“Gender-critical thinking is no less an ideology than queer theory. The most ardent supporters of both are never going to meet in the middle. In the meantime, more tolerant and practical people will develop solutions around the points of contention.”
With this paragraph you have shown that you actually hold some pretty prejudiced views on the what women are campaigning for.
This is the both sides attempt.
What women are campaigning for is not ideological. It is based on facts. Facts that are based on abiding historical needs and understanding of risk. And of proven science.
The facts that women have to support their arguments have been ignored based on emotional manipulation.
Emotional manipulation can certainly get policies changed, but policies can get changed back as facts reassert themselves.
You can’t have a population living in a country where on one hand you have the need for sports to remain sex segregated because sex cannot change, then have the safeguarding for women and children existing in parallel supported by the ideological belief that males can be females for safeguarding protocol.
It won’t work in the long run.
And these ‘solutions’ you try to assure us will happen, will eventually revert to single sex spaces remaining single sex, and sports being even more strongly delineated by sex since sex testing was abandoned in the 90’s, and medical experimentation on children stopping.
You have attempted to portray women’s campaigning to be unreasonable.
However, it is not unreasonable. The movement towards the edge cases of medical treatment and sport is already well underway. Single sex spaces will take time. But we are here for the long haul. We have children caught up in this and we are not going anywhere despite your very predictable twists and pivots on this thread.
Besides, each week there is sadly yet another piece of evidence that adds to the large bank already.
Whether it is 1 in 585 ‘transwomen’ sex offenders or 1 in around 1000. The figures will solidify and will show that this group of males are just like the wider group of males. The logical fallacy that they have ‘lost’ somehow their ability to commit sex crime at the same rate as all other males will be proven.
And like all history, it repeats because historical fact is forgotten or manipulated. The last group who tried to portray themselves as exempt from safeguarding protections is still in living memory for many people. That group of males were just as prone to commit sex crimes against women and children too.
So many posters try to emotionally manipulate readers using deception. The LGB movement didn’t want to lower safeguarding, they wanted it equally applied. The church though, pushed the belief that males in their employ were exempt from safeguarding based on their ideology.
That is the correct comparator for safeguarding issues here.