Daughter in early 20s lonely due to GC views

[Currentquandry]

My daughter is in her early twenties. She is GC and is struggling because so few of her peers have similar opinions. She is very lonely because of this. Are there any online groups she could join to give her a sense of community? She is also ND. Thank you in advance for your advice…

Ok definitely last time…

I think there should be funding provided for two sets of rape crisis centres: one that accepts trans men, one that doesn’t. I can totally see that some women wouldn’t feel comfortable with biological men in those places; equally trans women need that help too.

As for changing rooms and bathrooms, I think people should get over their hang ups on seeing other naked bodies. As long as people aren’t being wildly inappropriate, I don’t think the occasional glimpse of a penis or a vulva is the worst thing in the world!

i have to provide a slight correction.

Most GC folks I come across absolutely do not conflate sex and gender. We think gender is regressive bullshit stereotypes. We know sex is a material reality and immutable and that it matters more than gender in some circumstances.

Thanks so much....I can see the term could easily get misconstrued...:(

One thing this thread has shown is there's enough people who push genderism who would misrepresent the, possibly perfectly moderate, views of OP's daughter to paint her as a bad person. SINBU to assume that she will need to be cautious if there are similar people in the circles in which she moves.

So you can understand that women who have been raped and sexually assaulted want to have their own centre because they won't want to see men there - but those same women using toilets and changing rooms where there are naked men should just get over their 'hang ups'?

Explain that one to me.

Why? Because it is an example of how women have been accused of being as bad as the male people who abuse them by some people who declare that 'both sides' are extreme. While those making the accusations also claim that there are 'compromises' that women have not agreed to / considered / suggested when this is false.

Because women have actively offered / considered and campaigned for the very compromises they have been accused of not offering / considering and suggesting.

The point is that women are being told they are extreme, when the accusers actually agree with the end outcome that the women are campaigning for. It shows that the OP's daughter is likely to be subjected to the same kind of dynamic if she shows that she supports those same end outcomes by people who will make the accusations we have seen on this thread.

The Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre (funded almost entirely by the Scottish Government) 'harmed rape survivors' by not only refusing to provide single sex rape crisis services but by refusing to signpost women who needed such a service to Beira's Place. Beira's Place, the only single sex rape crisis service in the Edinburgh and the Lothians, which is entirely funded by JKR and so takes no funding away from ERCC and for which she has received enormous amounts of abuse from women hating gender ideologists.

For anyone who hasn't seen the (damning) independent review of ERCC after a (damning) ET -

https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/resources/ERCC-Review-Report-FINAL1-.pdf

No, only the posters who display a repeated pattern of "plopping" soundbites - usually ad hominem slus like TERF or Nazi, or random asserions about what some other GC commentatpr said elsewhere - and not engaging in good faith with the followup.

Usually that pattern repeats over multiple threads, so the Plopper hallmark is a groundhog day reset each new thread where no matter what was said last time, the same comment is re-plopped as if it had never been discussed.

All we know about the law about single sex spaces currently is it's utterly unclear; legal cases since FWS have interpreted the law on trans inclusion differently, and while of course there have been multiple different iterations and interpretations of the guidance to the EQ2010, none have yet been made official.

What we do know is Sex Matters intended to use the Ponds as a legal test case to settle the matter and force trans exclusion into case law - this was against the wishes of the pond users, and they lost. The women who swim at Kenwood ponds did not want to be used as a test case and resented the interference from anti-trans lobby groups who are not and never intend to be swimmers there. You'd think an organisation that actually cared about what women want or about women's spaces would have some respect the women who use this space, but the thing is, Sex Matters doesn't actually care about women or women's spaces at all, they care about forcing trans people out of public life by making their participation in it as limited and difficult as possible - Helen Joyce's own words make this motivation quite explicit.

If you want more evidence SM doesn't give a shit about women's spaces, consider that if the ponds are forced on appeal to exclude trans women, the most likely outcome of that is that all the ponds at Hamstead will become fully mixed sex, and Kenwood as a women's space will disappear altogether. Which would be a huge loss.

Because there’s a difference between discussing your rape in a room full of strangers, and getting changed after a swim.

I can completely understand why some women wouldn’t want biological men present for the first scenario.

the most likely outcome of that is that all the ponds at Hamstead will become fully mixed sex

2 out of three are mixed sex, the other is males only

Read this https://genderblog.net/cambridge-students-launch-single-sex-society-for-women/ These girls weren't obsessively communicating GC views. Read it.

thank you again.

So, just to confirm then, two sets of rape crisis support? One for male people with transgender identities (ie. not 'trans men' as your post mentions?).

