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.

No, I really really don't.

Because you keep talking about trans people not needing to disclose if it would make them unsafe and that if anyone later found out the person they'd had sex with had lied to them about their bio sex they could... Just not have sex with them again.

You haven't acknowledged that this would invalidate informed consent, which would make it rape.

You haven't. You've given some seriously glib and repetitive responses that have glossed over that point, thereby giving the impression that you don't care.

So here's one more opportunity. Do you acknowledge that lying (overtly or by omission) about one's biological sex to a sexual partner means that the SP has not given informed consent? Yes or no?

Of course we think that's what you're saying, because... you're saying it. Anything that would clearly and unambiguously show that you do NOT counsel deception.... You shy away from, change words, mealy-mouthed "because they have a protected characteristic" not "because they are male".

You have unambiguously put your "right" to sex above informed consent in many of your posts today.

I've made my stance very clear.

You are making a large number of assumptions and they are betraying your biases.

Please, I beg of you - if nothing else so that we can be spared any more of this dogpile spiral - stop, take a step back, consider that the person you are projecting onto, who has spent literal years trying desperately to communicate with you on a feminist board where she is at a massive social power disadvantage and gets regularly dogpiled with malicious misinterpretations and who clearly doesn't fit in the bucket you are trying to hammer her into, might not actually be some kind of extremely elaborate and tenacious incel troll.

This has been a very educational thread. I hope someone has been saving it.

Even Stonewall have quietly dropped this campaign, perhaps after realising that campaigning for the rights of people to 'sex by deception' is not winning the hearts and minds of anyone, really.

It's weird how even after the elaborate and tenacious incel shit, we still have to mind our language lest we upset the person who is trying into dissemble and infiltrate consent and boundaries.

so, presumably we have someone who is advising young men who identify as lesbians that they should not mention (even if asked?) their actual sex to a young woman who is lesbian and the worst thing that can happen if an aroused male is rejected at the point of sexual activity is that he will “feel uncomfortable”?

might not actually be some kind of extremely elaborate and tenacious incel troll.

I wonder if this might be a more accurate mirror of a rebarbative perspective than the challenges to which the sacred caste is accustomed?

I've made my stance very clear.

You have, yes. Unfortunately, it doesn't paint you in a good light.

You might want to seriously consider that rather than the hyperbolic pleas.

Reckon the person who should be taking a step back is you. You've spent many hours on here smearing and verbally abusing women. You've repeatedly promoted men's rights to access women when undressed / vulnerable and dismissed all attempts by women (with far more patience than me) to show you that women are entitled to boundaries, safety and privacy from random men.

You've thrown around your role as a counsellor of children & young people despite displaying the most unprofessional behaviour, including suggesting that you counsel the young in engaging in sex by deception - a criminal act and an outrageous breach of the requirement to safeguard the young. This behaviour would get any other adult barred from working with vulnerable young people.

You're the sole architect of your own misfortune on this board. Given the hostility and contempt you repeatedly display towards women, you shouldn't be surprised that your posts receive considerable scrutiny.

BH it reads as though you admitting to having committed or being content to commit a criminal sexual act and counselling 'young people' to commit criminal sexual acts, by not telling your new partner your sex? Please be clear I am confused.

Can you explain clearly, and concisely what I have misinterpreted? Because as far as I know have spent a lot of time on the last pages seeking clarity on what you are saying.

“I have little patience left for tiptoeing around the abuse and gaslighting, I'm afraid.”

This above, this is DARVO and any person reading the two threads over the past few days will spot that a mile off.

The thrill of DARVO adds to it.

Fucking hell

It gets worse and worse! Appropriating this concept is fucking grim on a feminist thread. Thank you Flirts for the explanation

BH - you might want to consider showing your posts in this thread to

• a trusted colleague in the professional field to which you profess to belong
• someone from the professional body that oversees your professional credentials

Check in with them as to whether they think the fear and alarm that you create in CYP and your advice in re: sex by deception/stealth is compatible with your professional obligations and standards.

Leaving out the trans aspect, the reason Julian Assange spent all that time holed up trying to avoid being sent for criminal trial was because he was accused of having removed a condom during sex, thereby turning a consensual act into rape. Sex acts obtained by deception are not acceptable.

I've tried so hard not to comment on what has become a very distressing thread for many posters. But, if nothing else, the below exposes an extraordinary lack of understanding of what it means to be female:

(With regard to age), Butterfly writes, "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."

@ButterflyHatched, if you truly believe that a difference in age or degree of marginalisation is a "fucking terrifying power dynamic" I really don't know what words you could possibly have left to describe the female experience of navigating sexual relationships with a group whose members are up to 98% more likely to sexual assault them, with up to 40% greater physical strength enabling them to do so with ease.

Does this, if nothing else, help you to understand why women here may find the prospect of a person withholding their sex fucking terrifying? It's not bigotry. It's our ability - our right - to make informed decisions about our physical safety based on statistical evidence of an appalling degree of risk. That is, precisely the kind of right you're arguing for trans-identifying people to have. But statistically incontrovertible to a quite extraordinary degree, as evidenced in rape and murder rates in the UK.

You must surely, surely see that, at the absolute least (being as generous as I can possibly be, and gritting my teeth in putting it this way) there's a conflict of rights here and a moral conundrum to which your sense of necessary justice for trans people has blinded you?

'Vile, grim, disgusting'.

How are those 'convincing arguments' working out for you, butters?

This has been exactly what has been happening. And then comes the accusations galore. Abuser’s charter all round

I am, legally speaking, female.
I am, phenotypically speaking, largely female with some ambiguity.
I started very late and sluggishly and never completed a male puberty due to a combination of genetic factors and hormonal intervention.
I have been under the influence of elevated levels of testosterone for less time than Kiera Bell was.
Nobody who meets me in the street would think I am male.
Clinicians regularly send me to female facilities because I comfortably exist within what is generally assumed to be the range of attributes that would inform a patient is female. They generally assume I am AFAB if they are aware through context that I am trans but don't know the 'polarity'.
I do not have a male gender identity.
I have never had a male gender identity.
I am not male.

Why would I say that I am something I am not?

This thread has been quite useful in demonstrating that I was, in fact, quite correct to advise other trans people to avoid dating while stealth if you can't be sure of someone's ideology. It has demonstrated that it just isn't ever worth the risk of assuming.

Since it's now a great deal more culturally acceptable to challenge negative attitudes toward trans people without automatically outing yourself, I will be modifying my advice.

I think the safest option is probably to just outright ask 'do you hold negative or otherwise discriminatory views toward trans people' as any answer that isn't 'no' or a succinct variation thereof - especially 'no, but...' should provide a pretty solid red flag that this is not a safe or desirable relationship for either party.

Thanks all, this has been quite helpful.

Totally.

Not to mention all the teenage boasting about how men and women hit on butters to the point where butters is batting them off, and yet at the same time spends fucking hours justifying the need for illegal stealth sex.

Thoroughly enjoying winding up the wims.

I don't think it's a surprise to anybody that butter spends their life in crushing isolation.

A Phenotype is an expression of genes, not of cosmetic surgery.

Little tip, laminate the first bit of that post, and just had it to anyone you want to date.

who has spent literal years trying desperately to communicate with you on a feminist board

Hilarious. I don't think you've answered a single solitary question of mine where I've tried to gain clarity over what you are even trying to say.

We read your words and that is what we are basing our opinion of you on. They are alarming. Your posts. It's absolutely textbook that you pretend to think we're somehow copy & pasting wrong though.

Reminds me of another person who likes to use 'legally female' as a stick to beat wims with.