Men who affirm TW

[Holdmeclosertinydancer2018]

This is something I've wondered for a while and a post from a woman on FB asking/stating the same thing prompted me to ask everyone's opinions on this.

I have noticed a large proportion of Trans Idealogues on both FB and Reddit go absolutely berserk when someone points out that TW are not, in fact women, but oddly, a large proportion of them are men.

Now I completely understand the women that have bought into this notion as women generally speaking tend to be more empathetic for their fellow human so are more likely to go along with 'be kind'. But what about the swathes of seemingly normal, gender conforming men that support it? I don't know a single man other than one in real life (who's daughter is apparently now a 'she') that support the idea that TW are women. What is their motive for this?

Just to be clear, I think that the initial response (from all of us, not just men) is to show support to those who appear to be struggling.

However, as soon as it became clear that that 'support' was supposed to mean giving the green light to men in women's rape crisis centre, prisons and domestic violence shelters ... anyone with a brain and a conscoe
ce should have backed up that truck immediately.

But again, that's just more lazy thinking. There are some deeply troubled individuals who identify as trans. Lumping them together with cross dressing middle aged men just shows that you aren't prepared to give this issue any thought.

Where is the belief that men who have a trans identity are are higher risk of violence than women coming from?

Stats on Brazilian sex workers?

Self declaration surveys in which hurty words are literal violence?

The biggest way to fight the pro-trans argument is to show that medical transition and social acceptance does not lead to lower rates of suicide and violence within the trans community. That is the strongest argument they have for allowing transwomen into women's spaces.

I disagree.

The premise is completely flawed from the start.

Women have single sex spaces for their own safety and dignity. On what grounds would we let ANY group of men into them?

Exactly. The "arguments" only make sense if you consider the trans person the only actual unique person, with "women" as a sort of dull background of womanly sameness that trans identifying men can identify into.

"Feels like a woman" as if all women feel the same 🙄

"Presents as a woman" as if all women present the same.

As soon as ypu think about it properly it's nowt but sexist bollocks. Which is why they never, never, never think about it properly.

I agree that there is a group of people who think that they should treat one person’s constructed and subjected reality as if it is material because they arrive at that support via philosophical theories such as queer theory and postmodernism. I think they believe it is an intellectual argument in that way.

They also believe that it is like neurodiversity in approach. (Not that it IS neurodiversity, if you know what I mean). That to these people, their belief is material reality therefore the identity is materially real.

Of course, there is not even any logic to support their arguments and it is all emotional reasoning and manipulation.

If men were prioritising the suicide rates, wouldnt they be dating TW? Not have the 'except for relationships' clause?

Why would the suicide rates of these men be more pressing than the suicide rates of any man?

Women have single sex spaces for their own safety and dignity. On what grounds would we let ANY group of men into them?

I feel like you are not reading anything I have written as I have already explained this point. They see transwomen as a separate category to men, one which is persecuted by society. They think they can lower the rates of violence and suicide by transwomen by accepting them socially. Women are oppressed but not nearly as oppressed as trans people according to them.

If men were prioritising the suicide rates, wouldnt they be dating TW? Not have the 'except for relationships' clause?

Men by and large dont care about trans issues. Only the social justice warriors and activists care.

This is really all that needs to be said.

Until TRAs can explain why there can't be a word for [the sex class that used to be called women] as well as a word for [the gender class that wants to be called women], one can only conclude that all their fluffy words are juat a smokescreen for old fashioned sexism, misogyny and society's desire to define and control [the people who have been defined by and controlled because of their biological sex since forever].

They see transwomen as a separate category to men, one which is persecuted by society. They think they can lower the rates of violence and suicide by transwomen by accepting them socially. Women are oppressed but not nearly as oppressed as trans people according to them.

If men are at risk from other men, why would anyone decide that's women's problem to solve?

If trans identifying people need separate accommodation, fine, do that. But what right thinking person would consider it appropriate to hand over women's accommodation to them, without women's consent?

Taking care of one group should never undermine the provision made for a different group or make them less safe.

What you're describing here is just deep rooted, thoughtless misogyny.

”They see transwomen as a separate category to men, one which is persecuted by society. They think they can lower the rates of violence and suicide by transwomen by accepting them socially. Women are oppressed but not nearly as oppressed as trans people according to them.”

Yes. Some men who support the mantra TWAW do think this.

However, they also seem to lack any knowledge or understanding of safeguarding principles. Perhaps if there were greater understanding of these principles (not just policies), they would understand what Keating is pointing out.

