Edinburgh Uni under pressure for hosting discussion on women's sex based rights

[GCatEdinburgh]

Scotsman article here

So far they have been firm re. protecting freedom of speech, but the pressure is escalating and will continue, and they will keep a close eye on the balance of negative/positive correspondence.

The event details are here.

If any of you could write in support of the event the key recipients would be the head of the School of Education Prof. Rowena Arshad ([email protected]) and the Principal Prof. Peter Mathieson ([email protected]).

Thanks for the links, LangCleg. To expand on this, a few points:

1. From the GIRES submission it is evident, that to date (as of 2015) only 5% of UK people identifying as trans had sought any medical help at all.

2.) That medical help starts with counselling, not genital surgery. 95% are therefore not only intact, they don't even have a diagnosis or take hormones (some buy their own but typically only after approaching the doctor and being turned down or finding the wait too long. So the number who take them without medical supervision is contained within that 5%.)

3.) The 80% number comes from conjecture by GIRES, based on actual data, that eventually a further 15% will seek out medical help.

4.) So called Genital Reassignment Surgery (GRS) includes feminization surgeries like hair implants, facial feminization surgeries, voice feminization surgeries, shaving the Adam's apple, constructing breasts while masculinization GRS includes mastectomy and chest reconstruction and hysterectomy.

However, most people think GRS refers solely to surgery on the genitals. But when you delve into the data, you'll find that most GRS do not involve the genitals at all.

5.) With the influx of crossdressers and others who identify as trans but do not suffer from gender dysphoria, the latest stats, especially from the Netherlands, show the percentage of those who progress from hormone treatments all the way to genital surgery is now smaller than 30 years ago and continues to shrink.

6.) It is fairly common among males who identify as trans to have an orchidectomy but to keep their penis, at least for a number of years. And it is important to know that 97% of such males are capable of PIV-sex, over half of them without medical aids like erectile dysfunction meds.

7.) In conclusion, we are being overly generous when we say that 80% of UK males who identify as trans are intact. The number of those who actually have their penis removed is vanishingly small, at less than 1%.

Accurate, up-to-date data is very difficult to come by, however, so we tend to accept the percentage given by trans rights organisations because they are harder to dispute by trans rights activists.

Even among GRC holders btw, who we know have to have an actual diagnosis of GD and used to have to provide evidence of at the very least a medical treatment plan, the number of intact males is rising. Thus to date, of 3000 male GRC-holders, 900 are intact males.

Correction, that is 3100 male GRC-holders

Robin, this is a thread about a women’s rights event at a university, the pressure the university had to resist to give women the space and time to speak and be heard, and the ensuing attack by a transactivist on one of the women speaking afterwards. Why are you trying to me-rail it to become all about you? Engage with the topic at hand, or quite frankly feel free to fuck off, start your own thread if you want to discuss statistics of transwomen retaining their penises, backwoods USA bathrooms or anything else.

Sorry for being such an UnBunbury, darling!

I have found this thread helpful in understanding that, once again, based on the language and approach of those posting, reaching out to the so-called ‘gender critical’ is pointless.

Consider the type of male behaviour you claim to abhor, and take a look at yourselves.

As I have said, fortunately the general run of the population, can see such behaviour for what it is.

That's nice, dear.

DARVO, dear, DARVO

Since we're women, our behaviour is female.

Surely it is for all persons of goodwill to advance the rights of all?

Thats great, however what TRAs are demanding does not advance the rights of women at all. 'All' in these conversations seems to mean..males. Women obviously come last, even in feminism! where of course, focusing on female people is mean and exclusionary and feminists should spend their time fighting for all other groups instead as otherwise its just unfair.

A third space being compared to a ghetto is, offensive too. Given we segregate certain areas based on sex, why would an area where those who felt they did not fit their sex could go if not wanting to use the usual areas be a bad thing? Why are so many so against that option. The alternative is to make all areas mixed, which is both an unpopular idea, and unfair on women. But, it might please some males so obviously that makes it fine. Afterall, who on earth would include mere women as part of 'all' when discussing whos rights are important?

Consider the type of male behaviour you claim to abhor, and take a look at yourselves.

Oh noes. However will we sleep at night being told that not rolling over and allowing our rights to be trampled on apparently means we exhibit male behaviour

And yes, 'reaching out' is impossible really if your starting point is that women are big meanies for setting boundaires and actually caring about their own rights.

The public you keep mentioning, all polling shows the opposite to what you state.

And its rather an unfair assessment to disregard all the posts which have bent over backwards to be polite and dismiss it as pointless to speak to GC feminists, because a couple of people refused to basically, bow down.

Shovelling shit against the tide springs to mind. No matter what we say about boundaries is countered by some version of "you're all mean", as if that will magically make be more accommodating.

‘Reaching out’ does not mean* telling women that you want a share of some of their sex-based rights and getting sniffy when you’re told ‘no, we’d like to keep them for ourselves, thanks, and here are many good reasons why.’

