Well, hello Emma Watson

[crumpet]

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-15130209/Harry-Potter-Emma-Watson-treasures-J-K-Rowling-trans-rights.html

Ah yes. Laurie Penny. A woman who claims not to be a woman because she thinks being a woman is so boring and uncool unless you are the kind of woman who has a penis, in which case it's stunning and brave, and who thinks we don't need a word for female people.

So progressive. Much feminist.

How do humans reproduce?

Tandora has tried to complicate it more recently, as the house of cards tumbles further every day, but ultimately the argument is the lie that trans women are women. That's the dishonest premise that all of this nonsense stands on, and it's why they all tried to enforce No Debate.

It's untrue, we know it's untrue, they know it's untrue. If Tandora really cared about safety for trans people, the emphasis would be on campaigning for third unisex spaces and for men to welcome TW in their spaces. Instead, the priority has always been to pressure women to accept men in their spaces, sometimes by exploiting DSDs, always with dishonest and absurd premises.

The priority is clear. Male wants over female needs and reality itself.

OK but it's not your call. If we say it has a negative impact on women, then it does, because we are women and we say so.

If you believe that not getting changed next to women with penises has a negative impact on you, feel free to campaign for separate spaces for people who identify as whatever the fuck it is you believe both you and trans identifying men are identifying as.

Because (as you surely know) I do not share your understandings of "male", "female" and "female space". I think your understandings of these things are reductive, false and based on ignorance/ prejudice.

Er…. You don’t know what a male and a female is? Dear Lord. Your parents and teachers failed you so badly. You poor poor child.

Yet reason, judgement and all the evidence says it does. You cannot argue against that.

They're based on science and reality.

OK but it's not your call. If we say it has a negative impact on women, then it does, because we are women and we say so.

😂
Just because you as an individual declares that something negatively affects you - it doesn't follow that society must therefore automatically be organised in ways that also impact others. Surely you understand this basic principle?

So no idea about human reproduction then?

Funny how much easier it is for men to ignore the role of each sex in reproduction than it is for women. I wonder why that might be?

I understand that is your opinion.

I disagree with it entirely.

But a clear majority of women in the UK want female only spaces.

For some reason you want society to be organised in a way that benefits a small number of trans identifying men at the expense of a majority of women and girls.

Why?

Any idea @Tandora ?

No, it's not my opinion. It's a fact.

My understanding is based on millennia of history. It's based on educated, on experience. It is not ignorance or prejudice to say that sex matters and the female sex are the oppressed sex and rape survivors like me need female only spaces.

It is ignoring millennia of history, of females lived experience to deny sex is real and matters and the female sex need safety, dignity and privacy away from the male sex. To deny this, show you are deeply ill-informed, ignorant and prejudiced. And misogynistic. Males are the oppressors. Females are the oppressed. Female spaces exist because males are a threat. It is ignorance to not understand this.

Laurie has got a lot of mileage out of being a feminist pundit, for someone who claims not to be a woman (except when it suits her).

Didn't she write a book about feminism and then claim to have developed complex PTSD as a result of actual feminists writing unflattering reviews of it?

Your mob believes the female sex don't exist, that our rights aren't sex-based and that every single thing our foremother feminists (rest their souls) fought for was.... all for nothing.

That's true - this is a quote from India WIlloughby

'There are no “sex-based rights” in the UK - Suffragettes rightly got rid of them.'

Just because you as an individual declares that something negatively affects you - it doesn't follow that society must therefore automatically be organised in ways that also impact others.

Jeez, the irony and lack of awareness here!

The thing is Tandora, you have this habit of seeming to use the same words as the rest of us for page after page, so it's not clear what the disagreement is, then you do this Aleister Crowley type thing of saying "I'm using these common words with an esoteric meaning that you muggles don't understand", but you don't tell us what that esoteric meaning is.

This makes it rather difficult to have an exchange of views.

I think what you mean is that it's very important to have female spaces that are billed as "single sex", but it's much more important that male people with a certain philosophical belief should be able to access these "female" "single sex" spaces on their own say so.

Most people don't agree with this. It might be more useful to recognise that yours is the minority view, and think about how you might convince people that your view is the correct one.

Indeed.

Society shouldn't be organised around the clear wish of a majority of people to have single sex spaces, but it should be organised around how a tiny minority of people claim to perceive themselves.

Because that makes total sense.

Hail Mulvaneys 😂

She cracks me up

There are 2 sexes, male and female. There are however many religions and belief systems, and if people wish to believe that they are a different, other sex, and if they wish to have different spaces for people identifying as this different sex, they are of course free to campaign for this.
That, however, doesn't change biology. So no discussion can ever sensibly be based on the premiss that there is a third sex that has to use female rights.
It's rather akin to the idea of teaching creationism under the auspices of 'science'.
Of course people have a right to believe in creationism and reject evolution. However, one is based on a belief system and one is based on science. No discussion about creationism 'versus' evolution can be had if we pretend that they are simply different opinions based on the same premiss. One is based on religion and one on science.

I love that you've just admitted you disagree with science and reality.

Most people don't agree with this

Apart from anything else, here in the earthly realm, a space can't be simultaneously mixed sex and single sex.