Feminists only claim to care about lesbians in order to justify transphobia

[emerencesometimeshopeful]

Came across this article today. Posted by a friend (ex-friend maybe) who I know would identify with the author.

I fundamentally disagree that the brave new world gives more options than the old one. I'm not even convinced that the numbers of people identifying themselves for statistical purposes as lgbtq+ is useful given the myriad of ways one can identify and fall under stonewall's umbrella.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/lesbians-trans-women-gender-issues-erasure-lgbt-rights-a9005151.html

I posted this last night, and have just caught up (am Australian).

The thread title was my one sentence summary of the article. I probably should have clarified that near the beginning.

It is fact that people can be fellow travellers about a particular issue while disagreeing vehemently about almost everything else. Some people probably are hiding behind 'feminism' just as others hide behind 'socialism' while espousing hate speech. But that doesn't mean that the current narrative isn't damaging to lesbians and the author does seem very much to be saying that if xxxx hasn't happened to me then it isn't really a problem.

I also really struggle with the cognitive dissonance here. Gender stereotypes are enforced by genderism (a belief system that accepts that gender exists separately from the body/biology) and the organisations that once supported same sex attracted adults now talk about same gender attracted. I can sort of understand how younger lesbians might accept the narrative but older women, those who have been around for a few decades, who are mothers (sometimes), who are politically engaged - why do these people not see what is so clear to many here?

Ps - it is not 'clearly transphobic' to want single sex, female, toilets. To the pp who said it was, go find another hobby.

@wacademia
Can I suggest becoming disabled? Since I started using a wheelchair full time this has emerged as a positive.

Of course, do be careful about exactly how disabled/old you grow. Being more vulnerable isn't all it's cracked up to be.

re the teen protected from rape by the single-sex loo policy enforcement in a restaurant: www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3627067-My-daughter-was-assaulted-tonight-why-Im-against-self-ID

emerence Actually, being old doesn't work perfectly, my mum was over sixty when she and I were both propositioned for blowjobs by two young men. Disability doesn't work perfectly either... www.vibe.com/2019/01/woman-gives-birth-in-coma-after-rape

Anyone up for founding a womyn's land type of shared estate?

Yes. That's why I added the second paragraph.

Statistically my chances of being assaulted has gone up. But in daily life I have fewer of the 'minor' interactions.

I got the impression that the author only knows lesbians over 30. Of course someone in her position is not going to be targeted

It’s pretty bad for ones coming of age now, from those I know. My sister had to deal with a lot of aggression and dick pics when she was trying to “date while lesbian,” there was no easy way to say “I’m homo!” and be left alone. There was pressure to “just give it (lady dick) a try, otherwise how can you say for sure?”

But since she settled down and left the whole GBT scene behind it’s much better (from what I see).

DIVA et al is

The author is entirely disingenuous.

In the US Planned Parenthood are, or at least were at one point, running workshops entitled 'Overcoming the Cotton Ceiling'. I know this as someone who is neither a lesbian nor a woman who has ever particularly considered myself a feminist.

If I, a working class woman who has never and probably will never read any feminist theory, who isn't involved in LGB circles and who doesn't have any family members or close friends who are lesbians, am aware of this why the hell doesn't the author know?

If I know Mitchfest was closed down by trans privilege activists, one of whom is now awaiting trial for the triple homicide of a lesbian couple and their adopted son, why the hell doesn't the author?

If I know there are thousands upon thousands of threats directed at lesbians online why does the author not?

I have no particular reason to know these things. I am just a working class woman who has never thought men can be women and who is primarily concerned about the vulnerable people I work with. The elderly people with dementia, the learning disabled people, the children. Yet I know this stuff.

I don't believe the author doesn't know. I believe she is choosing to ignore. For personal gain.

I don't care if she calls herself feminist. I don't care who she is sexually attracted to. She is a horrible person.

Frankly, I'm in awe of the strength of so many women who speak out on this issue. Particularly lesbians, who despite everything, are sticking their necks out and being accused of transphobia and gatekeeping, plus being called vagina fetishists for refusing to sleep with male bodied people.

Lesbian academics have been threatened and abused and their jobs have been put at risk. Knowing these facts doesn't make me transphobic, it just strengthens my resolve to be the best ally that I can.

like the restaurant recently mentioned on FWR where a teen girl was protected from rape by the staff enforcing toilet sex segregation against her attacker who had followed her into the loos)

That was a man, presenting as a man. Not a TW and nothing to do with trans people. I think it’s pretty unpleasant to conflate.

In the workplace, women are entitled to single-sex or else single-occupant loos by a law called the Workplace (Health Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, look in provision 20 where it talks about men and women having separate "sanitary conveniences". A woman is defined under the Equality Act 2010 as a "female of any age". We know that transwomen with GRCs should normally be treated as women, but there is no legislation that I'm aware of allowing pre-/non-GRC transwomen to use women's workplace loos.

Page 17 the ehrc makes it clear that trans person should be treated as the gender (I agree that’s a bit problematic I don’t really like gender either) they present unless very good reason not to. I think most people would consider toilet use reasonable.
www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/what-equality-law-means-for-your-business-2018.pdf

Fieldofgreycorn
*
*
That was a man, presenting as a man. Not a TW and nothing to do with trans people. I think it’s pretty unpleasant to conflate.

How do you know how he self ID'd?

*wacademia
*
For this reason, I can't wait to get old. As I remarked to a colleague on Monday who asked how my weekend had gone, the days elapsed since I was last sexually assaulted in a public space can currently be counted on one hand.