*Or maybe it does now - I lose track of what means what anymore. Oh well, at least I know what I think it means and that’s all that counts, right?

I will heed your words, Cwenthryth and return to the topic at hand forthwith.

But before I do, I will address this comment from RobinMoiraWhite first:

Discrimination imposed to deal with illusory fears - no.

Excluding males, even those with GRCs, from an exclusively female-only set aside is, of course, discrimination. We do it all the time in all kinds of other settings - disabled parking spaces, awards or scholarships just for BAME persons, events just for children or elderly people. Where it serves a legitimate purpose, indirect discrimination is perfectly legal and justified.

Maintaining women's sex-based rights and therefore excluding all males, regardless of identity, for our safety, privacy, dignity and to redress sex-based discrimination and the inequality we face is such a legitimate purpose.

The vast majority of women are not willing to let males into female-only set asides, however nice those you know are to you personally. (You could start by asking them about Karen White or BalldeMort. They might feel brave enough to answer you honestly.)

All surveys done over the last 24 months show a minimum of 75% of women reject self-id outright. As public awareness grows, that number continues to rise. In 18 months of talking about this with every one I met, not one woman consented to sharing our set asides with males.

Although I feel no need to convince you of our collective views on this and you certainly don't need to believe a word I say, if you are what is generally known as an old style transsexual, then I would urge you to consider how much damage this transgender ideology and legislation has already done and continues to do. TRAs and the assorted perverts and predators who have been emboldened by recent developments are giving all of you a bad name. And the backlash will affect you all, too.

On the illusory fear. There have been no reports in the UK (that I am aware of) of a male who identify as trans being attacked in male-only toilets. I am about to go shopping in a supermarket though where a male who identifies as trans attacked a ten-year-old girl in a female-only toilet. I've witnessed countless incidents of sexual harassment in the mixed-sex changing rooms in my local swimming pool, and no matter how often I complained, it hasn't stopped. At a women's rights meeting I attended last year, tge organisers asked for a show of hands and 100% of the women present had been victims of male physical and sexual violence. Including me. And we were not talking about a hand on a knee or a quick boob grab.

So, no our fears are not illusory, they are real and based on our own experiences. As Julie Bindel said at the Edinburgh event, one thing all females on this planet have in common is the fear of male violence.

A male who glibly dismisses it as illusory and prioritises his own desire for inclusion among women over our need to exclude all males for our own safety, is demonstrating nothing other than male socialization.

So, let me make this absolutely clear:

any male who violates female boundaries by using female-only set asides without the consent of every single female using them or intending to use them, is engaged in an act of aggression against females and displays nothing other than the male entitlement that treats females as lesser humans.

I find it noteworthy that this the second time Robin has visited FWR, made some vague pronouncements about dialogue, ignored all points put to them for a few pages while repeating their dismissals, and then flounced as though they had actually engaged with anything at all.

Yes, I'm fairly sure readers will be drawing their own conclusions. I don't think they will see the world the way Robin does.

What a patronising attitude "the general run of the population" is. I suppose when you're institutionalised by the militarily you can't find much empathy for for the "general run" especially if your only contact is your polite neighbours or the media people flogging your self promotion.

I also can't reconcile this nonsense that everyone in the general run or the village is perfectly accepting and yet it's so terrifying and dangerous that trans people are murdered and assaulted continuously and can't therefore be expected to be anywhere near their same sex villagers or general run of the population.

Which is it?

So Robin asked a poster for some evidence, got the evidence, and then said we are all exhibiting male behaviour and not listening to reason?

I know a lot of posters get exasperated by the merailers but like all TRA nonsense it's always an own goal when they try to out argue people who rely on fact and stats.

Robin didn't intend this, but Robin's posts offered opportunities for some well written and well researched ripostes, while displaying Robin's complete failure to engage. And as is often said, thousands of women are reading these threads, hopefully deciding to join in.

Taken a look at myself, Robin, and love what I see, thanks for checking, have a nice day!

So far I’ve read reports that it seems that Julie Bindel hasn’t/isn’t going to report her attacker to the police. I feel disappointed by this decision, although obviously respect it is 100% her decision and maybe she wants to ‘go high’ etc. But my gut response is disappointment.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/i-tried-very-hard-to-be-male-but-it-just-didnt-work-out-nt8lk5cbxrf?shareToken=bccefb898b8262f9f55337cf54480801

I can see her point though. She's a very busy woman and the work she's doing is important. It's not as if Brennan is likely to be jailed - and the godawful circus that would surround a trial would be a huge distraction to her.

At Time’s link. If this is the same RobinMoira let’s hope they are imore skilful at arguing in a courtroom than they are on here.

Let's hope.

If RMW has a background practising law, perhaps a cover to cover read of the Equality Act, including all the associated Schedules and explanatory Notes is in order by RMW.

Gutted I missed this event

If this is the same RobinMoira let’s hope they are more skilful at arguing in a courtroom than they are on here.

That's what I was thinking