Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth

1000 replies

IwantToRetire · 21/01/2025 18:51

Purpose.

Ideologues who deny the biological reality of sex have increasingly used legal and other socially coercive means to permit men to self-identify as women and gain access to intimate single-sex spaces and activities designed for women, from women’s domestic abuse shelters to women’s workplace showers. This is wrong. Efforts to eradicate the biological reality of sex fundamentally attack women by depriving them of their dignity, safety, and well-being. The erasure of sex in language and policy has a corrosive impact not just on women but on the validity of the entire American system. Basing Federal policy on truth is critical to scientific inquiry, public safety, morale, and trust in government itself.

This unhealthy road is paved by an ongoing and purposeful attack against the ordinary and longstanding use and understanding of biological and scientific terms, replacing the immutable biological reality of sex with an internal, fluid, and subjective sense of self unmoored from biological facts. Invalidating the true and biological category of “woman” improperly transforms laws and policies designed to protect sex-based opportunities into laws and policies that undermine them, replacing longstanding, cherished legal rights and values with an identity-based, inchoate social concept.

This will defend women’s rights and protect freedom of conscience by using clear and accurate language and policies that recognize women are biologically female, and men are biologically male.

Policy and Definitions.

The policy is to recognize two sexes, male and female. These sexes are not changeable and are grounded in fundamental and incontrovertible reality:

(a) “Sex” shall refer to an individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female. “Sex” is not a synonym for and does not include the concept of “gender identity.”

(b) “Women” or “woman” and “girls” or “girl” shall mean adult and juvenile human females, respectively.

(c) “Men” or “man” and “boys” or “boy” shall mean adult and juvenile human males, respectively.

(d) “Female” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the large reproductive cell.

(e) “Male” means a person belonging, at conception, to the sex that produces the small reproductive cell.

(f) “Gender ideology” replaces the biological category of sex with an ever-shifting concept of self-assessed gender identity, permitting the false claim that males can identify as and thus become women and vice versa, and requiring all institutions of society to regard this false claim as true. Gender ideology includes the idea that there is a vast spectrum of genders that are disconnected from one’s sex. Gender ideology is internally inconsistent, in that it diminishes sex as an identifiable or useful category but nevertheless maintains that it is possible for a person to be born in the wrong sexed body.

(g) “Gender identity” reflects a fully internal and subjective sense of self, disconnected from biological reality and sex and existing on an infinite continuum, that does not provide a meaningful basis for identification and cannot be recognized as a replacement for sex.

Recognizing Women Are Biologically Distinct From Men.

Full statement text at https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/

Every news outlet is reporting this as anti trans legisliaton.

Not one has reported it is about women's rights.

That's why I started this thread, although there are others as hoping the search engines will pick it up.

Seems that women's rights are so unimportant to anyone, that even when there is a political statement about them, the media reports it is about something else.

Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism And Restoring Biological Truth To The Federal Government – The White House

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 7301 of title 5, United

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/defending-women-from-gender-ideology-extremism-and-restoring-biological-truth-to-the-federal-government/

OP posts:
Thread gallery
14
Runor · 27/01/2025 09:03

“You cannot know because you’re not trans” alongside “ I, as male, understand my ‘cognitive sex’ to be female” - How? Against what reference point?

lifeturnsonadime · 27/01/2025 09:05

@Lostcat

I really want to engage further with you on this.
You answered my first question on whether people who cross dress for kink should be included in the legal definition of 'trans' for the purpose of establishing the right of a group of males to enter single sex spaces for women and you said no to that.

There were a couple of questions that you didn't answer that I would find helpful please?

They were:

  1. Given that you don't think that cross dressing men should be included how do we, in a practical way, write laws to exclude those men from women's sex based spaces? and
  2. Why should the wishes of any group of people who are physically males (even the ones that come within the definition of being 'cognitive female') usurp the needs of women who are physically female in the back drop of the fact that spaces are designed to protect women on the basis of physical differences between the sexes rather than cognitive reasons? And furthermore against the backdrop that we can see that women are being harmed as a result of allowing 'cognitively female' male people (and all other males on the basis of the difficulty of policing) into those spaces.

