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.

TM are women, 98% of sexual crimes are carried out by men, with the overwhelming majority of victims being women. We’re at risk from men, not women.

We are capable of doing more than one thing at once you know.

We aren't obsessed with transwomen. We are rational people who realised years ago what the Supreme Court confirmed recently - it is rationally impossible to have any kind of objective definition for which male people are allowed in female spaces that doesn't boil down to "this space is for female people plus any male person who wishes to enter" and that effectively means the same thing as a mixed-sex space, and the abolition of all female spaces. There is no set of definitions that allow lovely kind and nice transwomen in that won’t also allow in every male sex offender, no matter what gender they are.

The only way of making a space that has any benefit for women is to say that all honorable, decent and trustworthy male people stay out, regardless of gender, so that we know that any male person in there is not honorable, decent or trustworthy and we can act accordingly.

It would only be interesting if it was true, or don’t facts matter?

It’s not just about which spaces they use and they are not taking the SC well either.

You don’t think they are just going to accept the SC ruling and go away do you? Their propaganda wagon has leapt into overdrive, the BBC have featured countless ‘poor, sad ‘transwomen’ and they are organising protests and soliciting ‘allyship’ commitments from organisations up and down the country.

Tell you what, you shout about the issues you’re concerned with and we will continue to deal with the issues we know about and combat the heinous and insidious effects of #nodebate that linger. Deal?

Things like stopping the NHS from carrying out hundreds of extremely expensive penis removals of inadequately assessed, vulnerable men per year. And protecting the thousands of kids who are getting sucked into ruining their health and fertility by doctors and activists.

We’re not here to discuss our trauma in detail with you, that’s really inappropriate.

It’s just deflect, deflect, deflect. I think it’s clear what the motivation is here.

You can't possibly think that transwomen are different to any other men. In fact...

Firstly, statistically, they are over representated in prison for sex offences.

Secondly, they have started their own porn genre, on porn hub, in women's toilets, wanking all over them.

Thirdly, they love nothing more than to pose in women's toilets with knives, with their penises out, with their legs up on the sinks (don't really get that one, but whatever).

Fourthly, they are already in there without women's consent.

Fifthly, they are currently all over London, with their moobs exposed, threatening women and last week were pissing up statues.

I mean, I could go on. But when you get an entire cohort of men threatening to kill women, threatening to rape them, battering them at rallies, blacking their eyes, getting them fired, doxed and arrested, i'm going to hazard a guess, and say you're probably on a teensy weensy bit of a hiding to nothing asking why we don't want them in our private spaces.

Brace yourself.

@NoKnittingAllowed

Much like yourself presenting as a trans male the majority of trans women will present as trans women therefore I can see the difference between a trans woman and an average man

One of these is a man who claims to be a woman and inserts himself into places such as women's refuges. Another is a part-timer who claims to be a woman on some days and a man on other days. He has been given an award for women in business. The third is somewhat more in touch with reality. What difference can you see between them? Can you even tell which is which without googling?

Bodies with holes.

In response to the OP's 'words' query. Seeing women referred to by such a reductive term as 'Bodies with Holes' on cover of the world's leading medical journal - the fucking Lancet - enraged me.

Now that phrase indicated an obsession with genitals.

Oh yes, who can forget birthing bodies and menstruators.

I've yet to see any transwoman referred to as an ejaculator, or an inseminator, funnily enough.

And the "fully functioning" neo vagina. Which, contrary to the name, only performs one of the many functions of an actual vagina. Guess which one.

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.

Once understood, everything that been done to accommodate and promote trans identities seems strange.

Even the most committed TRA acknowledge that men are responsible for the majority of violence and sexual assault. But once a man declares that he is trans, safeguarding and caution is disregarded. And this is for any man at any time.

Politicians have been caught out imposing this ideology on society. They are the ones who wrote laws regarding safeguarding and equality, then allowed men to ignore it. Now the SC has exposed this, politicans are yet to acknowledge their mistakes.

So yes, I'll admit I'm going to remain obsessed with men with gender identities until the government stop giving men this protected class status.

Lots of articles and debates about trans women in women’s sports. But what about trans men in men’s sport. You don’t hear about that. I haven’t read a single article about a trans man getting kicked out a men’s football club or rugby club. All this talk about what is woman. Why is no one asking the saying thing about what is a man.

I seem to remember about 25 years ago a Trans man doing well in a caber toss competition in Scotland, and some big hairy men getting a bit upset about it...

