Please can someone who thinks that TWAW..

[BertrandRussell]

...explain to me the intellectual process that got you there? I promise -and as far as I can I promise on behalf of other people - not to challenge or argue and only ask clarification questuons. I just want to understand, even if I don't agree.

Jumping in having only read three pages, because my thoughts have been swirling around this all afternoon.

I used to accept "trans women are women" despite the difference in biology because I understood that the label woman refers to both a biological category and a social category, which generally (but not exclusively because intersex) overlap. I fully accepted the existence of the social category, because men and women are evidently treated very differently socially, and my externally-female friend was very definitely in the woman social category despite not quite meeting the biological requirements. it is therefore possible, I reasoned, to be a woman/female socially yet a man/male biologically.

I weighted the social category as more important than the biological category, because I had been raised to believe that who we are is more important than what we are. I was also keenly aware that my intersex friend was struggling with her identity within the male/female binary society is built around, and I was subconsciously very strongly motivated to comfort her by emphasising our shared membership of the social category while devaluing the importance of the question mark over membership of the biological category.

I can identify all the problems with my younger self's reasoning now - I won't preach to the choir but suffice to say: experiencing first hand, and witnessing in my peers, just how the social category gets utterly shafted when we exercise our membership of the biological category by reproducing, was a hell of a kick up the metaphorical arse.

From these experiences and observations, I inferred that enforced membership of the social category and all that entails - the clothes, the career paths, the caring, all of the other submission-inducing crap that is shoved into the pink box and forced on us from the day we are born - the gender that really IS violently and coercively assigned - is the very mechanism by which women/females are oppressed. And "trans women are women" not because they are in the biological category, not because they are in the social category, but because they are in the "embodying and identifying with the mechanism of oppression" category, and the overlap between that category and the biological category is more commonly known as internalised misogyny. TWAW if, and only if, the defining, unifying feature of woman, that we all share, is internalised misogyny.

And you have to have internalised a metric fuckton of misogyny to define yourself like that.

This makes me particularly angry because I feel my goodwill towards my intersex friend, my urge to comfort and support her and boost her psychologically, my capacity for sisterhood, has been exploited and used to strengthen and legally enshrine the very mechanism by which I and my sisters are oppressed.

I don't agree with what Blaire says but I quite like Blaire's manner!

@RatRolyPoly I don't always agree with you either but on this thread I would really like to hear your thoughts more!

AnchorMum your post is so moving.

"If we didn't care about trans people you'd soon know it. It's because we care so much, especially about actual women and girls (whether they still identify as such or not), that we come here day after day to read, absorb, think and learn.

It's emotional labour and it's exhausting. But we're doing it because we believe that 'woman' means something and don't want to lose the means of identifying our own selves - and risking all the consequences that will inevitably come from that."

Barracker yes, When people say TWAW, what they are really saying is "females are not allowed to be recognised as themselves, distinct from males, on their own terms, ever'" it's about so much more than toilets.

HairyStorm, great analysis there!

HairyStorm that is a really fascinating insight into why one might think that the social category trumped the biological category.

I can see I would have gone through a similar journey had I been a younger woman and had "trans" been a thing when I was younger. (In fact I think maybe I went through a similar journey with liberal vs. radical feminism, getting myself really confused about biology and mistaking the recognition that biology forms the "material conditions" underlying female oppression for the erroneous view that some form of biological essentialism was being blamed... In short, I was a very muddled twenty-something back in the day.)

Plenty of people believe that TWAW. Loads. Hundreds.

They are the powerful - in government

They have access to the powerful - LBG organisations, lobby groups

They make grants to further the transgender ideology - Children in Need

They threaten or actually withdraw grants from womens' organisations that cannot demonstrate 'diversity'

They make decisions that are harmful - whether that's in prisons, or in the council chambers and businesses introducing mixed sex facilities.

They take the piss and laugh - handing out gongs to men with dresses or high-fiving Chloe, the "first woman to be a front-line soldier" (even though she's only been a woman for two weeks).

These people are far more dangerous than TRAs - because they can get away with their stealthy promotion of TWAW and are in a position to do the most harm. They've done it already.

Why don't THEY tell us why and how TWAW?

Room full of people, I pick out all the women. Truth is I don't know what's in their pants

You do though, in almost every instance. There's a combination of cues that tell you what genitalia someone was was born with:

• shoe size
• hand size
• waist-hip ratio
• waist-shoulder ratio
• shoulder-hip ratio
• arm and leg length relative to torso length
• amount of breast tissue
• neck width
• adam's apple (or lack of)
• face shape
• voice (if they speak)

The last two in particular will tell you a lot: I've often been unsure as to a person's sex when they have their back to me but become instantly sure when they turned to face me. I can tell someone's sex over the phone without even seeing them. There are good reasons for this: millions of years of evolution as a species that reproduces sexually and has a poor sense of smell means that we rely on visual and sound cues as to someone's sex to decide whether they are someone we should mate with, fight, or flee from. Women in particular need to reliably read these cues because of the threat men pose to us of rape, which in case anyone had forgotten, requires a penis and therefore our ability to judge "penis or vulva" without performing an intimate examination has to be spot-on.

