"women who were born trans"

[MyAmpleSheep]

I'm posting this not because I'm suggesting that we need to make counter-arguments in this place but because sometimes it's very hard to understand TRA positioning. This (sort-of) makes an interesting read. Anyway. It's from comments on you-know-where:

Women should not be made to use men's toilets just because they were born with a trans body.

People pretending that women who were born trans are somehow an invasion of privacy of women born cis are just dressing up their bigotry as something else.

So instead of male and female bodies, we need to get to grips with the ideas of cis bodies and trans bodies. And instead of women, and men who want to be women, we have women who were born cis and women who were born trans.

Just FYI.

It’s like saying “humans who were born animals”- the statement itself is nonsensical.

That subreddit really is the lowest of the low-hanging fruit when looking for trans gibberish to quote. It's almost unfair to be digging for daftness there.

So instead of male and female bodies, we need to get to grips with the ideas of cis bodies and trans bodies. And instead of women, and men who want to be women, we have women who were born cis and women who were born trans.

What a pile of inherent nonsense. Babies are born male or female and gender neutral, and grow up influenced by social pressures of varying levels to conform to stereotypes of ‘masculine/manly’ or ‘feminine/girly’.

Yes 😂

I think more people were understanding, if not agreeing, when the line was 'sex and gender are different, sex doesn't change but sometimes they don't match'.

Unfortunately in recent years it's become more like 'sex doesn't exist and isn't binary, a male, XY person with a penis is 100% a biological female if they identify as such' and that's where they lose people.

I think a lot of people probably believe this, unfortunately.

Don’t understand a word of that word salad

I think it’s deliberately convoluted and wordy to make it confusing and make people think it’s clever and true. So they agree with it, emperors new clothes etc.

Does this nonsense even matter in the UK anymore? I thought our High Court had ruled it was nonsense and therefore has no practical place in our society? Let them pontificate, it’s meaningless in concept and practice now.

The supreme court said, in terms, that it has no place in the operation of the Equality Act 2010. That's not quite the same as saying it has no practical place in our society.

What society does and how it thinks isn't up to an small body to determine, it's determined by how we all behave and what we all think, for the widest possible meaning of "we".

This is why I love Joyce's book, Trans. She dismantles this argument expertly and explicitly - it's utterly incoherent to try and posit women-hood as a kind of software that gets installed at birth (or conception) and that can sometimes be at variance with the physical body in which its installed.

I don't think any of these people have ever seen a baby or have any clue what it might be like to be a baby. It seems that people do not have babyhood or childhood, they just immediately become a man or a woman as soon as they are born. They have teeth and everything. Obviously

🙄

The widest possible sense of the word ‘we’ means a huge range of differing opinions. One of which the OP has posted to share. But this is just an ‘opinion’. One of many.

What matters is the legal standing of those opinions. And today in the UK, thanks to our High Court ruling, it is your sex that is relevant in terms of what public facilities you are welcome to use. So people can fantasise that their own or someone’s else’s body is not what it is. As people have been prone to do throughout time. And it is nothing more than that, a collective fantasy.

Quite. And there is room for people to live their beliefs as they choose, so long as they are not utterly intolerant to other people's beliefs and needed spaces and language and lives continuing alongside them uninterfered with.

There have to be accessible spaces for all, not for whoever has the pointest elbows and current control of powerful people who appear to need a yellow brick road to Oz for brains asap

All nonsense.

I used to read a webcomic where the premise was that a bungling angel, who worked in Heaven's admin department, put some individuals' files (souls) back in the wrong sex filing cabinet and they woke up in the opposite sex bodies from what they were used to. As an impressionable teenager I thought this made perfect sense.

It does not make so much sense if you do not believe in souls, or do not believe in divine beings who are somehow both all-powerful AND make mistakes.

That's funny @Bergamotte. A bungling angel! It all makes sense now.

It's also quite different from most reincarnation beliefs which tend to be that souls don't have a sex, the soul selects the life that gives the best opportunity for growth and development and is intentionally born into both male and female bodies in its sequential lives with the aim of learning as much as possible from all angles.

But yes. Someone needs to go and sort that angel out.

I'm sorry i just can't believe that that was written by anyone who actually believes that. It had to have been written by some Russian bot where they're just continuing their efforts to infiltrate and break down the united culture and sanity of western world. I mean... It's just gotta be! Honestly that's a less outrageous concept than someone actually believing that ridiculous statement.

Although, the fact that they even created a space where they could spread such absolutely absurd nonsense as fact that goes completely unchallenged.

Yup. Until the men change their minds and say they’re something else, and then they were always that and we’re misgendering them and we always have been because we’re bigots.

I worry this has real potential to run as the follow-up to "born in the wrong body": where a "transwoman" is now a "woman" born in the right body, for them, but a body that reactionary bigots might ignorantly think to be male owing to the attached penis.
"Of course this is what a woman's body is like — I'm a woman and this is my body". Ugh.

I have read about trans IDing males saying they are women, but refusing to alter their appearance/bodies - 'we don't owe you femininity' - they are women just because they say so.

They claim this is proof of their transfeminism, as they are challenging bi-normative constructions of cis femininity or something polysyllabic like that...

Yeah, I read one of their articles once and there was the phrase "women and cis-women" in it. Let that sink in.

I don’t think enough women (and men, though they don’t seem to care) realise that TRA do not actually believe any of this.
They do not believe in all that garbage they are spouting, not one bit. It serves another purpose.

The purpose of the TG movement is to hurt women, to throw women and feminism back several decades. And that they have achieved.

This is the crux of the argument I think. The great divide between those who believe your sex/womanhood/manhood is determined by your body; and those that believe your sex/womanhood/manhood is (something...?) that exist regardless of your body, and only you know what it is, and have the absolute right to name it, and have others go along with what you say.
If you're in group two and a TIM, you will believe that you're a woman that exists in the 'type of body we associate with men' and that denying you anything available to 'other women' is discrimination based on your body type.