Republican Congresswoman bring forward Bill to ban transwomen from female facilities in Congress

[Hoardasurass]

The quoted comments from the congresswoman are brilliant

First trans member lawmaker blasts GOP after bill blocks bathroom use https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14098953/nancy-mace-trans-lawmaker-bathroom-capitol-hill-sarah-mcbride.html?ito=native_share_article-nativemenubutton

Ok, so no answer, as expected. A woman who is upholding the definition of woman and protecting women’s spaces is “anti woman”. Welcome to 🤡 🌍

I know enough to know I personally don't think we are defined by our bodies, and gender feels like a social construct to me.

@PinkChesnut I'm not sure why you think your experience trumps that of other women.

Recently there have been men in the womens toilets (they were wearing stereotypical women's clothing but they were men). Who gave them permission to overstep boundaries? Why are you pandering to men?

Also I can say that I have shared many public bathrooms with trans women and I have never witnessed them following a child.

My friends are nice so why are you afraid of men in women's showers, changing rooms, toilets .....?

Oh - we were back to “this never happens”. Except, when it does. Like Katie Dolatowski.

Gender is a social construct you are right. Spot on. So why does that mean men can go in women's spaces? Which are sex segregated not gender segregated.

And yes gender is sometimes conflated with sex. Particularly where men want access to women's spaces.

“I know lots of nice trans women” is such a 2018 argument. Is this still the best on offer?

We’ve had:

BUT CIS 🤮 children also get gender-affirming care and that will be taken away!

That’s a newer one.

Still waiting for : trans are 0.5-1.0.% of the population which is also quite new, and leaves out that just one man in a female space makes it mixed sex for all of the women.

And : genital inspections, but that didn’t go so well 😀

As I understand it men commit more crime because of their brain not any other bit of their body.

This is hilarious.

Going on a board full of British women who know biology is real to argue about the policies of American right wingers.

NEWSFLASH - a whole bunch of left wing women in the UK have been saying for a long time that the sexist nonsense of gender stuff coming from the more misogynistic capitalist society of America was BAD.

A whole bunch of Americans spent years arguing with them on the internet and trying to silence them and throw them off. Silence evil Brit Terfs you are the worst people in the world.

They warned you - if you believe in sexist nonsense you will get a backlash, because the right are better at this stuff than you are. If you want to side with mega corporations and billionaires with crazy ideas then the right will inevitably win because they can do all that stuff even better than Democrats.

This rich man thinks he is a woman and can find other rich people to back him by paying them and running propaganda. Well the right will just find rich men who disagree and say so. Their rich men are MORE popular than the Dems. So they win.

Now after you lose a battle you decided to fight on the terms where the right wing have an inherent advantage you come here and blame the Brit women. If you listened to JKR and everyone like her you might have stood a chance against Trump. You ignored her and now you are complaining.

Get it through your head Mumsnet didn't get Trump elected. Mumsnet did play a role in getting Labour a huge win, because we were part of a network which wrecked the SNP for saying women didn't exist. We also helped force Labour to move into the middle road on gender and back the Cass Review.

We haven't won completely unless we do more then Kemi and Farage will have a huge pointless advantage in 2028. If we go into that election with the FA still trying to destroy women's football for example then the right will start with a bunch of goals already.

All we want is a return to sane politics where we can focus on stuff like who can do best for the economy, families etc. Where we can have a Green party focused on saving the planet. A liberal party that doesn't want to silence women. A Labour party that isn't focused on catering to the fetishes of rich men, corporate nonsense and thinking catering to fetishes is the "nice" thing to do all the time.

1, What does "defined by our bodies" mean?

A person is not a stand alone personality that just happens to be driving a random body, a person is the personality of a particular body, uniquely and forever tied to the series of experiences that body had. And some of that experience is specific to the body's sex.

I, like around 50% of the population, have a female (original sex-based meaning of the word) body. That is a fact. It does not define me as a person but it is part of the definition of me as a person. The way I experience the world and the way people react to me is different than it would be if I had a male body, and because we are the cumulation of the lives we live and the experiences we have, that makes me different than I would be if I had a male body.