Even with the cognitive female argument I am struggling to see why laws should be changed given on the impact on women based on the differences between our sexed bodies, which was the entire reason for the sex segregation in the first place. Fairness for all would be to have spaces for men and women based on our sexed bodies and a third space for other people who don't fit into those categories.

Helleofabore · 27/01/2025 09:13

There have been a few posts over the past on different threads that seem to be attempting to implore people to seek to find a description that ‘works’ in making something impossible, not only plausible, but possible. Or over different threads the terminology changes as if finding just the combination that people start agreeing with, but the concept described is still the same and it is an incoherent concept upon evaluation. It is as if finding the right combination of words miraculously make a person’s posts even remotely credible.

It may be because ‘we haven’t yet discovered ‘x’ ‘ where x = the potential biological aspects underlying someone being ‘trans’ (which is an umbrella term for a group of identities that includes 130+ genders including being gender fluid and changing gender at anytime - some people change gender hourly or more often) or the very edges of the variations of human medical conditions that allow posters to state ‘sex is complicated and/or binary’. The explanations usually involve some appeal to future discoveries to stave off criticism about massive flaws in logic and evidence.

Or finding the words (or excluding segments of the community even) that don’t throw a massive beacon on those logical flaws and fallacies that are foundational to the transgender identities and the theories they are supported by.

However, there is no combination of words, descriptions or supposed nuances that accurately and coherently define or describe a ‘gender identity’. Except that it is a philosophical belief a person has about themselves that has a high likelihood of not reflecting material reality.

And there are several questions that have not been explained at all, or even attempted to be answered.
What other philosophical belief is prioritised in law that is higher in the hierarchy than the sex category of a human body in matters where sex does matter?

Does any other philosophical belief get the additional privileges (often mistakenly described as ‘rights’) that this belief gets?

And if the answer to that last question is no, why does this belief get these additional privileges ?

Helleofabore · 27/01/2025 09:17

Runor · 27/01/2025 09:03

“You cannot know because you’re not trans” alongside “ I, as male, understand my ‘cognitive sex’ to be female” - How? Against what reference point?

Yep!

And then there is the entire issue that in the description of this, the person with that cognitive / subconscious sex has then used their full awareness to categorise this feeling - thereby rendering the cognitive sex / subconscious sex referenced on the conscious interpretations to verbally describe it.

FlowchartRequired · 27/01/2025 09:26

NecessaryScene · 27/01/2025 07:05

All this "cognitive sex" stuff is just pseudoscience. It's completely made up, there is nothing to support it.

And recognising that makes it easier to explain. Rebecca Reilly-Cooper did this in a lecture many years ago - "Critically Examining the doctrine of gender identity".

Gender identity exists to justify the policies that transsexuals and others want. To get those policies it needs to have certain characteristics, and hence those are what it has been given.

Despite it those characteristics not making any internal logical sense in the theory, being assigned those characteristics makes perfect sense from an "evolutionary policy-making" view.

Snipped some slides from the video badly - let's see if they come out.

Very strong recommendation to watch the whole thing if you haven't - helped me get my head around what people like lostcat were trying and failing to explain many years ago, and I don't recall seeing anything better since.

Edited

I had forgotten that the cartoons uised in that presentation were from the 'Assigned male' series by Sophie Labelle Verville. If anyone has forgotten, this is the transwoman who got in trouble for using photos of real toddlers to create furry nappy drawings (that is young animal characters in nappies rather than nappies made of fur) that many deemed dodgy.

AlisonDonut · 27/01/2025 09:28

How would 'automatic cognitive sex' work for those people who have dementia and who relive the horror of having the wrong or no genitals every day, or sometimes hundreds of times a day? Would the nurse just say 'Oh, 20 years ago that was your 'automatic cognitive sex' Dave, shall I make you a cup of tea?

And yet if we say 'this ideology is sick to its core' we are the ones who would get a suspension or ban.

FlowchartRequired · 27/01/2025 09:34

To get back to reality:

Sex is defined by gametes.
If you are of the sex class that produces large gametes, you are female.
If you are of the sex class that produces small gametes, you are male.
No mammal (this is important as Human Beings are mammals) can change sex.
To be a woman, you need to be female and live long enough to grow to adulthood.
To be a man. you need to be born male and live long enough to grow to adulthood.

