Is trans movement now, comparable to LGB movement back in the day?

[JasmineVioletRose]

Arrrrgh! DH has just said to me that perhaps the trans movement is comparable to the LGB movement of the 70’s and 80’s. And that because of this he feels uncomfortable with my terfy views. I’m trying really hard not to rant. Can anyone share any helpful links I can send him to address his misconceptions?

And I ask for those statistics because you brought gay men and sex abuse into it.

This is a feminist board and focused on the risk to all females and all children, even those females who don’t identify as women still need the same protections as all other females.

If there was statistical evidence that a group of males were a greater risk to children or any female, it would be good to have those.

We can then make an informed decision about whether or not your analogy works or whether you are just making uninformed comparisons.

There’s a thread about it on here already, if I wasn’t on my phone on a train I’d link it for reference for anyone reading.

but off the top of my head: that one had borderline nonexistent sample size, confidence interval included zero. Those stats are good as made up. (Possibly worse than made up, they’ll have been trying hard to p-hack yet couldn’t find a significant result that said what they wanted.)

And ANYWAY it doesn’t even support the specific claim that was made that I asked for a citation for, about the % of TW who’ve been sexually assaulted.

and frankly no, I don’t believe TW are at risk of sexual violence, certainly nowhere near as much of a risk as women are exposed to.

And as a group, they are much more of a risk to women than they are at risk themselves.

And now direct name calling. Well done.

So, those studies and statistics are not going to be forthcoming?

You are just going to tell women they are fearmongering about hypothetical risk based on what, your feelings?

Because you feel morally superior to other women who have got a different opinion? and women’s opinions which are based on evidence?

To me a fundamental difference is that the LGB movement wasn’t harming anyone else’s rights. They weren’t saying I’m gay so you’re not allowed to be straight anymore.

Whereas transwomen are saying you can’t be a simple woman anymore, you’re now a cis woman. They call lesbians transphobic for not being attracted to a penis, and spew hate at them for refusing to sleep with men simply because they now declare themselves women.

The trans movement is homophobic and is setting progress back hundreds of years.

Do you take the view then that there should be no sex segregation in prisons, toilets, hospitals, etc?

That seems to be the direction you are going in.

@Labadabbado the fact that you’ve called me and other women ‘ciswomen’ tells me all I need to know.

You don’t get to label me. My sex. My rights.

Labadabbado

What you say doesn’t make sense. Men were in bathrooms/changing rooms with boys throughout the last century. Some of those men would have been gay, most not. A small proportion of those men would have been paedophiles.

Some boys in those bathrooms, and some outside them, and boys in boarding schools, and boys in sports, boys in churches, or childrens homes were molested by paedophiles - men attracted to boys so gay.

Pearl clutching or not it sometimes happened and continues to happen. Pearl clutching is irrelevant.

Women don’t want to share private spaces with men. A few men are dangerous for women and girls. Many men hassle women and girls. A transwoman is no different - all it takes to be considered a transwoman is to change into female clothes, relatively few undergo surgery.

The equalities act says that in certain circumstances women have the right to separate sex based spaces, and rightly so.

Apart from this, unlike being gay, affirming a trans status with gender dysphoric children to soon, giving them puberty blockers, cross hormones and surgery could cause them terrible harm. Being gay will never cause such harm.

And I repeat. It was you who brought in that comparison with gay males. You.

I merely asked you for statistics so we could assess the comparison that you made.

I don’t believe one person in this thread has made any claim that homosexual and bisexual males have a different risk profile for safeguarding than the rest of the male population. That is the point!

That is very clearly the point!

And not does any other group of post-pubescent males!

Again, for clarity I will repeat that you have claimed that any mention of transitioned males being at least the same risk profile for committing sex crimes is fearmongering and hypothetical despite there being an analysis of the UK transitioned male prisoner records. You have dismissed the evidence that this group of males has at least the same risk as other males in your assertion that those males should have free access to female single sex spaces.

And you have resorted to name calling when this has been pointed out.

If he thinks you're being 'mean', OP, I wonder what he'd make of this...

