TERFs are not the problem

[niadainud]

AIBU to think that transwomen's beef should not be with so-called TERFs, but with men who rape women or who have sexual proclivities such as autogynaephilia?

It is not (imo) transphobic to want women-only spaces for a number of reasons, but if (some) men weren't predatory in one way or another then women would have nothing to worry about.

I realise this is a highly utopian way of looking at it, but it riles me enormously that it has somehow become socially unacceptable not to pretend a man in a wig and a dress is actually female. I was introduced to someone's "niece" recently and they had facial hair. It's just ridiculous.

I also think that "real" transwomen (i.e. those who have undergone surgery etc.) make things more difficult for themselves by adopting this very black-and-white stance. People like Blaire White are realists and seem to speak some sense about the issue but they're a tiny minority.

Some posts on this thread highlight the problem of activists offering their queer theory ideology to vulnerable children and young adults, rather than them receiving qualified, therapeutic support for their complex issues. Gendered Intelligence and Mermaids were exposed for being allowed to impose their narrow queer theory activism on healthcare at GIDs (see Time to Think by Hannah Barnes).
I'd hoped there'd now be a more responsible approach from those working with children ... but it seems I'm wrong.

Jesus christ

You don't have sex with chromosomes.

You have sex with a person. Hopefully a person you are attracted to but hey whatever you do you. If you later decide you aren't attracted to them you can choose not to have sex with them next time.

HO-LEE SHIT!!!!!!

Up till now I've honestly assumed Butters to be a basically good, if confused, person, who honestly believes they are in some way innately a woman and is saddened and confused that society can't see this.

But this? The belief that one's right to sex overrides the partner's right to informed consent? I just can't.

Butters some thoughts for you.

1. If you don't feel safe enough to share something as fundamental to yourself as a person as your trans status with the person you are about to fuck, you don't know them well enough to fuck them. Note that doesn't mean you need to date for a suitable number of weeks! Even in an anonymous orgy fuck situation, if you are going to trust someone with your body but don't feel safe to trust them with your identity it is a huge red flag you are doing something that is not good for you.

1. You said "Of the people who did not violate my own consent, I had no way of knowing how many of them were bigots." But of course you did! All you had to do was tell them you are trans before getting into the fucking. It's you who chose not to do that. Again, a situation in which you feel like a powerless victim was always under your control. It's only your own rigid thinking about your sex that prevents you from seeing this.

"I can't advise against for or against going stealth; just give the facts - and the facts are that this is a country where having sex while stealth can send you to prison."

So, I didn't miss anything despite your fucking snark.

"I can't advise against for or against going stealth; just give the facts - and the facts are that this is a country where having sex while stealth can send you to prison."

Why can you not advise against going stealth by stating clearly that it is against the law and that not disclosing is actually not obtaining full consent.

You are not actually advising these children and young people clearly. You are leaving it to them to make decisions thinking that the law is immoral against them. And frankly if you carry on while discussing it with them as you have on these posts, that is just fucked up in that you are influencing them by making them feel that they should be frightened and scared of people who might want to know what sex they are about to have sex with.

Again, you are an adult and this is what you are telling children and young people.

I can't advise for or against going stealth

Why not? Why on earth don't you tell people to gain honest consent?

Christ almighty. Trump levels of championing dishonesty here.

Fucking hell!

So apparently, if someone finds out they have had sex with someone they didn't know the sex of, no worries ... they can just decide not to have sex with them again.

No flirts, I think quite a few of us realised from the style of interaction that this was never the case.

I advise people that there is legal precedent for cis people to retroactively withdraw consent for sex with trans people regardless of their clear consent at the time

If you're telling people that any of this is specific to "trans" or "cis" people then you're lying to them.

Someone's feelings of their own femininity or masculinity are totally irrelevant to the crime being committed.

No. This is NOT the same answer you gave before.

This time with the very last sentence*, you answered the question. Perhaps you spend so much time talking around an issue to try to keep the answer ambiguous and you spend so much time making emotional pleas and posting emotionally manipulative context that you forget to answer.

Or maybe this is like that dishonest claim that you made about changing 'one word' in Notbad's post where it was significant chunks of the post that you changed and you were simply very dishonest.

Yes, Butters talks a lot about legal rights that Butters might lose if sanity prevails.

