Women with alopecia harassed in woman's toilets at airport

[Christinapple]

https://x.com/lindSAYhanNAH3/status/1844696180887794159

I've said it several times, the gender critical movement harms all women. Any women who doesn't meet the criteria of what a woman "should look like" is at risk of being wrongly accused of being trans.

Also makes me wonder about that other thread about FWSSport. If a woman with alopecia plays sport with other women are people who are gender critical going to mistake her as a man and report her to FWSSport who will store data on her?

Because Flirts, you are expecting coherence and logic where all there is appeals to emotion.

You have to stay focused on the male people and be convinced that they should be allowed to enter female single sex spaces.

This

Going back to the original OP:

TRA exploits scenario where "Woman with medical condition is bad-mouthed by woman who should know better."

Trans ideology means that gender non-conforming women are made uncomfortable. If men stopped pretending to be women this would not happen.

Exactly this.

This screenshot was doing the rounds a few years ago. anyone can write anything on SM you know.

Yes, because you did.

You dont need to use the word ‘natal’ before ‘woman’ or ‘female’.

Good answer. Mind, I don't believe you can't change sex, I damn well know you can't!

🤔I'm sure I read a post by the OP yesterday that was in a vaguely similar vein...

Ah, yes. They claimed that Reduxx is a hate site.

Can I just say I know of plenty of women, particularly in my local lesbian scene who could easily be considered to look male if they were bald, and in fact many have been frequently challenged in women's bathrooms over the years even with short mid and long hair. They are all gc lesbians and are very happy with their biological vaginas and breasts 🙄.

Those saying they call bs because 'bald women look a certain way' are just as bad as those who would call someone out who looks masculine 🫠 Christ, you'd have a field day in the rugby or rollerderby scenes.

No, that is linguistic sleight of hand again.
We aren't saying women "look a certain way", we're saying women are easily distinguishable from men the vast majority of the time.
There are physiological markers which we all instinctively and unconsciously observe.

Women can and do look any way they choose. They are still women.

Genderists' obsessive insistence that being a woman includes conforming to norms of attractiveness or femininity makes it difficult for them to understand:
Anyone can be feminine.
Only female people are women.

@Christinapple 'I've said it several times, the gender critical movement harms all women' Yes, you've popped up on these boards many times with your ill-informed opinions but this one is your worst. If this happened - and as others have said the accuser must have been mentally ill or very short sighted - then it shows the opposite of what you say. Transgenderism is harming women by making them fearful and suspicious in places that should be single sex. The Darlington nurses are fighting to be able to get changed in a single sex spaces and these battles are playing out across the world because idiots in power listen to men in dresses over women. We say no.

TRA want us to believe that TW have always used womans spaces, either undetected or not, and its only recently GC woman have existed and complained about it. And because the majority of TW pass and there's a greater number of non feminine women, these women are more likely to be targets than TW.

Its a genderist perspective - they use indicators that are gender - clothes, make-up, haircuts. When GC and the vast majority of women wouldnt use these because lots of women dont wear lots of make up, wear trousers and have short hair.

Of course if women see a masculine looking person in a public toilet, they are going to double check, we always have. Its a natural safety reflex. And the reaction is going to be different for each woman and situation.

But TRA claim its only the recent phenomenon of GC women doing this and its wrong. They want women who have always reacted this way to stop.

But its not a recent thing to be wary of who is in womens spaces, its just something they experience because they are more likely to use womens spaces now.

Indeed. After all, those teenagers spotted Eddie Izzard was out of place in a women’s toilet decades ago. Yes, TW’s have been encroaching on female spaces for years, but until recently women knew they had the backing of society to push back and insist they leave.

'I've said it several times, the gender critical movement harms all women'

Of course, it is also important here to point out the significance of how extreme activists have detached ‘feminist’ and now wrongly use the term ‘gender critical’.

Through this deliberate detachment the ‘gender critical feminist’ movement is now the ‘gender critical movement’ and has not got the foundations of feminist principles.

Chris and others now lazily use the term to mean anyone who believes that sex is immutable. And they wrongly and deliberately include all those people who are not feminists and who don’t even reject gender stereotypes. It is a meaningless term. Just like ‘cis’ is meaningless for describing female people, yet chris still does this. Even after all the explanations.

But of course, women discussing their needs in excluding male people have to be blamed for causing the fear people have of those male people in single sex spaces. Because… of course the fear could never be correctly attributed to the male people themselves for causing the distress.

That the trope repeated by chris and others is very misogynistic doesn’t seem to get acknowledged by them even though they have been on threads arguing this over and over. And have seen that it is misogynistic being pointed out.

it is that magic thing misogyny, it allows people to amplify some things that are said by female people and frame them negatively while ignoring the rest or pretending to not hear the rest. I notice is it only ever the female people though who get this treatment.

But this didn't happen to this woman nor has she claimed it did. It's a screenshot she's posted of someone else's account of events. We don't actually know who it happened to, could have been a masculine looking woman with alopecia, could have been a transwoman with male pattern baldness claiming alopecia. It could be completely fabricated. All we know is that this woman has posted it in support.

oh you mean like this one I saw a few days ago?

Every now and again on twitter a post appears where someone (who has a timeline full of gender critical posts) writes a nice story about "chasing a man out of the ladies' shouting at him"

What's your point Chris?

Itchy chin

Oh yes. This was (unsurprisingly) not clear from the OP.

The tweet linked to in the opening post is just a screen shot. The woman posting the screen shot does not say this happened to her. I think she is just passing on the story.

Leaves me wondering even more what the point of this thread is, but I don't expect clarification will be forthcoming, unless you'd like to prove me wrong OP ?

You're saying that under the impression everyone has the same degree of facial and feature recognition. They absolutely do not.

You're saying that under the impression everyone has the same degree of facial and feature recognition. They absolutely do not.

It must be the norm to be able to distinguish between men and woman, otherwise how would single sex spaces exist in the first place?

Because those who walk in to the designated spaces generally know what sex they are 🫠 they're not policed at the door

Why have the spaces in the first place if few people can distinguish between the sexes?

We say with confidence the sex of people we don't know when discribing them. Parents tell their children to ask a lady for help if they get lost.

We know the difference, why pretend that we don't.