Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

"You don't speak for all women" - how to handle transallies?

101 replies

FairfaxAikman · 13/10/2018 15:49

WokeBro friend posted on FB "The only outcomes of not supporting your trans child is a dead trans child or a live but estranged trans child".

I'm openly GC and gave the usual responses about women needing sex segregated spaces free from penises etc (to which he asked me whose job is it to decide eligibility Hmm) but now a female ally has told me "you don't speak for all women".
I've pointed out that neither does she but can anyone help me further argue my point please? I can't find the evidence that i'm looking for and i'm not as eloquent as some others here.

OP posts:
Somerville · 13/10/2018 15:58

Answer to whose job to decide eligibility is that women’s privacy and dignity and safety is not going to be left to men to decide. And that no woman can give permission on behalf of another. So many women are happy with a male doctor given them an intimate examination, but Doctors surgeries make sure that female staff are freely available for women who request them. The fact that some women don’t doesn’t mean no-one needs them there.

If he starts saying “literal violence” about the definition of women or something then tell him you won’t debate it further - if someone doesn’t know the difference between literal and figurative then there’s no hope of a sensible conversation IME.

Original poster
FairfaxAikman · 13/10/2018 16:02

Sorry the ally is a female who waded into the conversation between me and WokeBro. For some reason i find it easier to debate with men on this but "You don't speak for all women" has stumped me for some reason.

OP posts:
FermatsTheorem · 13/10/2018 16:04

I think "well neither do you" plus the comment Somerville makes about personal boundaries being up to the individual is the right response.

BumbrainusMaximus · 13/10/2018 16:04

The answer is surely so what? One doesn’t have to speak for all women to be right. And just because she has no objection to this lunacy gives her no right to dictate that others should feel the same.

Charliethefeminist · 13/10/2018 16:05

Tell them you don't have to, because your consent is absolute and not in their gift. They can share with male bodied people if they like - why should they force you to?

deepwatersolo · 13/10/2018 16:07

I would answer with: And you don't speak for all men. Only for the MRAs.

But I am rather the outspoken, ironic type.

MaisyPops · 13/10/2018 16:14

Women like you describe OP would probably say "oh I don't do female friends. Women at sooo bitch. I just happen to spend huge amounts of time fawning over other women's husbands etc." Or "I don't do feminism. Feminism has gone too far". The TRA allies are just another way for that type of woman to grovel to men in my opinion.

I find it easier not to give them air time.
My personal views are:

  1. women should be free from sexism and misogyny and not have their rights removed
  2. actual trans people should be supported through transition if it alleviates their dysphoria and should be able to live their lives without transphobia
  3. The TRA lobby are a dangerous mob of men's rights activists, misogynist with a hint of homophobia. Self ID has massive problems.
If other women think that is a shocking set of beliefs then they can continue running around after men to get their validation.
WidowWadman · 13/10/2018 16:17

But you don't speak for all women, and the way how gender critical feminists phrase their rhetoric as if they did is really grating.

birdsdestiny · 13/10/2018 16:18

You can't give consent for other people.

VickyEadie · 13/10/2018 16:19

ODFOD.

deepwatersolo · 13/10/2018 16:21

But you don't speak for all women, and the way how gender critical feminists phrase their rhetoric as if they did is really grating.

I have never met a GC feminist who did not understand that handmaidens of the patriarchy do exist, so I don't really get your point.

ZuttZeVootEeVro · 13/10/2018 16:23

It's surprising how many people don't want women and girls to have full, informed consent.

R0wantrees · 13/10/2018 16:23

"The only outcomes of not supporting your trans child is a dead trans child or a live but estranged trans child".

This is a really dangerous narrative.

The comment 'better a daughter than a dead son" often used by TRAs is completely contrary to Samaritan's guidance and very dangerous for vulnerable children, young people and their families.

It is discussed here:
www.transgendertrend.com/suicide-by-trans-identified-children-in-england-and-wales/

Catmint · 13/10/2018 16:23

How about something like: not all women share my views, but my views do protect all women.

