Dating as a TERF

[TERFisTHEnewTREND]

I'm a 34 year old female. I'm currently dating via Tinder.

When the gender issue has come up and I've mentioned that I'm a TERF, a lot of men have disengaged from me. I once went on three dates with a man, we got on great, and then when I mentioned my views on gender ideology, he ghosted me after!

Do you mention your stance up front or do you wait? I don't want to date anyone who thinks humans can change sex, is it worth stating this on my profile?

Any help/ advice/ insights appreciated.

If sex and gender are different, why the fuckity fuck should there be any assumption whatsoever that these things should match?

Sex means male or female.

Male = penis and testes.
Female = ovaries, uterus and vagina.

What does gender mean? Can you define it in any way?

What are the characteristics of the "male gender"? Is it liking beer and football?
What are the characteristics of the "female gender"? Is it painting your nails pink and being shit at parking?

Do you think that liking beer and football "matches" having a penis and liking pink nail varnish and being shit at parking "matches" having ovaries, uterus and a vagina?

If yes, the 1950s called, they want to know what time you'll be back. Oh, and they want you to get in the kitchen and make them a sandwich?

If that's not what you think, then what the actual fuck DO you think?

What are the features of the gender identity that goes with being female and what are the features of the gender identity that goes with being male?

If you can't describe them, what makes you think they actually exist?

Do you realise that many people, in fact probably the majority of people, do not really have anything that could be described as a gender identity? They just see themselves as a person, who is either male or female, with a personality?

I believe that dysphoria is real but I think that having dysphoria, or even a gender identity, has got absolutely fuck all to do with whether you are a man or a woman. It's a mental health issue, or in some cases apparently just a set of personality traits, political views and fashion choices.

I'm not naïve enough to think that we can fix people's gender dysphoria simply by pointing out that no one else has an identity which matches their penis or their vagina either, and so having an identity which you believe doesn't match your penis or your vagina doesn't make you different, it makes you the same as everyone else. But that is the reality.

Finally, I don't give a shit about the statistics. The number of women or girls attacked, frightened or otherwise made to feel even vaguely uncomfortable by a male person in a female only space - regardless of that male person's personal identity - should be zero. Because the number of male people in that space should be zero.

The number of women and girls attacked by a male person claiming to identify as a woman in a female only space is not zero though.

What statistics?

The small numbers argument is /stupid/.

Very few attacks are on record in unisex public toilets by 23 yr old men called Cedric. It might even be none. With a name like that, they're liable to get bullied in the men's. Should we let Cedrics into the women's loos accordingly? And if we did, how would we make sure they weren't really called Brian and only pretending to be Cedric?

Even if you personally believe trans women are men.

That's not a belief, that's a fact. You're banging on about facts but failing to grasp the most obvious one.

Even if there were zero attacks, I don't want men in my private women's spaces, because of dignity and I like having a break from them. They're messy, take up more space and change the dynamic.

And pee all over the toilet seat/floor.

There is no logic at all that supports any male inclusion in female spaces unless it is for validation. (Just like the Scottish Prison guidance declaring that female prisoners should be used by male people to help give them confidence as a ‘woman’ for release). And validation surely cannot be considered ethical due to the harm it causes women and girls who then have to self exclude, or the distress that those not self excluding are caused.

The entire ‘keeping those male people safe’ argument is devoid of thought. It points out the lack of care being then extended to all other vulnerable male people who might be prone to feeling uncomfortable using male toilets too. If one group of male people need to be kept safe, why the fuck is no one caring about the other groups at risk? What is special about this group of male people? Long hair? Wigs? Make up? What they wear? what?

If there is a legitimate issue of male safety in the male toilets, then start a campaign to address it. You don’t just move one group out into the female toilet and leave the rest at risk. How fucked is that? Or… it is not about safety.

It is about some philosophical theory that says, if someone says they are something, then society must treat them as if they are what they say they are. Pomo.

There is absolutely no scientific basis for a male human to be categorised as a female human. People with differences of sex development are still male or female. Their conditions are often only ever found in either male humans or female humans. This leveraging of their conditions is vile and dishonest and a falsity.

Therefore it is only philosophy that supports this. The logic doesn’t hold up. The UK statistics actually show a higher prevalence of sex offenders in the male trans population in UK prisons. So even cold hard numbers that nt93 seems to like is not going to support male inclusion in female toilets. So no. It is the demand that some male people get special treatment to allow them to live in their own constructed world.

To call people bigots for not believing someone philosophical beliefs is ridiculous in this era.

They don't though. They're just pretending to think TWAW. In reality 99.9% of men espousing this shit would never, ever date a trans woman. They're all terfs in the sack.

I forgot to ask, @Nt1993.

Do you know whether you are having a boy or a girl?

If not, presumably you are aware that they asked/will ask you at your 20 week scan whether you would like to know?

