Gina Martin not happy women don’t want trans women in their sex segregated spaces

[happydappy2]

Gina Martin, who successfully campaigned to make upskirting a crime, has tweeted hat she is not happy that women referenced that particular law in regards M&S changing rooms becoming mixed sex. I suspect she has very woke friends leaning on her to speak out but even so, womens rights are not hers to give away. I wonder what she really thinks about denying teenage girls the right to single sex changing facilities.

Head Girl complex?

She thinks transwomen are women. It's a category problem.

She is mistaken then.

I'm tired of people being willfully ignorant. Just once, I'd love someone to say 'oh, yeah, you're right we can't tell who is predatory by looking at them so let's go with the statistics and keep single sex spaces to ensure women's safety.'

YY

She thinks transwomen are women. It's a category problem.

Except she hasn't bothered to define "transwoman". Nor do I think she's thought about it. Men are men, and transwomen are women. It's really so obvious, she can't understand why anyone can't see it.

She is mistaken then.

Well, yes, I think so.

But there is a reason that's been such a popular sloganeering point. If you accept it, many of the arguments about keeping biological men out of women's spaces etc don't work.

The point is that it doesn't make any sense. It's an article of faith. Not a coherent belief.

Nor do I think she's thought about it

A lot of people accept it because they have bought the idea that this is the new, correct, scientific understanding.

I think for a lot of them it will take the medical and scientific establishment coming right out and clarifying things, though trans people making the same point is also probably helpful.

She thinks transwomen are women.

Rather she thinks she thinks transwomen are women.

When you look at the effort of care and prioritisation she is affording to some people born male as opposed to that she is affording to all people born female, no, she does not believe that TW are women at all.

She is specially indulging and nurturing males that she perceives as vulnerable for her own personal reasons.

I agree, Michelle

Her responses to sexual assault survivors were really quite shocking. Handwaving it away with "I'm a survivor too" as if what she thinks is the last word on it.

It doesn't make any sense but - and I think this is Goosefoot's point but I'm sure she'll say if not - that argument on its own won't change Gina Ward's mind.
I get how frustrating it is and I guess some other people following the discussion might see the lack of coherence and pause to think. But all Gina's going to do now is double down, because even if she does have doubts, to admit them now would be too humiliating.
People don't as a rule back down unless they have room to manoeuvre.

It's not just humiliation - just imagine the pile on if she dared to stand up to the trans mob? She must be fucking petrified. They have serious power and influence behind them while women are just beginning to grasp some of our rights back from these men.

I don't think that's it. I think she genuinely believes it - that's the problem - and no amount of pointing out the lack of logic is going to change her mind.

It doesn't make any sense but - and I think this is Goosefoot's point but I'm sure she'll say if not - that argument on its own won't change Gina Ward's mind.

Maybe that's what I mean... that doesn't sound so promising...

This kind of argument won't change her mind, I think. People who aren't in her mind any kind of authorities aren't going to do it by saying it's illogical, or a language trick.

I think if you went up to a large proportion of university educated liberals, and asked them something like, do you believe in black holdes? Do you believe evolution selected for these kinds of traits through this mechanism? Do you think the universe started with the Big Bang, ado you think light is a photon and a wave - a lot of them would say they do think those things were true, and in fact they would think that to some extent they understand them, that they make sense. If someone tried to say, nah, that's just made up, they would argue it and think those people were a little cracked.

But if you pushed their understanding, or the basis of their confidence, or asked them difficult questions, it would become clear pretty quickly that they believe these things because they have been told that they are true, and their understanding is limited, and they don't have a capacity to really deal with difficult questions or problems, real scientific ones or maybe even made up ones.

People are used to thinking that way, and having a lot of confidence in their "scientific" beliefs. They don't know this stuff, it's all a belief system for them personally, but they've been told it's part of a system of true facts or at least a process that reveals true facts pretty well.

The science of gender ideology isn't really any different for many. I think it's why some people who claim to have the most faith in science are also prone to believe the worst scientific garbage.

TWAW never has been a logical argument, it's an emotional one, so trying to dismantle it with logic alone is never going to work.

