Three-day ban on Reddit for “hate”

[ConversingWithStrangers]

The only thing I can think of is posting on a UK sub about male violence. A man said that it’s not just men who have a problem with being violent because he’d been assaulted by a trans woman. I replied, “how did you know your assailant was trans?”.

They literally have subs for men to masturbate to videos of women who have a look of being “dead behind the eyes” they’ve been abused so much.

(It’s either that or somebody doesn’t like my crochet advice).

Pregnancy and potential for pregnancy is extremely relevant to law and policy in general.

For example, pregnancy rights at work directly impact a person with the potential to get pregnant. Pregnancy itself can cause lost earnings, severe health complications, and the inability to carry out certain tasks. On top of this, some employers still try and discriminate against female-bodied people because they think they may become pregnant.

If you have the body type that is designed (all things working as intended) to carry a child, you are going to be impacted by whether or not you may legally end the pregnancy if it is inconvenient or poses a health risk.

If you have the body type that is designed (all things working as intended) to carry a child, penetration by the sexual organ of the opposite body type, whether wanted or not and regardless of the psychological sex of the penetrator, has the potential to impregnate you.

Even if a female-bodied person is of an age where pregnancy is unlikely, or if she does not believe her body is capable of pregnancy, this does not guarantee the risk is 0%. The world's youngest mother was 5 years old and the world's oldest mother gave birth at 73. Tubal litigation can fail in rare cases and infertility is not always permanent depending on the cause. Lacking a necessary pregnancy organ is the only 100% guarantee.

Therefore, as all female-bodied people have bodies orchestrated around the same biological function, and said biological function is essential for the continuation of the species, there are clear reasons for categorising them as a discrete group that requires certain legal and social protections. One such protection is the provision of single-sex spaces for vulnerable situations.

These single-sex spaces allow many female-bodied people to participate in society. Female-bodied people, including but not limited to those with sexual trauma and religious modesty requirements, are no longer held back by the "urinary leash".

to justify covering women/ girls from head to toe and never allowing them to leave the house

Why are you using the phrase "women / girls" in the transphobic, exclusionary meaning of the word? After all, "women / girls" can refer to people with male bodies and female psychological sex, and these people are not forced to cover up and stay indoors.

Don’t be so stupid. Males are responsible for the overwhelming majority of sexual assault, and most of it is on women.
You just seem to want to be wilfully blind about this as an obvious reason we have sex segregation. It’s not because of the fucking Taliban, it’s for women’s safety, privacy and dignity in vulnerable situations. It’s how most women prefer it.

I have never seen anyone on these boards advocating for generalised "sex segregation" in society. Only for single-sex provision in certain quite specific situations where women (old meaning) are vulnerable and/or are at a physical disadvantage compared with men.

Let's start with the obvious one. Anyone who argues that putting fully functional males in women's prisons is somehow going to turn out fine if they identify as women, is at best extremely naive. There are less charitable interpretations, but I won't go there.

i mean this is indeed very much how the taliban justify it.

Im guessing you think they must provide a very safe social arrangement for women/ girls given all the sex segregation preventing violence and stopping males getting females pregnant and all?

(Quite what this has to do with trans people of course is anyone’s guess but somehow excluding trans people from any sort of recognition , dignity or safety has to be in there too I suppose)

Come off it, all you do is waste time.

I have never seen anyone on these boards advocating for generalised "sex segregation" in society. Only for single-sex provision in certain quite specific situations

Right. So sex assignment really has very little relevance compared to gender in the vast majority of social circumstances . There are only a very select few areas where it is significant- (the biggest one being healthcare)
so what is all this stuff about how “gender ideology is causing society to collapse and destroying the meaning of all words?”
And , for example, what was all the handwringing on mumsnet the other day about how trans people can change the f or m marker on their passport ? What‘s that that got to do with society collapsing because of who might get who pregnant? 😂

The tailban have now prevented women talking to each other.
Reddit obviously admires the principle.

Respecting the privacy and dignity of women and girls when in a state of undress is not “prudery”.

The “proportionate manner” to safeguard women and girls privacy, dignity and safety when in a state of undress is, indeed, easily achievable: single-sex, female-only, male-free spaces.

The meaning of words like "woman", and the nature of markers on passports, matter when they lead to inappropriate classification of individuals in those situations where sex (rather than gender) matters.

There are zero situations in which "gender" is relevant. Literally, none.

Hey, I 100% agree with you that we should not need to segregate by sex, nor should women need additional rights and opportunities that men do not get.

Women and girls (original sex based meaning) should not be at any more risk of sexual assault by men (original sex based meaning) than they are by other women.

Men should not find non-sexual female nudity or women simply using toilets titilating, nor take or share intimate images of women without their consent.

Women should not be being killed by their intimate male partners or male family members disproportionately more than men are killed by the women in their lives.

