Labour party invents new bollocks made-up non-existent definition for woman

[pisacake]

labour.org.uk/members/get-involved/national-youth-elections-2018/

Sixteen uses of the word 'self-defining woman'. Zero uses of 'female', 'biology', or plain 'woman'.

'Woman' is now literally meaningless. A woman can be a bog-standard heterosexual teenage male (Lily Madigan), if he says so.

And obviously with half the places reserved for 'self-defining women' (not 'women', 'self-defining women'), then there's not really any reason why men wouldn't define themselves a women, is there?

If misogynistic shits like Lily Madigan can 'self-define as a woman', well ALL men are women, aren't they?

The whole bloody human race is 'self-defined women'.

Stupid Labour.

@ButFirstTea

why do you think women only spaces exist in the first place?

I'm asking what you think about Travis' wanting to use woman's changing room at TopShop

www.buzzfeed.com/laurasilver/topshop-refused-to-let-a-trans-person-into-an-all-gender?utm_term=.gjgZX22qJ#.oe2G6eeVq

note the staff specifically told Travis there were women in their underwear in the changing room.

Also what do you think of Danielle Muscato generally - would you understand why I don't want that person in the women's bathroom with me, assuming a bathroom with communal area for washing hands?

scroll down for photos - Danielle admits, no hormonal treatment, no surgery
www.daniellemuscato.com/

Bottom line is, people cannot change sex. It is scientifically impossible

People can be cosmetically fashioned a certain way and good luck to them, but there is not compulsion for the entire population to buy into the belief that sex can be changed.

So keep the Protected Characteristic 'sex' segregated areas segregated and provide a third space for Gender NF/Trans/GN

And everyone should be able to express themselves in whatever clothes and manner they desire

Danielle wants to force his penis into our mouths because we don't accept him as a woman. Of course he's an extremist and a nutter but if you support "debate is transphobia" then he gets a free run.

@ButFirstTea - and here's Danielle's comment on International Women's Day

twitter.com/daniellemuscato/status/839611526998818817?lang=en

ButFirstTea
Why don't you support women who's culture or religion means they cant share some spaces or services with biological men?
They are caught between their culture/race/religion and activists cries of bigotry.

Do you not care what its like to be in a mixed sex psychiatric ward?

Don't you care about consent?

All of these problems disappear if you support third spaces & services for trans people, instead of taking away from women.

@InkThePurist - I always find that one a bit weird - like women of some religions are more important than women of other religions or no religion.

There's an argument that all English women are caught between culture and cries of bigotry - because English culture is separate facilities.

Also what do you think of Danielle Muscato generally - would you understand why I don't want that person in the women's bathroom with me, assuming a bathroom with communal area for washing hands?

I think this is interesting, because I think I understand what you mean when you say this, as in Danielle appears to be big, heavy, maybe strong etc? Also quite masculine in appearance? How do you feel about biological women who are heavy and strong as well, and maybe even those who look 'masculine' ie women who have some facial hair or hair loss? I'm not trying to be provocative here I'm genuinely interested.

To me, a public toilet isn't a particularly gendered place and I don't view it as a safe space so personally I wouldn't mind using gender neutral toilets. I understand that others feel differently and public toilets can be triggering for some. Maybe an answer would be to do away with the communal handwash area, make every individual toilet a cubicle with it's own sink and locking door.

I'm not a town planner though so this may never be possible!

NB this isn't about Danielle personally who appears to not be a very nice person from that link, more of a hypothetical.

@Snowdrop If women of certain religions or cultures are not able to access women only spaces, then what will happen is that they will end up leading lives which are much more limited than they now are. Some of them might end up pretty much confined to their own homes.

The way things are going, all women and girls are going to end up extremely limited in where we can safely go, and the ability to have our voices heard.

We are going backwards at a frightening rate, while people, including women, smile and congratulate themselves on being so progressive!

I’m not a Labour member so is it worth writing to my MP to tell them that, even as a lifelong Labour voter, I’ll longer be able to do so while they continue with this nonsense?

