If I argue transwomen are men is this an extremist position?

[DJLippy]

In my opinion this should not be viewed as an extremist position.

I think there is a humane argument to be made for this.

For example. I want transwomen to be protected from violence and prejudice but I think the best way forward is by recognising transowmen are still male. You can play with words but at the end of the day - saying transwomen are male - what you mean is the same. Let's be honest and stake our ground.

I don't know if the TW I am sharing an intimate space with has a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. I don't know if they have a penis. I don't know how I am supposed to tell the difference between a male with bad intentions or a transexual who just wants to pee in peace. I can't inspect genitals. I can't ask to see a GRC.

I actually think the demand to remove your genitals to gain entry into the club male/female club is barbaric.

Can we make a more human argument from such a position? The idea that some male born people can be considered women but some male born people cannot seems so difficult to manage. Who decides that? What criteria do they use? How are women supposed to tell the difference between 'good' and 'bad' trans.

I am not being goady. I genuinely want to hear what people have to say please take this post with the good intention it was intended.

If I argue transwomen are men is this an extremist position?

No. ‘Trans women’ are men by definition.

How do we make a humane argument for this position?

If your goal is to formulate a statement that is "humane" for TW* whilst still being accurate and not erasing women, I think you're on to a hiding to nothing. TRAs are not interested in common ground or compromise. Only complete capitulation will be acceptable for them.

I think that all TW are men

I also think that the argument that lopping your cock off gives you entry into female spaces is actually barbarism. No one should do this to their genitals/sexuality. I feel quite strongly about this.

Transwomen are all of the sex class that produces sperm that fertilise the eggs of the opposite sex class, and they are adult, and they are human.

Ergo, they are fit the exact dictionary definition of men.

My advice is that your energy is precious, and using it attempting to prove gravity exists or the earth is round is a waste of your energies.

We all seem to be trapped in an episode of Black Mirror, endlessly arguing the case for stuff that needs no argument.

Adult human females cannot be transwomen.
Transwomen are all adult human males.
The definition of man is adult human male.

Mumsnet may prevent me from reducing those those sentences down to one because the end result of logical reasoning doesn't create a welcoming atmosphere. So I'll leave them as they are.

The truth is the truth. Speaking the truth may be considered extreme in times when people prefer to hear lies. So be it.

^obviously if someone needs to do this to live a life free of pain - that's also fine. It still shouldn't allow you automatic entry into womanhod. For example if you have the money a surgeon will happily provide this service. Not fair surely? But entry into womanhood? No!

1. Only men can be transwomen therefore transwomen are men

1. A female born woman can't be a transwoman therefore transwomen aren't women

1. A male with his penis removed is a eunuch, not a woman; just like a stallion with its penis removed is a colt, not a mare.

3. A male with his penis removed is a eunuch, not a woman; just like a stallion with its penis removed is a colt, not a mare.

Balls. That is to say, a eunuch generally has their testicles removed. Removal of the penis is emasculation, meaning un-manning. It's meant figuratively but obviously some people are now taking it literally.

I think there's a generation that has lost the distinction between literal and figurative meaning entirely. Literally.

Aspie

Yes. They love misapplying the the term 'literally' don't they?
First they came for our words...

Removal of the penis is emasculation, meaning un-manning. It's meant figuratively but obviously some people are now taking it literally.

Well even taking emasculation=unmanning literally, still doesn’t make an emasculated male a woman. It makes them an emasculated male.

My advice is that your energy is precious, and using it attempting to prove gravity exists or the earth is round is a waste of your energies.

Very sound advice.

I actually think the demand to remove your genitals to gain entry into the club male/female club is barbaric.

Except there is no such demand - look at the thread on here which tells us that in 2009 a transwoman who had not had surgery was sent by a judge to the female prison estate because he had a GRC.

It is not compulsory to have male genitals removed to get a GRC.

I know it’s not the point but isn’t a male horse a gelding after being castrated?

Can we not just do away with the idea of gender altogether?

So there are male people and female people and they can present how they like and be their natural selves without their clothes or characteristics being coercively assigned as masculine or feminine?

There are some things that only female bodied people can do -menstruate, give birth and so on. They are women, regardless of how they present and whether they actually menstruate or give birth.

How is it extreme to state that?

The move to self-ID seems to come from a view that the need to live as a woman for two years is restrictive; and the same point you make in the OP that the need to take hormones and surgery is barbaric (and medicalises being trans). Hence, this means that any male person can say they identify with being female (how that is possible, I have no idea, as being female is an embodied experience) and that should be accepted. This view erases sex as a marker of difference (and need for different facilities).

Why on earth would a man want to erase sex as a marker of difference and erase the need for different facilities - particularly when the option exists to just present how you like (ditch the sex stereotypes aka gender)?

And why is it not okay to question this?

Being female is an embodied experience - it is not a feeling, or clothing, or voice pitch. Being female does not mean lesser rights, but having particular needs.

I cannot say what being trans is, as it is not my experience. But I do not believe it is being the opposite sex; it is being trans, so why is it not possible to work out the particular needs of trans people as a distinct group. It is not ‘othering’ to do this.

No it isn't.

Being female is an embodied experience - it is not a feeling, or clothing, or voice pitch. Being female does not mean lesser rights, but having particular needs.
This is beautifully expressed and exposes the nonsense of “living as a woman” for 2 years to get a GRC. All the “evidence” that shows men are living as women is window dressing (clothes/makeup/hair) and is meaningless because women don’t have to perform any of that window dressing to still be clearly and obviously women. You can only be a woman if you are born female. I am so angry that our legislative system is endorsing a lie and supporting delusions at the expense of women.

All TW are men but not all TW are the same as other TW.

There are some TW who pass convincingly, and some who don't even seem to be trying. There are some TW who essentially work as prostitutes for gay men, and there are some TW who are in 'lesbian' relationships with women.

So whereas 'TW' might have a fairly clear meaning in, say Thailand, Stonewall & chums have made it meaningless in the West. Everyone can be trans.

a stallion with its penis removed is a colt

Wouldn't that be gelding rather than colt?

(I agree with what you are saying, btw, I just want to make sure that my understanding of terminology is correct.)

A male with his penis removed is a eunuch, not a woman.

When did we switch from transvestites (absolutely birth sex) and transsexuals (grey area when it comes to court still birth sex in a XX/XY level)?

It seems the wording has changed to muddy the waters and confuse the issues. If the stats that 80% of trans women are physically men the surely this is something else than someone who genuinely feels that they are 'in the wrong body'. It's a kink along with the nappy wearers and puppy botherers.

Comes to courtesy (not court). Darn autocorrect!

It’s Gelding

Thanks, speaking.

It's not an extremist position, Lippy - it's a truthful position.

This, however, can never be acknowledged by men, the oppressor class, because they would have to a) budge up and b) address their violent ways, to safely include their non-conforming brethren. Hence the wokeazaoid beardy bros all over the internet affirming TWAW. Affirming the actual truth terrifies the life out of them.

twitter.com/uracontra_/status/1042517625211891713?s=21

Have a look at this guys twitter. Tom Farr. He just ripped little Owen Jones a new one

Doesn’t hold back one bit
Oh and told shon that shon was so thick that light bent round shon