Will fewer men discover they have female gendered souls?

[ItsCoolForCats]

The landscape has changed a lot in the last year or two in the UK. 10 years ago, if a man declared himself a women, many work policies allowed him to use women's changing rooms and toilets on the first day "presenting in his new gender". And he would be lauded as stunning and brave. Thankfully, these policies are getting binned now.

And the landscape is changing elsewhere as well. The IOC coming down on the side of protecting the female category has been really pivotal. If the Democrats in the US continue to push for men to be able to compete in women's sports, they will lose votes.

If tw have to use third spaces, won't be able to compete in women's sports or take women's honours and titles, will discovering their inner lady gendered soul become less appealing? Will.we see fewer sob stories in the metro about someone who was "femme-presenting" that day suffering the indignity of being denied entry to a female changing room?

I’m not using AI, I’m just typing on my phone while trying to keep up with a thread where almost every reply is repeating the same talking points. When everyone is saying variations of the same thing, it’s incredibly easy to mix up who said what, so I apologize for attributing the specific quote to the wrong person.

As for how I write—I’m just trying to express my points clearly and logically so there's no miscommunication. Since when is using full sentences and proper grammar a crime?
The point still stands, though. If you are calling a trans woman a "man in a dress" because of her biology, you are explicitly using biological sex as the sole defining boundary of who is and isn't a woman. You don't have to literally type the word "insist" for that to be the core of your argument—it is the logical conclusion of what you are saying.

Are you going to keep nitpicking or do you have a better argument?

I have no doubt that many posters here do brilliant, vital work in the real world to support women and girls, whether through volunteering, donating, or campaigning. I’m certainly not questioning anyone's personal dedication to those causes.
My question isn't about what you do offline. It's about why, on this specific forum, so much of the collective energy and discussion is dedicated to opposing a tiny, marginalized group of trans people—especially when there are so many massive, systemic crises facing women today.
If we agree that underfunded services and violence against women are the urgent battles, it feels counterproductive that so much of the debate here is focused on trans-exclusion instead of those shared struggles.

I'm entirely unsurprised that you think challenging your points is "nitpicking".

Woman = adult human female

Do tell what your defining boundary is for who is and isn't a woman.

As a woman is an adult human female and a man is an adult human male then yes, biological sex is what determines whether someone is a man or a woman

Hilarious when the only posts you've responded to on this site have been trans related ones.

Who's hyper focusing on the trans issue?

For me feminism is about equality for women, men have enough already.

What struggles based on my (female) sex do I share with trans identified men?

Tedious, from the usual bio deniers.

Just a quick tip while you are off finding more non-evidence:

The new "show all" "show less" function on MN now means that fewer people will read your majestic tomes because the function cuts it off after a paragraph or two. If you want people to actually read your posts, you're going to have to be more concise. Think about what you want to say before you start typing. If your first paragraph is nonsense, no one is going to read the rest.

ps. Also, you might want to keep your info relevant to the UK (or no one will be interested). Either you or your AI are not from the UK, and don't forget that there are Americans on MN who actually live in the UK, and can spot inconsistencies a mile away. 👋 😉

We just don't want men in our single sex spaces. The good men, the bad men, all men. Simple.

Yes. And the vast majority of men manage to stay out. So what is it about this "tiny fraction of the population" that makes them unable to do that?

Genuine question.

My definition of femimsim is achieving equality for everybody because the patriarchy fails everybody.

And we will all sit round the fire and sing kumbya.

Feminism is for females, all of them including trans identifying females. It excludes males, all of them including trans identifying ones.

One of the stand out points in the Supreme Court Judgement was the protection of pregnancy amd maternity rights for trans identifying females ergo the definition of women is determined by biological sex.

Funny how all you ultra inclusive, liberal, be kind types who are determined to include men within the definition of women couldn't give a damn about a group of women being denied pregnancy and maternity rights in pursuit of your goal, how very feminist, how very kind, how very progressive.

The irony of you claiming that the definition of women being based on biological sex is patriarchial when you are advocating for men such as trans identifying male Alex Drummond who states he is expanding the bandwith of womanhood, by wearing a skirt when he fixes his car, that men will determine what women are by their own criteria - that is patriarchy on steriods.

@OneHardyBiscuit

Dude, seriously? You're not even disguising that you're using AI. Do you have any idea how insulting that is?

So anyway. Sheet D1 clearly shows that trans people experience less personal crimes than non-trans people, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.

It'll be interesting if we see a decrease in the number of men getting GRC given that it doesn't give the holder any opposite sex powers. The numbers have been steadily increasing year on year. I know GRC holders are only a fraction of the number men who claim to be women, but it might indicate something.

I think while they get attention for being trans especially at work, they are going to continue to claim to be women.

It's about why, on this specific forum, so much of the collective energy and discussion is dedicated to opposing a tiny, marginalized group of trans people

Because that "tiny minority" is trampling the rights of 51% of the population, that's why.

Also: not marginalised.

I think while they get attention for being trans especially at work, they are going to continue to claim to be women.

I think yes, especially in universities. There, many staff will just close ranks. Women in HE will need to continue suing long after much of the rest of the workplace has gotten used to being in reality again. It's going to take a long time.

GRC? I imagine a lot of men will not bother, but there may be a substantial minority of men who don't understand that a GRC won't give them the "wants" they want. There might be an initial surge?

You've got this backward.

You're right that patriarchy determines who a woman is based on her biological sex. That's precisely why this is the definition that must be used to defend women against the patriarchy. We are not "going back" to anything: we are fighting the same fight as ever.

However, while the patriarchy reduces women to their sex, feminism says that sex is only one aspect of being a woman, and that women can be anything besides it.

It is dystopian. Terrifyingly so.

Feminism fought for decades to prove that being a woman is vastly more than just a biological function. To go back to defining women purely by their biological parts doesn't protect women...

This is nonsense.

Yes, feminism points out we are more than a biological function (the biological function of female animals is to bear young).

Feminism says we are MORE than that, that we are whole complicated people. Obviously it does.

Feminism DOESN'T ignore that our biology is an important and essential part of us. Our experiences of puberty, risks of getting pregnant, pregnancy itself, childbirth, breastfeeding or not, menopause - they are part of the reality of being a women. No man will ever share that.

That's not saying women are just walking uteruses like the patriarchy says. But we are female.

That's the thread that binds women together. That's what we share across millennia, across continents, across social, cultural, religious divides. Which is why a transwoman can not be a woman.

Sorry, @Seethlaw , I got interrupted while writing that post and when I came back I didn't see you'd already eloquently made the same point.

Just an aside. One of the most devastating things to come out of the reports on the Tavistock was that their patients were 10 times more likely than the general population to have a parent on the sex offender registry.

No need to apologise! I love the way you put it too.

You’re just posting your same talking points. No one cares, we’ve heard them all before and they aren’t convincing anyone any more.

Cor blimey ChatGpt is getting a right work out this afternoon

Well, biological sex is the thing that links all women. You can’t be a woman without those two pesky XX chromosomes.

A man who pretends to be a woman is just that, a male mimicking (often very badly) the sort of behaviours that they themselves have determined are the hallmarks of being a woman. The fact is they are wrong. They are playing out a fantasy.

I am so sick of these men telling us that talking about our experiences of being female is reducing being a woman to biology. Just fuck off. Shall I tell my 13 year that she is reducing herself to her biology the next time she is sobbing to me about period pain?