They walk among us

[TooManyAnimals94]

I've ummed and ahhed about posting this but I've been following this topic for a while now and sometimes I feel you are the only sane people anywhere.
I had a conversation slightly heated debate with a colleague today that initially made me angry and now I'm feeling quite upset about it because I realised that so few people actually LISTEN TO WOMEN.

Our school had a charity football match to raise money for Stonewall's Inclusion in Sport initiative. For reasons I'm sure you can understand I did not participate in any way and sat in the staff room minding my own.
There were two others there and we're having a jokey conversation about how they weren't joining in because they're no good at sport. I said (and maybe I shouldn't have) that I thought it was a questionable charity, especially for an all girl's school.
They asked me what I meant and I said I believed Stonewall did some excellent work a few years ago but they have lost their way and seem obsessed with supporting aggressive TRAs, getting self ID made into law and endangering women and girls.
One of the two (a biology teacher- go figure) completely understood what I meant about single sex spaces and said before I could that self ID could lead to predators taking advantage.
The second man proceeded to tell me that TWAW, men are no more of a threat than another woman? And in the countries where self ID had been brought in, nothing awful had happened. I couldn't really counter this because I don't know that much about Ireland, Finland or NZ (but I plan to find out!)

But this is what really shocked and horrified me. I said, what if a woman who has been raped or abused by her partner flees to a refuge and the first member of staff she meets is a biological male. Does she not have the right to a completely safe space? And he said "But that hypothetical person is not a man, she's a transwoman and is no more of a threat than any other woman"

I said what about perceived threat ? And he basically shrugged and said women should "accept " TWAW.

He also said segregation in prisons was not necessary because TW were just as vulnerable as women and self ID wouldn't affect bathrooms and changing rooms because it's already illegal to sexually harass someone in a changing room. Oh ok we'll just wait till there's an actual assault then shall we? Just offer women and girls up as sacrificial lambs.

I tried a different route and said OK, well what does it mean to "feel like a man" and he came out with some waffle about a combination of biology and culture??

This is a man with an Oxford doctorate. What on earth has happened to his brain? He's also a gay man who I'm sure would be horrified to be on a date with someone who turned out to have a vagina instead of a penis.

I'm quite thick skinned but I'm really upset at the fact my views were dismissed as right wing propaganda and my perfectly reasonable expectations of keeping single sex spaces mansplained away.

People would never suggest ethnic minorities are "silly" for talking about discrimination against them, or disabled people or any other group. Why this absolute refusal to listen to things that women have actually experienced?

I hope you pointed out to him how transphobic he is.

I think some men just don’t want to include men that pretend to be women in the category of men. They’ve disowned them and dropped them down to the status of women, so they can sit comfortably in their category of men without having to deal with such things.

Damn straight I did! He didn’t care;
its the only thing that affected him ( women’s spaces isn’t a problem he’s concerned with - genuinely doesn’t see the issue; or sports etc). I agree tho as I don’t thing gay men should be pressured into dating TM if they don’t want to - and his visceral reaction was pretty telling..

Trans ideology is a misogynists dream. And we all know Oxford educated is no panacea for misogyny or any other kind of bigotry.

Well done for holding your ground OP. Not surprised you’re upset.
Rightsraptor, don’t forget there are plenty of highly educated women (and men?) who are GC. Kathleen Stock and Jo Phoenix to name two academics, and there’s plenty of GC posters with Oxbridge degrees joining in on these boards. I do agree that more recent graduates will have had a harder time avoiding the sheep dip of gender identity - but some have made it through!

I just assume all men are misogynists until they prove otherwise

Some do
Most do not

And he said "But that hypothetical person is not a man, she's a transwoman and is no more of a threat than any other woman"

OP, your colleague is simply wrong on this point. Katie Dolatowski, Barbie Kardashian, Adam Graham, Karen White... and it's easy enough to find more just by googling "her penis"... (Thank you, IPSO guidlines!)

It's fucking insane op.
Totally with you.

Men have got nothing to lose from embracing “be kind” and “no debate”. None of these issues affect them. Their sports are safe, their spaces are safe, and the language used to describe them is safe. Trans men are not a threat to men. And women will not pretend to be trans men to try to break the Y-fronted ceiling and bag a gay man.

There is a positive here. At least one of your colleagues understood your point of view. so I’d take that as a win. And as for Mr TWAW, he may feel all warm and fuzzy inside about being on the right side of history (he’s really not). But the feigned puking at the thought of dating a trans man is about as transphobic as it gets! So he’s not such a trans ally after all. Just a woke bro who doesn’t get how trans people’s need for validation conflicts directly with women’s rights.

