Butches against transpohobia

[Catsanfan]

I saw a woman wearing a T shirt saying 'Butches against transphobia' today. It astounds me that some lesbians would think that way. I wonder what she would do if presented with a penis on a date?

Look at me disputing it!

There was even a fucking film about trans-identifying females being killed by men, starring Hilary Swank!

But I suppose male people never do hear and listen to female people explaining that they're scared of males. The gender identity of the female people doesn't change that, because misogynists know what women are.

Yes that was a very moving film.

Given the amount of time DadJoke saves by not reading our posts, I hope he's found the time to organise sanitary bins in the men's toilets at his workplace.

Or does he not realise that male and female people's needs aren't symmetrical?

Ahh what is this board LIKE Dadjoke, AMIRITE MATE?!

You’ve made a typo there, Arthur, I believe it’s spelled ‘Maaate’

Pretty sure @DadJoke couldn't care less about trans men.

Because they're...well...

Does your old maan know you're on here talking to strange men SpiderMaam?

I’ve sent her to do the washing up now.

Been lurking to see if DadJoke would respond to being proven incorrect re; "no law about toilets or changing rooms"- Why am I not surprised there's just more wilful misinterpretation?

No one is arguing that trans people have and will likely to continue to use these spaces in spite of the law.
They're arguing that you said there wasn't a law pertaining to those spaces, when there very clearly is.

At a certain point repeatedly stating that men ignore women's boundaries is purely about mocking women.

YY, exactly. It's just an exercise in goading.

I wouldn't trust @DadJoke to assemble a coffee table.

Well that was entertaining!

So back to the point, where has DadJoke proved that trans people have the right to use opposite sex toilets because I'm pretty sure they don't have that right?

He hasn't, he's just stated it repeatedly without reading the other posts which show that he is wrong.

I think it's quite clear that @DadJoke doesn't give a shit about women, or their right to consent to strange penis.

If the only women you care about are the ones who have penises, what does that say about you?

I'm sure he'd say he cares about the women who agree with him, the issue is that I don't believe it. What sorry men only care about the women's rights that they approve of? As I said, if he cared anything about women he'd at least consider how the majority of women feel about male bodies in their spaces. Which is clear from polling.

It doesn't count if you only care about the people who agree with you.

Either you think female people's rights matter or you don't.

It's very clear that @DadJoke doesn't.

It doesn't count if you only care about the people who agree with you.

Either you think female people's rights matter or you don't.

This. What these men think is that they are best placed to arbitrate on disagreements between women about women's rights. Because they are fundamentally sexist and paternalistic whether they realise it or not. Some people call it the "Testicles of Objectivity".

And by women, for the avoidance of doubt, I mean exclusively female people. No male has the right to tell me what my boundaries are.

Here are the pertinent questions from earlier in the thread (the first was from about page 4) we strangely never got any answers to. I've added a few more, because I really would like some clarity from gender believers here. Just so it's really, really clear to us all what they are saying and what they believe.

a) If you believe that "woman" means "feminine person" (as JaneGainsborough appears to), how do you define "feminine"? (And are women who wouldn't count as "feminine" by this definition actually permitted to call themselves women?)

b) Is it acceptable for lesbians who wish to meet up with and date ONLY other women to do so without the presence of males, including males who identify as female? Is actively preventing them from being able to do so if they wish an example of "live and let live" or is it something else entirely?

c) Do you consider it bigoted for women to be solely same-sex attracted, rather than being bisexual or pansexual?

d) Do you understand why it was that women historically fought to have single sex spaces and services in certain circumstances and what the reasons were?

e) What evidence based on those reasons do you have that suggest that males who identify as women should be given access to those spaces and services, when we exclude ALL other males?

f) Do you understand that women were never asked if they consented to allowing even some males into their single sex spaces? Do you think this is reasonable in a democratic society? If so, can you explain why you don't think women should get a say in this or any further changes with regard to their spaces and services, and if you'd say the same about any other demographic in society?

g) Was it okay not to ask for women's consent when it was only a small number of men designated transsexual, and is it okay when self ID is in operation and any male at all can declare himself female and get access? Are there any potential problems you can see here?

h) Do you think it's reasonable for women to be punished and called bigots for saying no, questioning or objecting to this? Is there any particular sort of male who this scenario might be quite appealing to?

Yes, you got the very simple and straighforward point I was making. Transgender people currently have the right to use the bathroom of their choice, and you want to take that choice away.

Here, you make a fair point.

Yes, we want male people to stop using single sex facilities for female people because female people never consented to this.

Why should trans people have the right to use the single sex facilities of their choice when literally everyone else on earth has to respect the rules and use the facilities corresponding to their sex?

Please explain.