Mermaids is taking LGBA to court. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4600447-mermaids-is-taking-lgba-to-court

(

Nor does. Not ‘not does’

Yes scrolling, the comparisons lack consistency and rely on being afraid to ask questions and expect evidence to back them up.

These comparisons rely on emotional manipulation to be accepted.

Exactly this.

Pearl clutching is irrelevant.

Yes. Pearl clutching is only relevant when a person wishes to shame and belittle women who disagree with them. It is denigrating and misogynistic.

It says a great deal about the posters who use it on FWR.

The vast majority of lesbians I know (including myself and my wife) are strongly opposed to the fact that lesbian is being redefined to same gender attraction as opposed to same sex attraction. And we are angry that we are expected to sleep with men based on their gender identity or be attacked.

Bit of an echo chamber here. Feel sorry for you all that your fear has stolen your capacity for compassion.

This isn’t about facts for you, it is about your own prejudice

On the contrary.

It is about facts for me. You see, I, like many others on FWR, read extensively through original source peer reviewed studies, statistics, papers etc to form my opinion based on those. And I readjust those opinions in line with that orginal sources.

It most certainly is not about my ‘prejudice’ (although that seems like clear projection from you). My interest has always been about the sex based rights set up for females to counter the negative sexist discrimination we still face after millennia due to our sexed bodies.

I have yet to see one shred of evidence that supports including males in those rights. Trans people fully deserve their own unique set of rights for their own unique needs.

But please, do crack on with the ad hominem attacks such as calling me a homophobe.

It is not the first time even this week that a poster has resorted to that type of attack when the lack of evidence and consistency has been pointed out. And the week isn’t yet finished, so I doubt it will be the last for the week either.

Again, another appeal to emotional manipulation while denigrating others.

Bit of an echo chamber here. Feel sorry for you all that your fear has stolen your capacity for compassion.

Where is your compassion for women in prison? An actually marginalised and vulnerable population who are provably being seriously harmed by the policies you advocate for.

You can fuck off with your fake compassion that gets women locked up with rapists and serial killers, that retraumatises rape victims when they are working to heal, that sterilises gay and autistic children. You’re not a good person, you’re not a kind person, you’re not a compassionate person. You just identify as one.

I think you have made it clear that your compassion doesn’t extend to women and girls. Especially those recovering from significant distress and trauma, or in any situation where they need single sex facilities.

No. You have treated them with contempt and relegated their needs as fearmongering and their needs as being based on hypothetical risk.

In fact, I think we have filled the bingo card of extreme activist tactics and well used trope tonight.

-Echo chamber
-lack of compassion
-prejudice accusations
-‘homophobes’
-‘pearl clutchers’
-‘fearmongering’
-Lectures on what real feminists are working on
-No evidence despite grand claims
-‘Right side of history’

I am sure I have missed some just from today.

But I am calling it - Bingo!

plus ça change

Labadabbado · Today 00:54
Bit of an echo chamber here. Feel sorry for you all that your fear has stolen your capacity for compassion.

I am sure you yourself inhabit a beautiful echo chamber singing with compassion and good feelings. How lovely for you. So simple too. Life’s great if you have insight and know how to really understand people - I wish I could be more like you.

It must take a bit of bravery mind to be willing to stand out from the crowd with only a few others like you. Champions who see the truth leading the way towards the right side of history.

Well, that was revealing.

@Labadabbado bbado · Today 00:54
Bit of an echo chamber here. Feel sorry for you all that your fear has stolen your capacity for compassion

Labadabbado re my response late last night to what you had said here - I apologise unreservedly for my rude and sarcastic reply which was quite uncalled for.

Bit of an echo chamber here. Feel sorry for you all that your fear has stolen your capacity for compassion

This is such a nonsense statement. Why do you think we have single sex provision at all? Males as a class have proven to be dangerous to women as a class. Most posters here want to keep that provision single sex for this reason plus privacy and dignity no matter how a Male may identify. Are we not being compassionate to all Males by your logic?

Has 'compassion' been redefined, together with 'woman', 'pronoun' and 'kindness'?