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?

Complete and utter garbage

I've always thought that Debbie Savage is a wind up merchant. Whenever they post on this subject it's always just on the edge of ludicrous and written to sound like something a TRA would say but in a similar tone to how I read Dame Katy Denise's posts on X.

I could be wrong and perhaps they are genuinely a TRA, some are tbf quite dogmatic in their beliefs, but I am mostly certain Debbie is on the wind up.

Also, being a woman is not a feeling inside a man's head - so feminism is sex based and therefore cannot include men and their identity feelings. Seems crazy to have to say it.

You are spouting mostly rubbish!!

Bollocks. Appropriately.

Absolutely the fuck not.

They may not “want” to but facts are facts and the fact is that trans men do benefit from feminism when the cause is things like female reproductive health, equality legislation that enables maternity leave,justice reforms that look at the reasons why women are imprisoned…..

@Mouldemort

Ah, Sally Hines. This is precisely the kind of garbage I meant when I said to Lexible on page three: Be wary of being so in thrall to what "academics" think. They can be wrong.

This Sally Hines?

Oh how totally surprising that “Mouldemort” has entered the chat. She’s practically a billionaire, she doesn’t need rent free accommodation in your head.

This is so racist.

If you think everything should be mixed sex, own it!

If you think people's bodies can change sex, own it!

If you think that an inner feeling about identity is more important than the physical body, own it!

If any of those are genuinely your beliefs, it is your right to hold them and express them here

But to use the struggle for racial equality as a shield to hide your beliefs behind is racist. Make your arguments stand on their own merit.

Okay but if a man proves to me that he is no threat (and that he will sit down to urinate 👀😬), I won't care if he's alone with me in an unsupervised location.

Otherwise: it's just discrimination against men. We don't keep them out because they are men. We do it for safety and that is the angle you must focus on or you will lose.

Note how @Mouldemortknows how weak their argument is, so is attempting to crowbar race in at every given opportunity, no matter how irrelevant, to try and grant it some legitimacy.

🙄🙄🙄

Yeah I think she posts to help others spell out feminist arguments for lurkers.

A man can do harm to you without his penis.

Is this seriously news to you?

Exactly. So I have no issue with them using a penis-free space.

No. Let's not dismiss valid arguments. Any argument focused on identity and by extension discrimination, will fail. You must focus on facts.

No, it’s not just because of safety. It’s also because of privacy and dignity. It’s so we don’t have to deal with the sexual harassment of men while we are vulnerable.

If you want to fawn over some gurning man aping sexist stereotypes of what he thinks of women, and pretend you think he is a woman and you’re all girls together in a “men v women” quiz, be my guest. But understand why other women think that’s grim.

Whut?

How's he going to prove that to you?
Are you going to watch him pee?
What if he's no threat to you personally, but he's a potential threat to another female person?
It's not discrimination against men to keep them out of women's spaces!

I won't dismiss valid arguments. I just haven't seen any yet.

Exactly. And as we cannot do that... Inevitably.. we have to stick with what we always have, which is appearances. Do you look like a man or woman. That is how you win. You need to start with a fact-based argument and then slowly drag people kicking and screaming to the same fecking conclusion we drew hundreds of years ago (or whenever). But I suppose time has passed and people forgot 😒😞

I agree. And it’s not just on this subject!

No men in female spaces. Not your Nigel. Not mine. Not “Nigella” who’s “lovely”.

I’m sure there are lots of men who could prove they are no threat for lots of reasons. Perhaps they are too old to be a threat, disabled, ill.

We arent letting them into women’s spaces either, so why on earth should we make an exception for this group of men?

@Awkwardisfunny “Okay but if a man proves to me that he is no threat (and that he will sit down to urinate 👀😬), I won't care if he's alone with me in an unsupervised location.”

I would care and wouldn’t want to be alone in an unsupervised location with one.

No, we rely on people to be honest, make the right decision and stick to the social contract. It worked fine until about 8 (?) years ago. Most men don't want to be in women's spaces. Even the horrible men, the confused men, the drunk men. Why do you want to make an exception for TW?

We absolutely do keep them out because they are men.

Because men as a class are a threat to women as a class.

And 'prove he is no threat' - its like you've never heard of men killing women before. Or raping them. Or drugging and raping their own wives and putting the opportunity out to the rest of the world to come and rape them whilst they are being recorded.