Great blog about being a trans inclusive feminist

[spannablue]

Here: alicenuttallbooks.wordpress.com/2018/11/04/why-i-am-a-trans-inclusive-feminist/

Enjoy!

Even the original intersex organizations would include medical conditions under their intersex umbrella which doctors did not classify as intersex. They did this, to enlarge their numbers for propaganda purposes. (It is now backfiring on them re: trans but they did it to themselves. There is a REASON radfems are scrupulously honest!)

Anyway, according to doctors, one of the criteria for intersex is that the person is incapable of producing offspring. And this includes by invtro .

I discovered this, by looking up the medical info on intersex and cross checking that with what the intersex orgs claimed...

How have we evolved this far as a species of sex isn't binary? How did people know what to do to make a baby? How did they know which people to shag?

It's time to find a new name for our species, homo sapiens is clearly no longer accurate.

For those who say they haven't read it/aren't going to, well you're kind of shooting down all your own arguments really

Ermmm, no im not

I read it when someone gave us a clicky link.

Self-ID will not allow men to enter spaces that they couldn’t before, because most women’s spaces don’t require you to show a passport to get inside.

The point has been made many times already that prior to all this trans nonsense, all it would take to put everyone on guard was a male-bodied person stepping even one foot into the women's locker room, for instance. His predatory inclinations was clear at the outset. Now we have to wait for him to dangle his twig and berries and even then we're not supposed to complain until he actually rapes someone.

If we look at countries such as Malta and Ireland, who already have self-ID, there has been no sudden spike in men pretending to be trans women in order to attack cis women

Not sure about Malta but Ireland for sure is still legally allowing bathrooms/prisons etc to be segregated by sex.

just as there hasn’t been here in the UK, for the nearly nine years since the Equality Act passed.

There is a whole of websites which document the crimes trans and other men commit against women in woman-only spaces. So often it's a standing joke, "they say it never happens". There once was a time when it was possible that a trans supporter saying that was just oblivious to the news reports. But now, when even the Daily Mail runs story after story of trans raping women in prison? That person is more likely just lying. Perhaps the author is trans?

purple chimp and human DNA are something like 99.6% the same
Basically biologically the reason we are different species is we can't breed to produce viable, fertile offspring. How similar DNA is, How similar we look etc has little to do with it.
Strange how sex and reproduction is at the root of all these definitions. It's almost as though reproduction is fundamental to life

“Re the 'binary sex is biology' argument, more than 1000 scientists disagree: not-binary.org/statement/“

This statement at no point says that sex is binary. The only comment on sex (other than in respect of intersex conditions) is to say: “There are no genetic tests that can unambiguously determine gender, or even sex.” This is true, given the possibility of intersex conditions. It is does not negate the fact that sex is binary.

Probably all this was covered on the other thread.

This statement says at no point that sex is *not binary.

Sorry!

If we look at countries such as Malta and Ireland, who already have self-ID, there has been no sudden spike in men pretending to be trans women in order to attack cis women

This is daft, because crimes by men are being recorded as crimes by women anyway. So no, there wouldn't be a spike in men pretending to be trans, but there would be a spike in 'women' committing sex crimes, which there is even here, before self ID as police and such are recording male crimes as female.

Banning trans women from women’s spaces because one or two cis male abusers have pretended to be trans is like banning men with broken arms from parks because of Ted Bundy.

The reason it's okay to ban male-bodied people from women-only space is because they are male. No other reason required. If we were to allow male-bodied people in, then it would be a mixed sex space and there's no reason to exclude any male-bodied person.

and I cannot understand how anyone can claim to be fighting sexism while also implying that women need to be small, dainty and femme to count as women.

nope, all females are female. All trans women are male-bodied. Big difference.

Btw. I no longer think this blogger is really a woman. It's a trans person, hoping to convince women that "oh gosh lots of women support trans." There used to be a time when that was true. But I read mainstream liberal forums and for a while now, whenever there is a thread on trans, there are no long-time posters who make comments in those threads anymore. The only comments are by trans and their transock poppets. You can tell they're second trans accounts because it's a liberal pro-trans site -- so if the long-time members wanted to voice support for trans in those threads then they could do so; they have no reason to hide their regular user names.

Trans is actually losing popular support by the boatload and they're making all these fake accounts everywhere in an attempt to hide that.

and I cannot understand how anyone can claim to be fighting sexism while also implying that women need to be small, dainty and femme to count as women.

Who is doing that then?

Hey Spanna didnt realise one could catch ‘women’ from a bus seat - shocker.

