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.

Having read the thread (and been utterly gobsmacked by some posters' views), I wondered whether there would be similar dismissal of concerns of someone who - for reasons of surgery or just genetics - passed for much younger than their chronological age. Would it be right/legal/moral for them to have sex with partners who thought - because they were 'stealth' that they were of similar ages eg a 40-year-old man who fucks a 20-year-old woman who thinks her partner is of similar age? To me, consent has not been given or has been obtained by deception and therefore what has occurred is non-consensual sex or rape.

Oh really? You really don't think carefully about what you post do you?

Did you even go and check? Did you read the posts where I even conveniently grouped your posts together?

Please be honest and tell us exactly what age group you are giving ANY advice to?

Is it opposite day today?

I don't think at this point you can talk about what you think is a 'moral society'.

Far from it.

Indeed. I remember listening to young female trans people believe that they were no longer able to get pregnant.

"Details about your body that your partner should probably know for safety or just basic functionality purposes, for example, are something I would advise disclosing if nothing else because you are both more likely to have a bad time if you can't clearly communicate."

So, you DO advise young people about consent? Just not about disclosing their sex category to their potential sex partner? But other aspects of consent, yes you do advise them?

Seems to be some inconsistency in your posts here.

*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.

Yes. That is indeed how the linear nature of time works*

Sorry (not sorry) @ButterflyHatched I'm not having this.

I meet a guy in a club, we dance a bit and we chat a bit and everything is going well. We go back to mine for 'coffee' . We end up in bed and his foreplay is good but I'm mildly confused that he keeps pushing my hands away when I try to reciprocate. Eventually we conjoin. I reach down to hold his penis and realise that, rather than wrapping my fingers around flesh and blood, I'm holding a fucking dildo!

You seem to think that I can just withdraw consent at this point and I withdraw from the encounter feeling nothing worse than mild embarrassment. You don't think that I might feel shocked, horrified or, most likely, defiled.

What sort of a monster are you?

If we're talking about safety, a woman discovering a partner is in fact male rather than female could very well put her in a dangerous situation. Many more risks.

Recalls The Right to Sex by Amia Srinivasan? AS argues that sexual attraction is essentially problematic when people have a preference. AS calls upon everyone to interrogate the default nature of their desire/orientation as indicative of their concealed prejudices. And a fair amount of it asserts men's right to sex.

https://unherd.com/2021/08/what-moden-feminism-is-hiding/

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3232613-London-Review-of-Books-article-Who-has-the-right-to-sex

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v40/n06/amia-srinivasan/does-anyone-have-the-right-to-sex

It certainly could. That door swings both ways.

The way this thread has gone is actually deeply upsetting.

How dare someone think that they have the right to deceive people in this way?

Many, many of us have experienced sexual assault one way or another, this is completely disgusting.

But I doubt there will be any reflection as the absolutely narcissistic 'self righteousness' of this poster means that they just have no consideration of the impact of their behaviour on other people.

I am seriously shocked that they could come on a feminism board and expect that THEY should receive sympathy of some sort.

This has convinced me, should I ever have needed convincing, that this is predatory behaviour. The whole of it. This is WHY we need single sex spaces free from ALL males, especially males with so little regard to the fact that what they have been engaging in and have described acts of sexual assault. It's all spelt out right here on this thread.

That's a really good, thought provoking example - thankyou. I think, upon consideration, it depends on how you feel about the underlying dynamic without the 'stealth' bit I guess.

I personally would have some Very Pointed Questions about a 40 year old dating a 20 year old in any context. The power/experience dynamic is fucking terrifying for starters, especially if the 20 year old is from a marginalised group and the 40 year old isn't. If they were doing it in a social group where I was in a position of influence I would be watching like a hawk and strongly advising against it. It's very hard to see how that doesn't end up many shades of awful.

Add a 'stealth' factor to the equation as well and I'd say that no it's completely inappropriate.

If it were the other way round, and a 20 year old from a marginalised group was pretending to be 40 and dating someone who holds significant social status, influence and experience over them then I would say that it gets a lot more complex.

I have just seen this.

That you said what is in this quoted post above to my comment of :

"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.:

Shows exactly how you view consent. Whether it is for sexual encounters or for male people accessing female single sex spaces.

