Triggernometry :"Transwomen aren't allowed to disagree with Trans activists.

[Childrenofthestones]

Just a heads up for this Sunday's episode of Triggernometry where the boys interview Rose of Dawn and she makes the statement in the thread title above.
An extract here

Ooooooh.

This is great. I'm warming to the Trigger chaps.

Thanks, I look forward to watching that. I enjoy watching Rose of Dawn, very down to earth

Great; like Rose,like triggernometry. Should be a good one. Thanks for the heads up!

Bumping

bumping, ready for tomorrow.

Thanks for the heads up

Interesting. I'll definitely watch that.

Full interview:

Good points of view, however still flaws in the argument. Rose is also being authoritarian in that people must conform to a stereotype to be 'woman.'

Why the 'gender war' will never be won.

@Triggerpod please speak to Miranda Yardley!

I also take issue with "it would be different if a child had had hormones from being young." Re sport. Firstly, actually possibly not according to science and secondly, child abuse.

(Haven't finished watching and I also know that she doesn't agree with transitioning of children, I think.)

What Rose is excellent at is making the extremely important argument that this must be debated and discussed without fear, for everyone's sakes.

Where Rose really comes into her own is her analysis of politics and trans policy; just brilliant.

I like Rose of Dawn too and subscribe to her channel, but I did find this interview infuriating. It showed that Rose supports the notion that it is the degree of trauma suffered by women which should determine whether transwomen are allowed in to single sex spaces, so refuges and prisons are no, while changing rooms and toilets are a yes (as an aside, this interview was also littered with the word bathrooms...). This leads to an inevitable debate across two axis - degree of trauma (eg do you have to have been raped) and degree of vulnerability (eg how undressed do you need to be) - in order to determine whether women should be entitled to single sex spaces. We already know when women are vulnerable or when single sex would be beneficial and all women are entitled to the dignity and safeguarding effects that single sex provision gives.

Also they seemed to be saying that if a passing transwoman was in a single sex space then that was fine because the women using that space would not be intimidated (because they wouldn’t know that a man was present). This presents two problems. First, it reduces the safe guarding effect of single sex spaces, because to be effective all males need to exclude themselves as it is impossible for women to know which are the predatory males. Second (and perhaps more controversially) if a women is unaware that a male is in her space and the male does not tell her, then that is a violation.
Query also whether the position is different for a passing post-operative transwoman than for a transwoman who passes but has not had genital surgery. I think most women would accept the former (though the purist in me thinks I am being inconsistent).

Women having our own spaces seem to be by permission of men, rather than a right.

Women having our own spaces seem to be by permission of men, rather than a right.

Yes, Zutt. Grace and favour, innit?

I'm going to go against the grain here as I'm not a fan of Rose of Dawn, who like so many other XY trans people seems to me to be trying to draw a line that includes them personally in the category 'woman'.

No XY trans person is a woman. No XY trans person should be in any women's spaces. No XY trans person should be made an exception for.

You’ve saved me from typing that Arnold
Consent would be required from WOMEN if we were to give away our single sex spaces.

The interviewers were not adept at putting across the 'opposing view' wrt toilets and safe spaces, clearly didnt understand it.

That women who have been abused are severely triggered by males. And that it's the actual concept of blurred boundaries that is distressing. And no Rose doesn't see it. And the fact that it's been happening for ages is not good enough.

That's how safeguarding works, close the loop hole as soon as it's been identified.

The film is excellent for the analysis of politics and free speech.

I am still concerned about the comment re children who've been on hormones from an early age. As that wasn't picked up on nor clarified if that was a theoretical position or what Rose would advocate for (- which I didn't think so but could be wrong)

Second (and perhaps more controversially) if a women is unaware that a male is in her space and the male does not tell her, then that is a violation.
Query also whether the position is different for a passing post-operative transwoman than for a transwoman who passes but has not had genital surgery. I think most women would accept the former (though the purist in me thinks I am being inconsistent).

Yes and Blaire white passes very well but isn't going to have an operation.

It's that hierarchy of true trans again. At the same time, Rose is very realistic about biology.

Armold I think you are right, but I struggle not to be “nice” about it, despite knowing the implications. I do get that culturally it is hard for a passing transwoman to use a man’s space and for transmen to use a women’s space - ideally it wouldn’t be, but there is a problem there (and I know - third spaces are the answer).

PaleBlueMoonlight I guess I find it easy to not be 'nice' because I have spent my entire adult life dealing with my paranoid schizophrenic brother in law and consider affirming delusions to be pretty much the furthest thing in the universe from 'nice'.

The entire world is not trying to kill my brother in law and transwomen are not women.

Why we are expected to help the former come to terms with reality but pretend reality doesn't exist to the latter is beyond my ken.

I struggle not to be “nice” about it, despite knowing the implications

You're not alone.
I think it's really important to try, and to support others who are trying.

In other words

1. Give yourself permission to think of all men as men. All men. Including the men who call themselves any variation of words that suggest they are in any way a type of woman.
2. Practice it. Make it a habit to undo the constant, pervasive conditioning of 'this person is a prefix-woman'. You know that this person is a man. Deprogramme yourself. Think the forbidden thought. They are - honestly - just a man, like any other man.
3. Work to ignore artifice. We're all just naked apes, once you strip off the eyeliner and false nails. See people for what they truly are.
4. Prioritise young girls. Decide what their rights should be. Decide which men they are not to be permitted to object to (none). Remind yourself that all men are men. All of them.
5. Remind yourself that no woman is being rude or unkind if she asserts her right to refuse all men. Including you.
6. Cultivate a bit of anger and indignation. If you managed the previous steps, you should have successfully arrived at the factual realisation that a man is telling you he has the right to be wherever you and little girls are when you are naked/dealing with periods/whatever he fancies, because he is a special man and you are not allowed to say no to him.
7. Using correct pronouns really helps.

Thanks Barracker. A timely reminder.

My DH rolled his eyes whenever I got cross about - in his words - 'this bloomin trans thing again' but having explained things to him he is nearly as outraged as me. The company he works for wants to bring in pronouns in email addresses and he has flatly refused, telling them it disadvantages women. I'm quite proud of him. He also calls out misogynistic behaviour and language of other men as he is now fully aware that men listen to men and not to women.

I have led a very sheltered life and have only known two people who have transitioned. The first was clearly dysphoric and quietly got on with life after transition. The second I realise now is AGP, a new employee a couple of years ago who is now the strident leader of the LGBT+ group at work and is constantly campaigning for trans rights and no-platforming women. I don't work there any more but this person has been in the news so I know what's going on (I might have radicalised some colleagues about the probability of this person still having fully functioning genitals ).

I fully get Posie Parker's view on men and am becoming less 'kind', shall we say, and more accurate. I hope my language is acceptable, and I hate having to tone police myself

Well according to their latest vlog the Rose if Dawn episode has 'managed to trigger the feminist Mumsnet forum'. Don't see anyone here being triggered, just having a discussion about it.

And there you go.

Nothing unmasks faster the lovely fluffy 'but I'm special' variety of male person like women saying 'no, dude, not even you'

What's that saying about only really understanding the true nature of a person by observing their reaction to being told 'no'?