The words that have been pulled over your eyes

[FlirtsWithRhinos]

I initially wrote this as a reply to a thread in relationships, but rather than derail the thread I decided to post it in FWR as a thread in its own right about a common accusation made against gender critical feminists.

It is a response to the claim that the only people who object to the word "cis" are people who deny the existence of trans women, and that such people are transphobes.

"Transphobe", like "trans woman" and indeed "cis woman", are just the words trans activists use to hide what is really going on.

These words exist to hide one simple truth: Trans women are not, in any objective, real way, in any way outside their own heads, in any way that is real to anyone else, any closer to being a woman than any other man is.

"Trans women" in reality are just men who for some reason feel compelled (or sometimes just really want ) to adopt a cross-sex persona playing out whatever their idea of what a woman is.

The words exist to make it sound like a reasonable thing when such men demand that their wives, children, friends and family, colleagues, officials, all of society pretend they are women, let them enter private spaces for women, let them touch or counsel women in roles reserved for women, let them take prizes for women, let them speak for women.

Because we'd never accept that as ok from men. But it's ok for trans women, and if it's not ok that's transphobia.

And we'd never say women in general are more privileged and powerful than men, but call the men trans women and the women cis women and suddenly everyone nods along. And if they don't it's transphobia.

But I don't believe the thing that makes men and women different is our minds. And without that belief, the whole thing falls apart.

Because the average man is not making a fuss about not being allowed into women’s bathrooms or women’s football teams

👏👏👏👏👏

Literally the ONLY thing you need to be a trans woman, is a man.

Either you do not understand the issue being discussed (because you lack the intelligence or have not bothered reading about it before forming an opinion), or you do understand and you are deliberately misrepresenting the GC position in order to deflect.

There does seem to be a lot of threads devoted to the subject.

How does one tell the difference between a harmless trans woman and a man with nefarious intent? They are both male.

And yet here you are, the first reply

This is very easy to answer.

Because not only is this group of male people demanding that people describe them as being something they are materially not, they are not female people or women or girls, but they are demanding access to female single sex provisions.

Oh. And there is no difference between this group of male people and the ‘average man’. No difference at all apart from a philosophical belief that is not based on material reality at all.

HTH.

Because trans identifying men are still men.

Yes, the other favourite being ‘you’re LITERALLY reducing women to walking vaginas!!’ Saw that a few times after the recent SC judgment.

Where do you start with these arguments?

just a reminder that changing the definition of women so it no longer means ‘adult human female’ but means ‘adult human female + plus men who say they feel like women/perform female stereotypes’ affects over 50% of the population

but thank you for those who’ve rushed her to trot out the usual fatuous ‘arguments’ about genitalia or ‘why do you even caaareee?’ I sense this thread is going to be yet another opportunity to lay out all the GC points

Because sociey is already talking about, acknowlledging and (to some degree, in some places, albeit not enough) fighting the bad behaviour of not-trans-identifying males.

Because the risk that the not-trans-identifying male poses is not subject to institutional level gaslighting.

Because the data about not-trans-identifying male crimes and risks are not being misreported and misrecorded as data about female people.

Because no one is being fired for acknowledging that not-trans-identifying males pose a risk.

Because the mitigations - the spaces and the language and the rights and the priorities - that have been put in place to deal with the threat not-trans-identifying males pose to women are being subverted and destroyed by the territorial demands of (TRAs on behalf of) trans women.

Because TRA's war on women is being executed through words and therefore talking about it is the place we fight back.

But why the obsession with trans women? It's not as if they are the only ones who might commit violence but they're made out to be the big bad bogeys. Yes there are some trans women ( who possibly only decided they were trans when faced with prison) who have done awful things but the vast majority are done by the average man.

Trans-identifying men are the average man, just they express a personal belief, or a fixation, or a fetish, and demand that the rest of the world enable it.

They're not the only ones who commit violence, but they are the only men we are expected to welcome into our single-sex spaces. Spaces which are generally safer for women purely because men are excluded from them.

Yes. You are on the board that was set up specifically for this topic. Of course there are slot of threads about it. The impacts on female people and children is very wide ranging.

You don’t sound very well informed if you don’t understand the ramifications. From safeguarding to the need for single sex spaces in prison, refuges, changing rooms and so on. To sport. To schools. To children’s needs. From language demands to court cases.

All because some people have a philosophical belief that they have convinced decision makers should be given additional privileges that no other group has been given.

Interesting how? Why would anyone care about trans men lying, stealing, cheating or even killing someone? That doesn't make us any different from the rest of the population. In particular, we don't do anything that threatens women or women's rights, which would be the focus of a feminist board.

But they're not getting access to our spaces so that's sorted. I don't know about you but I've had far more bother, aggression, unwanted sexual attention and forced attention etc etc from the average man many times in my life yet none of that from a trans woman. So it seems very unbalanced to continually go on and on about trans women and trans people in general.

I imagine the list of things you can't fathom is rather long.

Because they are men.

@NoKnittingAllowed

You keep talking about the average men and the danger they represent. How do you distinguish between these average men and trans women?

I’m not sure why this simple fact is being repeatedly ignored…

Have you missed the discussion from transgender ex-judges and barristers where they have stated that they are determined to ignore the law? And to find any way to either change it or have it declared invalid.

And we have discussed female people with transgender identities. Perhaps you missed those discussions. Or perhaps you have just missed the fact that they are included in feminist discussion. Because feminism is centred on all female people of any age, including those who say they are not women or girls?

At this point you seem rather ill informed to be attempting to censure others who are up to date on these discussions.

If you're aware of any trans men having done bad things, feel free to start a thread about that.

I am not aware of any.

There are about the same number of trans-identifying men in the UK as there are Jewish people. If you've never had bother, aggression, unwanted sexual attention and forced attention etc etc from a Jewish man, does that mean it's OK to let Jewish men access women's spaces? Or should they still stay the hell out because they are MEN?

And the SC rulling does not mean that men will stay out of women's spaces. It simply means that if a service is legitimately provided for women, then trans-identified men cannot use it. If the service provider does not want to police this for any reason, all that will happen is that services will become mixed sex. Whoopee for vulnerable women.

https://x.com/itsmeldaley/status/1926612928095982043?s=46

here are some of the men TRA want to have open access to women’s spaces

You read my post and you thought "genitalia"? Wow. I think that's a you thing, sweetie. (And yes, it is creepy AF of you).

Women are not a collection of body parts. A female human body is a complete thing in its own right, a living human entity, a mind and a body together, one thing. The experience of womanhood is the experience of life as a female person, yes the genitals but also the arms, the lungs, the feel of expectations and sanctions, social approval and social judgement, the joy, the fear, the risk, the safety, the frustration, the privilege, the recognition of others, the recognition of self, the experience of others' reactions and reacting to them in turn. Human life in the female. Not mystical bollocks about feminine energy but the simple fact of turning up every day of your life human and female, and every day dealing with that fact and what it means physically and socially, for better or for worse.

But yeah, sure, "genitals". If that is all that you see as worth noticing in the embodied fact of womanhood, I pity you.