A little piece of insight

[Tandora]

Into a topic so woefully misunderstood.

🎯💯

I think the sticking point comes with the position that it is a reasonable to expect the whole of society to participate in the treatment of gender dysphoria.

If treatment is to enable full participation in life, it needs to include building resilience to accept that sex is binary and immutable and that the treatment of social / medical transition, whilst alleviating symptoms, doesn’t change one’s sex. Patients need to understand that their dating pool will reduce, that some people will not want to participate in affirmation, and the law will require them to be placed in the sex category that aligns with their sex ( not gender identity) in some instances. They also need to be supported to understand that whilst some people are transphobic, the experiences listed above aren’t driven by transphobia.

Trans activism has been very damaging for people who live with gender dysphoria. Firstly, by including fetishists under the trans umbrella, and then by insisting that sex is redundant/ impossible to determine etc.

True advocacy would raise awareness of the condition and promote REASONABLE adjustments that don’t undermine other’s rights.

I think that a very small number of people do experience gender dysphoria and that it is a life long condition. I think there are many others who want to flee from their sex as a result of homophobia or toxic gendered expectations. I think there are also a small number of (very visible) males who have fetishes that involve social/ physical transition.

Anorexia is not incompatible with life, though it can lead to death in some instances. It’s based on a false perception of self. We treat it because it’s an illness that’s damaging both physically and psychologically, in the same way that we treat many other illnesses. Thinking oneself to be the opposite sex is also a false perception of self, as it is materially untrue. Treatments such as puberty blockers, cross sex hormones and surgeries are often damaging - sometimes indeed leading to death - and are generally incompatible with normal sexual functioning, which is why they should be discouraged.
Both anorexics and trans-identifying people can cause great suffering not only to themselves, but to those who love and care for them, though trans-identifying people’s demands of society as a whole, and their impact on women in particular, are far greater and more insistent.

The ‘cure’ to gender dysphoria is not to affirm - anymore that the cure to DID is to affirm the individual personalities, or the cure to schizophrenia is to affirm the voices telling you to kill someone/yourself. The ‘cure’ [sic] for these mental illness is treatment in the form of long-term therapy and medication that helps the individual understand the underlying reasons for their illness and find a way to overcome it. As with anorexics, alcoholics, or even just depression, there isn’t really a cure but a coming to terms with or a learning to live with it.

So much misunderstanding of psychological and psychiatric distress and illness on this thread by certain parties.

as always I assume Tandora is a deep state GC double agent

for years Tan has posted the same arguments a loop, leaving numerous goals wide open for us to demolish them with clear well reasoned posts with receipts and references to research and the law

Thanks for the opportunities Tan

if a woman cannot understand what it is to be trans… surely a male with a trans identity cannot understand what it is to be a woman?

Seventeen pages I've scrolled through to see if @Tandora has addressed this point.

Have I missed it?

Also just came on to see if the question has been answered. I think it is indeed the case that Tandora@ thinks women should welcome men into their single sex spaces but won't just come out and say that.

Thought you all might enjoy my AI song lyrics 🎵 🎶

What’s A Woman? (FWS v Scottish Ministers)

Verse 1:
For Women Scotland said “Hold on a minute,
We need to talk about who’s really in it”
The Scottish Ministers changed the rules one day
And FWS said “No way, José!”
They marched into court with receipts in hand
Said “Let’s check what Parliament actually planned
In 2010 they wrote it down clear
But somebody’s been creative here”

Chorus:
You can’t just change the dictionary
‘Cause you think biology’s scary
When the law says “sex” it means what it meant
Not whatever’s convenient!
The judge said “Sorry, not today,
Words mean things, come what may!”

Verse 2:
The government lawyers in their fancy suits
Tried redefining words right down to their roots
But the judge flipped through the legal pages
And said “This word hasn’t changed in ages!”
“When Parliament wrote the Equality Act
They meant biological sex, and that’s a fact
You can’t just scribble in the margins with a pen
And pretend it said something different back then”

Chorus:
You can’t just change the dictionary
‘Cause you think biology’s scary
When the law says “sex” it means what it meant
Not whatever’s convenient!
The judge said “Sorry, not today,
Words mean things, come what may!”

Bridge:
It’s like Humpty Dumpty on the wall
“Words mean what I say, that’s all!”
But the courts said “Nice try, but no,
That’s not how legislation goes”

Final Chorus:
You can’t just change the dictionary
Or rewrite legal history
When Parliament speaks, it says what it meant
You can’t just reinvent it!
For Women Scotland won the day
Words still mean things - hooray!