Surgery and cross-sex hormones do not change your sex.
Having special feelings of being the other sex does not change your sex.
Being infertile does not make you not of your sex or a third sex.

iamallofme · 27/01/2025 09:53

Perfect28 · 22/01/2025 20:49

Do you really want to be on the same side as trump? When all is said and done?

He is literally a sexual predator.

Do you want to be on the same side as those who send death and rape treats to women who say no?

Or, the side of women who are saying women are not non-men?

I'm sticking with the women.

PS: Trump is an idiot and only doing it to annoy the Democrats. He doesn't care about women.

Lostcat · 27/01/2025 10:01

lifeturnsonadime · 27/01/2025 09:05

@Lostcat

I really want to engage further with you on this.
You answered my first question on whether people who cross dress for kink should be included in the legal definition of 'trans' for the purpose of establishing the right of a group of males to enter single sex spaces for women and you said no to that.

There were a couple of questions that you didn't answer that I would find helpful please?

They were:

  1. Given that you don't think that cross dressing men should be included how do we, in a practical way, write laws to exclude those men from women's sex based spaces? and
  2. Why should the wishes of any group of people who are physically males (even the ones that come within the definition of being 'cognitive female') usurp the needs of women who are physically female in the back drop of the fact that spaces are designed to protect women on the basis of physical differences between the sexes rather than cognitive reasons? And furthermore against the backdrop that we can see that women are being harmed as a result of allowing 'cognitively female' male people (and all other males on the basis of the difficulty of policing) into those spaces.

Even with the cognitive female argument I am struggling to see why laws should be changed given on the impact on women based on the differences between our sexed bodies, which was the entire reason for the sex segregation in the first place. Fairness for all would be to have spaces for men and women based on our sexed bodies and a third space for other people who don't fit into those categories.

Hey, I can't spend all day on mumsnet again 😅but I just wanted to try and offer some kind of response here.

I am not an expert in the policy of sex segregation and I don't have fixed or definite opinions on this. And I think it's complex.

The answers in each case would surely depend on the space, what the needs of service users are and evaluation of various risks are etc.. These would be different in every context.

As I stated earlier, the vast majority of sex segregated spaces - toilets/ changing, etc., have always been and always will be based on self ID, whether a person is trans or not. There is no other practical way to manage this. I don't have to prove I am female to enter the female toilet. This will remain the case with or without Trump's EO. We cannot manage access to these spaces through biological tests, legal documents, or subjective judgements about gender presentation/ conformity. All of these measures are impractical and have harmful/ discriminatory consequences.

When it comes to prisons - the situation is entirely different. I am by no means an expert in prison security management, but there are security provisions for isolating prisoners who pose a risk.

Sports is a whole other matter again - and both the ethical and scientific considerations are much more complex than the public discourse cares to recognise.

What I do think is that the discourse on "sex-segregation" (one group of people "trumping" another group of people, etc) is based on a number of really problematic assumptions/ stereotypes/ prejudices. These include:

  • The naturalisation of sexual violence (the idea that sexual violence in rooted in biology - not patriarchy)
  • The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by pretending to be trans and entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!)
  • The total dismissal of trans people's experience - the idea that trans people are fakers/ pretenders. The idea that being trans is an "ideology" "philosophy", "about menz feels", a type of sexual perversion, a deliberate choice made out of a desire to erode women's boundaries etc etc, and all the other awful and flagrantly transphobic things people say on these forums about trans people.

Where I feel able to intervene and usefully contribute to this debate is regarding the last bullet point, as I have expertise in this area. Furthermore, I think this is the first and most fundamental issue to be addressed. We will never be able to organise society fairly and reasonably while people continue to view trans people in this way.

That's why I have (once again) taken the time to try to explain on this thread what being trans is. Being trans is simply something that some people are - another axis of diversity like any other. It has nothing to do with ideology or philosophy; it has nothing to do with gender stereotypes; it has nothing to do with being a pervert; it has nothing to do with "claiming that a person can change sex".

