Posie Parker's latest - Glasgow

[TheShadowyFeminist]

I wilted in the heat so missed the pub afterwards. But PP's comments on the 'fawning' I'm finding interesting. Because even at a meeting of women who are fighting for their rights, and the right to say no to any male, irrespective of identity, being given access to female only services/space/provision/sport etc. it seems that female socialisation kicks in when a male wears a dress.

I've been involved in this fight for a number of years now, and I've witnessed how the inclusion of males, irrespective of claimed gender identity, often shifts the tone, the balance, the atmosphere for women & limits what they will say/do to further their cause. It also means that some women who really need that female solidarity can't access it.

I think the 'fawning' is something that we al need to reflect on & work out why this is how some of us behave over someone who (as far as I'm aware) has failed to acknowledge their part in writing guidance for schools that breach female children's rights under the UNCRC.

I think we all need to 'be more Posie' in life & activism.

@FionnulaTheCooler

DH does not think he's a woman

Why transition at all then, especially to the point of getting a GRC and changing your official documentation to female? There's no consistency between what this person says and what they do.

I guess that's something that you would have to ask DH.

I get the feeling that while they are saying 'yes, yes I know that I'm really male etc.' they still want to benefit from trying to appear female by using women's spaces, speaking on women's issues etc. And of course the aforementioned fawning.

Yes PatsArrow, DH does admit to being biologically male, so why then does he insist on using female toilets etc. There is an incongruence between DH's words and actions.

Turns up at opening of a stamp. It’s not where’s Wally it’s but where ain’t DH.

Just had to deleted my rant my opinions which are true might appear personal,

But will say this I don’t give flying fck what DH on women, women can do it themselves.

The fawning pisses me off.

Women writes article DH then retweets with good girl pat on head but add something as if it needed finishing touches. Fawning over DH for whole article.

Fck off

DH has indeed admitted AGP openly.

DH also has a wife, for whom all feminist circles in which he is in any way feted are closed off.

I don't give a stuff what DH chooses to wear. I judge DH on DH's words and behaviour, and they make plain that DH is a male who finds being seem as a woman arousing, who has helped push through guidance that harms, and asks their pupils to use she/her and call them 'Miss'. The fact that this individual has a platform and voice in publications that speaks over women, when DH has no journalistic credentials, is frankly, a disgrace.

I have always accepted that men will need to speak up as part of protecting women, children and LGB people. But there is such a thing as talking out of both sides of your mouth, which DH does, and I don't think we need that at all.

DH doesn't have a GRC

Ok, but DH has changed the sex marker on their passport to female, so which sex of person would be forced to conduct a body search on DH if it was necessary at airport security?

But then this means that you don't believe anyone can exist as 'Trans'. DH doesn't have a GRC. Someone asked on Twitter a few months ago and he said no. I don't want to speak for him but DH would probably admit he has AGP tendencies but he thought long and hard about transition and felt it was the right thing for him. His Triggernometry interview is interesting.

DebbieInBirmingham wrote Tue 12-Jan-21
"I have no GRC and I have no intention of getting one. Three main reasons.

1. I do not want to falsify my birth certificate, which is an accurate record of my birth.
2. Neither do I want our marriage certificate to be changed. If I was granted a GRC, our marriage certificate would need to be changed to show that we were a same-sex couple who had been married in a register office. We were actually married in a church, but churches don't do same-sex marriages. We would even be able to change the date of our marriage (for consistency) but we wouldn't be compelled to do that. It feels like a dogs dinner.

3. Why bother? As others have said, I can change everything apart from my birth certificate, marriage certificate (neither of which I want to change) and certain pensions records without a GRC. Trans people might complain about Corbett v Corbett (that put a stop to the previous informal process that changed birth certificates) but it left in place the right to change passports, driving licences, bank records, medical records (!!!), and the rest with - at most - a letter from your GP. We had effective Self-ID in 1970, and nobody else realised. How good was that?

The reason I got involved in this campaign from 2016 was that I did realise and I figured that we were shooting ourselves in the foot. Or more likely Stonewall UK and others were shooting us in the foot for reasons I did not understand at the time).

My thinking has developed since then but I still view this entire campaign for legal Self-ID as a massive own goal."

