Alice Thomson in the Times today

[McDuffy]

All I can say is thank goodness for the comments

Let’s focus on real threats women face today

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6a8f336a-1895-11eb-a714-6e13d8ca860f?shareToken=5f80009bd7d0b12c2e40295b09438dd4

Massive eye roll. It's all there isn't it?:

Aligned with the far right (see Laurence Fox reference)
Doing Feminism wrong
‘Obsessed’
JKR ‘started’ a fight

She’s worried about transing children (as an aside, I'm sure that will sort itself out Alice)
But doesn’t care herself about single sex spaces (try empathising with other women, yawn)
The argument over sport only exists in academic circles, something, something chromosomes (so obviously won’t have a huge impact on generations of women to come)

The old chestnut of women not being capable of being concerned about more than one thing at a time (see doing Feminism wrong)

Alice, if we can’t name ourselves we can’t defend our rights in any of this. Who would we be talking about in the workplace? In the hospital? In the legal system. This is tedious.

This comment nails it:

I couldn’t disagree with Alice more. The reason this trans debate is so important is because it is a tipping point. The injustices served to women since the beginning of time are there for all to see: they are transparent, perpetual, deeply unfair. Slowly women have been working towards greater and fairer opportunities and, although it has been hard going, progress is being made. And then along comes the trans gender issue: men self identifying as women, men accessing private spaces fought for, and won, by previous generations of feminists who believed that women could finally and safely enjoy the opportunities and experiences granted to men. Suddenly women have to compete against men in sport, despite the incontrovertible evidence that this is unfair. Women have to shut up if they don’t want to share a changing room in a pool, where previously they were comfortably naked, with a “women” towelling her penis. They lose their jobs if they express scientifically proven views about males versus females. They get bullied, shouted down and threatened with rape and murder if they are brave enough to call it out.

All these rights for men identifying as women, have made it it the forefront of the agenda in the space of five short years, hi jacking debate, attempting to ride rough-shod over privileges finally granted to women, privileges that have taken decades to achieve. And then along comes a kind, sensible, thinking person like Alice who thinks this is a storm in a tea cup. Alice, this is misogyny, clear and simple and is another example of how men are allowed to prioritise their own needs over those of the woman they share society with. If a man identifying as a woman feels that he wants to have to true experience of what it is like to be female, he needs to understand that his hopes and dreams lie at the bottom of the pile and every privilege he desires needs to be fought for. Perhaps when these individuals can understand that, then they can begin to understand what it is like to be a real women. Bullying your way to to the top of the agenda, and shoving aside natal women and their issues in the process, is another indication of where women stand in their social hierarchy. That is what this is about and this is why it is important.

Great comment TweeBee.

Hope you are reading, Alice!

Some of the comments are excellent.

Alice really does miss the point on several levels. I don’t understand though why there is this ‘have the backs’ of youths. Since when has any age group been homogeneous and when have they had all the answers?

This comment nails it:

it is a tipping point. The injustices served to women since the beginning of time are there for all to see: they are transparent, perpetual, deeply unfair.

Thanks Twee.

Hecates Agree with all of that

But don't understand why Laurence Fox is considered far right? What has he done/said? I thought he just openly opposes critical race theory and doesn't really understand feminism?

@PaleBlueMoonlight

Hecates Agree with all of that

But don't understand why Laurence Fox is considered far right? What has he done/said? I thought he just openly opposes critical race theory and doesn't really understand feminism?

I think he's as much a signifier if 'wrong think' as anything else, for the purposes of the article. All the right people will nod their heads and say 'oh yes, awful Lawrence Fox, nasty women'.

That's an excellent comment Twee

Yes that comment was so good that I read it twice!

Great comments on the article.

Alice really does miss the point on several levels. I don’t understand though why there is this ‘have the backs’ of youths. Since when has any age group been homogeneous and when have they had all the answers?

