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?

I'd see it more like Nana in The Royle Family who wondered why a vegetarian wouldn't have a ham sandwich as the ham was sliced very thinly.

It's only a little bit of meat = it's only a few transwomen/men

Its only a tiny piece of meat in the ladies loos, what are you all getting frothy about?

😂

I'm expecting the arrival of a quotation from the Cambridge Online dictionary 'proving' that the English word 'woman' now also means 'some men', so I'm getting my retaliation in first

It pops up regularly, but the posters think that just because the Cambridge Online gives current, and often transitory, usage of a word, that means that the definition of the word has permanently changed.

For instance, it also says 'sick' can currently mean 'good' in some contexts, but that hasn't changed the dictionary definition of 'sick' as 'unhealthy'.

'Doctor can I have a good note because I'm too good to go to work today'

I would argue letting trans identified women (ie trans men) into single sex spaces is trans inclusive.

However, letting trans-identified men into women's spaces isn't compatible with feminism, as it deprives women of safety, dignity and legal identity.

There is another issue which is - trans identified people of either sex want to be defined by their identity not their sex. But that isn't compatible with the necessity or indeed the right to choose to be identified by your sex.

You should be able to say "women only because we prefer the dynamics of women only groups" because it's different, and you prefer it (like lesbians. Or just women who get on better in women only spaces.)

The history of men only spaces is more problematic for feminism because institutions like clubs are often networking / power hubs. However, I think men should be allowed to crack on with gay dating and mens' sheds type set ups.

I cannot offer a solution for the informal power networking, but that's a bigger question, because it applies for multiple different groups, in fact.

Wafer thin!

Well, you could have 'androgenised' and 'non-androgenised' signs, but how many would understand? 'Women' and 'men' works well enough, and they have clear legal meanings.

This.

No.

If you prioritise the desires and feelings of men over women - and are happy to exclude some women, mostly extremely vulnerable women, from provision, access, resources and inclusion because those men find it upsetting to allow them to have any -

you're not a feminist.

You might identify as one and want to pressure others to validate you. But sorry, reality is going to clash with that, and you can't control other people's perceptions. You also probably need really to come to terms with why you want to believe in and support the primacy of men on a binary basis, but have an identity that lets you avoid having to admit to and face it.

Ah sorry, that would mean that you don't think transwomen are born with a woman gender identity.

Just a tad condescending, don’t you think? Or are you being deliberately goading?
would like to define a proper academic circle and a respected scholar, probably not.

You aren't missing anything.

That the Genderist take on Intersectional Feminism does not acknowledge the glaring differences in social expectations and outcomes we face because of our physical sex, nor the history of oppression of the female sex, as a possible axis of oppression separate to "gender" is all you need to see to see through the whole edifice.

It is one of the biggest tells that Genderism is a dishonest movement that has adopted the language of Feminism but does not in fact act according to those principles.

Okay, I agree with this and it's given me food for thought.

Penis and vagina. Like I said. And have pictures of them too in case of confusion.

We're getting into genital inspection territory here....🙁

@Lexibletheflexible - you’re not by any chance from Australia/New Zealand are you?

Let's not do this. It's not helpful.
Also, some TW have had their penises removed.

I propose we all stop pretending that we think this group of men are a type of woman, and find another name for them.

No.

Men and women. Men who say they are women know they are men, they know full well which service is for them.

Removing a penis makes no difference to a persons sex. A man without a penis is still a man.

Exactly. I've never seen a woman post an over-excited photo from inside a woman's toilet purely because she was so delighted to be in the women's toilet. It's not something women do.

But I've seen plenty of TW on socials do this, and at least one of them used to post on here.

Could this group of men, who think they’re a type of woman, procreate with biological men?

I’m happy for all these TWAW men, trans identified or not, to go away and find out.

Most feminists are trans-inclusive, apart from a small group of almost universally white privileged people with a disproportionate influence. They align with neo-cons, incels and Christian nationalists in their obsessive hatred of transgender people.

The shift in language from anti-trans to pro-women, and from trans-exclusionary to sex-based rights is straight from the old-school bigotry used against black people and gay people forever.

www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09589236.2025.2468805#abstract

It comes down to this. If one (and their supporters) has to argue to the death that they are indeed a woman, they aren’t one.

Yes they are, they are inclusive of trans men, as they are women.

The rest is just laughable nonsense.