Paris Lee talking at MN - thread 2

[shinynewusername]

1st thread here

MN has invited Paris Lee to speak at its Blogging event.

Meanwhile, actual women are being silenced.

Wouldn't it be great if TA's said 'we feel really unsafe in men's bathrooms, women don't feel comfortable with mtt in their bathrooms, please provide us with a safe space in all public areas'. Hell, I'd stand shoulder to shoulder with them to campaign for that. It's funny (although not in the 'Ha ha' sense) that mtt can say they don't feel safe in men's bathrooms and we all have to accept that, but women get abused for saying the same thing about mtt. Surely the self identification thing will put mtt at risk in the woman's toilet as well as women. They're literally arguing to allow the people with whom they're afraid to share a bathroom to be able to use the bathroom that's supposed to be 'safe'.

Anyway, I digress. I know it's not all about toilets (although that seems to be where the conversation always ends up).

Yes they are literally arguing for the men they are scared of to be able to use the women's bathroom, changing rooms etc. Because what they are demanding will allow all men, trans or not to potentially claim that they identify as a woman. There won't be any way of knowing who is telling the truth, because there is no truth.

But then trans ideology is not known for its consistency, coherence or logical approach to facts.

And as has been said many times before, being "scared" of using a men's bathroom is a red herring. The issue is validation as a woman.

Anyway, I digress. I know it's not all about toilets (although that seems to be where the conversation always ends up).

The toilet issue IS the definitive issue. Transwomen's legitimate entry is based solely on the First Commandment that Transwomen Are Women.

That is the foundation to the entire house of cards.

I think they are perfectly aware that they will be at as much risk in the "open to anyone" bathrooms that were previously for women as they would be in the men's bathrooms.

I am rather sure they just want to take away women's safe spaces. And the only logical conclusion from this is that most of the transactivist movement are autogynephiles who get off on molesting women.

Any MtT who really fears male violence would at the very least want to restrict access to women's spaces to post-surgery MtT.

I am rather sure they just want to take away women's safe spaces. And the only logical conclusion from this is that most of the transactivist movement are autogynephiles who get off on molesting women.

If this wasn't true, they would be happy to use unisex, or the accessible toilet. It's goes beyond validation, because as soon as they start arguing, they are acknowledging that everyone knows, including them, that they're not actually women. The validation becomes meaningless.

I'm thinking of the backlash of that student in America who turned down a separate toilet and demanded to use the girls changing room. If it's validation of anything, it's his sense of entitlement.

Any MtT who really fears male violence would at the very least want to restrict access to women's spaces to post-surgery MtT.

Or at least something like the GRC which (I hope) includes psychological assessment?

Or at least something like the GRC which (I hope) includes psychological assessment?

Even this becomes an issue when their are tips and tricks on how to deceive a psychologist to get a GRC all over the Internet. And die warnings to conceal any feelings of AGP.

"Any MtT who really fears male violence would at the very least want to restrict access to women's spaces to post-surgery MtT."

Very true. The bathroom thing always comes down to intimidation of women doesn't it? Whether because they're so beautiful that women wouldn't want them to be near their husbands

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_563b997fe4b0411d3070003a

Or this, from transman which seems vaguely threatening:

mobile.twitter.com/JayShef

The one thing that puzzles me is that the trans movement has managed to inflict the vcitimhood of the perpetrator upon women and we buy it, well not "we" but women.

It's quite a trick, isn't it?

How can any woman genuinely feel that a transwoman is more at risk from men than us? You hear libfems say it, don't you? You hear them talk as if women have this power and we have it over trans women. As if looking in the mirror and not wishing you had an actual cock means that women have privilege.

How many teen girls are self harming? How many teen girls are coerced into sex? don't get me started on Peter Tatchel using a photo of very young lesbians kissing to start his fucking campaign about lowering the age of consent How many teen girls absolutely loathe puberty? Just because the response isn't to cut their tits off apparently they're okay and are drowning in privilege.

Ugh. The whole thing sucks.

And meanwhile the likes of Miranda and Helen, etc are getting caught in the crossfire. Joining us under the bus.

We already know from Paris's columns that Paris has contempt for women who feel afraid of strange men. They are "infantilising" themselves.

