Sandi Toksvig "doesn't get it", poor love....

[HootyMcBooby]

Sandi Toksvig slams anti-trans bigots ‘claiming to be radical feminists’ (msn.com)

"I could weep. I don’t get it. It’s beyond me"

Yeah Sandi, I don't get it either.
How is it possible that men can say they are women and have unfettered access to females in their safe spaces?
How is it possible that we are medicating children against puberty?
How it is possible that a woman can be raped on a female hospital ward by a man claiming to be a woman and then gaslighted to be told a man was not on the ward?
How is it possible that men are claiming titles, sponsorships and medals in women's sports?
How is it possible women and females are being literally erased from so many spheres of life, including health/medicine and marketing campaigns? How come the same isn't happening to males?

As a lesbian do you like "lady penis"?
Or do you actually know that men remain men whatever surgeries they may have had, and are just on the "be kind" train?

Have you even THOUGHT about the issues this ideology ushers in?

Actually you don't need to answer that.
It's obvious.

Toksvig didn't specify the UK or US though.

She said the feminist movement had a history of excluding lesbians. And contrary to the legion of people here declaring that a lesbian was wrong about the treatment of lesbians, she is in fact correct.

If Sandi is so passionate about her belief that lesbians are people of either sex attracted to people of either sex, I'm surprised she hasn't spoken up to make this clear before now.

So many times it's been the assumption that when she uses the term, it meant "females attracted to females" it's odd she has never clarified this over the decades.

It has amazed me, and continues to do so, just how many very intelligent, highly educated people 'just don't get it' - and I work in a school.....

But I don't think it's that they don't get it, I think it's that they don't BELIEVE us.

They don't believe that any medical professionals would support this if it was, in deed, harmful.

No, they're not putting rapists in women's prisons, are they? Haha, they're not letting grown men play football with teenaged girls, that's so stupid!!!

Or it's :

Well, I have had a baby and the doctor was a man so I wouldn't have a problem with anyone doing intimate care, I have a lovely transwoman friend and I don't mind sharing a loo with her, my daughter's friend has just come out as trans and she's so happy now.....

Because although we may live and breathe forstater, Joyce, keira bell etc they are not household names.

I my experience, though, it just takes one man in the ladies loo or changing room for someone to realise it's actually quite a frightening prospect.

The thing about ‘name calling’ and not being polite about toksvig is that… she has a massive media platform and she’s used that to call people who don’t agree with her ‘bigots’.

After that point, it’s ridiculous to be complaining that people have been rude about her.

Yes. Also, re your earlier comment on Sandi: Sandi's problem here is she's very satisfied in finding middle ground. - she was a high profile supporter of the LibDems in the 200s before WEP. The LibDems are the very definition of the middle ground in UK politics - handwringing, #bekind, and right behind all the TWAW stuff.

The only time she used the word bigot in the article OP posted was when talking about the CofE. It wasn't directed at individuals or people who disagree with her.

I'm guessing izzard didnt proposition her when they made that public information episode of 'extraordinary escapes'.

What I'm saying is she's shielded from the damaging effects of TRA and benefits a lot from the publicity around it. For someone who regularly dips her toes into politics, she really has no clue how lots of people live. She expects others to 'be kind' when she would never be in the situation to 'be kind' herself.

Honest to God, I cannot express how angry I am that even know we still have people thinking that the answer to the ridiculous extremism "trans rights" went to needs to be countered by throwing out the whole idea of a middle ground and leaning into equal-but-opposite extremism. Most of our current problems are because the Tories have been hard right since the referendum and Labour was hard left, and they threw out the sensible middle everywhere so loads of us were left politically homeless. The answer to this is not yet more polarisation.

Toksvig is being a fool over this, but putting that down to centrist politics in general is incorrect and frankly dangerous. The hard right is no friend to women either and I'm more than a little sick of seeing it dressed up in sheep's clothing.

Which conservatives policies have been far right? Which labour ones are far left?

So you think it’s not name calling if it’s bishops who don’t agree with you?

its all a big ‘watch your tone, ladies’ as an argument @Flickersy.

I would go a step further and say that it is often quite hard for people to go beyond Empathy Level Zero: 'Well, it's fine for me.' Sometimes combined with: 'Oh I've never heard about that' and 'It isn't an issue round here.'

It isn't affecting them directly, they can't seem to make that mental leap.

Victoria Smith (glosswitch) has done a fantastic article on the phenomenon of men lecturing women to find the middle ground, be kind and so on:

https://thecritic.co.uk/ive-done-the-work-thanks/

Sandi is intelligent, so she's knowingly choosing to condone trampling over some of the most vulnerable women in the country.

I suspect like many privileged women she lives in such a bubble that vulnerable women simply don’t exist in her world and she clearly gives people outside her cozy privileged bubble no thought whatsoever except when she complacently assumes she knows better so feels free to reprimand us.

Calling someone with a bigoted belief a bigot isn't name calling, it's describing.

Thinking gay couples should not be able to get married is a bigoted belief.