Sex has multiple components - one of these components is cognitive. In the overwhelming majority of cases the different components of sex align, in some minority cases they don't. Just as a person's chromosomes may not align with their sexual phenotype, a person's cognitive sex may not align with their other (observable, physical) sex characteristics This is not "wrong"; it's just different. Therapy to try to change someone's cognitive sex to align with their physical sex characteristics is rarely effective and usually profoundly harmful. Someone's cognitive sex is not something over which a person typically has any control. Cognitive sex typically develops very early in life and is highly resistant to change. It very possibly has a biological underpinning. It can be deeply painful when it is denied/ repressed by self and others. This is why many trans people seek social, legal and medical transition, because doing so is fundamental to their dignity and wellbeing. This is not an attack on (non-trans) women, or a movement to redefine their persons, any more than medical, social, legal interventions for people with DSDs is an attack on women without DSDs, or a movement to re-define their persons.

I hope that makes sense to at least someone - anyone - reading this thread.

Thank you for your respectful engagement @lifeturnsonadime and willingness to consider different points. That is so appreciated.

AlisonDonut · 27/01/2025 10:03

I don't think Trump is an idiot. I think he saw an opportunity and the utter insanity and jumped on it. He seems to be positioning people into jobs that are in their ball park. The lawyer he got to write this wrote something that appears bombproof.

Even a man as vile as him can see an own goal opportunity and let They/Them knock it in the back of the net. And They/Them did.

iamallofme · 27/01/2025 10:04

Lostcat · 27/01/2025 10:01

Hey, I can't spend all day on mumsnet again 😅but I just wanted to try and offer some kind of response here.

I am not an expert in the policy of sex segregation and I don't have fixed or definite opinions on this. And I think it's complex.

The answers in each case would surely depend on the space, what the needs of service users are and evaluation of various risks are etc.. These would be different in every context.

As I stated earlier, the vast majority of sex segregated spaces - toilets/ changing, etc., have always been and always will be based on self ID, whether a person is trans or not. There is no other practical way to manage this. I don't have to prove I am female to enter the female toilet. This will remain the case with or without Trump's EO. We cannot manage access to these spaces through biological tests, legal documents, or subjective judgements about gender presentation/ conformity. All of these measures are impractical and have harmful/ discriminatory consequences.

When it comes to prisons - the situation is entirely different. I am by no means an expert in prison security management, but there are security provisions for isolating prisoners who pose a risk.

Sports is a whole other matter again - and both the ethical and scientific considerations are much more complex than the public discourse cares to recognise.

What I do think is that the discourse on "sex-segregation" (one group of people "trumping" another group of people, etc) is based on a number of really problematic assumptions/ stereotypes/ prejudices. These include:

  • The naturalisation of sexual violence (the idea that sexual violence in rooted in biology - not patriarchy)
  • The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by pretending to be trans and entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!)
  • The total dismissal of trans people's experience - the idea that trans people are fakers/ pretenders. The idea that being trans is an "ideology" "philosophy", "about menz feels", a type of sexual perversion, a deliberate choice made out of a desire to erode women's boundaries etc etc, and all the other awful and flagrantly transphobic things people say on these forums about trans people.

Where I feel able to intervene and usefully contribute to this debate is regarding the last bullet point, as I have expertise in this area. Furthermore, I think this is the first and most fundamental issue to be addressed. We will never be able to organise society fairly and reasonably while people continue to view trans people in this way.

That's why I have (once again) taken the time to try to explain on this thread what being trans is. Being trans is simply something that some people are - another axis of diversity like any other. It has nothing to do with ideology or philosophy; it has nothing to do with gender stereotypes; it has nothing to do with being a pervert; it has nothing to do with "claiming that a person can change sex".

Sex has multiple components - one of these components is cognitive. In the overwhelming majority of cases the different components of sex align, in some minority cases they don't. Just as a person's chromosomes may not align with their sexual phenotype, a person's cognitive sex may not align with their other (observable, physical) sex characteristics This is not "wrong"; it's just different. Therapy to try to change someone's cognitive sex to align with their physical sex characteristics is rarely effective and usually profoundly harmful. Someone's cognitive sex is not something over which a person typically has any control. Cognitive sex typically develops very early in life and is highly resistant to change. It very possibly has a biological underpinning. It can be deeply painful when it is denied/ repressed by self and others. This is why many trans people seek social, legal and medical transition, because doing so is fundamental to their dignity and wellbeing. This is not an attack on (non-trans) women, or a movement to redefine their persons, any more than medical, social, legal interventions for people with DSDs is an attack on women without DSDs, or a movement to re-define their persons.