Alice should have said Middle Class youth

Middle Class youth are not homogenous either.

Unless we are able to use the word woman to mean biologival female, these issues will not be spoken about and reported in the same way.

Instead of talking about rape of women, the narrative is muddied by women who rape, instead of focussing on the gender pay gap, we see an increase in the number of male bodies taking the place of female spaces on committees, awards and in statistics making comparison meaningless. Females not feeling safe in toilets will result in lower attendance in schools, we are seeing women hounded out of academia due to their beliefs in biological facts, female writers are losing their contracts due to their stance on the use of language around sex. Without these voices, women cannot stand up for other women who are under threat.

Instead of supporting women and focusing on period poverty or the impact of baby loss, organisations are wasting time and resources developing inclusive media messages which are increasingly finding their way into common usage. As more people are challenged when they use gendered language when talking about sex based issues it becomes increasingly difficult to start these conversations and they become derailed by the gender discussion resulting in the silencing of women who wish to raise these issues.

I read this in the middle of the night and it pissed me off so much I couldn’t get back to sleep.

Thank god for the comments.

I found it tone deaf to discuss women’s employment without acknowledging the very real conflicts that the current lack of definitive meaning of what ‘women’ are protected by those rights, and acknowledgement that acceptance of males into those protections renders than meaningless.

Along with Alice admitting her lack of empathy around single sex provisions for those who need them, the discussion about employment showed how superficial her thinking is.

Alice Thomson has a few teenage/university age kids, unless I mistake her for someone else, I think that shows in that comment.

Her inability to join the dots leads me to think she must be quite stupid tbh.

I keep getting "this page isn't working"

But I’m not worried about female lavatories or changing rooms becoming unisex

well if Alice isn't worried about it why is anyone else? silly women!

no need to address the evidence that mixed sex provision exposes women and children to higher risk of exhibitionism, voyeurism and sexual assault eh? better to just be kind and have each other's backs (although not the backs of women and children, obv)

That is just so bad.

Complete inability to think anything through.

Why are you worried about males next to you when you're undressing; you might get raped!"

And a complete inability to connect those two issues.

It really grinds my gears! Such a position of privilege. Female spaces are not yours (or anyone else's) to give away, Alice. Some (most) women want them and a lot of women need them else they can't play a full part in society.

Does this work Melroses

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6a8f336a-1895-11eb-a714-6e13d8ca860f?shareToken=6bb05dc798dc3cc4bb0d30a609bf0a7a

But I’m not worried about female lavatories or changing rooms becoming unisex.

Well bully for you Alice. Spectacularly selfish statement followed by a lecture about what everyone else is doing wrong.

She has zero support in the comments.

That article has made me think that perhaps posters such as me aren't clear enough, often enough why we are here.

I actually agree with her that other battles can appear more immediate. But if we lose the right to call ourselves 'women' then somewhere down the line, future generation will lose the ability to meet, to organise and to fight those battles. They will not have the language to talk about it, or even to see it (crime, employment and pay statistics will be meaningless).

This is already happening and although I shall quite possibly be long dead before it seriously bites, it scares the hell out of me.

The majority of women in this country are grappling with more immediate issues. The academic debate about chromosomes and elite sport doesn’t impinge on their lives. I hate the way the government appears willing to stir up the culture wars for its own electoral ends. There are bigger battles for feminists to fight and more worrying concerns for our daughters.

As a side to the lack of empathy and the lack of understanding about women’s safety and financial security being impacted, this is yet another wonderful example of how superficial Alice’s thinking is.

So, does she honestly think that any changes to sports made now can be magically rolled back at a time she seems suitable for them to be focused on? Is she so detached from what is happening that she cannot see that sports are important.

Not just for those who are involved at ALL levels, but because there is clear scientific evidence that is being ignored in the support for inclusion.

It is one more clear cut issue (along with males in female prisons) that highlights the level of women being harmed.

And she just hand waves it away. ...