Hopefully old is better, yes. But I do hear of news items about elderly women getting raped by young men, usually in their homes during a break in.

What age is old enough not to be harassed? I’m mid 40’s and it hasn’t stopped yet.

My 72 year old mum got 'hit on' in a supermarket a couple of weeks back.

I don't think it ever fully stops, though perhaps the pool of harassers gets smaller as (sweeping generalisation alert) men tend to disregard women older then themselves.

Page 17 the ehrc makes it clear that trans person should be treated as the gender (I agree that’s a bit problematic I don’t really like gender either) they present unless very good reason not to. I think most people would consider toilet use reasonable.

The EHRC appears to be unaware of current case law which clearly states that unless a GRC is possessed by the person concerned, a male who is at any stage in the "transition" process must be treated the same as all other males. Ditto for females.

Possession of a GRC is verifiable by checking the person's Birth Certificate [driving licence or passport are both insufficient as evidence because a GRC is not required to change either of these].

See paras 70 onward here from a 2003 case:

www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5b46f1fa2c94e0775e7ef4e3

and again in 2013 [after GRA became law [see paras 63 - 68]

www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7bb60d03e7f57eb1a1f

Page 17 the ehrc makes it clear that trans person should be treated as the gender (I agree that’s a bit problematic I don’t really like gender either) they present unless very good reason not to. I think most people would consider toilet use reasonable.

But what about that "IT'S MA'AM" guy? Who had a massive hissy for because everyone in the shop kept calling him sir.

He presented as a hulking male but on closer inspection he had pink trainers on

1 The coercion by these males is aimed at the younger lesbians who are coming to terms with their sexuality. It is these young women we aim to protect from such corruption of their sexuality by men.

1. No evidence that this is common but if it is I’ll certainly be calling it out.

Download the report published here: www.gettheloutuk.com/blog/category/research/lesbians-at-ground-zero.html

2 UK law provides for men in all their forms to be excluded from toilets designated for females.

2. TW can (legally) use female toilets and you can’t stop them. They’re public toilets, not your toilets. You don’t decide who goes in them. You can go in, do your business, and mind your own business. That’s about it mate.

This is incorrect. See case law: [paras 70 onward] www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5b46f1fa2c94e0775e7ef4e3

and [paras 63 - 68] www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7bb60d03e7f57eb1a1f

See also Equality Act 2010, Schedule 3, section 26 [separate services for the sexes]; section 27 [single sex services] and section 28 [gender reassignment]

www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/schedule/3

Women are asserting their boundaries and will continue so to do.

There’s no indication of how representative that report is. Get the L out have made their anti trans views clear and have been disowned by most lesbians.

None of that legislation you quote states that TW should be told to use male toilets. If you asked the ehrc directly if TW should be told that, what do you think they would say? I think we know the answer.

@JackyHolyoake

Just wanted to say thank you for always painstakingly quoting the law on here, especially where posters have misunderstood it.

I am archiving all your posts for when the inevitable happens in the school where I work.

I didn’t really think about lesbians too much but the cotton ceiling set me off cos it’s just the same old rapey shite.

I guess I very naively thought lesbians get to skip having to deal with the kind of gender stuff I was particularly concerned with (family dynamics, womens work that kinda thing) because of my own cultural background. I also stupidly thought things were going in the right direction for women.

But yes rapey shite targeted at any women will piss me right off. I was actually all for turning everything unisex (as I now understand it to be, don’t judge me, I was radiclised in time by mumsnet after I got over the fact that you weren’t just absolute total lady bigots). But cotton ceiling made me think “hmmm this doesn’t sound very good for women” it reminded me of incels and that pervert that runs pick up classes which involve gaslighting. The idea that you could moan about being excluded from someones pants was very enlightening for me. I always assumed the one place you could be as prejudiced as you bloody well like towards anyone is in your own pants.

So yeah I care about women regardless of who they are sleeping with. Plus ladybrain, always the ladybrain.

I am archiving all your posts for when the inevitable happens in the school where I work

Here's the school regulations that state the requirement for sex-segregated toilets and washing facilities for children aged 8 years and over.

www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/1943/made

Field but how do you know they were a man and not a TW? Genuine question. If TW like Danielle Muscato and JY use the female toilets (as they do), how can you tell by looking at someone?

Isn't that kind of the point? If you can't exclude TW you also can't exclude men. Because you can't tell gender identity at a glance. But also many trans activist types are asking for unisex facilities, which don't even in theory exclude men, and are known to increase risk for women. Single gender facilities doesn't work, they'd need 76 for all the different possible identities.

Field but how do you know they were a man and not a TW

That's what I'm trying to say. It's almost impossible to tell the difference in a lot of cases, and totally impossible to tell the difference in some cases

There’s no indication of how representative that report is. Get the L out have made their anti trans views clear and have been disowned by most lesbians.

Oh well that's ok then the incidents mentioned represent a problem, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

Page 17 the ehrc makes it clear that trans person should be treated as the gender (I agree that’s a bit problematic I don’t really like gender either) they present unless very good reason not to. I think most people would consider toilet use reasonable.

The EHRC had to revise some of their guidelines around this last year and one of the things they specifically took out was that you can't say to a trans person that they can't use the opposite sex toilets. Because, yes you can. It's covered by the EA exemptions. Yes it might go to court as a discrimination claim and we don't know what the outcome would be. But it is covered by exemptions meant to protect single SEX spaces.

FamilyOfAliens

I meant to include a "thank you" in my post for you above.

[See the post above that links you to the school regulations for toilet and washing facilities.]