I hope that makes sense to at least someone - anyone - reading this thread.

Thank you for your respectful engagement @lifeturnsonadime and willingness to consider different points. That is so appreciated.

Edited

Hi... I am looking into being trans. I identify as female. And biologically am female. Can I be trans?

Lostcat · 27/01/2025 10:08

iamallofme · 27/01/2025 10:04

Hi... I am looking into being trans. I identify as female. And biologically am female. Can I be trans?

No. Because in that case your cognitive sex aligns with your other physical, biological sex characteristics (as observed at birth). So you are not trans - trans describes those people for whom these characteristics do not align.

NotBadConsidering · 27/01/2025 10:11

Lostcat · 27/01/2025 10:08

No. Because in that case your cognitive sex aligns with your other physical, biological sex characteristics (as observed at birth). So you are not trans - trans describes those people for whom these characteristics do not align.

Can you please explain what the cognitive sex is of someone with a Eunuch gender identity please?

NecessaryScene · 27/01/2025 10:11

The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by pretending to be trans and entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!)

The only bizarre thing here is your addition of trans part of it. You've invented "trans" and from that belief are then interpreting "men entering a sex-segregated space" as "pretending to be trans."

Get rid of the trans, and you're left with

The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without entering a sex segregated space!)

So the argument is "unsafe places exist, therefore it's bizarre to want safe spaces".

AmaryllisNightAndDay · 27/01/2025 10:13

Well yes of course it's for the votes and popularity, it's an easy win for Trump and is one election promise he can easily keep. I don't suppose Trump really gives a monkeys either way and even if he did he could change his mind anytime.

But I'm reading this and thinking yup.. yup.. yup.. all good. Looks as if he asked someone who knew what they were talking about to write the policy for him. And now I am waiting for opinions from people who understand the US law and the full effects and implications of this policy before I decide.

Helleofabore · 27/01/2025 10:14

Where I feel able to intervene and usefully contribute to this debate is regarding the last bullet point, as I have expertise in this area. Furthermore, I think this is the first and most fundamental issue to be addressed. We will never be able to organise society fairly and reasonably while people continue to view trans people in this way.

You have expertise, yet cannot produce a robust and coherent description. And certainly not one that the transgender community use as per their published work by their support groups. Your description consistently rejects whole segments of people who state they are transgender.

In providing your explanation the way you do, you are putting yourself in the position of being a spokesperson for transgender people. Particularly because you have a history of telling people who is and isn’t transgender according to what seems to be your own personal definition of being transgender.

Do you ever stop and think you should not be telling people who is and who isn’t transgender and providing explanations that lack logical consistency?

AlisonDonut · 27/01/2025 10:15

What part of a female's sexed body can be controlled by 'cognition'?

Take a 'trans man' for example. How do they get pregnant if their 'automatic cognitive sex' is male?

A woman who is pregnant who decided halfway though that they now have an 'automatic cognitive sex' of a man would immediately expel the baby if this were a thing.

If you are going to create concepts then you need to think through all the different ways it would work before announcing it to the world/mumsnet.

Greyskybluesky · 27/01/2025 10:16

@Lostcat "The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by pretending to be trans and entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!)"

This again. But now with an exclamation mark because it's oh-so-amusing.

When I was sexually assaulted by a man in the women's toilets I fully believe that man was NOT trans.
But the fact he was a man in the women's toilets was enough for me to be taken seriously when I reported it. The station authorities knew he should not have been in the women's toilets because he was a man.

If I reported it now, all he'd have to say is that he's trans and therefore entitled to be there. It makes it harder to keep men out, whether they're trans or not.

It's really not a "bizarre idea". Do not minimise women's experiences.

Helleofabore · 27/01/2025 10:25

"The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by pretending to be trans and entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!)"

The blatant disregard for female people’s safety in such a dismissive statement is eye opening.

It is saying, just because a male can access any space they want, we shouldn’t exclude this sub-group of male people.

How many female people are acceptable to be harmed before we stop seeing such statements repeated as a way to dismiss female people’s legitimate needs for safety or to distract from discussing those needs ?

