trans supporters and tactics

[applesandpears33]

I was posting on the now deleted thread about trans women who wanted to pee and it made me think about the tactics that are used by trans supporters. The "need to pee" one being obvious. Another used to be "be kind" but I think that is becoming a little outdated now. Ageism is another I've observed - whether it is calling people who support single sex spaces dinosaurs, or just pointing out as was done on the other thread that it tends to be slightly older women who support womens rights. Another is to call people phobic, because we associate the word with homophobic which is obviously abhorrent. Also the mention of DSDs. Any other tactics that I've missed?

White feminism
Weaponising our tears
Prurient genital fetishism
Side issue

The distortion of language. Very interesting how this only goes one way with cervix havers and menstruators but not ejaculated or prostate havers.
Almost as if it shows there really is a difference between the sexes...🤔

that never happens, and if it does you can't use that as a reason they are obviously an individual bad person and not representative

Punching down.
Right wing
Women who think like us are a minority.
The majority of women don't think like TERFs.
Weaponising our trauma.
Picking on the most marginalised group in society.

Yes, exactly - it's peddled as equality, but the demand for accommodations always go only one way. Once again women at the bottom of the heap.

The whole disagreement framed as hatred is an infuriating one, as is 'erasing my existence' - eh, no dear, you exist - there you are, I'm looking at you. What you really mean is I'm not pandering to your delusion, I'm not flattering your ego, and I'm not validating your self image - but I guess those don't sound as good to the casual observer.

As for other tactics OP, there's quite a few TRAs on the site today, I'm sure one of them will be along shortly to demonstrate these in real time.

Use of the word genocide

They've been through so much even though most of them haven't.
Suicide statistics, even though these have been debunked, used for maximum emotional impact and guilt tripping.
Literal violence or literally killing completely ridiculous and over the top hyperbole again used for maximum emotional impact and guilt tripping.

Check my username!

The ones that post here will post disingenuous questions, refuse to actually engage in any honest way, and when they’ve managed to get someone to say something that they believe is transphobic, will then announce that their case is proven, and will leave.

That one today did this in a pretty major way. Lots of questions, absolute refusal to define terms or answer anything he was asked, and then angrily saying everyone was a bigot.

TRAs seem to have no idea about the structure of a logical argument, about defining terms, showing how conclusions arise from premises, or about how to deal with logical statements that they find to be a problem.

”Is Rachel Dolezal black” is one of these questions. There is no possible reason to say that you can be trans sexual but not trans racial, so they know they can’t explain the hypocrisy, and instead they will just say that it’s a ludicrous question, and refuse to engage.

Literal violence.

Saying that anyone speaking out is engaging in a culture war and guilty of moral panic.

It's all the fallacies.

But while TRAs seem to use these in the most blatant way, it's not uncommon to see them in all kinds of activism now.

The "lived experience" trope is one that I find annoying. Yes, it's good to talk to people with different experiences including the ones affected by whatever you are dealing with.

Does that mean any individual can speak for the group? No. Does that mean that anyone in said group always has a reasonable/accurate take of what's going on? Also, no.

A lot of people also struggle with things like statistical validity, and many activists will take advantage of that.

Forced teaming. Especially on here.

'"If you care about women, why aren't you campaigning for...<insert random unrelated issue>?"

As if we can't support more than one cause at a time. JK Rowling got a lot of abuse for not commenting on Roe v Wade.

Moral panic, yes - it's the latest buzzword.
"Trans women in sport should be treated as a separate issue" or it's a "wedge issue" that's not relevant to the question of whether TWAW.
As used by the R4 Today presenter who interviewed Maya Forstater and refused to let her mention sport, and that US sceptic guy discussed on this thread
www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4441324-GC-British-guy-debating-US-sceptic

A dogwhistle

Another one is “if trans women are not women then how are black women.”

Butch lesbians and gender non conforming women will be harassed/excluded/beaten up in toilets if you don't let TW in Totally untrue of course and the only times lesbians are mentioned or matter are when TRAs want to use them.

“Denying their right to exist”

Telling women what to do - why are you talking about this/campaigning on this/spending your money on that? you should be doing this/that/the other - gotta love the ever present misogynistic patriarchy that just loves telling women what to do.

So many are coming to mind.
Just not answering a question.

Copying and pasting a link that doesn't answer the question, then saying 'I've answered it, you're too stupid to understand' and refusing to explain anything about what they've posted.

If anything can be described as anything, that is 'reducing to' it.

The absolutely basic logical fallacy that seems to assert that 'because you say most assaults are done by men, you are therefore saying most men carry out assaults'. (Facepalm)

The utterly unexamined and erroneous conflation of 'femininity' and 'female' / 'masculinity' and 'male'.

Reliance on "brain scans" that even if they were valid would show the opposite of what they are trying to say.

I see your point, but I think many just don't care, they want what they want and stuff the consequences. You can't argue when the logic isn't there underpinning it.

My DD who does have SpLD just doesn't 'get' the whole trans thing at all. It is obvious you can't change sex to her. I find I have to tread a very fine line on what I say to her, because I don't want her getting into 'trouble' with peers or staff at college by accidentally being too blunt.

The bringing up of something completely unrelated to the discussion with a claim of well what about this? Hmm, Hmm, answer me - it's the look over there, it's a squirrel deflection tactic, used regularly and usually early on in the discussion when their lack of argument or evidence is laid bare for all to see.

Censorship and mudslinging. It’s been almost impossible to get balanced articles or even comments into mainstream press. Anything remotely off message has been so aggressively attacked that people have been terrified to look.

It’s not hard to explain the problem, the difficult bit is getting anyone to listen to the first 5 sentences.

(I am quite proud of the British public for still going ‘er, nah’ anyway! We may be wingeing poms but sometimes that unique balance of a sense of fair play and quietly seething at things that annoy us builds quite a wall of resistance)