Also humans and bananas share 50% of our DNA (but under 1% of our DNA with our third cousins!?), I see no ‘nana in me, so maybe you have my bit !?

Oo or maybe we’re 4th cousins

FloralBunting

I'm trying to imagine another debating chamber where people don't debate with each other, they just hand each other articles every couple of hours.

Sounds suspiciously like academia. Although the debating is much slower, as people take their time (usually) to think through the issues properly before responding. Maybe it's pointless to do this here.

just as there hasn’t been here in the UK, for the nearly nine years since the Equality Act passed.

It's old Schrodinger's trans: are these documented criminals like Karen White (so yes, you're wrong dear) "trans" or not? I bet they aren't when it suits her "argument".

Maybe it's pointless to do this here.

Pointless to do it with you, anyway.

Can humans change sex spanna?

no-one says that Kim Kardashian is less valid as a woman because she dresses in a stereotypically feminine way – so why should there be a different rule for trans women?

Kim has a female reproductive system which means she is female; she could be stark naked without any clothes at all and she'd still be female. In contrast, transwomen are male-bodied people with male reproductive systems which means regardless of they are wearing or not wearing they are still men.

Motherhood is a social construct

This is just getting stupid. The practice of adoption is not the reason which explains why a person with a male reproduction system who wishes to think of himself as a female should be pandered to.

Gender stereotyping and gender are not the same thing, just like stereotypes about ethnicity and being of a particular ethnicity are not the same thing.

More word salad? I define gender to mean 1) euphemism for bio sex and 2) harmful stereotypes associated with bio sex. (Please note: trans do not believe in the concept of untrue assumptions regarding a person based on their bio sex). Trans, in contrast, define gender to mean 1) euphemism for bio sex and that's it, there is no #2 because they do believe all those stereotypes about women are real. If you were to ask a trans to define the term "gender stereotype" they'd gobble something like "people are mean cos they won't let me stick my dick in the women's showers".

Banning trans women from women’s spaces because one or two cis male abusers have pretended to be trans is like banning men with broken arms from parks because of Ted Bundy.

Ted Bundy didn’t have a broken arm - he just dressed like he had a broken arm to give him access to women.

Do you think this analogy helps you?

no-one says that Kim Kardashian is less valid as a woman because she dresses in a stereotypically feminine way – so why should there be a different rule for trans women?

Part of the problem is this idea that being male or female isn't just a neutral description like blood type or height, it's an endorsement of 'validity'.

Would having human DNA cover it Aspie?

No, because you’d have to define human DNA in a way that isn’t circular. Humans are defined by their DNA. What’s human DNA? The DNA that humans have.

TRAs throw up this ‘Hah! You can’t define women! Therefore anyone can be a woman!’ But we can’t define things like human (at which point did our ancestors become human? Is a fetus human? How about a corpse?), consciousness (are animals conscious? Can we create it artificially? What the fuck is it anyway?) or life (Self replicating molecules? Proton pumps? Bowl of cherries?) in absolute terms and yet we still get through the day without doing so.

I’ve heard this kind of argument described as ‘isolated demand for rigour’. TRAs demand sex be defined with a clarity they would never accept for other commonly understood words because they think having a fuzzy edge makes a concept incoherent. But the atmosphere has a fuzzy edge - and we don’t believe that the Earth extends indefinitely into space.

The stupidity of thinking that being female is a question of identity, not biology “because you let all those [insert name of marginalised group] be women” would be funny if it weren’t so horrible.

This. Here's what I - a white woman - have in common with the marginalised groups that TRAs and their supporters like to use as some sort of 'gotcha!' when all they're doing is demonstrating their own horrendous prejudices towards those very groups:

We're all actual, biological, XX women.

FloralBunting

You are a charmer.

AspieAndProud That was really interesting. If you ever start a blog I'd like to read it.

no-one says that Kim Kardashian is less valid as a woman because she dresses in a stereotypically feminine way – so why should there be a different rule for trans women?

tyvm Merrymouse I missed that part. Notice what he thinks is a reason... He thinks that the reason Kim Kardashian is considered to be a woman is NOT because she is female but merely because of the clothes she's wearing. One presumes that trans would classify Kim as male if Kim dressed in lumberjack plaid. It's all about stereotypes, but the stereotypes are assumed to be real, so they aren't using the word stereotype in a way which most would recognize. Too much word salad...

spannablue, you're still doing it. Aspie and others are posting some really good posts, and all you've got is pointless snark at me for pointing out your non-engagement.