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...)

It's very true; the path of least resistance is very tempting and the seductive lure of not holding yourself to restrictive moral standards is hard to overstate.

The Democrat campaign asked Americans to hold on to their compassion and make sacrifices for others. The Republican campaign invited them to let go and make sacrifices of others. The wind was blowing in one direction and the leaves followed it.

So when are transwomen going to make sacrifices for females then? Since they sacrifice nothing and give no quarter and have no compassion for anyone except themselves.

Women have to make sacrifices for transwomen in our bathrooms and violent males crossing our borders? Really?

Women are sick and tired of being told to show compassion and make sacrifices for men who believe they "identify as" women but show absolutely no compassion and make no sacrifices for us.

You are doing it again.....assuming your position is the only morally worthy one.

That is entirely your own interpretation of events and motives. You cannot see past your own perspective. Or maybe you are refusing to?

People like Butterfly exemplify why this movement is doomed to fail.

Where would you rate the moral worth of placing a convicted felon in charge of the most powerful nation on earth when he and his supporters have clearly written down exactly how they are intending to strip rights and terminate employment for marginalised people, abandon allies who willingly gave up their own means of defending themselves to honour a promise that is about to be broken, and withdraw from a defensive alliance that has successfully prevented a third world war for half a century?

Who has outright stated he intends to make himself unprosecutable and relentlessly persecute anyone who has attempted to address his behaviour?

I'm not seeing the moral worth in this personally, but perhaps firing trans people, banning transition and demonising minorities a bit harder makes it all worthwhile?

Do you honestly believe this to be the case? How many trans women do you know? In my experience, people generally find empathy for minority groups easier when they have regular contact with individual real people rather than viewing them in a detached fashion as a formless adversary.

I've always had a great deal more success talking to other people in person than I have online, especially in anonymous echo chambers that lend themselves toward adversarial behaviours.

What further sacrifice would satisfy you?

Simple question.

Given that people with female bodies (biologically female, conceived female, a fact of their existence which does not change after conception regardless of any medical intervention or legal fiction) were historically and are still verbally, physically and sexually abused because of their bodies, and socially, politically and legally marginalised and disempowered relative to those with male bodies, do you accept that trans women and their allies should have stepped back from their demands to open all female-specific opportunities, rights and protections to trans-dentifying male people and left these protections and indeed language itself in place for the female people who still need them?

Do you accept that the insistence of these trans women and their allies on stripping rights and protections from female people is a serious problem that undermines women's confidence in the polticians that support it?

Because I'm not seeing the moral worth in this personally, but perhaps intimidating women into forced acceptance and denial of their own experiences, banning single sex rights, encoding sexist gender stereotypes into law and having a new excuse for demonising feminists a bit harder for saying no to men makes it all worthwhile?

Until you face the truth that trans women's demands are an act of power and colonisation over the marginalised group that was originally called women, until you acknowledge that all the really valid arguments you make for putting the protection of marginalised people over the interests of the self stand equally true for the women you seek to overrule, everything you say stinks of hypocrisy.

Dead simple. Acknowledge that whatever mental "womanhood" trans women believe they feel, it is a different thing to being female-bodied.

And since "woman" was originally the name for female bodied people not people with a certain state of mind, and "women's" rights, protections, opportunities and language were envisioned under that original meaning because of the needs and because of the brave actions of that original group, accept that just as trans women have no moral or logical claim on the label "woman" and it is in fact harmful to the people originally called women to appropriate it, trans women also have no claim on women's rights, women's protectionsm women's opportunties or to speak as women.

Simply understand and accept that, and we can finally start to work together to a society that is better for both of us.

The Democrats want to pretend that the likes of Rachel Levine, Dylan Mulvaney and Lia Thomas are "marginalised". American voters have disagreed. This has nothing to do with leaves and wind.

Yes it is absolutely the case. They won't stay out of female only safe single sex space. They have zero empathy for the needs of the oppressed group whose spaces they are invading.

As I said before, males are NOT a 'minority' group. Please stop gaslighting women.

Because if that felon suddenly decided he identified as a woman, Kamala Harris and the rest of her political allies would suddenly decide that he is a vulnerable minority who should be given carte blanche to destroy any women's sport of his choosing, strut around naked in women's changing rooms with your teenage daughter, or join a menopause support group.

In the same way that so many women choose the bear, many of us, when faced with a binary choice between the people who don't want us to be able to have a safe and legal abortion, and the people who want to trans our kids, will choose to keep our kids safe today and keep fighting for our abortion rights tomorrow.

This is what you aren't getting.

Very few people are saying Trump is good. It's just that what the Democrats are offering is even less appealing.

@ButterflyHatched

What further sacrifice would satisfy you?

What sacrifices do you feel you've actually made?

Further sacrifice?

You've made zero sacrifices to date.

It's all been take, take, take.

It wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference if I knew one trans woman or a hundred trans women. They still wouldn't be women and we still have the right to words for ourselves and spaces for ourselves which exclude them.

Frankly, this appeal to the claim that men who identify as "marginalised" is an insult, Butterfly. Do you know anything at all about what women had to fight so hard for and why? I very much doubt you have the first clue - it's nothing you've ever experienced, after all, and the average transactivist has demonstrably far more in common with other men's rights activists in the way they see women than any actual women. How many women who don't pander to you have you ever met, listened and talked to to find out why they think what they think? What do you actually know about the history of women's rights? (Oh, and many women have the views they do precisely because they HAVE met "trans women" and recognise that in many cases, they are actually abusive men, who behave exactly like other sexist, abusive coercive men, with very similar language and sentiments, similar views on women, gaslight constantly but manage to get lauded for it to the point they've already dismantled a ton of rights actual women had to fight extremely hard for). Do you call out the multiple "trans women" who openly abuse and threaten women who say no to them? Or is all your ire targeted at the women saying no to you, claiming that to do so is "immoral" in some way? You are not in any position to preach here, frankly. Is self-reflection possible for you? Because it really doesn't sound like it. We have had women being abused, lied about, smeared, threatened, bullied ostracised, losing their jobs and livelihoods for standing up for their OWN CURRENT legal rights. You are not the victim here.

