Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Trans remembrance flags and SNP renews support for LGBTYS

443 replies

WandsOut · 26/12/2024 22:57

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14226129/Trans-remembrance-flags-flown-public-buildings.html

What is going on here.
Why are they so determined to support LGBTYS and trans young people - who is driving this?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
15
AstonScrapingsNameChange · 07/01/2025 12:31

Edit: Oops posted on wrong thread. Going to leave it here though as its relevant to the discussion.

Lest we forget, this is what the TRAs* are up to:
www.terfisaslur.com

*not all trans people. Obviously!

If you can find an equivalent website documenting all the violence and threats perpetrated by GC women, please do share it.

TERF is a slur

Documenting the abuse, harassment and misogyny of transgender identity politics

http://www.terfisaslur.com

sadmillenial · 07/01/2025 12:35

Waitwhat23 · 07/01/2025 11:59

Ah, this comes up depressingly regularly - women being blamed for the 'toxic' argument.

It's age old. Women apparently -

  • Were right but didn't say it nicely enough.
  • Women should 'be kind' and step to one side.
  • Mild disagreement is obviously the same as rape and death threats. Obs.

It boils down to - 'Women! Know your place! Follow your socialisation or you deserve everything you get!'

Depressing.

i dont think ive said this at all! or even inferred it

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 07/01/2025 12:42

sadmillenial · 07/01/2025 12:35

i dont think ive said this at all! or even inferred it

You may not have inferred it, you have certainly implied it.

You have repeatedly suggested that everyone who disagrees with you should be nicer.

ArabellaScott · 07/01/2025 12:47

I was nice, once.

It was a Thursday.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 07/01/2025 12:48

Great discussion. Adding some additional information - even safeguarding children is being deemed bigotry if there's any suggestion that single sex spaces should be allowed.
Instead Lord Cashman and others continue with their campaign to decriminalise the crimes of indecent exposure and voyeurism by wedging men & boys into spaces where women and girls undress.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4954762-pushing-back-against-safeguarding

Pushing back against safeguarding | Mumsnet

Saying the quiet part out loud…. Michael Cashman has announced he is incensed by the right wing wanting safeguarding in schools and wants to push bac...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4954762-pushing-back-against-safeguarding

Datun · 07/01/2025 12:50

sadmillenial · 07/01/2025 11:22

yes, i understand this frustration and i promise i'm not trying to diminish it, i also get irate when im told im either transphobic or a traitor to my sex (ive been told both, often within the same conversation)

I don't judge arguments by the extremes, i dont measure trans people by the extreme TRA arguments and i dont believe most women's right activists seek to be transphobic either.

from my experience the vast majority of both groups are looking to find a solution that works? the loudest voices arent always speaking for the majority

I don't understand what you mean when you say you don't judge arguments by the extremes. Women not being allowed to take their clothes off without the possibility of a man being present is bloody extreme. Sending male criminals into women's prisons is extreme.

Men saying some words out loud and being able to compete as women in sport is bonkers - and extreme.

You could go further. La Leche League claiming that breastfeeding support groups have to include men who want to take drugs in order to breastfeed.

If you can't see that these things are extreme, try and take your eyes off the men involved. Try and focus on the women, instead. A distraught new mother who wants feeding advice because her baby won't latch on is being told by the most famous, international breastfeeding organisation in the world that she will only be accepted if she realisesshe might have to do it in the presence of a lactation fetishist.

This is a parenting website. Many of the women here have been petrified for their children, coming home from school and declaring that if they want to when they get a bit older they can take tablets to be the opposite sex. That they have to call the new male teacher miss or they will be sanctioned.

Dozens of women here have children who think they're the opposite sex, because they've been taught it in school.

This isn't two sides of an argument. This is the wholesale removal of women's and children's rights. It doesn't get more extreme.

And still keeping your eye on the women, rather than the men, let's get back to toilets.

You have to remember that it's not the toilets that are important. They are just four walls and a ceiling. It's the women and girls in the toilets. They are the resource. It is they who are being used. As a tool to validate men's self image.

If all the women got up and left the space, the space would no longer be appealing. The next space where the women congregated would suddenly become the focus.

It is their presence that is crucial.

Why should women, any individual woman, any girl, or women as a class, be disadvantaged, sometimes in the most extreme way possible, in order to validate the self image of men, sometimes just one individual man.

It's like some people don't see women as really human. They are just a support class, in the service of men.

We're not.

Not wanting to share changing rooms, or female only spaces with a man should be enough.

'No' isn't just not enough, it's considered utterly wrong.

Seriously, sadmillenial, try and focus on the women just for a minute and you will instantly stop seeing this as a both sides argument.

