"Trans women ARE biological women"

[TangenitalContrivance]

I see this argument and comment more and more the last few weeks and hugely over the last 3 days.

For example:

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1k1tliv/trans_women_are_biological_women/

This statement, and the comments underneath it absolutely baffle me.

The approach, one that I am sure will only work with a minority of the people who said TWAW, is to undermine the definition of words, yet again, and deliberately cloud the water when it comes to speaking clearly and using terms that everyone agrees with

I have seen it said in more places than Reddit however, and by respected people

Interestingly it is even more obvious what sex the transwoman is when you meet him in person.

Male people don’t belong in female spaces.

I know several btw.

I have read various accounts of vulnerable young girls trying to play the male ‘provider’ role in a relationship with a trans identifying male. Giving him money that they could ill afford, going out to work, providing sex on demand and generally having literally the worst of all worlds. It was heartbreaking to see.

This "why would they go to all the trouble of identifying as a woman..." argument really grinds my gears.

It doesn't matter why they want to identify as women. It doesn't matter whether they are homosexuals identifying as straight or heterosexuals identifying as lesbians who do actually want to ogle naked women in the changing rooms.

Similarly it doesn't matter whether Lia Thomas genuinely identifies as a woman or is just doing it to compete in women's sports.

The impact on women is the same either way.

WHY SHOULD OUR RIGHTS BE CONDITIONAL ON MALE PEOPLE'S FEELINGS?

You don’t realise what you’re doing, do you?

Yep, that’s more reaching for sure.

This "why would they go to all the trouble of identifying as a woman..." argument really grinds my gears.

It really does mine, too, especially as under gender self ID (which was being pushed for) or even the current government’s plans it would be no trouble at all.

Here is the thing @ChessorBuckaroo .

When did you, personally, decide that there was a point when male people’s efforts earned them the right to be treated as female as a reward?

Your posts have place you in a position of arbitrating who has and has not succeeded enough in an impossibility. It is irrelevant whether any male person makes an effort or not. It never did.

No male person ever had the right to be classed as a female person. The amount of effort they put in is meaningless.

The amount of effort is also irrelevant to the purity of their intentions. A great many male people spend what seems like a lifetime of effort to get access to their victims. And the purpose is not always sexual.

Why do we always have to look at it from the men’s point of view? It doesn’t matter what their motives are, or whether or not they are interested in naked women.

How does it feel to the women in the changing room to encounter male people where they were expecting an all-female environment?

Many women have reason to be wary of men, and many have reason to be very frightened of them. Why doesn’t it matter what these women feel in that moment? Why should women have to put up with feeling on edge or worse?

Why can’t trans people campaign for third spaces if they are unable to use the spaces designated for their sex? Why do some of them assume that because they are only sexually attracted to men, it’s ok for them to be in female spaces?

Plenty of trans people are able to consider the effect their presence in enclosed spaces will have on women, but others don’t seem to be able to make that leap of empathy (is it autism? Belief that they truly “pass”?)

We need a solution that works for everyone, and trans people will have to drop using opposite sex toilets purely for validation and start to take women’s feelings and experience into account as well. It’s a practical problem to be solved.

I saw the term "Phallic Drift" on another thread and I think this encapsulates it perfectly.

I am just not interested in what these internet mountebanks are selling. They can stand on their imaginary soap boxes and and try to flog their imaginary snake-oil ideology all they want.

I am not listening any more.

Mammals cannot change sex (this includes the Equality Act 2010's protected characteristic of 'sex') and I will not pretend that they can.

Good, solid rebuttal!

I have met and know several. Worked with one. Shared a stage with two. All very nice people. All male and clearly so. They deserve to live in safety and peace but they don't have a human right to enter spaces for women and girls because they are not women or girls. The same reason Prince William can't go in there either. They can use the facilities for the males or they can use unisex ones. Female spaces are for females. When you insist that female spaces remain purely so that males can use them, the spaces are not female and they are not for providing safety and dignity for women, they are for falsely validating men.

I'm also so sick of people saying "why would men do something to get access to naked women..."

What planet do you live on?

Men have qualified as doctors and nurses and priests so that they could get at vulnerable people. Men have committed acts of rape, torture and murder because a woman wouldn't give them what they wanted. I'm still amazed when I think of some of the lengths men I've known - not abusers, to be clear, but just men who really wanted to get me into bed, and believe me I ain't Angelina Jolie - to get me to sleep with them.

Two days ago they pissed en masse in Parliament Square and held deranged demonstrations in which they threatened to piss where they wanted and to burn, hang and shoot any woman who tried to stop them. They defaced statues, including ones of Millicent Fawcett and Nelson Mandela. They've spent the last five years sharing JK Rowling's home address online along with instructions for creating bombs while issuing her and other women with so many death threats that, in her words, she could paper the house with them. They've hung around outside her home to intimidate her family. They're now issuing death threats to the Supreme Court judges and I've even seen a few of them spreading antisemitic conspiracy theories because one or two of the judges were Jewish, apparently. Conspiracy theories from the people who captured the world, institutions and establishment first, top down.

