Brilliant Transwoman on Channel5 now

[Heavenssakes]

Really likeable , down to earth transwoman on Storm Huntley now.
Really open discussion, for once.

These people exist. What would you call them?

I'd call them men. What I want from them is to keep themselves under control, use spaces with other men, not expect any kind of special treatment and not abuse their wives.

Why do you think men like KJW are women's, and in particular a trans widows, problem to solve?

Having women on a feminist forum trying to get me to give some ground that a man like my ex is anything other than a bog standard man, is really bizarre.

He's not a transexual.
And the idea 'we' dealt with this argument and it's 'disappointing' people still want to discuss a complex issue is quite frankly absurdly arrogant.

You don't own the FWR discussions and everything hasn't been agreed.

There's no such thing as a transexual either.

He claims in that video not to want to be a woman/think he's a woman, but then goes on to say some things like "pronouns are her/they etc in that order" and also says he corrected an airline crew member when she misgendered him after she firstly called him "Mam" when seeing his long hair but then corrected herself to "Sir" when he started to speak, upon which KJW said "No, you were right the first time!", so it seems all very muddled.

He can keep saying it doesn't matter, but why correct people then?

Yes he's a man.

We need a word for 'people who alter their bodies to look like the other sex'. Trans can be used to mean this (and many other things)

KJ is not expecting any special treatment, doesn't use womens spaces, and I don't think he's our/ your problem to solve.

I just think the vitriol towards him is irrational.

@TinselAngel I don't think we're trying to get you to give ground.

We're just expressing different opinions, exploring concepts, asking questions.

I personally have read your posts and find them an interesting view, but I don't fully agree with all your points. I'm sure you don't agree with all of mine.

I'm happy with a sitaution where people can request I use incorrect pronouns if they want, but they have to accept when I choose not to.

Thats seems to be his position.

He has a preference, accepts that others may not go with that, and doesn't mind.

It describes something.
You know that.

It's a word that decsribes someone who has altered their body to try to beceome the opposite sex. That is a thing that exists. Those people who do and think that exist.

What doesn't exist is people who have actually chnaged sex.

Your insistence on refusing to use words whihc describe real phenonmenon isn't helpful. You just make everyone type out a long decsriptive sentence when you know what they mean.

Do we need more clarity to ensure when we use that word we know no one has chnaged sex? Yes.
Do I know that? Yes.
Do you? Yes.

I feel like you are playing a linguistic gotcha game, because someone dared to say: we don't have to hate all TW.

Yes, I understand that but my point is, he claims he doesn't think of himself as a woman, so why use (and ask other people to use) female pronouns? Why correct people when they don't?
Either he is being disingenuous or he is very confused himself.

Just because he doesn't feel comfortable as a man, doesn't mean he is a woman either. I think that's what the issue is.
I'm willing to admit he may not "identify" with his manhood/masculinity, and somehow he thinks that "well, I'm not a man so I must be a woman".
And he HAS used female spaces in the past, and I think slipped up a few times in the interview to say he still does on occasion (I would have to rewatch but I'm sure when talking about the swimming pool situation he implies that he still would have no issue with this, and at one point elsewhere he concedes that prisons and refuges are important but actually shrugs and makes a dismissive "psst" sound when asked about toilets and changing rooms.
HE has decided those don't matter.

And that's the point.
He's just another bog standard bloke who thinks his rights trump those of women's rights.

On this thread alone, he's been described as a trans woman, a transsexual, a man who knows he's not a woman, someone with psychology/development issues solved by surgery.

He's not helping women and children because he's adding to the confusion, not solving anything.

We're expected to believe that a man, who has changed his name to katy, has chosen to modify his body, and wanting to make everyone aware of the fact, is somehow a clear voice?

My favourite transexuals are the right wing America ones on Twitter often Trump voting and in the Caitlin Jenner mode.
Great senses of humour and of the two I can think of one who is called Moni constantly tweets about stopping young people transitioning and the other whose name escapes me campaigns for single sex sports. The latter did a blog about using men’s loos and about how he doesn’t give a crap if men look at him as he has a right to be there. He’s also a competitive sports person and I’ve seen pictures of him on a podium next to the other two male medal winners. That is actually progressive in my opinion.

