How can people seriously believe....

[PerverseConverse]

That there is scientific basis to support that transwomen are women and trans men are not women?

Facebook is awash tonight (thanks Posie ) with women saying that this sign in a cafe (pictured) is perfectly ok and that terfs (can I use the full word on here? Sorry if not) can't be feminists as they don't include all women. All women meaning men identifying as women.

I was following a discussion based on a review of the cafe but when I read that there is a "bunch of science behind it" that transwomen are not men I had to give up trying to get my scientific head round what she was trying to say.

Where do people get these ideas from and then claim that science supports them?

I don't want to get into the whole toilet debate here, I'm purely astounded as to how people come up with this and believe it to be supported by science. But then there are people who believe the earth is flat....

NoSquirrel it is obviously not a direct parallel to homosexuality, because the transumbrella additionally comprises autogynephiles and men with paraphilia that may directly target women, while at the same time demanding direct access to women and defining our boundaries for us. It is very different, and remarkably ‚lesbian‘ autogynephiles hide behind science looking at homosexual transpeople‘s brain scans to make their (scientifically absurd) ladybrain point.

Think we should all identify as disabled and demand the right to compete in the Paralympics. The image of someone able-bodied running past the people in wheelchairs should make it visually clear how crazy self-ID is.

Then I fancy identifying as being in my late-60s so I can pick up my pension. Then I fancy identifying as 100 so I can get my letter from the queen.

Then I might identify as a multimillionaire.

All problems solved. Lovely jubbly.

I've skipped the last few pages to post this - can't do clicked as on limping phone, but Google vox.com how politics makes us stupid.
It was linked on one of the brexit threads, and reall y explained what we can see happening. That political/religious beliefs are tied to matters of identity. The intellect is in service to our place in the tribe, i.e. Tribalism first, and our reason justifies it.

Help all. The Doctor of Science who I mention above is close to peaking. How do I get him o er the line?

I need links and evidence he's now saying there needs to be a test case to prove things legally and that we should be able to have grown up discussions about it all.

It's frustrating that he thinks it's more complicated than 2 different gametes give rise to another individual.
There are 7.5 billion examples extant on this earth, and that's only the human examples. How much more evidence does he need?

It's obvious the women that claim TWAW don't really. They wouldn't fawn over a common or garden woman in that way nor gush over crappy outfits. They would be bitching about them
Men. Imo some men are more than happy to push feminine or potentially gay men out of their club

Hell SciFi - a Doctor of bloody Science needs feminists to explain to him how biology works?? If he needs "a test case to prove things legally" then he's not much of a scientist in my opinion....

Just ask him how many biological males he knows who've given birth...

It's obvious the women that claim TWAW don't really.

The thing is that I was reading some worrying stuff on a very large fb group last night where those women, all mothers, who fully believed TWAW were describing it literally as a birth defect that was corrected and as it was a type of defect were also fully accepting and believing that a self Id 'd no surgery person was truly the opposite sex. and needed women's support and protection.

There were women who respectfully disagreed but gosh the number who agreed was high.

I've explained myself badly. Was in a rush. He disagreed with me when I stated that humans were a binary species (then went into great detail about the science of it) and his role means that he meets lots of trans identifying children so was initially very supportive of the GRA.
Now he seems less supportive of the GRA and more "we need to be able to have a grown up conversation about it"
I'd like good blogs to send him around the subject (not the science of it) the background etc etc to bring him more onside.
His opinion has obviously started to move away from complete kool aid acceptance to a more questioning perspective.
I sent him the screen shot about the trans woman who threatened a 15 year old lesbian with rape and that completely shocked him.
I've explained that free speech is at risk because we are regularly no-debated
Waiting to see what comes back.

The thing is that I was reading some worrying stuff on a very large fb group last night where those women, all mothers, who fully believed TWAW were describing it literally as a birth defect that was corrected and as it was a type of defect were also fully accepting and believing that a self Id 'd no surgery person was truly the opposite sex. and needed women's support and protection.

Deep down they are reacting to them in this way and coddling their feelings because they know they are men, not women.

Nobody cuts women that much slack. It's the coddling that tells you clearly that everyone knows the individuals in question are male, even if they pretend not to.

Even if someone believes that people can in some way change sex, they can't possibly believe that self ID causes someone to change sex.

Also they should have noticed that where the law cares about whether you are a man or a woman, it is always for physical reasons. So feeling that someone can change sex socially or temporarily or honorarily isn't relevant.

I mentioned on here a few days ago that I saw some woke people claiming on Facebook that transwomen athletes 'have no innate advantage' over women athletes. Someone's even written some sort of article 'proving' it.

I'd say 'you couldn't make this up', but they are doing - every day.

It’s about virtue signalling.

You can’t signal your virtue by supporting something plausible. It has to be something outrageous.

If you say, yes, men are more violent than women, you aren’t signaling ‘woke’ because it’s demonstrably true, and even if you didn’t know it was true you’d still think it’s plausable.

To signal a commitment to a cause you have to express a belief in something ridiculous.

You aren’t a Catholic if you just say ‘I believe there was a guy called Jesus and he said be nice to each other’ (which is plausible); you have to say that he was born of a virgin, rose from the dead, and priests can turn crackers into his flesh with magic words.

How can people seriously believe... well often religious beliefs take some swallowing/blind faith... many people still choose not to believe in evolution.

In the clip George Carlin beautifully skewers a belief in god with the invisible man in the sky skit.

The question is not whether, the question is how.

I like being a terf. (Just saying...)