Good points, Goosefoot. I wouldn't be able to explain much about black holes if asked, but I believe that the theory is likely to be reliable because people I trust to know have said so.

Academia is absolutely riddled with this nonsensical magical pseudoscience of sex as a spectrum, though. Probably not the science subjects, but the arts are well befuddled. Post modernism and moral relativism has a lot to answer for.

Its interesting, though depressing, to see the experiences of a transwoman seem to elicit more sympathy than those of a woman. People just presume abuse, violence and rape are such an accepted part of being female, it doesn't even merit a mention? Does a TRA honestly think the transwoman's pain matters more?

Is it easier to extend sympathy to a transwoman because to acknowledge the pain of a fellow woman triggers empathy, which can be painful? Honest questions! I really don't understand this response/lack of response.

Does a TRA honestly think the transwoman's pain matters more?

Yes, because narcissism. But other people should engage their brains more.

I get how frustrating it is and I guess some other people following the discussion might see the lack of coherence and pause to think.

If she doesn't have the imagination to have empathy for all the women and girls who don't share her views, she's not going to suddenly develop it. I'm happy with arguments peaking some lurkers.

Very astute points Goosefoot

Its interesting, though depressing, to see the experiences of a transwoman seem to elicit more sympathy than those of a woman. People just presume abuse, violence and rape are such an accepted part of being female, it doesn't even merit a mention? Does a TRA honestly think the transwoman's pain matters more?

It might just be a reflexive preference for the view of the person they see as the underdog. Or even a more explicit view that the lived experience of the person they see as being most oppressed has to be just listened to and affirmed. If TWAW, and they believe that absolutely, they will always see biological women as hierarchically superior.

It's not fundamentally different than people in the MB thread saying, we have to listen to the experience of black people and not question in any way the terms they put that in, or the conclusions they draw. In that system it's almost taboo to put any kind of critical faculties to bear on what someone says about their perceptions. It's pure acceptance only. And the stick to enforce that is the idea that if you do, you are a bigot.

Habits of thought are just that, habits. A lot of these bad habits have been pretty well ingrained before gender ideology ever caught hold.

If she doesn't have the imagination to have empathy for all the women and girls who don't share her views, she's not going to suddenly develop it. I'm happy with arguments peaking some lurkers.

I think this is where I'm at too. People like Gina are problematic because they become the "feminist" representation and example held up of "a feminist". For all the good she's undoubtedly done, she may yet cause far more harm by being part of the process of grooming young people that it is possible to change sex and that girls and women should not have boundaries.

On a personal level, reading her dismissal of other women's trauma hurts. I keep thinking I'd love to actually meet her face to face and see if she could empathise at all with me. But pragmatically she's just one other privileged person. Her obvious indifference to women's experiences might just be the thing to get through to some lurkers. It was a horrendously biased piece in the Guardian a couple of years ago that did it for me.

This is a battle with different fronts. For legislature, we stick to facts and material reality because that is the essence of we need in law to protect.

For making the case with those taken in by the effective PR from the genderists, we need to counter the emotional fluff with factual reality, yes, but also pierce through all those assumptions and the conditioning of genderist thinking which has been prevalent for way more generations than just the last 50 years. Remember, the trans stuff is just the modern iteration of every sex stereotype in the system that feminists have been pushing back against since the year dot.

Gina Martin thinks she has already struck the patriarchy hard, and sees herself as part of the modern feminists whose mission is to right the wrongs of the entire human race. If you're a victim, anywhere, of anything, feminism is for you. That's a big play in the PopFem crowd, and it's all emotion based.

You don't pop that bubble with stats and logic, sadly. You do it by demonstrating that PopFem betrays the women it thinks it is for. You show the PopFeminist that she's dismissing the very women she is purporting to stand for. You make her notice her hypocrisy and then you give her the space to move away from it.

Now, I'm not saying everyone has to do this, or even do it all the time. Some of us do the first bit well, others do the second. That's ok. But both are necessary, and the Gina Martin's of the world will need to be countered with both approaches.