Mothers should not find their lifetime career and earning potential is more affected by having children than fathers, nor find if the realtionship breaks down they bear a disproportionate amount of the time or money burden for the children.

Women should not be considered less serious employees because they might at some stage get pregnant,

Women should not be assumed to be better suited to caring and support roles than leading and technical roles simply because their bodies can bear children.

Introducing a women into a group of men should not be seen as introducing a sexual element.

Women at work or in social groups should not have to face unconscious bias about their lack of competance simply because our society's default idea of competance is male.

Male partners in a relationship should shoulder an equal part of the domestic load including time out from work to care.

Character traits and talent considered valuable in a man should be equally valuable in a women.

All these things should not be happening.

The problem is that today, they are happening. And because they are happening, women's lives carry physical and emotional dangers that men do not, and women's opportunities and autonomy are limited in ways that men's are not.

So alongside working towards better respect and understanding between men and women so that these protectuions are no longer needed by future women, here and now we need to keep them going so that the women who are alive today and do still need them have the protections and opportunities they need to live the best lives they can despite the sexist injustices they have to face .

Yes but Most of these things are about gender.

Well that’s just more delulu isn’t it? ( Like the belief that all lesbians are gender critical).

Our whole society is organised around gender identity- from clothes, to passports, to awards/ titles, people’s names, children’s toys, social events, bathrooms. People are obsessed with gender- it permeates all aspects of social life from the moment of conception . And yet as a pp said- the situations where sex segregation by assignment at birth is actually a serious concern are very few and specific..

……so what is all this stuff about how “gender ideology is causing society to collapse and destroying the meaning of all words?”

Said with a straight face while redefining the word lesbian

again, what is your basis that sex as registered at birth is the “appropriate classification”, rather than subconscious sex - gender/ sex as understood / apprehended by the individual concerned?
when gender is so much more relevant than sex assignment in the overwhelming majority of social situations (except for specific discrete things like eg healthcare). There is no obvious reason for this belief, it’s simply seeped in assumptions that derive directly from your own experience as a non-trans person.

Again, it was other posters on this thread who said they were happy to explain to millions of lesbians that they weren’t lesbians: Im certainly not in the business of redefining or telling anyone else about their sexuality.

No, they are about sex. No one is checking whether the female person they are assaulting or making sexist assumptions about actually identifies as a women before they do it! And no one is double checking whether any male people in the area are actually trans women who are missing out on their fair share of the sexist crap dealt on women.

Now, if by "gender" you meant "the constructions and behaviours laid on top of sex within a society" then I would very much agree, but that is the gender critical understanding of gender whereby gender is seen as something imposed upon us because of our sex which is false and limiting and should be challenged, not the genderist understanding of gender which sees it as something true and valid which should be embraced, with the only options being whether one is happy under the gender constructs of the sex in which one was born, or transitions to live under the gender contructs of the opposite sex.

The appropriate classification is the one that safeguards the privacy and dignity of women and girls when in a state of undress by affording them single-sex female-only male-free spaces,

Awarding males who want access to women and girls in a state of undress special access to opposite sex spaces on the basis of those males’ claims about their “subconscious apprehension of their sex” is not the appropriate classification because it makes those shared spaces mixed-sex, not single-sex.

If you want to be a slave to pink and blue stereotypes, then you knock yourself out. It's not remotely progressive though.

Passports are supposed to contain factual information. Gender identity (which is something most people don't even have, by the way) couldn't be less relevant and it's insane that some people are allowed to falsify the sex marker on their passport.

Awards for women exist because in a patriarchal society it is much harder for women to be recognised for their achievements. This is because of our sex, not our gender. Letting men pretend to be women and then take our awards just adds insult to injury.

Children's toys are children's toys. How about we just let them play and stop telling boys who like dolls that they're really girls, FFS?

Toilets are sex segregated for reasons of safety and dignity. We know they're segregated by sex and not the nonsensical concept of gender identity because the men's have urinals on the walls and the women's have sanitary bins.

Do you ever stop and read what you've just written and think, "Hmm, that actually sounds like the opposite of feminism"?

… Preventing violence, protecting female “dignity” and “privacy” (we’ve heard those words a lot on this thread too) - some might say honour perhaps? , and safeguarding females against any unanticipated impregnations…

Yes thank god for all that sex segregation, it sounds very safe/ protective for women/
girls, and not at all heteronormative…

There's no such thing as "subconscious sex".

Sex is determined by reference to objective criteria, which is why you lot want to replace it with the entirely pointless and nebulous concept of "gender", which you can't even define.

There are no benefits to this for women.

Gender identity (which is something most people don't even have, by the way)

🤦🏼‍♀️

There's no such thing as "subconscious sex".

🤦🏼‍♀️.
im guessing you haven’t read the thread.
theres really no point debating policy in this area if you don’t even know what being trans is.

Not wanting to cut your sex organs off isn't an identity.

Wrong.

What is it you imagine you have said that would change everything if I only took the time to read it?