Continuation of Polypostwonder thread

[Imdunfer]

Follow on from this thread

www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5532352-the-liminality-of-sex-perception-sex-based-spaces-and-bodily-autonomy?page=39

For argument sake, I understand Blaire White to be a woman. This is independent of the knowledge she chose to only undergo cosmetic facial surgeries and breast augmentation, while retaining everything else.
I think I remember reading that she politically aligns 'right' and is politically vocal about being a male, living as a trans woman. I'm not 100% sure, though. It's not a way that I could understand living, but it is financially lucrative in her case.

There is a person who declares themselves to be male.

That person chooses to live presenting as a female.

In spite of their self declaration as a male, complete with male genitals, you understand that they are a woman.

And you ascribe their understanding of themselves being male, at least partly, to financial motives.

This is either monumentally arrogant or monumentally stupid thinking, or possibly both. Or perhaps you just like playing with a largely female forum and seeing how many feathers you can ruffle.

One thing is for sure, and that is that I don't think anything you write on this subject from now on is going to be of any value to read.

“And it would follow, using that same argument, that no woman can withdraw consent (if such a thing even exists) on behalf of any other woman.”

Really, this statement is vile. It is pure misogyny.

The utter contempt in comments about consent such as that and the one today show clearly the contempt for female people collectively.

For anyone no yet seeing it:

https://x.com/knownheretic/status/2032639781658833142?s=46

in my opinion the contempt for female people Billings shows in this and other videos (and the videos of Daviana) along the line of ‘how are you going to stop us’ is the same as someone making the statement :

“And it would follow, using that same argument, that no woman can withdraw consent (if such a thing even exists) on behalf of any other woman.”

So. According to that statement, women’s consent doesn’t exist.

Its a doozy.

Basically this boils down to 'my pal said it was fine, fuck the rest of you'

Some years back I started a thread on consent and the responses then were astonishing. TRAs were absolutely raging at the idea that women had this agency. I wish I could remember what it was called.

Found it!

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/4196176-Consent-for-women

I wasn't posting this as an endorsement of other women's statements. It was to provide a counter narrative to your statement "enough women over the years have told him that him using the provisions was wrong and that he should not do so." How many women is enough?

ONE.

It's not that fucking difficult to understand PPW. And as Helleofabore said, children cannot consent.

Just to repeat this and to be clear:

"enough women over the years have told him that him using the provisions was wrong and that he should not do so." How many women is enough?”

How many women is enough?

ONE

It only takes one female person to not consent for a male person to access a female single sex provision to use it for consent to be withdrawn.

That is how consent works.

Poly doesn’t care about women’s consent. As he said directly to me.

as Much as he wants to be female, his male entitlement is showing loud and clear.

I understand the above post to be about consent.

I've said why FWR's use of the word consent doesn't make sense to me in this context. As Blaire White does not live in the UK, no laws are being broken. I think you are just seeking reasons to attack my posts.

The law in California says trans women are women. No woman has any consent over whether another woman may access a public accommodation available to all women.

And it would follow, using that same argument, that no woman can withdraw consent (if such a thing even exists) on behalf of any other woman.

Yes consent as a thing exists.

What a statement! Holy Fuck.

I knew I had to specifically clarify that my statement applied to this imagined remote control over spaces unoccupied by the person who is claiming the right of consent.

Single sex provision exists because either it is mandated by law or because the service provider has made it available.

Service users cannot either give or withdraw consent on behalf of others.

I've not had to seek very far in the last few days PPW, your arguments are increasingly lacking any kind of logic.

Will it help @polypostwonderto understand if I explain that consent in this context means that all women have a veto and if just one of us exercises that veto then the presence of men has been rejected?

We understand that America is rather a regressive country and that women's rights are limited in many ways.

Wasn't something like this suggested by the Judge in the Sandie Peggie case?

It needs to be clear that a space is either single sex or mixed sex. We don't need to vote.

I agree with this.

I don't think so. I've read non-trans women on twitter who say they "don't consent to sharing toilets with 'terfs'." How does that work, exactly?

Gosh you really are struggling today PPW.

Women have no legal power to exclude other women. Their legal power is limited to excluding men.

"That" works by them choosing to stay out of spaces where they will meet women who don't agree with men sharing women's spaces. Effectively that would mean them staying at home, as this is a majority held view.

Judge Kemp said that if any woman complained about presence of a man in the changing room due to her trauma history, the employer would have to find other space for said man.

But FWIW he was talking utter mince.

I am not a lawyer, but even I can see the holes in his judgement are actually larger than the judgment itself.

I agree women have no legal power to exclude other women. I've said this many times. My understanding of consent is it doesn't require law enforcement, it is a personal right. I assume there were plenty of FWR members who claimed a right of consent over public spaces prior to FWS; with no specific law backing their belief in who is a man or a woman? Will this change again in the UK if and when the law is further 'clarified?'

A lot of Britons still don't consent to being in facilities with same sex attracted people. I feel this context is very similar to that context, only straight people were generally far more vocal about it than gender critical people in public spaces.

Regarding the twitter posters, I assume they believe trans women to be women, so they wouldn't be excluding trans women. But they would also expect 'terfs' to respect their lack of consent and to use third options.