The term "men in dresses"

[AuntMsVanillaRose]

Trans-excluders like to say that they're absolutely fine with boys who don't fit in with gender stereotypes. And I, not one of you, am fine with children not fitting gender stereotypes. But I don't think that is true of all of you. Why is "man in a dress" used as an insult by so many of you?

You don't think you're trans excluders? I think it's a fairly accurate term, given the tone of these threads. You want to exclude trans people from your spaces. You are excluders. I think you're being snowflakes finding such a term provocative when you're prepared to make the lives of trans people harder for the sake of accuracy.

Factual terms can be provocative. They can be pejorative and hurtful to the point that the accuracy is lost and an insult remains. Feminists have made words their bread and butter and rightly so. But don't now pretend that there is nothing more to language than accuracy. Otherwise you will have nothing to come back with when men distinguish between working and non-working women as work wives and housewives!

MNHQ used to delete goady fuckers.
Now they are allowed to goad, troll, screengrab, PLANT posts as transphobic evidence, and we are told
not to call them out as trolls (no troll hunting)
Not to warn others of a trap thread
Not to respond with humour giving others a heads up
I think we're supposed to just sit down and take it.

MNHQ

An OP coming to the feminist section to call us 'trans excluders' is simply goady. You've banned the acronym
Trans
Excluding
Radical
Feminist

But you are allowing the words the acronym stands for? Trans Excluders? Is that somehow different?

How many times are feminists going to have to keep knocking back these shitty and untrue slurs?

There have been at least two posts from TRAs this week comparing feminists to Nazis and suggesting we want to recreate the Holocaust. Screenshots on twitter as if they were from feminists here rather than planted by the TRAs themselves.

Please work with us here a little bit MNHQ.

You want to exclude trans people from your spaces. You are excluders.

We want to exclude men from our (women's) spaces. We are male excluders. Whether the men identify as trans or not is irrelevant.

But you are allowing the words the acronym stands for? Trans Excluders? Is that somehow different?

I think the difference is that it's identifying it as a separate set of values from radical feminism and therefore avoiding conflating the two as being inherently linked.

You don't think you're trans excluders? I think it's a fairly accurate term, given the tone of these threads. You want to exclude trans people from your spaces. You are excluders.

Nope. I want to include transmen. And exclude men. I don't care if they are trans or not.

How is a working woman vs a non working woman being either a work wife or a housewife at all similar to a man in a dress being a man in a dress?

I mean the woman may not be married, or may be widowed. Or did you mean work-woman and house-woman? If so that would be an accurate if not deep description.

Words matter you see.

I honestly don't care if you want to call people draft excluders. It's gone from transphobes, bigots, terfs, anti trans activists to excluders.

No one cares. Because every time you say those words people just hear obey my demands.

How is it that trans activists (nearly?) always fail to see that the issue is the exclusion of transwomen, particularly those with penises, going along with the inclusion of transmen? It's not that difficult to comprehend surely?

But yes, HQ, you still need to ban it. Because it's being leveraged in the same way as all the other slurs.

If you want just about to be civil, as you insist, then people must use accurate descriptions. We are feminists, women. If someone wants to argue, they have to use the correct language.

No, we are happy to INCLUDE trans people in our female spaces if they are female.

It's men that are excluded.

Men.
People with penises, testicles, prostates, a Y chromosome. All of them.
Men. Male. Those are some accurate terms for you. The sex class that produces sperm. Because every single human that fits those characteristics is male.

Feeling snowflakey? Well, like you said.
Factual terms can be provocative.

So call us male excluders, by all means.
But for all the trans people out there who are biologically female, take note
You are ALWAYS WELCOME in women's spaces.

By the way, every feminist here has probably noticed that as far as you're concerned, you've equated all Trans people with the ones with dicks.

They're the only trans people that matter, right? We could include every last female in the world and you wouldn't give a shit because they're not the 'people' that you count.

You don't think you're trans excluders?

The term T**f is banned here. This isn't subtle. It's also provocative name calling.

I think it's a fairly accurate term, given the tone of these threads.

Blame, shame, judgementalism.

You want to exclude trans people from your spaces.

Sigh. Total lack of interest in reading the threads here, obviously, or in actually making a case, or being part of a discussion here. So you're posting purely because of your moral superiority to tell women off for thinking and talking about what you think they're talking about, without actually bothering to check. Or give examples. And yet somehow you expect to be taken seriously.

You are excluders.

