Is it not possible to have "trans rights" and "women's rights" at the same time?

[Artmumcreative]

I suppose I just think debate is too polarised. I think the answer might be to have third spaces (e.g. a separate toilet a bit like a disabled toilet) for trans women, so they're safe and women are safe. I think it would be nice if women supported transpeople and transpeople supported women (e.g at a trans rights demo and a women's rights demo). Not all transwomen are rapists, just as not all men are.

So how would you evaluate someone you meet’s worthiness of whether they should get the privilege of female language?

Do you see any inconsistency in using female language for one male when you then won’t use it for others? Whereas, no matter how horrific a woman is, she will always be referred to as ‘she’?

Also, how to you personally then compartmentalise the collective harm of using female language for any male person ? Theoretically, of course, because you have said you have done so yet.

I think what you're saying @DiscoBob is that will pretend men are women, up to a point, because they want you to (no other real reason).

But then at a certain point you'll stop pretending.

Which, I get you're trying to be nice and it's coming from a good place, but it strikes me as quite an incoherent position and one that probably causes lots of issues of its own.

@DiscoBob

I guess my question is, why do you prioritise male people's needs over female people’s needs? I am sure you have thought this through, is there a reason you would do this? Is it a built in need to be polite? Is it kindness to the person in front of you and you cannot use neutral language?

I appreciate you might not have an answer, but I am wondering how your thought processes work on this issue.

Haha. I don't really know. Just politeness. I guess it is weird really isn't it.

I think it is intrinsically an incoherent place but I also think that some people have worked out a way to make it coherent in their mind.

I feel that I cannot because I base it on facts and science. But I saw arguments yesterday that really made me start to understand the contortions of ‘facts’ that some
people will go to so they justify their decision in their mind. One poster even used the ‘any socially constructed language is open for application to gender identity’ approach. I couldn’t fathom why that was a coherent boundary to have but that is just me.

What I don't really get is why people have decided that it's 'polite' to do what men ask of us, without question, for no other reason than they have demanded it.

Then for the transwoman in question, I think it's quite confusing / sending mixed messages to go along with the pretence that they are 'really women' and then suddenly pull that support.

I agree.

The incoherency of the usage of female language for male people has been framed around respect and kindness. But those only seem to go one way.

Then there is that other issue of what happens when someone then retracts their support when they previously accept the demanded language. How is that kind? It is the opposite of kind to make the use of female language for male people into some kind of choice.

Those who sold in the mantras did a proper job and have made people believe it is a sign of respect and courtesy. Because they sold in the premise that some people have the control over the language that people use for them.

When it is the other way around. People retain the control of the language they use for others. But then the ‘kindness’ aspect comes into play.

Society has really allowed this deception around who should have the choice of language to use to permeate rather deeply.

Personally I would much prefer not to have a woman coming into men's spaces, for reasons of dignity and a tiny concern that someone might make a false allegation. But I have no reason to be afraid of a woman with a trans identity, whereas women have reason to be wary of any man in a situation where the woman is vulnerable.

Yes, and trans people have been framed as very vulnerable and delicate, but definitely not mentally ill or misled in their thinking. My son was robustly nonconforming in all things until he adopted his trans identity; he didn't care about the way people perceived his very unusual fashion choices, and was oblivious to funny looks or suggestions that he should wear conventional clothing to weddings and funerals. Suddenly it matters if people don't see him as a woman in his tasteful frock.

I think this is a natural human response tbh. We meet other people, they are warm and nice to us, we are warm and nice back.
So if we are introduced to a TIM who is polite, pleasant and nice,many of us would not go out of our way to show him we see him as a man. Simply because in the course of a social interaction, we don't want to cause hurt or offence to someone who has been nothing but pleasant to us, and tend to give little social rewards to those who have earned it by their treatment of us.
However where we know the TIM has caused harm, we don't consider him deserving of our courtesy and social reward, so we drop the pretence.

True. I guess my question is, when the ask is unreasonable (which I believe pretending a man is a woman is) what then?