Bowlofbabelfish · 13/10/2018 16:26

I’d say:

You don’t need to agree with me.
This is my informed opinion.
No one speaks for everyone. I speak for myself, judging by my conversations a significant number of others agree with my stance.
The suicide statistics are false (give actual ones, there’s a thread here somewhere.)
The suicide stance is a ploy - the interventions pushed by groups such as mermaids are so extreme, leaving children sterile and mutilated, that they can only be ‘justified’ if the alternative is death. That’s why the ‘affirm me or I’ll kill myself’ narrative is pushed.
Self ID will render all spaces unisex.
Self ID will make the equality act unenforceable
The guidelines for schools pushed by groups like mermaids will place all children, including trans children, outside the safeguarding framework - that’s dangerous.
We don’t need to agree on this.

GraceTheDisgrace · 13/10/2018 16:27

"I'm not speaking on behalf of those women who choose to desert their own interests and those of their fellow women, that's true."

gendercritter · 13/10/2018 16:42

I would say 'no I don't speak for all women but I've read enough online to know I speak for lots of them.' FPFW has been crowdfunded entirely by individual women concerned about this issue. Many thousands of women have been signing petitions about this and going to meetings. Even the suffragettes faced opposition from lots of women, sadly.

And most trans children grow up to be comfortable with their sex - the stats are that most grow out of this. In reality I think only one child known to Tavistock took their own life - which is definitely one child too many but if there was truly an epidemic of 'trans' children killing themselves, we'd know about it.

Knicknackpaddyflak · 13/10/2018 17:15

No woman speaks for all women.

But in matters of consent, no always trumps yes. As long as any woman is not ok with sharing spaces with males then it's a no. And some women are very much not ok with it and never will be able to.

doublethink · 13/10/2018 17:21

I think the women who do not feel the need for female only spaces are very privileged. Any women that have been raped or assaulted are likely to feel less blasé. And women in places such as female only prisons, mental health wards or women's shelters could probably do with more 'woke' women checking their privilege and offering solidarity with them, since they will be the ones paying a higher price for this madness.

ShotsFired · 13/10/2018 17:22

One man in a woman's space instantly makes it mixed sex.

The onus is on the person who wants change the default/current position, to ensure the change being proposed is acceptable to everyone else.

One single yes cannot invalidate one hundred nos.

BlardyBlar · 13/10/2018 18:22

I think I’d go with something like...

Neither of us can speak for all women, but if some men are asking (demanding) women’s rights are extended to them, then unless it can be proven that this will not have a negative impact on women, then we should be listening to those who are concerned.

Many of the women I am in contact with have good reason to fear men. Do you speak for all of them? You are the one advocating change. Surely it should be up to you to demonstrate no harm will come of it.

She might counter with “but your way will harm TW, to which the reply is “they need to find an alternative solution”

Djnoun · 13/10/2018 18:24

The fact that you are asking this question speaks oceans about how unreasonable you are.

newtlover · 13/10/2018 18:35

I'd just reply to the woman
no, I don't but I AM concerned for the safety of all women
to the man-
this is a very dangerous lie, (link) if you really cared about the MH of young people you would be mindful of the samaritans guidelines (link)

and by the way, what ARE you doing to promote YP's mental health?
I think in these cases it's as much about reaching the others who are reading the discussion as convincing the idiot you are replying to

happydappy2 · 13/10/2018 18:48

I had a curious exchange with a friend today about trans rights-she stated this......if you change the condition to black would it be acceptable to say no blacks in the toilets? No blacks in the girl guides .. you could say it’s not the same but it is if you change it to white girl guides

I can't believe she genuinely thinks that-she has 2 daughters & is otherwise a smart woman...

How do I respond in a clear way?

Bonions · 13/10/2018 18:57

What negative consequences are there when black girls and women are allowed in women’s spaces? (This is awfully phrased but in keeping with the hypothetical).

Will anyone’s privacy, dignity and safety be compromised? Will anyone exploit this to their own benefit and the detriment of others?