Help me argue that What it Feels Like For a Girl doesn't prove terfs are wrong

[Pluvia]

I'm in a women's discussion group with a woman who is an expert in her field of medicine. She's worked for some years with the WHO and other major agencies and has only recently returned to the UK after about a decade working in Geneva, with stints in Ethiopia and elsewhere in the developing world. Her specialist field is a particular area of women's health. She knows what a woman is.

Sex realism/ the GC pov seems to have completely passed her by. She has no idea of the complexity or reality of the situation and thinks trans people are vulnerable souls who probably have some genetic or neurological predisposition that leaves them feeling that they are in the wrong bodies. She thinks Cass is unduly harsh. Although her life appears to be focussed around women's health, she seems blind to the feminist or women's rights issues inherent in GI.

She has no idea about sexual fetishes, AGP, attacks on women, the misogyny and homophobia that lies behind so much GI. She can't understand how someone like me, who appears to be so reasonable on so many other topics, can be so cruel when it comes to transpeople. I asked her to read Helen Joyce's Trans and she said she tried but couldn't bear the hatred that she experienced in the first few chapters. She has now sent me a link to What It Feels Like For a Girl. which, she says, will show me what I've misunderstood and why my attitude is so harsh.

I'm not going to watch WIFLFAG and give a misogynistic, homophobic gay man any oxygen. Any thoughts on what I can say that might get through to her? At what point with people like her does one just give up?

Lots of males are in some minority group or other. Should a centenarian male be allowed to invade female spaces, and would he be the victim if women told him to get out?

Perhaps she could explain to you why she thinks watching that series would convince you - and, crucially, what she thinks it would convince you of?

The difficulties with all these conversations is that the split in opinion comes so early in the discussion. I remember a thread on here long ago about women’s sport. There was at least one poster on the thread arguing for transwomen in women’s sport (less common these days although I’ve seen at least one in recent days which felt a bit retro). They started their post something like ‘so let’s start from accepting that transwomen are women…’ at which the debate is already over because nobody on the GC side is going to accept that.

So it’s possible that her belief is that the series will convince you that Paris Lees, and/or the (presumably) transwoman actor playing her, is a woman; or should be treated as a woman by others; or IS treated as a woman by others, particularly when being fucked for money by men. Does she genuinely think that is what makes someone a woman - being fucked by men? I mean, presumably not. I’m sure she doesn’t think that, and she must know that you don’t think that. But exactly what does she think is going to change your view of being female when you see this, or what changed for her when she saw it?

What is a transperson? Is there a criteria one must follow to be trans? Or can anyone say they are trans?

See how you ignore facts and just plough on saying the same erroneous stuff post after post! The House of Commons has apologised after mistakenly letting a male person (transwoman, RMW) use the female toilets RMW shouldn’t have been in those toilets and they were wrong to allow RMW in - for which they’ve apologised.

Why? It’s like watching films about why the earth is flat or the moon landing was faked. Pointless waste of time.

This sort of comment is just silly and trying to be goady for some reason. I think we all know what trans people are, after all there are hundreds of threads discussing them so what is your point?

it is perfectly clear in law that toilets labelled as single sex (either in words: "ladies", "women", "gents", "men"; or in symbols) are for the sex indicated. In this case, there were also toilets indicated for anyone of either sex. Any decent person, and it is clear that White is no such thing, uses facilities intended for their use. I'm not a lawyer and don't have any opinion on the legality of White's actions, but he should abide by the social contract that has kept me out of the Ladies since I was an old enough boy to let go of my mother's hand and venture into the terrifying world of the Gents, where as a lad I was at least as vulnerable as the rather imposing White.

Opinions differ on this even amongst trans activists: "truscum" versus "tucute" perspectives. It's worth asking the question.

Women would be women, whether or not there were any trans people in the world.

And transwomen would not be transwomen if there were no women in the world.

Very true.

No, it's not really silly. Even - or especially - amongst trans people and their allies, there are quite bitter disagreements about who actually qualifies to be trans. If you Google "define trutrans" you will get a glimpse of at least one of the issues. Opinions range from "you have to have always felt like that, had full surgery and hormones, and got a GRC' to "if I happen to feel like a woman this morning, I'm a woman, till I feel like a man again."

Oh god I need a lie down 🤣

It's easy to see what India Willoughby, Pips Bunce and Isla Bryson have in common with each other.

Clue: it's something they don't have in common with women.

Well, take my advice and don't Google "transmaxxing", it'll finish you off!

OP I can see why you couldn't watch much of the series. I struggled to make it through the first episode. It's all a bit grim so far

🤣🤣🤣

Well no, there is no definition of trans. Do you mean those who have had treatment and surgery, those who just say they are trans, non binary( who are definitely a not a minority as 99% of people don’t conform to gender norms), the other 100 genders or another definition?

No, it's not really silly. Even - or especially - amongst trans people and their allies, there are quite bitter disagreements about who actually qualifies to be trans.

Even vocal TRA India Willoughby doesn't agree with self ID. Only 'good' transwomen can be real dontcha know.

We don't as there's no clear transition (change), no defined steps and it never ends. When we are all dead in the ground our remains will even show the sex we were.

It’s not a silly question at all

Trans people don’t even agree on this topic

If a non trans identifying male walked in to the toilets would it be harassment if the women told him to leave?

This transgender barristers? I believe he’s over 6 feet tall.

He apparently also entered the ladies after the two women, has used the facilities before so knows the setup and there was a mixed sex toilet really close to the ladies.

@Pluvia sorry, we seem to have derailed this rather. If it's any help, some of the things that pushed me from "just be kind" to "be kind wisely or not at all" included:

No Debate and the chilling of academic and publishing freedoms; and the women hounded out of their jobs for daring to dissent.

The callous disrespect (or worse) for the needs and feelings of women in states of extreme vulnerability, like prisoners and rape victims; what sort of "woman" would think and behave like that?

The relentless malice and obsessively sexualised filth of the comments directed at JKR ( there was a spread of them shown in the New European once) and others who have dared to speak up, coupled with the steady trickle of very unpleasant cases in the news involving trans-identified perpetrators.

It showed me that however harmless some transpeople might be, transactivism was not harmless. Either there were a surprising number of unpleasant people amongst the "tiny minority" itself, or a significant number of unpleasant non trans people had spotted a handy bandwagon for misogynistic behaviour and breaches of safeguarding and women's safe spaces, and the decent trans people were unable to stop them. Either way, the "just be kind" granting of concessions to people who said they were trans was beginning to look problematic.

Maybe try it from the perspective that trans people are being let down hugely and that they are victims of a society that doesn't tolerate feminine makes and masculine females. It's fundamentally our culture that is insisting what being a female looks like and feels like. It's regressive and ultimately it's the trans person who pays the price with their body. I find this more frustrating than the other aspects that are often cited (female spaces etc...) and while I recognise those arguments it's the damage done to these people that hits me in the stomach.

I know a couple of trans people and know they are not AGP etc... but I also know they have been hugely let down by people who should be caring for them.

@EmptyPocketBlues
Trans people are not a stable, defined cohort. Any and all men could declare themselves to be women at any point. Are they trans or not? Are all men a minority?

Some people - especially young people and children - who declare an identity may do so because they are being bullied, or are social misfits or autistic or vulnerable in some way. Declaring themselves trans gains them an instant uplift in status and may enable them to bully other people.
The bad prior experiences do not equate to trans people being discriminated against or harassed for being trans. Not joining in with their subjective view is not oppressive.