And we're still being told a man won't put on lipstick and call himself Louise if it gets him a free pass into the women's changing room? Even while we're also told that since men were never kept out by force fields so actually a bloke never even needed to do that?

And while they tell us female spaces don't protect women, they're still not in favour of unisex third spaces? They want to keep these female spaces? Even though they don't think they offer protection? They want to keep them, purely so men can use them?

And WE are the ones who haven't seen enough?

Edited because it was Nelson Mandela, not Mahatma Gandhi, although there were photographs of them disrespecting the Gandhi statue too.

The bottom line is that they are men. Men pretending to be women to get access to womens single sex spaces used to be deemed very dangerous and predatory. No amount of lying or pretending or squealing they are gay doesn't allow them the right to enter a space they are not legally allowed to enter.

The majority of TW do fuck all in doing anything medically (with possibly the exception of fake breasts), but even if they do - they are still men.

Every. Bloody. Word. 💯

It matters because this bogus argument ("they transition to ogle naked women") is brought up to justify denying them access to women's toilets/changing rooms.

I'm convinced most anti-trans people have never met a transwoman as If they did they would never make this ridiculous argument.

The only justification needed is that they are men. Doesn't matter what their individual reasons are for wanting to be in female spaces where women and girls are unclothed.

It doesn't matter whether my trans-identified son is motivated by the possibility of seeing naked women or by his wish to be accepted as a woman himself (or any other motivation). I hope the former is not true for him. The fact is that he is male, has been male all his life so far (I should know, I was present at his birth and was involved in caring for him as a child) and will remain male for the rest of his life, whether he is one of the quite small percentage who access "gender affirming care" or not. And as he is male, he has no business colonising women's spaces.

That is the blunt truth, and it is doing him no good when people persuade him otherwise.

Women shouldn't have to justify denying members of the opposite sex access to our single sex spaces.

The word "no" should be good enough all on its own.

Not taking women's "no" for an answer is pretty male behaviour, if you ask me.

However, if you insist on wanting a better reason than "because we want to get changed away from the male gaze", how about, "because the group of men who say they should be entitled to be in women's spaces because they identify as women includes a significant minority who go round threatening to rape and murder women who don't believe that they are real women"?

Give me one good reason why I should feel safe taking my clothes off next to these men, @ChessorBuckaroo?

www.terfisaslur.com

Wrong.

I’ve met a few. One, a neighbour, with a GRC and a girlfriend, was/is a blatant AGP and asked my Mother for her underwear, saying it was fine if it was used. Unsurprisingly she declined and never felt comfortable with him again.(And neither do I)

He goes around with his fake breasts exposed, dresses in a way that no woman ever dresses outside of a sex club i.e in extremely provocative and bizarre outfits and clearly gets a thrill from the attention he receives.

I’ve known another who was not an AGP and had “transitioned” who was still undoubtedly a man. I could meet a million. It wouldn’t make a difference. I still don’t want a man in women’s spaces, no matter how he identifies, what “effort” he’s made or what his justification for being there is.

Haven't read the whole thread and am replying to the OP.

I've also seen this 'biological woman' argument. The logic goes that they're women, they're biological beings, therefore biological women. All that does is underline how important it is to have a definition of women that encapsulates the meaning of 'the female sex'. We are a distinct category. If you can't name something, you can't fight for it. The genderist movement noticeably has no word for adult human female.

It matters because this bogus argument ("they transition to ogle naked women") is brought up to justify denying them access to women's toilets/changing rooms.

No, they're denied access to women's toilets and changing rooms because they're men. Even if they're sincere and nice men, they're still men. My son abides by it, my husband abides by it, the King abides by it and all other men can too. It's not a space for women and men who promise they're nice, it's a space for women. Use the gents or a mixed sex space.

I'm convinced most anti-trans people have never met a transwoman as If they did they would never make this ridiculous argument.

You are convinced of a number of things that are demonstrably untrue, and you seem to think that this matters. It doesn't. We don't need to convince you. It's the law and it's always been the law. Women don't have to accept men in their showers, toilets, changing spaces, lesbian dating events and rape crisis counsellors and they don't have to convince you, O Great Overseer of Forced Access to Naked Women. Creep off.

Hear, hear.

We don't need to negotiate or justify or plead the situation.

Males (however they identify, whether they are heterosexual or homosexual) are not allowed in female single sex spaces or services. And have never been allowed.

That's it. The footstamping tantrums aren't going to work.

As you have repeatedly demonstrated that you are Convinced by utter bollocks (literally), this is not the mike-drop winning point you are apparently Convinced it is.

That argument is a TRA strawman. There are clearly a multitude of reasons why men transition and often when you hear feminists arguing why men shouldn’t have access to female spaces they are quite clear that they are not saying all men are a risk.

Can't you just image a group of Muslim or Orthodox Jewish women arranging a space where they can get changed, remove their hair coverings, wear gym clothes and exercise together without men in it, thinking the reasons for that are so obvious they don't need stating, and old Chessor coming along, twirling his moustache and doing his best President Snow impression..."Convince me."

Creep off. I know I already said that but it bears repeating. They don't need to.