However, I suspect Trans men, having been raised female have internalised not taking up space and keeping their mouths shut. Perhaps other players don't kick up about it because TM don't generally have a physical advantage or an intimidation factor, so it's not a concern?

Yup 100% agree.

Thinking on this, I find it remarkable that someone would be arbitrarily designating who is and isn’t a male with transgender identity based on whether that person has abused or assaulted you (a general you). I am sorry to hear about @NoKnittingAllowed ‘s trauma. However, this definition is meaningless. Absolutely meaningless.

Because that category of male people, transgender male people, according to that definition now includes all the lovely male people in the world who have not abused or assaulted anyone.

If you, general you not this poster personally, make statements that the difference between two groups of male people is their offending rate based on a purely idealised, completely misinformed and factually incorrect belief that male people with transgender identities don’t assault or abuse people, you really are not making any convincing argument at all. You (still general you) are showing yourself as someone who simply wishes to shame others who have the knowledge that you lack.

But in repeatedly posting to shame others, you (still general) have simply shown that you are doing so from a position of zealous ignorance. Ignoring what conviction rates have shown and indeed what a very quick trip to social media platforms show to be false.

This really has been a type of post that supports Flirt’s OP though.

This.

I would actually rather have to share these spaces with the average man than with a man who claims to identify as a woman.

What is the difference between a TW and an average man?

Firstly, because a female person who has specifically chosen to compete in male sports events should be doing so knowing it is them that is at risk of injury and harm. Those female people are not placing male people at risk of injury because those female people do not have a competitive or a physical advantage in sports over the male people they compete in.

Secondly, because based on pure numbers, because of that risk and because of the fact they are also likely to be uncompetitive in the male category, the presence of female people in male sports categories is very rare. Plus female people with transgender identities that do not take testosterone, compete in female sports. Even at Olympic level.

If you also don’t understand the difference in dynamic between a person who is part of the oppressor class, who has benefited from the oppression of female people collectively for millennia, identifying into the oppressed class vs the opposite then I am not sure how to help you understand the group dynamics.

Plus, if a female person is competitive in a male sports category, comparing like for like, then it is also understood that female person is an exceptional athlete compared to the male people she is competing with. Because that female person has greater skill or talent to overcome male physical advantages.

We discuss daily ‘what is a man’ though. Perhaps you just don’t read posts closely enough. So many of us discuss who is a man on this board every single day.

I think it is appropriate to add to this thread a reminder of who are the male people that we women are being told that we should no longer be discussing. The male people who are still using female single sex spaces despite clarification that they should not be by law.

Here is the “vulnerable tiny minority” making threats that women should be afraid of them.

https://x.com/gerrykeogh_/status/1926622168000983489?s=46

Here is another male person standing with a police officer in a photo frame with a sign that also says women should be afraid. And that police officer is supporting that sentiment.

https://x.com/gerrykeogh_/status/1926652333565358394?s=46

But apparently, female people should stop discussing this group of male people. And they apparently are no where near as harmful as the ‘average man” and are different somehow to the ‘average man”.

Translation: I can't be arsed to do some research so I'll throw the words 'creepy as fuck' about in a verbal weaponised attack (see OP subject matter about the weaponisation of words) to try and silence people who talk about this.

This is an example of the OPs point in real time.

I would like to thank StMarie4me for their valuable contribution to the thread in helping to highlight the subject.

I think a fair number of transwomen have lived a full life as a man, got married, had children etc, before announcing they had been a woman all along.
How would you tell those ones apart from ‘ordinary men’ or are you only a transwoman when you put a dress and makeup on? Were they not really women until then? Even though they ‘knew inside’ they were. Is there some way of easily telling a closeted transwoman who is a married father from a man who is a married father? How would you know which one is a man on the inside, and which one is a saintly woman on the inside?

We're not bothered by trans people. Live and let live, say I.

TRAs though, seem to be inordinately bothered by the existence of women's sex-based rights (mostly consisting, for boring physiological reasons, of the right to sometimes exclude men).

They're bothered enough to picket a women's meeting centred on FGM, and commit literal violence.

They're bothered enough to set off the fire alarm in a library because a women's group was having a meeting to set up an NHS women's health survey.

They're bothered enough to withhold funding from services with women-only provision (even when it's additional to trans-inclusive provision, not instead of it).

They're bothered enough to call the police about not being allowed into a private home hosting a rape survivors group.

They're bothered enough to cancel the Labour Party National Women's Conference, because heaven forfend the women should be allowed to meet without letting men in.

Why are you so bothered by women having rights? It's creepy AF.