This bears repeating.

Men who parody women through creating poor facsimiles of our bodies are never reasonable or brilliant. Such behaviour is always deeply offensive, rooted in misogyny as it is.

But if we want to decsribe them as 'men who alter their bodies to look more feminine' what word do we use for that?

Men. That's the only word you need. No matter what surgeries or medications they use they are still men.

'A opposite sex impersonator'.

How thrilling it must be to be discussed by so many women

Don't be fooled

🤨

He uses women's spaces and he admits in that interview he gets a sexual thrill from dressing as a woman. Everything else is just waffle, frankly.

I respect Fionne Orlander and Miranda Yardley, two men who respect women's needs for single sex spaces and sports etc

No.

There is NOTHING womanly about him.

He is trying to create a connection with woman. But he is a man. If he is fine with being called a man then what is he on about? Ok, you are a man, what gives?

Met him. Man. The rest is all attention seeking/manipulating hearts and minds. If that is not what he is doing, then what is he doing?

have always wanted to find common ground with men who identify as trans and understand them properly. Again and again and again, I have found that the single most important thing to them is their belief that somehow, they are women. They will make claims about having "intersex" conditions despite being unambiguously male and in many cases fathering children. They will claim that people just spontaneously see them as female, when they are clearly male to anyone with eyes and ears.

I think most GC women want to believe that there exists a situation where everyone gets what they want and that most trans people "just want to live their lives" and are in agreement with GCs. They're not. Practically nobody who identifies as trans wants to be seen and treated as the sex they are. Not the raving TRAs, not the men who say "of course I know I'm biologically male (but really it's just so much more sensible to think of me as a woman)". When male people present as female and use female pronouns but then say "of course I won't force anyone to use she/her" they are (mostly) relying on emotional and social pressure to get what they want - which is women referring to them as though they are female. And then they'll say "but lots of women refer to me as a woman, so they see me as one (so why don't you? Are you hateful or bitter or something?)"

What exactly is 'brilliant' about him? I really don't get the breathless fawning. There are plenty of genuinely brilliant women who are never fawned over, he doesn't add anything to the discourse and I really don't see why we need his lordly opinion at all. Women are good enough to speak and be heard without needing the benediction of a transwoman.

"A man who identifies as not a man" is my favorite.

This works too.

Those definitions are both accurate.
Really, what a trans woman is actually saying is "I really don't think I feel like a man, so the only other option open to me is to be a woman", because there are only two options right?
But obviously, he cannot "identify" as a woman, because that's nonsensical. He has no idea what it IS to be woman and can never know, can never have anything to compare it to. It is literally impossible for him to do so, just as it would be impossible for me to know what it is like to be a man, or a cat, or a zebra. Him "identifying" as a woman makes as much sense as any of those things.
All he knows is that he thinks other men must feel differently from him, because he doesn't align with his ideas of what a man should be/look like/feel/sound like etc.
At it's core, this is a sexist, outdated ideology, because these men think their feminine traits must mean that they are women. And hence the stereotypical portrayal of many transwomen as long hair / full makeup / high heels / sexy clothes / painted nails etc. That's their idea of femininity and womanhood, precisely because they DON'T know what it is to be a woman. It's their interpretation of it. They refuse to see that men come in all flavours and some of them have more feminine traits or alternative tastes in clothes and hair, pursue more traditionally female activities and interests, etc.
It doesn't make them woman. It can't.

Rejecting your manhood and masculinity doesn't mean that these men are not men.
Or ANY kind of woman.
They have bought into the completely sexist notions of "gender". There is nobody as sexist as a TRA, which is quite ironic.

Really, what a trans woman is actually saying is "I really don't think I feel like a man, so the only other option open to me is to be a woman", because there are only two options right?

I find this kind of rationale maddening, but it's quite common with these men.