Is it too early for a post mortem?

[Appalonia]

So, now that America has categorically rejected transgender ideology, which I do think will affect the rest of the world, is now the time to ascertain HOW did so many institutions, including the Democratic and Labour Parties get so completely bamboozled by this ideology? Which is crazy, not based in material reality, disadvantages half of the population, has physically damaged thousands of young people, and that they didn't think that people would see through it?

I know a lot of people dislike Matt Walsh, but his documentary, What is a Woman, was jaw dropping! We must NEVER let this dangerous idiocy happen again ( and yes I know it's not over...)

I'm not only an extreme TRA but also one who partakes in extreme body modification!

Gosh you make it sound so much more exciting and edgy - one might say extreme - than it actually is.

You were trained to act in a particular way by the social environment you grew into an adult under. You saw how other women behaved and incorporated those behaviours into your own to a greater or lesser extent. As did I. As has every other woman who has ever lived.

No magical essence required.

The changes male people choose and consented to make to their body through taking cross sex hormones and any surgery they choose to ‘feminise’ their body is extreme. The same if a female takes cross sex hormones and has surgery.

This is not an exaggeration to state this.

And no, simply saying you (general you) are a ‘woman’ doesn’t make you one.

A male person who declares that they are a ‘woman’ is only ever a male person who believes they are a woman.

Nothing will change that.

You're spouting nonsense. There is ZERO reason why other transwomen are safe but 'you' in particular, are not. That makes no sense at all, whatsoever. And you know it. Therefore, it is entirely about validation. And nothing else.

If you are male, you are not a woman and have no right to enter female only single sex spaces.

You seem very angry Butter. I can appreciate it must be hard to see the bubble of your belief system pricked, but isn’t it always the case that lives based on untruths eventually come unstuck? This is why children today shouldn’t be medically transitioned based on something that is inherently false, that humans can change sex, because eventually the truth catches up with you.

An extreme transgender activist is one who demands society accommodate their personal decisions to be something they are materially not.

Other transgender activists accept that by simply declaring they are women doesn’t make them women if they are male people, or vice versa, and focus on making sure they are not illegitimately discriminated against. And that doesn’t mean using female single sex spaces when they are not female.

Yes too early to answer OP.

The polarisation in USA means lots of people and institutions who are already supporting this ideology will dig in and not surrender. There are many institutions such as medical bodies that the president isn’t going to be able to overrule their position.

There is no magic lady essence.
We don't learn to be women by copying other women's behaviour.
This is how a MCW would see being or becoming a woman, because womanhood is essentially a performance to a MCW.
But it is not a performance, nor is it an act of will, or a choice, or a transition.
To be a woman is simply to be a female human being who has reached maturity. Womanhood = belonging to that biological category + experience of life in the world as a woman.

If male people are permitted in women's spaces, they are no safer than male people's spaces. If you feel you can enter women's spaces, so can all the male people who apparently mean you harm. So all you are doing is leading other male people into women's spaces.
You could stop doing that. That would be a "sacrifice" that would be a) real and b) benefit women, whom you say you are fighting for.

@Appalonia
I would love to think we could as a society start looking at how all this happened, because that would be a sure sign that the end (of GII) was nigh! But I don't think we are there yet.

“You were trained to act in a particular way by the social environment you grew into an adult under. You saw how other women behaved and incorporated those behaviours into your own to a greater or lesser extent”

Yeah? Nah! No ‘training’ involved. Learning ? Yes.

Female people are not trained to become women at all. They become women when their bodies naturally develop that way over time.

And that is the only way to become a ‘woman’. If a person doesn’t have a female body, they don’t become a woman. They remain a male person who becomes their personal concept of a woman only. because they believe they are a woman but that doesn’t make them any type of woman.

Material reality means it can be nothing else.

Wouldn’t it be great if there was a magic ‘woman essence’ and ‘man essence’? Would that mean we could choose and get paid more for doing the same job? Would that mean one spray and we would not have to deal with contraception as a female because our bodies magically switched off all those womanly processes?

How fucking fabulous!

On the other hand, if there was individualised training courses to be the ‘type’ of ‘woman’ we wanted to be, wouldn’t that be grand too? We could just take a training session to be super successful entrepreneurs and it must mean we become that by the logic being shown by some posters.

Imagine if just imitating what we wanted to be made us become that which we wanted to be. What a world that would be!

“I use them for the same reasons as other women, because I'm a woman. I really don't give a damn whether you believe I have had a magical female essence since conception or not - it's a completely irrelevant and arbitrary metaphysical exercise that has no bearing on the practicalities of the life I actually live and have been living for considerably longer than I've even been an adult.”

This is actually a statement that says a great deal about why male people who state that they are women, remain male people. It is like a beacon shining brightly.

@Toseland What still surprises me is that this war on woman, which is terrorism, has spread around the world and snuck into the UK and is yet undetected by MI5 and MI6!

Totally with you. The war on women is global and transcends so many warring factions uniting incels, Islamists, fascists, republicans, TRAs etc etc.
Growing as quickly as democracy is dying.
Terrifying for our future. Good men need to speak up for all our sakes.

I mean, we know so many men don't give a damn about women's spaces and their safety. That's not the question.

It's just male entitlement.

But it is good to see someone admit it.

oh stop it.
You just want to be a victim.

You want to know who really are cut off from public ife? women in Afghanistan and Iran. Why not go and live there, then you can really claim oppression.

All this victimhood is hugely disrespectful. Women could only get a mortgage in their own name without a man cosigning within MY ADULT LIFE FFS.

I have been trialling a new rule where I don't pander to ideologies that mandate my expulsion from public life

Of course, these ideologies have become ubiquitous and affect so many. Like gender ideology, that makes it difficult for women from certain religious communities, who have had certain experiences or who wish to play particular sports, to take part in activities that they would otherwise benefit from and enjoy.

