Supporting men who break stereotypes.

[lurker33]

I've said this on another thread, but I'd like to explore it a bit further...

In my opinion the only thing that differentiates boys from girls are their primary and secondary sexual characteristics. Girls can do anything boys can do, and boys can do anything girls can do, barring those things that are required to procreate.

The only thing holding people back are societal expectations. We need to be challenging these, not reinforcing them with this gender identity nonsense.

A man wearing a dress and wearing makeup however should be applauded for being courageous and breaking stereotypes.

If a man dresses and acts 'like a woman' and calls himself 'a woman' then he is a parody of a woman (in the ironic sense) because the only way he can do this is to perform deeply flawed stereotypes.

Men in dresses and make up insisting on being recognised as women is therefore exactly the same as blackface and is deeply insulting to women.

Why is it ok to insult women with the lie that men are woman, but not ok to tell the truth and say men can never become women?

As a result I cannot support the GRC or self ID. These are red herrings and should be repealed and rejected.

Not only have people of color not historically been a threat to white people in the way men have been to women, it is in fact rather the other way around.

This is part of what I mean by saying that as long as we have the current situation then the EA exemptions need to be mandatory. Women should not be forced into a situation where we're saying "please sir can I have a rape crisis counselor who doesn't have a penis?" as if begging for a favor.

@AngryAttackKittens I agree the service users should be the ones making the decisions, but then it goes back to being on a case by case basis.

There are probably a lot of cases where all service users are happy to include trans women.

I think it would be fair enough for a service user to object and ask the service applies the EA exceptions if they were made to feel uncomfortable or threatened.

i know you believe this but it seems incredibly pessimistic to assume the Government is secretly plotting

Please don't gaslight me. It is not a case of belief. It is a case of looking at the evidence, looking at what has already been done, looking at what transactivists have done, have said and are saying, and looking at what the government has pledged to the trans community - and coming to an unavoidable conclusion that the Equality Act is under threat and will not protect women.

Please stop trying to imply that it is some kind of ungrounded conspiracy theory.

But daim that doesn’t work for eg Women’s Aid. WA makes a choice that it will employ trans staff and treat trans service users. It chooses to disapply the exemptions. It basically means that women have to like it or lump it. It’s not a question of the service users choosing- it is a question of it being mandatory to apply them in some circumstances and that the service users can then sue the service providers if they fail to do this.

It’s not a question of secretly plotting. They are quite open about it. The point is that the EA needs tightening up because at the moment it does NOT offer adequate protection. Therefore it makes no difference that the government has said they don’t intend to reform the EA.

A woman who needs to go into a refuge is going to be the victim of male violence, or the vast majority are. The need a space where all they have around them are women. Women who were socialised as women and who know or can empathise with the situation. If people who presents as opposite to their birth sex had any empathy at all they would stay well away from refuges never mind apply for jobs there.

That is pure validation and a fuck you attitude to women, even vulnerable and terrified women. Don't even get me started on the children who go into refuges with their mums and need women only support.

'there is no chromosomal difference between black and white women but obviously there is a biological difference in terms of their skin colour and bodily appearance'

There are biological differences in terms of skin colour and bodily appearance in everyone.

Appropriating apartheid is racist and you should stop.

They'll be comparing Tara Hudson to Nelson Mandela next.

Appropriating apartheid is racist and you should stop.

Me? Read the posts. I think you are confused. I was replying to the person who actually WAS appropriating apartheid.

This whole acceptance that it's fine to use colour to further this argument sickens me and cheapens the arguments trying to be made. Those who use women of colour should hang their heads in shame.

PeakPants someone said on the other thread the debate needs to be reframed and urgently.

There are plenty of women from all walks of life as well as liberal feminists that will happily support the strengthening of the EA.

But an argument for strengthening the EA is never put forward on here. It's all about self ID and in the case of the OP repealing the GRA.

The OP called self ID and the GRC red herrings and she is right. They really have no bearing on women's rights at all, it's the Equality Act that matters.

Peak: I was indeed . Specifically, the posters now ignoring the explanation of why it's racist, and refusing to withdraw the analogy.

I did read it Peak. You quoted the poster and tried to justify their post. That's just as bad you know.

it's the Equality Act that matters

I think the source of this insistence, combined with volumes of evidence to the contrary, tell us a great deal.

Oh really Faire? I actually was referring to Daim and Snappity's posts.

No, sorry Peak, not you. It was Snappity. Apologies.

I did read it Peak. You quoted the poster and tried to justify their post. That's just as bad you know.

Huh? No, I was not trying to justify their post at all. I am getting confused now. If it came across that way, I am sorry. My point was that race like sex is fixed and unchangeable. I in no way agree with that poster and have pulled them up on their posts on several occasions.

The all-the-dollars-ever-printed-in-the-history-of-the-world question: "will the flounce last less than ten minutes?" - Lang

Quite, or is it a Grand-d-d Flounce lasting an hour or a sock

Yeah, it was my mistake, Peak, sorry.

It's not a proper flounce if the person doesn't come back 5 minutes later to say "and another thing!"

No worries Fair

It's not a proper flounce if the person doesn't come back 5 minutes later to say "and another thing!"

I love those.

If people who presents as opposite to their birth sex had any empathy at all they would stay well away from refuges never mind apply for jobs there.
That is pure validation and a fuck you attitude to women, even vulnerable and terrified women. Don't even get me started on the children who go into refuges with their mums and need women only support.

Quite - the entitlement and disdain and treating women and children as objects for their use is palpable.

Can someone explain why having surgery to align one’s feelings about their gender identity is fine, even encouraged.

Yet others who have similar feelings about non sexual parts of their body- the cases where arms or legs feel like they don’t belong to the person- they aren’t given surgery, they are considered to have a mental health issue.

Same general “ medical condition” that their physical body doesn’t fit their internal perception.