Europe must not erase sex - We must resist the imposition of activist fantasies

[IwantToRetire]

When, in mid-October, MPs from the broad left-wing bloc Nouveau Front Populaire tabled a proposal in the French Parliament to remove sex from national identity cards, they prefaced it with an explanation: having one’s sex recorded on identity documents, they claimed, is bad for equality, bad for women, and especially bad for those who identify as transgender. “It is common for an individual’s appearance not to correspond to the stereotypes associated with the sex recorded on their official papers,” they argued, followed by a non sequitur of the highest order: that sex itself is an outdated stereotype.

Feminist discussion groups exploded. One woman asked, “What happened to the French? Have they gone mad?” Truth be told, the same question could be asked of many nations today: have the Irish, Portuguese, Belgians, Germans and others gone mad? And if they have not, what explains why legislators across so many states are suddenly deciding that biological sex — not only a basic fact of human reproduction but a cornerstone of equality and non-discrimination law — is a relic of the past to be discarded like phrenology or geocentrism?

The almost 70 left-wing MPs who backed the proposal in the French National Assembly also claimed that, unlike a person’s height — also recorded on ID cards — recording a person’s sex is not in line with international human rights standards set by the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the European Union. Considering recent developments in these institutions, it seems, at least on the surface, difficult to argue against that claim.

Article continues at https://thecritic.co.uk/europe-must-not-erase-sex/

The details have been ironed out in the U.K. by the SC. Sex means sex here and thank god for it.

Agreed. The return to reality is so important. A society that makes laws promoting lies, delusions and fantasies is heading nowhere. Everyone knows that only women give birth / have the potential to give birth. Sadly social media has "empowered " the flat earthers in their basements to try to overturn laws, the social contract and relaity - to the detriment of women and girls.

There are no competing rights between women and trans women because tw do not have any right to be categorised as female. The fact that in Australia sex is deemed to be changeable in law is ridiculous but it is not down to electorate approval so much as the electorate's ignorance that such an absurd idea could ever have become mainstream. That and a dollop of good old sexism.

@Howseitgoin I deeply object to you calling my right to sex based protections due to trauma as a result of my violent rape and sexual assault “manufactured moral panic”.

I can’t be behind a door where there is a man on the other side.

unless a trans woman gets extensive surgery they always code as male to me. Their voices are male. They look male. They are men.

I am legally entitled to the protection of single sex spaces and the fact that you categorise my trauma as “moral panic” is abhorrent.

where is your condemnation of the man who violently raped me? Where is your condemnation of the police for the further trauma they heaped upon me?

how about we start with the boundary pushing men who can’t be told no, instead of victim blaming women like me?

Dear Taztoy,

I am very sorry to hear of your rape & suffering. Of course I condemn rape & fully support the laws that prevent & punish rapists.

But I don't agree that trans women should be held responsible for the violence of cis men any more than all lesbians should be held responsible for the violence of some lesbians. Nor do I believe banning trans women or lesbians from public utilities would change the opportunistic nature of criminals so in that sense I consider banning trans women or lesbians an illogicality.

While I fully appreciate the presence of men can trigger post traumatic stress in sexual assault victims I don't think that justifies creating a situation where trans women are more at risk of sexual assault or not able to use necessary public utilities for the same fears of being assaulted or that cis women who are gender non conforming may be harassed as being suspected of being male. Hopefully, we can eventually reach a conclusion where competing needs can be met in re configuring public bathrooms where all will be safe.

I also worry that all this all consuming focus on bathrooms distracts us applying political pressure in finding real solutions to violence & sexual violence.

The fact that it isn't an electoral issue in Australia means the electorate isn't interested in change despite every effort by propagandists to make it so. And that you assume ignorance is a very revealing tell the demand for women's spaces was never a grass roots issue but a top down one.

Thanks for the heads up.

I have never harassed any woman for being gender non conforming. You are no doubt aware that women are much better than men at identifying sex correctly?

Your “dear” comes across as patronising given that it’s not your normal way to open a post. You might want to bear that in mind.

Trans women as a group sexually assault at the same offending pattern as men. Because they are men.

but my point wasn’t about the trans women it was about me, a woman, who has a legal right in the U.K. to single sex protection.

if trans women in the men’s bathrooms are more at risk of sexual assault (than what?) then that is a man problem. It isn’t women’s issue to solve.

again, as you do every time, you completely ignore the fact that I have a legal right to single sex spaces in the U.K. and you completely dismiss my trauma and that of millions of women like me.

The word is no. Men need to learn to accept it. Pushing back - as you are doing - is a slippery slope to rape in my opinion. It is a consent violation. I do not consent to a man in my lawful single sex space.

why should I be forced to stay at home because men won’t obey the law? By admitting men to women’s spaces you are excluding millions of women. And forcing them to stay at home to please a small percentage of men. And the law says no.

'Trans' IDing men are men, let men deal with their own issues and stop expecting women to clear up all the mess they make.

If you want to focus on finding real solutions for violence and sexual violence, first you have to acknowledge that the most violence is perpetrated by men and that such a thing as sex exists and that sex is immutable and cannot be changed.

Most of the violence 'trans' IDing people face is from they're own community, not the community at large, find away to make that community less toxic and you might solve the problems 'trans' IDing people face.

