Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

It's simple to me

43 replies

MrsTerryPratchett · 15/06/2018 05:05

Alright, I don't normally make a fuss on here. But this is the thing, there are a few things I want. Tell me how I get them without being labelled transphobic.

I want a name for the group of people with XX chromosomes and vaginae. Used to be women. I want a name for the oppression of those people. Used to be sexism. I want a movement to liberate those people. Used to be feminism.

I want those people to be able to organise around issues that affect their bodies. I want to talk about abortion, FGM, rape, pregnancy, wage gap, wifework and prostitution without centering people with penises. Formerly known as men. I want us to be able to meet, talk, just be without 'checking our privilege'. Unless it relates to WoC, women with disabilities or lesbians. I'll happily check some shit there.

I want some things that belong to the XX people. Sports, rape crisis centres, prisons, services, homeless shelters, DV shelters and my own bloody vagina. I want to be able to exclude people with penises from those places should I choose.

What are we called now? How can we organise? How can we talk about our experience? Do trans people share common interests and goals? I think they probably do. People with XX chromosomes and vaginae do too. And have been oppressed for thousands of years. Why can't we talk about that any more?

OP posts:
ImPreCis · 15/06/2018 05:38

Well that’s summed up everything that I’m feeling.

No answers though, sadly.

BettyFloop · 15/06/2018 06:02

Perfectly put Mrs P

Unfortunately I have no answers either.

QuoadUltra · 15/06/2018 06:06

I completely despair.

I am not prepared to lie for the whole ‘pretend-a-gender’ agenda. It is bullshit. Men can’t be women.

FermatsTheorem · 15/06/2018 08:22

I was just thinking along similar lines MrsTP ((largely in connection with the whole "hidden Facebook" thing).

We need to be able to talk about these things in public, not hidden away in the shadows.

I agree with everything you say.

KittyKlaws · 15/06/2018 08:26

Got to agree with you there MrsTP

GibbertyFlibbert · 15/06/2018 08:26

" want some things that belong to the XX people. Sports, rape crisis centres, prisons, services, homeless shelters, DV shelters and my own bloody vagina. I want to be able to exclude people with penises from those places should I choose."

Not everyone with a vagina is XX. You seem to be trying to create a new protected characteristic based on genotype. That's very disturbing

enoughisenoughtoday · 15/06/2018 08:30

Ah, Gibber is here to start their day reporting women for stating the truth. 2 + 2 = 5

InTheRoseGarden · 15/06/2018 08:33

Spot on MrsTP. Gin

Ereshkigal · 15/06/2018 08:33

It's nice to see your true colours Gibberty. Stop lying about the EA. The overwhelming majority of people protected by the sex characteristic "female" are women with XX chromosomes and vaginas. To discriminate against this class of people is sex discrimination. Otherwise the term wouldn't have any legal strength. But it does.

littlbrowndog · 15/06/2018 08:33

Was just thinking that!

alexpolistigers · 15/06/2018 08:35

Not everyone with a vagina is XX? Please do give us statistically significant examples of people who are not XX who have vaginas.

GibbertyFlibbert · 15/06/2018 08:36

It's nice to see your true colours Gibberty. Stop lying about the EA. The overwhelming majority of people protected by the sex characteristic "female" are women with XX chromosomes and vaginas. To discriminate against this class of people is sex discrimination. Otherwise the term wouldn't have any legal strength. But it does.

Yes, the majority but not all and I am not lying about the Equality Act. Please explain the other attributes of sex in S7, given the example in the Explanatory Notes,

Ofew · 15/06/2018 08:38

Read the part you quoted, gibber. Mrs TP said she didn't want people with penises in her vagina. If you don't think she has the right to decide who or what goes in her vagina, that is very disturbing.

Ereshkigal · 15/06/2018 08:47

Yes, the majority but not all and I am not lying about the Equality Act. Please explain the other attributes of sex in S7, given the example in the Explanatory Notes,

This has been dealt with. Read one of the hundreds of replies to this. Do you understand what kind of claim would constitute sex discrimination? You would have to claim and make a case that it was genuinely done because you were a woman (or a man). Gender reassignment is a different protected characteristic.

