Questions for TRAs or Transpeople on here

[Bloodmagic]

Genuine question and I hope some of you will answer.

From my perspective, Gender Critical people (you would call us TERFs) want to accept you exactly as you are. Your sex (which you cannot change) and you personality, your fashion, mannerisms etc etc are all perfectly fine to us. We accept you as you are. We accept Transwomen as feminine men because that is exactly what you are. We accept Transmen as masculine women because that is what you are. We don't think there's anything shameful or degrading about that. Quite the opposite, we think it's pretty great. I think that men who identify as transwomen as a group should have: safety, freedom, political representation, political speech, suitable facilities (bathrooms, changerooms), inclusion in sports (co-ed, on teams of your own sex, or trans teams), free expression, happiness, the right to be around people like you and share experiences with them, organize with them, etc.

I don't think that has to come at the expense of the same rights for women.

Why is that such a terrible thing, in your eyes?

They only thing we won't do is lie for you, or prioritize your needs over our own.

How does it hurt you that we accept you exactly as we see you?

On the other hand, a lot of the people who claim to be trans supportive will not accept you as you are. Lily Madigan would not have been appointed to labor as a feminine man. They would not have accepted him as he is. They hate feminine men so much they demand that you hate yourselves and deny your reality before they will even let you be used as pawns in the Game of Patriarchy. Your self loathing is the only part of you that they value. It's the only part that I don't.

How many of your trans allies and supporters would still stand by you if you came out as a man who aspires to be as feminine as possible and understands that makes him no less a man and no less worthy than anyone else? They might not, but we would.

I'm having trouble understanding how you can look at us and see hate? We are the ones saying that everything you are is fine and perfect. We can't make you something you're not, no one can. But we also think you don't need to be anything other than exactly as you really are. What's so bad about that?

But Rat the problem I have with 'woman' having different meanings depending on the context is, in the social example, that it suggests a female may not be a woman if not presenting as one e.g. a non-gender conforming woman or a firefighter in uniform and full mask.

If you cannot discern their sex, does that mean a female is not a woman in a social sense?

particularly when you are starting make the argument that paedophiles make

That this correlation never seems to give pause for thought to anyone saying this stuff is extremely concerning. I don't attribute malignant intent or anything like that, but the ideological blind spot is so apparent.

Fine, have it your way. It seems to baffle so many people around here that a good number of intelligent, educated people are happy to say transwomen are women. And whilst that's obviously my position, I'm not trying to make you believe it; I'm just telling you the logic behind it, because it's not nonsensical.

A good number of intelligent educated people are happy to say god exists. Your point is?

A good number of intelligent educated people are happy to say god exists.

A good number of intelligent educated people do all sorts of bad things.

It means nothing.

I mean, if we're going to say that the word "woman" has both biological and socio-political senses, what difference does it even make? How will gender critical people suddenly agree with the transactivist point of view? All that will happen is that gencrits will say, "Well, fine. Woman has two senses. And in an environment where the rights of women in the biological sense of the word are coming under attack from males, it becomes even more vital that a woman in a socio-political context is also understood to be an adult human female".

Stupid argument.

(Because it assumes that the socio-political definition of woman is the transactivist definition. That. Is. Not. My. Definition.)

How will gender critical people suddenly agree with the transactivist point of view?

If ALL gender critical women all started to say that Trans Women are Women - the TRAs would make a point that they are not - they are special women, not boring old women women.

This argument will never be won. Which is why it is time to roll back the GRA and just go by sex and forget gender altogether.

I'm with Rat on this one. I have stated before - I am happy to have "women" include trans women in social contexts (as has been the social situation for a long time), but not to have that definition written into law. Because then laws based on sex-based issues would be meaningless.

So as soon as people stop with the nonsense of "changing sex", or "always having been a woman/girl" or whatever else - which truly IS double-think - then a reasonable discussion can happen.

Every single legal contract begins with setting out the definition of what is meant by a word in that contract in this particular context. So that can be applied to the word "woman" and things can be clearly defined so that there is no doubt that when we say "woman" in this specific legal context it means "biologically born a woman".

particularly when you are starting make the argument that paedophiles make

Lord, saying that "adult" has a different meaning in law than in society than in biology has nothing to do with paedophilia. It's self-evident. I also happen to think sex is enjoyable; I'm sure a paedophile has at some point used that as some sort of argument; should I not say sex is enjoyable then, lest I be branded a paedophile-apologist?

