Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Is it safety or separation?

660 replies

OneFlakyMaker · 20/09/2025 05:54

When opposing transgender people in women's spaces, are you looking for safe spaces or separate spaces?

They may overlap but are not the same thing, and while a lot of the discussion is focused on safety, the tone and some arguments hint that addressing safety won't be enough for many people to feel comfortable. Instead, a place without males is sought.

I read one woman described it "At the club we used the women's bathroom to get a break from interacting with men".

OP posts:
Helleofabore · 22/09/2025 09:52

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:47

It means that the charges of MN being a propaganda source are legitimate given the there's no serious engagement in discussion on some issues (Certainly not all) rather a defensive & disinformation stance.

What a remarkable statement coming from you who has spread misinformation over threads for weeks.

Datun · 22/09/2025 09:53

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:47

It means that the charges of MN being a propaganda source are legitimate given the there's no serious engagement in discussion on some issues (Certainly not all) rather a defensive & disinformation stance.

One has to wonder exactly what there is left to discuss.

Men have to stay out of the ladies. Debate finished.

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:54

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 22/09/2025 09:56

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:44

False equivalence.
You are assuming there isn't a commonality there when as we have already discussed there clearly is.

No. You asserted. I disagreed. I showed the flaws in your logic and the lies in ypur claims.

You have given no basis for your self-serving belief that "commonalities" of behaviour cherry picked by you should be more relevant than the undeniable commonalities of sex and sex based experiences women share.

We all see that you do not in fact have any real organising principles behind your beliefs. You just twist in the wind grabbing any disjointed assertion that you think will serve your real cause of inserting yourself into female only spaces and concepts.

But at the end of the day, female people exist. We are a material reality in the world and you cannot word-salad that away.

Any argument you make that does not respect that simple fact, the reality of female existence, is easily demolished by the material fact of our existence.

And any argument you make that does respect that simple fact cannot give you what you want.

Give it up mate. What you want is not fair and it's not reasonable. Drill down and it is based on nothing more than the lies men tell each other about women and the social power of men to impose it on to women.

TheKeatingFive · 22/09/2025 09:57

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

You're absolutely deluded. The position on here has always been clear. No men in women's spaces because they are men. Very simple. What don't you understand about that?

Taztoy · 22/09/2025 09:57

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I’ve engaged. Both with the op and with you.

you have ignored me.

How is my reasoning for a safe space due to my violent rape and sexual assault a “collective psychosis”?

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:58

FlirtsWithRhinos · 22/09/2025 09:56

No. You asserted. I disagreed. I showed the flaws in your logic and the lies in ypur claims.

You have given no basis for your self-serving belief that "commonalities" of behaviour cherry picked by you should be more relevant than the undeniable commonalities of sex and sex based experiences women share.

We all see that you do not in fact have any real organising principles behind your beliefs. You just twist in the wind grabbing any disjointed assertion that you think will serve your real cause of inserting yourself into female only spaces and concepts.

But at the end of the day, female people exist. We are a material reality in the world and you cannot word-salad that away.

Any argument you make that does not respect that simple fact, the reality of female existence, is easily demolished by the material fact of our existence.

And any argument you make that does respect that simple fact cannot give you what you want.

Give it up mate. What you want is not fair and it's not reasonable. Drill down and it is based on nothing more than the lies men tell each other about women and the social power of men to impose it on to women.

Are you suggesting men & women on average are identical in respect to behavioural, psychological & cultural traits?

Go ahead, shock me by not dodging again….

RedToothBrush · 22/09/2025 10:00

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

The point is PRECISELY that we SHOULD NOT be engaging with the question, because it's a dishonest question that only benefits men.

The point is PRECISELY that we SHOULD NOT be engaging with questions that seek to create a narrative that safeguarding is ever illegitimate and that it's akin to racism. Because it's a false equivalence and this narrative only benefits men.

The point is PRECISELY that we SHOULD NOT be engaging with people who are either creeps, pervs or enable them.

Glad you are keeping up with previous posts and having a hissy fit over the fact that we refuse to let you control the narrative and undermine women's existing lawful rights.

The answer is no. We aren't going to play by your rules because they don't work for us. It IS that simple.

Taztoy · 22/09/2025 10:01

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:58

Are you suggesting men & women on average are identical in respect to behavioural, psychological & cultural traits?

Go ahead, shock me by not dodging again….

No. They’re not identical. Neither are they identical by reference to their sex. The law gives protection on the grounds of sex, not on the grounds of behavioural and psychological traits.

Cultural traits may or may not be protected under law depending on the specific situation under discussion.

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:02

RedToothBrush · 22/09/2025 10:00

The point is PRECISELY that we SHOULD NOT be engaging with the question, because it's a dishonest question that only benefits men.

The point is PRECISELY that we SHOULD NOT be engaging with questions that seek to create a narrative that safeguarding is ever illegitimate and that it's akin to racism. Because it's a false equivalence and this narrative only benefits men.