I think some men would be uncomfortable with a woman in their space. I think it’d be unfair to disallow them the right to privacy on the grounds they’re unlikely to be harmed.

I don’t think every trans woman is a pervert or rapist. I just don’t want to share single sex spaces with people of the opposite sex. You’ve got to afford men the same respect.

There will be lots of men who give no shits just like the handmaids in the ladies.

I think for me, pretending a man is a woman is never a reasonable thing to be asked of a woman. However, it can be something it can be reasonable for a woman to choose to do, if she feels that the consequences of not doing so are greater than the consequences of doing so.
So if it will lead to social ostracisation, threaten her friendships, threaten her safety or her employment. Or even because, frankly, in the moment she wants to prioritise social comfort over the principle.
I completely agree it doesn't do TIM any favours to pretend. It's patronising and disingenuous However, its not the responsibility of women to shatter the unhealthy delusions of strangers and we often have enough to do navigating the challenges of social interaction as it is.
If a woman chooses to play pretend because its easier for her and a side effect of that is a TIM gets validated, well that's unfortunate, but I'm not going to be criticising her for navigating the situation as best she can.

The only people who don’t support this option are the more aggressive transwomen and their supporters, for whom it isn’t enough that they are accommodated, they have to be accommodated the RIGHT way, which means women giving up their rights.

Every woman I know is wholeheartedly in favour of third spaces being made available. Just think how much progress could be made if the TRA crew also got on board with the idea.

This is partly true.

We don't have to 'reward' them with female language at all though. We can still be warm and nice. But we can choose to use neutral language as a compromise.

When did female language become a gift to bestow on male people?

When did female language become a gift to bestow on male people?

I find this weird also

"I'm not going to be criticising her for navigating the situation as best she can."

I am going to be criticising someone in my mind if they then try to convince women and girls that they should be doing the same. I agree there are going to be times when it might be safer to do so. Of course there is. Also employment situations.

However, those making that decision should acknowledge that it is being done under duress and not then reprimand those who choose to not make the same decision. And if they are choosing to do it for their own comfort, that too should be acknowledged.

There are so many inconsistencies. I think it must be hard for some people to calm the clanging dissonance.

There are further complexities with this suggestion. A six foot 2, 20 stone male who, aged 40 started taking estrogen and had his penis inverted is not likely to cause any less alarm or compromise to the dignity of females in a refuge than any other male.

Also, granting permission to TIMs who have physical intervention and not to those who haven’t won’t comply with equality law. Some TIMs will have health needs and disabilities that preclude them from undergoing physical treatment. It’ll never fly for them to be given ‘less preferential treatment’.

The problem is also that every time a woman pretends or hides her discomfort, the man (who identifies as a woman) uses this as evidence that he is really seen as a woman - that he really is a woman!

That is when you get those big, obviously male transwomen saying things like 'no one has ever objected' and 'all my friends use female pronouns for me, why are you such a bigot?' We have seen many examples of this.

The people who pretend out of misplaced kindness or politeness make it harder for those (rape victims, for example) who cannot complain due to trauma.

Instead of thinking about the poor bloke, they should think about the vulnerable women who they are throwing under the bus.

Agreed.

One of the main points of excluding them is that simply recognising them as male is harmful to some women. The Supreme Court judgement recognised this.

I, personally, think it is cruel to lead any male person to have the expectation that if they 'do enough' they will be rewarded by being treated as if they have changed sex. That includes rewarding them for having extreme body modifications as if that is something that deserves recognition with a gift that they have defied material reality somehow.

I have noticed that today there seems to be a few more women in the USA who are complaining about male people in their changing rooms and videoing it.

I wonder if this momentum will continue to grow.

Its not generally speaking obviously. The 'reward' is to treat people as they would wish to be treated and varies dependent on what we percieve that might look like. So it could be laughing politely at the not very funny joke of someone who is has been nice. Or feigning interest in their anecdote about their grandchild. Or in this case calling them she when they are pretending to be a woman or he when pretending to be a man.
I'm not saying 'we have to' reward them with female language. I'm describing something that people do and why i think they do it. Nothing directive about it at all. There are of course alternative ways of being polite.