Well... imagine that? yes. Another thing that the very women you have chosen to portray as extreme using 'both sides' have been actively suggesting for over a decade from what I have seen.

"As for changing rooms and bathrooms, I think people should get over their hang ups on seeing other naked bodies. As long as people aren’t being wildly inappropriate, I don’t think the occasional glimpse of a penis or a vulva is the worst thing in the world!"

So here you think that the same traumatised women and girls you agree should have their own rape crisis care 'should get over their hang ups'? You reckon "I don’t think the occasional glimpse of a penis or a vulva is the worst thing in the world!" I am sure that those female people who have suffered at the hands of male people, (including me) feel very heartened by your care here.

If I remember correctly, you were the poster who was telling others to be kind? And you have celebrated the tolerance you see of young people. Yet, you have effectively just declared that women and girls with histories of abuse should just get over their fear reaction.

And you think women who point this out are the extremists and as bad as the male people who threaten violence and rape if someone disagrees that they are female in any way?

Oh FFS.

I would love nothing more than a world where male-bodied people didn't get weirdly excited by the idea of accidental or transgressed upon female nudity.

Sadly, right now too many men (in the original sex based sense) do fetishise female nudity and body functions.

Now, you might claim that's a function of the privacy in the first place and honestly I'd not argue with you, but however it came about, here and now it is a reality for us.

So until men start treating female nudity, and their own nudity in front of a captive female audience, not as exciting but as boring and everyday as grabbing a cup of coffee, female people will continue to need spaces that male voyeurs and exhibitionists can't enter.

And you cannot understand why a woman or girl with a history of abuse and trauma would want to feel safe to get undressed without a male person present. Can you clarify that please, because I don't want to be making a wrong assumption.

It's not unclear. It's perfectly clear. That's why TRA's hate it.

And as for the 'if I can't have it, no-one can' mixed sex gambit - they can, of course. One suspects that, like Girl Guiding they won't want to give up their (supposed) USP though..

If anyone is actually interested in the ponds and the views of the women who swim there, here's a lovely article which includes a quote from a friend of mine (not a trans woman) who swims there: https://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/69529/1/the-women-fighting-for-trans-inclusion-at-hampstead-heath-ponds-sex-matters

Sex Matters, an organisation which purports to speak for women, is actively working to destroy this space.

There are not over 38,000 users of the Ponds so no there is no way of knowing that men have overwhelming support to carry on using the women’s pond. It’s clear that a huge number of none users responded.

How about the women who are self excluding from the ponds because of the men? Do their views not count? Or are your friends the only women whose opinion counts?

I'm not talking about the consultation, I'm talking about the member's association vote in 2024 which overwhelmingly voted to remain trans inclusive - everyone who is a part of the member's association is a swimmer at the pond.

Personally, I self-exclude from the pond because I don't like cold water, but what I'm not doing is ruining it for others by campaigning to fit a heater.

You don't get it, do you?

Women who have been raped or sexually assaulted don't get over that. The fear they feel does not disappear once they leave the rape crisis centre. The feeling of helplessness, or feeling trapped, of being terrified of being in a space with a naked man they have not given permission to be in their space (and who actually has no legal right to be there) does not go away ever - the venue does not change that.

Reflect on the absolute ridiculousness of what you said and learn from it. Unless of course you're of the 'reframe your trauma' school of thought?

"Unless of course you're of the 'reframe your trauma' school of thought?"

I expect that this is what is driving the 'get over it' comment. I think that it is a good example though of the meaninglessness of the words 'kind' and 'tolerant' when you see what people mean by those terms. That kindness and tolerance doesn't seem to extend to female people very far at all....

No, I’m done here. People asked for my suggested solutions and I provided them. I think they work.

I’ve shared a changing room with a trans woman before. She showered in her swimsuit, then got changed facing away from everyone else. Yes, I saw her penis, for about a nanosecond, and only because I was staring, not because she was waving it at me!

I’ve seen more disturbing things on Channel 5 ffs. It’s time we all grew up.

last time I went to Berlin, I ended up in a mixed spa where swimsuits were not allowed. You know what, nobody cared there either!

Wow you really are doubling down on this!

She was saying, with compassion, that fundamentally people cannot change sex and society cannot keep up the pretence that they can forever, so people who had been lead to believe they could live as the opposite sex and may even have had pretty severe medical intervention in the belief they could be the opposite sex are going to be the real victims as society structurally and/or individually will ultimately place limits on that cross-sex identity.

And it is for that reason, because it ultimately can only lead to disappointment and distress, the fewer people who start down that path the better.

Yep, your posts could not have been clearer @IggyPopsPlasticTrousers - 'reframe your trauma'. Got it.