I know I called you a transphobe. I'd love to expand on why I said and why it is critically important to say so - but I can't, because it will lead to my account being suspended.
I've just had a discussion with a mod they told me it's acceptable for others to call me prejudiced but I'm not allowed to say that about others. Not even kidding - you're allowed to tell me I'm prejudiced and your comments doing so will not be removed. But I'm not allowed to say the same to you. Any comment that does so will be removed and I'll be banned.
So, what can I say? Nothing at all, which I presume is their ntent.
Actually, sod it! [Mods - this is not a personal attack but an explanation of why I said I thought this poster was a transphobe and prejudiced. I'm trying to explain what I meant, not denigrate anyone].
I think you're a transphobe for the same reason that I think people in the 60s were racist when they expressed concerns that the end of segregation would lead to a rise in sexual offences against women. These were the same people lynching black men 30 years earlier for talking to a white woman. Obviously, times had changed and it wasn't politically acceptable to claim that black people weren't human and the races should be kept separate. But they had to find some way of opposing desegregation. So they came up with an alternative spin - it's nothing to do with skin colour and everything to do with "protecting woman".
It was exactly the same with gay people in the military. It was no longer acceptable to be homophobic and claim it was a mental defect so the argument shifted to "unit cohesion".
Same with women in the military - it's not acceptable any more to say that women are inferior to men. So you make the argument that it's about "strength and personal safety".
My point is that prejudice doesn't disappear simply because it becomes socially unacceptable. It mutates into more acceptable forms.
In your case, you know full well you can't be all "i hate the wierdo trannies!!" because it's not 1994 and you understand that this is unacceptable.
So you frame your prejudice another way. You've got no problems with trans women, no siree. It's entirely to do with the "safety of women." Because that is acceptable.
But, you might say, I genuinely am only concerned with the safety of women!
To which the response would be then why this issue? Why is the issue so important to you?
Even if you're 100% correct and all trans women are secretly men looking to get unrestricted access to women's prisons, it's a miniscule issue compared with other problems facing women. Even if you're correct that every single one of these 436 cases is as you say, there were 400,000 reported rapes in the same period. So these cases would represent 0.1% of rapes in this period. Why are you so bothered about these and not the 99.9% of other rapes? Why, when I search this forum (a feminist forum, mind) is rape only mentioned in the context of trans women? And mentioned dozens and dozens of times a day?
I know it's not nice to be confronted with the fact of your prejudice. We all rationally understand that prejudice is wrong and we want to think of ourselves as fair and reasonable people. But being unable to acknowledge and confront your own prejudice means you can never tackle it or. move beyond it.
I also think that there's a stance of "I'm a woman, a a member of historically oppressed group of people and so I could never oppress anyone myself". Which is just not how it works.
So, yeah, that's my explanation of why I think you're prejudiced.