If you still can't see it, just ask yourself one question

What are women getting out of this?

sadmillenial · 07/01/2025 12:51

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 07/01/2025 12:42

You may not have inferred it, you have certainly implied it.

You have repeatedly suggested that everyone who disagrees with you should be nicer.

i dont think i have? i think i've called for a more productive dialogue and to look to move forward? i've put forward arguments that some disagree with, but i haven't called for " niceness" or passivity from anyone??
i'm not nice! lol. Its not a quality i admire or think is useful

Brefugee · 07/01/2025 12:56

ArabellaScott · 07/01/2025 12:47

I was nice, once.

It was a Thursday.

i never could quite get the hang of Thursdays.

@sadmillenial You should maybe go away for a while and have a think about what you are saying and who you are saying it to. This is not our first rodeo with the "but won't you beeee kiiiiind" and "how about talking to each other"

As if: a) we had never thought of that and b) you are the very first person to say it to us.

So as we said, go to the subreddits where the more toxic TRAs hang out and say it to them please. Most of us are banned so we can't.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/01/2025 13:04

i dont think i have? i think i've called for a more productive dialogue

Go and call for it to trans rights activists then.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/01/2025 13:05

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/01/2025 11:54

from my experience the vast majority of both groups are looking to find a solution that works?

Where are the reasonable people on the other side, who accept there is a conflict of rights and that what women feel matters too? Can you link to an online board where they are discussing it? Shouldn't be too tricky to find if what you say is true.

Also I'm still hoping for this link @sadmillenial

AstonScrapingsNameChange · 07/01/2025 13:09

sadmillenial · 07/01/2025 12:51

i dont think i have? i think i've called for a more productive dialogue and to look to move forward? i've put forward arguments that some disagree with, but i haven't called for " niceness" or passivity from anyone??
i'm not nice! lol. Its not a quality i admire or think is useful

But we ARE looking to move forward.

What do you suggest we do, aside from roll over and give up, that might result in what you call 'a more productive dialogue'?

You seem to be suggesting that by examining and discussing the issue we are somehow preventing the much needed progress on this issue.

You are suggesting that the very existence of women's boundaries is somehow unreasonable.

And you are apparently ignoring all of the excellent points being made.

It'infuriating, and is what suggests that you're Implying we should be nicer. You might say you haven't saud precisely that but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

What did you think of the link I posted above? Can you point us to a GC equivalent? Have you looked at the book I linked to yet? Have you any thoughts on that?

Datun · 07/01/2025 19:31

I'm going to take it that sadmillennial's lack of engagement means that she/he has gone away thinking.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 07/01/2025 19:33

Perhaps she's busy interacting with Redditors.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 07/01/2025 20:12

Datun · 07/01/2025 12:50

I don't understand what you mean when you say you don't judge arguments by the extremes. Women not being allowed to take their clothes off without the possibility of a man being present is bloody extreme. Sending male criminals into women's prisons is extreme.

Men saying some words out loud and being able to compete as women in sport is bonkers - and extreme.

You could go further. La Leche League claiming that breastfeeding support groups have to include men who want to take drugs in order to breastfeed.

If you can't see that these things are extreme, try and take your eyes off the men involved. Try and focus on the women, instead. A distraught new mother who wants feeding advice because her baby won't latch on is being told by the most famous, international breastfeeding organisation in the world that she will only be accepted if she realisesshe might have to do it in the presence of a lactation fetishist.

This is a parenting website. Many of the women here have been petrified for their children, coming home from school and declaring that if they want to when they get a bit older they can take tablets to be the opposite sex. That they have to call the new male teacher miss or they will be sanctioned.

Dozens of women here have children who think they're the opposite sex, because they've been taught it in school.

This isn't two sides of an argument. This is the wholesale removal of women's and children's rights. It doesn't get more extreme.

And still keeping your eye on the women, rather than the men, let's get back to toilets.

You have to remember that it's not the toilets that are important. They are just four walls and a ceiling. It's the women and girls in the toilets. They are the resource. It is they who are being used. As a tool to validate men's self image.

If all the women got up and left the space, the space would no longer be appealing. The next space where the women congregated would suddenly become the focus.

It is their presence that is crucial.

Why should women, any individual woman, any girl, or women as a class, be disadvantaged, sometimes in the most extreme way possible, in order to validate the self image of men, sometimes just one individual man.

It's like some people don't see women as really human. They are just a support class, in the service of men.

We're not.

Not wanting to share changing rooms, or female only spaces with a man should be enough.

'No' isn't just not enough, it's considered utterly wrong.

Seriously, sadmillenial, try and focus on the women just for a minute and you will instantly stop seeing this as a both sides argument.

If you still can't see it, just ask yourself one question

What are women getting out of this?

Edited

Absolutely barnstorming post.

How do women - the real kind - benefit?

Answer: they don't.

