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.

Rape advocate (at best) claiming moral high ground was not on the list of things I thought I'd encounter today. Especially on FWR.

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.

I think the legal option is to ensure that anyone you enter into a sexual relationship with knows your sex.

And I note I never got my yes or no.

I'm still waiting for a definition of 'transwoman'.

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

Yeah, not because of respect or boundaries or pregnancy or anything. But because the person might have an ideology.

Is not wanting to have sex with a trans person who isn’t of the sex you are attracted to holding “negative or otherwise discriminatory views toward trans people”?

The other point I've been resisting making (and someone may have beaten me to it by now - in any case, it's been implicit in 90% of posts, but to spell it out) is...

Sexual attraction is a biological imperative. It's evolutionary. It's driven by the desire to reproduce.

It's an innate, programmed attraction to the opposite sex.

Yes, it manifests in different ways. And absolutely, there are gay, lesbian and bi-people.

But this doesn't invalidate my key point, which is its ultimate "raison d'etre": without the biological imperative, it doesn't exist. We wouldn't experience it. There'd be no such thing.

This is what you're talking about withholding information on: the very essence of the thing itself, by stark, inescapable definition.

Withholding information on that is a universe away from withholding information on personal prejudices (as you'd describe it), however awful these may or may not be, about particular demographics.

To take the worst-case hypothetical scenario imaginable, I've no doubt that every single poster on this thread would be appalled to discover they'd inadvertently slept with the proverbial Nazi (as so often invoked in this debate - good ol' Godwin's Law!) But would it be a violation of their physical integrity?

No.

It would not.

I read the Butterfly's first post justifying sex by deception and thought 'no, I must have read that wrong, they can't possibly have meant that'. I wondered if it was some kind of thought experiment. I watched the thread for a while, assuming I had misunderstood but it slowly dawned on me that, no, I hadn't.

How, HOW, have we come to a point in society where sex by deception is suggested as being a good thing.

Queer theory.

Don't know why you've directed this at me. I've never been the slightest bit interested in what you claim to look like. (I'm more interested as to why you think appearance, or body type, is related to whether you are a man or woman, but you never elaborate on that).

"If a person holds negative views toward a minority group with a protected characteristic "

What, like homosexuality!

Could that sentence BE more bigoted??

you've already done yourself proud this time, butters. You normally do towards the end of a stint, to be fair.

“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.”

This again reads as if you are stating that it is ok to not tell someone that a person feels will ‘accept’ the deception?

Do you understand anything that we have been saying?

It is NEVER ok to be advising ANYONE (or doing this yourself) to not disclose your sex to the person you are about to have sex with. It isn’t to do with ‘being trans’, it is to do with the other person rightfully needing to give full consent based on the sex category of the person they are about to have sex with.

It's not. It's illegal.

Very, very few people will openly state they aim to repeal consent laws.

Even fewer will try to claim s 'sex by deception' as some kind of moral high ground.

And even fewer yet will suggest that people who have a sexual attraction to one sex or the other, who wish to know what sex a sexual partner is, are 'bigots'.

And what ever happened to people assuring us that no person who identifies as transgender is denying their sex category?

Men (edited to NAMALT, obvs)

Boat, sailed, whoosh, longtime.

Maybe because deception - pretence, fakery, fantasy, appropriation of others is the bedrock belief of those who claim to be the opposite sex? And if you silence those who challenge this, calling them bigots and nazis, that removes the power of peer influence, the social contract, decency and good human values that helps keep society respectful and safe?

For what it's worth, for anyone who is deeply upset, I personally don't think butters has any influence over children or young people in any 'mentoring' capacity.

The last thing I wanted to say was that I'm sorry for the challenges you face, @ButterflyHatched, and especially your own experiences of assault. Taking the related posts at face value, I can't begin to imagine how it must feel to go through this. I actually can empathise with your need to frame denial of your legal sex in the context of physical relationships as a form of bigotry. (I'm also aware that, in many contexts, awful, genuine bigotry exists).

But I can't empathise with acting on this need, or arguing for it so vocally as a fundamental right that should be granted at the expense of others.

But to condemn people who are simply sharing their own sexuality and their needs as bigots is simply to impose your own perceptions on them, seeking to paint over something deep and fundamental to their very being as superficial prejudice. Even if you disagree with this, and think human sexuality can be reduced to outward physical appearance and documentation, you must surely, again, at the very least, see that there's a real ethical conundrum here, as opposed to a simple case of right versus wrong, and hatred?

No. Many of us asked for clarification. It eventually came after abusive, emotionally manipulative and sparpling posts.

But apparently, we are twisting words and misunderstanding.

Misunderstanding a poster who deliberately obfuscates their answers and has actually lied several times now about what they posted. But apparently, it is all our fault.

The DARVO is very clear.

Ah, are you thinking more Mermaids than someone actually credentialled in counselling/youth work etc. and certified to professional standards with (say) a governing body?

However, my recommendation upthread still stands.

Whatever difficulties or stresses or traumas Butterfly has experienced, they don't include the risk of becoming pregnant. Transmen have to keep that possibility in mind at all times. Because they have female bodies.

Male attitudes are shaped by a fundamental sense of sex being consequence free, for them.

I don't think it's anything. I think it's said to wind us up.

Slightly messy post above, it cut me off while editing as it was so difficult to express. Second attempt, with italics clarifying my meaning.

The last thing I wanted to say was that I'm sorry for the challenges you face, and especially your own experiences of assault. Taking the related posts at face value, I can't begin to imagine how it must feel to go through this. I actually can empathise with your need to frame denial of your legal sex in the context of physical relationships as a form of bigotry - I suspect this is (again while giving the benefit of the doubt in a multitude of ways) a protective mechanism of sorts. But while I can imagine why someone may feel that way, I can't begin to empathise with acting on this need, or even arguing for it as a fundamental right that should be granted at the expense of others.

Because to actually condemn people who are simply sharing their own sexuality and their needs as bigots is simply to impose your own perceptions on them, seeking to paint over something deep and fundamental to their very being as superficial prejudice. Even if you disagree with this, and think human sexuality can be reduced to outward physical appearance and documentation, you must surely, again, at the very least, see that there's a real ethical conundrum here, as opposed to a simple case of right versus wrong, and hatred?

Yes it should stand, and thank you for writing it.