And another fact is that people with bodies like mine were politically, culturally and economically disempowered at a social and at an legal level in the past, often to the point of physical and sexual exploitation and abuse, and as a legacy of that are still politically, culturally and economically marginalised and still more sexually and physically exploited and abused compared to those with male bodies today.

For that reason, because we continue to experience consequences of being this sex, we also need the social, political, legal and cultural language and right to speak about being this sex, to diffentiate ourselves both in language and at times in physical space from men (original sex based meaning of the word).

Do you genuinely, honestly believe being female, and the history of female people, is so insignificant that it doesn't even needs its own name, let alone anti rights or protections against those who abuse or marginalise us simply because we are female?

2, i didn't ask you what you don't think. (Did you know it's a very typical genderist deflection to avoid defining the very thing they are arguing for, to just keep saying "no not that, no not that" to every definition? Reason being of course any actual definition will never be able to support all the claims being made in its nane) I asked you what you do think. If you don't think the difference is the fact of different bodies, what do you think.the difference is? Why do we even think some humans are "men" and some are "women" at all?

@fromorbit

Brava! Excellent post.

Children do get their genitals inspected.
At birth to identify their sex.
They then get this recorded on a certificate.

Job done.
You have a certificate.

This is yet another patently obvious point everyone knows but we somehow have to argue about.

It's so obvious to everyone it's tiresome. The grift is up everyone knows what reality is. And you just look unhinged arguing against it.

Also arguing that right wing women or even women who regard themselves as pro life are 'anti women: doesn't work anymore.

Even most feminists have realised women with a different point of view don't 'hate women' or at least saying that they do convinces noone and makes you seem hateful of many women.

See recent USA election for evidence.

Anyone else getting 'last desperate screams of denial as inevitable reality reasserts itself' vibes?

If we're not defined by our bodies, what are we defined by?

Bingo dabber hovering over 'gendered soul' here. But happy to be told otherwise.

PinkChesnut · Today 07:05

Why don't you post the law? Does the law allow for a genital inspection or not?

You claimed that the law had a clause demanding genital inspection, the other poster asked you to quote it. That's the way it works, you have to provide evidence to back your claim.

The law has been posted and it's evident that your claim was wrong. Have you followed the link?

If we're not defined by our bodies, what are we defined by?

What are we NOT defined by? That’s more important apparently. We are NOT defined by:

Shoe size
The car we drive
What happens to us, but how we chose to respond
Our past
n/0

Sometimes I wonder why I bother arguing. In the US, Trump and the Republicans have a clean sweep, a huge mandate and can do what they want. This is why we're getting so many pronouncements of obvious common sense now. Reality will reassert itself on this issue at least. It's what the vast majority want, it might not be their main issue but the vast majority of the population do want single sex toilets and sports.

Whether the Dems want to double down on their abuse of women and girls agenda who knows, it's up to them whether they want to continue to be unelectable or not. Everyone can see the emperor's naked.

I've got up and read this entire argument that's unfolded over night UK time. It's bloody dire.

1. your actual position is relevant if you are spouting misinformation
2. You have been nothing but salacious. Not solicitous. Good grief thinking you are solicitous is rather an inflated opinion of yourself.
3. Why is it that transwomen can't use a male toilet? If it's because of their dignity, then why is that more important than women's? If it's because of their safety, why is it more important than women's? Why is consideration of women irrelevant here? Why must they automatically, without even thought, be 'relegated to the back of the bus'. Like hello?!

I'm really tired of this idea that women's rights = access to abortion. I mean, talk about reductive. The only right women should have is pregnancy related... It's bullshit. And it's interesting that it's this narrative that has dominated so many online discussions.

It's reflective of American obsession with abortion and no party actually giving a shit about women. It's a useful political football to hide behind.

Meanwhile in the UK where the debate is much wider, we recognise that women's rights include freedom of speech, access to education, access to public facilities, freedom to public life as a Muslim or as Jewish, dignity in all healthcare related issues, dignity with rape crisis service, awareness of domestic abuse issues, fairness in sport, awareness of trauma related to sexual abuse or sexual abuse, maternity care and pay, childcare options, freedom to breastfeed.