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/a4132641-Why-do-you-think-so-few-people-have-applied-for-acquired-a-GRC?msgid=103559930#103559930

The interview with him and Dr Stephanie Hayton for 'Straight Spouse Network' is more interesting.
(transcript from p2 onwards)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4053058-Debbie-and-Stephanie-Hayton-interview-transcript?pg=2

@CatherinaJTV

cis is a prefix, not a slur. I am a cis woman. Linehan, as a man (born and identified as such) has absolutely NO business in a lesbian space. I note though that you think that women's spaces should be open for the "parodies" of men. Great Feminism (slow clap).

It’s not a slur to me but it is a lie when applied to me and for that reason I will continue to challenge it.

By defining women as either trans or cis, you implicitly define womanhood as a personality trait not a physical fact. That forces female people like me who don’t identify as having a “women’s personality” or “women’s brain” or whatever it is out of the definition of woman without our consent, and that’s not ok because it removes our right to woman-only protections and provisions which historically applied to all female people, unless we submit in public to an identity we don’t actually share in private.

Dividing all women into trans or cis is literally misgendering us.

That’s why if society chooses to redefine womanhood from single sex to mixed sex, it has to be done in parallel with the creation of a new label for all female people regardless of gender and untangling all the “woman-only” stuff into what is suitable to become mixed sex and therefore stay women-only and what needs to stay single-sex and therefore move over to the new female group.

Get that sorted and defining all women as trans- or cis- makes sense, but until then the concept of cis women is not fit for purpose.

On this board we often say we have no problem with people living or presenting how they please and we support Trans people. Well here is Transwomen who is not only certain he's biologically male but is prepared to stand up and say so loudly.

I have no problem with someone presenting how they please, what I do have a problem with is them using that to access women's spaces.

I do not want any biological male in women's spaces, regardless of how they self identify.

Dividing all women into trans or cis is literally misgendering us.

I don't believe in the controversial ideological concept that a male can ever be considered a woman, so it's complete nonsense to me.

If women have to be divided into "trans" and "cis" then to me it would be women who identify as men who are the "trans" cohort. Not any males.

I guess DH makes a lot of money out of his journalism. More publicity= more dosh. He's carved out a specific protected niche for himself and may be marking his extending territory. Many men have much in common with Tom cats.
Lineman in completely different. I support him going on a lesbian site just to demonstrate how easy it was. This ultimately helps protect women. I believe he is doing his best for us and has helped fan a flame when it was flickering dimly.

I have no problem with someone presenting how they please, what I do have a problem with is them using that to access women's spaces.

I do not want any biological male in women's spaces, regardless of how they self identify.

In the 'interesting' Triggernometry interview Hayton describes how asking to be directed to the toilets based on presentation is affirmation of having successfully signalled being female/not male. The desired outcome is to be directed by a stranger to women's facilities.

Hayton's claim appears to be that he believes he 'sex signals' as 'female' which based on photographs from Glasgow would appear to be via choice of short dress, long hair and false breasts. Of course women, especially feminists, will object to such sexism and I doubt very much that any women there read such choices as anything other than 'very male'.

If women have to be divided into "trans" and "cis" then to me it would be women who identify as men who are the "trans" cohort. Not any males.

That is what I thought before I started reading about all this. It is why if anyone had said to me that TWAW, and should be able to use women's facilities, I would have said 'well of course they are' 🤷‍♀️

But I didn't realise then that the world was being reinvented in an upside down way, via Queer Theory.

Indeed R0wantrees which just goes to show we are all unwilling participants in DH's validation game.

@Datun

I totally agree that a man, any man, alters the dynamic as soon as they enter a female only space. It's palpable. And obviously it's not anything that a man, any man, would ever be aware of, or could ever be made aware of.

But it's ten times worse when they are actually the living embodiment of the concept that we are all campaigning against.

And I think it's a bloody cheek, to be honest. And I do see it as manipulative. Every single transactivist will claim that they are different to all the others. And their access to female spaces is the legitimate one. And it's always a different reason why. From longevity, to 'passing', to surgery, to a GRC, etc.

And in DH's case, it's claiming to support the very women who will be excluded as a result of Debbie's erstwhile campaigning. Which, as Posie rightly points out, has never been recanted.

Debbie apparently has also used a female space on the basis of permission from the women. So that is Debbie's reason. Expecting women, standing right in front of Debbie, to answer the question of access.

And it's exactly the same as all the other reasons. Women's boundaries are up for grabs by men. It's just the justification that changes.

