What are you feeling since the judgement?

[BlessingKalmly]

A space to explore the emotions, thoughts and feelings post judgement; that Women are BORN and not worn.

A request: If TRA's join and derail, PLEASE can we totally ignore them like we might a gnat. Please let's not unfocus from us, the women who have seen this fight through to the end

Personally, I'm feeling a whole range of emotions.

I feel elated, I have that feeling like I have to almost pinch myself to remind myself that this madness has ended. I feel emboldened to speak my truth, I feel powerful in protecting my sisters. I feel slightly in shock... as if I haven't fully been able to process the madness of the past few years.... it's been constant fight, fight, fight for our rights, and only now can I stop and take stock of WHAT THE F* went on.

At the same time I feel so DEEPLY effing ANGRY at the men lamenting over not being able to give away rights that were never theirs in the first place. Men lamenting over something that has no impact on them.

I feel deep sadness and frustration that people can't seem to find a single fuck about severely disabled, or elderly women who deserve the right to truly female only care.

I feel so confused over how fucking stupid some people are, sharing memes and propaganda without ZERO understanding of how the Equality Act works or what any of this means in practice.

I feel so deeply thankful that our justice system remains strong, and a beacon of sense a truth in what feels like times of madness.

I feel like I could facepalm myself into oblivion, watching trans-maidens totally disregard their sisters and pander over men's rights.

What about you?

Yes, I am new here so don’t know this history.

We know. You're going to tell us about the Samoan fa'afafine next, aren't you? Or DSDs?

Oh no, it's going to be this:

Pointing to “unisex options” does not solve the issue when many public spaces do not provide them

Haha. But you're fine with nobody ever providing womens' spaces ever again...

We know you waded into this discussion 20 seconds ago, so let me give you the VERY brief summary: we have suggested third spaces. The terfs have been suggesting them for years and years and years. They have been roundly rejected since day 1 and you're trying to find a way to avoid saying why you're tacitly rejecting them too. But it's the same reason as everyone else: because you want them in order to validate men. Let me repeat, for the absurdity: you want female spaces to remain so that men can use them. You know it, we know it.

That's the real reason you're dancing around the issue of unisex spaces. And the real reason why TRAs haven't directed any of their considerable resources and clout into campaigning for them (and don't tell me they don't have resources and clout. Every institution and establishment has been hammering women for them, which is why, in the cases of women fighting for single sex spaces, the transwoman have human rights organisations, the NHS and government itself fighting for them while the women had grassroots organisations and crowdfunds). If you lot had spent the last ten years calling for additional third spaces, you'd have them by now.

It's not our fault that you didn't and it's not our problem to solve.

Transmen hardly featured at all in this nonsense until the SC judgement. The slogan was "transwoman are women". The argument was all about what a woman is. The only reason you're all suddenly concerned about them now is because you THINK you can use them to undermine women's spaces. But you can't. The transman gotcha is covered in the law and the judgement. You really should read it. You won't like it, but at least you'll know what you're talking about.

Rather than lecture us on stuff we've been talking about for close to a decade, attempt to undermine the law or tell us that we've never seen tall, broad or butch women in women's spaces before, go back to your camp and tell them to start campaigning for third spaces. You almost got this entire loony and harmful ideology in under the radar as planned (https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists/) so there's no way you won't be able to get some additional facilities put in within the next few years if you actually want to.

Of course, you don't want to, so it'll never happen. But that's not our problem. We offer it as a solution but you're the one who doesn't like the existing situation so you're going to have to be the ones to effect change.

Also (sorry last point from me on this, I know I’m going on a bit now) isn’t what the original message said. It referred to trans people as a WHOLE, not ‘biological men who go into spaces not for them, not giving any thought to the women in there and how they might feel about their male presence in there, because they feel they are a women, are absolutely selfish yes.’
Although I disagree with the above anyway, there is no denying that the original point was bigoted.

Also people on mumsnet: trans people are selfish.

That's a creative misinterpretation of what that poster actually said, which was to acknowledge that almost all people think of themselves first.

It overlooks the reality that disabled toilets are not always available

So that's absolutely A-OK and not something that we should fix for everyone disabled, so long as as transmen can use the gents? Because that's what it looks like you are saying. Disabled toilets not always being available doesn't only hurt disabled transmen, it hurts other disabled people too and those other disabled people also matter. Actual solidarity on this issue would look like demanding more accessible toilets everywhere. It would not look like weaponising that lack of accessible loos to try to farm sympathy for people who want the privilege of waltzing into the opposite sex's loos.