@ButFirstTea "How do you feel about biological women who are heavy and strong as well, and maybe even those who look 'masculine' ie women who have some facial hair or hair loss"

put it this way - before the GRA was proposed, if I thought I saw a man in the women's bathroom, I would be concerned and report it to whoever was in charge of those bathrooms.

After the GRA - or even now, happening in an office near you! - a DM type who has been harrassing someone could actually legitimately watch for them going to the bathroom at work, and then follow them in.

As for women who are heavyset etc as you describe, I know quite a few and my sister has to basically clear her facial hair every week!

so yes there are lots of women like this, but I have never yet mistaken one for a man so haven't felt unsafe, no.

if you think a public toilet isn't a particularly gendered space, then trans people shouldn't be arguing about access to a particular bathroom should they?

also imagine being on a hospital ward at night, if you never have. Sometimes it's a long corridor, nurses can't see you. A biological male is in the bed next to you. That doesn't worry you at all? Women have worked hard for these spaces, if you don't care about them, can you see that others might?

I don't care about lots of things but I respect the fact that others do.

Seeing - re religion, yes I know, it just bugs me because it's important full stop, it doesn't need an extra factor. It will also end up being hijacked by religion if that's the only way you can get protection from things - e.g. we will be told to tell HR why we need a women only bathroom when the answer is "we're women" but they will hive off one loo for women who are of a particular religion or whatever. Watch how fast everyone pretends to be it...we shouldn't have to do this.

hipsterfun - yes, I would write to them.

I'm almost 50 - not that old. I remember going to the football with my father and there were no toilets at the football ground for women. I had to wait till I got home. And as an adult I have been in pubs in Glasgow, albeit maybe 20 years ago, which did not have toilets for women.

A lack of access to safe, secure toilet facilities for women, is something which historically and currently in many parts of the world, ensures that girls and women cannot take part in public life, cannot attend school, cannot have a life out with their own home and immediate neighbourhood and one which is not controlled and overseen by the males in their lives.

I was at the meeting in Glasgow last night, and one woman at the front said that she works with women who are refugees and asylum seekers. She said that the first thing those women ask for are toilet and sleeping quarters which are women only and where men are not allowed.

Gender, it is well worth remembering, is not "binary". Gender is a socially constructed hierarchy in which men are superior and women inferior. A hierarchy in which men - as a sex class - oppress and women - as a sex class - are oppressed.

I've said loads of times that whilst some of these things don't bother me personally I can see and I understand that others are affected by them, I think I've made that clear through my posts here (and my very basic toilet suggestion on my last post!).

What's the difference between women's spaces that have been hard won and women's spaces that have always been mandated as women's? E.g. I didn't know that women only wards was a hard won thing, I think I just assumed that wards had been segregated since Victorian times. My own ignorance there probably!

Thanks, prickly & assigned, I've tried that and thought he understood as he's always agreed that trans women are still men and shouldn't be allowed in women's spaces, but he doesn't see the problem with that as it's "just words on a form." Also, he said: "what does it really matter who ticks the box, it doesn't affect you personally and doesn't stop you applying."

I'm really disappointed, we have girls, and I thought he understood, now I can see that he really doesn't get it.

I've never seen myself as a feminist as such, but this issue scares me, more for my girls' futures than for me, and it's worrying how few people know about it in RL.

@ButFirstTea "What's the difference between women's spaces that have been hard won and women's spaces that have always been mandated as women's?"

i can't give you a list but I wonder if you are just assuming that's the way things were from a more prudish era and haven't realised that women had to actually battle to get facilities at all in some cases, and then privacy? Women had to get spaces because we couldn't just wander in with men without risk of being attacked.

no offence, but you said upthread you know about this stuff - you really don't, that's not a criticism. When the GRA was first talked about I didn't know the difference between transsexual and transgender.

I note in your first post you said something about misgendering someone being really bad. But what actually even is gender? What do you think it is? Do you think it matters?

If you look at all these things and you're still of the same opinion, sure, we agree to disagree and write to our MPs with totally different views etc. But I have a feeling you haven't realised what a serious problem this is.