When someone trans has had hormones or surgery that alter their appearance, the cues get confused because some of them change (breast tissue changes, adam's apple can be reduced or the lack of one hidden by a beard, facial feminisation surgery for TW) but others can never change. The cues will never be completely in concordance for a trans person, leading to the "uncanny valley" effect and also leading to women double- and triple-checking as they try to gauge sex to risk assess someone who has intentionally obfuscated their sex cues. If I cannot gauge a person's sex at a single glance, I am immediately nervous because my risk assessment process has been disrupted.

TWAW if, and only if, the defining, unifying feature of woman, that we all share, is internalised misogyny.

And you have to have internalised a metric fuckton of misogyny to define yourself like that.

I am saving that to my computer. The heels, the makeup, the sexually-submissive AGPs, everything, it's internalised misogyny.

HairyStorm great post.

I am only on page seven, but also wanted to thank AnchorMum for her insightful post

Now read through - many amazing posts!

theOtherPamAYresThe thing that I struggle with is that I can't believe that people, including those in powerful positions, who say TWAW truly believe it. Because TW are NOT women. So why are these people perpetuating the lie?

That said, I once saw IW stating on a breakfast telly segment regarding women's refuges that transwomen victims of DV should be allowed in because they are not men (and then went on to say that no such place existed for trans people so where else were they meant to go?)

Add bd67th list into the mix and what IW says makes some sense. Depending on how far down the transition path they have gone, transwomen may no longer be men, but transwomen are still not women.

And IW seems to totally ignore the fact that there are males who claim to be women just by stating that they are. Not sure what IW would have to say about those (Although I think I saw on a twitter thread that IW said that a transgender prisoner with a penis should not be housed in the female estate - and was then referred to as 'the Katie Hopkins of the trans movement' or some such)

It’s not my own thought, but if people genuinely thought twaw they wouldn’t give a shit about their mental health, suicide stats, sexual assault and rape risks, daily discrimination for just existing, lack of job opportunities based on other people’s prejudice etc, etc. Because they make it clear through attitudes and words that they don’t give a shit about the w so they obviously perceive a difference between the tw and the w, though they won’t admit it.

And IW seems to totally ignore the fact that there are males who claim to be women just by stating that they are. Not sure what IW would have to say about those

IW was none too happy about Pips Bunce.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3372607-India-Willoughby-meltdown-on-Twitter-re-Pips-Bunce

Can it be that IW will finally begin to understand why the TWAW mantra doesn't work for actual XX women?

Doubt it as IW is convinced that they are a genuine woman.

The thing that I struggle with is that I can't believe that people, including those in powerful positions, who say TWAW truly believe it. Because TW are NOT women. So why are these people perpetuating the lie?

Action speak louder than words. Even if they don't believe it, their actions and policies have validated TWAW. Their actions and policies also tell me (and the public) that it is a done deal. They are either silent or they tell you and me to "get over it".

Let Penny Mordaunt debate the government's policies with one of the Women's organisations and let's get to the bottom of this TWAW mind-set.

A big personal issue for me here is the cognitive dissonance. From the start, I have felt that I should be on the TWAW side. After all, I am strongly opposed to putting people into gender stereotypes. I am a social liberal. I was a canpaigner for
gay rights back in the day. I used to work for the Terence Higgins Trust. I tick all the lefty liberal live and let live boxes. I hate much of the company I keep as a gender critical feminist. It is very uncomfortable to feel that I am saying "No, you can't be what you want to be" But I am seeing some parallels with the gay rights movement back in the day. Men took charge there too, and women were sidelined. Women put their own struggle to one side to be spear carriers for men. I am rambling...but I think I am right.

The difference between us and them, is that we are critically assessing the problem. We have been asking, practically begging, for an open and transparent informed debate to look at the whole issue, to see how each position became so strongly held and to see if there is a way to get satisfactory outcomes for everyone.

They are trying to get away with "shut up and sit down, the men are in charge, we will decide" response. And they don't like that we won't do that.

BertrandRussell "A big personal issue for me here is the cognitive dissonance. From the start, I have felt that I should be on the TWAW side." and "It is very uncomfortable to feel that I am saying "No, you can't be what you want to be""

I totally get this. I signed petitions for things like Tara to be moved to a women's prison and that little trans identifying child in the USA to get to use the female loos. I did it when I didn't really understand the full picture. Now I would want to sign petitions or campaign for safe spaces for trans people without denying that biology matters.

This thing has rumbled on so long, but I can see how cracks in the walls. Lots of in fighting etc. No real desire to help all trans identifying people from with the LGBT ++ community. No desire to protect lesbians etc.

I used to think non-binary was a bad thing but now I think it is a limited good thing (for those who want it) because it may stop people feeling the need to transition if they can be happy as non-binary.

Plus, the need to supply safe third spaces for non-binary people means all trans people, and all the women who want to be in with natal men who identify as women, can all use a third safe space. Those looking for validation may even find it in that some natal women will use those spaces while identifying as natal women! If that makes sense!

Is there any campaign for these safe third spaces?

For me it's because I accept gender dysphoria is real. I can't fully comprehend how it feels. The closest I can get is knowing I feel female (and was born as such). If someone came and knocked me out and transitioned me against my will: when I awoke, I would still be female in my head and heart. I assume it's the same, apart from sex I was born as. I can understand that gender is an innate feeling and not necessarily your birth sex.

Zombie thread!