For the Attention of Posters in the "bloody terf" thread

[PurgatoryOfPotholes]

So we can stop disrupting the OP's thread, and continue the discussion here.

What spaces do you suggest for non binary people and how is the GC movement hindering it? Most of us are supportive of additional third spaces.

For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman
...when the word woman has absolutely no meaning whatsoever

Just to be clear, you are saying it's possible to identify with a sequence of letters that have no definable meaning?

Yes, what are they identifying with, if not stereotypes?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

"Oh yes, we'll we don't normally like males in women's spaces because abcxyz but this particular male here, the one that seems to especially despise women and has a total disregard for consent and boundaries, this one we'll welcome in!"

Quite.

I wonder why a trans woman would resent you. Can't think of a single reason at all.

[quote SpookySeason77]@Blibbybobby
"If I accept the genderist redefinition of woman I must also accept that I am not one."
How so?

No one is saying you have to identify with anything except the word itself. For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman.

No "stereotypes" required.[/quote]

What do you mean "How so"?

If trans women are women then women aren't women. Obvious.

Because they are entitled male people who don't like hearing the word no?

@Alektopteryx
"If squares are rectangles then rectangles aren't rectangles."

The victims of Katie Dolatowski were teying to live their lives too. They were just on an ordinary visit to the supermarket.

A transgender woman threatened to stab a 10-year-old girl’s mother during a terrifying sexual assault in the female toilets of a Morrison’s supermarket.

Katie Dolatowski, 18, admitted grabbing the youngster by her face and forcing her into the cubicle before demanding she take her trousers off at the store in Fife, Scotland, on 4 March.

She carried out a similar attack just weeks earlier, on 8 February, when another young girl using the toilet at an Asda store in Halbeath spotted Dolatowski using a mobile phone to spy on her over the partition wall.

What happened next? Katie got housed in a hither-to female-only hostel.

extract

SICKENED residents at a female-only hostel have hit out after a transgender sex offender was housed there.

Katie Dolatowski, 18, avoided a prison sentence for sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl in Morrisons, Kirkcaldy, and filming a 12-year-old over a toilet cubicle in Asda, Dunfermline.

Campaigners say women at the supported Fife accommodation - which has a shared bathroom - could have been put in danger while she was living there.

One resident in the unit for homeless offenders said: “This is a women’s hostel and it’s all women who work here. I feel sick and can’t stop thinking about what she has done.”

A spokeswoman for Women and Girls in Scotland said: “Katie Dolatowski has already taken advantage of access to female spaces to commit sexual assault.

www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/3928585/transgender-sex-offender-female-only-fife-hostel-katie-dalatowski-furious-residents/

The other residents were trying to live their lives too.

For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman
...when the word woman has absolutely no meaning whatsoever

These people never quite seem to be able to explain/rationalise that bit. Maybe Spooky will be the one to do it!

Cracking extinction burst.

Sorry, chaps, but I don't subscribe to your belief system, & it's a resounding #nothankyou.

I like feminism lots more.

You continue to use recycled homophobic rhetoric, so I will continue to point it out
Deal with it.

You're bastardising homophobic rhetoric by bringing it up in discussion where you're imposing an ideology on us, and women are in response objecting to their own identity, their own existence and spaces being destroyed.
They're not. The. Same. Thing.

Comparing the GC position with homophobia is a sophistry. Gay people and straight people describe material reality. So do male and female. Gender identity does not. GC feminists do not have a problem with anyone having a non-standard sexual orientation or a non-standard gender expression. This would be bigotry - hating people for being different or deviating from gendered norms. That is the motivation of actual anti-trans bigots, the kind who beat people up for being trans. (and who transactivists largely ignore in favour of demonising women)

GC feminists don’t hate trans people, they object to a concerted campaign to get women’s rights and protections removed in the name of gender identity. That is already resulting in women suffering.

But even if you can’t understand this, surely you can notice that large numbers of GC people are homosexual? Increasingly so as it becomes clearer that trans ideology tells people it’s wrong to be same-sex attracted. Why do you think these people would be homophobic bigots looking for a new target? How does that make any sense?