Name calling.

I think you're being snowflakes

More name calling.

finding such a term provocative

This really is about forcing the right to call wrongthink women t**fs isn't it?

when you're prepared to make the lives of trans people harder for the sake of accuracy.

I note your total lack of engagement in or interest in the many many articulate, detailed posts on this thread and every other, trying to explain why this is about women, and why massive, emotive generalisations like this are not helpful or even true.

You are not posting in good faith. You are not trying to join any conversation. You are obviously not remotely interested in engaging with any views here. So the question has to be asked really, what your motive is?

Trans-excluders is such a boring addition to the list of point name calling. I mean, they've gone from the big, impressively wounding insults like Nazi and Bigot, to a made up word that inexplicably riffs on lawns, and now we're being called something that sounds like you could buy it in B&Q. It's all rather diminishing returns.

I honestly don't care if you want to call people draft excluders. It's gone from transphobes, bigots, terfs, anti trans activists to excluders.

Don't forget identity deniers!

Frankly, I don't give a single shiny shit what the latest pejorative is. It's all the same thing: misogyny.

Trans people with female bodies are welcome in any women's space I'm in- trans people with male bodies aren't. So no, I am not excluding trans people. I am excluding male bodies. And not because I think that they are likely to attack me or my girl children. But because I think people have the right to dignity and privacy. I have a female body. I would not strip off in front of a teenage boy-particularly one I do not know. I do not expect people with male bodies to strip off in front of teenage girls. And I challenge anyone to say they think I am wrong about this.

What about trans women who wear trousers and a shirt? Are they still men in dresses?

Well no, because they're not in dresses.

Nonplussed/AuntLydia/Whoever you are

Read your first and second paragraphs again and try to do it with the feeling that you've contradicted yourself and made your side of your bridge look foolish. Snowflakes indeed!

And, as others have said. It's not trans people I wish to exclude from women's spaces, it's men. All men. And I couldn't give a shiny shit what those men are wearing.

Oh yes you are ..... trans excluders
Oh no we're not ..... but we exclude men
Oh yes you are ....... trans excluders
Oh no we're not ..... trans identifying women are welcome
Oh yes you are......... trans excluders
Correct, yes we are ..... if they've got a penis
Oh yes you are ....... trans excluders
Oh no we're not .......if they've got a vagina

Rewind. Repeat.

Oh yes you are. Oh no we're not. Oh yes you are. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

S/he's behind you!

I honestly don't care if you want to call people draft excluders.

Was that deliberate, Datun, or a genuine slip?

I think you're being snowflakes finding such a term provocative when you're prepared to make the lives of trans people harder for the sake of accuracy.

How about the lives of the women trapped in prison with Karen White, and in particular the four Karen White sexually assaulted? Trans ideology has made their lives significantly harder, wouldn't you agree? Or are they merely collateral damage in the quest for wokeness?

Also, I'm not really following your reasoning here. How does objecting to a slur make trans people's lives harder?

Otherwise you will have nothing to come back with when men distinguish between working and non-working women as work wives and housewives!

Interesting how misogyny is the go-to position, isn't it? We're asked to accept the fiction that men can be women, but when repeatedly we're called all sorts of names for refusing to accept penises into our safe spaces, we're 'snowflakes'.

Rapey people gotta be aggressive and rapey, it seems.

when you're prepared to make the lives of trans people harder for the sake of accuracy

This statement is just so laughably ridiculous

Bertrand please go add that on the AIBU thread about gymnastics, there's someone there insisting that teenaged girls must get over themselves and get naked in front of people with penises because this is the new world order, or something.

I got hit like a bolt from the blue by a comment up this thread or another thread (there's a lot of bloody irritating threads today) that paraphrased was: this is extremes of femininity isn't it? Out with the women who don't perform femininity enough and out with the women who won't get naked in front of men and surrender their boundaries and sense of privacy and dignity - and this is exactly what men have always wanted .

This, this this. It's an intentional, political strategy of shaming and ridiculing women who try to defend their right to bodily privacy, consent and boundaries. What gets an MRA or incel really riled? Talking about a woman's right to consent, to boundaries, to own her own body and refuse sex.

Seems to have been a LOT of these threads popped up recently, maybe fish should start being lobbed instead?

It's not that difficult to comprehend surely?

It is when you're incapable of rational thought.

Person on the AIBU thread: why are girls at risk from people with penises, they're round penises all the time, blah blah.