Because Keating is correct. It doesn’t matter about showing that transitioning doesn’t improve suicide rates and violence. Female people have specific needs, as you know, and these are in direct conflict with that sub group of male people that some people wish to wedge into female single sex provisions.

As I said above we do understand their arguments, we've heard them a gazillion times.

they're all nonsense and have been evidenced as nonsense repeatedly

despite this, lots of men men fundamentally just don't care about the affect on women because it isn't affecting them directly. In addition, some men are actively enjoying how upset and distressed this is making women.

(edited for grammar)

What you're describing here is just deep rooted, thoughtless misogyny.

I don't think it is misogyny at all. I think they would do the same if the issue was transmen in men's spaces (they would support the trans side).

They see a major problem (high violence/suicide of of trans people) and thinķ it can be solved through treating them as their preferred sex. To them women are at risķ of violence but as trans people experience more violence than women it is more important to safegaurd them. That is their argument. Would be the same if it is transmen in men's spaces

despite this, lots of men men fundamentally just don't care about the affect on women because it isn't affecting them directly

Honestly this is an pretty niche issue even amongst women. We on here are pretty unusual in how much we talk about think about this issue.

So they're prepared to put women at additional risk, without their consent, to protect men from tother men.

Explain to me how that isnt deeply and profoundly misogynistic.

It is misogyny though as they conveniently ignore the incredibly high rate of violence committed against women by men and all the effect of that on women's lives

So they're prepared to put women at additional risk, without their consent, to protect men from tother men.

They are going with the numbers. They are choosing the side that experiences higher rates of violence, suicide, mental health, homelessness etc. If women experienced higher rates of all those things, they would have probably sided with us.

They also side with transmen over men. That's why I don't think it is driven by misogyny. Not right, but that is how they justify it.

I'm not following the argument.

We need to prove that trans surgery and social acceptance don't lead to reduced suicide rates, because its the suicide rates that enforces TWAW.

Yet men aren't generally bothered about trans and suicide rates. Its only activist who are.

So you are saying women need to prove that suicide isnt improved by social acceptance, when most men aren't bothered about this argument?

The thread is about men in general supporting TWAW, but you seem to think that working to prove a premise wrong that they arent thinking about is useful?

I havent seen any indication that activists argument would fall apart if suicide rates were disproved either. They say TWAW and its not treating them as women thats the problem. Suicide rates are irrelevant.

A) that's not true, the stats do not bear out that out at all in the UK.

B) there's absolutely no need to play one group off the other. They could accommodate trans identifying men without troubling women's spaces.

So no, that doesn't justify anything.

There's no evidence in the UK that this is the case

and more than that I would say that men are not being swayed by numbers. As the saying goes you can't reason people out of a place they didn't reason themselves.

that just don't think women matter and they approach everything from that point. Women are support humans and men are the proper humans

it's not that complicated

So you are saying women need to prove that suicide isnt improved by social acceptance, when most men aren't bothered about this argument?

I think debunking that would help sway a lot of people to our side (not just men, but women as well).

If we said OK woman is about a feeling, it's a 'gender word' but we now want the word 'adhufem' as a 'sex word' and is only to be applied to as such and female toilets (oh hold, on according to the PP this is already a 'sex word' - this isn't going to work is it?) are now 'adhufem' toilets and set up the 'Adhufem Institute' the TRA aren't going to say 'great you finally got it, we never wanted to be female sex, just woman gender you can have as much 'adhufem' stuff as you like and we will stay away from it as long as there is 'woman' stuff for us.'

If that was what they wanted Brighton would have a single sex 'adhufem' rape service along side single gender 'women's' service but the refusal to have such a group despite agreeing to and the determination to bring down Sisters Heal shows that none of this about making sure transwomen have a service, it all about making sure women, sorry adhufems don't.

If we relinquished 'woman' from any biological meaning and made it a 'gender word' today and set up a parallel 'sex word' the TRAs would have Adhufem on their X biographies before the ink was dry on the agreement.

and more than that I would say that men are not being swayed by numbers. As the saying goes you can't reason people out of a place they didn't reason themselves.

I'm not talking about trying to reason with people who are ideologically captured. I'm talking about reasoning with the large percentage of people who are undecided or uncertain about the issue. The vast majority of people mistakingly believe treating TW as women helps reduce harm, showing them evidence that it doesn't would change their opinion.

And yes we have seen a change in public opinion with new evidence coming to light (Cass report).

I suggest that is a confused reading of the situation. It doesn't matter if a man is violent or not, or whether he feels suicidal - he remains male and women have a right to the dignity of their sex when in protected services or spaces.

Came to say I think a lot of those men are attracted to the perverseness of it - but don't want to admit it outwardly, so instead affirm it