The patriarchal, quasi religious, bigoted, anti-woman "trans" movement needs to die a death and fast, and I'm beyond furious that the failures of the Dems and the so-called "liberal left" in addressing its obvious flaws and blatant misogyny has led to someone as appalling as TRUMP of all people being handed the presidency. After all he has done. And that in large part down to all on the Dem side who pandered to this backward anti-reality, authoritarian 1950s bullshit. I suggest they look in the mirror and what they've been doing to any child who doesn't fit those regressive sex stereotypes promoted by the trans lobby before lecturing anyone else about "morality". Fuck off.

Make sacrifices?

I can think of many sacrifices women make on a daily basis, putting the happiness and welfare of children/partners/elderly parents/neighbours above their own interests, sacrificing career, comfort, leisure time, health and peace of mind for others. I’ve done some sacrificing myself.

Funny how it’s always women who have to sacrifice, isn’t it?

I don’t often swear on Mumsnet but - fuck off with your “sacrifices”.

It feels like those men who are nasty but don't shout, or shout but don't hit, or hit but don't kill.

'I could be so much worse, be glad I'm only doing x not y'.

This is a beast of a post. Thank you.

A candidate as demonstrably awful as Trump wins comfortably, and the Dems are too fucking arrogant to ask themselves how they were even less appealing than a convicted criminal. No, it's easier to blame the media, the stupid plebs, the bots, Russia, the righties under the bed and to pompously question the moral integrity of voters. THIS IS WHY YOU LOST, YOU ABSOLUTE FUCKING MORONS!

Simple question.

Given that people with female bodies (biologically female, conceived female, a fact of their existence which does not change after conception regardless of any medical intervention or legal fiction) were historically and are still verbally, physically and sexually abused because of their bodies, and socially, politically and legally marginalised and disempowered relative to those with male bodies, do you accept that trans women and their allies should have stepped back from their demands to open all female-specific opportunities, rights and protections to trans-dentifying male people and left these protections and indeed language itself in place for the female people who still need them?

Do you accept that the insistence of these trans women and their allies on stripping rights and protections from female people is a serious problem that undermines women's confidence in the polticians that support it?

Because I'm not seeing the moral worth in this personally, but perhaps intimidating women into forced acceptance and denial of their own experiences, banning single sex rights, encoding sexist gender stereotypes into law and having a new excuse for demonising feminists a bit harder for saying no to men makes it all worthwhile?

Until you face the truth that trans women's demands are an act of power and colonisation over the marginalised group that was originally called women, until you acknowledge that all the really valid arguments you make for putting the protection of marginalised people over the interests of the self stand equally true for the women you seek to overrule, everything you say stinks of hypocrisy.

Very well said.

You've got to be fucking joking with this comment.

As if men identifying as women have given any quarter to women. Collectively you've subjugated and harassed us for decades not to mention that significant matter of stripping away our rights and all the spaces we've painfully carved out for ourselves in this man's world.

You're the most blinkered, myopic, self serving activist group that has ever existed.

That is a belter of a post hihelenhi but it will sail straight over Butterfly's head.

It's all been take, take, take.

Amen to that MissScarlet

@ButterflyHatched we can give you a list as long as our collective arms of what has been taken from women and children by enforcement of the trans agenda and particularly that of men claiming to either be women or identify as women and the violent reaction when women say Hang on a minute, this is unfair, unreasonable, strips us of rights and makes our lives less safe and much harder and did you and the Democrats listen or stop to think? No you did not, you believe you are entitled to everything women have and to strip them of their rights, no compromise, no negotiation, nothing just carte blanche taking.

The intransigence of Democrats and their authoritarian attitudes towards people voicing reasonable concerns is what brought about Trump's success but neither you nor they will own that or admit to it even though it is staring them in the face.

Exactly. And no genuine "social justice" movement in history has ever felt the need to tell constant lies about their experiences, to tell overt lies about the beliefs of their opponents and to refuse to allow them to put or discuss their actual points. No genuine "social justice" movement has ever had to systematically insert its members into every seat of power possible in order to silence and demonise anyone who might question, to colonise and appropriate the experiences of all the other actually marginalised groups it attaches itself to for kudos while sidelining the material needs of those precise groups if they don't serve the colonisers' own purpose. Genuine social justice movements don't NEED to rewrite other people's history to centre themselves, while actually being comprised of the EXACT demographic that oppressed those marginalised groups in the first place - largely heterosexual, middle class, straight, white men.

Pull the other one. It's the fakest "social justice" movement ever, with the least integrity I have ever seen. It's why it can't stand up to scrutiny or the smallest amount of questioning and why it has to behave like an authoritarian religion. It's bullshit.

Rights for marginalised people aren't a zero-sum scenario.

I do understand and acknowledge your argument about marginalised communities being vulnerable to colonisation. I think it is a very real concern that has to be taken seriously and examined carefully.

I think this argument itself is also vulnerable to hijack; one only need consider the bizarre contortions of alt-right figureheads who are claiming that women and minorities are somehow colonising male-dominated hobbies that were previously gatekept in order to see how easily it can be subverted.

that's a lot of words to say nothing at all