That poster had it right when she said "You’re wasting your time if you think we’re going to be manipulated into believing other [specifically, trans] people matter more [than women and girls]."

You come across as more interested in policing who gets to speak than actually solving anything. You accuse others of bad faith while piling on assumptions, sarcasm and strawman arguments.

You keep insisting that “third spaces” have been suggested but conveniently ignore that they do not actually exist in most places. Suggesting something and making it happen are not the same. Saying “we offered it” while nothing changed is meaningless.

Your claim that the only reason people want additional spaces is “to validate men” is not just insulting, it is lazy thinking. It flattens complex realities into one bad faith narrative because it is easier for you to dismiss.

You talk about “resources and clout” like every trans activist is sitting on a government budget. Meanwhile, women’s rights groups also campaign with little funding. Pretending there is a conspiracy with unlimited power on one side is not credible.

You accuse people of “dancing around” unisex spaces but ignore the fact that a lot of people simply want practical solutions that work for everyone. You are not defending women. You are defending your own sense of superiority.

Bringing up the Scottish judgement like it is a trump card only shows you are clinging to legal technicalities to avoid harder questions about dignity, access and reality. Finishing by saying “it is not our problem to solve” says everything. You are not interested in public spaces being better. You want to draw a line and shout across it.

If you actually believed in protecting vulnerable people, you would not need to act like this!

No, it was not a “creative misinterpretation.” It was an exact reflection of what was said. Trans people were called selfish. That’s a bigoted statement. Why you’d want to defend that is beyond me.

Pointing out that disabled toilets are often unavailable does not mean anyone thinks that is fine. It highlights that sending trans people to use them is not a real solution because those spaces are already inadequate for disabled people themselves.

Nobody said disabled access does not matter. You invented that. Raising one group’s access problem does not erase another’s. Pretending it does shows you are not interested in real solidarity, only in setting groups against each other.

You claim to care about disabled people but use their struggles to attack trans people instead of pushing for better access for everyone.

You come across as more interested in policing who gets to speak than actually solving anything.

That's rich from the camp that attempted to get forced Newspeak enacted in law...

Just so you know, I did read this entire post of yours. It has no substantiation, no backing, no rebuttal. It is seven paragraphs of absolutely nothing. Apart from a load of ad hominems and you-sound-like, there is nothing in it. Except for blaming women who suggested third spaces for not being the ones to work towards getting them. You lot are the ones who would apparently benefit from them and we were busy fighting for our own spaces, honesty in language and literal freedom of speech and thought. Sorry not sorry that we weren't also going to fund and fight for this one for you guys while you tried to batter down our boundaries and reinterpret the law to suit you. God, women really are to blame for everything, aren't they? And, of course, yet another way of avoiding having to admit that you never fought for third spaces, and never will, because what you actually want is men colonising women's spaces.

Why do you need toilets anyway when so many TRAs are happy to piss publicly in Parliament Square?

It's not a script. If some of us have similar retorts to specific points, it's because we've seen those points many times before.

someone asking ‘How much thought do you think trans rights activists give to women’s needs exactly?’ was a perfect example of this

Women being held to a higher standard of giving a shit about others than men are is a misogynist double standard that we keep on seeing.

So far on this thread you have illustrated rules three, five, and twelve.

Don’t feed the scabby shark troll.

I’m a troll because I’m here disagreeing with you?

For a group who loves to accuse the other side of shutting down debate, I’ve been attempted to be shut down twice in the space of 24 hours on this thread.

A number of years ago, when people were still nervous to talk about it, I asked a friend his opinion and I remember him choosing his words very carefully, then saying 'It's all a bit self-absorbed, isn't it?'
And it is. It's self-absorbed and it is selfish. That is a genuine issue.
The cost of a few trans man being a little more comfortable because they don't have to hear the word 'woman' is rises in cervical cancer among immigrant women because they don't know what a 'cervix-haver' is.
The cost of trans women having their feelings validated by being allowed to counsel female rape survivors is much larger numbers of traumatised women avoiding the service.
Even worse when that comes to refuges being called transphobic for being female only. That risks women's lives who already have huge barriers in trying to escape domestic abuse situations.
And before the usual strawman comes out, there are already a large number of 'trans inclusive' refuges. It's female-only ones that aren't allowed.
At every level, the demands are for trans women comfort at the cost of women's safety and privacy. It is selfish.

I know you're right. The problem is, everything it's saying are the real life attempts at arguing the point that men are women. The movement is beyond satire or parody.