Artemis7 · 15/06/2018 08:50

I think history has taught us, that when men want something that women have, they will stop at nothing to get it. I honestly think there is very little point trying to reason with men that demand we, and the law, pretend they actually can be us, and should have access to all our spaces and resources. Men have a history of not taking women’s no for an answer, they will just have to accept that women’s no means no, they have to accept that our boundaries are non-negotiable. That no amount of gaslighting, emotional manipulation, projection, outrage, temper tantrums etc, will make us give into their demands, the sooner they get that message the better. I think the best thing is that women stop worrying about thought of as ‘phobic’ to be honest, it really just translates into ‘man-hater’, which is what feminists have always been called by men when we don’t give them what they demand, or when we stand up for our rights.

AngryAttackKittens · 15/06/2018 08:50

I guess Gibb hopes that if they repeat it often enough people will assume that it's true? Unfortunately for them literacy is a basic requirement that everyone reading this site has by definition already met.

Ereshkigal · 15/06/2018 08:51

Please explain, also with reference to the explanatory notes, why even GRC holders of the opposite sex can be excluded from certain roles which are female specific under the protected EA characteristic of sex? How can this be possible?

Ereshkigal · 15/06/2018 08:54

I guess Gibb hopes that if they repeat it often enough people will assume that it's true?

That tactic works well for the hard of thinking on twitter and FB, while in the rest of the media and social media the transactivists hope to shut down any discussion.

Newspeak · 15/06/2018 08:55

Difficult to argue with people who endlessly repeat that apples are oranges over and over.

We can see they are apples everyone knows they are apples. The apples know they are apples no matter how citrusy they act.

NB not calling anyone apples or oranges it's a metaphor (don't want to start any potato rows)

starcrossedseahorse · 15/06/2018 08:56

Gibb, I am outraged and appalled by what is happening to women right now and the offensive ridiculousness of statements like yours make me feel sick. Surely no one can be this thick/brainwashed?

(I know that they can and are but it does beggar belief at times...)

Serfisafleur · 15/06/2018 08:57

Gib is appropriating intersex conditions where very rarely people with XY chromosomes don't develop into males and some have a vagina (but will usually lack ovaries and tge condition can also come with a side order of heart abnormalities).

Intersex people are nothing to do with trans issues it's very very offensive to conflate the two.

IStillMissBlockbuster · 15/06/2018 08:57

Ignore the troll people, please. Otherwise we'll never get anything done.

SweetGrapes · 15/06/2018 08:58

Not everyone with a vagina is XX. You seem to be trying to create a new protected characteristic based on genotype. That's very disturbing

What's really disturbing is the erosion of the protected characteristic SEX. It IS a protected characteristic in law today but apparently we have no words to describe it. Because woman/man, female/male all are apparently tabboo words. This is what is really disturbing.

If someone really wants to create a new protected characteristic that is really not disturbing. Go for it.... campaign for your cause and do your best - whether it's xx or ginger hair.

It's erosion while supposedly protected in law - that's the disturbing thing.

Ofew · 15/06/2018 08:59

to save other people from looking up the EA 2010, section 7, referred to by Gibber, is about the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. It is separate from the section about the protected characteristic of sex (s. 11). Neither section 7 nor the explanatory notes that accompany it say anything about what is a man or a woman or expand the definition of man or woman in any way. The examples given in the ex notes are of people who decide to 'live as' the opposite sex to that they were born as. Whether they have medical intervention or not, they have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment , so for example they cannot be denied a job because of their gender reassignment. This is unrelated to the separate protected characteristic of sex, which, for example, means that a woman cannot be denied a job because of her sex.

Serfisafleur · 15/06/2018 09:01

There is a word for all XY people who have a vagina and there is a different word for other XY people who have had their penis inverted to form a neo vagina.

We have lived very comfortably with these people overlapping into womanhood for generations.

We now object to TRAs determined to conflate intersex and transexual people with self declared whatever gender and cross dressers all into one group.

Swipe left for the next trending thread