No, they are saying that, in order for lesbians to a have a political voice, they need leave the male-dominated, gender-identity-politics-crazed, Post-modern alphabet soup faction (led by Stonewall), which is erasing their existence, and speak out as lesbians for lesbians.
I know what they think. What they're arguing is that trans women erase lesbians, and they want trans activism gone. That they make this argument because they believe as you claim here doesn't change what they are arguing.
^^ Rational, coherent thinking stops here. ^^
It is very clear you don't follow the discussion very well. Is English not your first language? I'm being serious, because you keep thinking things I'm objecting to or presenting as the beliefs of others are my beliefs.
Yes, my
point there was that there was a problem with that 'reasoning'.
Did you read the
article?
Yes.
When transwomen ask others to agree with them when they say : "I am a woman",
This is what they are fighting for:
"Everybody else in the world has to go along with my fantasies"
It is not possible to change sex simply by saying you are the opposite sex to the one you are born as, or by any other means.
Well, no, they generally are fighting for tolerance. As in, if you don't like how they are living, don't bother them with it. If you are leaving them alone, tolerating them, how would they even know if you agree with them or not?
But this is the essential conflict among the many other conflicts with transgender issues. You, Rolfe, and some others despite your other disagreements don't care to treat trans women (always women) as women in any meaningful context. You all arrive there differently. Others accept them as women, even if we have other disagreements around that. Arguing any other point with this central point is in disagreement isn't likely to be that productive.
No, they are saying that a biological man cannot be a biological woman.
No, they are saying they can't be women in any sense.
Yes, they are. They are telling them they are "cis lesbians".
They are telling them that they are not homosexual. They are telling them that lesbians can have penises (girl dicks) and "cis lesbians" ( i.e. lesbians who are homosexual women) should be open to having sex with people with penises (men). And, if they are not sexually attracted to transwomen (men), they are being told that they are 'transphobic'.
They (as a general group we are talking about trans-inclusive activists right?) are doing no such thing as saying they are not homosexual. That's absurd. It's the same absurd concern as cishet men. The reasoning 'The people I want to have sex with are women, I don't want to have sex with those people, therefore those people aren't women' is obviously wrong. It's as wrong as 'The people I want to have sex with are between 20-40, I don't want to have sex with that person, so that person isn't between 20-40'. We simply don't define sexual orientation by who you
don't want to have sex with. If we did, lesbians and I would be in the same category (penis ruins it).
The people arguing that if you don't want to have sex with a trans person you are a bigot are wrong, but that doesn't make every objection against that argument correct.
What is non-cis lesbian?
Does it mean a lesbian who's never had a penis?
That would be a trans lesbian. Is that really hard to follow?
Transgender activist ideology (which does not represent all trans people's beliefs) wants us to tolerate a lie, namely that transwomen are women.
The lesbian protesters are telling transwomen (men) that they aren't aren't women, which is true. Or perhaps your kind of tolerance includes embracing dangerous lies.
Contradicting this lie is blasphemy to the Church of Post-modern Transgender Identity Politics (COPTIP) and triggers huge outpourings of screaming, narcissistic, sometimes violent, rage.
Yeah, opponents of trans rights are never violent, screaming, narcissistic, dickwads. Lmao. This 'the trans people are the violent ones' assertion is utterly moronic. Yeah, the people targeted by literal Nazis are the violent ones. Of course being the target of violence doesn't mean a group isn't violent themselves, but when comparing the groups for trans rights and against and thinking those for are the more violent is beyond idiotic; it is a dangerous lie.
LOL. What do you think labelling people "TERFs" is doing?
What is calling lesbians "cis lesbians" doing?
Differentiating groups. Do you think that is always done for the purpose of 'othering'?
Well in one sense, yes. TERF specifically is to 'other' TERFs who the larger feminist community doesn't want representing them. I'd say that's more than justified. I'm generally fine with that being done for things like political or philosophical groupings, such as TERF, and not for intrinsic personal characteristics (cis, trans, black, white, old, etc).
Calling women (aka "Uterus bearers") cis-women erases women as a class, by pretending that biology and the life experiences and oppression based on biology, are irrelevant/ non-existent. It asserts that transwomen are as much women as "cis" women and therefore deserve all the legal rights and protections women have as women.
Please present a reasoned argument supporting the claim that a man can be a woman simply by "identifying" as a woman.
Wait, you think that
being oppressed is inherent to the definition of a 'true woman'? Does this mean that when equality is in existence, there are no more 'true women'?
Even more absurd, trans women who pass get treated as cis women already. They get those life experiences too.
Also; it is NOT that they become a woman simply by identifying as one, but the things that cause them to identify as a woman make her one. This is an important distinction, and ties into another mistake in reasoning you make.
The only people objecting to the word "man" are your non-cis friends subscribing to transgender activist ideology. For them, men, like lesbians, no longer exist.
Feminists object to the word 'man' being used to mean 'woman'. They have no objection to a man to calling himself a man.
Well that point flew completely over your head. Is English not your first language?
When did you discover your cis-man identity?
The second after the term was explained to me.
What's the difference between a man and a "cis man"?
One is a subset of the other.
What is your definition of the word 'gender'?
Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to, and differentiating between, various gender categories.
Confused waffle.
Feminism, from it's foundation, has critiqued the concept of gender as a tool for keeping women politically subordinate.
Nooooooooooooo. That is just straight up wrong. Feminism, from its (it's is a contraction of 'it is') foundation is advocating for the advancement of women. It was for gaining rights and liberties for women, and has in modern times become the struggle for equality. That some feminists have come to the conclusion that the concept of 'gender' has to go, or be changed, or exist but have power removed from it, or many other things depending on the feminists theory one is talking about, does not mean that feminism is
founded on that conclusion. In short at
best you have it backwards.
And if the destruction of 'gender' is the goal, and for many/most radical feminists it is supposed to be, opposing trans activism is a backwards way to go about it.
Gender is the societally defined behaviours and attributes deemed appropriate according to one's biological sex, i.e. what is supposedly masculine and feminine.
That's a surprisingly western Imperialist view coming from you. There are plenty of cultures with more than two genders, and assuming the western tradition of tying it to male and female only invalidates them.
