As I said, let's leave it at that. You can keep arguing and attacking me if you want. I just won't be taking any notice.
Nobody's attacking you. They're making points to which you have no rebuttal. That's telling, no?
This is all part of a belief system that is allowing any male into any female space, as soon as they claim she/her pronouns. That's not hyperbole. That's simple fact.
The government's own figures state that one in fifty male prisoners are now asserting that they identify as women. Those holding that belief system state that should be taken literally, and they should be moved to the prison estate.
Every single prison reform charity has said males in the women's estate terrify those women, all of whom have suffered abuse from men in their lives, almost all sexual, and more than half sexual abuse in childhood. The presence of those males is traumatising in itself. And that's before you begin to consider that most women in jail are there for financial offences, and most men violent. So you are moving violent males - including rapists and killers - into the women's estate, despite that terrifying the women and despite the risks not being containable, because there are so few women posing that sort of risk. The obvious is happening, all over the world. And in most countries, nobody cares. They're all women. The females don't matter. Shut the fuck up. That's not hyperbole. That's fact.
The pronouns creep is a way of manipulating people into signalling that they do not protest this. That they do not object. And given Maya Fostater was sacked for simply tweeting, respectfully and on her own account, that she did not think a man can become a woman simply by saying that he is (she did not say this at work, or harass or 'misgender' - stupid idea, when the entire point of this is to ensure that if someone demands it you DO misgender - anyone) nobody dares say they think this is simply not true, with pernicious implications for women.
There are three ways of looking at what is happening in the prison example. One is that transwomen are as likely to be predatory criminals as anyone else, which given women are not, means the same single sex spaces must be retained. The second is that these people are not truly trans, but predators seeking to use trans as a means to access women to abuse, in which case the same single sex spaces must be retained. The last is who cares, females don't matter anyway - and that seems to be the present state of play, much as people hotly deny it.
At the moment, any man can turn up at Center Parcs, assert that their pronouns are she/her, and that male will immediately be allowed to use the communal women's changing rooms on that basis. We had a male person arrive on Mumsnet to gloat, in fact. That person, when it was carefully explained that male bodies in a communal space where women will be naked would cause unease and discomfort at best, and could retraumatise rape survivors at worst, responded by saying that the obsession with their body was really creepy. It was, you see, all about them. Actual female women were there as props in this person's fantasy world... at best. If that's not rather more than creepy, and well into disturbing as fuck territory, I'm not sure what is.
I was firmly on the side of the trans argument until quite recently, because I knew none of this. I assumed common sense was being applied, sex protections retained, and all we had to be was kind, understanding and tolerant, while our own rights and protections were retained. I went away and researched all this solely to prove that the arguments to the contrary were rubbish.
They were not rubbish. They were absolutely correct. This is the biggest single threat to women's rights in my own mother's lifetime - her words, not mine - let alone my own. If you think you have good arguments against the above, I'd love to hear them. Because to date, nobody has been able to make a single one that doesn't boil down to: women don't matter. Sports? No male advantage. The physical reality doesn't matter. Our ideology says so. All women's shortlists should remain female? OMG you're so bigoted! What about the women born with penises?!
You see in old money, that would make them men. And in history, men weren't discriminated against. Henry VIII wore what we'd regard today as dresses. You'd need to ask his wives how vulnerable and powerless that made him. Those he didn't execute, that is.
And that's been the basis of most societies for tens of thousands of years, so you'll need to explain why this brief, fifty year span in just some of the nations on earth has left our rights and protections impregnable, and why allowing males to self-ID into those rights, protections and provision at will isn't the most misogynist thing imaginable.
It's not 'just pronouns'. It's signalling that you agree with what is happening.
If you look near the start, I saw no problem with this. I was happy to use whatever pronouns people wanted. You know what's swayed me? As ever, the people in favour of using them. It's not women with these ideas who 'radicalise'. It's the people who think females should have no rights. Funnily enough, as a female I'm not down with that.