I think Justine is hitting the wrong zeitgeist.
I agree, in a big way. Most women I talk to about this dont identify themselves as feminists tbh (I do), most of them consider themselves liberalish 'natural' mum types, lots of homebirthers and breastfeeders etc. None of them buy trans ideology and most are horrified with the way its seeping into schools and children's tv. Other large online women's forums, like Lipstick Alley or LChat, dont buy it either. Women are being silenced exactly because most of us dont buy it, people pushing that ideology need to create a fake atmosphere of agreement because the reality is most women dont buy it, and more of the ones that do are reaching peak trans every single day.

They say we are on the wrong side of history, I think they are dead wrong. History will not look kindly to the trans movement or its enablers and collaborators.

Paris on violent trans prisoners.
"Despite the outpouring of support for Tara, I saw some people on Twitter – and Mumsnet – question whether a woman like her, who still has a penis, should be placed with other women because she "will be a danger to vulnerable female prisoners who are biologically smaller and weaker." This is fear mongering based on stereotypes. Some trans women I know are tiny, and weak as kittens after years of hormone replacement therapy. And another thing. According to the US Department of Justice, the rate of inmate-on-inmate sexual assault is at least three times higher for women than men in America. That's right. Women abuse other women in prison. A lot. More than men do. People are the problem. Not penises."

Not All Men
Women Abuse Too

Is this a game of MRA bingo?

Is there a veiled threat in Justine's comment that she thinks a civilised conversation on this topic may be impossible? I thought there was an implication in there that MN may not be able to provide a platform for these discussions of trans issues and the impact on women's rights for much longer as we aren't being civilised enough about it. But we aren't protesting Paris' inclusion because she is trans and we are horrible transphobic bigots - please, invite a trans campaigner as suggested on both threads who has not written such hateful stuff about women.

It is not fair to dismiss Paris' comments as 'a but dodgy' when they perpetuate a damaging, reductive view of women welcoming harassment and abuse because they love being 'slags'. This view isn't just one which Paris expresses. It's a view hammered over and over in misogynistic pornography which is rife everywhere. Women and girls are harmed because of the perpetuation of this view. Paris' comments are not just dodgy, they are dangerous.

It's disingenuous to compare her to Lumley, whose comments are nothing like as graphic and humiliating as Paris'.

And finally, it is simply not true to claim that people are consistently deleted for calling other people racist or misogynistic and certainly not for calling people transphobic. That quite clearly is not happening- not just due to lack of reports, but in this very thread we have an example of someone reporting someone who had called her transphobic but MN confirmed it could stand as the poster had obviously thought about it before commenting. Well, I think a lot of people have thought quite carefully before they call Paris misogynistic. I'm bewildered that anyone could look at her Julie Bindel's Genitals campaign as anything BUT misogynistic. But apparently we should celebrate and legitimise that kind of campaigning by welcoming her to Blogfest. Wow.

Tara iirc wasn't as weak as a kitten - far from it.

What happens in prisons is impossible to quantify and analyse, for v obv reasons. Stats are bunkum.

I don't agree - i think it shows that on MN we are trying very hard to maintain a space for a civilised debate on the trans issue where people consider other human beings' feelings. I'm afraid I'm beginning to think that might be impossible, though.

Just catching up on the threads, and read this from the end of the other one, please tell me I've read it wrong and it isn't saying that if we can't be civil and don't put feelings of others ahead of our own then trans issues discussion won't be allowed on MN anymore?

That's how I read it, JustWoman.

Cross posted with captain

"Is there a veiled threat in Justine's comment that she thinks a civilised conversation on this topic may be impossible?"

IMO, yes.

My feelings are really hurt by the idea that a man can get surgery to create a hole in himself and then decribe himself as a woman and the hole as a vagina. I find that incredibly dehumanising. Do my feelings matter or do I lack the correct chromosomes for that?

OT a tad but I feel I need to query this statement - "the rate of inmate-on-inmate sexual assault is at least three times higher for women than men in America"

Surely that's because a large chunk of the time male on male sexual assault in prison will actually be classed as rape, whereas there is no rape for women?

Say... (made up stats!)
m-m sexual abuse = 15% of reports
m-m rape = 50% of reports

f-f sexual abuse = 30% of reports
f-f rape = 0 (what with the usual lack of penises in female inmates...)

So more "sexual abuse" that is f-f but far more sexual violence in m-m.

Miranda has it exactly right. The issue is not that PL voices opinions that offend many women. The issue is that PL is famous - and therefore invited to the event - precisely because of PL's campaign to undermine women's rights as a sex.

It's like a Jewish society inviting its members to learn from Marine Le Pen's campaigning skills.