I have to go to bed now!

I think this is interesting, because I think I understand what you mean when you say this, as in Danielle appears to be big, heavy, maybe strong etc? Also quite masculine in appearance? How do you feel about biological women who are heavy and strong as well, and maybe even those who look 'masculine' ie women who have some facial hair or hair loss? I'm not trying to be provocative here I'm genuinely interested.

Strong hairy women are women. Why would we feel anything untoward about them? What is your point?

buttea

Let’s just strip down the facts here.

Biological women are more likely to be raped, murdered, assaulted or attacked by a biological Male than a biological woman. So much so that we fought to have sex segregated spaces in situations where we could be vulnerable, toilets etc.

Trans women are biologically Male and studies show keep the same level of offending when they transition as a non trans biological male.

Why should biologically female people give up these spaces free from their main attackers so that the feelings of biologically male people aren’t hurt? How come we have been so conditioned that a biological males feelings is more important than a woman being or feeling safe.

When someone says something like ‘Trans people can be at risk too, they're not all out to attack women.‘ I actually find this very aggressive, it’s almost like you’re gaslighting us (though I’m sure not intentionally), as biological females (women) we have been socialised to put other people’s feelings first and of course we don’t want people to be at risk.
But this is a tactic that men use all the time ‘cheer up love I’m just trying to be nice’, men hate it when women have boundaries and this is another way to push them.

I think because Tea feels that MTF trans are a subsection of woman rather than man, just because they say they are, she assumes we are using the same logic as her but unfairly excluding Muscato due to looks. No. We are opposed to all males with penises, at least, invading women's spaces. Many want no males there at all. Even ones that superficially "pass" as women. But if they are really good at that and we genuinely don't know then obviously it's not much of an issue for either. And no, that's not fair. Life rarely is.

\linkTory members 'a breed apart' from other main parties, study finds

www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/04/tory-members-a-breed-apart-from-other-main-parties-study-finds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

So - back to the labour party. The link above shows just how heavily they rely on womens' votes, more so than the other parties. Whilst we are disproportionately impacted by austerity we need them, but in the longer term they cannot form a government without us. We should be able to leverage this.

ButFirstTea - your answer as to what you make of Muscato is totally evasive. Why are you asking us what we think about women in answers to a question about what you think about a man??

Your evasive answer suggests that you think Muscato is a woman. Is that the case?

I think this is interesting, because I think I understand what you mean when you say this, as in Danielle appears to be big, heavy, maybe strong etc? Also quite masculine in appearance? How do you feel about biological women who are heavy and strong as well, and maybe even those who look 'masculine' ie women who have some facial hair or hair loss? I'm not trying to be provocative here I'm genuinely interested.

You may well be genuinely interested but your question is misogynistic towards women who don't fit into the box society labels "feminine".

I don't think Muscato should be excluded from women's refuges because he isn't feminine. I think he should be excluded because he is a man.

Now, I have answered your question. Will you be so good as to answer mine in my above post?

I don't get Danielle Muscato at all. It's like he isn't even trying to 'present' as a woman.

Beachcomber well said.

And tea, before you ask, it's not about lesbians, any more than it is about hairy women or GNC or tall women, either. Biological women of all types are welcome in sex segregated women's spaces.

The irony is transsexuals have been happily sharing our loos etc for years and we have happily let them. This new breed of aggressive transwomen reek of male privelege and tend to remain in every way male (80% keep their penis) and even switch between male and female depending on the situation.

You're not telling me that Travis Topshop (who was simply a woman on that day) and the man who sued a rape crisis centre into bankruptcy because wouldn't let him be a counsellor on account of being a women's only service or "Lian" Huntley or Lily Madigan have sincere intentions and just want to feel safe. They want to feel validated and they do not want women to have anything for themselves.

And yes, NATALT (not all transpeople are like that). But how do we keep women, or indeed the "not like that" transwomen, safe when all gatekeeping is removed so people's feelings aren't hurt?