Trans people; why is it our responsibility?

[XChrome]

Okay, so trans identifying folks say that they need access to women's spaces because they aren't safe in men's spaces. I get that, but it is a problem caused by men. Therefore the solution should be about men, not women. So why isn't the main focus on targeting these men, campaigning for harsher penalties for such hate crimes? Why instead are they expecting women to compensate them for male behavior, making ourselves feel less safe in the process?

I would love for a trans identifying person to answer that question.
Has anyone here ever asked a trans person this question and received an honest answer?

I'm not hardcore "terf" as I respect everyone's right to decide who and what they are. My problem with it is when it conflicts with other people's rights to safety and security. I would really like to them to tell us why the violent men who cause this problem are being let off the hook and women are the ones targeted with all this anti-terf hate.

Yes garden music, I think you are, but also, I agree that’s not a bad thing!

And personally I see no issue with trans identified females using female spaces. It’s about sex not gender!

I'm not hardcore "terf" as I respect everyone's right to decide who and what they are. My problem with it is when it conflicts with other people's rights to safety and security

That's exactly what all "terfs" I know/speak to/follow believe.

I'm not hardcore "terf" as I respect everyone's right to decide who and what they are.

Really OP? You think 'terfs' don't also respect 'everyone's right to decide who and what they are.' I know I certainly do, I just also support womens rights to single sex spaces, sports. It's the wanting single sex provision bit that apparently makes me a 'terf' 🙄

No, it affects 51% of the population. Women's rights are compromised by allowing men to identify as women.
(more than 51% actually, when you also add on the harms done to children and young people of both sexes)

I assume op, that it's for the same reason so many posters insist we must vote Labour: because it's our job to make the world a better place for everyone else.

Indeed it is.
TRA's claim we wants trans people to cease to exist but that's not the truth. By claiming that, however, they successfully avoid addressing our actual concerns and instead get people to focus on and froth about their bullshit invention of terf = people who want trans people to die.

I still don’t understand why they can’t see the very simple facts here.

They tell us that men are a danger to trans identifying males in intimate spaces, so it’s about safety.

But cannot understand why TIMs, who are also men, are a danger to women in the same intimate spaces.

If some men are dangerous, but you can’t tell which ones in advance, why admit them with women, who are more vulnerable? Or are women just disposable props in this enterprise, a sort of necessary evil? 🤔

Still getting my head around this.
Of course a man should not play a woman at a professional sport, even if he is wearing a tennis skirt, or boxing in a pink T shirt, because he is a man.
He will, in almost all cases, be stronger. He has an unfair advantage.
I have no objection to him wearing a tennis skirt while playing tennis against a man.
What is the scenario if 'Julie' gets changed for swimming, in the women and children's changing room and drops his towel?
Is this indecent exposure? Or do we have to think that this 'woman' just happens to have a penis, and not mention it?
Call me old fashioned, but I don't think a woman should have a penis. (hermaphrodites excepted)

My thoughts exactly

Men who identify as women come under a huge umbrella from men with a fetish of wearing women's clothes to men who have undergone surgery.
Women don't know who we're getting when they enter our space.

Particularly as 'men with a fetish of wearing women's clothes' and 'men who have undergone surgery' are not mutually exclusive groups.

To go back to the original question - why is it our responsibility?

Women who identify as men are our responsibility because they are women who have been failed by a misogynistic and patriarchal system - and challenging that system is the point and purpose of feminism.

Men who identify as women are not our responsibility - but they are our problem if they are trying to get into our spaces or water down our rights.

sadly so true but what I cannot comprehend is how men protect themselves to the detriment of their own daughters 😥

Naturally hermaphrodite humans do not exist. There are DSDs. That isn't one.

Some slugs are naturally hermaphrodite.

The OP is really confusing because of that phrase in the first sentence 'trans identifying folks'. The problem is males in women's spaces, not folks. The genderists love messing with language to try to prevent us speaking and writing clearly - we have to work hard to say what we mean.

Apologies if I have the term hermaphrodite wrong, I mean the very few people who were born with both sets of genitalia.

TRAs are never able to explain why some males should get to decide they don't have to share spaces, services, prisons and sports with other males but females shouldn't have the right to decide the same.

TRAs are never able to explain why some males should get to decide they don't have to share spaces, services, prisons and sports with other males but females shouldn't have the right to decide the same.

Okay, so trans identifying folks say that they need access to women's spaces because they aren't safe in men's spaces.

This is just one of many reasons the TWAW brigade give though.

This one is easily refutable for the reasons you state and on the basis that it always falls to women to solve men's problems and to move over and make space for them as we are essentially second-class citizens in society.

Most - if not all - reasonable people believe that both transwomen and women should be able to go about their lives safely and free from discrimination.

So while it would cause some logistical upheaval for businesses, if it were merely about trans safety issues, this problem could be resolved relatively simply using third spaces (in a similar way to how people originally said there was no room for disabled toilets or wheelchair ramps, but these are far more commonplace now despite the fact it apparently 'couldn't be done').

As an aside, for me personally, it was the safety issue cited by transwomen a decade or so ago (before the narrative shifted to TWAW) that prompted me (and many of my contemporaries) to be supportive and accepting of transwomen in women's spaces, as we knew only too well how risky men's spaces can be. So it's an extremely effective argument to garner women's support.

But third spaces obviously aren't acceptable to people who believe TWAW, as they don't believe that third spaces would be separating biological males from biological females; rather, they believe they would be separating two types of biological females (one type whose 'inner gender' aligns with their physical body, and the other type of biological women whose bodies were born male) and relegating one group of these actual women to second-class women by pointing out their differences and making them use separate facilities.