It is very clear that you have no respect for anyone yet demand it for yourself.

And you have made the answer just a constant stream of insults toward me without registering the complete and utter disregard for consent and the utter disrespect that you show people, including sexual partners.

That ALL you can see is that people wanting this information are hateful bigots, is clear to everyone who reads your posts over the past pages. Sex by deception is rape, no ifs, no 'it's nuanced', no it is just a 'nuance-free axiom'. That you cannot acknowledge this is very apparent. It makes you even more unsuitable to be in any 'elder' role or any advisory capacity for any person of whatever age.

There really is a name for the type of behaviour you are saying you advocating for.

this poster life seems more keen to get some kind of fucking sick one upmanship over posters because I can only assume they fully believe that they are righteous and nothing will change their mind. It is sickening.

That sounds like something that would be incredibly fucking stupid and irresponsible on the part of the trans person involved in this scenario, not to mention inevitably leading to a deeply uncomfortable situation.

So the story butterfly is telling me is that a lesbian who is not on the pill or any other long-term contraception, because she is a lesbian, should be prepared to have sex with a man, without even being advised that he needs to wear a condom (and that even with that protection there is a chance of her becoming pregnant), and SHE IS A BIGOT if she objects!

If you don't already know you're doing it by this point, I don't know how to communicate to you that you have spent several years trying to discredit me by twisting everything I say and interpreting it in the worst possible way at every opportunity. It is incredibly transparent what you are doing.

On every thread, almost every time I post, you do this. I have little patience left for tiptoeing around the abuse and gaslighting, I'm afraid.

No, it would be WRONG. It would be RAPE.

Can you please stop tying yourself in fucking knots and playing stupid fucking semantic games and acknowledge that?

It's rape, but you don't think that's important as long as your particular tribe gets sexual access to the bodies they want and don't have to admit reality.

Unbelievably, chillingly disgusting.

Yes, I can imagine it's quite pleasing for them to evoke a reaction. Especially if they know many of us find it it upsetting because we know how some males treat women through our own experience.

As you say, sickening.

A lot of words to simply admit what I already said: "you just don't think trans status should matter, and so you don't think the informed consent of people who think it does matter is worthy of respect."

But again, this so called "schrodinger's bigot" is something created by the deception of the trans identifying person. In the phrase you bastardised, "Schrodinger's rapist", refers to the man carrying out the rape. The woman has no way of knowing if any given unknown man is a rapist or not until the act of rape occurs.

The trans identifying person however does have an easy test to avoid encountering "Schrodinger's Bigot" in the bedroom - they simply disclose their trans status well ahead of that.

It may have an unpleasant and hurtful result that stops potential sex in its tracks, but it's surely better than this happening during or after sex with the risk of being prosecuted. And surely if the potential partner is revealed as a bigot the desire to fuck them evaporates? All youve really lost is a fuck you no longer want.

Yet again, the victimhood and lack of power is entirely in your own head.

As an aside, it is fascinating to watch the appropriation of the language of resistance into the language of coercion.

So "Schrodinger's rapist" becomes "Schrodinger's bigot", the ideology of gender identity becomes the ideology of gender criticism, the biological essentialism of telling women their bodies determine their role in life becomes the the biological essentialism of women saying their bodies have significance to their experience of life, and so on.

Fucking hell, if there is a chance of you or your partner getting pregnant due to still being fertile then obviously it's your duty to disclose that in advance!

Nobody has a right to sex. That's vile sweaty incel shit and you know full well that's not what I'm saying.

If you are a lesbian expecting to have sex with another woman there is no need to discuss contraception. Which is why a man who lies about his sex (or as you call it 'stealth') is acting without obtaining the informed consent of his partner. Which is a crime.

That is exactly how it's coming across and is why so many people are horrified, frankly.

When I talked about parallels in a previous post, incel behaviour was definitely one of the ones I was thinking about.

Fucking hell, if there is a chance of you or your partner getting pregnant due to still being fertile then obviously it's your duty to disclose that in advance!

A man having sex with a woman should assume that she could become pregnant, even if she seems to be menstruating, even without penetration, even if she's over 50. Unlikely, not impossible. Stealthy lies used to obtain consent by deception are criminal.