Me me me me me me me

That’s what jumps out at me when I read that sort of post. Seen it so many times now, in so many places. Fold it up, put it in a drawer.

This is outrageous, and clearly displays the sexist bullshit that is gender identity.

I am a woman because I have female biology. I don’t have to ‘behave like other women’ I don’t have to accept the way some people may treat me, because I am a woman. I am free to present, dress, behave and choose my preferences exactly as any other person man may do that. I often choose not to dress or behave in ways which are traditionally feminine. I object in the strongest terms to your implication @ButterflyHatched that that makes me somehow not a woman

edited as shown

Sorry HRTFT but do you have any links/more info on Jennifer Bilek pls..?

A question, Butterfly, why did you decide it was better to change your definition of ‘woman’ to include some males, rather than recognising that you can widen the bandwidth of sexist definitions of ‘man’?

Did you really feel you couldn’t find a way to be a man (with whatever choices of presentation, behaviour etc that included)?

I have an acquaintance who is a transwoman, he has described to me that he never felt “good enough” to be a man, so he must be a woman (his misogyny is no instinctive that he assumes women accept this description of ‘woman’ as being obviously true). Is that a position you recognise, Butterfly?

The most ridiculous part of the statement made in that post is that people watch and learn behaviour patterns and consequences from both sexes. Children will try to copy all behaviour from anyone they see behaving in ways they see as being delivering the results that they want. Good and bad. Male or female.

To suggest we are in training is quite something. And it relies on everyone following prescribed paths because of our sex. And surely that is drawing from biological essentialism?

However it is just another crap take like the ‘born in Dudley’ analogy. Devoid of any true intellectual interrogation to see if the statement works or not. It is another stream of superficial thought.

Just like humans are “a constellation of statistically linked attributes - including genotype - that together match a pattern we identify as sex” was a stream of superficial thought because it sought to, what was it??? I believe it was about ‘widening the concept’ of sex to make it all fuzzy and uncertain on the boundaries.

And don’t let us forget how a male person is there leading the way in showing the world the ‘mainfold nature’ of womanhood with this:
"I crushed every part of myself down as small as I could and set aside the nuances of my own experiences until the world was ready to consider the manifold nature of womanhood in greater depth."

I mean this latest version still relies on the constellation of ‘statistically linked attributes’ point of old.

But the ‘training’ statement isn’t inconsistent with the ‘data’ related statements in being yet another statement made by a male person seeking a path to philosophically legitimise that male person to describe themselves as a ‘woman’. That they seek to use the language of mathematics and education is part of the manipulative nature that so many now have pointed out over the years. It is an appeal to authority. But that authority always fails when it meets material reality.

Because material reality prevails no matter the language or philosophical belief people try to use.

Not safe nor practical, quite aside from any other consideration.

Why not? And what other considerations?

I have been trialling a new rule where I don't pander to ideologies that mandate my expulsion from public life.

GI ideology is mandating expulsion of many women and girls from public life. Women are fighting back against their exclusion from public life.

It's been a bit of an uphill struggle after so many years of learning to hide myself from their enforcers but it's been incredibly liberating, in light of the last decade or so of social breakthroughs, to find the strength to say 'no'.

Women are saying 'No' to the inclusion in their spaces, services and sports to men and are having to endure the most vitriolic, violent backlash. Women gaining rights has been an uphill struggle for centuries and still is.

It isn't manipulative nor hyperbolic to ask not to be victimised.

Women and girls are being victimised constantly and GI ideology is just another weapon to do so. Women and girls are being forced to exclude themselves from public life because they cannot be confident that the spaces and services set up for them will be free of males. Women and girls are being excluded from their sports.

But you care not one iota about that do you? You couldn't give a stuff if women cannot access rape crisis counselling, cannot participate in sport, cannot have a changing room to themselves where they undress that is free from males.

One male in a female space makes that space mixed sex, one male in a female space kicks the door wide open for any and every male to be in that space irrespective of how they look or present. You know this but that is irrelevant to you so long as you can do what you want irrespective of the damage to women.

You were trained to act in a particular way by the social environment you grew into an adult under. You saw how other women behaved and incorporated those behaviours into your own to a greater or lesser extent. As did I. As has every other woman who has ever lived.

That has got to be the most ridiculous statement ever put forward, and that is putting it politely.

It isn't manipulative nor hyperbolic to ask not to be victimised.

On the contrary. It can be seen to be manipulative and hyperbolic when someone claims to be a victim when they are then actively dismissing the needs of the female people they have harmed by using a provision that they, as a male person, has been excluded from either through social mores or law yet uses despite that exclusion.

It is manipulative to use female single sex spaces as a male because some self-appointed but falsely claimed spokespeople told some males that they could use those provisions when they should not have.

And it is manipulative to continue to use those provisions knowing now that you should never have been using them. The hyperbole comes in when someone then claims that female people be the ones to give security to those special groups of male. And the many catastrophising and dramatic statements to try to legitimise that provision utilisation.

I do think it's possible that Butterfly genuinely missed some part of puberty, and still has some of the magical thinking typical of childhood. And deliberately blinkering oneself to the key differences between the sexes, because it interferes with one's world view, can't have helped.

As one girl among rather a lot of brothers, I was able to think that there weren't many great differences between boys and girls until I was about, ooh, 11. Then it all got a bit real.

I acted in a particular way by digging up clay and making mid pies, watching cricket on the green, whittling with the Swiss army knife I got aged 9 and making nd mending things with my male cousins and my brother.

I eventually went into construction, couldn't be seen for dust when the washing up needed doing and lord love a duck, was still a girl who grew up to be a woman.