Single sex spaces are wanted and necessary, end of. We don't need to have a reason for it, because we want them is enough. No men in women's spaces, it don't come simpler than that.

Queensland is changing things in Australia, with any luck. they'll drag the rest of the country bad to sanity.

Maybe if women didn't have to spend all their time defending their rights to transactivists, we could spend our time on actually stopping the increasing violence against women and girls.
Maybe transactivists could help women and girls in making women and girls safer, but no, they spend all their time undoing any safeguarding by punching great big holes in social conventions that women and girls rely on to be able to keep all men out of womens facilities.

Despicable behaviour, maybe you should reflect on the issues you are causing before telling women off for their traumas

100%.

I can't wait for half term/ reading week to be over.... (though this one sounds familiar - I don't know where he finds the time).

The millisecond I read the word 'cis' I conclude that the poster has no respect for women.

I now bitterly resent the people who have caused women to waste so much time, energy and money defending the position we fought so hard for.

Their selfishness and self-absoprtion blows my mind.

This.

I've absolutely been guilty of engaging with certain posters on this forum, that in hindsight, I shouldn't have done. It's a pointless exercise because certain posters are not here to respectfully discuss issues. They're here because they get great pleasure in upsetting women.

So, I'm no longer going to engage with them at all. I'd never suggest to anyone else what they should post and who they should reply to, but for me, I think simply ignoring them now is the best thing.
Just glide on by and engage with those that have a brain and live in the real world.
Certain posters will eventually fade away once their opportunity to rub their thighs with glee when they've pissed off women disappears.

I don't engage with the incels. They're just awful, irredeemable people.

This is the dead hand of Michael O'Flaherty at work. It's a surprise to absolutely nobody that a failed Irish Catholic priest of his vintage is imbued with sexism & misogyny to his very marrow.

How about instead of coming on here scolding women for refusing to allow men into female spaces, you go and do work with your fellow men to stop them raping, bearing and killing women? If you’re so concerned about violence towards women and girls, stop haranguing the victims and go and deal with the perpetrators. If you’d spent half the time doing that that you spend being horrible to women on here, maybe you might have achieved something.

I don’t think it’s their thighs they’re rubbing….

Thought I might translate some of this into plain English, so we can see the arguments more clearly:

I don't agree that men who demand entrance to women’s spaces should be held responsible for the violence of men who don’t demand access to women’s spaces any more than all lesbians should be held responsible for the violence of some lesbians.

Noteworthy here is that the group “some lesbians” is a subset of the group “all lesbians”, whereas the two groups of men described are separate.

Nor do I believe banning men who demand access to women’s spaces or lesbians from women’s spaces…

Nobody is demanding lesbians should be banned from using women’s spaces. Whatever follows, bear in mind that this particular argument is a straw man from this point on. Note also, in the original version, the straw man argument is doubled up, because instead of truthfully owning the fact that the discussion is about women’s facilities, the lie that the discussion is about all “public utilities” is inserted.

You know, I’m already thinking that, anyone who has to insert so many lies into their arguments, is probably so used to lying that they no longer know when they are doing it.

Anyway, having established that inserting lesbians into this argument is simply a red herring, I shall remove them so we can see what is really being argued is clearer.

Nor do I believe banning men who demand access to women’s spaces from women’s spaces would change the opportunistic nature of criminals

Well no, it wouldn’t change the opportunistic nature of criminals, that much is correct. What it would do however, is ensure that opportunistic male criminals are offered more opportunities to have access to women in spaces from which they previously could have more easily been excluded or expelled.

so in that sense I consider banning men who demand access to women’s spaces from women’s spaces an illogicality.

If, as a man, you want access to women’s spaces and don’t care that your access means that opportunistic male criminals will also gain access, then you probably would pretend you think women’s arguments are illogical. As we can see, someone here is being highly illogical, but it isn’t the women who want single sex spaces.

As a male person, I can’t really appreciate how the presence of men can trigger post traumatic stress in female sexual assault victims

No man can really understand that, even though some pay lip service to doing so, especially when they want to appear empathetic so as to push their own agenda.

I don't think that justifies creating a situation where men who demand access to women’s spaces are more at risk of sexual assault or not able to use men’s spaces for the same fears of being assaulted

This comes down to men being more likely to assault other men than women being likely to assault other women. Men being more violent to one another and committing more sexual assault than women does not justify some men being given access to women’s spaces to keep them safe. Women’s spaces are not there to keep vulnerable men safe. Of course, in most circumstances, for example in most workplaces, men dressed as women are highly unlikely to be sexually assaulted in the correct facilities with the other men. That’s why the even more nonsensical argument that people will be forced to “out themselves” at work is now being employed. We can see why all these lies require multiple levels of inconsistency. What a tangled web we weave, springs to mind.

or that masculine women may be harassed as being suspected of being male.

Women don’t generally harass masculine women and no man making this argument really cares. This is another argument that purports to show empathy to women, but really is simply used to shore up the argument for allowing men into women’s spaces.

“Hopefully, we can eventually reach a conclusion where competing needs can be met in re configuring public bathrooms where all will be safe.”

I think we all hope for this. It can’t be achieved however, by forcing men into women’s spaces. How it will eventually look will perhaps depend upon those men finally stopping their unreasonable demand to have access to women’s spaces and start to push towards a solution where everyone’s needs are genuinely considered.

Yeah I know, I was just trying to be polite 😬