectrum of human behaviour, without it being classified as male or female and single sex protections remained in place to protect women where necessary.

also if you think people who disagree with you hate trans people, I think you are doing a lot of people (not all) a huge disservice. After all, do you consider you hate women? I know, you are one. According to some, I am trans, as I have PCOS, so…
it’s obviously ludicrous to say all the people posting to protect women and children are anti trans, although there will be a small percentage who do

“*You have a cervix so cervix haver is accurate.

But it excludes women who have had surgery.”

It also excludes women who don’t speak English as their first language or have learning difficulties and don’t know if they have a cervix or not.

And marketing for male products

Exactly. Look how well the Bud Light campaign went down!
Far more outrage when men are “affected” than when TW are advertising sports bras with their boobless bodies, and becoming the face of tampax when there is no earthy reason for them to use them!

Yep.

I also haven't had time to read the full thread. But I'd like to point out the false equivalence in the OP, thought I expect others already have...

IF the TW inciting people to" punch terfs in the f*ing face" was just an example of an extremist and not representative of the movement, they wouldn't have got a cheer from the crowd. The same goes for the "decapitate terfs" signs at the protest earlier in the year where there were SNP politicians milling about in the crowd. There's no way things like that wouldn't have been policed and called out on the GC side. Violence and threats of violence are tolerated completely by one side of the debate, so yes OP we are bored of trans hate- i.e. the hate coming from the trans rights movement.

No one benefits from using words to describe people that make them feel uncomfortable, disgusted or anything else negative.
That is exactly my point.

It seems very odd to me that people pm both sides take issue with the way some of the other side refers to them while simultaneously referring to the other side in ways they don't like, which leads to further polarization.

Both sides feel they have the right to define themselves and others as they see fit but hate being defined by how others see them.

Yes I know. I hate it. You haven't read the conversation I was having and so have missed vital context.

“*You have a cervix so cervix haver is accurate.

Do we get to call all males Willy-wavers or penis havers (for male services in the nhs) then?

If you had read the conversation I'm having you would know that I'm not advocating that these terms are used. I'm in fact advocating for not referring to people in ways that they've asked you not to. This means not using the term cis and cervix haver for people who don't like it.

A man not wanting to be referred to as male in any situation , isnt the same as one not wanting to be referred to as an ejectulaor, even if both are accurate.

Its disingenuous to pretend otherwise.

@Alifelessweird I suggest you read the thread before categorically stating who is saying what. I gave some examples of specific things I have seen on here that that I would say are extreme but only one poster engaged with it ...

That isn't what I am saying though.

Women don’t have to concede on pronouns because they say no to cis and cervix haver

@Cucucucu

When I struggled with bf, my doctor refused domperidone as she was worried about risks to baby. Which is ethical, I am not complaining. Why would it be ethical to try a drug on a baby that hasn't had strict trials (which it hasn't, it really isn't clear on the science).

I think some people just fail to understand that pronouns are about control.