Review "Six Conversations we're Scared to have"

[Igneococcus]

I hope this sharetoken works, my laptop has died a lonely death while I was away and I'm doing this from the phone.
Sarah Ditum review if Guilty Feminist book:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/325fffb2-2c93-4dc8-908f-8b9bf22f331a?shareToken

I would pay to see that. Or Helen Joyce, or Sharron Davies or Maya Forstater or KJK.

Yes. Me too. But I believe that DFW will continue to ignore those women.

Can you imagine Helen Joyce sitting down with her? Or Julie Bindel?

But she won’t.

She won’t, because “we’re scared” is forced teaming. No one on our side is scared to have those conversations. Just her.

And Lavery. Lavery cancelled.

None of the trans or trans ally authors will do these interviews or debates.

Thinking more on this Eresh.

It actually becomes very clear when we have threads of posters who simply cannot interrogate their answers to then answer questions that highlight the incoherencies of their position.

It is all very well do declare that we should accept some male people's philosophical belief about themselves as no longer being male, but when you get down to exactly what the implications are for that, the answers disappear. It has all be sold in using emotional arguments that never withstand scrutiny.

And yet, even when shown the incoherency, people double down because they have been told it is righteous.

I mean, look at this latest move. The Supreme Court clarified that the EA2010 had been deliberately misinterpreted by extreme transgender activist groups. Then one of the immediate reactions was 'well, they didn't define biological sex'... well.. they didn't have to, it was done previously.

Then came the calls that organisations needed to 'wait for guidance'. No... the law is now very clear but these organisations are still attempting to impose their own misinterpretations on it.

Then came the declaration that they are taking it to the European Court, which of course, if they are able to they should. But what is it that they are seeking? For male people to be able to access female single sex provisions, even when it has been shown repeatedly with evidence that this is harmful to female people.

So, we have also moved dishonestly from 'those male people never said they were female' - yes they fucking did and it is on public record and not fucking hard to find if you actually just searched! To those male people need us to treat them as if they are woman, because they are 'vulnerable male people' and not 'men' anymore.

Really? How the fuck does that work? No one, and it is now many people saying it, explains they just keep repeating it. It is like one massive group think to calm any dissonance they might feel. The righteous people are saying it, therefore it must be right. It is defies the very premise of equality when you view it as it is without the emotional lens.

How is it that one group of male people qualify for such special treatment above all other male people who could be said to be just as vulnerable, if not more?

Anyone? Anyone want to explain it?

Or will it continue to be tumbleweed and crickets.

I suggest anyone reading this who don't understand where the phrase 'turtles all the way down' comes from, should perhaps look it up if you think that your position should be accepted but you cannot explain why beyond emotional pleas.

100% and we’ve also moved disingenuously from “nothing to see here, absolutely no clash of rights and only these silly old women who no one cares about think there is” to a live demonstration of what the clash of rights means (if I were to call what they are demanding a “right” (being generous for the sake of argument).

Its so obviously a mans rights movement too because media isnt talking about how this is affecting women with trans identities.

Nothing about sport, nothing about if mens organisations can still include TM.

I suspect its because TM were never in male spaces and organisations, they were already using appropriate toilets. And thats not what men with gender identities want, so the TM have to be quiet.

I hope the female people in the 'trans community' notice this.

I suspect its because TM were never in male spaces and organisations, they were already using appropriate toilets. And thats not what men with gender identities want, so the TM have to be quiet.

When we say that we want to exclude TW from female-only rape counselling groups, the same would apply in principle to a TM who tried to blag her way into a testicular cancer support group.

Though I've never heard of a TM doing that. Funny that. It's almost as if, in the trans community, the females are the support humans.

Absolutely agree that women should be excluded from those groups for men too, as you say it’s a lot less of an issue as women don’t do this as much.

Unless of course it is the BBC or ITV virtue signalling. Such as the inclusion of a female participant in the upcoming gay man show.

Just came across this review of the Triggernometry podcast with DFW by Ani O'Brien
https://aniobrien.substack.com/p/the-guilty-vichy-feminist-encounters?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Thanks for sharing @April1625 - pretty scathing stuff but spot on!

Ditum is spot on in her analysis that Frances-White must truly think that having difficult conversations is a metaphor for preaching the ‘Good Word’ to heathens

Bingo. I suppose DFW means she thinks these conversations will be difficult for others, not her.

by George Arabella, I think you have it

For all those reading who need further confirmation as to why ‘social’ woman is not going to work, and that some people are quite ok to push for female single sex spaces to include male people if they fit some criteria such as ‘had a hard enough life so deserve consideration’ (ie most vulnerable and marginalised) or has chosen to undergo brutal surgery, what difference would those criteria make in this Darlington Nurses situation?

I cannot think of any difference at all.

No male inclusion in any female single sex provision. No male people have any concept of what it means to be born a female or to ever live as a female. The only lived experience that they have is living with their male body.

It is not just about safety, it is about privacy and dignity. And it is about boundaries. And female people should be supported to have them and to have others recognise those boundaries. Perhaps if you don’t understand that your own boundaries are either low or non existent, you cannot understand why people have their own boundaries that need to be respected.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14698557/I-begged-bosses-not-let-trans-nurse-invaded-changing-room-intimate-operation-refused-didnt-want-hurt-feelings.html

archive.is/HYlzX

This is very hard to hear and I don’t recommend it if you are likely to be triggered in any way.

Here is a video of Karen’s testimony about how the NHS has treated her.

https://x.com/salltweets/status/1921484351964848258?s=46