100% agree @Datun

While men and women should be able to wear what they like, it makes me uneasy that men often wear stereotypically feminine clothing for a sexual thrill.

@CatherinaJTV

cis is a prefix, not a slur. I am a cis woman. Linehan, as a man (born and identified as such) has absolutely NO business in a lesbian space. I note though that you think that women's spaces should be open for the "parodies" of men. Great Feminism (slow clap).

Of course it is dear. Get some damn self respect and respect for women while you're at it.

@PatsArrow

I'm uncomfortable with PP having a go because DH wore a dress.

What is this? Do we believe the line "dress as you like" or not? Do we believe men and women can express themselves in clothing as they like or not?

DH does not think he's a woman. There were other women there wearing sundresses, shorts, t-shirts. I just find it uncomfortable getting angry that DH wore a very casual sundress.

He was covering it for The Spectator. I know others may disagree but I think a transwomen has something interesting to say in all this. The Spectator often platform other women including Julie Bindel.

DH wasn't the only author of the schools guidance, there were others. I don't know if it's within his power to 'withdraw it'. What he could do that would be useful is to personally and publicly say it was wrong.

I've been in this GC 'fight' for a while now, but I just can't spend energy on being angry at DH who consistently tries to be an ally. Others may completely disagree but it leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.

DH a self-confessed autogynephile. AGP is a paraphilia which fetishises women, and quite frequently their oppression. See sissification, and forced feminisation. It's the patriarchal idea of women's lowly status as arousing.

I'm not sure if you can even have AGP, without taking into account women's oppression. Either way, a male who has it, and then shows up at a women's rally in a frock, with a fake breasts, is absolutely telling you something and it's not about the sartorial choice of a man who wants to bust open gender and support women. It's about a sartorial choice to 'look like a woman'.

DH has himself confessed to enjoying pushing boundaries.

What's so odd is that DH is perfectly open about finding presenting as a woman arousing. That's what AGP is.

I find some women's reluctance to acknowledge it quite extraordinary. But even more so, at a rally to campaign against it!

Doesn't your head explode?

If DH detransitioned, and then campaigned to help other men understand AGP and gender dysphoria then it would be different. And it still wouldn't be anything to do with gender critical feminism.

@PatsArrow

I'm uncomfortable with PP having a go because DH wore a dress.

What is this? Do we believe the line "dress as you like" or not? Do we believe men and women can express themselves in clothing as they like or not?

DH does not think he's a woman. There were other women there wearing sundresses, shorts, t-shirts. I just find it uncomfortable getting angry that DH wore a very casual sundress.

He was covering it for The Spectator. I know others may disagree but I think a transwomen has something interesting to say in all this. The Spectator often platform other women including Julie Bindel.

DH wasn't the only author of the schools guidance, there were others. I don't know if it's within his power to 'withdraw it'. What he could do that would be useful is to personally and publicly say it was wrong.

I've been in this GC 'fight' for a while now, but I just can't spend energy on being angry at DH who consistently tries to be an ally. Others may completely disagree but it leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth.

I agree with this. Although there is lots of other stuff that I agree with Posie on, too.

Of course it is dear. Get some damn self respect and respect for women while you're at it.

I bow to your superior rhetorical skills

I am a cis woman, a tall woman, a feminist

DH is afraid that the backlash, when it comes, will affect him...naturally enough. This is the real reason he is in the fight. It has nothing to do with protecting women and girls.

@CatherinaJTV

Of course it is dear. Get some damn self respect and respect for women while you're at it.

I bow to your superior rhetorical skills

I am a cis woman, a tall woman, a feminist

😂 Too funny. You don't even know what feminism is.

@CatherinaJTV

Of course it is dear. Get some damn self respect and respect for women while you're at it.

I bow to your superior rhetorical skills

I am a cis woman, a tall woman, a feminist

No feminist would call themselves cis.

No feminist embraces the sexist stereotypes imposed on women by a patriarchal society.

Feminism is liberation from a patriarchy not the embracing of its means of control!

Well said Datun. No feminist would ever demean herself by claiming a toxic patriarchal tool of oppression, that which is gender, is innate.

@LastSummerHere

DH is afraid that the backlash, when it comes, will affect him...naturally enough. This is the real reason he is in the fight. It has nothing to do with protecting women and girls.

Exactly.