Are they conclusive though? Your two explanations don't stack up and aren't the only options as you assert. Is it possible that trans women are more likely to be identifiable as a perpetrator of a crime because they are part of a minority group? Taking that further, if they are more likely to be caught then are they more likely to be discriminated against during investigation and sentencing, so more likely to receive a heavier custodial sentence? If someone has committed a crime, they should be accountable regardless of their identity. But we know that black and minority ethnic men are disproportionately arrested, charged and imprisoned compared to white men involved in similar crimes. I think it's a fallacy to say the data you refer to is conclusive as to the reasons why trans women are apparently over represented in the prison population. The data says what the data says. It gives numbers, not explanations.

So basically he says TWAW but transmen aren't men. Sounds like a misogynistic fuckwit.

Is it possible that transwomen are more likely to be identifiable as a perpetrator of a crime because they are part of a minority group?
Isla Bryson / Adam Graham is representative of a large percentage of these perpetrators who transition AFTER the event.

Show him Barbies selfie. That generally stumps them.

I'm quite thick skinned but I'm really upset at the fact my views were dismissed as right wing propaganda and my perfectly reasonable expectations of keeping single sex spaces mansplained away.
Ignore him. Concentrate on the children, they are the ones who need help negotiating the minefield.

At a guess transwomen are overrepresented in sexual crimes stats because it is a paraphillia, so hardly surprising. I find the explanation that they are only prosecuted because of police hostility wholly unconvincing as the majority only discover their inner womanliness after arrest or conviction.

Ah yes, Prison Onset Gender Dysphoria.

archive.ph/2022.10.04-232359/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/half-of-scottish-trans-prisoners-changed-gender-after-convictions-pftqbbhg6

www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/anger-trans-inmates-revert-males-25840252

This graph is a particularly interesting one in terms of disproportionate rates.

As other PPs have said, transwomen are 3.5 times likelier than other male prisoners to have been convicted of sexual offences.

From the Ministry of Justice:
“Comparisons of official MOJ statistics from March / April 2019 (most recent official count of transgender prisoners):
76 sex offenders out of 129 transwomen = 58.9%
125 sex offenders out of 3812 women in prison = 3.3%
13234 sex offenders out of 78781 men in prison = 16.8%

https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/18973/pdf/

However you look at it, this means that either
(a) transwomen are worse sex predators than other men,
or
(b) self-ID allows non-trans sex predators to pretend to be transwomen. Which gives them advantages such as access to women’s and children’s spaces, including women’s prisons but also, outside, to women’s toilets and changing rooms etc.

And transactivists have no way of countering that.

Again though, the data doesn't say that and IB is one example of someone who transitions after the fact. It's also unreasonable to make assumptions that trans people commit more sexual offences than the general population when a) the conviction rate for rape is 1.6% and b) trans and non-binary people make up 0.3% of the population overall. The numbers are so small in both counts that it's not possible to come up with statistically significant conclusions. And you certainly can't take raw data and decide what it means without further quantitative analysis.

I'm afraid these kind of "intellectual" brain dead conversations are only going to increase. And the more "brainy" the person, the more likely they'll subscribe to this toxic mantra of TWAW etc. Despite a lot of these people decrying organised religion, this new magical thinking is effectively religious, and gives them togetherness with other "right" thinkers, despite the theory not passing even the most primitive levels of logic.
Just see how Richard Dawkins has been jumped on from a great height by the majority of American atheist and humanist organisations for simply confirming the science of two sexes, and gender being a pure social construct.

OT I know, but shouldn't workplace charities be things that are so bland they will be acceptable to everyone who might possibly work there? That is, nothing that is in any way politically or socially controversial or divisive? Like funding school lunches for poor kids or buying hospital equipment.

I went to university with a guy who was a devout Orthodox Christian, and he left his job about three years ago because of the increasing pressure to do things like walk in the Pride Parade with the firm's banner. There is something wrong with that kind of workplace/political intersection.

I think you should get him to read some of Graham Linehan's Substack posts. He wouldn't labour under the misapprehension of 'most vulnerable ever' for long, just from looking at the photos.
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/a-week-in-the-war-on-women-monday-fb0

Your Oxbridge colleague sounds like a twit engaging in luxury beliefs because it’s fashionable and there is no personal price for him to do so. He can claim unearned valour by doing so, while leaving vulnerable women and girls to bear the burden. It’s a shame someone so lazy and self indulgent is influencing children.

I've just countered it. There are other possible explanations that are equally, if not more plausible.

Just realised the fake puking anecdote was about another poster’s gay friend and not your TWAW colleague OP. He still sounds like a piece of work!

Stephen Nolan has several podcasts on Stonewall which would be worth listening to.