Outro:
So here’s the lesson, plain and simple:
Don’t mess with words, it causes a kerfuffle
When the law says “sex” - here’s the scoop -
It doesn’t mean whatever floats your group!

not sure about the last bit but 🤣 reasonably happy

Oh but these articles were full of the harms to others caused by "homosexual ideology". That was what gave rise to the fear and the anger. They contended that homosexual ideology was responsible for the spread of HIV and AIDS (because of higher rates of infection in these populations and the increased risk of HIV transmission through anal sex). They claimed that homosexuality was a dangerous form of sexual perversion/ social contagion, corrupting innocent children and creating the conditions for paedophilia and sexual abuse . They said that "homosexual ideology" was destroying families and compromising fertility and sexual health. The said that homosexuality was dangerous to women - (your husband cheats with a man, contracts HIV and gives it to you and your children), etc , etc.

The parallels to the fears in the UK right now about so-called "trans ideology" are very striking.

Do you think women should accept biological men into their single sex spaces and categories?

@Tandora if a woman doesn’t want to sleep with men, is it ok to tell a “trans woman” trying to hit on her that it’s because she’s a lesbian?

Being trans is not being homosexual.

The comparison is illogical, inaccurate and offensive

HTH.

No, Tandora.

That you see "parallels" here is wrong and highly offensive.

Take that on board please.

Gay people successfully won their rights because being gay doesn't have any impact on anyone else. They didn't even demand that religious groups who don't accept it make any changes; they simply asked to be able to get married in law and be able to create suitable services and spaces in addition to the existing ones.

Trans ideology demands that everything around it change to reflect the person's false self image and that no spaces exist that do not affirm this false self image. If you guys did what gay people did - campaign for third spaces and use them - you'd have been successful like gay people were. You don't, because you don't want a safe and suitable space, you want to impose your religion on literally everybody and leave no suitable space for women who can't tolerate a mixed sex space or who need one. You want all women to act as props for male self image and you don't give a shit about the cost to them.

That's the big difference and that's why gay people won and you lost. Gay people also didn't have a side hustle in trying to sterilise children or keep them artificially prepubescent.

Another load of word salad nonsense with nothing original, avoidance of questions, and failure of logic. Don’t TRAs ever get together and try and come up with something new?

The parallels to the fears in the UK right now about so-called "trans ideology" are very striking.

Women having to fight to defend hard earned rights or to be treated as human beings that matter has so many historical parallels it’s hard to know where to start, and those parallels at least make logical sense.

No, access to naked and unconsenting women and girls is not a male mental health therapy.

Therapy resolves - or at least tries to resolve - the mental health issue... TQ+ ideology tries to resolve society in a way that, if successful, embeds the mental health issue that trans people are dealing with, and not only that it does it in a way that damages the mental health of the 99%.

Ok. So we let a trans person live their life as they wish. They can wear what they like, call themselves what they like but they cannot force others to participate. That means they use the facilities compatible with their sex and they cannot complain if people refuse to go along with their wishes.

The entirely incorrect analogy to being gay is irrelevant. Being same-sex (sex not gender) attracted has no effect on women's rights.
Again, every single argument is irrelevant to the crux of the matter which is that males cannot have access to female spaces and prizes because they are male.
They can and do have all the rights that apply to everyone, and they can and do have their added rights under gender reassignment.
They can also, I'm sure (if they put their minds, power, money and privilege to the matter) have their own, third spaces.
So, I don't care that people who dont understand biology or logic or law or history think that me saying 'no males in female spaces' is homophobic. In the same way that I don't care about the sadness or the existence or the other utterly spurious emotional blackmail.

I’d forgotten that particular comment, Arabella.

It really does sum up the irony of the argument (paraphrased), “Can’t you tell if someone’s distressed in your presence [so as to decide whether to remain in their presence]?)”

Again this is where you need to get out of your own head- this isn't about some grand theory of sex/ gender or "what a woman is". It's not about stereotypes or clothes or projection.

A trans woman knows they are a trans woman simply because of the acute psychological pain / torture/ disorientation / dissasociatjon they experience when someone calls them / perceives them as a man. And conversely the complete absence of this when someone calls/ recognises them as a woman- which feels psychologically comfortable/ right/ true/ makes sense. Thats it. Thats how they know,

I already answered the question about anorexia- it's simple and obvious: read my posts .

To the contrary, I suggest you reflect carefully on the parallels - they will tell you something urgent and important.

If he wants to pretend he's a woman, that's up to him. If he wants me to pretend he's a woman, that's up to me. You do not get to police and coerce thought and belief, no matter how much emotional blackmail you employ.