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.

It's fantastic.

Roll up, roll up, fund your DIY whilst kicking creeps out of the ladies.

And that's just the loo.

You could probably get a two floor extension by kicking them out of the changing room.

And don't get me started on sport. That's got to be an entire wing.

Another shit stirring thread started by some faux naive muppet, who then runs away never to return. Yawn🥱

Well, I have given up waiting for the far right religious groups money that we were all supposed to get. And weren’t we all also to be allocated a wife?

And a lawn boy. Not entirely sure what that is, but I want one.

I'll have one too, if it comes with a lawn.

I think its a young man used as a gigolo. Althoigh maybe thats a pool boy.

If by trans rights you mean the right to override the equality act then they are clearly in conflict with women’s rights to single sex spaces. If trans people are keen for unisex changing areas then fair enough and I’d support that.

Trans people have the exact same rights as the rest of us. They were just lied to and told a stonewall version of the law. Nothing has been removed the law hasn’t changed merely clarified and we (women) would now like the pisstaking to stop.

Oh I'd forgotten about the lawn boy! That was an amusing thread.

They don't care if it makes no sense. They just spout nonsense and for some reason there are many people stupid enough to go along with it.

You can't have it both ways. There's trade offs for either party and women (and children) have more to lose than a small number of men.

It's like a mathematical equation. Once you get it, there's no going back I've found.

weren't all the 'GC's' having garden parties too or something? I never got invited to those, you fuckers

I'm not hopeful.
Because to TRAs trans rights basically means accepting a person's 'rights' to 'be' the opposite sex, either because they want to, or because they 'always were really because its not the body that dicatates sex'.
And once that's been accepted, the logical progression is that TW are be able to access all spaces available to women, because they 'are women'. Which impacts women's rights.
Any compromise which protects women's rights, such as treating TW as though they are women when sex doesn't matter, but treating them as men when it does, will always be seen as anti trans rights, because the right being fought for is full and complete acceptance as their sex of choice.
I genuinely don't see this circle ever being squared.

Exactly this.

I think the problem is that where third spaces or categories have been provided, trans activists have complained or rejected them. They seem to need us to reinforce their fantasies.

Haven’t got a lawn but will settle for a Planters In The Front Garden Lad?

Why do you think that talk about AGP is particularly offensive limits? If it's existence is formally acknowledged, it creates something of a political problem.

Yes, exactly.

I've never understood the need to differentiate between them and 'cis' women if a transwoman is a real woman.

Because many of these men want to both erase the concept of female and be dominant at being women.

Or rather, they know what being female is, they just want there to be no way to talk about it.

I got tolld the other day by a friend that "some people use the gender critical position as a platform for transphobia" which annoyed me.

Because there are times when it is useful to the agenda to be able to identify as separate (and more important) than mere actual women, but the point is that it's entirely on trans terms and only when to trans benefit.

It starts from erasing, controlling and disempowering women.

Look at us here - we just want equal rights and equal access to resources and consideration given to men with trans identities, which is going to require that single sex spaces are provided alongside accessible ones for these men and which ever women are happy to go in there with them.

That's apparently evil. As is women having inconvenient rights under law that present boundaries to men wanting to use them.

They believe that they are a particularly unfortunate subset of women who's journey to and through womanhood has caused them challenges not faced by women who had their femaleness 'recognised' at birth, and so have been treated as female all their lives. They find the distinction helpful because it recognises they have a particular struggle and face extra discrimination.
(This is not my view. It's my understanding of theirs.)

There are many inconsistencies in the messaging that extreme transgender rights activists say. Indeed, if they were actually women then there would be no need for the misused word cis to be forced into use to differentiate.

It is like that ludicrous ‘rights aren’t pie’ mantra. Yes, in relation to female single sex spaces they absolutely are. Even the Supreme Court acknowledged that.

I noticed again yesterday that there are people who have no depth of knowledge but feel they have moral superiority over those who prioritise sex over gender identity. A poster yesterday on another thread used Chat GPT to look up sex offence rates for male people with transgender identities and took everything that ChatGPT said as being factual and logically consistent. That poster kept repeating a point as if it was a wise rebuttal but showed that they simply had no fucking clue what it actually meant. And was not even interested in thinking it through.

This is where we are.

It will take a very long time to pull out all the damage done to the rights for women and children. When looked at historically in decades to come, I really hope society and governments will have learned from this era. But I also think that lesson will be all too quickly forgotten.

I have noticed this thrown around on threads on FWR more and more.

I think it is the position of people who are still under the illusion, like the OP, that there ‘must’ be a compromise solution and no one has suggested it and feminists are just extreme. Whereas, when you gain the knowledge, you understand there is no way to allow ‘some’ male people into a female single sex space (logically or practically) and yet, those male people reject any safe alternative.

It is also like the ‘case by case’ scenario for sports or the reinvent sports altogether scenario from people who have little knowledge in sport. They keep suggesting handicaps or weight / height categories because to them, they don’t care about the integrity of competition or the actual science about advantage. They just care about allowing some male people who are very sad at being excluded play.

Too little knowledge and the need to be kind becomes harmful. Yet, people are all too quick to call people transphobic.