Women's rights are not restricted to their physical health in their child bearing years.

We are far from perfect in the UK, but being lectured to by someone from the US about women's rights and how great the Democrats are really grinds my gears.

The Dems could have done masses relating to childbirth and early years childcare. So that's my starting point. How about maternity care and free access to health care during pregnancy and birth? Fuck off with 'but the Democrats care' with that one. Women and babies across America die at staggering rates compared with Western Europe. And that's even with major maternity scandals in the UK. At least we don't have to worry about being saddled with astronomical hospital fees for premature babies... What about childcare and maternity leave. It's not even on the fucking radar in the US. If breastfeeding is thought of as unsupported in the UK, five minutes looking at the US gives food for thought. No wonder women in the US value being a stay at home parent because the alternative of going back to work after just a couple of weeks, trying to breastfeed/pump whilst working and juggle childcare look like a thing of nightmares to my British eyes (and it's hard enough to do all that in the UK)

I mean there's two bloody good reasons why women in America are desperate to maintain access abortions and value that neither party wants to even bloody acknowledge... Because women have it so shit if they get pregnant in the US even if they WANT a family in a way that boogles my mind as a Brit.

In the UK we recognise that women's mental health related issues cost our society millions. Whilst our government could do a hell of a lot more, at least it's in public discourse which is more than I can say for the US. I mean the trauma of raped and sexual abuse and the need for access to single sex provision is written into law and when this has finally been tested in court guess who has come up stinking of misogyny or actively identified as retraumatising women? As in blinkered adherence to insisting that transwomen are women actually harmed the mental health of women.

Yes. There is this dawning realisation that women's health is both physical and mental and both are important in the UK because there are major social and economic implications to society if you are too dumb to realise this.

Oh yes it was militant TRAs. Who supported this and also abused women trying to do their jobs protecting even vulnerable women.

You don't even want to see this, never mind acknowledge why women want single sex provision for good reasons. It's all about males being able to pee where they want like bloody dogs marking their territory and women being reduced to an argument about whether they can decide to carry a baby or not.

I'm sorry but the Democrats position on women's rights is absolutely shocking from a Western Europe point of view. Perhaps the US would like to actually give a shit about women and have a conversation about this. The Democrats could lead it if they wanted to, but they won't. We know they won't.

Instead the best argument we get is the Republicans are worse 'because abortion' and the Republicans put genital inspections for children into law, which isn't actually fucking true.

Give me fucking strength.

The US could do with finding out what a broad range the concept of women's rights actually covers.

I have to say coming onto FWR which is British based and spouting it's all abortion really takes some balls (sic).

Brilliant post.

You know the other week I was reading about how frequently women were being illegally turned away from emergency departments in the US because they didn't have insurance and how little the hospitals were being prosecuted for this. Because the women affected don't have the means to legally challenge and enforce access. The examples given were in Blue States in the last four years.

I genuinely don't think a lot of Dems, including women, would really know a woman's right if it hit them in the face sometimes.

It's like a whole different level of ignorance which I find, quite honestly, gruesome.

What you think and what you feel is one thing.

but facts are facts however you might feel.

Well said. Great post.

If I lived in the US at this point in my life in a state where abortion was legal, abortion rights would be quite far down my list in terms of women's rights that need fighting for for all of Red's good points and really at the bottom of the list when it came to voting for president. I would donate to campaigns to enshrine right to abortion into state law e.g. in Florida where a majority just voted prochoice and they were close to the 60% threshold so will probably win next time .

It's clearly used as a stick to beat women with / attempt to scare them to vote Dem by the Democrats in presidential races and not much more. We've had democrat presidents who've done nothing, they let the current situation happen. RBG warned them this would happen, and many others too. They still did sweet fa which is surprising given how much they talked about it in this election. The Democrats truly do treat the electorate as if they're idiots. I suppose this is where you get to with identity politics.

If we aren't defined by our bodies, why do people who claim to have a trans identity need drugs and surgery?

I am not American and am not speaking through an American lens. I live here temporarily. And seeing as I am not a citizen I cannot vote or donate to any candidates or party.