Can you be a fully trans inclusive feminist?

[Imdunfer]

Inspired from another thread where it was out of place so I brought it here.

Someone seemed to claim that it was possible to be both be a feminist and to be trans inclusive, where by trans inclusive they mean males in women's spaces and shortlists (the attitude to sport wasn't stated).

I don't believe that you can truly be both, do you?

It's not "Fuck it". I don't think you'll get a trans man to be a woman and you don't get a trans woman to be a man. You can put them back in the closet, but they do not belong in these categories. That, in my opinion, would be propping up a lie. I agree that sex and gender should ideally align, which is why I support transition.

Housing sex criminals will never be an easy topic, but I actually do think you can tell the difference between someone who is sincere and someone who lies out of desperation. Especially is a risk assessment is performed. It's also true that trans women as a group are not the ones committing rapes in prison, even if rapist trans women exist. (It's known that it's the male staff.) But for the record I believe cis women can also be rapists. And they are also in prison.

My left eyebrow did raise when I was typing that.

The topic is men in female jails not prison officers or women. Who cannot rape due to not having penises...but anyway.

You said 'trans women were never men', so how can you tell when it comes to rapists? Which ones would you not put in a female prison?

Well of course they belong in these categories. They are SEX categories.

Sex is the clear designator in science, in law and in every single society since time began.

Why on earth should I, as a woman, countenance replacing that for ‘gender’ which no one can even give me a definition for?

Probably because most trans people I ever talked to had dysphoria. I presume it's possible to perceive the incongruence without being distressed by it. But they still perceive it.

I don't think you'll get a trans man to be a woman and you don't get a trans woman to be a man.

It's not a question of getting them to be anything. Changing sex is not possible. It would seem more helpful to encourage people to accept themselves as they are rather than to promote the idea that they can only be accepted if others pretend to believe something that is impossible. The second seems downright cruel and inhumane.

I actually do think you can tell the difference between someone who is sincere and someone who lies out of desperation.

How do you define what is a lie? What trans means? Who are you to say that somebody else has the wrong definition of trans?

But for the record I believe cis women can also be rapists.

Under UK law, not without an available penis.

Since I don't think there's an "universal woman experience" or an "universal man experience", I don't see the issue.

You're talking about life here. You won't find many people disagreeing that women have all sorts of different experiences depending on context.

But a universal experience for a woman is, for example, not having a penis. So there's one, right there. Or wondering if she should get a prostate exam.

Likewise, no man on the planet will wonder whether or not he might be pregnant, or why can't he get pregnant, or terrified that he might be pregnant, or miserable that he's not yet. Women deal with their biology all day long. Have I got enough painkillers for my period, why hasn't my period started, will my period start during the party. All universal female experiences, all based on biology.

if you say being female means nothing else but the sense of being in a female body, then some trans woman experience a form of that, in a very disorienting way, which is why they're dysphoric since the body is wrong.

The definition of woman isn't a man who doesn't want to be a man because he doesn't like his male body. How can you not see how sexist this is?

Women are real you know. We are real human beings with our own characteristics, bodies, issues.

It never ceases to amaze me how some people genuinely seem incapable of dragging their focus off the men. They can't seem to actually look at women for more than a nanosecond.

A man who doesn't want to be a man is still a man. It's not the definition of a woman!

And him thinking it is turns every woman into a resource for him. The entire concept of womanhood in fact. Women are not beings in their own right, they're a solution to his problem.

This bloody ideology is so sexist, it's difficult to believe. And it's baffling there's so many people who can't see it. I genuinely think it's their own internal sexism doing a fucking number on them.

Every man is born from a woman. No woman is born from a man.

No, you’ve got that wrong. It’s not sex realists who say that ‘being female means nothing else but the sense of being in a female body’.

We say that being female is a matter of biology; nothing to do with ‘sense’ (or feelings or essences or souls).

How? How can one infallibly tell the difference? What do a TIM and a woman have in common thst make them both women? Some people also believe the earth is flat. Are they correct? Because that’s as batshit as your belief a male can be a woman

I don't think they're personality labels. Because yeah, we agree, being a woman requires no specific behavior or look or activity. The full range of human behaviors is open to both women and men.

Also understand that these two boxes are indeed neat and tidy, but I simply don't think they're sufficient. I don't think they give you the full picture. Trans people (to me) have a genuine natural variation of sex/gender and I think the big difference is, I don't think accommodating them is harmful or dangerous.

98% of all sex offences are committed by men, not women. That's why sex segregation is an instant risk reduction.

And men identifying as trans in prison are statistically even more likely than any other man to have committed a sex crime.

And as for being able to tell? For heaven's sake. Who's going to do that? Who's going sit there and say you, but not you?

Who's going to say you're pretending to be a woman, but you, matey, are only pretending to pretend to be a woman.

This idea that women can tell who's a sex offender and who isn't it so dangerous. If we could tell, we bloody would and no one would ever be raped by their husband, partner, boyfriend.

Not only can we not tell, we end up falling in love with, marrying and having children with these men.

I wish people would get it into their heads that no, we are not going to change the definitions of words so that a group of men can dismantle women’s sex based rights.

Why would we?

https://www.hrc.org/resources/transgender-and-non-binary-faq

However, though many transgender and non-binary people experience gender dysphoria, it is not a necessary requirement to identify as transgender or non-binary. Some transgender people never experience gender dysphoria, or only feel it at certain points in their life.

Plenty of similar definitions available on other sites.

There isn't any particular need to feel incongruence. Trans can just mean having a perspective that it's possible to self define with reference to masculinity and femininity and that one is somewhere in the middle. It doesn't even need to be a fixed identity.

No, trans people don’t have any variation in sex. They are one sex or the other, same as everyone else.

“Trans women” male rapists have sexually assaulted female prisoners in the U.K. and in other countries. Hope that helps.

but I simply don't think they're sufficient. I don't think they give you the full picture.

Man and woman?

They are no more supposed to give the full picture than your age or your height. Most of the time sex discrimination is unlawful.

Trans people (to me) have a genuine natural variation of sex/gender and I think the big difference is, I don't think accommodating them is harmful or dangerous.

Nobody is suggesting that trans people shouldn't be accommodated. It's just that where sex is relevant, sex is relevant. See also age. The fact that I can't get a young person's rail card is not because I am not being accommodated. It's because I'm the wrong age. In many ways that is distressing, but that is life.

If words have personal meanings such as woman / man, female / male, feminism etc, then so to do page numbers. Because how can you change words such as woman and female to include the opposite meaning of what they were established to mean, while demanding that numbers mean a specific concept.

@totinoit is important to acknowledge that this is what you are supporting

What natural variation of sex category that people who have claimed to have a transgender identity have?

Did I miss the explanation?

Don't know but it seems to exclude quite a lot of people who identify as trans.

"I actually do think you can tell the difference between someone who is sincere and someone who lies out of desperation."

Please provide this rigorous and accurate test.

Otherwise, you are spreading misinformation. Because if such a test existed, it would be in wide usage around the word.

I see.

There have been some posters in the past who claimed that they had academic qualifications who also were very clear arbiters of who was and was not a genuine person with a transgender identity.

Women are real and we fucking rule.

We have the words cis and trans to acknowledge that there's a difference. No, I'm not 1:1 to a trans woman. But I'm not 1:1 to all cis women, either. I really do think there's enough room for all of us but I know you don't agree.

Is Eddie Izzard a man or a woman? Is that what they have always been. Were Frank Maloney and Bruce Jenner never men (and by extension never boys)?