So the while safety is often cited as a concern, the crux of the issue, IMO, arises from the notion that transwomen actually are women, in all material respects. This is what causes the issue, because if one accepts that TWAW, then one would be discriminating against women by excluding transwomen.

The conflation of gender and sex over the past decade, along with the GRA introducing the concept of 'legal sex' has meant that the everyday and legal definitions of "sex" have been expanded to interpret transwomen as being of the female sex, in at least some instances. And the fact the law says this can be possible in some instances opened the door to the fact it is actually possible to change one's sex.

So while people might say transwomen should be in women's spaces because 'men are dangerous', 'transphobia can be deadly', 'why would being trans make someone more dangerous?', 'you're scared of little old me?', etc, the only people who will always stand firm on transwomen needing to access women's spaces specifically (aside from those with nefarious designs) will be those who firmly believe that TW actually AW.

In the entirety of medical history there have been 2 people who had both sets of apparently complete genitalia. However, 1 produced fertile eggs but not viable sperm; the other produced viable sperm but not eggs. Hermaphrodites are about as relevant to the discussion as mermaids.

You are thinnking of people who the TRA side tends to refer to by the outdated term 'intersex'. These are people who have disorders/differences of sex development (DSDs). These people are still either male or female - indeed in most cases a specific DSD occurs only in 1 sex. Also, they repeatedly ask to be left out of the trans argument - they have a medical issue that is completely unrelated.

That just doesn't happen. I think there have been one or two instances ever.
People born with a DSD are still either male or female.

NoBinturongsHereMate Abouttoblow
Thanks for the info, I have learned something.

Here's more info on DSDs/VSCs/'intersex' conditions:

www.nhs.uk/conditions/differences-in-sex-development/

If the TRA arguments really were all about safety and the right of trans people to be themselves we would be able to have a sensible discussion. We would probably reach an agreement that currently third spaces are needed and that much more needs to be done to tackle male violence in general so that everyone is safer. I know some trans women who DO want to have this discussion.

But the TRAs have never allowed a sensible, open discussion. Instead the argument seems to be:

• Transwomen are women, regardless of how they look or whether they have penises. As women, they have equal right to women's safe spaces etc. In fact, trans women are the most marginalised of all the women and need the space most. Any discussion around whether this is true, or whether trans women are as likely as other male bodied people to harm women is bigotry.
• Everyone has the right to choose how they identify and what words people can use to describe them. Except biological females, who are cis-women and if they don't like being called that they are bigots. Any attempt to question anyone's identity, or motives for claiming a particular identity, is bigotry. This is the case even if the individual is a child or vulnerable adult and the person questioning wishes to safeguard and support them.
• Any attempt to re-name safe spaces to refer to biological reality, or propose third spaces, is bigotry and an attempt to erase trans people.
• 'Cis-women' should Be Kind. If they don't it is perfectly acceptable to bully and threaten them.

Because they know men would laugh their arses off (rightly so) if they were asked to put up with the shite that women have.

There's a reason that it's women's spaces, language, services and sports etc are the ones that have been co-opted.
They see us as the easier target.

Same old, same old.

Nobody has ever been born with both sets of "genitalia".
This is a leftover from the days of the Victorian "half man, half woman" sideshow (which was fake) and the rudimentary understanding of DSDs at the time.

Since we have learned about chromosomal disorders, we know through karyotyping that EVERYONE on the planet is either male or female. There is no third sex and no third gamete (only sperm and eggs).

Some people have "streak" gonads which means they have rudimentary tissue in their bodies like underdeveloped ovarian tissue or internal gonads etc. But nobody has two sets of fully formed and functioning genitals, it just doesn't happen in humans. In other words, nobody has ever produced two sets of gametes and was able to impregnate and fertilise themselves.

DSDs (disorders of sex development) are sex specific, meaning that there are MALE DSDs like Klinefelters, and FEMALE DSDs that ONLY affect females. It doesn't mean that these people are somehow hovering "between" the sexes or that they are a third sex.
This is why the term "intersex" is inaccurate and misleading.

Only 0.018% of live births results in an offspring with a DSD, and even LESS of them have genitals so ambiguous that only a chromosomal test will reveal their sex.

In summary, hermaphroditism does not exist in humans and never has.
Any textbook that talks about human hermaphrodites is probably about 100 years old - if not, it's a crap textbook using inaccurate terminology.

Unfortunately the DSD issue has been pounced on by the TRAs as if it is some kind of argument for allowing men into women's spaces, because, well, who really KNOWS what a woman is etc etc? It is used to blur the lines of what sex actually means by perpetuating inaccurate, outdated and incorrect definitions of DSDs. If we cannot define what a woman is, then it becomes impossible to protect them in reality and in law. When IN REALITY, those with DSDs are EITHER male or female and not only that, have repeatedly asked to be left out of this debate and that their very real and distressing medical issues are not used to weaponize the "trans" issue.
DSDs occur with the exact same frequency in the trans population as they do in the general population, there is NO CORRELATION at all with trans people, it is a separate, unrelated and distinct entity.

Two sexes.
Two gametes.
No human hermaphrodites.

Trans people; why is it our responsibility?
Because trans rights are no good if they're not at the expense of women's rights; so gender-neutral third space loos are no good because they don't encroach on women's spaces and threaten our sense of safety.
It's part of the backlash against whatever advances centuries of feminism managed to achieve.