Horrifically, here is another male person who accessed female single sex spaces to sexually assault those already traumatised female people.

https://reduxx.info/canada-trans-identified-male-charged-after-allegedly-sexually-assaulting-multiple-women-while-staying-at-a-womens-shelter/

edit: oh wait… I forgot the next part of the script. ‘There are always some bad apples, we shouldn’t exclude an entire group of people though based on those bad apples’. Isn’t that how it goes? Then we get into discussing safeguarding principles and how groups are evaluated for risk ?

or ‘your personal experience does not mean that female people will be safer in female single sex spaces with the exclusion of this subgroup of male people’.

As I say, it is a predictable script.

CANADA: Trans-Identified Male Charged After Allegedly Sexually Assaulting Multiple Women While Staying At A Women's Shelter - Reduxx

A trans-identified male in Edmonton, Alberta, has been charged after allegedly sexually assaulting multiple women at a women’s shelter in the city. Mika Lin Katz, 37, is also known as Michael Collins. On January 24, the Edmonton Police Service (EPS) is...

https://reduxx.info/canada-trans-identified-male-charged-after-allegedly-sexually-assaulting-multiple-women-while-staying-at-a-womens-shelter

Lostcat · 27/01/2025 10:27

Greyskybluesky · 27/01/2025 10:16

@Lostcat "The bizarre idea that sexual predatory men who want to assault women would choose do so by pretending to be trans and entering a sex segregated space - (men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!)"

This again. But now with an exclamation mark because it's oh-so-amusing.

When I was sexually assaulted by a man in the women's toilets I fully believe that man was NOT trans.
But the fact he was a man in the women's toilets was enough for me to be taken seriously when I reported it. The station authorities knew he should not have been in the women's toilets because he was a man.

If I reported it now, all he'd have to say is that he's trans and therefore entitled to be there. It makes it harder to keep men out, whether they're trans or not.

It's really not a "bizarre idea". Do not minimise women's experiences.

I am deeply sorry that happened to you and I have no intention/ desire to minimise your experience.

But your experience doesn't demonstrate that women are safer by excluding trans people from toilets.

-I'm not in favour of gender neutral toilets. We can still have women's toilets and you can still report men for being in them; we can do this while including trans people.

-That man could have said he was trans and entitled to be in the toilet, but he didn't need to do so to sexually assault you. And he didn't. He simply entered the toilet. Trump's EO won't make it any harder for men to enter women's toilets.

  • If that man retrospectively chooses to claim to be trans, it may be a defence of his entry into the toilet (which by the way is not actually a crime), but it is no defence of his sexual assault of you - so regardless your experience would and should be taken seriously.
Greyskybluesky · 27/01/2025 10:28

If you don't/won't understand it, I can't help you @Lostcat

Lostcat · 27/01/2025 10:28

Anyway, like I said, I can't spend another day on mumsnet. I have work to be getting on with.

AliceNutterWasAWoman · 27/01/2025 10:29

@Lostcat
What I do think is that the discourse on "sex-segregation" (one group of people "trumping" another group of people, etc) is based on a number of really problematic assumptions/ stereotypes/ prejudices. These include:

  • The naturalisation of sexual violence (the idea that sexual violence in rooted in biology - not patriarchy)

This is at the nub of gender ideology, that VAWG is rooted in patriarchy, not biology. So if we queer biology by re-defining sex to mean gender then patriarchy will be castrated and VAWG will cease. It is a academic thought experiment that is to being promoted in the real world to see if it works.

So far we have seen only misery and chaos.

Greyskybluesky · 27/01/2025 10:30

It is saying, just because a male can access any space they want, we shouldn’t exclude this sub-group of male people.

Yes, but some men are going to attack women anyway @Helleofabore. So let's not bother trying to do anything about that. To quote, "men have plenty of access to women without pretending to be trans!"

How many times have we read this on this board over the years?

Greyskybluesky · 27/01/2025 10:32

Greyskybluesky · 27/01/2025 10:28

If you don't/won't understand it, I can't help you @Lostcat

I'm glad you responded to this comment of mine with an agree emoji, @Lostcat. Confirmation that you don't/won't understand it.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.