The point is PRECISELY that we SHOULD NOT be engaging with people who are either creeps, pervs or enable them.

Glad you are keeping up with previous posts and having a hissy fit over the fact that we refuse to let you control the narrative and undermine women's existing lawful rights.

The answer is no. We aren't going to play by your rules because they don't work for us. It IS that simple.

Seeeee the conspiratorial thingy I mentioned upthread?

Taztoy · 22/09/2025 10:03

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:02

Seeeee the conspiratorial thingy I mentioned upthread?

Still ignoring me I see.

RedToothBrush · 22/09/2025 10:03

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:02

Seeeee the conspiratorial thingy I mentioned upthread?

Mate.

Take the hint.

I don't give a shit what you say and what your argument is.

It's bullshit that harms women and girls.

The end.

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:03

Taztoy · 22/09/2025 10:01

No. They’re not identical. Neither are they identical by reference to their sex. The law gives protection on the grounds of sex, not on the grounds of behavioural and psychological traits.

Cultural traits may or may not be protected under law depending on the specific situation under discussion.

Ahhhh so you admit to commonality? Progress!

Helleofabore · 22/09/2025 10:05

FlirtsWithRhinos · 22/09/2025 09:56

No. You asserted. I disagreed. I showed the flaws in your logic and the lies in ypur claims.

You have given no basis for your self-serving belief that "commonalities" of behaviour cherry picked by you should be more relevant than the undeniable commonalities of sex and sex based experiences women share.

We all see that you do not in fact have any real organising principles behind your beliefs. You just twist in the wind grabbing any disjointed assertion that you think will serve your real cause of inserting yourself into female only spaces and concepts.

But at the end of the day, female people exist. We are a material reality in the world and you cannot word-salad that away.

Any argument you make that does not respect that simple fact, the reality of female existence, is easily demolished by the material fact of our existence.

And any argument you make that does respect that simple fact cannot give you what you want.

Give it up mate. What you want is not fair and it's not reasonable. Drill down and it is based on nothing more than the lies men tell each other about women and the social power of men to impose it on to women.

Yes. ‘We’ is used correctly here.

Taztoy · 22/09/2025 10:07

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:03

Ahhhh so you admit to commonality? Progress!

I never said there weren’t commonalities of behaviours. I have many typically male hobbies, and I don’t wear dresses or skirts and I have short hair.

however, there is no commonality in terms of sex. And that means that men are not allowed into women’s single sex spaces, and neither are women allowed into men’s single sex spaces.

And that is the law. Men are not allowed into women’s groups.

and the reason for that for me personally comes down to safety. Because, as I’ve said, my violent rape and sexual assault means I need that safety.

Theswiveleyeballsinthesky · 22/09/2025 10:08

i continue to assume Hows is a deep cover GC double agent so well do they do our job for us

RedToothBrush · 22/09/2025 10:08

The mistake that Howse makes is in believing we have to give a remote toss about the feelings of men versus the needs and protections of women and girls.

We do not.

Hurty feelings are legally a lesser consideration in law than harms caused by violence or abuse. So says human rights.

And there endeth any need for further conversation.

MrsOvertonsWindow · 22/09/2025 10:09

FlirtsWithRhinos · 22/09/2025 09:56

No. You asserted. I disagreed. I showed the flaws in your logic and the lies in ypur claims.

You have given no basis for your self-serving belief that "commonalities" of behaviour cherry picked by you should be more relevant than the undeniable commonalities of sex and sex based experiences women share.

We all see that you do not in fact have any real organising principles behind your beliefs. You just twist in the wind grabbing any disjointed assertion that you think will serve your real cause of inserting yourself into female only spaces and concepts.

But at the end of the day, female people exist. We are a material reality in the world and you cannot word-salad that away.

Any argument you make that does not respect that simple fact, the reality of female existence, is easily demolished by the material fact of our existence.

And any argument you make that does respect that simple fact cannot give you what you want.

Give it up mate. What you want is not fair and it's not reasonable. Drill down and it is based on nothing more than the lies men tell each other about women and the social power of men to impose it on to women.

Great post. Poor old Hows still flailing and wailing and refusing to get the message.

Women say no.

Shortshriftandlethal · 22/09/2025 10:10

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:58

Are you suggesting men & women on average are identical in respect to behavioural, psychological & cultural traits?

Go ahead, shock me by not dodging again….

Most people acknowledge there are generalised differences between the sexes at the level of behaviour and psychology...but that is besides the point.

The point is that sex based differences are rooted in, and reflected in, the body and its biological functions. The reason we have single sex spaces is to acknowledge and respect that these differences put the female sex in a compromised and vulnerable position in relation to males; in certain and specific types of situation in which the body and its functions are highlighted or centred.

Males are generally the more predatory and sexually driven of the two sexes; displaying more paraphillias and fetishes, including voyeurism.