Please. Criticising bad arguments is not misogyny, and calling it that is just a way to avoid addressing the points. It’s a slap in the face to people who actually do experience misogyny. I’m sure a lot of the women on here do experience that (including me), but it’s not misogynistic to respond to all your inflammatory statements.

Spot on. It’s just empty posturing.

The issue is that trans people are protected by the sex they were born into in the Equality Act. They also have protection not to be discriminated against on the grounds of their gender reassignment. That has drawn a line under it. No need for any further hyperbole.

I previously decided not to engage with this poster any more because their posts across various threads are contradictory, misinformed, blinkered and often insulting ("You are not defending women. You are defending your own sense of superiority")

But this statement really takes the biscuit:
"You keep insisting that “third spaces” have been suggested but conveniently ignore that they do not actually exist in most places. Suggesting something and making it happen are not the same. Saying “we offered it” while nothing changed is meaningless."

Yes. That. Is. The. Point. They do not exist in most places. Which is why trans people should be fighting for them. Women's toilets used to not exist. Women's refuges used to not exist. Women's sex-specific services used to not exist. Women's votes used to not exist. You get the picture. Women got off their backsides and actively campaigned, fought and argued for these things and made them happen.

"We" women did offer it as a solution. As you say, "practical solutions that work for everyone". Do not accuse us of not looking for those. You see only what you want to see. It is not our fault nothing changed!

"Bringing up the Scottish judgement like it is a trump card only shows you are clinging to legal technicalities to avoid harder questions about dignity, access and reality" - where to even start with this! Clinging to the legal technicalities of the law! The law that is needed to ensure dignity, access and reality for women.

It is. This movement and its supporters are not known for their self-awareness, put it that way.

Something occurred to me this morning, something I've seen a lot starting with JKR's tweets but probably predating that. Something I've seen in every article that has welcomed the SC judgement and in most interviews. Statements to the effect that they want tp to feel safe, for their dignity to be recognised, for them to be able to participate in society. Something that, conversely, is noticeably lacking when their allies are talking about what they think tp want and what women actually need.

Absolutely @lcakethereforeIamand it’s striking how none of them ever answer when asked why they don’t consider what women need.

What that poster actually said, in context:

I’m thinking about the needs of women and girls. Just like people who identify as transgender think about their own needs and put themselves first.

Please note the important context, given in bold text, which changes the framing of the second sentence. Quoting people out of context is intellectual dishonesty.

You claim to care about disabled people but use their struggles to attack trans people instead of pushing for better access for everyone.

You don't know me and you don't know what I campaign for offline to make that judgement about me.

By using TM in women's loos as a wedge to undermine single-sex spaces, you set different groups against each other. You set women without the protected characteristic of gender reassignment against other women who do have that protected characteristic, aka "transmen", in order to set up a "sauce for the goose" argument to justify TW in ladies' loos. I see it and I reject it. Transmen have the right to be in the ladies' loos. They may get questions from women who aren't very observant (look at someone's pelvis, hands, feet, and browbones, people!), but questions can always be answered.

This double standard isn’t a bug, it’s a feature of this movement. Women come second. Not in my world, we don’t.

Why are you making this a whole trans issue, that’s what I’m not understanding. I’m bothered about men, regardless of how they identify, being in women’s spaces. For safety, dignity and privacy. This is not bigoted. If a female wants to go into male spaces and sports that’s on males to have an issue with it. That doesn’t mean I think they should be discriminated against or not treated ill in any way. They are still protected from this, in law.

Firstly, the obvious point that different women think different things.

Secondly, while many women here do, out of compassion for trans people caught up in a mess, suggest solutions, ultimately women's right to say no to an unjustified and unagreed appropriation of women's resources is not contingent on having another solution to offer, any more than it's my responsibility to find another way for the guy who stole my car to get to work before I am justified in taking my car back.

Thirdly, when it comes to dignity, this is not just about the dignity and right to exist of trans people. Trans people are redefining everyone in order to validate their own projections about how men and women live and think. So if a trans person's dignity relies on me accepting that I have no right to understand my own life and my own needs through the impact of my physical sex, and no right to say "this happens to me because of my sex so the language to describe it and the tools to mitigate it also need to be based on my sex" then that is selfish.

Eventually, even to nice people, even to genuine people, we have to say no. No because what you want is bigger than you and affects other people in ways that also matter.

I’ve always envied your way with words @FlirtsWithRhinos- that post is <chef’s kiss>

I know the discussion has moved on, but I've been away. How I feel is surprised. And relieved. And getting ready to move on to whatever's next, because it's a sea change but it's never the end.

I’m annoyed , this whole debacle made reasonable people looks like haters. All the complete 💩women have had to put up with.