Sandi Toksvig's terrible memory by Glinner, in case you need reminding who funds WEP.

https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/sandi-toksvigs-terrible-memory

Wow! She's such a good writer.

These men never seem to have noticed all the times you’ve been kind and conciliatory in ways they’ve never had to. To them, that’s not a gender norm; that’s just you not being an evil witch. To them, gender norms are dress codes and pronouns. It’s not all the shitwork that goes on in the background without their noticing or appreciating it (at least not until there’s some malfunction in the smooth delivery of female-coded goods and services).

Its the casual, extreme end 'othering' that you see so often in the middle class luxury beliefs movement.

If its not about them and their personal friendship group (or their current patronised awww bless special pets groups) it's not happening to anyone who matters. So whatever.

It's snobbery of a kind and extreme not seen since the 1970s, the Margot Leadbetter kind of snob who thought anyone beneath her didn't matter and wasn't really human.

And lets compare the two beliefs shall we?

Women: Men freely identifying into all women's spaces doesn't work for all women. It is not right that vulnerable women have nothing so that men can have more choice, that just subordinates women as a sex class to men as a sex class and is just basic seeing male people as more valuable and important, which is obviously not ok. What we need are third spaces, where women who are delighted to undress in mixed sex spaces and lesbians who are thrilled to date male people identifying as women can enjoy themselves, plus leaving the female only spaces for the women who need them and those who wish to be homosexual. Everyone's needs met, everyone's equality catered for, no one left without provision, and it's not unreasonable to say to male people that they need to accept that women need spaces and their right to their feelings and identities too.

TQ Activist view: male people must be able to be women at all times, with no limits, and if they harm a few women that's a fair price (I think an activist said 100 a year would be appropriate) because it's not fair to say no to some men being free to be with women in women's spaces because some men will exploit it. And any woman who will not abandon her faith or get over her disability and trauma and does not feel safe to get undressed with any male who wants to is a bigot who doesn't deserve equality and services and should be hurt or worse as punishment, <insert highly disturbed sexual violence references here> and women who are homosexual must learn to cope with straight sex rather than harm a TW by rejecting their identity, or else they are sexual bigots not welcome in society who again deserve exclusion and harm. It is fine for non compliant women to be excluded, subordinated and hurt so long as male people's gender identities can be freely expressed.

You do not need a PhD to see the very obvious issues here. You really don't.

I remember, probably on QI, Toksvig saying, of herself, something like 'posh voice, no money'. A throwaway line, it got a laugh, but it stuck with me. With all her anecdotes she always seemed terribly privileged; boarding school, in mission control during the moon landings, friend to so many luvvies, etc. A quick glance at Wikipedia (I know) left me impressed at her achievements but fairly certain that she has never known poverty. Her 'no money' crack was obviously in comparison so the very wealthy circles she moves in, relative to which she probably sees/saw herself as quite poor.

Tldr - she lives in such a bubble. She really doesn't get it but she hasn't an inkling of the 'it' she's not getting.

In the vein of TRAs is it? Where are the posts calling for Sandi to have her eyes gouged out and her face carved up? Where are the posts calling for her to be punched in the fucking face? Where are the death threats, the rape threats the sexual violence threats?

Insulting Sandi's intelligence, yes absolutely it is hardly a sign of intelligence to start a political party called The Woman's Equality Party where the policies are for men and written by men and then wonder why women are not flocking to join it and support it.

*Which means she must simply think marginalised women, like rape victims, imprisoned women, survivors of CSA, religiously observant women, disabled women who need intimate care (i.e. they need someone to wash them) should put the comfort of men above their own mental and physical safety.

I think that's worse than thick. Some people aren't intelligent. That's not a flaw that they can be held responsible for, any more than it would be my nephew's fault if he's colour-blind. It is his responsibility if he kicked a football into next-door's greenhouse though.

Sandi is intelligent, so she's knowingly choosing to condone trampling over some of the most vulnerable women in the country.*

Please explain

*And the posts on here calling her a twat, a traitor, and numerous other insults are doing what, exactly?

I don't agree with her but this thread is very in the vein of the TRAs. Woman has wrongthink opinion, how dare she*

Agree with this

This is hilarious reasoning - so you're not insulting, just describing...how convenient.

A bit like me calling a man in a dress a man in a dress - I'm just describing him, not insulting yes?

When sandi is saying she doesn't know what the problem is, she is lying. She knows the problems around sports, prisons. She knew including izzard wasnt just another woman being included in her TV show.

She's just dismissing other womens experiences. It is twatty behaviour.

OK I will assume she is correct.

She still seems to be using very strange "logic" here.

It was wrong to exclude lesbians from feminism.

Does that mean you can never correctly exclude anyone?

It's wrong to exclude a group of women, so it's wrong to exclude men? Or we know that trans women are "really women" because of how lesbians were treated?

From the quotes we have, it's just a very bad argument and nothing more than an emotional reaction from her.

If you are going to get involved in this stuff publicly, shouldn't she have a real argument?

However educated she is, maybe logic and rhetoric isn't her strong point. Or maybe she is being a politician with her words.