Can you explain how this is possible if male or female is something you are assigned at birth?

I think the thing to do is to try to signal that you're not a 'true believer' and not interested in dating one. Without putting off the 66% of men who haven't been following along with this at all by mentioning the words radical feminist before they've had a chance to get to know you.

Photos
You could have a photo of yourself in front of a bookcase on which some of the forbidden books are visible. You want to weed out the sort of guy who'd dump you for reading the wrong book as early as possible.

Photo of you in a woman definition t-shirt?

Ways to write that into your profile
"Big fan of JK Rowling"
"I believe that single sex services are important"
"keep prisons single sex"

Good luck out there

What does TWAW mean? Please, I'd really like to understand what this phrase means.

Does it mean we must believe TWAW? In which case "natural born" men and sport makes that argument fall down.

Or does it mean we must pretend TWAW and treat them as such?

I used to think we all knew people were pretending and that going along with the pretence = not bigoted

Or are we supposed to believe TWAW, therefore pretending along = bigoted.

Most women also want to be left alone to live their lives without needing to worry about members of the opposite sex in their single sex spaces and sports.

///

This

Why are the feelings of a man who thinks he's a woman prioritised above the feeling of actual biological women?

Because we have to be kind despite the harm we can see? That is what people like @Nt1993 are telling us with their derisive comments positioning themselves as the righteous ones. While ignoring the facts that prove inconvenient in the repetition of an opinion from someone else’s flawed logic.

Because he is a man and we are women.

This is the biggest irony of the whole thing.

The only reason they are prioritised in this way is because they are NOT women. If they were, society wouldn't give a shit about them.

Yes, the JKR thing could be a very useful short cut.

If the conversation heads down the route of:

"Oh I can't stand her, she's evil to T people" then the next obvious question is,
"Really, what has she said/done?"
To which the inevitable answer is "I have no idea, have no evidence, this is received wisdom from my tribe which I regurgitate on cue."

You've discovered quickly that you're dating someone who outsources their thinking, believes any bull they are told and goes around being unpleasant about people on hearsay/because they think its a virtue signal, is more worried about being in with the in crowd than any actual opinions, and is therefore not very bright/a crashing bore.... and you can discover an urgent need to go and wash your goldfish's hair. Win-win. Freed immediately to go and find someone with a bit more to them.

You could have a photo of yourself in front of a bookcase on which some of the forbidden books are visible. You want to weed out the sort of guy who'd dump you for reading the wrong book as early as possible.

A colleague of mine actually cried when they saw Material Girls on my shelf, which was disturbing. If it had been Mein Kampf would they have assumed I had decided to become a Nazi?

He what now?

Can you tell us more about how this conversation went?

Rather cautiously on my part, because I was trying to be both kind and truthful. I think I made some headway by talking about religious minorities who can't share spaces with the opposite sex.

Then I told them about the shenanigans at the Glasgow FiLiA meeting and they looked them up on Wikipedia and 'discovered' that they are hateful anti-trans activists. Damn you Wikipedia!

I told them how Wikipedia is completely captured. Now they think poor old illtempered is a conspiracy theorist.

But before that.... the crying part?

Can you tell this from the beginning? How did he see the books on your bookshelf? Was he in your house or was it a Zoom meeting or something? What kind of crying? Like, actual real crying or "I'm making a political point" fake crying? How did he actually introduce the subject?

I'm genuinely fascinated about this.

I am still here and reading. Thanks for all the advice so far. I like the books/ JKR suggestion!

I mentioned small numbers purely as a means to state that a case by case thorough evaluation is doable.

Two males who try to masquerade as females inorder to attack females, is two too many, so we are not saying small numbers are inconsequetial in regard to female safety.

HOW?

Let's say you are in the women's lingerie department at Marks and Spencer.

WHO is responsible for deciding, on a case by case basis, whether this particular male person should be allowed to use the women's changing rooms, and what criteria are they using?

You know that people employed to fit bras don't have access to the criminal records database for a start, right?

I don't want to doxx myself but let's just say I left it in view in genuine error, they 'told' me that Stock is hateful, I argued that she's worth reading whether you agree with her or not and .... that's when the tears happened. Not sobbing, just shiny eyes and thickened voice, but heartfelt nonetheless.

I too find it intriguing.

'Two males who try to masquerade as females inorder to attack females'

And how do we tell these men apart from the men who have a burning desire to use women's facilities to satisfy their innate and deeply meaningful genderfeels? Is it a post hoc type of thing? So if they rape you, bingo, they were of the former type, but if they don't, then they are the latter?

Jesus Christ, what a wet wipe.

I'd have said, "Oh really? Have you read the book? No? Would you like to borrow it? No? Oh. But if you haven't read the book and don't intend to read it, how can you pass judgement on its contents. Oh, what's that? You read about it on Wikipedia? Do you outsource all your opinions or are some of them the result of your own original thought?"