Take any aspect of gender ideology whatsoever and you will find that, whatever anyone is calling themselves, the impact is beneficial to the ones who were born with penises and detrimental to the ones who were born with vaginas.

When parliament was debating the Gender Recognition Act, they identified precisely one scenario in which a female person might benefit at the expense of a male person. An incredibly niche scenario. They anticipated that a male aristocrat might want to change his legal sex without forfeiting his right to inherit the title and the landed estate, or even that the devious older sister of a male aristocrat might change her legal sex in order to steal her brother's inheritance. And they legislated against it to make sure that it couldn't happen.

Did they put in place any other exceptions to the rule, to protect women? Like, for example, to stop convicted rapists from being sent to women's prisons?

Did they fuck.

Tells you absolutely everything you need to know about this ideology and who benefits.

It's the patriarchy on steroids.

Datun · 07/01/2025 21:03

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 07/01/2025 20:12

Absolutely barnstorming post.

How do women - the real kind - benefit?

Answer: they don't.

Take any aspect of gender ideology whatsoever and you will find that, whatever anyone is calling themselves, the impact is beneficial to the ones who were born with penises and detrimental to the ones who were born with vaginas.

When parliament was debating the Gender Recognition Act, they identified precisely one scenario in which a female person might benefit at the expense of a male person. An incredibly niche scenario. They anticipated that a male aristocrat might want to change his legal sex without forfeiting his right to inherit the title and the landed estate, or even that the devious older sister of a male aristocrat might change her legal sex in order to steal her brother's inheritance. And they legislated against it to make sure that it couldn't happen.

Did they put in place any other exceptions to the rule, to protect women? Like, for example, to stop convicted rapists from being sent to women's prisons?

Did they fuck.

Tells you absolutely everything you need to know about this ideology and who benefits.

It's the patriarchy on steroids.

It's Unbelievable isn't it. The one way women might have got a leg up, and they stamped it out before it started.

Plus if they Really believed in trans as a phenomenon, they wouldn't have cared about that as it would be so rare. They were just making sure no woman could take advantage of a man.

FrippEnos · 08/01/2025 08:13

Was there ever an answer to what rights trans people don't have?

Ereshkigalangcleg · 08/01/2025 08:58

Did they put in place any other exceptions to the rule, to protect women? Like, for example, to stop convicted rapists from being sent to women's prisons?

And we could see this all in bright sunlight when they have considered and in some cases passed legal changes in Scotland in recent years. They had the opportunity to create a self id exception for men who had been convicted of sexual violence against women and girls. They didn't want to do this though.

GailBlancheViola · 08/01/2025 10:05

Did they put in place any other exceptions to the rule, to protect women? Like, for example, to stop convicted rapists from being sent to women's prisons?

I seem to recall this issue was raised as was the calling of rapists 'she' in Court proceedings and it was made clear that of course it would be the case that rapists would go to women's prisons and be referred to as she in Court.

Labour cannot say that they didn't expect this to happen and try to blame anyone else for it they knew it would, they supported it, it was part of the legislation they enacted.

INeedAPensieve · 08/01/2025 10:11

Ereshkigalangcleg · 08/01/2025 08:58

Did they put in place any other exceptions to the rule, to protect women? Like, for example, to stop convicted rapists from being sent to women's prisons?

And we could see this all in bright sunlight when they have considered and in some cases passed legal changes in Scotland in recent years. They had the opportunity to create a self id exception for men who had been convicted of sexual violence against women and girls. They didn't want to do this though.

This is what enrages me the most. Why oh the fuck why would you not make an exception when it comes to sexual abusers, rapists and murderers? Beggars belief.

Argh....

SkiingonKaraSea · 08/01/2025 10:17

INeedAPensieve · 08/01/2025 10:11

This is what enrages me the most. Why oh the fuck why would you not make an exception when it comes to sexual abusers, rapists and murderers? Beggars belief.

Argh....

Because exceptions undermine the whole ideology by recognising it for the luxury belief it is.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 08/01/2025 10:28

Exactly what @SkiingonKaraSea said.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 08/01/2025 10:28

No divergence from the message can be allowed. Trans women are women.

TWETMIRF · 08/01/2025 10:29

Saying that transwomen who commit sexual offences should be treated as men tells the world that everyone knows that transwomen are men and they are just pretending otherwise for the nice ones

SkiingonKaraSea · 08/01/2025 10:30

Ereshkigalangcleg · 08/01/2025 10:28

No divergence from the message can be allowed. Trans women are women.

Unless it means they don’t inherit a peerage.

Ereshkigalangcleg · 08/01/2025 10:53

Well, dur. The laws are meant for their benefit, no, because they're such an oppressed group, even when they are part of the nobility.

Swipe left for the next trending thread