Of course, because a woman couldn't possibly be able to call out the absolute tosh being discussed on here eh?
O I'm sure India Willoughby for example might:
cf Dr Nic Williams description of an interview earlier this year:
(extract)
"India Willoughby – back on Good Morning Britain again – being introduced by Piers Morgan. India will also be giving her views on the Women’s Aid story. This time up again an expert in the field; Karen Ingala Smith is the head of an amazing organisation called nia that provides services for women and children who have experienced male violence" (continues)
"Suzanne Reid tries to bring the conversation back to the topic, but India is straight in there again with the old chestnut ‘but what about the lesbians!’ India was now claiming that because some women will be abused by their lesbian partners that women staff should be barred. At last Karen is allowed to speak. “A woman and her lesbian partner would of course not be allowed in the same refuge, but statistically we know that when we are talking about sexual and domestic violence men are much more likely to be the perpetrators and women much more likely to be the victims”.
I often hear the argument thrown in by men that lesbians should be banned from women’s toilets, changing rooms etc etc. This is based on the false premise that women are at risk because both men and lesbian women are sexually attracted to women. Sexual and physical violence against women is not because perpetrators are sexually attracted to them – it is based on power, aggression and dominance – the same power and dominance that is embedded within and encouraged by the patriarchal system we all live in. This is about the imbalance of the male vs female dynamic which women grow up being aware of from early girlhood. Women, particularly if abused by men, are acutely aware of a male’s physical presence, his demeanour, his powerful place within society. It is this – the social conditioning all woman have undergone – the unconscious associations they carry within them – that means that women NEED a male-free space sometimes. That social conditioning affects us all as women – we see it in Karen, the expert in the room no less, as she waits for her turn while the males speak. I felt it inside me as I sat in the studio not wanting to interrupt or come over too aggressively. We see the male privilege that both Piers and India have grown up with pushing them on – allowing them to speak with such confidence on areas they know very little about. If we closed our eyes and just listened – there would be no doubt who was born male and who was born female around that table.
And then India pounces in for the killer blow, turning to Karen who had just dared to interrupt and give her views. India said “you accept that transgender women aren’t men, yeah?” “If I got beaten in a relationship would I be welcome?” Karen replies that India should have access to a specialist refuge for transwomen to an indignant India who declares “A specialist refuge – but they don’t exist”.
Let’s just unpack that for a minute. First, it is already the policy of some shelters, such as Women’s Aid, to allow male-born transwomen refuge on a case-by-case basis. India would not have no where to go. Secondly, how does India think specialised refuge’s for women came into existence? Women campaigned and fought for their existence that’s how. Something that the transgender community can and should be doing for themselves rather than expecting and demanding access to under-funded and over-stretched services that are not designed for their particular needs.
Without pausing to let Karen speak India then crossed a line – a line that has lost h** all respect from me and I hope all the women watching – India dared to tell Karen that her website contains a list of crimes committed by men and that this was is a great demonisation.
“I feel really sorry for guys this year – I think they’ve had it really tough”
(continues)
fairplayforwomen.com/thank-india-w-showing-us-women-perceive-transwomen-still-male/