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Because they are entitled male people who don't like hearing the word no?

Or maybe because you keep constantly, incessantly antagonizing them as they try to simply live their lives.

And when did trans women consent to being subjected to forced segregation? Why do you ignore trans women saying "no" to your attempts to police their own lives?

Comparing the GC position with homophobia is a sophistry.

That's literally all they have, besides insults.

On the subject of Judith Butler, Judith has said,

"When I wrote Gender Trouble [in 1990], there was no category for ‘non-binary’ – but now I don’t see how I cannot be in that category."

Me too, Judith, me too. It's that or I reject the whole edifice altogether.

And when did trans women consent to being subjected to forced segregation?

What will be the next level of hyperbole?

Anyway, to sum up:
-spooky suggests it's possible for people to lie about their gender identity
-spooky uses 'sex' and 'gender identity' interchangeably, denying the trans existence.
-they use 'non-binary' as a separate category to 'trans', invalidating non-binary people as being trans
-they misgender people in this thread

Great work buddy! Way to be inclusive.

[quote SpookySeason77]@Alektopteryx
"If squares are rectangles then rectangles aren't rectangles."[/quote]
Women aren't bleedin rectangles!

Come onnn

[quote SpookySeason77]@Blibbybobby
"If I accept the genderist redefinition of woman I must also accept that I am not one."
How so?

No one is saying you have to identify with anything except the word itself. For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman.

No "stereotypes" required.[/quote]
My problem is that I do not identify with a definition of woman that includes male bodies. My only identity is my female sexed body, previously that would be classed as woman but it isn't anymore according to you, so what am I?

[quote SpookySeason77]@Gncq
"Can you please stop comparing the gay rights cause with (trans rights)"
No.

You continue to use recycled homophobic rhetoric, so I will continue to point it out.

Deal with it.[/quote]
Oh, you are spiky and absolutely not winning me over with your teenage foot stamping.

Have they called out the homophobia of describing straight males as lesbians yet?

@MrsMadderRose
"Gay people and straight people describe material reality."
How so? Sexual attraction no more "material" than gender identity. There's no "straight" and "gay" physical components in our bodies, they are both a matter of one's feelings about oneself and about others.

My problem is that I do not identify with a definition of woman that includes male bodies.

Me neither. It's not the general definition, although many people do seem to have the old fashioned idea that if you have had your penis inverted and been castrated you have changed your sex to woman, because what male would want to do that otherwise. A for effort.

[quote SpookySeason77]@Blibbybobby
"If I accept the genderist redefinition of woman I must also accept that I am not one."
How so?

No one is saying you have to identify with anything except the word itself. For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman.

No "stereotypes" required.[/quote]
I explained that is my earlier post. Briefly, I use the word Woman only because it is (or at least was) the word for people with a body like mine. It’s not the word itself that’s important, it’s the reality it describes.

But when Genderists redefine the word woman as something other than female-bodied then suddenly I am not one, although nothing about me has actually changed. Do you see? It’s not a choice I got to make, it’s something imposed upon me. Surely that is not ok?

And harking back to another post, Genderists seem to think the word itself is all that matters, but surely word is only meaningful and useful because of the reality it labels. A word with nothing under it means nothing.

When I define woman as female I can draw a very clear causal line between the realities and challenges of female life and the various Woman-only rights, protections and opportunities that have been set up over time to support us.

So when Genderists define woman as just a label, what is it about that label that somehow leads to the same Woman-only rights, protections and opportunities? How is it that everyone who uses that label but need have nothing else in common, still have a common need for these exact same provisions?

@MonsignorMirth

Anyway, to sum up: -spooky suggests it's possible for people to lie about their gender identity -spooky uses 'sex' and 'gender identity' interchangeably, denying the trans existence. -they use 'non-binary' as a separate category to 'trans', invalidating non-binary people as being trans -they misgender people in this thread

Great work buddy! Way to be inclusive.

Spare me your dishonest, facetious nonsense.