Transwomen v. deceptive men are a threat

[pantsforteaagain]

I am just reading about Keir Starmer on Radio 5 live about the new stance by Labour on transwomen. The interviewer was talking about how women need safe spaces in case transwomen are a threat, e.g. Isla Bryson. But surely most people are worried about men being deceptive and pretending to be trans in order to access single-sex spaces. That seems much more likely to happen, and that is relevant because the response is always "but that, i.e. transwomen being a threat, hardly ever happens". Do people not say it because they are are scared to say out loud that some transwomen are a fraud? It seems such an obvious and important distinction to me.

some who is trying to force you to pretend something that isn’t true (say, ‘I perceive you as a woman even though you’re a man’) is by definition being controlling and pushing your boundaries

they are not a reliable person

What other not true things might such a person try to pressure you to pretend?

that doesn’t really hurt?
I enjoy it when you behave that way?
I’m really happy with the relationship we have?

All men claiming to be women are being deceptive, some are also deceiving themselves. What you've got is either a man claiming to be a woman or a man claiming to be claiming to be a woman. Both are men stepping over women's boundaries, both are unwelcome in women's spaces.

This is about safeguarding not about transwomen. We have safeguarding in place for vulnerable adults (which includes women) and children not because we believe that all teachers or sports coaches or vicars or care workers (or transwomen) are abusers etc but to minimise the risk that someone with the intention to harm can have access to vulnerable groups.

There is no Teachers Rights Group complaining that not allowing male teachers into girls changing rooms is labelling all male teachers as predatory.

This is about protecting women and girls and if that means a tiny minority of people don’t get free reign to over ride over safeguarding policies (many of which only appeared after awful scandals) then so be it!

The vast majority of transwomen excluded are honourable and lovely people.

And any transwoman who is genuinely honourable & lovely will recognise that they should not be encroaching on women’s spaces, and won’t do it.

The vast majority of transwomen excluded are honourable and lovely people.

I don't recall anyone ever citing any research that would support such a claim, so I suspect that there is a PhD going begging.

Or do you mean, "I would like to think that . . . etc."

Excellent post.

Brk said: And the only thing I know about a transwoman other than their superior strength is that they have body dysphoria, which is a mental health issue.

Many men who identify as transwomen don't have "body dysphoria" - they're quite happy to retain their male bodies intact. These are heterosexual cross-dressing fetishists who have upgraded to transgender status now that they can benefit from the "be kind" enforcers, which means they can also indulge their fetish in public, rather than the privacy of their bedrooms.

Some of these men freely admit that it sexually excites them to present as women in women's toilets and changing rooms etc. In the topsy-turvy world of trans ideology, the very worst men to have intruding into women's spaces - those that do it for sexual kicks - can now claim this motive actually "entitles them" to be there.

I think that is the threat. I don't for one second believe Isla Bryson is a transwoman. To me the threat is men pretending to be trans, not actual transwomen.

How do you tell the difference?

What about Karen White and Katie Dolotowski? Are they pretending too? Who is to tell a transitioner whether or not they are genuine, or prevent either of those two serious sex offenders from presenting as women and walking into women's spaces? Incidentally both of them used their access to women's spaces to assault women and young girls, White left a woman so seriously injured from multiple rapes she may never have children.

If a genuine transwoman is also a rapist, what should happen?

And whether transwomen are sincere in their transition or not, what do we do about this large group of vulnerable women excluded from any access at all to provide these male people with their preferred choice from all the facilities?

There isn't really any such thing as "genuinely" trans. Trans means anyone who says they are - it's an indefinable feeling and there is no "test" for it.

This is the problem with self-id. A male who says they are a female isn't somehow more female if they genuinely hold beliefs that having certain personality traits makes you female, or think the right things, or say the right words.

You could argue that having or not having certain body parts makes you more female, but that doesn't really apply to self-id.

Quite. If you respect transgender people and the concept of transition then it is necessary that you respect someone is who they say they are without it being relevant what crimes they may have committed, or any other aspect. You cannot say to someone that they may not transition because of reasons, but others can.

And equally, you cannot permit dangerous biological males who predate upon women into women's spaces where they are vulnerable, whether or not those males have transitioned.

Transitioning does not change or end the behaviours of a male who is predatory, as was clearly known even before the infamous names and the trail of women harmed by self ID.

And equally, if you respect women and see them as equal humans to male transitioners, you cannot provide inclusion for any male people into female spaces, while then excluding female people from the female space and therefore any space at all, if those female people are of the vulnerable groups who cannot use mixed sex spaces. It makes no difference how lovely or safe those male people are: those female people lose everything to provide those male people with more freedom of choice and comfort. That's basic discrimination and unacceptable inequality, it is wrong.

The obvious answer is that anyone can obviously and rightfully transition as they want to and without restriction. And that third spaces are created, and male and female people can choose between their sex based spaces and the mixed sex/gender neutral space depending on their personal access needs. Women using a mixed sex space are therefore willingly consenting to use a mixed sex space and accepting and consenting to the risks involved.

It will require firm boundaries and probably an awareness raising campaign that for male people to invade a female only provided space or resource is an act of aggression and exclusion that will not be tolerated, and that they are required to respect female needs, access and equality in the same way that they require their own to be respected. They cannot remove resources or access from women for no other reason than wanting to, or the thought of a women's facility they cannot use being threatening to their sense of identity. They may need help with that, but the answer cannot be that women just suck up being subhuman.

Basically this post said it better than me!

TRA will always paint the GC position as being totally ridiculous.
We're "trying to deny the existence of trans people"
We're "calling trans women sex pests and predators"
We're "hostile and threatening to gender non conforming women"
We therefore "should die in a grease fire/choke on dick etc etc"

We can't really have reasonable discussion with that level of disingenuousness

I agree.

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 Well said

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

Bloody excellent thread.

This sums up my issues with the trans agenda. They are obsessed with gender stereotypes, and rather than making a more equal society, this thinking divides and separates men and women even more. To define us by our clothes, choices, interests, hair length and 'feelings' undoes decades of equality campaigning and reduces us all to stereotypes.

I get what you mean but with single sex it’s just down to privacy, dignity and safety for me

And allowing any male is the issue

This ^

By saying that anyone that is trans is trans means that they can't say those that they don't like are not trans.

But then logic has never stopped them from changing the definition of things and people.

Isn't one reason why would-be trans women want to go into the ladies because they have been told to "live as a woman" in order to qualify for medication/ surgery / a GRC? And the reality is that using the ladies loos is one of the few characteristics of living as a woman.

My neighbour is a threat and a fraud for sure. Holding 'pyjama parties', 'accidentally' booking a double room instead of two separate rooms on a trip with a female friend to 'see what happens', asking me and DH to leave them alone with our friend when she was drunk so they could take advantage. Amongst other things.

I have genuinely trans friends and family members so no underlying issue with people being trans so long as they don't encroach on women's prisons/hospital wards/sports. I honestly do think my neighbour is faking this to try and guilt women into having sex with them. She's a predatory bloke with a beard in a dress and a 'lady penis' (her words) so far as I'm concerned. She frequently rants to me that nobody wants to be with her and they're transphobes because they won't.

Unfortunately I have to walk past her door whenever I leave my flat so the rants just go on and on.

Totally disagree. Those who have undergone full transition, hormonal and physical, have done so as they do not want to be associated with male violence. They suffer terribly because of the behaviour, beliefs and attitudes, including violence towards them- of men who 'pretend', for all the wrong reasons, it seems.