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.

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?

Good point!

Well, squares are special rectangles but triangles are not, and never will be, no matter the relative length of their sides, rectangles of any sort, so long as no two internal angles add up to 180 degrees.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

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

What will be the next level of hyperbole?

Ooh, this is interesting. We need transwomen's permission to say no to them, do we?

What does that remind me of...

Does this logic work with anything else? Can I tell other people that I do not consent to being kept out of areas I don't have clearance to enter? Can I try this with Ministry of Defence airbases?

Spare me your dishonest, facetious nonsense.

Spare us yours.

Can I try this with Ministry of Defence airbases?

Try it with Fort Knox.

"If squares are rectangles then rectangles aren't rectangles

But squares are rectangles. They have four sides that meet at right angles.

A shape that is to rectangle as trans woman is to woman, would be a shape that does not have four right angled corners, but everyone is pretending it’s a rectangle for some reason.

@CorvusPurpureus

Cracking extinction burst.

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

I like feminism lots more.

It's a resounding #NoThankYou on your attempts to dictate other people's identities.

Trans women say #NoThankYou to your attempts to categorize them as "male".

Look, I said your magic "I win because I say so" words. What now?

It sounds a bit Freeman on the Land, tbh. Spooky, do you happen to spend much time talking about the Magna Carta and maritime law?

In fact, you could have triangle with two internal angles of 89.999 degrees, so at first glance, those sides might appear to be parallel, but if you look properly, you realise that they do eventually meet and you indeed do have a triangle, with all the geometrical properties of a triangle.

I must say, if Spooky's posts are an attempt to "demonstrate to us that words can in fact be psychologically harmful", well I'm not impressed. I've been more physiologically harmed by being called late for my dinner.

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.

The physical reaction to a body you are attracted to is pretty material, I would have thought. If I am a straight guy, the cute guy next door will have absolutely no affect on my penis, whereas the very hot woman across the street is a very different story.

Well, the biggest issue with this is that there aren't many spaces for non-binary people, and the GC movement is not exactly helping with that...

You are joking right? GC people are entirely behind third spaces! It’s the Genderists that won’t consider them.

It's a resounding #NoThankYou on your attempts to dictate other people's identities.

So, you're officially conceding. Great. Perhaps we can move on to.something else now.

For as long as you consider that word to describe you, you are a woman

What about non English speakers?

@DialSquare

I must say, if Spooky's posts are an attempt to "demonstrate to us that words can in fact be psychologically harmful", well I'm not impressed. I've been more physiologically harmed by being called late for my dinner.

Oh, I would be banned if I actually did that. Which is probably going to happen anyways, considering GC forums aren't known for condoning dissent for very long.

Spare me your dishonest, facetious nonsense.

Everyone on here can see what you have written. You can't pretend you didn't write it. That's dishonesty.

Well if you're going to be banned anyway, give it your best shot.

@PickAChew

Silly disappears, spooky materialises.

So? Or is this the same daft conspiracy theory to desperately try and discredit posts that you see on here that if TWO people have a differing opinion to the majority then it must be that it's the same person?

Oh, has the baton been passed again?

Trans women say #NoThankYou to your attempts to categorize them as "male".

We are all categorised against our will by others. They are no different. Some things need to be accepted, as they can never be changed, and most of these male people aren't and never will be seen as women by the majority of people.

Oh, I would be banned if I actually did that. Which is probably going to happen anyways, considering GC forums aren't known for condoning dissent for very long.

Why would you think that? You are entitled to your opinion and we are entitled to disagree with it? Mumsnet is not an echo chamber and we welcome anyone. However, if you present an argument with more holes in it than a sieve, you have to expect a robust rebuttal.

I'd encourage everyone to go back and re-read BlibbyBlobby's posts in this thread.

And to mildly chuckle at people who say 'I am certain you are all cisgender' and then 'It's a resounding #NoThankYou on your attempts to dictate other people's identities.'

The physical reaction to a body you are attracted to is pretty material, I would have thought. If I am a straight guy, the cute guy next door will have absolutely no affect on my penis, whereas the very hot woman across the street is a very different story.

Yes, exactly.

Fuck me, it's like a Christmas Carol in here tonight. The ghost of Christmas yet to come has just turned up.