Another Labour misogynist.....

[FattyCat]

So Michael Cashman CBE has been twittering away today and publicly asking for people who signed the Jo Cox "Spartacus" letter, initiated by mumsnet, to be dealt with in some way by Labour.

He's the LGBT Global Envoy apparently. And co-founded Stonewall. I love it that I'm being spoken for by a women hating nob head like this.

Lesbians don't matter to LGBT. We fought against clause 28 and wiped the arses of people dying of AIDS in the eighties before it was a sexy clause and now we are expendable.

Women don't matter to Labour unless they have cocks.

30 odd years an activist for women and LGBT and all the fight has gone out of me.

Time for Dykes to get the "L" out of LGBT I think

As removing AGP also means removing the calls to 'trans' children too. And the majority of 'transactivists' who are just angry young men with fetishes

No, they aren't and removing AGP will not cease calls to 'trans' young children. There are a range of other activists with other agendas, including simply finding ways to silence and oppress women.

"The AGP stuff is really tricky. It's offputting to people when you mention it and in that sense I agree it's not helpful.

But it's the elephant in the room, isn't it?"

Yes, I think this is what I'm struggling with. I just think many people on the TRA side see AGP mentioned and read it as "she's saying all trans women are perverts!" At that point, they become very protective of this "oppressed minority" and start aligning them with gay people, black people etc. and not wanting to be on the wrong side of history.
I'm inclined to think that's why it's better to leave AGP out, at least for now, and focus simply on the argument that men commit the vast majority of sexual and violent crime, that TIMs retain male patterns of criminal behaviour, and therefore that if women are entitled to safe spaces away from men, this needs to extend to TIMs too out. This firmly links (or it should to anyone with any common sense...) TIMs to other men -the oppressive class rather than the oppressed.
I struggle to see how anyone who sees an argument for separate loos for men and women on the basis of (some) men's violence and women's vulnerability could object to that line of reasoning. But of course many seem to lose their ability to reason when they enter the trans arena

I'm inclined to think that's why it's better to leave AGP out, at least for now, and focus simply on the argument that men commit the vast majority of sexual and violent crime, that TIMs retain male patterns of criminal behaviour, and therefore that if women are entitled to safe spaces away from men, this needs to extend to TIMs too out.

I know what you're saying but many of the men you are describing are AGP. At some point you get asked why you won't accept these men in female spaces and that is a big reason why.

In the buybull it says women should not have authority over men and women should stay silent when men are speaking.
Men like that enjoy the sound of their own voices and find women's voices a distraction to their own thoughts.

I dont see how we can NOT mention AGP

as others have said, its the elephant in the room.

I believe that a certain number of people who apply for GRCs at the moment are turned down - Ive seen some really creepy posts from someone who has been refused one and is def AGP. I would be really interested to know why people may be turned down - maybe because they are deemed not safe, perhaps. Maybe because they are fetishists and not gender dysphorics? I dont know. But at the moment we are safeguarded by the process.

Perhaps this is what the push is for? To get the AGPs a free pass, and quickly too.

Perhaps this is what the push is for? To get the AGPs a free pass, and quickly too.

I think this is an objective. The wider trans community knows any scrutiny or gatekeeping of AGP will damage the whole movement.

Historically, marginalised men have always been been treated better in the UK than any women. Why is anyone even surprised?

I think AGP is at the heart of why it's such a misogynist movement. But I don't refer to it much in my discussion about it (slowly converting my neighbourhood ). It's too weird and makes one sound slightly deranged, even though I think it's true.

I focus on science - these people are not women. They cannot become women on their say-so. Women's biology is relevant and it's not for men to tell us that it isn't.