Paedophiles, once and for all (although it's bizarre that I'm even making this pronouncement) entirely break the law in engaging in any sexual practice whatsoever that involves people under the age of consent - that is the legal age of adulthood in this country. It is illegal, it is about the definition of adult in law. It is also morally reprehensible and deplorable on every level imaginable.

If anyone here wants to link any innocuous phrase uttered in the name of trans-inclusivity with paedophilia I would suggest it is they who are deliberately trying to conflate the two.

YY NoSquirrels, I agree with the sentiment.

I have stated before - I am happy to have "women" include trans women in social contexts

Can you give examples?

Well that obviously isn't my hashtag, although can't we debate the issues without going into the whole "transwomen are or aren't women or men" thing? I believe we can.

No we cannot. The fact of their being male is entirely the whole issue.

They'll simply think you're wrong, and you'll simply think they are. And we'll all come out of it not one step closer to anything.

Too bad. When I see an ounce of compromise or consideration for women from transactivists, I will revisit it.

I have stated before - I am happy to have "women" include trans women in social contexts
Can you give examples?

So - I don't really care about "trans women are women", as long as it's not followed by #nodebate.

I am happy for a trans woman to call herself a woman in social contexts - tick the gender box on the form, refer to herself as a woman, use the appropriate loo even (I realise this tramples on some other people's boundaries, though, but in practise this has always been the case so I am happy for the status quo to remain). I would use preferred pronouns.

If I think about trans women I know, I think of them as "women" not "men" - if I really examine my own feelings on it then I am clear that I know they are in reality biological men, but I don't put them in the same "box" in my head as men, I would more naturally put them in the "woman" box ... if I was into boxes at all, or thinking of people as male vs female, which most of the time in day to day life I am not.

I don't think the majority of trans people are pretending to be something they are not, I guess. I actually think they are trying to be authentic to themselves - but the hows and whys of what caused them to feel this way are debatable.

I do think dysphoria cannot be taken out as a factor, and thus I see it as a mental health issue, which many trans people would find offensive.

I am unhappy for trans women to be "women" when there is a clear safeguarding risk, the division being biology. Girl guiding, women's organisations and spaces, sports, politics etc. Then they can be trans women, and campaign for their own spaces and places.

I've posted above and I can't come back to the thread for a bit because Life but I am sure there are massive gaping holes ready to be picked apart, contradictions aplenty etc. But in real life, I think a lot of people feel like me. I know a trans woman is a man. But not really a man. I know a trans woman is not really a woman. But sort of a woman.

Socially, this woolliness is OK.

Legally, it's not. So Self ID is nonsense.

NoSquirrels. I get that. What about initiatives for women and girls? I'm thinking about encouraging girls into stem and AWS. Should TIM be included or excluded?

Sorry, cross post.

.........campaign for their own spaces and places. Is this happening at all? Do transwomen have any campaigns running at the moment, does anyone know?

I've searched but can't find anything. Transwomen, genuine question: Is there a petition I could sign for transwomens own spaces, places, sports? Or a campaign?

Protests arranged, anything at all? For transwomens own spaces/ sports?

NatLuc Could you and other transwomen lobby for spaces, sports, etc? For example, as disabled people did? Not saying it's a disability, that's just an example.

I seem to remember that NatLuc said they only didn't because it wouldn't work. You'll never know until you try!

Lobbying for transwomen own spaces/sports at this point in time could be the right way to go, when there is an increase in support/empathy. My autistic son (now adult) would have had no education at all if it hadn't been for people like the director of Ipsea fighting to have sen statements and then made legal. A lot can be accomplished by people joining together and fighting. As in disabled parking spaces/toilets etc, animal rights, racism laws, to name just a few.

Just wondering, should I carry on my current battle to ensure ds stays in his supported living flat and with dwp about his benefits, or shall I just give up and come on here stamping my foot because wah! I can't get what I want? I'm sick to death of transwomen thinking they have the right to trample over our rights. Go and fight for your own needs. Grow a f.....g backbone. Our answer is
NO!