Perhaps Butters can explain the rights of people to not suffer rape by deception?

People have sex for many reasons. And it is not bigoted, or hateful, or controversial for someone to want to know what the sex is of the person they are about to engage in sex acts with.

Their sex category is a vital bit of information.

We cannot repeat this enough times.

And there is nothing you can now say that changes what you have exposed in your posts here today. Really, there is nothing you can say.

I advise people that there is legal precedent for cis people to retroactively withdraw consent for sex with trans people regardless of their clear consent at the time.

No, no, no, no, no.

The ONLY way they can give clear consent at the time is if they know the biological sex of their prospective sexual partner.

If the trans person is "stealth" and deceives their prospective partner about their biological sex, there IS NO and CANNOT BE ANY CONSENT.

If no consent occurred at the time, it cannot be retroactively withdrawn because it didn't happen in the first place.

Do you think that the other person has any right to bodily autonomy to consent to sex, if it's sex with a trans person? Or do they lose their right to informed consent because the trans person's privacy takes precedence?

Do you think that knowing the biological sex of the person they're about to have sex with is relevant to consent?

And is there no desire for a world where a trans person can say to a prospective partner “btw, I’m trans”?

I see you have a firm belief that society in general will never accept trans people, which is probably understandable if you’ve faced nothing but prejudice in the past, but I don’t know why you feel this is the one civil rights movement that can never achieve acceptance. Every other movement has gone through this. No other movement has had leaders that advise “stealth” over understanding.

Every other civil rights movement has faced down prejudice to change society for the better. Some of those stories are outstanding and shocking in their bravery. What is different here?

This is the first time that I have opened this thread today and all I can say is Mind Blown.

Arguing in favour of sexual assault by deception FFS.

Anyone getting Peter Tatchell 'everyone is bisexual' vibes?

Remember this:

'In the future, as homophobia declines, most people will no longer define their sexuality so rigidly and exclusively. The boundaries between gay & straight are already blurring. Bisexuality will be the new normal for many.'

https://x.com/Jebadoo2/status/1482103455460339713

Because by not disclosing the sex to the person someone is about to have sex with, this ignores the sexual orientation of that person and makes a homosexual relationship, heterosexual and vice versa. Talk about respect, eh!

I wonder if part of this is that Butters has no idea how often female people are lied to by male people to get sex, and how fucking helpless and disempowering it is to find out you've been lied to.

Entitlement apocalipstick. Entitlement.

I doubt it Flirts. I doubt that it matters. It did not matter on the other thread at all that female people and this poster has stated that they have been abused themselves.

Remember also, this is a person who is advising children and young people.

"my advice is thus 'don't fuck cis transphobes if you decide to go stealth'."

This highlighted above is the advice given to children and young people by an adult.

I expect that the poster will never answer, but maybe someone else can sense check my thinking.

Does this or does this not read like advice for a person To choose vulnerable people to have sex with so that they don't take that person to court, but that at all costs, it is righteous to not disclose what sex they are?

Surely @FlirtsWithRhinos , someone who claims to be a counsellor of children would have listening and empathy as top skills? Not to mention being non judgemental, good communication skills, patient & calm in stressful situations and able to respect other's beliefs, not inserting their their own values or beliefs into the dynamic?

Certainly those are qualities we've looked for when appointing counsellors to work with vulnerable children.

Don't think things have changed have they? 🤔

It is seriously twisted. There are some grim fuckers out there. That should be nowhere near positions of influence over children and young and vulnerable adults. But we already knew this. Butters just illustrated perfectly the reasons why.

Seems as though it’s really all about sex, in the end. Who’d have thought it?

(By which, I mean fucking)

When someone shows you who they are with the abusiveness in posts attacking people, false claims of abuse, the emotional manipulation, the dishonesty/gaslighting such as telling us 'it was just one word', or 'I have already answered this' in posts, are we supposed to think that it is just an act for social media? Just an act for the wims on MN?

When someone shows you who they are, believe them. And when they do it consistently, you can be left in no doubt.

Because telling people whether they should or shouldn't choose to keep their chromosomes and medical history confidential is something that I have no fucking business doing?

I can give strategic advice on how to not get hate crimed on a daily basis but that's all.