Helleofabore · 22/09/2025 10:12

There is certainly a commonality to how female people interact with how society treats them due to them being a group with a particular body. **

Are we still referring to the study that was self selecting, with expectation of potential compensation for that task, and asking for self reflective answers? That may or may not be accurate representations of that person’s traits at all? Answers that may be aspirational rather than rational? Is that what we are discussing ?

** that of having a body formed around the production of large gametes whether the body is producing those large gametes, will or has produced those large gametes.

Helleofabore · 22/09/2025 10:15

Theswiveleyeballsinthesky · 22/09/2025 10:08

i continue to assume Hows is a deep cover GC double agent so well do they do our job for us

Eyeballs, they are a super feminine agent! Unlike us not so super but who like a diverse range of interests and have diverse skills to match type women.

I take it that super feminine also means they possess that super empathy that allows them to see things super clearly when the rest of us don’t.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 22/09/2025 10:18

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 09:58

Are you suggesting men & women on average are identical in respect to behavioural, psychological & cultural traits?

Go ahead, shock me by not dodging again….

No, I'm saying as I always have that your self serving claim that behavioural "commonalities" between the "average" woman and a handful of self selected men, "commonalities" the significance of which is cherry picked by those men regardless of what women actually say about ourselves and our lives, are not an especially meaningful way to group people and certainly not so much more meaningful than physical sex that we can just discard any and all single sex language, rights, protections and dialogue in favour of them, nor anywhere close to being so relevant to the historic and cultural realities of female people that we can use the same word for both.

And either you know this is my position and are deliberately misrepresenting me, or you have totally failed to read my posts.

Either way, after this post you have no excuse to misrepresent me again.

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/09/2025 10:29

Anthophile · 22/09/2025 09:18

Regarding your third paragraph, while I certainly don't believe feminists in the US can't do anything ever about federal rights on abortion or paid maternity leave because their hands are tied, it's true that the US political and cultural landscape is markedly different from that of the UK and any criticism of the perceived ineffectiveness of women's rights campaigns in the US should be viewed through that lens. I assume many are vaguely aware of this, but some may not, so I think it might be helpful to briefly touch on it.

The US is a federal republic of 50 states that sometimes feel like a federation of 50 small countries with starkly different political prorities and cultural standpoints, and the UK's devolution doesn't exactly mirror US state politics.

As long as abortion rights remain a thorny issue for religious conservatives, mostly older (and some younger) Republican voters, securing federal protection for abortion is going to be difficult; Tories, or mainstream UK conservatives, don't really care about making abortion illegal as GOP politicians do. Religious conservatives have vastly more political and financial influence in the US as well.

I'm not saying the UK isn't divided on certain issues, but in the US the division appears to be much stronger not just due to political differences, but cultural views as well; championing individualism at the cost of communitarianism and safety nets might have served the US-style capitalistic growth well, but that also means things that aren't immediately cutting costs and increasing profits, like paid maternity leave, is often considered superfluous and those campaigning for such things are just told to "find new jobs that have paid maternity leave, it's your fault if you don't have it, why should the rest of us care?".

That sort of mixture of individualism and capitalism means women seeking rights on paid maternity leave are left out, again especially in Republican-controlled states where there is not tangible political appetite to push for legal changes. Without somehow getting Republican states and their political representatives on board, federal codification is a tall order.

I'm not saying it's easy, but I would expect there to have been some progress on this over the last generation, and there really hasn't been.

I would have thought that whilst the position in relation to women's rights in the US remains as dire as it is, so called feminists should not have even the smallest amount of bandwidth left over to worry about cross dressing men and their preferred pronouns.

I also think that by fannying around focusing on these luxury beliefs which most ordinary people don't share, they are putting off millions of potential supporters, including women who would obviously like to have sex based rights but don't see what feminism (by which I mean American "feminism" as opposed to real feminism) has got to do with them or how it is relevant to their lives in any way.

If women started voting for a proper, pro women Democratic Party en masse, they would have much more political clout to effect these changes. But that party doesn't exist.

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:30

FlirtsWithRhinos · 22/09/2025 10:18

No, I'm saying as I always have that your self serving claim that behavioural "commonalities" between the "average" woman and a handful of self selected men, "commonalities" the significance of which is cherry picked by those men regardless of what women actually say about ourselves and our lives, are not an especially meaningful way to group people and certainly not so much more meaningful than physical sex that we can just discard any and all single sex language, rights, protections and dialogue in favour of them, nor anywhere close to being so relevant to the historic and cultural realities of female people that we can use the same word for both.

And either you know this is my position and are deliberately misrepresenting me, or you have totally failed to read my posts.

Either way, after this post you have no excuse to misrepresent me again.

So you won't answer the question. Its inconvenient isn't it?

Just remember, omission is as good as lying….

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 22/09/2025 10:32

Howseitgoin · 22/09/2025 10:03

Ahhhh so you admit to commonality? Progress!

Nope. I have no commonality whatsoever with trans identifying men.

I have less commonality with them than I do with other men, in fact.

Swipe left for the next trending thread